The Tribune, Chandigarh, India

Badal flatters Modi
Forgets uprooted farmers’ case

WHEN Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal went to Gujarat to attend an agricultural function there on September 9, media reports had indicated that he might take up the case of Punjab farmers stripped of their land-holdings by the Narendra Modi government. However, Badal did not utter a word about them in his address, though Modi did give the assurance that none would be evicted. If Modi is genuine, all that he has to do to help the dispossessed farmers is to withdraw the case from the Supreme Court. The high court has already ruled in favour of the farmers. This is something Modi won't do. Hence his double talk, which Badal failed to question.

After the Shiv Sena the Shiromani Akali Dal is the only ally left with the NDA. Badal could have taken advantage of this position. But instead of pushing the aggrieved farmers' case, he tried to flatter Modi by calling him a “Sardar” and equating him with Patel. Many leaders within the BJP as well as the Shiv Sena are not yet reconciled to the idea of a divisive Modi becoming the prime-ministerial candidate. Apart from Muslims there are people who question Modi's role in the 2002 massacre. Nobel laureate Amartya Sen has disapproved of him as a possible Prime Minister since the minorities feel unsafe under him. But Chief Minister Badal felt no such qualms. He called him “the greatest leader of the country”.

Badal spoke about farmers’ problems — which they already know. He could have spent time to learn how Gujarat had managed to achieve an agricultural growth rate of close to 10 per cent, almost five times of Punjab. In Gujarat farmers are given guaranteed power for at least eight hours; in Punjab it is free but erratic and inadequate. Unlike Badal, Modi has kept a small government. Modi was strengthening his vote bank among farmers; Badal went there to clap. Turning his back on the setting Sun (LK Advani), he is worshipping the rising Sun.

Poverty and crime
Court takes a lenient view

WHILE hearing a case involving a tailor who had killed his wife and two sons, the apex court has come up with an unusual ruling. A bench comprising Justices S J Mukhopadhaya and Kurian Joseph has ruled poverty as a mitigating factor. Thus keeping in mind “poverty, socio-economic, psychic compulsions, undeserved adversities in life” it commuted the punishment of the culprit from death to life imprisonment. Their judgment has given a new dimension to the “rarest of rare” clause especially applied to cases where death penalty is awarded.

Sometime ago the Bombay High Court too had posed the contentious query as to what comprises the “rarest of rare”. It too talked of mitigating circumstances that included first-time offence, age and whether the culprit was the sole bread winner. In fact, courts have interpreted the “rarest of rare” clause in different ways, invariably making an allowance for the circumstances. No one can deny the link between poverty and crime. In a study it was found that an overwhelming majority of prisoners in Asia’s largest jail — Tihar Prisons — came from the lower income strata of society. According to yet another study “Children in India-2012” around 57 per cent of the 33,887 children involved in crime belonged to families with an annual income lower than Rs. 25,000.

No doubt a person's unfavourable circumstances go a long way in defining the choices he or she makes, poverty can't become an excuse or an alibi for crime. The judges of the Supreme Court too have realised this and not given the culprit a clean chit, but reduced the quantum of punishment. Whether poverty leads to criminal activities, there can be no two opinions on the need to break the vicious cycle. The governments, both at the Centre and the states, are duty bound to remove poverty. Society too needs to understand the dynamics of crime and deprivation and play a positive role in developing an equitable social order.

Thought for the Day

It is not every question that deserves an answer.

— Publilius Syrus

ARTICLE

Challenges in Afghanistan
Delhi must shed its pusillanimity on relations with Kabul
by G Parthasarathy

THE Air India flight from Kabul to New Delhi on September 5, in which I had travelled, had just landed when I was told at the arrival hall that Sushmita Banerjee had been brutally murdered by the Taliban in retribution for her expose of Taliban atrocities against women. The brutal murder again exposed the medieval and murderous characteristics of the Taliban with whom the US is almost desperately seeking “reconciliation.” This, after the Taliban, operating largely from bases in Pakistan, has killed 2,161 American combat personnel and wounded 19,080. What I found in a five-day visit to Afghanistan is that it is a country with unlimited opportunities for development and democracy, even while facing a brutal insurgency fuelled and funnelled from across its borders with Pakistan. Pakistan is an object of hate and derision across the country. Visitors from Pakistan in Kabul often prefer to describe themselves as “Hindustani” in Kabul’s bazaars.

In just over a decade after the medieval Taliban was ousted, Afghanistan has seen a remarkable political and social transformation. The country has since developed a robust political system. President Karzai and his ministers are freely criticised. The media is free and lively. Shahrukh Khan and his “Chennai Express” receive rave reviews. While schools were virtually defunct and women denied the right to education and work in the Taliban years, there are now 10.5 million students in educational institutions, with universities now flourishing in Kabul, Nangarhar, Khost, Herat and Balkh. Forty-eight per cent of all doctors and 60 per cent of teachers are women, who now are also well represented in the legislature and even in the army and the police.

Afghanistan is now preparing for the Presidential elections scheduled for around April, 2014. With President Karzai constitutionally ineligible for a third consecutive term, jockeying has commenced for who should succeed him. Afghanistan has traditionally been ruled by the dominant Pashtuns, with the Tajiks, Hazaras (predominantly Shia), Uzbeks and Turkmens who constitute over 50 per cent of the population, forming alliances to protect their interests. Powerful regional leaders with significant armed cadres like Mohammed Atta in Mazar-e-Sharif and Ismail Khan in Herat will have a significant say in any outcome. This jockeying for viable coalitions will continue till the Presidential elections are held. President Hamid Karzai, derided by the Americans and their British camp followers, deserves high praise for the way in which Afghan democratic institutions have been nurtured, ethnic, sectarian and religious pluralism respected and the state and educational institutions developed, in his 11 years as President. Even the miniscule Sikh and Hindu communities are now represented in Parliament.

There are understandable suspicions in Afghanistan about the future American role after they end their combat operations in December 2014. Recognising their economic and military vulnerabilities, Afghans realise that they will have to conclude a security pact with the Americans, giving the Americans more than half a dozen air bases, if they are to secure American and western economic and military assistance. It will require at least 10 years of relative peace for the Afghans to become economically self-reliant, by developing their agricultural and mineral potential. What is most worrying for the Afghans is the American policy of supplying their armed forces only weapons with limited firepower, while denying them artillery, tanks and other heavy weaponry, which they possessed earlier, but were destroyed by the Americans shortly after they arrived. This is a source of deep anger and anguish as Afghanistan's ill-equipped armed forces are taking huge casualties as they confront the Pakistan-backed Taliban. American policies are widely seen as a deliberate ploy to force the Afghans to “reconcile” with the Pakistan-backed Taliban and Haqqani network with Pakistani "facilitation".

While the Afghans are seeking good neighbourly relations with Pakistan, the overwhelming view is that there will be no change in Pakistan's malevolence in the near future. In contrast there is huge admiration and affection for India with public opinion polls indicating that India is the most highly regarded country, by 74 per cent of Afghans polled. Ninety-one per cent of Afghans polled have an “unfavourable” view of Pakistan, with 58 per cent regarding the Taliban as the “biggest danger” to their country even when including local warlords, drug smugglers and the US. India's economic assistance and political non-interference have played a crucial role in this. But this favourable perception is slowly changing, primarily because of India's refusal to provide any military equipment to the Afghan army, which has deliberately been kept inadequately equipped.

With Russia now poised for a larger economic role and ready to supply military equipment on commercial terms (something the Afghans cannot afford), it is time to review our approach of dovetailing our policies almost totally with those of the US and worrying needlessly about Pakistani reactions to our policies, which are, in any case malevolent, and will remain so. New Delhi must shed its pusillanimity on relations with Afghanistan. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh should personally get President Putin’s concurrence for transferring military equipment of Soviet origin like India’s older T 62/T 55 tanks and MiG 21/23 fighters to Afghanistan. It is also shocking that while we have supplied 105 mm Field Guns and Howitzers to Myanmar, we are seeking every conceivable excuse to refrain from doing so to Afghanistan. Arms transfers have to be complemented by an institutionalised tripartite India-Russian-Afghanistan dialogue on security issues so that proposals for promoting security cooperation are expeditiously implemented. There is also need to reach out to Iran, activating the India-Iran-Afghanistan tripartite dialogue on the development of Chahbahar port and road communications between Iran and Afghanistan.

Any Indian visiting Afghanistan cannot but be proud of the sterling role of our diplomats who live barricaded, under a heavy security cover. Particular tributes need to be paid to successive Ambassadors” — Vivek Katju, Rakesh Sood, Jayant Prasad, Gautam Mukhopadhyay, Amar Sinha — and their diplomatic colleagues, military staff and the ITBP security personnel. Likewise, the role of our diplomats living in a challenging environment in Kandahar, Jalalabad, Herat and Mazar-e-Sharif deserves high praise. These are all individuals who have soldiered on bravely, leading spartan lives, away from their families, in the face terrorist threats. Similar tributes have to be paid to all those engineers, doctors and construction workers who have done India proud in Afghanistan. Those who have sacrificed their lives in this effort should have their names engraved on the premises of India’s new Chancery building. Their selflessness should spur others to join the effort to make Afghanistan and our neighbourhood free from the scourge of Pakistan-sponsored terrorism.

MIDDLE

Being cold and cruel
by Anmol Sandhu

IT was a hot, sultry day and I was coming back home from Chandigarh by bus. It was getting late and I rushed to the bus stand just to realise that I had missed the last Volvo to Patiala. To make matters worse, the conductor of the next bus, which was going to Bathinda via Patiala, was asking passengers to buy tickets from the ticket counter before getting into the bus. I stood in the long queue at the counter. I was sweaty, tired and very eager to get back home.

The lady in front of me bought her ticket and moved aside, but suddenly rushed back, saying that she had received her balance money but not the ticket. Assuming that the ticket had slipped from her hand and fallen under the counter, the conductor started searching for it.

After several minutes of a frantic search, he could not find the ticket. Seeing the conductor feeling helpless and agitated, the passengers standing in the queue also started looking for her ticket when suddenly she exclaimed, “Oh here it is!” The ticket was in her hand all this time.

Now I lost my cool. I clucked my tongue loudly to display my irritation at that woman’s carelessness that had cost us so much time. The conductor too was yelling at her for delaying the bus and making the other passengers wait. The lady said nothing, smiled apologetically and went inside the bus.

When I entered the bus and started looking for my seat, I realised that my seat was next to the same lady. I sat down and settled my bags.

We were almost half way through to Patiala when that lady's phone rang. She started speaking to someone in Punjabi. And when I heard what she was speaking, I drowned in shame. She was telling someone on the line that she had just had a chemotherapy session at the PGI in Chandigarh and was going back to Bathinda, and that she had come alone because there was nobody to take care of the household chores.

It was then that I observed her closely. She had covered her head with a dupatta underneath which was a bandana wrapped around her head. She had very little eyebrows and eyelashes. Throughout our journey she had been drinking water sip by sip from a bottle that she carried with her. I had been rude to a lady who was battling cancer.

My aunt is a cancer survivor and she used to tell us about her ordeals with chemotherapy. The lady beside me had probably been very exhausted because of which the incident at the ticket counter happened. I could not even begin to imagine how she would have mustered up so much courage and energy to go through the tribulation alone.

In a mad race to nowhere, how many of us stop and look around? And even the ones who do, how many do actually show compassion towards someone? Are we really humans or walking machines? We don’t have time to stop and think as to why a certain person is acting the way he is. Instead of showing some compassion or empathy in a stressful situation, we end up being cold and heartless. We judge and we condemn, and sadly that's what we do the best. The generation of today has sufficient time for social networks but little for social graces. I belong to this generation. And I plead guilty!

OPED — AGRICULTURE

Food Bill: Promises and challenges
The recent passage of the historic Food Security Bill by Parliament assumes importance in India's fight against hunger. No other country has such a law that entitles 82 crore poor people to food at an affordable cost
Manjit S. Kang

Modern storage facilities must be constructed on priority, in the absence of which food security will face a serious threat.

Foodgrains continue to rot even as millions go hungry.

THE institution of the food security law by India should be a matter of great pride for all Indians, regardless of their political affiliations. It signals India has come a long way out of an era of famines and starvation. More than two-thirds of India's population would be beneficiary of the right-to-food Act. This achievement is in sharp contrast to the pessimism of writers like Paddock and Erlich, who never thought that India would achieve self-sufficiency in food production.

The food security law comes at a time when India shamefully boasts the largest population of undernourished children in the world and when the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations says that India's malnutrition rate has hovered around 20 per cent during the past decade and that it is projected to remain stable through 2022.

If we look at this proposed right-to-food law in the context of the 1960s, the passage of this Bill can be considered a monumental achievement for India. Before the onset of India's Green Revolution around 1968, wheat flour and other items such as sugar were rationed. Foodgrains used to come from the US under P.L. 480 (changed to 'Food for Peace' in 1966), and pejoratively, India was said to have a 'ship-to-mouth' existence.

Pre-Green Revolution agony

When, after completing a Bachelor of Science degree from the PAU, Ludhiana, I went to the US for higher studies in 1969, I learned that an ecologist by the name of Paul Erlich had written a bestseller book entitled "Population Bomb" in 1968, which was being discussed on television and in newspapers and which had caused much resentment and anguish in the Indian community. In the book, Erlich had supported the "triage" strategy advocated by Paul and William Paddock in their 1967 book entitled "Famine 1975!" In the last section of their book 'Potential Role of the United States during the Time of Famine', Paddocks essentially portray Malthusian pessimism and propose to apply the 'triage' system, which is normally applied in military medicine, to the hungry nations around 1975.

India, Egypt, and Haiti would be declared 'cannot be saved' and left to starve because the amount of aid needed to bail out their malnourished millions would be so great as to leave little for everyone else; Gambia and Libya would be 'walking wounded' who would be able to survive without immediate aid; and Pakistan and Tunisia would be the beneficiaries of US food aid, only because they had made some effort to implement population control campaigns and had a sufficiently robust political structure to make them worthy of aid. The Paddocks were aware of the wheat-variety development work of Dr Norman Borlaug in Mexico, but they believed that the Green Revolution would not be able to save India, Egypt, Haiti and the Philippines from the impending catastrophe.

The revolution

Actually, most Indians are aware of what has transpired since 1968. The Green Revolution essentially began in Punjab, Haryana and western Uttar Pradesh. In 1966, with the help of Dr Borlaug, India imported 18,000 tonnes of seed of 'LermaRojo 64A' and a few other varieties of dwarf wheat. As a result, India's wheat production increased from 12 million tonnes in 1965 to 17 million tonnes in 1968. Lerma Rojo 64A and Sonora 64 produced 5 tonnes per hectare in comparison to local wheat varieties that produced only about 1 to 2 tonnes per hectare. In 2012, India was able to produce 94 million tonnes of wheat. Similarly, with the use of genes obtained from the dwarf rice variety 'Dee-Gee-Woo-Gen', scientists were able to develop new varieties, which increased rice production tremendously.

India became self-sufficient in cereal grain production by 1974, for which credit goes to agricultural scientists, enabling government policies, and farmers of Punjab, Haryana and western UP. Dr MS Swaminathan thus wrote in an essay about the role of Punjab farmers in the Green Revolution: "Brimming with enthusiasm, hardworking, skilled and determined the Punjab farmer has been the backbone of the revolution. Revolutions are usually associated with the young, but in this revolution, age has been no obstacle to participation. Farmers, young and old, educated and uneducated, have easily taken to the new agronomy. It has been heart-warming to see young college graduates, retired officials, ex-army men, illiterate peasants and small farmers, queuing up to get the new seeds. At least in the Punjab, the divorce between intellect and labour, which has been the bane of our agriculture, is vanishing".

Mira Kamdar, a former senior fellow of the World Policy Institute, New York, wrote in a 2008 article entitled 'On the Front Lines of Global Food Crisis' (Slate Magazine) about the role of the PAU in the Green Revolution, "If a single institution can take credit for bringing the Green Revolution to Punjab, it is Punjab Agricultural University."

Food security law

Food is every human being's most fundamental right. Nobel laureate Borlaug wrote, "Food is the moral right of all born into this world. Without food, all other components of social justice are meaningless." Therefore, I think the institution of the food security law by India should be a matter of great pride for all Indians, regardless of their political affiliations. It signals India has come a long way out of an era of famines and starvation. More than two-thirds of India's population would be beneficiary of the right-to-food Act. This achievement is in sharp contrast to the pessimism of writers like Paddock and Erlich, who never thought that India would achieve self-sufficiency in food production. This law has adopted a life cycle approach, providing a nutritious diet from pre-birth to death. It helps expand the 'food basket' by including, in addition to rice and wheat, 'health' or 'nutri' foods, such as bajra, jowar, ragi and maize.

The way forward

For the success of any new programme, it is important to ensure its stability and to know what factors can derail it. The biggest threat to food security is the rate of population growth. India's population grows at about 15 million people per year, which means in two years, a population equivalent to that of Malaysia is added to India. By 2050 India will have 40 per cent more people than it now has. Can India continue to produce adequate food and feed its people in 2050? The Government of India will need to take serious steps to control its population.

Another big challenge facing India is its lack of scientific grain storage facilities. Now there will be no room for wasting foodgrains out in open storage. Modern storage facilities such as silos need to be constructed on a priority basis throughout the high food-production areas. While at present, India has in reserve 65 million tonnes of foodgrains, if the foodgrain storage situation is not improved quickly, food security will face a serious threat. Post-harvest losses must be minimised.

Indian agriculture also faces the challenge of climate change. Climate change is expected to reduce yields of many crops, including wheat and rice. In 2009, an FAO team reached the conclusion that with 1°C increase in average temperature, India's wheat production would be expected to decrease by 6 million tonnes per year, a loss of $1.5 million. If the yield reduction of other crops is included, a loss of $20 billion per year would occur. A study conducted in 2004 at the International Rice Research Institute concluded that a 1°C increase in minimum (that is night) temperature would reduce rice productivity by 10 per cent. The latest data show that recently India produced 253 million tonnes of foodgrains, which is the highest level of production so far. Projections are that India will need to produce more than 450 million tonnes of foodgrains in 2050 to be able to feed its population. Producing this much foodgrains in the face of climate change will be a grand challenge. The Government of India will need to set up centres of excellence for climate change, staffed by scientists doing cutting-edge research on climate change to solve such problems.

For sustainable agriculture

Multi-disciplinary research and training centres for sustainable agriculture should be set up in agriculturally advanced states like Punjab, where the adoption of the rice-wheat cropping pattern has proved to be unsustainable. As suggested by Prof Swaminathan, such a centre can be organised under the National Action Plan for the Management of Climate Change, which includes the Mission for Sustainable Agriculture.

To fulfil the mandate of the food security Act, crops other than rice and wheat would need to be promoted. Area under rice could be curtailed and replaced by maize, quality protein maize, arhar, and other pulses. The inclusion of pulses in the mix should also enhance soil fertility and soil physical properties.

To make agriculture an engine for development and poverty reduction, we must ensure that agriculture expands. Agricultural development cannot occur until an appropriate/required amount of capital is invested into it. According to the UNDP records for 2008, India spent 0.8 per cent of its GDP on total (not just agriculture) research and development, whereas China spent 1.2 per cent, US 2.7 per cent and Japan 3 per cent. Of the 0.8 per cent, the share for agricultural research and development was quite small in India. India will need to invest more in agricultural research and development to stay competitive globally. No new technology can be developed without novel, cutting-edge research.

The writer is a former Vice-Chancellor, PAU, Ludhiana

Borlaug, the saviour
Dr Norman Ernest Borlaug, better known as the father of the Green Revolution, was a US agronomist who developed semi-dwarf, high-yield, disease-resistant wheat varieties. With the help of modern agricultural production techniques, wheat yields nearly doubled in India, boosting food security. Borlaug is often credited with saving over a billion people worldwide from starvation. He was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1970. Later, India awarded him the Padma Vibhushan.
(Today is Dr Borlaug's death anniversary)