E D I T O R I A L   P A G E

EDITORIALS

N-armed basket case
Pakistan’s nuclear ambitions and intentions have never been a secret. Now Gen Pervez Musharraf has expressed them in so many words. He says categorically that Pakistan could use its nuclear bomb if its security is threatened. 

Three voices on economy
THE government presented three report cards on the state of the economy, which were a study in contrast. Finance Minister Yashwant Sinha, an ardent votary of the feel good factor, painted a cheerful picture, sidestepping worrisome signals. 

Pay for police help!
THE Supreme Court on Monday delivered a significant judgement in a case in which the Meghalaya government was directed by the Gauhati High Court to allow the complainant to pay for police investigations. The judgement deserved wider publicity than it received. Why? 

opinion

WEST ASIA PROBLEM
Shaky peace parleys
from Inder Malhotra in Washington
WHAT we call West Asia and the major western powers insist on describing as the Middle East is well and truly on the edge. An all-out war between the Israelis and the Palestinians has been averted by the Cairo summit at which the Israeli Prime Minister, Mr Ehud Barak, and the chairman of the Palestinian Authority, Mr Yasser Arafat, came together in the presence of the US President, Mr Bill Clinton, and the Egyptian host, Mr Hosni Mubarak.

Small-scale industrial policy to nowhere 
by K. Vaidyanathan
A MONTH ago, Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee announced the new industrial policy for the small-scale sector. Self anointed spokespersons for the SSIs applauded the approach. As a consequence the bureaucracy, as usual, felt smugly complacent and the Industries Minister gave herself a pat on her back. Some stray voices, in wilderness did express their reservations but by and large, they have been ignored. No clarifications have been forthcoming from the concerned quarters; nor have any modifications been proposed.

From obscurity to Nobel Prize
From Stuart Jeffries in Paris
THE surprise winner of the Nobel Prize for Literature sat on the edge of a friend’s bed in Paris and reflected on the journey that had brought him from China to France, from the obscurity of being a playwright and novelist known only to a small number of critics and intellectuals.

Where child marriage, polygamy thrive
From Syed Zarir Hussain in Seppa (Arunachal Pradesh)
Fortytwo-year-old Rojo Tok, a tribal peasant in Arunachal Pradesh, was all decked up in local finery to wed Mepong Taku, a girl who will turn 14 this winter. The atmosphere in this remote township in East Kameng district was festive, with tribal villagers making hectic preparations for the marriage. Tok’s first wife and their three children, one of them aged 18, were equally excited as they await little Taku’s arrival in their home.

SPIRITUAL NUGGETS

N-armed basket case

Pakistan’s nuclear ambitions and intentions have never been a secret. Now Gen Pervez Musharraf has expressed them in so many words. He says categorically that Pakistan could use its nuclear bomb if its security is threatened. That should rank among the most irresponsible statements ever to come from the lips of someone who happens to have the reins of a country in his hand, what if through a military coup. The “threat to security” is such an all-encompassing term that it could be twisted to mean anything that suits the ambitious General. The perfidy of it all becomes all the more clear when it is compared with the stand of India which has all along specifically eschewed the first use of nuclear weapons. But make no mistake about it. What the military ruler has said is no slip of the tongue. It is a well-calculated, deliberate statement. For one thing, it was made during an interview with an American television network. It was one of a piece with the old Pakistani endeavour to virtually blackmail the western world with the help of its nuclear arsenal into armtwisting India in various ways. The General and his predecessors have all made use of the western fears about the possibility of a nuclear conflagration in this region and engulfing the entire world. To this purpose, Islamabad has always tried to raise the bogey of dangerous instability, while hiding the fact that Pakistan itself is responsible for aiding and abetting such a confrontation. That is like someone killing his parents and then pleading for leniency because he is an orphan!

The world in general has seen through the game plan but there are some who still fall for this trick. Take Gen Anthony Zinni, retired chief of the Central Command which keeps a strategic eye on Pakistan. Interviewed by the same television network, he said that General Musharraf might be America’s last hope in Pakistan. If he fails, the fundamentalists would get hold of the “Islamic bomb”. What escaped the attention of General Zinni was the fact that the military rulers are hand in glove with fundamentalists all along. Many military officers have direct relations with the schools indoctrinating youth and work with them in fomenting trouble in India. In fact, General Musharraf was himself instrumental in planning and executing the Kargil intrusion along with the operatives of the ISI, regular Pakistani army, foreign mercenaries and trainees from various madarsas sowing the seeds of hatred. What the world has to realise is that although Pakistan’s mischief is India-centric, it is not confined to this country alone. Terrorism that is being assiduously spawned can engulf the entire region, nay, entire world. The policy of keeping the crumbling state out of mischief by treating it with kid-gloves has proved counter-productive. It is high time the military junta and the fire-spewing mullahs were told that enough is enough, nuclear weapons or no weapons. Despite all the rabble rousing, General Musharraf and others of his ilk cannot be unaware of the fact that Pakistan is not the only country in the world to have the dreaded weapon.

Three voices on economy

THE government presented three report cards on the state of the economy, which were a study in contrast. Finance Minister Yashwant Sinha, an ardent votary of the feel good factor, painted a cheerful picture, sidestepping worrisome signals. Railway Minister Mamata Banerjee lived up to her image as pro-people leader, declaring that there would be no increase in freight or passenger tariff despite a 30 per cent hike in diesel prices. Petroleum Minister Ram Naik referred to the rising crude prices, estimated that if nothing changed, the import bill would touch $ 18 billion (up by more than 50 per cent compared to last year) but ruled out another price hike. Read together, it was an equal mixture of robust optimism, queer populism and fuzzy economics, which is what the policy core of the BJP-led government is. Given his exalted position, Mr Sinha dominated the news reports. He is sure that the economy will grow by 7 per cent despite a sharply different assessment by the RBI and a leading research organisation. He dismisses the lower figure of these two, pointing out that their base is narrow, just the results of the first three months. He forgets that the two respected organisations do not merely compile a few numbers and project them in a linear fashion. They select several factors, study the trends and fit it all in a model. Available statistics support their caution. Industrial production has marginally slowed down, non-oil imports have dropped, inflation — at 7.56 per cent — is rising, agriculture output is likely to stagnate if not shrink somewhat, soaring crude prices will take the balance of payment deficit close to 2 per cent and, finally, the stock market and the rupee are wobbly. Mr Sinha takes his gaze away from these and talks grandly of the government borrowing going along targeted lines, dynamism in revenue collection, comfortable foreign exchange reserve and surging exports. He repeats his old promises to push ahead with economic reforms by introducing new legislation or amending old ones. But he is realistic when he says redoing labour laws might lead to unemployment and that will be unacceptable.

Experts are unanimous that the economic recovery seen last year has petered out. Goods are not moving as fast as last year and several factors have combined to hit the sales of heavy and light commercial vehicles, cement and steel. The Union budget had expected improvements in these sectors. The recent attempt by a jute baron to buy into a Mumbai-based textile mills has created both confusion and fear among established industrialists. Thus the psychological setting for a robust growth is simply not there. On the top of this has come the marginal downgrading of investment in this country from positive to stable. The sluggish inflow of capital is the most obvious result. In fact, Mr Sinha is aware of this. Even in telecom where Indian liberalisation is of world standard, he expects an investment of only $ 1.76 billion, very meagre by the size of the network and potential for booming business. His disinvestment calculation will be upset if the Tata proposal to buy out Air India gets stuck or is sabotaged. True, the Indian economy is not in a crisis, but the trend may not justify the projection of a 7 per cent growth.

Pay for police help!

THE Supreme Court on Monday delivered a significant judgement in a case in which the Meghalaya government was directed by the Gauhati High Court to allow the complainant to pay for police investigations. The judgement deserved wider publicity than it received. Why? Because the essential elements of public interest were present in the case in abundant measure. The strange case came up for hearing before the Gauhati High Court after a Shillong-based company filed a complaint with the local police about having been cheated of Rs 9 crore by a Mumbai firm. But the police did not investigate the complaint. The complainant moved the high court against police inaction. The state government came up with the strange plea to explain why the complaint was not investigated. The state government did not have the money to pay the police for performing one of basic duties of investigating cases of cheating and fraud brought to its notice! The explanation for inaction was indeed strange, but the relief which the complainant received from the high court was even stranger. He offered to pick up the tab for police investigation into the specific complaint of cheating filed by him. The state government did not raise any objection and therefore the high court had no problem in giving the complainant the permission to meet the legitimate expenses of police investigation. In effect what the Gauhati High Court did was to allow elements of privatisation to be introduced in the domain of public duty.

Imagine the consequences of the Gauhati verdict becoming the law of the land. The police force would have been legally at the beck and call of the rich and powerful elements and would have had even less time for investigating the complaints of the poor. Much the same situation prevails in most parts of the country without the Gauhati High Court's verdict giving legitimacy to underhand private funding of police investigation. He who pays the piper calls the tune, and he who pays the police gets his complaint investigated is the unwritten law. It was a judgement which even a layman would have found strange. It reached the door of the Supreme Court because the Mumbai party, against whom the case of cheating was filed in Shillong, expectedly raised legal objections against the private funding of police enquiries. Among the points raised against the Gauhati verdict was one that private funding would turn the entire exercise into a hired investigation and would dilute the sanctity of the purpose of statutory investigation. A three-Judge Bench of the apex court found merit in the arguments against the indirect privatisation of the police force and stated categorically that "financial crunch of any state treasury is no justification for allowing a private party to supply funds to the police for conducting investigation". It rightly observed that the "augmentation of fiscal resources of the state for meeting the expenses needed for such investigation is the lookout of the executive.... funding by interested private parties would vitiate the investigation contemplated in the CrPC". But who will take the responsibility of ensuring the implementation of the most crucial part of the judgement in which it was stated {or reiterated} that "all complaints should be investigated with equal alacrity and with equal fairness irrespective of the financial capacity of the person lodging the complaint"?

WEST ASIA PROBLEM
Shaky peace parleys
from Inder Malhotra in Washington

WHAT we call West Asia and the major western powers insist on describing as the Middle East is well and truly on the edge. An all-out war between the Israelis and the Palestinians has been averted by the Cairo summit at which the Israeli Prime Minister, Mr Ehud Barak, and the chairman of the Palestinian Authority, Mr Yasser Arafat, came together in the presence of the US President, Mr Bill Clinton, and the Egyptian host, Mr Hosni Mubarak. But the hopes of a lasting and just peace in the region have been delivered a shattering, if not a fatal, blow already.

I write on this deeply pessimistic note because of the harsh, indeed cruel, realities on the ground. Even though the Cairo summit has succeeded, so what? The expectations from it have been scaled down enormously. All that might happen is a tentative truce to halt the spiral of vicious violence during the last fortnight that has brought the old enemies to the brink of another war. Any hope of resuming serious negotiations for the “final settlement”, already overdue by a year, would be illusory. Why?

One short answer to the question is that deep-seated historical hatreds apart, the Middle East peace process has virtually collapsed because the United States with its strong and traditional partiality for Israel has not proved to be an impartial mediator between the two sides. Even more damaging than the US administration’s lack of even-handedness is the virulent anti-Palestinian and pro-Israeli bias of the America media, highly influential at home and abroad, thanks to the formidable strength of the pro-Israeli and Jewish lobby.

It is in this context that even serious violations by Israel of the seven-year-old Oslo Peace Accords, so ostentatiously signed at the White House in September, 1993, are usually slurred over by the USA while the slightest transgression by the Palestinians is vastly exaggerated. For instance, under the various interim agreements within the Oslo framework, nearly 90 per cent of the land occupied by Israel in the 1967 war on the West Bank should have been returned to the Palestinian Authority. Only 40 per cent, scattered over cities and areas isolated from one another, has been. Every inch of land conceded to the Palestinian Authority is represented as an “Israeli concession”, the reality is that an “occupying power” is reluctantly withdrawing from only a small portion of its neighbour’s land that should have been vacated long ago.

An inevitable consequence of this has been the constant humiliation and harassment of Palestinians travelling in their own country. Security checks at Israeli checkposts are as degrading as they are superfluous. As if this was not enough, the reckless expansion of Israeli settlements on lands earmarked for transference to the Palestinian Authority has gone on for seven years and is continuing.

All this Mr Arafat has tolerated, to the chagrin and anger of his followers, because he is a leader who must operate in the real world. The Israeli military might is awesome. The Palestinians are in no position to take it on. No Arab country, not even Syria, can possibly come to their aid. On top of it all, there is no countervailing force to the sole superpower. Hence the acceptance, hopefully, of America’s mediation. This now seems to have come unstuck.

Ironically, the main cause of the drastic setback has been Mr Clinton’s undue, if understandable, haste in trying to clinch an overarching Middle East peace agreement and thus leaving an indelible imprint on history. American officials are at last admitting that last July’s Middle East summit at the US President’s summer retreat, Camp David, was hasty. Even after its failure, Mr Clinton kept hoping that he might yet achieve his goal. For this purpose he held talks with Mr Barak and Mr Arafat at the UN Millennium Summit in New York and the US Secretary of State, Ms Madeleine Albright, conferred with them in Paris. But to no avail. Because the US President had by that time cut the ground from under Mr Arafat’s feet.

This happened because of Mr Clinton’s frustration. At Camp David the Israeli Prime Minister did go much farther on the critical issue of Jerusalem’s future than any Israeli leader had ever done before. He gave up the insistence on undivided Jerusalem being the “Eternal capital” of Israel, and agreed to let the Palestinians have a portion of Eastern part of the city. But he would not concede to Palestinians sovereignty over East Jerusalem’s holiest spot that the Muslims call Haram al-Sharif (Noble Sanctuary) and the Jews call Temple of the Mount. Some ruins of this temple, destroyed by the Arabs in the eighth century, can still be seen. But two of Islam’s most sacred shrines, Al Aqsa mosque and the Dome of the Rock are also located there. Mr Barak offered to place the Holy Mount under the sovereignty of the UN.

Any informed person should have known that neither Mr Arafat nor any other leader in his place could have accepted this offer. The situation could have been saved by adjourning the summit to meet again. But Mr Clinton, for his own reasons, publicly chastised Mr Arafat for showing “no flexibility” while the Israeli Prime Minister had made “so many concessions”. The Palestinian populace was not amused. Even so, Mr Arafat advised his countrymen to stay calm. They, by and large, did.

It was the right-wing Israeli leader, Gen Ariel Sharon, who triggered the recent chain of ghastly violence by visiting the Haram al-Sharif. Even the staunchest supporters of Israel accept that this was a “patently provocative” move. Its consequences were predictable. In the eyes of Palestinians and most Arabs General Sharon is a “war criminal” because he was responsible for the Nazi-type massacres of Palestinians in the refugee camps of Lebanon in 1982.

In their rage, the Palestinians threw stones at the Israeli soldiers who retaliated with bullets. When the Palestinians used firearms, the Israelis brought in tanks and attack helicopters. No wonder a 12-year-old Arab boy, cowering behind his father, was killed. Then followed the horrific lynching of the two Israeli soldiers by a Palestinian mob. In the USA almost everybody is shouting against the lynching; few talk about the murdered boy and close to 90 other Palestinians killed, often in cold blood.

These two rival images have got “eternally etched” on the psyche of the two sides and could form a mental block to even the resumption of meaningful talks between the two sides.

Moreover, at Camp David, Mr Arafat had told President Clinton that the dispute was really between a billion Muslims and the Israelis. Given the terrorist attack on the US naval vessel at Aden and angry demonstrations against Israel and America from Tangiers to Teheran, is the PLO leader’s claim turning out to be right? 

Small-scale industrial policy to nowhere 
by K. Vaidyanathan

A MONTH ago, Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee announced the new industrial policy for the small-scale sector. Self anointed spokespersons for the SSIs applauded the approach. As a consequence the bureaucracy, as usual, felt smugly complacent and the Industries Minister gave herself a pat on her back. Some stray voices, in wilderness did express their reservations but by and large, they have been ignored. No clarifications have been forthcoming from the concerned quarters; nor have any modifications been proposed.

The hard fact is that the policy which fails to address the problems of SS sector has been yet another exercise on paper impossible to the implement with any resultant advantage.

In order to fully appreciate the impact of the new excise exemption limit — at Rs 1 crore raised from Rs 50 lakh — acknowledged as the most significant part of the package — an understanding of the mechanics of working of the small-scale sector is essential.

For the purpose of this analysis, 100 per cent EOUs (exporting units) in the small-scale sector, can be safely ignored in context of the duty draw back system.

Various permutations and combinations of parameters like sourcing of raw materials — whether indigenous or exogenous, nature of demand for the final product etc have to be considered to (a) predict the impact of the policy and identify the beneficiaries (if any) & (b) evaluate the proposed measures vis-a-vis the desired objectives, including whether the policy is an improvement on its predecessor.

Small-scale manufacturing units sourcing their raw material from either indigenous sources or through imports and where the inputs are free from excise levies, the policy effectively inhibits growth. Notwithstanding the market imperfections and the nature of demand for product, it would be impossible for any unit in spite of idle plant capacity to produce and sell its manufactures once the sales of Rs 1 crore is exceeded, both on account of price disadvantage and in the absence of “brand-equity” or “customer preference”.

If the indigenous sources of inputs had hitherto been competitive to the imports, the blanket reduction in import duty without any increase in countervailing duty reduces the competitiveness of the indigenous sources.

Imposition of countervailing duties or protectionist tariffs would not in most cases be within the ambit of WTO obligations. The policy, therefore, tends to encourage import of inputs at the cost of indigenous sources of raw materials — especially those in the small-scale sector.

There have been general and vague comments from both critics as well as those who have welcomed the proposal. The critics have pointed out the possibility of a growth in parallel economy and also increased tieup in excise recoverables with the small units while others have welcomed the resultant relief by way of price reduction for consumers and have claimed that the existing malpractice of multiple units under the same roof would cease to continue. It may be farfetched to imagine that a unit, bent upon escaping the excise network would have extended scope upto sales of Rs 1 crore to fuel the growth the parallel economy (Arun Goyal, ET) can do so without detection, but both claims and counterclaims require specific scrutiny.

SS units availing CENVAT credit were hitherto paying excise duty at the rate of 16x60% i.e. 9.6% ad valorem on clearances upto Rs 50 lakh and at the rate of 16x80% i.e. 12.8 % on clearances in respect of sales between Rs 50 lakh to Rs 100 lakh. As per the announced policy the unit would now pay excise duty at the rate of 9.6% ad valorem on total clearances upto sales of Rs 1 crore.

In other words the units will now pay 3.2% less duty on clearance between Rs 50 lakh to Rs 100 lakh. The actual amount would work to Rs 1.6 lakh over the total sales of the unit at Rs 1 crore. If the entire amount were to be passed on the consumer, the relief would be to the extent of 16 paise over purchases of Rs 10. Immense relief indeed !

The tieup in excise recoverables would depend upon whether the excise paid on inputs — (CENVAT credit) is more than or less than 9.6% ad valorem excise paid on sales. The authors of the policy seem to have assumed the percentage of imputs to sales at an average of 60%.

To elucidate if a unit in the small-scale sector were to consume inputs worth Rs 60 lakh in effecting sales of Rs 1 crore the tieup in the CENVAT credit would work out to Rs 9.60 lakh (i.e. 60x16%). The excise duty at the rate of 9.6% ad valorem on sales of Rs 1 crore would also work out Rs 9.60 lakh and as a consequence there would be no buildup of excise recoverables. If the inputs constitute 50% of sales the unit would have to pay Rs 1.6 lakh over and above available CENVAT credit in order to effect clearances of Rs 1 crore (i.e. Rs 9.60 lakh — Rs 50x 16% lakh). Although the problem of shortage of funds at the time of clearance has been taken care of by allowing post clearance payment of duty, there is an inbuilt provision for the unit to buy more inputs and effect sales in the parallel market. Suppose the outlay on inputs works out 80% of the sale value, the maximum increase in the tieup of excise recoverable works out to Rs 3.2 lakh. Can a unit have value additions as low as 20% of sale value and survive?

Most of the small scale units in the organised sector supply semi manufactures or sub-assemblies to the large-scale units (OEMS). These units source their inputs from indigenous large-scale units and the inputs attract excise duty at the rate of 16% ad valorem. They also enjoy the dubious distinctions of procuring raw materials from the sellers’ market and effecting sales in the buyers’ market. There is always a time lag between the increase in the price of raw materials and increase in sale price. During this period, the raw material cost can rise to even beyond 80% of the sale price.

The rise in exemption limit does not enable an ancillary unit to any price advantage since the large units are also covered under CENVAT scheme. If the unit is incapable of catering to any other market in view of the technical or locational reasons, the small-scale unit may find itself burdened with growing build ups in excise recoverables.

At present there is no scheme for the banks to finance the tieup in excise recoverables. The depletion in working capital funds would be reflected as irregularity in the bank accounts and could result in dire consequences.

If the small-scale ancillary unit has a product mix which enables it to sell its products in an additional market other than OEM and the combined sales exceed Rs 1 crore, the unit’s products may no longer be saleable in the market where other units who pay concessionary excise duty co-exist. This is bound to result in clandestine operations. In an oligopolistic situation, the time taken by the least efficient unit to reach the level of sales at Rs 1 crore would determine the volume of the parallel economy.

Relatively honest entrepreneurs would seek the option of setting up multiple units under the same roof. If multiple sourcing involves two geographically separated ancillary units under the same management, will both units be entitled to the benefits separately?

It may not be out of place to mention that while the negotiated price on the products from the small-scale sector is on net input costs (net of excise) while the price of the final product is computed on the basis of “Cost Plus” formula. The ambiguity in interpretation has been one of the factors for relatively high profit of some of the large-scale units in recent years.

In simpler terms the entire benefits of CENVAT availed by the large-scale units are not passed on to the consumer. It should, however, be mentioned that the excise authorities did in some cases, issue show cause notices to the large units regarding the “Cost Plus” formula in determining the final price. Unfortunately owing to lack of proper direction and ambiguity, no follow-up action has so far been taken by the Department.

The excise policy, therefore, falls short of expectations in as mush as it helps (a) restriction of excise network base; (b) extension of the parallel economy and (c) does not solve the problem increased tieup in excise recoverable or of multiplicity of units under same roof. The new excise policy fails to eliminate the existing pitfalls. Above all the policy inhibits growth.

The policy fails to address some of the specific problems facing the SSI sector, two of which require special allusion.

First, with the withdrawal of “zero-tax” facility, large-scale units have off-loaded a number of in-plant operations to the small-scale sector in the name of “backward/forward integration” and in the context of existing practice of multiple sourcing large unutilised capacities have been created in the small-scale sector.

Second, a well intentioned legislation introduced by Dr Manmohan Singh, regarding prompt payments to SSI from large-scale units which has remained a paper legislation for no SSI unit can afford to seek remedial measures under the said legislation.

Suitable provisions to take “suo-motu” cognizance of delayed payments to SSI sector and making it statutorily obligatory on the part of the paying bankers to pay overdue interest (beyond the contracted usance period) by debit to drawee’s account would have been a welcome step.

Other proposed measures can at best be described as enlarged versions of the existing ones and therefore, require no elucidation. Although the proposals may seem well intentioned, successes of any measure would depend on the quality of approach of the implementing agencies especially the SIDBI.

From obscurity to Nobel Prize
From Stuart Jeffries in Paris

THE surprise winner of the Nobel Prize for Literature sat on the edge of a friend’s bed in Paris and reflected on the journey that had brought him from China to France, from the obscurity of being a playwright and novelist known only to a small number of critics and intellectuals.

There’s a little party of admirers and critics in the living room, but Gao Xingjian, (60) his eyes a little tired, keeps getting dragged away to do interviews with journalists who had never heard of him before Thursday.

He says that the Nobel Prize is `something that falls on you from the sky like a miracle. It’s a total surprise’.

Gao, the first Chinese-language winner of the prize, is a political refugee from Communist China who has embraced France, its language and its culture, yet remains in China a potent, and proscribed, figure of dissent.

To explain his spiritual journey he describes a dream he had when he was 15. ‘I was sleeping with a marble woman. She was beautiful and cold — a statue that had fallen into the grass, and I was lost in an exuberant freedom. It was that freedom, that we call decadent, that brought me to France.’

Of course, it is more complicated than that. His early life was difficult. He was born under the sign of chaos, his mother giving birth while bombs fell during the Sino-Japanese war.

When he was young he developed a taste for the French surrealists like Ionesco, several of whom he later translated into Chinese. They influenced his own writing, which offended the Chinese authorities who regarded the genre as decadent and worthless.

During the Cultural Revolution he was forced to burn much of his early work, attended re-education camps and did hard labour in the fields for six years.

It was a terrible time, Gao recalls. His wife denounced him and he burned `kilos and kilos’ of novels, plays and articles.

But writing was a compulsion, an obsession, and he carried on in secret. But when in 1979 he was allowed to publish, he ran into trouble again. A work of criticism was damned as ‘spiritual pollution and connivance with Western literature’.

And his plays, such as Bus Stop (1983), a kind of Zen theatre of the absurd heavily influenced by Beckett and Artaud, though performed at the Beijing Popular Theatre, were officially regarded as too decadent.

In 1987, he left China and settled in Paris. ‘I love Paris — it’s the best city in the world for artists.’ After the Tiananmen Square riots of 1989, his flat in Beijing was seized by the authorities.

The massacre formed the back- drop of his most overtly political play, Fugitives, a love story. Its publication caused his work to be banned in China.

Gao lives in a two-room apartment on the 19th floor of a tower block in Bagnolet, a tough suburb in the east of Paris. He spends 16 hours a day writing or painting. He listens to Mozart, and Messiaen. He became a French citizen in 1998 and does not consort with the Chinese community. He gets a little cross when I suggest that, like the 1994 Nobel laureate Kenzaburo Oe, his work is little known and may well benefit from the exposure the award will give him. `No, that’s not true. I am well known. Not well known among the public, but the professors and theatre people know me well.

‘In Europe, my plays are performed a lot. In the past 10 years more than 30 of my plays have been produced. But these are not plays for a big audience.’ But his work is not popular — even in France where it has been extensively translated. I asked for his books at four Parisian bookshops on Friday, but they were unavailable. `Try Tuesday,’ said one proprietor. `We’ve ordered a few because he’s won the prize.’

And yet, in making their award, the Swedish Academy said Gao had produced ‘an oeuvre of universal validity, bitter insights and linguistic ingenuity’.

They singled out his 1989 novel Soul Mountain for particular praise, calling it ‘one of those singular literary creations that seem impossible to compare with anything but themselves’.

Based on a 10-month walking tour Gao took along the Yangtze River, Soul Mountain uses several narrative voices, interweaving tales of people Gao met on his journey. At one point, one of these narrators criticises the novel’s author: `You’ve slapped together travel notes, moralistic ramblings, notes, jottings, untheoretical discussions, unfable-like fables, copied some folk songs, added some legend-like nonsense of your own, and call it fiction!’

I ask Gao if he wants to become popular or if the prospect worries him. ‘These things are not in my power. They just happen.’ Is he happy about winning the $1m award? `Obviously! It’s the greatest prize. But I wasn’t waiting for this. It’s something that falls on you from the sky like a miracle. It’s a surprise. And, while this prize guarantees my independence, I don’t think it will make my work better known in China. `The award expresses a friendship which I find very moving,’ says Gao. `Because I write mostly in Chinese and yet I am not published in China, the support of my translators, critics, even journalists has been very important in getting my work known around the world. The prize, then, honours these people as well as me.’

The Chinese reaction was sour. Jin Jianfan of the Chinese Writers’ Association said: `He is French and not Chinese. The reason he won it is more political than literary.’

— By arrangement with The Guardian

Where child marriage, polygamy thrive
From Syed Zarir Hussain in Seppa (Arunachal Pradesh)

Fortytwo-year-old Rojo Tok, a tribal peasant in Arunachal Pradesh, was all decked up in local finery to wed Mepong Taku, a girl who will turn 14 this winter.

The atmosphere in this remote township in East Kameng district was festive, with tribal villagers making hectic preparations for the marriage. Tok’s first wife and their three children, one of them aged 18, were equally excited as they await little Taku’s arrival in their home.

As the local brew flowed and the men and women accompanying the groom danced and feasted, the marriage was solemnised. And joining in the rhythmic steps were Tok and Taku, the newly-wed couple.

By local standards, there was nothing unusual about the marriage. In fact, child marriage and polygamy are common in the tribal society in this state with a population of 800,000.

Of late, however, women leaders and government authorities have expressed serious concern at this trend and have begun discussing ways to stop such practices. “In many interior villages, more than 60 per cent of the people are still influenced by the traditional child marriage system. The issue is a very serious one and needs to be addressed,” Takam Sanjay, a young Minister said.

For many, giving a girl child in marriage is done not by choice, but rather out of compulsion. The poor economic status of tribal villagers is attributed as one of the primary factors responsible for the prevalence of child marriages and polygamy in this mountainous state.

“Most parents give their teenaged daughters in marriage due to poverty,” said Tana Muni, a tribal woman. “In some cases, men, to prove their masculinity, want more than one wife. There are many rich and educated men who have four to five wives,” she said.

The ruling Congress Government has been striving hard to bring in legislation to put an end to the traditional system of child marriages and the equally menacing issue of polygamy.

“There has to be political consensus and public opinion (against such practices) before any legislation is brought in,” Sanjay said. “We are making serious attempts to check this social evil.”

Village elders and tribal chiefs, however, said they would not endorse any government move to curb traditional customary rights by imposing provisions of the modern laws in consonance with the Indian Penal Code.

“I don’t subscribe to the idea of child marriage and polygamy at all. But to stop that, the government should try and create awareness among the people instead of taking recourse to laws to govern the state,” said Tana Topu, a village headman. “We shall oppose any move by the government to snatch our traditional customary rights,” he said.

With no legislation in place, child marriages and polygamy will continue and there could be many such Mepong Takus who will attain womanhood when they should actually be playing and studying.

Even though child marriage is banned in India, every year thousands of children are married off, especially in the month of April that is considered auspicious for such a practice, in places such as the socially backward state of Rajasthan.

— India Abroad News Service

SPIRITUAL NUGGETS

Human pride is the greatest barrier to wisdom. Egotistical pride must go. It is a blind that prevents our seeing God as the sole doer, the director off the cosmic drama. You are playing different parts in this movie-house, and you may not foresee what part will be assigned to you tomorrow … Play your 365 roles each year with an inward smile and with the remembrance that you are only dreaming. Then you will never again be hurt by life.

— Goswami Tulsidas; The Heart's Prayer