 |
Monday,
July 1, 2002, Chandigarh, India  
|
EC cracks the whip Economy springs a surprise
Ground monitoring of the border |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The mango tree of contention
|
EC cracks the whip The Election Commission’s directive on Friday, making it mandatory for candidates seeking elections to the Lok Sabha or state legislatures to furnish details regarding their criminal antecedents, if any, particularly whether they were convicted or charge-sheeted, statement of their assets and liabilities and educational qualifications, is in conformity with the Supreme Court’s ruling of May 2. In fact, the former was duty-bound to give effect to the latter’s directions by July 1 as enumerated in the ruling. Clearly, Friday’s directive could be interpreted as a significant step in the annals of electoral reforms in India. For, even though these reforms have been discussed at various forums ever since the 1967 general election, no breakthrough was possible in the absence of a consensus among political parties. Criminalisation of politics has polluted the electoral system. In the last decade, the issue had assumed menacing proportions because along with the entry of criminals and history-sheeters, the role of money power and muscle power too made contesting elections difficult for ordinary citizens. Against this background, it is doubtful whether our present system is capable of ensuring a free and fair election. To a large extent, political parties themselves need to be blamed for this malady because while giving tickets to candidates, they seem to be guided by the winnability factor of the candidate rather than his/her antecedents and their deleterious effect on the representative institutions and the quality of governance. Friday’s directive from New Delhi’s Nirvachan Sadan has certainly caught all the political parties off their guard. It was a surprise for the Union Government too. For, ever since the May 2 ruling, it has been maintaining that as its implementation involves legislative measures, it is primarily a political issue and hence it requires a political consensus. It had also sought adequate time for the purpose. It was in tune with this policy stand that Union Law Minister Arun Jaitley had convened an all-party meeting in New Delhi on July 8. Now that the Election Commission has given effect to the Supreme Court’s orders and decided to implement them from July 1, neither the Centre nor the political parties seem to have any alternative than to abide by the directive which has the force of the law within the meaning of Article 141 of the Constitution. Significantly, the issue has also acquired a sense of urgency because the directive will be implemented during the forthcoming elections to the Jammu and Kashmir Assembly. While it will be interesting to see how it is implemented there, it will also give an opportunity to the Centre to plug loopholes, if any, and ensure effective implementation of the directive. After all, it is Parliament that has to make the necessary amendments to the Representation of People Act. The directive assumes special significance because the Centre and the political parties cannot avoid implementing it under the pretext of evolving a consensus on the issue. Instead, they would have to take expeditious measures to cleanse the system of all the ills and make it open and transparent. More important, they cannot afford to circumvent the provisions and hoodwink the law because of the stringent provision in the Election Commission’s directive that false affidavits or wrong disclosures in the nomination papers will lead to the rejection of the candidature. |
|
Economy springs a surprise There is cheering news from the economic front. Despite the gloomy atmosphere owing to various national and international anti-development factors, India posted a growth rate of 5.4 per cent during 2001-2002 against 4 per cent in 2000-2001, as per the revised estimates released by the Central Statistical Organisation. Surprisingly, among the main contributors was agriculture, though the financial and services sectors too showed an encouraging performance. Agriculture grew by 5.4 per cent, at a much faster rate than the previous year’s 0.2 per cent. This was the period when the world’s economic engine, the USA, suffered a severe jolt with the terrorist strike at the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, leading to a cascading effect throughout the globe. Yet India’s financial and insurance sector gained by 7.8 per cent and the services sector by 6.7 per cent. There is, definitely, inbuilt resilience which has made the economy move faster on the road to recovery. In spite of the depressing developments in Gujarat and the military standoff at the India-Pakistan border, it is believed that 2002-2003 will show a growth rate between 6 and 6.5 per cent. This brings one to the main issue related to the 10th Five-Year Plan target of 8 per cent growth. The economy’s performance between the Fifth Plan and the Eighth Plan remained between 5 per cent and 6.8 per cent. So, should the country expect the realisation of the 10th Plan target of 8 per cent by 2007 in view of the current showing ? Of course, one should always hope for better days ahead, but there is a long time gap between now and then. Anything can happen during this period. However, the chances of disappointment can be minimised once we take care of two major sectors—agriculture and
infrastructure. Though agriculture affects the country’s economic growth more than any other sector, it has not received the required attention so far. The reform process relating to this area is too slow to enthuse the sentiments of those dependent on its performance....over 70 per cent of the population. As pointed out by the 1999-2000 Economic Survey, the farming sector’s performance even today is “closely related to the
performance of the monsoon....Even after 50 years of economic development no major water management strategy has been developed to reduce the agriculture sector’s dependence on the monsoon.” Though certain steps have been taken as part of the new agriculture policy to meet the post-WTO challenges, there is still a lot to be done to make agriculture realise its real potential. Like agriculture, the infrastructure sector too is not getting the attention it deserves. Except for telecommunications, the efforts to improve the situation in the areas of power availability, seaports, airports, roads, railways, etc, are too slow. There is definitely some reason why most foreign institutional investors (FIIs) prefer China to India when they decide to set up shop in this part of the world. The government will have to review its strategy to make the economy reach the respectable growth level of 8 per cent from the 5.4 per cent already achieved. |
Ground monitoring of the border Ever since the visit of US Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage and Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to India last month, there has been talk of deploying sensor-based ground-monitoring systems to check infiltration along the Indo-Pak border (IB) and the Line of Control (LoC). Our Defence Minister George Fernandes has publicly confirmed that such measures are indeed being considered. The utility of ground sensors for surveillance and detection is neither a new concept nor unknown to us. Both the Indian Army and the Border Security Force have carried out trials with several types of sensors and also deployed some of them along the IB and the LoC. The ground monitoring systems being considered now are based on combinations of different types of sensors, which would hopefully be able to detect and monitor any movement in the topographic and climatic conditions existing in different sectors of the IB and LoC. Such a combination of sensors may comprise seismic, magnetic and acoustic sensors, a ported co-axial cable that creates an electro-magnetic field, ground surveillance radars, sensor-activated halogen lights, video cameras and thermal imagers. Information obtained by these sensors will be transmitted to a manned control centre where a quick assessment will be made and then the response decided. The immediate response may be despatch of a patrol to confirm the assessment, to deal with the intruders, or any other suitable action. I saw the working of a ground monitoring system during my visit to the Israel-Lebanon border in March, 1998. The Israelis have considerable experience with this type of technology. The points that emerged after my visit on the ground and discussions with Israeli officers were:
The ground monitoring system deployed on the Israel-Lebanon border was fairly effective. But then such systems cannot be easily replicated when political and military situations and ground conditions are different. I believe that the systems being proposed/sponsored by the USA for monitoring the LoC are those developed by the Cooperative Monitoring Centre (CMC) of the Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico. The CMC assists political and technical experts from around the world to acquire the technology-based tools they need to assess, design, analyse, and implement nonproliferation, arms control and other cooperative security measures. The CMC provides a forum for international and regional experts to explore ways in which technology can facilitate achieving and maintaining a wide range of bilateral, international and regional security objectives. It has done considerable work in this field and is willing to share its expertise with other nations. What difficulties can be expected in deploying the ground monitoring system along the Indo-Pak border and the LoC, and how can some of these be overcome if we wish to try out the system? Firstly, let me begin by stating that no technical monitoring system on the ground, air or the seas is 100 per cent reliable or effective. In the case of Jammu and Kashmir, the very difficult terrain and climatic conditions, particularly in Kashmir, Kargil and Ladakh, would further reduce the efficacy of the sensor-based ground monitoring system. Extreme temperatures, soil conditions, the visibility problem, fog and blizzards would restrict the employment of monitoring devices. Secondly, deployment of sensors and their logistic requirements — a continuous supply of electricity — would require a certain level of accessibility, the availability of a road or a motorable track. Rugged, glaciated mountains with extreme temperatures would demand a high degree of dedicated support. Thirdly, these systems form part of a cooperative mechanism. They cannot be deployed unless the level of tension along the border of the LoC can be substantially reduced and there is a certain amount of cooperation as well as collaboration between the military on both sides. Fourthly, we shall have to evolve acceptable norms for manning the systems and procedures for passing information to either side. In this context, the government will have to decide what “facilitator” role would be played by the CMC and the US Administration, keeping in view our consistent stand in the light of the Simla Agreement that this is a bilateral issue and no third party, including the UN, has a role to play. The technical requirement for manning the ground monitoring system will be very little because military personnel on both sides are capable of handling such systems. The CMC could, however, be asked to supply equipment, train personnel, and assist in the modification of the systems and further technical developments. Fifthly, there may be the problem of high cost, which would rise steeply in areas that are not easily accessible. All the above mentioned aspects have a major bearing on the political intentions and assurances of both parties; confidence, trust and cooperation at the military-to-military level to be able to deploy the monitoring infrastructure on the ground and make it effective. If, on the recommendations and assurance of the USA we do decide to deploy a ground monitoring system along the Indo-Pak border and the LoC, we should consider the following three-step incremental monitoring approach to make this exercise as effective as possible.
Step one
Step two
Step three
The cooperative ground monitoring system in the Indo-Pak context can work only if it includes total monitoring — of political assurances as well as implementation— in a cooperative atmosphere. Can we achieve that? The writer is a former Chief of Army Staff. |
The mango tree of contention Some years ago, nursery officials brought some saplings for plantation during the monsoon season in our houses to improve the landscape of the township. We planted a mango sapling near the boundary wall. The plant grew up in routine but after four years, it was noticed that the tree and some branches were leaning towards our neighbour’s side. Sensing that some fruit may fall on the other side of the wall, we put stay wires around the tree. Despite our best efforts, we failed miserably and the leaning continued unabated. Rather, some major branches/offshoots favoured them vehemently. We became upset sensing that we may have to share the fruits with our neighbours — a possibility unacceptable to my Home Department and children. After another two years, in March, it was observed that the “mango bur” was heavily loaded on our neighbour’s side. This became a cause of worry as it was amply clear that the fruit would gravitate towards the adjoining area. Willy-nilly, our relations with the neighbour started souring — owing to various assumptions and presumptions. The D-day came. Mangoes got ripened, and one fine morning, we picked up a stock of about 10 mangoes and enjoyed them. My wife suspected that the mangoes must be more in number and might have been stolen by our adversaries. Our suspicion escalated steeply. Our children started keeping vigil round the clock. Sooner than later, my eldest son found the neighbours’ boy picking up our mangoes early in the morning and carrying the basket to his house. He was challenged and the first episode of the “Tu-Tu, Main-Main” serial commenced. Hearing quarrelsome noises, we joined our son to strengthen our side of the ‘tug of war’. Meanwhile, the neighbouring parents also came out to participate in the slanging match. Arguments and counter-arguments were fired like missiles. They claimed that since mangoes had fallen in their area, these were their property and they will not part with it. We stressed that the tree was planted, nurtured, manured, watered etc by us for a pretty long period and naturally the whole fruit crops was ours. When the heated discussions were tapering down — they sprang a surprise. “How about the droppings, leaves and shoots shed by the tree falling in our compound creating littering and garbage?” Since they were taking care of them, the fruits were the compensation, they argued, we were completely stumped with that concept. The heated arguments on that day strained our official, social and neighbourly relations. These strained relations produced impact on our common friends. They started either avoiding us or visiting us late in the night — so that they were not noticed by the other party. Our fight dominated discussions in every social meet. Our common wall got named as LoC. Even our houses were nicknamed “Hindustan and Pakistan”. Our friends were rendering us advice of many sorts like. (i) File an FIR (ii) Axe the trees (Na Rahega Baans Na Bajegi Bansuri) (iii) File complaint with the Big Boss It was a piquant situation for us and it lasted till the mango season was over. Thereafter, some common friends tried to bring about a working compromise between the neighbours sulking in cold war. Somehow, we came on talking terms only — but no chance was missed to condemn our neighbours’ unruly behaviour. Our relations remained workable on surface during nine months of the year (non-mango season) but remained strained for three months (mango season). After a few years, we were posted to a new station and we were happy to observe that there were a lot of papaya but no mango trees in the residential complex. Whenever we see a mango tree or even a mango fruit — we remember the episode and get chilled (sometimes thrilled). |
Enter: an assertive Deputy Prime Minister
On June 29 when Home Minister L.K. Advani was made Deputy Prime Minister on the advice of Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee, it was a signal of the fast-changing equations within the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and the ruling 24-party National Democratic Alliance (NDA). Though Mr Advani is the seventh Deputy Prime Minister and the second DPM after Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel to hold the crucial portfolio of Home Minister, he has several firsts to his credit. Mr Advani, who will turn 75 on November 8, continues to be the Home
Minister, a post he has held since March, 1998. Probably for the first time we have a DPM in Mr Advani who has been appointed on this post— which is not mentioned in the Constitution — for long-time strategic reasons rather than short-term political considerations. All the predecessors of Mr Advani — including the tallest of them all, Sardar Patel — were appointed DPM because the politics of the day demanded such an arrangement. In the case of Mr Advani he has been unofficially holding the number two position in the Vajpayee Cabinet without the DPM tag for the past four years. Mr Advani’s appointment as DPM comes at an interesting time when the BJP got a drubbing in the recently held assembly elections, including the elections in Uttar Pradesh, and the general election is due only in 2004. This is a powerful indication that Mr Advani has been drafted in for the role of a DPM as a long-term measure. Political observers believe that Mr Advani is being “prepared” for the prime ministership, or more accurately, as the BJP’s prime ministerial candidate in the next elections. This is despite the categoric assertions made today by Mr Advani himself that the next general election would be fought by the BJP under the leadership of Mr Vajpayee. Political observers believe that Mr Vajpayee would take ‘sanyas’ after completing his tenure as Prime Minister in the 13th Lok Sabha and hand over the reins to Mr Advani. There is another first for Mr Advani as DPM. He is tipped to be the first-ever “assertive” DPM, probably more assertive and powerful than the legendary Sardar Patel. An indication of this would be as and when he is given an office in the Prime
Minister’s Office in South Block, which observeres believe, is going to happen soon. It is expected that from now onwards Mr Advani would be a pro-active DPM, more pro-active than any of his six predecessor DPMs — Sardar Patel, Mr Morarji Desai, Chaudhary Charan Singh, Babu Jagjivan Ram, Mr Y.B. Chavan and Chaduhary Devi Lal. Political circles here are agog with speculations that from now onwards Mr Advani will call the shots in the affairs of the party as well as the government. In other words, the new political arrangement in the Vajpayee government shows that Mr Advani’s going up the ladder would signify Mr Vajpayee’s political eclipse. Incidentally, this was not so even with the all-powerful Sardar Patel. It is not for nothing that Congress spokesman and a seasoned politician, Mr Jaipal Reddy, wryly remarked: “Becoming Deputy Prime Minister is not so much a promotion for Mr Advani as it is a demotion for Mr Vajpayee.” CPM leader and politburo member, Sitaram Yechury commented: “What has been de facto has now become de jure. Mr Advani’s appointment is clearly a sign that Mr Vajpayee is increasingly getting marginalised.” Significantly, Mr Advani’s appointment comes in the wake of a scathing story published recently by the “Time” magazine which gave graphic details of Prime Minister Vajpayee’s failing health. Observers believe that though the government has dismissed the “Time” story as baseless and even the reporter concerned, Mr John Parry has tendered a lame-duck apology (which “Time” is not going to publish), the story has, in a way, been vindicated by the sudden elevation of Mr Advani as DPM. Born on November 8, 1929 in Karachi, Mr Advani has indeed come a long way. His earlier schooling was at St Patrick’s in Karachi. He later on graduated in Law from Bombay University. Though not a practicising lawyer, he argued on behalf of his party in 1974 before the Supreme Court in the Presidential reference whether election to the post of President could be held when the Gujarat assembly was dissolved. At the time of partition of India, Mr Advani was the RSS organiser in Karachi city. After partition, for several years, Mr Advani organised RSS work in Rajasthan. When Dr Mukherji founded the Jana Sangh in 1951, Mr Advani became its Rajasthan State Secretary and continued there till 1957 before he moved to Delhi to become the Delhi Jana Sangh Secretary and during this period he was also the Secretary to the Jana Sangh Parliamentary Group. From 1970 to 1989 he was a member of the Rajya Sabha. In 1991, he was also appointed the Leader of Opposition. He was elected President of Jana Sangh in 1973 and continued until 1977 before he was appointed Information and Broadcasting Minister in the Janata government. During his tenure, he freed the media from legislative and executive shackles, instutionalised reforms and inbuilt safeguards to guard freedom.He abolished press censorship and repealed anti-press legislation. When the BJP was launched in 1980, he held the key post of General Secretary for six years. In 1986, he became the BJP President, a post he held until January 1991. The turning point in the career of Mr Advani as well as the BJP came in 1991 when Mr Advani fanned across the country on his famous Rath Yatra on a makeshift motorised chariot from Somnath to Ayodhya. Though his “Rath” was stopped in Samastipur, Bihar, by Bihar Chief Minister Laloo Prasad Yadav, Mr Advani has never looked back since then. His Rath Yatra made sure that he became a household name. Political observers believe that now onwards Mr Advani would be groomed for the top job of the country. The BJP strategy would be to popularise Mr Advani in the South where he is believed to be less popular as compared to Mr Vajpayee. In the North, he has already made forays in the minds and hearts of the people and is viewed more popular than Mr Vajpayee. Once his acceptability in the South increases, he would be a PM-material, observers argue. Mr Advani’s appointment as DPM (and also the anticipated shifting of Mr Jaswant Singh from the External Affairs portfolio to Finance) can also be seen as a powerful political symbolism to Pakistan in particular and the global
community in general. Mr Advani is probably the only Indian minister who had a “successful” tour of the USA and virtually every single American leader of consequence met him during his recent visit. And this was when he was not the DPM officially. The Pervez Musharraf regime of Pakistan must be wary of the move of appointing Mr Advani as DPM as Islamabad has singled him out as a “hawk” and Gen Musharraf held him squarely responsible for, what he described as “derailing” the Agra summit. Mr Jaswant Singh, who has been known to have a close rapport with the USA, is also tipped to make way for a new External Affairs Minister at this juncture which signifies that India would no longer be cajoling Islamabad for its sins of omission and commission. Mr Advani is expected to be indulging in back-seat driving from his new-found status of DPM which is bad news for Pakistan. Mr Advani’s views on Pakistan and its long-practised ideology of exporting terrorism are too well known to leave any iota of doubt on New Delhi’s Pakistan policy in the coming days and months. The onus of steering the BJP as well as the government in a clear direction determinedly now falls on Mr Advani. After all, “Swaraj Se Suraaj Tak” (From Independence to God Governance) was his pet slogan in the mid-nineties when the BJP was knocking on the doors of power. Now that he has the necessary wherewithal, Mr Advani has to deliver. |
You are the primal Lord,
creator beyond reach There is none equal to you; From age to age you are the only one Forever the only one who gives stability; What pleases you comes to pass What you do comes to be; You created all that exists You will take it all back as you will; Your slave Nanak sings your praises Who knows all that is worth knowing. You are the true Creator, you are my Master What pleases you will come to pass, What you give, I receive. All that exists belongs to you You are worshipped for your creation; To those you are pleased with, You grant the jewel of your name. Men of God find it, followers of Mammon lose it; You abandon the worldly, clasp the godly to your bosom. You are the mighty river, all within you is contained Without you nothing exists; All living creatures are your play things Some get separated from you Others by your grace merge in you. Those you give the gift of wisdom do you appraise. And forever sing songs in your praise. He who serves you, finds peace of mind And in the Lord, he gently a place finds. You are the Creator, you the executor There is none besides you, You create and keep everything in your sight. Says your slave Nanak, for the godly you came to light. A whirlpool of boiling water is our abode Our feet are clogged with the love of worldly things We see people sink into those quicksands. O my stupid heart yet know you not If you forget the one God All that is good in you will rot. I am neither saintly, truthful nor erudite I was born a fool and foolish I remain Nanak pleads with you in earnest Grant me refuge among those who you never forget. Rehras, Sri Guru Granth Sahib. |
 |
| 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 | |
