 |
| Friday, October 20, 2000, Chandigarh, India    |
Grains at cut rate prices SC nod for Narmada dam |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
COMBATING TERRORISM Rebuff from Riyadh
A question worth
crores...
Will English overwhelm the world languages?
|
|
Grains at cut rate prices INDIA will export wheat at a highly subsidised price to generate demand. And two organisations — State Trading Corporation and MMTC — which have either no experience in this field or have forgotten all about the global market, will spot buyers and push through the deal. One calculation is that this way the FCI will be able to sell two million tonnes of wheat and since the subsidy will come to a minimum of $ 45 a tonne, in dollar terms the outgo will be $ 90 million or approximately Rs 405 crore. This is Rs 105 crore more than the much hyped Punjab package. All this depends on finding countries which will like to lift Indian grain as against the preferred white Australian variety which costs $ 160 a tonne. The FCI’s so-called economic cost and freight and other charges push up Indian price to $ 205 a tonne. The Centre has released doctored figures to dress up this idea as a great loss-saving proposition and not a loss-making one. The export and other measures thought up to somehow reduce the buffer stocks with the FCI is expected to cost Rs 1000 crore but holding on to the excess grains (of about 18 million tonnes)will cost Rs 4000 crore! Thus this bright thought will lead to a reduction in expenditure by Rs 3000 crore. Apart from the veracity of these figures, what is intriguing is that the government had repeatedly rejected the idea of reducing prices to spur domestic demand. In fact the Group of Ministers which endorsed this decision, pointedly refused to roll back the price rise and also put off any action on “antodaya” plan to offer foodgrains to the extremely poor at a very rate. The two earlier schemes to get rid of the rotting stocks proved to be a spectacular failure. The release of five million tonnes of wheat from Punjab for auction to state governments and others elicited no response and then when the price was brought down still there was no buyer. How much wheat will finally be exported is a moot question. The other components are equally odd. The common thread is to unload wheat and rice at lower rates to a wide variety of below the poverty line (BPL) sections or those who will be declared so. The states will be persuaded to accept a greater volume to feed their poor. Conveniently, somebody had discovered that the BPL population has increased by 56 lakh between 1995 and 2000 and they are to be targeted as a possible outlet for the stocks. Despite all the talk of poverty reduction, the number of those living below the mythical line is going up. Even the non-poor will get some benefit. They can now draw their quota at the open market sale price and not pay the economic cost. All welfare programmes, employment-related work will get allotment at the BPL price. Destitute homes, orphanages and women shelter homes will be the other
beneficiaries. All this will cost nearly Rs 1000 crore. It is unbelievable coming from a government which has made subsidy
cutting its sole life mission. Obviously the foodgrains stock situation is desperate and hence these desperate remedies. |
|
SC nod for Narmada dam NOW that the Supreme Court has given the green signal to the construction of the Narmada dam, the last legal hurdle in its way has been removed. But even the adjudication of the highest court has not managed to satisfy the Narmada Bachao Andolan and some other non-governmental organisations. While Arundhati Roy has called the judgement “shocking and disgraceful”, Medha Patkar has not even stopped at that and has gone to the extent of branding it “anti-people and a virtual surrender to the pressures of power holders”. Such allegations should not have been levelled at the apex court, but spewing fire and brimstone is nothing new for the anti-dam activists who brook no reasoning or opposition. While they will continue to oppose the dam for opposition’s sake, it is time to go ahead with the construction. The long delay has already led to a sharp cost escalation of the Rs 18,000-crore dam. The problem with the opponents of development is that they do not offer any alternative. The first thing that must be borne in mind is that India needs a lot of power, given the shortfall caused by shortsighted policies and the ever-increasing population. Electricity is not a luxury but a basic necessity even for the poorest of the poor. Jawaharlal Nehru recognised this fact and called dams India’s modern temples. Thermal and atomic plants are not only prohibitively expensive but also environment-unfriendly. That leaves out only hydroelectric generation. The recourse to small dams is suggested by many laymen but experts do not find these viable. So, under the circumstances, hydel projects are perhaps the best option for India. No doubt, these have their own problems but what is important is that other alternatives are far worse. Call them necessary evil or whatever, but we have to have them, and in large numbers. The displacement of some people is inevitable whenever a large project is taken up. In the larger interest of a large section of the people, a small segment does have to make some sacrifices. Had that not been done, neither Bhakra Dam nor Chandigarh would have come up. But, at the same time, the government has to ensure that the oustees are suitably compensated. That, unfortunately, has not been happening and most of the opposition to dams emanates from this shortcoming. The plight of the people of Himachal Pradesh who were given land in the arid Rajasthan in lieu of the land that got submerged in the Pong dam is before us. The compensation money has also been coming in dribble. The report of the Grievance Redressal Authority has pointed out that during the construction of the Narmada dam, there was slackness in Madhya Pradesh in identifying and acquiring land for oustees. Such inhuman treatment has to stop forthwith. The Supreme Court has done well to make the construction of the dam conditional on the clearance of the Environmental and Rehabilitation Authority. Only then would the height of the dam be allowed to be increased to 138 metres as envisaged by the tribunal award. The court has even instructed the Narmada Control Authority to draw up a plan within four weeks on the relief and rehabilitation work that should be carried out immediately. It is of the view that any dispute on this aspect could only be decided by the Review Committee and if the dispute remained, it would be referred to the Prime Minister, whose decision would be final and binding. With international attention
focused on the plight of the Narmada oustees, it is hoped that they won’t get a raw deal. In place of opposing the dam as such, Medha Patkar and others would be well advised to act as watchdogs of their interests. Not allowing the dam to come up at all just because the rehabilitation package is not to a particular group’s liking is tantamount to throwing the baby out with the bathwater. And as far as the locational desirability and the height of a particular dam are concerned, these issues are best left to technical experts. |
|
COMBATING TERRORISM AT the meeting of the Indo-US Joint Working Group (JWG) on Counter Terrorism held in New Delhi on September 26, both sides expressed deep concern at the growing menace of international terrorism. Referring to the recent hijacking of the Indian Airlines IC 814, the chief of the Indian delegation, Alok Prasad, pointed out that such acts of terrorism posed a grave threat to all countries of the world. Incidents like these, he added, also underline the urgent need for international cooperation to combat this threat. Inasmuch as contemporary terrorism has crossed national frontiers and assumed inter and transnational dimensions, it has become a challenge to the entire international legal community. It has given rise to a special type of transnational acts of violence that has posed new and so far unsolved problems in both theory and practice of international relations and international law. The much-vaunted international law regarding renunciation of force has remained incomplete and protestations of peace by states that allow this kind of perpetration of violence to proliferate further sound an insincere ring. Because of the delicate nature of international relations, attempts to combat terrorism at a global level will always focus on legal and treaty obligations rather than action-oriented measures. The diplomatic and political implications of, for example, an international anti-terrorist strike force are such that suggestions of this kind are never likely to be translated into reality. Rather, the only suggestion that has any hope of gaining acceptance is one which places treaty obligations on nations to act in a prescribed way in a certain situation, eg, agree to bring to trial any captured terrorists, or agree to extradite them to the country of origin. However, even this avenue is fraught with such dangers as to seriously jeopardise its eventual success. One of the central problems bedevilling international cooperation is the definition of “terrorism”. Because treaties are couched in legal terms, they rely heavily on definitions acceptable to all parties. Since the issue of what constitutes terrorism is one of the most important unsolved problems in debates about terrorism, the attempts to arrive at a definition for international treaty purposes epitomises the confusion and dissent which surrounds the whole subject. Until the 20th century there have been no efforts at international cooperation to control terrorism, even though many governments in the 19th century were seriously challenged by terrorist campaigns. It was the advent of international terrorism which prompted efforts to gain international agreement on a concerted approach to the suppression of terrorism. The hijacking of aircraft, the kidnapping and murder of diplomats, military personnel, and business executives, the conduct of highly publicised terrorist acts by individuals of one country in the territory of another, and the spectre of nuclear blackmail have all pressured authorities to seek common agreement in trying to contain these incidents and their consequences. In the past, particularly because of the absence of an effective, coordinated, and rapid-reaction news network, terrorist acts were localised and specific. Today, many are spectaculars mounted to draw worldwide attention to the terrorist cause. Because less emphasis was placed on publicity, past terrorist activities generally took place within the borders of the country against whose government the activities were directed. If conducted in a foreign country, the acts of violence were generally limited to attacks on individuals or installations of the home country. As such they represented little threat to the internal security of the country in which the attack occurred because they did not seek to change the policies of the host country nor force it to make concessions (for example, release prisoners, provide money, or guarantee safe passage). The motivations, tactics and consequences of contemporary acts of terrorism make them a greater threat to both national sovereignty and international order than they ever were in the past. Many acts are possible only because of modern technology and increasingly the motive behind terrorist acts is a millenarian one. This latter development is accompanied by a widening acceptance of the view that there are no innocents and that the fight must be taken all over the world. It seems to be the case, too, that persons espousing such views utilise terrorism as the tactic of nihilism and desperation, with all that this implies for lack of restraint. Because of these striking changes many people turn to international law as a force which could play a significant role in the suppression of terrorism. The first attempts to stimulate international cooperation took place within the League of Nations. Following the assassinations of King Alexander I of Yugoslavia and French Foreign Minister Louis Barthou in Marseilles on October 9, 1934, the League considered two measures dealing with terrorism. The first was the 1937 Convention for the Prevention and Punishment of Terrorism which criminalised international incidents involving heads of state and other internationally protected persons. It also proscribed destruction of public property and injuries to the citizens of one country by citizens of another. A second convention, that for the creation of an International Criminal Court, gave signatories the option of committing persons accused of terrorist offences for trial in an international court established for the purpose. The subsequent efforts to gain an international accord on terrorism through the United Nations gave rise to bitter controversy on the question of the definition of the term “terrorism”. On September 8, 1972, the UN Secretary General Kurt Waldheim proposed that the General Assembly should consider measures to prevent terrorism and other forms of violence which endanger international peace, take innocent human lives and jeopardise fundamental freedoms of people all over the world. The proposal was fiercely opposed when the General Assembly decided to include an amended version of the proposal on its agenda. The amended agenda suggested the study of “the underlying causes of those forms of terrorism and acts of violence which lie in misery, frustration, grievances and despair and which prompt some people to sacrifice human lives, including their own, in an attempt to effect radical changes.” Needless to say, the resolution was defeated. Similarly, irreconcilable views have been advanced from time to time as to what measures were appropriate to control terrorism. Some states favoured initial action at the national level, some stressed the need for bilateral agreements, and others favoured multinational treaty arrangements. In an attempt to crease out these differences, the General Assembly formed three sub-committees to examine, respectively, the definition, the underlying causes and measures for the prevention of international terrorism. The results were predictable. In the first sub-committee, it soon became evident that there was substantial disagreement as to whether or not a definition was either necessary or desirable. In the second, there was a rerun of the debate as to whether measures could be undertaken to restrain terrorism parallel with efforts to deal with underlying causes or whether elimination of the causes must precede such measures. Again, no consensus or compromise was reached. This same conflict was repeated in the third committee. Thus as a result of their inability to agree on basic issues, the report of the sub-committees to the General Assembly amounted to little more than a summary of divergent views. As a result, no convention on terrorism emerged and the people of the world were left with nothing but a lot of empty and high-flown phrases to comfort them. States were invited “to become parties to the existing international conventions which relate to various aspects of international terrorism and to take all appropriate measures at the national level with a view to the speedy and final elimination of the problem.” All very well as far as it goes. But there followed the obligatory warning that states should “bear in mind the provisions relating to the inalienable right of self-determination and independence — in particular the struggle of national liberation movements.” Thus it was made clear that if terrorist activities are undertaken in the name of self-determination or national liberation, then such acts are beyond the scope of condemnation and are legal. The conclusion that must be reached from a survey of international attempts to counter the terrorist threat is inevitably a depressing one. If nations cannot agree upon ways to control terrorism, all we can expect to see in the near future is an international order in serious jeopardy. It is not an encouraging view of the future but current international efforts to combat terrorism would suggest little else. The writer is a retired professor of political science based in Calcutta. |
|
Rebuff from Riyadh THE language was diplomatic. The External Affairs Ministry clarified that the proposed visit of Foreign Minister Jaswant Singh to Saudi Arabia, had been “deferred”. That too, at the request of the Saudi government. The External Affairs Ministry spokesman would not even use the term “postponed”. He also used the word “reschedulding” with reference to the proposed visit. But the plain truth could be different. The Saudi government, preoccupied in trying to broker a ceasefire between Israel and the Palestinian Liberation Front was simply not interested in someone from India landing on its soil. So, it quietly cancelled the programme and left the Indian Government to do some embarrassed explaining. The cancellation of the Jaswant visit was a sad reflection on the bankruptcy of the Indian foreign policy, particularly in the Gulf region. The Vajpayee government had been bending backwards to please the USA. The MEA was proud of the fact that the External Affairs Minister and the Secretary of State of the US, Ms Madeline Albright, were on a first-name basis. President Clinton had visited India, our Prime Minister had returned the visit. What more could one ask for? Such an approach was clearly an indication of the short-sightedness of the Ministry of External Affairs. Ever since India began to edge closer to the USA, there was a clear implication that we were becoming more and more pro-Israel. The Saudi embarrassment would be exploited by the Prime Minister’s Principal Secretary, Mr Brajesh Mishra, who was actively interfering with the running of the External Affairs Ministry and undermining the role of Mr Jaswant Singh. He will be quite happy that Mr Singh was put in his place by the Saudi authorities. But the Saudi fiasco was something more than the clash of interests of two people in the Indian Government. It went much deeper and reflected badly on how insignificant India had become to one of the most volatile and news making regions in the world where Indian diplomacy was much soughtafter in the past. It also reflected on our waning influence in the Arab world. The Saudi visit was important both from the political and economic angles. With the oil crunch on and prices of crude shooting up, India had to make direct appeal to the Saudis on the need to hold price lines and increase production. As the leader of the developing nations, India had a responsibility on this sensitive issue which was capable of wrecking the economies of the poorer nations. Saudi Arabia was the most important member of OPEC and a direct, diplomatic approach from India would not have been out of place. With war tensions gripping West Asia, there were fears that oil production could be curtailed even further and prices skyrocket even more. This would result in utter economic chaos for nations like India. Perhaps, the Saudis were busy with organising a West Asian summit which also included President Clinton and seek a solution to the political and military crisis in the region. But they could have spared some time to the dignitary from India, who, after all was not an unfamiliar figure in the region. On the economic front, Saudi Arabia was of utmost importance to India. It is one of the major oil suppliers to India. Nearly one half of the Indian workforce of around two millions employed in the Gulf, was in Saudi Arabia. Despite stringent employment and entrance rules which tended to favour a total Muslim workforce, the role of Riyadh in sustaining part of the Indian economy could not be overlooked. Hence the need to cultivate Saudi Arabia. A popular, vibrant democracy like India, however, could not support most of the internal policies of Riyadh. The nation was ruled by a royal family which was determined to hold on to power and any cost and ruthlessly suppress any attempts of dissent. Saudi Arabia was the only nation in West Asia which did not allow any winds of change of liberalisation, particularly on the religious and social fronts. It was a true Islamic state forbidding any kind of visible pleasure of exhibition of happiness. Even foreigners in that country could not be exempted from living the kind of lives they were accustomed to. No drinks, no parties, no mingling of sexes. Adultery and robbery were serious crimes which invited severe punishment. Public executions, flogging and chopping of hands and legs were common. The more liberal nations which cared for human rights may be shocked, but that was the Islamic law as practised in Saudi Arabia. What went on inside Saudi Arabia was tolerated even by the Western nations who were sensitive to the issue of violation of human rights. Britishers and other Europeans living in Riyadh, who had been found guilty of violating local laws had suffered indignities and punishments. But despite extensive media coverage of these, the respective Western governments had maintained an embarrassed silence. There were no cries of alarm, no clamour, no special sessions of the UN Security Council, no talks of sanctions against Saudi Arabia. Why? Because the West could not do without Saudi oil. The rulers of Saudi Arabia may be guilty of belonging to the Stone Age, but their power and influence could not be diminished. They were high on the lists of “friends” of President Clinton. In fact, arms purchases by the Saudis kept alive several arms manufacturers in the USA besides enabling Pentagon raking in profits. The arms deals were convenient to both the sides. Armed with sophisticated weapons, the Saudi royal family felt safe and capable of handling any hint of dissidence and revolt from within. On its part, the USA had extracted an unwritten promise from the Saudis that the arms it had sold would not be used against Israel. They were meant only to quell internal rebellions against the royal family. This rather peculiar arrangement had managed to survive despite the fact that Saudi Arabia had declared publicly it was an implacable enemy of the Zionist state. It allowed less powerful Arab nations to wage war against Israel, always watching from the sidelines and occasionally lending some money for the “jehad”. How did all this affect India-Saudi relations or for that matter, India’s image in the Gulf region? Today, the entire Arab world is disillusioned with India for its lack of interest to the problems of the region. India, they feared, was almost in the Israeli camp and took instructions from the USA. And there was much justification for such a conclusion. Right from 1948, India had been a close friend of the Arab states, which for years, had been under the imperialistic sway of the West, particularly Great Britain. Even after they emerged free, their oil wealth was continually exploited by the West. For decades, the industrial revolution in the West had been spurred on by cheap oil obtained from the Gulf region. That was why the West had to intervene militarily when Iranian Prime Minister Mosseadgh had the guts to nationalise the Anglo-Iranian Oil company. The CIA also helped to overthrow the Iranian nationalist leader. India’s sympathy was clearly with the Arab states. This continued even at the time of creation of Israel, which was a geographical and historical monstrosity right in the heart of Arab territory. The West decided that the Jews must have a nation of their own and chose West Asia because the Bible had stated that the Jews once ruled the region. The passage of time, the shifting of populations did not register with them. The Arabs, were poor, disunited and could not withstand the Zionist onslaught which had the support of the powerful US Jewish lobby, the UK and part of Europe. In the process millions of Palestinians were driven away from their homeland and sought shelter in other Arab states. Indian leaders like Jawaharlal Nehru and Indira Gandhi who had an intelligent understanding of world history constantly supported the Arab cause which was just. Of course a handful US stooges for whom America could do no wrong constantly espoused the cause of Israel which went on gobbling up Arab territories and organising massacres of even Arab women and children in the numerous refugee camps. Some of the leaders of the Israeli war gangs who had perpetrated such atrocities, like Menacham Begin were elevated to the Prime Ministership of Israel and the world had to acknowledge their leadership! The Israeli attitude towards the Arabs had not changed, it was one of elimination. The most modern and fearsome weapons were used for this. Yet, it was during this time that the Indian thinking veered away from the traditional support to the Arabs and growing intimacy with Israel. Suddenly the “Israeli security tactics” were talked about as being suitable to deal with the terrorist menace in India. BJP leaders who had never hidden their support for Israel and dislike for the Arab leaders went on a “pilgrimage” to Tel Aviv. They identified the Arab leaders with local Muslim leaders, whose “Indianness” they had always questioned. Under such circumstances, the Arabs had every reason to feel they were betrayed by India. So who needs an Indian Foreign Minister with a begging bowl for more crude? |
|
A question worth
crores... MY seven-year-old Pomeranian Bonzo, and I are great pals. We had to be. After all, we have so much in common. We are both 49 (to fix a dog’s age in human terms, you multiply his age by seven). Professionally, both of us are trained to keep our eyes and ears open — he being a watchdog, literally, and I being a watchdog of public interest. We also share a lot of interest in politics. For me, being a journalist, it is professional requirement. However, he has a political pedigree. He was a gift to me from one of Haryana’s leading families of politicians. We are both great fans of Amitabh Bachchan too. For that reason we never miss any episode of Amit’s debut making soap-casino, Kaun Banega Crorepati. After a few episodes, I noticed that whenever a participant used the Audience Lifeline (one of the three allowed to every participant) Bonzo would hop off the bed and scratch his head lazily. His strange ways made me suspect something was bothering him immensely. “What’s it mate?” I asked him. “Well. Nothing much really. You need not bother,” he replied absentmindedly. The next morning we did not talk much when we went out for our daily walk. But, on the way back he lost his patience. “Tell me yaar, how much faith do you have in the judgement of the audience or the bharatiya janata?” he asked. “Don’t ask foolish questions”, I retorted, “You know the janata is the best judge in this country. It decides who will govern us.” As I said, Bonzo has politics in his blood and he displayed his inherent talent in his next query. “That is why I ask, buddy. The KBC audience has never been wrong so far. Whenever a participant seeks an answer, it delivers. And did you notice that whenever they pick up their voting pads, they come out overwhelmingly with the right answer,” he said. Not knowing what he was up to, I tried to discourage him. “Now stop being philosophical so early in the day. Let me concentrate on framing the intro for my story of the day, unless, of course, you have something better on your mind”, I said angrily. “Well, just tell me, this janata has all the right answers as both us know from watching KBC. It has never let any participant down. But why does it come out with all the wrong answers when it uses the voting pads to elect a government?” Now, I was not prepared for that although I know this milk-white Pomeranian has a wily mind. Stumped by his queries, I chose to be silent. He broke the long awkward silence that followed. “Never mind, buddy. Just let me use the phone when we are home”. “What for”, I retorted. “May be M.S. Gill sahib has the answer”, Bonzo said. Back home, I let him use the telephone but he never told me what Gill sahib had told him in turn. And this mystery is one more thing we share not only between ourselves, but now with Gill sahib too! |
|
Will English overwhelm the world languages? THE answer is: No. That is: if you have a mind to resist it. English is the mother tongue of about 400 million people. But it is used by 1.6 billion people today. This is unprecedented. And their number is growing because of globalisation. It was colonialism which helped the English language to gain such far reach. More precisely, it was the farsight of Macaulay, who advocated teaching of English to the natives. Today, it is globalisation which is taking English further afield. And, in turn, it is English, which helps the spread of globalisation. English is already the dominant medium in publishing, newspapers, magazines, radio, TV and films. It spreads American pop culture. Half the foreign students (about half a million) study in English speaking countries. And English dominates both Internet and other forms of information transmission. The English speaking countries account for 40 per cent of the world GDP. They dominate commerce. They are thus able to give a tremendous impetus to globalisation. In short, if you want to be in business, English can help. When EU politicians meet today, they speak not in French, but in English! And EU Central Bank transacts its business in English. Is there any wonder then if the young in Europe prefer English? Thus, globalisation, IT revolution and Internet are driving the spread of the English language all over the world. There is nothing that can check it for the present. But Greek and Latin perished. And in our own times, we saw the decline of French in importance. Will English meet the same fate? Will it not decline with the decline of the English-speaking nations? Will it not decline with the decline of globalisation. Already, regional languages are on the rise, and they threaten the spread of English. Thus, Chinese, Arabic, Hindi, Spanish and other languages have already made major advances in the world. In terms of numbers, they are already significant: Mandarin (Chinese) comes first with a billion people, next comes English (400 m), Spanish (320 m), Arabic (200 m), Bengali (190 m), Hindi (180 m), Portuguese (170 m), Russian (170 m), Japanese (120 m) and German (100 m), in that other. Globalisation has almost lost its momentum. The old enthusiasm is gone. It has become a victim of its own failures — the Maxican crisis and the crisis in Asia, and the reversal of policies by Russia, Malaysia and others. Globalisation has not cured the ills of public enterprises in either China or India, nor has it brought any respite to the problems of public debt of nations. And, above all, it has not raised world trade significantly. The only beneficiaries are the rich. Obviously, there was no ground for optimism in the first instance. Few knew anything about globalisation. Economists hailed the first spurt in Asia/s growth, following marketisation, as an “Asian miracle”. And they branded it as “crony capitalism” when crisis struck the Asian economy. Institutions like IMF and World Bank knew even less. It was said of capital flow that it should be free of controls. And yet when the flow led to crises, it was said that the flow should be under government control. No one had the right answer. That is true even today. With info explosion, any infection can spread today throughout the world in no time. Globalisation has thus lost its attraction. It can no more help the spread of the English language. In fact, regional languages are steadily growing. And this is favoured by technological developments. In Africa, there are 2000 languages. But throughout East Africa they speak Swahill. Even Indian films are dubbed in Swahili. Throughout West Africa, they speak Hausa, which is largely spoken by the Muslims. But they also learn Arabic, which is the language of the entire North Africa. One can well gauge the spread of these regional languages. Similarly, Mandarin is spreading beyond China, Spanish in America, French in Africa. As for Hindi, it is spreading in India, thus reducing the importance of English, as also beyond India. Arabic is gaining ground in Africa and South-East Asia. France, Germany and Italy spend considerable sums to promote their languages. The use of regional languages will go up with the growth of trade and commerce and trade associations. The final question is: will a man give up his own language for another? This is unlikely, for most men are deeply attached to their languages. It is a major part of his identity. So, the more the world opens up threatening men’s identity, men are more likely to close their windows. It is concern for his authenticity which makes a Jew, otherwise a highly secular person, to study Hebrew. All these explain why there are still as many as 1200 standard languages in the world. In fact, the revival of a language is the first sign of an emerging nationalism. Thus Mexican tribes are championing the revival of Mayan languages. And linguists are asserting that rural folk are more receptive to information on agriculture, medicine, culture, in their own languages. The pre-eminence of English is thus confined to urban areas and to a minority. And it cannot last for long. New software enables Internet users to communicate in most languages, from German and Arabic to Chinese and Russian. The objective is to meet the language preference of the users. It is thus the regional languages which stand to gain. Thus, the use of the English language is bound to decline in the coming years all over the world. If we take a look at the technological advances expected in the info revolution, they do not favour the spread of the English language. But this is not to say that multi-linguilism is going to decline in the future. On the contrary, the trend is towards multi-linguilism. Each language has a function. Thus Arabic is the language of the Koran and a Muslim must learn Arabic to read the Koran. English in India is both a link language and a window on the world. The opposition to English is when it is trying to displace Hindi from its assigned role at present. Thus globalisation, regionalism and localisation are all happening simultaneously. So, what is to happen to the English language? It will continue to have patronage of the higher social classes. But this very fact makes it less popular. People of more modest status will turn to regional languages even though the gains are less. There is no reason to believe that English will remain a necessary language, say experts. Decline of other languages — for example, French — has not done any harm to mankind. If we are to go by historical experience, English will decline with the decline of Anglo-American supremacy. And as English makes no deep impact on the “users” of the English language today, they will not miss it when it is gone. Yes, there will remain the “lovers” of the English language. But they will be a small minority. |
|
SPIRITUAL NUGGETS The creator is perfect He possesses a perfect power. Whence is created perfect Nature? The perfect universe derives life From the perfect creator. Let us comprehend this perfect power That bestows life on all beings. — Atharva Veda *** Through the Divine energy of the Supreme Being This dynamic universe came into existence In the course of the evolution of the universe, the earth and other habitable planets came into being And souls manifested themselves in the form of living beings and thus life came into existence. — Rig Veda *** God made the night and the day, The days of the week and the months, And he made winds to blow and water to run, He made fire, He made the lower regions; In the midst of all this He set the earth as the temple, On it He set a diversity of creatures, Various in kind and colour Endless the number of their names.... — Sri Japuji Sahib *** The Lord God is King. For His own delight He created all the worlds. He seeth, He knoweth, He comprehendeth all things. From within and without, There is naught that He doth noth pervade. — Sri Guru Granth Sahib *** O Imana (God) of Urundi/Ruanda, if only you would help me! O Imana of pity, Imana of my father's home, if only you would help me! O Imana of the country of the Hutu and the Tutsi, if only you would help me just this once! O Imana, if only you would give me a homestead and children! I prostrate myself before you, Imana of Urundi/Ruanda. I cry to you: Give me offspring, give me as you give to others! Imana, what shall I do, where shall I go? I am in distress: where is there room for me? O Merciful, O Imana of mercy, help this once. — Kwambaza: A prayer of the peoples of Rwanda and Burundi |
 |
| Punjab | Haryana | Jammu & Kashmir | Himachal Pradesh | Regional Briefs | Nation | Editorial | | Business | Sport | World | Mailbag | In Spotlight | Chandigarh Tribune | Ludhiana Tribune 50 years of Independence | Tercentenary Celebrations | | 120 Years of Trust | Calendar | Weather | Archive | Subscribe | Suggestion | E-mail | |
