 |
Sunday,
February 10, 2002, Chandigarh, India  
|
Presenting
the picture of a timid, frightened nation |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Pandits
& Sikhs must return to Kashmir We
should practise what we preach
Harihar Swarup
Congress
in a dilemma over SYL canal
Humra Quraishi
|
Presenting the picture of a timid, frightened nation
KEEPING the stands empty and making the citizens see the Republic Day parade on television is no way of fighting terrorism. Pity, this is what happened this year. It was a scene in sharp contrast with the past Republic Days. Where there used to be jampacked galleries, there were this time empty stands. Pity again, we heaved a sigh of relief that there were no bomb blasts and no one was killed. But is this the kind of a parade we want? Our strategists, police authorities and administrators should together work out how to fight terrorists. What we must discuss is whether closing down a city so that the terrorists cannot find a target is the way to fight terrorism. We must try to live normal lives and at the same time make it difficult for terrorists to operate. This is different from closing down streets. This is no challenge to terrorists. In fact, they are challenging us and we are running away from it. Granted that surprise is the terrorists’ best weapon, we should make it difficult for them to operate. When a terrorist goes to hit a target, he must move out with fear in his heart that he could be shot down God knows from where. That is the kind of mood we should create of our capability. Yet, another difficulty is that more than before terrorists also turn themselves into suicide squads. True, they have an advantage but we should see to it that the people wanting to give themselves up in suicide are not able to come near enough. Don't we know that Rajiv Gandhi's assassin should not have been allowed to come near him? Far from congratulating themselves, the authorities should not be happy with the way we celebrated Republic Day this year. The way was to have the full parade and let no terrorist have the courage to play mischief, not being able to come near enough or being stopped from acting destructively. That would have earned a tribute for those who look after our safety. This is something which we must plan well, all the time remembering that the routine, the traditions and the life of the country must not be shut down. Let us take an everyday instance. If we are to make the city traffic safe, it does not mean that we should stop vehicles going about. This is not making traffic safe. If the streets are empty, sure there will be no accidents and traffic will be safe. But it is not that kind of traffic safety we want. We must have traffic on the roads, but everyone must regulate himself, everyone must follow the rules and everyone violating the regulations must be punished. That is how we can maintain traffic safety, not by stopping people using the roads. Suppose terrorists threaten to disrupt a cricket match, our answer cannot be to cancel the fixture and then say that we have fought off the terrorists. We should have the match and yet not allow the terrorists to disrupt it. The way we had the Republic Day parade this year was not the answer. There could be many reasons why the people kept out of the parade route. First, it was a truncated parade and there was little to attract spectators. The reason for this is the threat of war, and not the threat of a strike by terrorists. The armed forces were hardly present in the parade. Surely, it should have been possible for them to show up a respectable presence in the parade, with marching columns and armoured units. Are we so short of armed forces at a time like this that when there is going to be a parade, there will be no units for it? There would have been units of the armed forces near Delhi who could have been drafted into the parade. Suppose something like what happened in Gujarat would have happened on this Republic Day, we would have no armed forces to help the civilian authorities. Our military administration is getting into a strange mental fixture. We shift a lieutenant-general from the war theatre because he moves his unit too close to the border. Bad enough, according to the Ministry of Defence. Worse, according to the USA which has the temerity to point this out to us, a sovereign country surely knowing what is good enough for it. When we criticise someone for going too near the international border we also say that we don't have enough soldiers and airmen and Navy personnel away from the border to take part in the Republic Day parade. Aren't we allowing ourselves to fall between two stools? The average citizen, studying the way the defence structure functions, finds it too strange to understand what the priorities are. Think of what the administration did in America. When it became known that four aircraft had been hijacked and were made to go into selected targets, the administration asked all overflying aircraft to land at the nearest airports. That was sensible because no one at that time knew what was happening. But aircraft were not banned for flying for more than a day. They were up and flying next day. That is how an active administration behaves. It was a sad show to see this year at India Gate. While the parade was on, there were empty seats one after the other. We have never seen a Republic Day parade like this. All this because we feared that someone would spring up from the stands and pull a gun. This should not ordinarily happen, particularly when we have been warned of terrorists. Granted this could happen. But because of this we could not keep the entire populace who love the parade away from the celebration. It does not behove a nation like ours. We opted for a simple-minded solution which did not call for innovation. The other reason why the people kept away was because of the strict security measures the authorities resorted to. There were fears that the people would be frisked away again and again. But the measure should not have been such that the people would altogether not come. Think of the earlier Republic Days when hundreds and thousands came and this year hardly anyone did. The terrorists won a psychological victory. One reason was that we overdid the fear. If the President and the Prime Minister were there and not exposed to grave danger, why should the ordinary people not be exposed to just that very kind of danger? The answer would be that strict measures were taken to ensure their safety. The same type of measures could be taken for the rest too. For the people the added advantage was that when roused they could also give hell to terrorists. They have it in them. This is possible for a roused nation. Indians are no cowards. The terrorists too would be afraid of this. Also, very little could happen when people were there in large numbers. This Republic Day we presented the picture of a timid, frightened nation. I hope I am wrong in feeling like this. That is why we should go over whatever has happened and find out what a bad effect it has created on the psyche of the people. Think of how brave people fight against odds. Think of the tiny tots whom we honour every Republic Day for they show great guts individually and collectively. Why don’t we learn from them? This year there were also children who had fought against militants. Think of other people. Think of the Americans when they were hit at Pearl Harbour when hundreds of them were killed in a sudden and ferocious air attack by the Japanese. Yet they pulled themselves up and fought a brave war. Think of the British during the war when waves of bombers visited them in a blitz and even as the people were running into shelters, work went on as it should have. Think of the President of Sri Lanka, Ms Chandrika Kumaratunga, who was hit in a terrorist attack, lost an eye and yet continues to go about in the public — of course, with safety measures. Think of our own Parliament. It met the very next day after it was attacked. That showed that we were not afraid. We should have done the same with Republic Day — to celebrate it in full splendour with the crowds. The key is that we should be careful but not afraid. |
It’s fashionable to blame the West for faults of our own SUNDAY
morning in New York. The World Economic Forum's annual meeting, is winding down and as I gaze out onto Park Avenue from my room on the 31st floor of the Waldorf Towers, I reflect on what the mood has been at this gathering of the world's richest and most powerful people. The rich and the powerful usually excite resentment, envy, anger and for the past couple of years in Davos there have been protesters outside the conference hall demonstrating their feelings against globalisations. This year too the protesters came. A small group of angry, confused young people who stood on Park Avenue, played loud music, and waved placards that protested against everything from the war in Columbia (is there one?) to the war in Afghanistan and the treatment of the Falun Gong sect in China. The Falun Gong lot were the best organised and shoved leaflets and DVDs into the hands of passing delegates. The rest made a lot of noise but little difference to the conference which, in any case, spent many sessions, deliberating the nuances of ‘global anger’. The opening session set the tone with the rock star, Bono, a new invitee into Davos' charmed circle, emphasising the importance of understanding that the time had come to do more than talk. I am a spoilt, rotten rock star, he said, and I enjoy living in the Waldorf Astoria and drinking the champagne and eating the cake but I also realise that unless we do more than talk we will be a bit like Marie Antoinette. The French Queen remembered by history mainly for her heartless comment on giving the people cake if there was not enough bread. So, was there a Marie Antoinette flavour at the conference that went this year by the name of Davos in New York? No, the only Queen who attended this year's meeting was the extraordinarily beautiful Rania of Jordan. She sat beside Bono and Archbishop Desmond Tutu at the opening session and spoke for the poor and dispossessed. In general there was more concern than usual about the need to address issues of global poverty, more realisation that in the global village that our world has become we are all affected by each other's poverty and each other's wealth. September 11 continues to haunt New York and dominated the mood of the conference. But, if there was an overwhelming amount of time devoted to discussing terrorism there was an almost equal amount of time devoted to understanding why radical Islam had such an appeal and why there was so much anger against America. In sessions on 'global anger' and related matters much time was spent pondering over disparities in standards of living. Was it poverty that drove young men into the arms of radical Islam? Would the men who hijacked those planes on September 11 have been less inclined to do what they did if they were not so angry at America? Why were they so angry? Questions, questions and more questions to which answers sometimes acquired an apologetic tone so absurd it excused all our Third World flaws. So, for instance, in terms of the economic inequalities of the world the West got blamed so much that we almost forgot that the main reason for poverty in countries like India — and many in the Islamic world — was the inability of their rulers to provide governance. If you are Indian you become painfully aware of this in a city like New York. You notice that not only does the city function in an orderly fashion unimaginable in any of our cities but that systems are in place that ensure civic amenities. Garbage gets collected, streets get cleaned, pavements exist for pedestrians to walk on and traffic moves in orderly fashion. All these things require municipal governance which is something that is almost unheard of in India. We have elected municipal officials, of course, and even mayors that are supposedly in charge of making our cities function but somehow they do not deliver governance. Anyone who has had the pleasure of living in one of our larger cities will tell you that this is because our municipalities are usually more concerned about the rights of their employees than about their duties to citizens. Further up the ladder of governance the story remains unchanged. Governments employ thousands and thousands of people who seem more interested in hanging on to their permanent 'government jobs' than in doing anything by way of governance. So, poverty alleviation programmes often end up spending more on administration than on delivering alleviation. If this is not bad enough we have also bequeathed ourselves a system that allows government officials to interfere in virtually every area of our lives. Officials are given powers of interference so great that they quickly discover which areas can give them maximum profit. So, for instance, they would rather harass the average citizen with needless inspections and raids than work on providing such things as sanitation, healthcare or education. The net result of this approach is that we have been almost totally unable to rid ourselves of the infamous inspector raj and because our officials are so busy making money out of this they have little time to do what they should be doing. Can we blame this on the West? Is it America's fault that we have such bad governance? No, but judging from the mood of 'Davos in New York' it is currently fashionable to blame the West for every fault in our lives and even for the rise of radical Islam. The sessions that discussed the so-called clash between the Christian West and the Islamic Middle East, from whence the terrorists came, acquired a bizarre quality because nobody seemed ready to accept that radical Islam was a phenomenon that could be directly blamed on the inability of Islamic countries to provide decent governance of halfway just societies. It was so much easier to blame Islamic anger on the disparities between standards of living in the Middle East and the West. Yet, Saudi Arabia from where most of September 11 terrorists came is one of the richest countries in the world. There are other oil-rich Islamic countries that are poor and backward mainly because their rulers refuse to make the investment needed in social infrastructure like schools, healthcare and sanitation but in the glittering, over-heated halls of the Waldorf Astoria this gathering of the rich and powerful spent more time blaming themselves that the rulers of countries like Saudi Arabia. And, us Third World types were happy to whine and plead for understanding: we cannot do better because we are poor. We produce terrorists because we are poor. We seek the indulgence of you who are rich and powerful. So, instead of solving our grim problems we are cashing in on the mood. |
|
Pandits & Sikhs
must return to Kashmir THE Good Samaritans of the world community owe an explanation to the Pandits and Sikhs of Kashmir whose near and dear ones lost their lives at the hands of the cross-border terrorists. The world also owes them an explanation for why they lost their hearth and home and were forced to live as refugees within and outside their homeland. No honest and just human being can deny that the Pandits and the Sikhs must return to their homes in the Valley. But will their homes be there when they return? Can the leaders of the nations sitting comfortably in the UN absolve themselves of the guilt of loss of memory, lack of concern and simplistic equation of the guilty with their victims? If the Kashmir Pandits and Sikhs were made the special targets of the so-called “freedom fighters” from across the border, what was their fault? Will someone kindly see their plight and listen to their very tragic tale. There might be doubt about Kashmir being in the blood of every Pakistani but there can be no doubt about Kashmir being in the veins of the Pandits and Sikhs of Kashmir who died and have remained the victims of threat and violence for decades now. President Kennedy had once told a Pakistani ambassador to Washington, “Mr Ambassador, I think your country is more concerned with the Kashmir dispute than it is with Kashmir”, and today, years later, one finds that the distance between “dispute” and Kashmir is sought to be further expanded under the smoke-screen of renaming cross-border terrorism as “freedom struggle”. Nobody seems really concerned with Kashmir, Kashmiris, Kashmiriyat, Kashmiri Pandits and Kashmiri Sikhs, perhaps because there cannot be a “dispute” about these. The point is that even before the helpful voices within the UN and outside it, piously talk about an Indo-Pak dialogue and “settling disputes” through mutual negotiations, serious and honest efforts must be made by all concerned to ensure the return of the Pandits and the Sikhs to their homes in the Valley with a sense of security and amity which was the main characteristic of Kashmir and Kashmiriyat, a land and its spirit totally free from communal conflict and fundamentalist prejudice. Long before the creation of Pakistan, Kashmir and Kashmiris had never witnessed a communal conflict or religious hatred. When hired hordes of NWFP tribals, backed by Pakistan army battalions raided Kashmir in 1947, there were full three days, even before the Indian Army could come to their rescue, that Muslims and Hindus fought the invaders as a volunteer militia and resistance movement, inspired by leaders like Sheikh Abdullah. None can say that Kashmir did not run in the veins of those who laid their lives for its security and integrity as civilians and soldiers, Brigadier Usman and Major Som Nath Sharma laid down their lives to defend the freedom and very existence of Kashmir against “invaders” who might have seemed “freedom fighters” to those whose definition of freedom did not include democracy, elections and civilian rule for millions of their own people. The world is entitled to interpret Pakistani championship of “freedom” and “right of self determination” as seen from Islamabad, but they must see the plight of the Kashmiri Pandits and Sikhs and listen to their voices. Minister of Tourism and Culture
Jagmohan, once the Governor of Jammu and Kashmir, in his well-researched and documented work “My Frozen Turbulence in Kashmir” had called them “frightened pigeons and forsaken community” and detailed crimes committed against them by the terrorists in a “proxy genocide” campaign directed from across the border. Almost 12 years ago, the Kashmir Pandits in their “Appeal to people of India” had said in anguish “We migrants were forced to abandon our homes and hearths, our jobs and enterprises, our fields and orchards, because the armed militants killed our loved ones brutally, in broad daylight, without any reason, without our ever having given them the slightest provocation now or in the past. History is witness and the majority community (in Kashmir) will acknowledge that we stood by them at all times of trial and tribulation and contributed our mite to the peace and well-being of our homeland.” The Kashmiri Pandits had opened their hearts in that appeal. “The militants warned us, our families, our children through posters that no one was going to protect our lives and property. They stoned houses, especially during dark nights, day in and day out, breaking window panes, hurling abuses and invectives…” What kind of “freedom” or “self determination” was that for the civilized world? Or were the Pandits and Sikhs outside that “freedom”? Is someone with a clean conscience listening, somewhere? Asia Defence News International |
|
We should practise what we preach “SARV-e-Bhawanti Sukhina, Sarv-e- Santu Nirmya, Sarv-e-Bhatrani Pashyantu, Ma Kaschit Dukh Bhawat”. Thus concludes the Yajna, the believers of Vedas perform on various occasions. It wishes for all to live in comfort and good health, all to see good in everything and all on this earth to be free from difficulties. Anguished by the destruction and devastation by terrorism, killing hundreds of innocents in the World Trade Center and the Pentagon and its aftermath in Afghanistan, Pakistan and elsewhere in the world, Pope John Paul II invited on January 23, representatives of all religions to the Vatican to offer prayers prescribed in their respective scriptures for world peace. This writer was upset by the total absence of sisters from the All-Faiths Prayer. This amounted to denial of rightful place in the religious field to women, who comprise half of humanity! We are here for peace. Here to pray and meditate for peace. For thousands of years, we religious champions have preached and talked about peace. Endless are our quotations from holy scriptures. God revealed revelations and infallible words of gods, saviours and prophets. What have we achieved? What are the results of our sermons? Look at the present world. Every year tens of millions of children are starving to death. Hundreds of millions are illiterate and have to subsist on the bare minimum. Nearly one-third of humanity is vegetating in subhuman conditions. On the other hand, people suffocate in affluence and are condemned by a ruthless economic system, devoid of all spiritual orientations, to endless consumption, only to keep the machinery going. Where is our opposition to these forces? Where is our voice against the global players from Wall Street, London and Nikkei, Tokyo? Where is our opposition to religious fanaticism, social injustice, unequal opportunities which go beyond the palatable goodie-goodie talk of Sunday sermons? Are we, as religious dignitaries, doing our God-ordained homework? Are we also on the side of losers or only the winners? Two and a half thousand years ago, Buddha talked about compassion. Five years later Jesus said: “For I was hungry and you fed me...for I was
thirsty...” One and a half millennium ago, Mohammad talked about universal brotherhood. Sorrowfully, one may ask as to what have we achieved? Very little, I’m sorry to say. The world’s mightiest Christian country presided over by a born-again Christian, increased its military budget by 20 billion dollars for the next year, while India, the land claiming itself to be the land of Dharma, is plagued by endless social problems, corruption and violence. The global military budget exceeds US $1,000 billion a year, a tenth of which would be enough to solve the dreadful conditions of the poor. Where is our voice? This writer is actively pursuing peace and friendship between India and Pakistan even at this juncture. Not war. Peace comes first within and then reflects outside. It reflects outside as love, compassion, tolerance and social justice. But egotism and new religion of the market forces sweeping the global village, ignoring all human and environmental concerns. It is a world where only the share value and profit dominate and where we religious leaders are simply standbys doing nothing. If even the founder of the World Economic Forum of Davos, Klaus Sohwab, calls for a new type of hero, meaning not the global player and speculant but the leader of social concern, we should be ashamed of ourselves. I dare to say that some of us are “corrupt” We don’t live up to the standards we preach. We are the cause of more bloodshed and pain in history than another caste can be blamed for. We like to be in league with the powerful, the famous and the mighty and ignore half of our brothers and sisters or feed them with some future heavenly award or some better rebirth in a future life. What is the use of quoting holy books if they do not translate into action? We should all feel inspired by St France of Assisi. No system of injustice and exploitation can subsist unless we religious leaders give a moral and ethical platform for it. Taking interest rates is prohibited in prophetic scriptures, yet global system thrives on it and the bill is paid by the poorest. No doubt, hard work and creativity should be rewarded but there are limits. A world can only be peaceful if everyone gets a fair piece of the cake. A highly evolved human likes to share his/her wealth. It is natural to such a person. We are on the threshold of new millennium. Humanity has all the resources and the means to eradicate some of the worst problems that mankind is suffering from. The meeting in the Vatican was a God-given opportunity to do some deep soul-searching about our role in this game called globalisation. Can we give the world a spiritual and social orientation that is truly uplifting, humanistic and universal? Can we refrain from our sectarian outlook and find a common platform to contribute our share for a better and more peaceful world. And finally, can we give half of humanity, the woman, a rightful place in the religious field? Founder of New Delhi’s Bandhua Mukti Morcha, the writer is Chairperson, United Nations Trust Fund Against Contemporary Forms of Slavery. |
Gandhi, Martin Luther are his role models RECIPIENT of the Gandhi Peace Prize, John Hume, posed a very pertinent question in his acceptance speech at Rashtrapati Bhavan a few days back : “What does Gandhi means for India today”? Undoubtedly, this is the most relevant question in the strife-torn India of the present time. The refrain everywhere in this country is — “all that for which Gandhi stood have been negated”. Evidently, fighting shy of directly answering the question himself, Mr. Hume’s initial observation was: “I am, perhaps, not the person to answer the question”. Nevertheless he could not resist the temptation of expressing his views on such a relevant topic and his observation answers the vital question — “What Gandhi means to India of today”. Architect of the peace process in distant Ireland for which he was awarded the Nobel Prize, Mr Hume himself can be described a Gandhi of the island nation. Note his words carefully and read in between the lines. “First, as a visitor to India, I am struck by the robustness of democracy, the freedom of the press and the quality of writing, the coalition of cultures, the social programme represented by the Constitution, the deep-roots of so many faiths, the activism of so many men and women on behalf of good causes. In all this the legacy of the Mahatma seems to play a part”. Secondly, he believed that Gandhi, looking round him today, would see a number of areas in which he would want to see the spiritual depth in the people of this region harnessed as a transforming energy. Hume’s two heroes were Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King even when he was very young. Two great men were, in fact, his inspiration as he led Northern Ireland’s civil rights movement in 1960s. When Gandhiji was assassinated he had just completed his eleven-plus examinations but old enough to under the Mahatma’s ideals and his talisman — “an eye for an eye leaves us all blind” — got deeply engrained in his psyche. Over 108 years ago, according to Mr. Hume, Gandhiji stayed in the home of Gopal Gokhale in Calcutta and the two discussed the question of the next Congress President. Gokhale had visited Ireland only recently and he suggested that Alfred Webb, a member of the Irish Party, might well be suited for the post. Gandhiji readily gave his approval and Webb presided over the tenth session of the Indian National Congress held in Madras in 1894. The Irish leader told the INC in his presidential address: “The political atmosphere, that which we here hope to breathe, is one into which no thought of greed or lust, or low ambition should enter. We desire the good of all. We work for all”. In sharp contrast to those lofty ideals, one is bewildered as one sees the atmosphere of the present day politics. Yet another great Irish lady, Annie Besant, started the Home Rule Movement in India and adopted by Indians as one of their leaders. Hume quotes recording of Webb in a diary as saying that Gokhale’s knowledge of Irish history was superior to that of many members of the Irish party and says: “So it is safe to assume that over a century ago, as two friends (Gandhi and Gokhale) discussed in Calcutta the future of India, the word Swaraj was mentioned, and with it, the name of Ireland”. A teacher by profession, Hume first came into prominence through the civil rights movement in the later 1960s when Catholics demanded substantial changes to the way Northern Ireland was run. He helped found the moderate nationalist social democratic and labour party in 1970 taking over its leadership in 1979. He became a member of the European Parliament in the same year. For over three decades, John Hume, has been the chief conceptualiser and steely presence behind nationalist demands for equality of treatment and a recognition of their political aspirations in the Northern Ireland. In the process, he annoyed a succession of governments and infuriated British dispensations by enlisting option in the USA and in Europe in favour of a comprehensive change. Hume made debut in politics advocating the need for providing housing to the poor and set up the first housing association in Ireland. In the first year, the association housed a hundred families besides counseling people on how to go about housing. When the association put in major plans to build 700 houses, the local authority declined permission. He decided to take recourse to civil rights movement, marking his entrance into politics. Even though he joined active politics, Hume’s commitment to non-violence remained firm. He says: “The most fundamental right of all is the right to life and therefore there is no way that you can be involved in any activity designed to achieve civil or human rights if your method undermines the most fundamental human right of all”. Hume has a dream; this generation will be the generation that takes the gun forever off our streets. |
Congress in a dilemma over SYL canal WITH its strong presence both in Punjab and Haryana, the Congress is in a quandary over the recent judgement of the Supreme Court on the SYL issue. Its Punjab unit says things opposite of what its Haryana colleagues want. Elections being days away in Punjab, the Congress is treading cautiously on the sensitive issue. While the Shiromani Akali Dal has already raised the pitch high on the SYL, the Congress leaders in Punjab are confining themselves to making the “right noises”. Interestingly, in Haryana the Indian National Lok Dal is also targetting the Congress for “not protecting’’ the state’s interests, a charge Akali Dal in Punjab is not tired of repeating. Not willing to give a beating stick to its opponents in Punjab, the Congress high command decided not to depute any observer from the Haryana Congress in the state for the polls. While neighbouring states of Himachal Pradesh and Rajasthan sent over 20 observers each with one observer coming from as far away as Karnataka, Congress leaders from Haryana were strictly kept out. Even a chance remark on SYL from a Haryana Congress leader would have been cannon fodder for the party’s rivals in Punjab. To add to the Congress’ woes, the Supreme Court has on Friday refused to initiate contempt proceedings against Punjab Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal for his stand on the SYL canal. Punjab has been given one full year to complete the project and till then the apex court would not take note of the political statements made by the leaders. For the Congress which is hoping to win in Punjab this time, it cannot afford to make lofty statements on the SYL canal. It should not be forgotten that any party that comes to power will have to face the Supreme Court after one year. SHADOW IMAGE Remember the failed mega entertainment firm ABCL which Bachchan floated a few years ago. Well, the firm is still repaying its creditors and Doordarshan is one among them. Before Amitabh left to meet the Prasar Bharati officials, the Samajwadi Party ensured that every media organisation in the capital was informed about the event. They were even assured of a press conference by the Big B. It turned out later that an embarrassed Bachchan was in no mood to talk to the Press. Nevertheless, his presence provided a photo opportunity for the cameramen. It also provided an opportunity for the Samajwadi Party general secretary and Bachchan’s close friend Amar Singh to figure in all the prominent dailies and television channels. IN A BIND However, the decision has invited criticism from other quarters. Terming the decision as “undemocratic” the critics wondered what was the harm in allowing a PSU to bid if the deal was above board and transparent? Moreover, it has been pointed out that the refining capacity in the country already exceeds demand. With private companies taking over the HPCL and the BPCL, new projects like the HPCL’s Bathinda refinery and the BPCL’s Bina refinery could be in jeopardy, they say. DESI & PHOREN That is because she is the spokesperson of the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) and through her the Government of India’s foreign policy issues are articulated. She is also the Joint Secretary incharge of the highly influential External Publicity Division of the MEA. As the first woman spokesperson of MEA, she has undoubtedly brought in a whiff of fresh air in the ministry. On the other hand, few would know Colonel Shruti Kant. Colonel who? would be the standard response even though Col Kant is the Public Relations Officer (PRO) of the world’s fourth largest army, the Indian Army which has a strength of over a million. The comparison does not end here. When Nirupama Rao got an award by a Kannada magazine, the event was covered extensively by the Indian newspapers and magazines. On the other hand, when Col Kant was chosen for this year’s President’s Vishisht Seva Medal on the occasion of Republic Day there were hardly any takers. This despite the fact that with this award Col Kant has become the most decorated PRO in the three services. He already has five of the decorations to his credit and three commendations from as many Army Chiefs. Native of Sirsa in Haryana, he has been PRO in the Army Headquarters in the national capital for more than four years now. Incidentally, in 1974 when Nirupama Rao was an IFS probationer, her group had gone for a course conducted by Shruti Kant who was 2nd lieutenant then. Today he is a full Colonel while the IFS probationers of 1974 batch have become Joint Secretaries, two rungs above a Colonel. Will the Government consider making the defence services as attractive as the IFS? Contributed by Prashant Sood, Satish Misra, T.V. Lakshminarayan, Rajeev Sharma and Girija Shankar
Kaura. |
Khushwant continues to be ruthlessly honest LAST
Monday saw the release of Khushwant Singh’s much awaited autobiography — “Truth, Love & a Little Malice” (Viking in association with Ravi Dayal
publishers). There is no need to go into the details of that injunction put forth by Maneka Gandhi because after nearly six years, the book has finally hit the stands and is being discussed all over this city and elsewhere. At the launch itself, guests were seen buying copies of the autobiography and turning the pages, trying to read between the lines in the midst of all that heady cocktailing. Writer Anees Jung, who finds a mention in the book was overheard saying “isme mujhe gaaliyan padee hain” (I have been mentioned unfavourably in this book). There are several others here who can be heard giving long-winded explanations about their presence in the volume. Perhaps, they cannot stomach an honest appraisal of themselves, but that’s Khushwant’s greatest quality. He is ruthlessly honest and blunt about himself or anyone...I have just finished reading the book. My first reaction is this. How many of us can write about our sexual encounter(s), domestic problems, ailments, relationship with spouse and children, friendships that leave dents, interactions with those who are in the business of running this country, fall-outs along the way...Well, Khushwant has written about all this and much more. The 400-odd pages tell you the story of his life, those happenings from childhood through old age together with those who interacted with him. Amazingly, in the midst of all these happenings, Khushwant hasn’t wasted a minute. Even though he is nearing 87, you’d find him either reading or writing, as though he is accountable for every moment that passes by. And the more you know Khushwant or interact with him, you’d realise that he’s a far cry from that set image. Actually, he is rather conservative and a family man...very few husbands would take such care as he did of his Alzheimer’s stricken wife Kaval, who passed away in December last. Making her sit on the sofa opposite the chair where he sat, looking at her with great concern even whilst busy answering phone calls or talking to guests. ISSUE IN QUESTION The four speakers were not just good but gentlemen too. Arun Jaitley was cornered by Indian Express editor Shekhar Gupta, Tarun Tejpal of Tehelka fame and NDTV’s Rajdeep Sardesai, but he managed to retain his cool in between coming up with unconvincing and weak arguments in favour of the politician. As Tejpal pointed out, the system is to be blamed. He narrated an anecdote which goes to prove the hollowness in the very functioning of the system. Perhaps, there’s something wrong with all of us for we seem not to be reacting! Like weaklings we are taking in whatever is thrown our way. Nodding in (supposed) agreement to whatever the politician says or orders, without once thinking of vetoing his moves and dictates. The least we can do for our country is question and query. Though there’s a lot going wrong at several ends, we have no access to several such places. For instance, the jails are run on the taxpayers’ money, yet we have no clue to what is happening behind those high walls... |
 |
| 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 | | 122 Years of Trust | Calendar | Weather | Archive | Subscribe | Suggestion | E-mail | |
