By T.V.R. Shenoy

Govt draws flak on Bezbaruah issue
THE Union forces had a tough time in opening stages of the American Civil War despite a huge advantage in numbers and material resources.

75 Years Ago

Tax on cow-slaughter
THE object of this piece is only to show the respect and regard which Mussalman rulers showed towards the religious susceptibilities of Hindus in the matter of the slaughter of cows.

.........

By T.V.R. Shenoy
Govt draws flak on Bezbaruah issue

THE Union forces had a tough time in opening stages of the American Civil War despite a huge advantage in numbers and material resources. After one setback, Abraham Lincoln sighed that only his commanders could “snatch defeat from the jaws of victory!”

I wonder what Honest Abe would have said about the BJP-led government’s performance in the past month. The Supreme Court was supposed to hear the Indian Bank case on September 8 and 9. The Indian Bank somehow managed to make Rs 1,326 crore disappear, even its Chairman got eight extensions from the Narasimha Rao regime for his services! It is said that several influential people got ‘loans’ from the bank that were never returned — Congressmen and members of the Tamil Maanila Congress.

It was a wonderful opportunity to flaunt the anti-corruption credentials of the Vajpayee government. Yet in a supreme irony it was the government that found itself getting a tongue-lashing from the apex court for having moved Enforcement Directorate Bezbaruah from his sensitive post.

The mere fact of Bezbaruah’s removal, for reasons that are still not clear, would have been enough to justify the Supreme Court’s ire. (He was allegedly removed because the Delhi Administration needed someone to set right the chaos in the capital’s transport system.) But what really stoked the fire was the mischievous and utterly misleading affidavit filed by the government. It rewrote a previous order of the Supreme Court itself, thereby trying to prove that the shifting of the Enforcement Directorate chief was perfectly in order!

This nonsense was immediately brushed aside by their Lordships, and the government ended up eating a humble pie. Bezbaruah is now back at his old job. (Alas, Delhiites must put up a little longer with the mess on the streets!) But the distasteful episode has thrown up questions that need to be answered.

Who misled the Prime Minister into believing that Bezbaruah’s transfer had legal sanction? Who tried to mislead the Supreme Court with that silly affidavit? The Prime Minister has already asked Attorney-General Soli Sorabjee to conduct a probe into the affidavit episode. Knowing Atal Behari Vajpayee, the initial removal of Bezbaruah too will be probed. Heads will roll.

But the excuses being offered are utterly laughable. “One line is missing in the copy of the Supreme Court judgement that we have,” is one explanation. All I can say is that such mistakes are multiplying like rabbits — the bureaucracy omitted a crucial section from a Law Commission report on the appointment of the Chief Vigilance Commissioner through “typographic error”.

But let us return to Bezbaruah and the events of August 13, 1998. It isn’t just that the transfer was ill-advised, judging by the facts presented to the Supreme Court. It turns out that practically nobody was asked to offer any advice at all. The Establishment Office wasn’t consulted nor was the Department of Personnel, (Personnel Minister K. Janarthanan, who wasn’t in Delhi on August 13, had officially opposed any such transfer.)

Yet Revenue Secretary N.K. Singh, Bezbaruah’s immediate superior, asked the Enforcement Directorate head to leave on the evening of August 13, handing over the charge to his deputy. When Bezbaruah demurred, Singh summarily made over the Enforcement Directorate to Joshi. (N.K. Singh himself was appointed to the Prime Minister’s Office the next day.)

Just what was going on? Who misled the Prime Minister? Why was such urgency shown in shifting Bezbaruah once the Prime Minister gave his sanction? Who wrote that affidavit? Finally, who benefited from the episode?

Not the BJP certainly! The only ones to gain were those members of the Congress and the defunct United Front whose names would have appeared in the Indian Bank case. I am sure Attorney-General Sorabjee will unearth the conspirators who tried to mislead the Supreme Court and the Prime Minister. But who will solve the mystery of the missing Rs 1,326 crore?

By N.K. Pant
Missiles: effective tools of modern warfare

THE Tomahawk cruise missiles so effectively fired from naval ships in the Arabian and Red Seas at terrorist targets in Afghanistan and Sudan without losing a single American combatant indeed have heralded a new trend in the annals of modern air warfare. It definitely underlined the fact that technological superiority in military matters would be the cutting edge in winning a future war.

The cruise missiles were also extensively used against Iraqi formations and installations during the 1991 Gulf War but this time the application has been really telling and deadly accurate with highly refined Circular Error Probability (CEP). So much so that only two out of the 75 missiles launched at Afghan terrorist camps is reported to have gone off target having fallen unexploded in the vicinity of Chagai, the Pakistani nuclear test range.

The Tomahawk has subsequently become the hot favourite with the US servicemen. It has at least proved one point beyond question that ballistic and cruise missiles have a distinct edge over the manned aircraft in springing surprises and penetrating the strongest air defence systems. Pakistan which boasts of an effective air defence radar coverage did not have even the inkling of the swarm of missiles passing through its airspace while on the way to the targets in Afghanistan.

Where do we stand in this vital field of modern warfare in India? It is well known that India’s indigenous missile programme has been moving at a snail’s pace. Since 1983 the country’s Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) has been trying to develop various kinds of missiles under the Integrated Guided Missile Development Programme (IGMDP), but except for the 150 km range army version of Prithvi surface-to-surface missile (SSM), which is now reportedly available for deployment, all others are still under various stages of development.

Prithvi has a cost-effective role against airfields, defence installations and other vulnerable areas. For the cost of one modern aircraft, scores of these missiles can be acquired and used against heavily defended targets deep within the enemy territory. Their range will automatically stand augmented after the 250-km range version, now under trial, is made available to the Indian Air Force for deployment.

While the Army version of the missile launched from the mobile launchers and armed with conventional warheads is designed for tactical application in the battlefield, the Air Force type will be basically meant for strategic targets. These SSMs can prove to be a vital part of Indian deterrence against Pakistan whose inadequate geostrategic depth can make the remotest corner of the country vulnerable to the Indian attack.

The nearest equivalent of Tomahawk cruise missile in the Indian navy’s arsenal will be Sagarika which is still in the initial stage of development. The proposed missile is not yet part of the IGMDP though in the aftermath of the much publicised Ghauri test firing by Pakistan, Americans, instead of putting pressure on the Pakistani-Chinese nexus under the provisions of the MTCR, had leaked the story to the US papers about India’s attempts to design 300 km range Sagarika with active Russian assistance. Though the charges were refuted by the Indian and Russian authorities, it was obviously to cover up the Pakistani misadventures in the field of medium-range ballistic missiles.

While the Indians have a well laid out missile development programme under the IGMDP, its progress has been quite tardy. The missiles being developed under it are Prithvi, Trishul, Akash, Nag and Agni. Development of these missile systems except the army version of Prithvi has been delayed due to the additional time taken in the realisation of the state-of-the-art technologies; changes in the user’s requirements and unavailability of some critical components necessitating their indigenisation. The sanctions imposed by the USA and allies have put further hindrances in the timely completion of these projects which, according to official estimates, were to be completed before June, 1999.

The latest test-firing of the short range triple-role missile Trishul at the interim test range at Chandipur incidentally coincided with India’s underground nuclear test in the desert of Pokhran on May 11, 1998. The quick reaction short-range missile has surface-to-surface capabilities, including sea skimming for the naval version and can also be used in the air defence mode by the IAF as well. On the other hand Akash is a surface-to-air missile with a range of 25 km and a payload of 50 kg of warhead. The smallest of the series, Nag, is a third generation anti-tank missile and can be fired from mobile launchers, tanks as well as helicopters.

The development of Agni (IRBM), termed as re-entry technology demonstrator so painstakingly developed by Indian scientists, was put under cold storage by the previous governments under American pressure. It had a maximum range of 2500 km and could have proved to some extent a deterrent against the Chinese threat. Only three Agnis were fabricated, the last of which was tested in 1994.

The further development was abandoned with the plea that the parameters of re-entry technology have been achieved. In this respect the BJP-led coalition at the Centre has been remarkably bold. Keeping in view the hostile security environment in the South Asian region, the government has rightly approved the development of 5000-km range IRBM capable of deterring the Chinese, who have become trusted strategic allies of Pakistan. But the mere approval of the longer range Agni will not help; it will need a strong bureaucratic and financial support.

The deployment of missiles will reduce the nation’s dependence on the highly costly combat aircraft for offensive and defensive roles making defence cost-effective. Have not the Tomahawk cruise missiles effectively proved it during the recent operations against the terrorist strongholds in Afghanistan?

The writer is a retired Wing Commander.

By Harihar Swarup
A crusader for public cause

WHATEVER may be the final shape of the recently promulgated Central Vigilance Commission Ordinance when tabled in the winter session of Parliament for ratification, the Commission will be headed by Nagarajan Vittal for four years. The ill-fated Ordinance has drawn flak since it was signed by the President, Mr K.R. Narayanan, but nobody raised a finger against Vittal.

An upright IAS officer of the 1960 batch belonging to the Gujarat cadre, Vittal has been a low profile bureaucrat of high integrity but during his long and chequered career, he was surrounded by controversies; he had to invariably fight to make his way for a cause. He succeeded because his plans did lot of public good though it might have hurt vested interests. He has often been quoted as saying he would not compromise on his principles which were motivated by public good.

A frequent contributor to newspaper columns, Vittal has produced three books. His theme, apart from other topics, has been declining standards of governance and soaring corruption. India, afterall, ranks ninth in the list of most corrupt nations of the world. In Vittal’s views the safeguard in services, which often prove a shield against corruption and red tapism or, as said in official parlance, procedural delays, very often create major problems in governance. The system that breeds corruption has to be cleansed.

Vittal believes in transparency in government work and proposes to ensure this concept is enforced in the functioning of the Vigilance Commission. Transparency increases the effectiveness of an institution. One may say that the first-ever Chief Vigilance Commissioner may turn out to be a crusader against corruption.

Though Vittal is an idealist, the Ordinance that created his post has run into serious trouble. So much so that Urban Development Minister Ram Jethmalani, an eminent jurist himself, has attacked the measure and demanded that the CVC statute should be rewritten. Though generally known as a “loud mouth” and “sharp-tongued” in political circles, Jethmalani has raised valid points regarding faux pas committed by officialdom while drafting the ordinance.

He suspects that a powerful lobby of bureaucrats has worked behind the scene to protect its own interest by deliberately flouting every recommendation regarding appointment of the CVC.

The bureaucracy dealing with the Ordinance completely bypassed the recommendations of the Law Commission and the direction of the Supreme Court. The Law Commission as well as the apex court had stated that the CVC’s post would not be restricted to bureaucrats alone. The highest court of the land has laid down that “the CVC would be from a panel of outstanding civil servants and others with impeccable integrity”.

Contrary to the recommendation, the Ordinance stipulated “the CVC and the two vigilance commissioners shall be appointed from persons who are or have been in an all-India service”. This means that the appointment of retired or sitting judges or even police officers on the sensitive post has been ruled out. The Ordinance has now been challenged in the Supreme Court and the outcome is awaited.

An amiable person by nature, Vittal avoids controversies but he often unwittingly lands in uninvited rumpus. But once he is thrown into battle he fights with the zeal of a reformer. He has again been led to a similar situation where he is to supervise the work of two premier investigative agencies — the CBI and the Enforcement Directorate.

While the Supreme Court and the Law Commission has clearly stated that the CVC would supervise the working of the CBI “in all respects”, the Ordinance limits the scope to cases involving prevention of corruption act. Successive governments have thoroughly misused the CBI and ED for their political ends. Can Vittal bring about much needed reforms in the two organisations with his powers curtailed?

Vittal is a firm believer in the Bhagavad Gita and its precepts have always shown him the way in a difficult situation. As Secretary Telecommunication, he and his minister, Sukh Ram developed serious differences. Sukh Ram did not like Vittal because of his transparent and upright style of working yet they managed to pull on. Both as Secretary of Telecommunication and department of electronics, Vittal’s contribution to bring the government and the industry closer was an achievement.

Vittal’s motivation wherever he had worked was to make life easier for the people and ensure that the schemes were implemented in right earnest. As the Development Commissioner of Kandla Free Trade Zone, he ensured that exporters were not harassed by cumbersome procedures.

He has an advantage of working practically in all southern states and in the north too. Though he is not a linguist, he can fluently converse in Tamil, Kannada, Gujarati and, of course, Hindi. A lover of music and a keen reader, Vittal starts his day quite early in morning with prayers followed by long walks.

75 YEARS AGO
Letter to the Editor
Tax on cow-slaughter

THE object of this piece is only to show the respect and regard which Mussalman rulers showed towards the religious susceptibilities of Hindus in the matter of the slaughter of cows. From the very beginning of their rule, the Mohammedans realised the depth of Hindu feeling in this matter and as it was the underlying principle of their policy to govern the country by treating the Hindus as their fellow-countrymen and brothers, they fully respected the religious feelings of the Hindus in regard to the slaughter of cows.

From the very inception of Muslim rule a special tax was imposed on butchers for the slaughter of cows to the extent of 12 “jetal” per cow.During the reign of Feroze Shah, butchers complained against this tax and the king abolished it. Details of this taxation are not given in books of history, but its object could only have been the prevention of cow slaughter.

— A reader