P A G E
Wednesday, November 3, 1999
spotlighttoday's calendar
|
E D I T O R I A L P A G E |
Wednesday, November 3, 1999 |
| weather spotlight today's calendar |
||
|
Musharraf
looks for legitimacy
TACKLING
GLOBAL TERRORISM |
 |
Talks
improve US perception of India
Menace
from Miami
November 3, 1924
|
||||||||
 |
|
Musharraf looks for legitimacy IT is now certain that General Parvez Musharraf, the CEO of Pakistan, will continue to govern his country as long as he can. His primary concern, therefore, is to earn legitimacy at home as well as abroad. This observation is justified by most of the steps he has taken after capturing power on October 12 in a bloodless coup. If there were any doubts these were cleared by him at his first Press conference on Monday. For the satisfaction of the home public he is concentrating the maximum on tackling corruption cases, mainly those involving politicians and others close to ousted Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and his family. But all the others who have acquired wealth through questionable means or are loan-defaulters may also not be spared. The National Accountability Bureau that he has set up is aimed at achieving a "great" objective — to prove that had the armed forces not ceased power from the civilian rulers they would have turned Pakistan into a bankrupt nation. Thus the General-turned-CEO and his comrades should be accepted by the Pakistanis as their "saviours". The world should not be surprised if General Musharraf goes in for a referendum on whether he should quickly hand over power to elected representatives of the people or should stay on till he feels he has accomplished "the task" he has assigned to himself. There is every possibility that he may get or manage the people's mandate to legitimise his dictatorship. As it appears from the expression of joy by the people in general at the turn of events, there is no love lost between the man in the street and the political class. The feeble demand for the restoration of democratic rule from certain politicians belonging to the Grand Democratic Alliance carries no meaning for the military strongman. And very few people take seriously what the Nawaz Sharif-led Pakistan Muslim League says these days. The General has been very cautious about handling the Press. He is allowing it maximum freedom (or as much freedom as poses no threat to his survival as the CEO) as part of a design. A free Press, perhaps he realises, will not collaborate with the politicians to incite people to demand an immediate end of military rule. General Musharraf, one can notice, has been giving a sufficient doze of the tranquilliser called Kashmir to help his countrymen, including media personalities, not to lose their cool. To quieten those
pressing for the restoration of democratic rule from
abroad, the General has put on the job the man who knows
how to handle the world, specially the significant part
of it---the developed world. The man is Sahibzada Yakub
Khan, a former Foreign Minister. Mr Khan is already on
the move to impress upon the world leaders that the
General means business and he has responded to "the
call of the Pakistani nation". Thus General
Musharraf may soon start getting a different kind of
treatment from world leaders. He will then be free to
experiment with his own "concept of democracy"
as he hinted at the Press conference. Pakistan is
unlikely to see the democracy as it existed till the
second week of October for years to come. As far as India
is concerned, the General will not be an easy person to
deal with. He has struck a tough posture on Kashmir and
decried New Delhi's nuclear doctrine. He says that
Islamabad wants all "outstanding issues" with
New Delhi to be sorted out and considers Kashmir as the
core issue. That means he has closed the option of having
a dialogue with India with an open mind. A sad scenario,
indeed! |
BSE’s wild swing A SUPERCYCLONE howled through the stock market, felling the share index and wiping out the total value by nearly a fifth. What is heartening, however, is the two week-long panic ended soon, halting the current free fall. As in the past, the foreign institutional investors set the pace and the Indian counterparts, who were earlier caught in a stampede, regained breath and lifted the sentiments. The 11-day-long plunge was caused by foreign players who had picked up leading scrips when the 40-share sensitive index (sensex) was hovering around 3000 points, found it irresistible to unload them at a profit of anything upto 500 per cent. The D-Day for the dreaded Y2K bug is just two months away and if everything turns out alright, New Year festivities will keep the FIIs busy for a few more weeks. This means a full and firm revival has to wait until early February, despite the partial rebound on Tuesday. This is evident from the strategy of leading local investors like the UTI. Contrary to their practice, they have not entered the market either to buy shares at a lower price and to calm down the nervous brokers. Analysts offer several reasons for the crash in share prices — the sensex plummeting by more than 800 points in two weeks and the value of all shares shrinking by 19 per cent. With the sensex hitting 5000 points, the Indian market seems to have peaked. On the other hand, countries like South Korea are well on the road to economic recovery and hence promise quicker and bigger profit. Add to this the high margin of 25 per cent for all incomplete deals, steep badla charges (on notional transactions) and the falling prices. A combination of these factors has derailed the once healthy market. The degree of robust confidence that propelled the sensex to jump from about 3000 points to over 5000 points is not likely to return very soon and the jump of sensex by 220 points is what brokers call a technical correction. Several “retail” investors like banks and companies with spare cash, entered the rising market in the hope of super profits but have lost badly during the past two weeks. It is these new comers who imparted that extra stimulus to help the index climb steeply and next time around they will feel inhibited. Every leading share was
battered. On Monday many big names lost 8 per cent and
the computer froze the price at that level as rules
demand. Caught in this free fall were SBI, Tisco, Telco,
ITC, ACC, Dr Reddy’s and the top favourites of the
FIIs like Zee, Ranbaxy and Satyam. Since October 12, when
the feverish bull run was first broken, share prices of
computer and software companies plunged by more than 25
per cent, pharmaceutical units by 23 per cent,
telecommunication service providers by 19 per cent,
consumer goods producers by 10 per cent and oil
refineries by 8 per cent. The ill effects of the crash
was thus evenly spread with only a very few exceptions.
In the midst of this fading gloom there are some
optimists. They trot out three factors in support of
their hopeful outlook. One, the value of total shares
traded on Monday was Rs 4298 crore, while the average for
the previous 10 days was Rs 6000 crore. This indicates
that a fewer number of people are now rushing to the sell
counter. This, in turn, is a healthy development. Two,
the result of the working of several companies has been
uniformly good, a sure sign that the downward spiral will
be halted. Above all, the FIIs have not fled the market
as they did on several previous occasions. They are
watching from the sidelines and once the mood turns
positive, they will be back buying. This is a slender
hope but then the stock market is ruled by such feelings. |
Death for rape? ON October 31 a minor girl was raped by by three young men in a jhuggi cluster in north-west Delhi. Similar reports of minors being raped by sex fiends can be picked up from any part of the country on a regular basis. Of all the forms of heinous crimes rape has registered the highest growth rate in recent years. What is more revolting is the fact even a few-month-old babies are not being spared by the perpetrators of sex crimes. There have been stray instances of the rapist or rapists being lynched by infuriated mobs. However, to condone the killing of suspected rapists without a fair trial may create other complications. Union Home Minister L. K. Advani has for long been advocating the death sentence for rapists. If a quick vote were to be taken, his proposal may get overwhelming support. However, it would be better to use the mind rather than the heart for understanding the problem and finding the solution. The National Commission for Women has done just that. It has rejected the proposal for awarding the death sentence to rapists. The NCW expressed its unequivocal opposition after a careful study of the draft legislation prepared by the Home Ministry. What may come as a surprise to Mr Advani is the fact that the NCW is just one of the many women's organisations which rightly believe that death sentence for rapists "is not the answer to the problem". They have put the issue in perspective by pointing out that cases of rape have shown an alarming increase not because the punishment for the crime is inadequate. The real issue is not too little punishment, but no punishment at all for the perpetrators of the crime. The rapists are let off by the courts for want of clinching evidence. As far as the
"Advani formula" is concerned women activists
are rightly surprised that the proposal should have come
from him. A valid reason why women organisations have
taken the lead in opposing the death sentence proposal is
that it may force the culprit or culprits to commit the
double crime of rape and murder. If the rapist's life
depends on the testimony of the victim, why should he
spare her life? There is another problem. As it is, the
rate of conviction in rape cases is appallingly low
because of unsatisfactory investigation and reluctance of
the victims to identify the criminals in open court. Add
to it the fact that courts award the death sentence in
the rarest of rare cases. There is also global pressure
favouring abolition of capital punishment because even
criminals have human rights, including the right to life.
Reformation and not punishment is the new buzz word.
Women activists rightly fear that the rate of conviction
may drop further if Parliament recommends death sentence
for rape. The better option may be to create special
cells in each district for investigating cases of rape.
And only women officers should be allowed to record the
testimony of the victims. There is also a socio-economic
aspect to the problem. The glorification of sex and
violence by television channels is affecting the poor
more than the rich. For a young and unmarried jhuggi
dweller aroused by the explicit scenes on the small
screen, the "zero money" option is to rape a
minor girl in the neighbourhood when her parents go out
to work. Unfortunately, there is little that can be done
in the global village to make TV channels screen
wholesome yet entertaining programmes. |
TACKLING GLOBAL TERRORISM INDIA has been the constant and consistent victim of cross-border terrorism emanating from Pakistan over the years and mainly manifesting itself in J&K. Pakistan-inspired terrorism has also been active in the north eastern states though in a different form and through different intermediaries. In 1989 General Zia gave a special thrust to this menace which reached its peak in the valley of Kashmir in 1990-91. It has not ceased and almost every day there are attacks on some target. After the Pakistan army burnt its fingers in the Kargil war militants carried out a series of raids across the border targeting the camps of security forces in Kashmir. Now that Pakistan has come under army rule, it remains to be seen if there is going to be any let-up in militancy. Towards the end of August this year Dagestan, a small Russian province adjoining Chechnya in the Caucasus, became the target of Islamic fundamentalists who mounted attacks from Chechnya. A Chechen militant, Shamil Basayev and a Jordanian, Khattab, were spearheading the attacks calling themselves Mujahideen, with the declared objective of establishing a free Islamic state of Dagestan. Simultaneously, the militants carried the war to the very heart of Russia by setting off sensational bombings of multi-storeyed apartments in Moscow and in a neighbouring city in which as many as 100 people died. In one of the explosions the victims were mostly families of the armed forces. The Russian security forces struck back decisively and ordered military attacks on the militants based in Chechnya. The Russian President, Mr Boris Yeltsin, said terrorists had declared war on the people of Russia and the Russian armed forces would respond “appropriately, harshly, rapidly and decisively to meet the bandits’ challenge”. Prime Minister Putin added that the Russia was dealing with a well-trained gang of international terrorists which was bent upon whipping up political tension and destabilising Russia. Mr Putin’s reference to training to the militants was specifically in respect of Osama bin Laden who had reportedly visited the camps in Dagestan and also distributed large sums of money to the militants there. The Russian intelligence network also reported that as many as 10,000 mercenaries had been trained in the camps on the Afghanistan-Pakistan border which were originally set up to train Afghan tribes to fight the Soviet Union in the 1980s. It was in this context that Kazakhstan, one of the Central Asian republics which formed part of the erstwhile Soviet Union, convened a Conference on Interaction and Confidence Building Measures in Central Asia. It was attended by 16 countries including Russia, China, India, Iran, Israel as well as Pakistan. There were several observers such as the USA, Japan, Australia and South Korea. India’s External Affairs Minister, Mr Jaswant Singh, who attended the conference at Almaty, Kazakhstan, spoke about the menace of international terrorism, New Delhi’s own experience in Kashmir and elsewhere and the need for decisive action against the growing danger. At the end of the deliberations the conference declared that the member states should not export terrorism. In case any nation was found guilty of indulging in this act, the other countries should seriously examine their relations with it. The Almaty conference marked a decisive step in the direction of a coordinated approach against the menace of international terrorism, which was by and large, Islamic fundamentalist terrorism funded by hardcore Islamists in Saudi Arabia, Libya, Sudan, etc. There were two other important events such as the meeting of the Russian Prime Minister, Mr Putin, with the Principal Secretary to the Prime Minister and National Security Adviser Mr Brajesh Mishra in Delhi during Mr Putin’s stop-over on his way back from the APEC conference. Close on the heels of the meeting between Mr Putin and Mr Brajesh Mishra, India’s Foreign Secretary, Mr K. Raghunath visited Moscow and met the Russian Foreign Minister, Mr Igor Ivanov. The problem of international terrorism came up for a detailed discussion. The USA has also undertaken a comprehensive review of international terrorism and the roles of the Taliban in Afghanistan. Washington has no hesitation in recognising the fact that the training centres set up for Afghan Mujahideen in the 1980s had since become home for training Islamic militants under the auspices of the Taliban. A very large number of Islamic militants running into thousands have been trained in these camps. After two senior officers from the Ministry of External Affairs visited Washington and held detailed discussions on the dimensions of international terrorism and India’s experience, the USA had designated Mr Michael Sheehan as coordinator on terrorism in the US State Department. He visited New Delhi recently and held extensive discussions. It is likely that the USA may set up an office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation in Delhi for constant contact and coordination with Indian security agencies. Meanwhile India signed the international convention for the suppression of terrorism at the United Nations on September 19. The convention was adopted by UN General Assembly in 1997 and it calls upon member nations to prosecute or extradite those accused of terrorist acts and to extend all nations facilities for dealing with terrorists. The USA has since been able to focus its attention on the issue, even though it has first-hand experience and that too within that country when the World Trade Tower was subjected to bombing. Later there were attacks at the US embassy staff in Pakistan. The climax was reached when bomb attacks at the US embassies in Nairobi and Dar-es-Salam, were reportedly masterminded by the Saudi terrorist, Osama bin Laden. The US administration has also included several other Islamic outfits based in Pakistan as terrorist organisations. These are Al-Hadeed and Al-Faran which actually form part of the main organisation of Harkat-ul-Ansar, also called Harkat-ul-Mujahideen. This was followed by the USA calling upon Pakistan to take decisive steps against militant groups such as Harkat-ul-Ansar which are based in Pakistan and operating in Kashmir. Russia took up with Pakistan the question of the latter’s support to Islamic militants. In a letter to the then Pakistan Foreign Minister, Mr Sartaj Aziz, the Russian Foreign Minister, Mr Igor Ivanov, demanded that Islamabad should take concrete steps to check cross-border terrorism and conveyed Moscow’s dissatisfaction over Pakistan’s routine disclaimer on the militants involved in Chechnya. This was followed by Russia calling upon the other permanent members of the Security Council to condemn international terrorism. The UN Security Council made an appeal in the last week of September to all the countries to cooperate in preventing and suppressing terrorist acts. The USA recently introduced in the Security Council a resolution calling for the imposition of sanctions against the Taliban regime in Afghanistan unless it surrendered Osama bin Laden. The precedent for such a move was the Security Council’s sanction against Libya in 1992 for harbouring the suspects in the bombing of Pan Am flight 103 over Scotland. The resolution was passed unanimously which marked a major step in tackling international terrorism emanating from Afghanistan. The sanctions against air traffic and international financial aid and loans would affect Afghanistan’s already shattered economy. The Taliban leader, Mulla Omar, has since reportedly agreed to close down the terrorist camps but it has so far refused to surrender Osama. Ironically, a few days
before the army coup Pakistan itself had made certain
moves against the militants from Afghanistan when it
despatched the ISI chief, Lieut-Gen Ziauddin, to Kabul.
Pakistan’s main interest was to prevent Islamic
fundamentalists from adding fuel to the fire for
aggravating the Shia-Sunni divide. The unfortunate fact
is that sections of the Pakistani army already consist of
religious fundamentalists and the armed forces generally
have been Talibanised to some extent. Whether this
contributed to the recent coup by Gen Pervez Musharraf in
dethroning Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif would be known in
due course. However, irrespective of the recent events in
Pakistan, the United Nations, the major Western powers,
Russia, Central Asian states, China and, of course, India
have all decisively moved against international
terrorism. The most important step in this regard was the
positive response from the Clinton administration to
India’s stand that it cannot resume the Lahore
process until cross-border terrorism ceases, and that it
would seek commitments from General Musharraf in this
regard. |
Bofors: without the Prince of
Denmark HALF-done jobs or incomplete charge-sheets are bound to create doubts. Therefore, it is no wonder that the case filed in the court on the payoffs from the Bofors gun deal has the fact that the name of the late Rajiv Gandhi has been included in the charge-sheet and not that of the Hinduja clan, does, indeed, raise eyebrows. But this in no way suggests that Rajiv Gandhi was not involved. Probably, the government could have waited for some more time, when it has done so for more than a decade, for the sixth account documents relating to the Hindujas to arrive. The FIR was filed in January, 1990, and the case in October, 1999. Another six months or so would not have mattered, particularly when the papers submitted to the court are the ones which were received several months ago. One can argue that the sins of the dead should be buried with them. Had the Congress presented its case from that point of view, it would have aroused sympathy. But it cannot take a cavalier attitude and say that there was not a shred of evidence against Rajiv Gandhi, and take a moral stand and beg that the memory of the assassinated Prime Minister should not be defiled. If the Congress and Mrs Sonia Gandhi feel that Rajiv Gandhi’s name has been unnecessarily dragged, they should welcome the opportunity that has come to clear him. The Bofors payoff is one mark against him which has not got rubbed off after many years. Were his name to be deleted now, it would be playing Shakespeare’s drama “Hamlet” without the Prince of Denmark. The impression would also go round that the Vajpayee government had yielded to the Congress threat and compromised on the issue of corruption to have an easier time in Parliament. How would the electorate, which gave a clear verdict in favour of the National Democratic Alliance, react to such a dishonest deal? I do not know what will be the fate of the case. But I do know that if the country has heard one word, day in and day out for the past 12 or 13 years, it is the Bofors. The payoff deal has been discussed threadbare that Bofors in common parlance has come to mean corruption. The 1989 election, which the Congress lost, was fought by political parties on this issue. And there has not been a session of Parliament in the last decade without the demand for tracing the recipients of the kickbacks. In fact, if there was unanimity in the attack on the government, it was on its inability to get the papers from Sweden quickly. I do not know why Mrs Sonia Gandhi has characterised the charge as some kind of “political vendetta”. She herself challenged the government a few months ago to come out with any evidence. I do not have to go over the events of more than a decade to show how nervous the Congress has been whenever the question of Bofors gun has cropped up. Congress Foreign Minister Madhavsinh Solanki’s written request to the Swedish government to delay the release of names on the deal is too recent to be forgotten. When the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) tried to whitewash the deal, there was one DMK MP, Alladi Aruna from Tamil Nadu, to point the accusing finger at Rajiv Gandhi. In his dissenting note, Aruna quoted chapter and verse to prove Rajiv Gandhi’s complicity and questioned the various conflicting statements made by some former Prime Ministers. The Congress has to answer many questions. Who introduced Ottavio Quattrocchi, an Italian businessman working in Delhi, to Bofors? Where, when and why? He had a hush-hush contact with Bofors. What job did he do for Bofors between November, 1985, when the contract was signed and March, 1986, when it was terminated? The answer is clear. He got the deal swung in favour of Bofors and that too in a record time. He could not have done this without Rajiv Gandhi’s support. I think the credit for bringing the case of the Bofors kickbacks into the open should go to the young, intrepid woman journalist, Chitra Subramanyam. She did not give up even when threatened. The first time when I met her at Geneva nearly 10 years ago, she told me how she was warned on the telephone and through messengers that she would be killed if she did not give up pursuing the case. “Aren’t you afraid?” I asked her. She said she was worried. “But they knew that I have an assurance from Deep Throat (who gave her information) that he will release to the press all information and documents on Bofors if they tried to harm me”. The CBI, particularly M.D. Sharma and K. Madhavan, who registered the FIR in January, 1990, did a satisfactory job. Still the agency has been on and off the enquiry, depending on who headed the government at the Centre. The credit should also be given to Mr B.M. Oza, India’s Ambassador to Sweden at that time. To the CBI he said: “With the revelation of the evidence that Quattrocchi received commissions from Bofors, I have no doubt in my mind that they were actually the bribe money for Rajiv Gandhi paid by Bofors through Quattrocchi. He was merely a conduit for siphoning money.” I have gone through reams of material. I have not yet found why Rajiv Gandhi telephoned Swedidsh Prime Minister Ingvar Carlsson on April 27, 1987, and requested him to terminate the official probe which the Government of India had earlier requested in view of the uproar in the country. Again, why did Rajiv Gandhi call off the visit of Bofors officials in July, 1987? He had definitely something to hide when he refused to support Lars Ringberg’s investigation in Sweden. It is apparent that everything relating to the deal in its last stages took place in the Prime Minister’s Office, with Rajiv Gandhi creating two channels: one official and the other known only to him and his office. Mr Arun Singh, then Minister of State for Defence, was probably right in saying that the government specifically told Bofors that there should not be any middlemen and that the condition was accepted by the company. His reference was to the government channel. He was not aware of the second channel. General Sundarji, after retirement, admitted that he was told by Mr S.K. Bhatnagar, then Defence Secretary, to change the note in which he had asked the government to threaten cancellation of the contract to force Bofors to disclose the names of those who received the kickbacks. Significantly, Mr Bhatnagar was appointed by the Rajiv Gandhi government as the Sikkim Governor. I wish Rajiv Gandhi had
resigned when the accusing finger was directed at him.
Had he owned moral responsibility for what had gone wrong
with the Bofors gun deal, he might have done better at
the polls in 1989 because the people are generally
willing to forgive a person who tenders an apology. He
lost because he did not turn out to be “Mr
Clean”. One day the full story will come out, as it
did in 1977 after the Emergency when many skeletons in
the government cupboard were brought out by the Shah
Commission. What will then happen to the Congress or
those who are not allowing the truth to come out is not
difficult to guess. |
Menace
from Miami CONSIDERING that I and my wife Karuna are very close friends of the Trivedis, this visit of ours to them was taking place after a long time. Nor, for that matter, had they visited us for the past several weeks. As I pressed the call bell button, Madalasa, the 15-year-old chirpy daughter of Satyabhama and Makarand, opened the door. We had hardly occupied our seats in the living room when the couple joined. Madalasa was complaining to me about our not coming for such a long time while Karuna asked Makarand if everything was all right and why they had not bothered even to call us. As the preliminaries went on, I noticed that Satyabhama was unusually quiet, even off colour. She is a vivacious person and makes any company lively with her presence. She takes pride in being the namesake of Lord Krishna’s consort whose beauty has embellished many a page of the Puranas. As Madalasa went into the kitchen to get us tea and Karuna tried to make some conversation with Satyabhama without much success, I asked Makarand if there was something wrong between him and Satyabhama. “No”, said Makarand, “this time, it is not between us, though something is terribly troubling her. She has been sulking for the last several days and has almost lost her appetite. She speaks little, and in monosyllables. Even when Sutanu (their 20-year-old son, studying in Bangalore) called the other day, she barely talked to him. “And if you don’t mind sharing” asked Karuna, “what is wrong with her?’’ Tea came. After serving it, it was Madalasa who spoke, “Auntie, it is mosquitoes. They are behind Mama’s problem”. If I thought I had noticed a mischievous glint in Madalasa’s eyes, I let the thought perish immediately. Satyabhama gave her daughter a stern look and the latter was silenced. Karuna, feminine curiosity overtaking her, asked Makarand, “But what is this mosquito problem, Bhai Sahib? There are so many varieties of repellents available. Surely one of them can help.” I intervened to make light of the conversation. “A mosquito, you know, imitates a wicked person, says a Sanskrit poet. First, it falls at your feet. Then nibbles at the flesh of their soles. Moving upwards, it reaches your ear and makes slow musical whispers. Finding a small (loop) hole it enters it without compunction and troubles you no end. Believe me”. I said, “I have myself lost many a sleep over both, a mosquito and a wicked person.” “You and your quotations, “Karuna remonstrated, “here we are trying to solve a problem and you think it is time for indulging in quotations.” The telephone rang. Madalasa went in to attend it and returned, “It is Amrita auntie, Mama; wants to speak to you”. Satyabhama rose. She had not uttered a word all through. We had been feeling uneasy. I suggested to leave but while going in, she gestured to us to stay, she would be back in a minute. Karuna, sympathetic about her plight, made another attempt. She asked Makarand again about the mosquito problem. If it was indeed serious why a doctor was not being consulted. Again, it was Madalasa who responded, “Oh auntie, it is about the mosquitoes who, despite being all over, refuse to bite my mother.” We were both dumbfounded. Before I or Karuna could utter a word, Madalasa said again, “There is this news from Miami. An entomologist of Florida University has concluded that mosquitoes use odour to sort attractive people from the unattractive and bite only the former. Mama is sulking because they no longer bite her...” Madalasa would have
continued but Satyabhama returned. As she was about to
sit down, we stood up and took leave of our friends. How
I wished I could tell her that I disagreed with the
mosquitoes. |
Talks improve US perception of
India A RECENT official visit to the USA has left me fully convinced, that relations between the two largest democracies of the world are not only on the mend, but are poised for a quantitative and qualitative jump in the coming millennium. Doubters who always see the dark side of things could contest this statement, but then that is to be expected. Such criticism must be taken in the stride, if our foreign policy is to charter a truly independent course, synchronising and meshing in with our strategic overview and national interests. The post-Kargil period provided an excellent opportunity to review the thaw that had occurred in Indo-US relations, and to charter new paths and routes that both the countries could take for their mutual benefit. This was one of the guiding sign-posts of the visit. It is not within this writer’s purview to give many details of our visit, for that matter lies within the jurisdictional domain of government. But certainly, what can be shared with the readers without giving away any state secrets, are some of the nuances and impressions of a vast cross-section of the common American, the think-tanks, and the policy-making institutions of the sole super power left today. Meetings both in Washington DC and on the west coast, covered a wide spectrum of US public opinion ranging from Mr Carl Gershman, president of the National Endowment for Democracy, to ambassadors (and columnists) Howard and Teresita Schaffer, to Mr Michael Krepon of the Henry L. Stimson centre, and on to Stanford University and the Monterey Institute of International Studies, just to name a few. Everywhere we went, the ground swell of appreciation of Prime Minister Vajpayee’s restraint in handling the Kargil crisis was more than evident. Restoration of the military situation by India, without crossing the LoC, and thereby restricting the scope of the Kargil war which could have destabilised the whole of South Asia, was considered an act of mature and masterful diplomacy on the part of the PM and his highly articulate Minister of External Affairs, Mr Jaswant Singh. Quite surprisingly, hardly anyone raised the question of when exactly the intruders had occupied some of the snow-clad hilltops in Kargil, which just went to prove that such an orchestration by some of the political parties, was mainly an electoral requirement meant for home consumption during an election year. The second impression on a different plane altogether, which stands out is the viewpoint expressed by an American fast-food joint owner in San Francisco, enquiring as to why is it that, “you guys (India and Pakistan), keep on fighting with each other”? I had to remind him that it was the Pakistanis who attacked first in Kargil, but as far as he was concerned, “this Kashmir thing is one hell of a bore for us; why don’t you guys divide the place between the two of you, and be done with it”? So here is one American commoner’s suggestion for whatever it is worth. The third trend one noted was the marked attitude of the Americans to initially tar India and Pakistan with the same brush, especially in so far as their rationable for imposing sanctions on both countries after their nuclear tests were concerned. We suggested to them that in India, our signing or not signing the CTBT is governed by taking into account the views and the will of the people and their directly elected representatives in the democratic system that we follow. In any case, as it transpired, the American case on this issue died a natural death when the CTBT was voted out by their own law-makers, inflicting a major defeat on President Clinton’s government. One major area of concern for us, the growing trans-border intrusions and terrorism by Pakistan across the Line of Control and in other parts of India, has now begun to be appreciated by the USA and its call to Pakistan to pull back its troops from both the border and the LoC, is to be seen in that light. This is for the first time that the Americans have put down their viewpoint on the Pakistani intrusions, in so forceful and unambiguous terms. In security terms, it was clear that a pullback from the international border meant little as long as the Pakistanis did not do the same along the LoC in Kashmir. This signal from the USA has been a major gain for Indian diplomacy. A new lesson in
international diplomacy seems to be emerging for India,
as we step into the next century. And that is, that
diplomacy is often best served by direct talks in
closed-door sessions, where both parties can be candid
and forthright with each other. The Americans prefer this
kind of an approach, because earlier on there was a
viewpoint expressed in some circles by them, that,
“half the time we really do not know what the
Indians want from us.” The diplomacy of the
Victorian age, where you said everything without really
saying anything, now lies, (happily), dead and buried in
most world capitals. |
Need to imbibe ‘Bhakra
culture’ at Thein IT is a matter of recent history that Mr M.H. Slocum spent the last 11 years of his life building the “temple” of the modern India — the Bhakra Dam. He was entrusted the task by none other than Pt Jawaharlal Nehru. He arrived in India in 1949 and breathed his last in 1960 and his body was flown back to the USA for burial. Those who had a chance to work with him are still aware of “Bhakra culture”, an open engineering fraternity in which discussions were encouraged. Mr B.M. Johnson, Director of Bhakra Dam Designs, issued a circular saying: “Don’t believe in rumours; if in doubt come to me for clarification”. A similar situation prevailed in other wings also. Let us go back to the evening of August 21, 1959, when a “mishap” had occurred resulting in ‘failure’ of the hoist chamber located above the right diversion tunnel, which housed the high head-regulation gate for early irrigation of the Bhakra canal areas. What happened was not kept a secret. Engineers of all ranks were ‘encouraged’ to give suggestions on what should be done to rectify the situation. Mr Kanwar Sain, Dr A.N. Khosla and Dr K.L. Rao, addressed several technical fora where there was complete freedom of speech. Rather, an announcement was made of an award for ‘brilliant’ ideas found feasible. It is no secret that the idea of plugging the right tunnel by building a reverse earth dam, in front of the tunnel mouth, was floated by the foundation section of the Bhakra Dam Design Directorate and put forward at the meeting by Mr O.P. Chadha, Executive Engineer (Design), working in the section headed by Mr P.S. Bhatnagar, Deputy Director. The credit was thus shared. But the “journey” from Bhakra to Thein via Talwara has led to a loss of the “Bhakra culture”. Now everything is kept secret and is known only to a top few. In this regard, the case of the snags of the Thein Dam power tunnels is cited. As per media reports, the “commissioning” of four 150 MW units of the Ranjit Sagar Dam (Thein Dam) has been “delayed” by a year or so, resulting in a loss of Rs 500 crore on account of delayed benefits. After a quarter of a century, the goal of building Thein Dam remains elusive. In such a situation it is duty of the Thein Dam administration or the board of consultants, to answer some questions being asked by the ‘engineering fraternity’ such as:- i) What happened? ii) Why it happened?, iii) Could the situation have been avoided? And the most important of all — what is proposed to be done to rectify the situation, including the likely mode of repairs and expected repair costs. While preparing the answers to these questions, it may be kept in mind how the situation could have been handled if the “Bhakra culture” had flourished at Thein Dam. How would Mr Slocum have acted in such a situation? Instead of “declaring the Project Area to be out-of-bounds for those who may hold technical opinions different from the official point of view, we should invite engineers who had worked on similar projects to see things for themselves and suggest how the situation should be handled. This will not cut across the powers of the Board of Consultants as the “final authority” would still be theirs. Unless that is done, we
will continue to hear rumblings from the graves of people
like Slocum because we are not doing justice to the
nation, let alone the ‘engineering community’.
Will history will forgive us for what we are doing? |
November
3, 1924 ELSEWHERE in this newspaper will be found certain important resolutions of which Raja Narendranath has given notice for the next session of the Punjab Legislative Council. One of these resolutions proposes the appointment of a Committee, apportionment of seats on the Lahore Municipal Committee between various communities and report to Government as to the action to be taken. The proposed Committee is to consist of 5 Musalmans, 4 Hindus and one Sikh, and we have no hesitation in saying that the Hindu and Sikh gentlemen whose names are proposed are such as would command the confidence of their respective communities. It is nothing short of a scandal that for more than a year the premier municipality in the Province has been run without the representatives of one of the principal communities of the town, and it is high time something was done to put an end to the impasse. We, therefore, welcome the suggestion made in the resolution. But there is one aspect of the proposal which cannot be over- looked. The resolution suggests that the proposed committee is “to report to the Government” (which can only mean the Governor and Minister in case of a transferred subject) “as to the action be taken”, but goes on to add “that the report be laid before His Excellency the Governor-in-Council for orders”. It is, therefore, not
quite clear what the mover of the resolution actually
means; but we are sure he does not want the
Governor-in-Council to interfere in a matter which
relates to a transferred subject. |
 |
 |
| Nation
| Punjab | Haryana | Himachal Pradesh | Jammu & Kashmir | | Chandigarh | Business | Sport | | Mailbag | Spotlight | World | 50 years of Independence | Weather | | Search | Subscribe | Archive | Suggestion | Home | E-mail | |
