The Tribune, Chandigarh, India

EDITORIALS

Blame game

Quite expectedly, the India-Pakistan diplomatic row has degenerated into a tit-for-tat slugfest, in which the first casualty is the truth. In response to Delhi’s decision on Wednesday asking four personnel of the Pakistan High Commission to leave within two days, Islamabad has also issued similar marching orders to four personnel of the Indian High Commission. With charges and counter-charges flying thick and fast, Pakistan has succeeded in playing down the harassment caused to Indian Charge d’Affaires Sudhir Vyas. The way his official flag car was blocked was insulting, to say the least, which no self-respecting country could overlook. At the same time, it was such an ugly trick that no civilised country could do a tit for tat either. That is why India had sent a tough message through the expulsion. But Islamabad has chosen to reciprocate the gesture in kind. Interestingly, all the four Indian officials it has named belong to the visa section. The action will ensure that the dwindling number of people who are able to get Indian visas is further reduced. All this gives the impression that our neighbour is deliberately indulging in provocative behaviour as an excuse to discourage its people still daring to travel to India on valid documents. Among the four who have been ordered out is Mr Vipin Handa, Counsellor, who along with his family has suffered greatly at the hands of Pakistani intelligence officials for several months.

The end result is that the relations between the two countries have become even more frosty. New Delhi had recalled the Indian High Commissioner and cut the staff strength in the mission by half in the wake of the December 13 attack on Parliament. Pakistan had followed suit. But of late, there was a move to send a High Commissioner again. In June, India agreed to lift the ban on over-flight facilities to Pakistani aircraft on a bilateral basis, but Pakistan chose to ignore this well-meaning gesture. This behaviour, seen with the latest attacks on Mr Vyas, makes it obvious that Pakistan is not at all keen to lessen the tension. India has made repeated attempts to mend fences, in the process even angering a large section within the country which does want the government to make such confidence-building gestures to its neighbour and get a black eye in return. By maltreating Mr Vyas, Pakistan has pushed back the normalisation process greatly, deliberately or otherwise.

Police highhandedness

In more civilised societies the torture and subsequent death of an eight-year-old boy, detained by the Jalandhar police along with another boy on the suspicion of stealing Rs 87, 000, would have resulted in an upsurge of mass protest. But in India, and particularly in Punjab, people have got so used to seeing and reading about tales of police excesses that these apparently have ceased to shock them. After their torture, the two migrant boys were bundled into a car and thrown on the wayside. One of them was later found dead and the other badly bruised. Such incidents are not infrequent in Punjab, but the saving grace this time is that the three accused policemen were immediately arrested and charged with murder. The kidney scam that has shaken many people in general and the medical community in particular also highlights the irresponsible way the police has handled it. The illegal trade of human organs in Amritsar has been going on for years, yet no action was taken until recently. Some police officers and politicians were, it is reported, shielding the influential accused persons. With the change of government, when the police finally clamped down on the illegal activity, it did it the only way it is familiar with: handcuffing the Principal of Medical College and a renal transplant expert of international repute along with certain middle men and dragged them to court. A widely hailed and publicised Supreme Court judgement has restrained the police from handcuffing and maltreating such citizens as are willing to cooperate in the police investigation and are unlikely to win over the witnesses or flee the country. Every accused person is innocent until pronounced guilty by a court and must be shown the basic courtesies.

It is not uncommon to hear about police harassment, detention or torture of ordinary citizens. Right from an extortion of bribe, a traffic challan to a death in custody, violation of the law and the rules of conduct by policemen is a routine occurrence. The fault lies with the police training, low salaries, inhuman working conditions and the police-politician nexus. Because of the salary not being commensurate with the difficult job conditions, talent flow to the police gets restricted. Ancient methods of investigation and third-degree treatment lowers the police in the common citizen’s estimation. In this context, Amnesty International’s recent observations about torture and custodial violence in Punjab in the post-militancy period are quite relevant. It says: “only a small minority of the police officers responsible for a range of human rights violations, including torture, deaths in custody, extra-judicial executions and ‘disappearances’, during the militancy period have been brought to justice. This has led some state officials to believe that they can violate people’s fundamental rights with impunity even now”. It is in the police top brass’s own interest to refurbish the image of the force by ensuring a dignified conduct for winning back public confidence. Tackling crime becomes much easier with public cooperation. Change in attitudes and community policing are the need of the hour.

USA isolated on Iraq

It is heartening to see two erstwhile warring nations get together on a common platform of peace and friendship. Germany and France have a long history of facing each other’s armies but now they are eying the future and reconciling. The recent commemoration of the 1963 signing of the Elysee Friendship Treaty was an occasion for the political leaders of both nations to affirm the common vision of future. Both nations are important members of the European Union and have been described together as the French-German engine of the EU that pushed the integration of the union forward. There is no doubt that the EU is now a major global player economically and it should come as no surprise that it is seeking an independent role politically too. Historically, France has seldom played to the UK-USA tune and at times has even struck discordant notes. However not for a long time has such a clear diplomatic divide been seen. Britain is totally allied with the USA on the Iraq issue while France and Germany are opposing precipitate action. Paris has long been Washington’s most awkward European ally, but it now has an ally in the German Chancellor, Mr Gerhard Schroeder, who has taken a distinct stand whereas his nation has often been seen as an automatic US ally.

At the root of the differences is their interpretation of the November 2001 UN Security Council Resolution 1441 that asked Iraq to open its weapons programmes to UN inspection and cooperate with the UN inspectors or face “serious consequences.” The USA and the UK maintain that Iraq has not cooperated and want to wage war to “disarm” it. On the other hand, France and Germany rightly say that there should be no war, or even perpetration for it, while the UN inspectors are at work. The American discomfort at the fraying of the consensus against Iraq is reflected in the statement of Mr Donald Rumsfeld, the US Defence Secretary, that “Germany has been a problem and France has been a problem.” His ham-handed comment about France and Germany being “Old Europe” to be differentiated from the “New Europe” of the eastern states, had further aggravated the matters. The UN inspectors are to submit their reports of the kind of cooperation they are getting from Iraq to the Security Council on Monday and these reports should be the basis for any further action. As long as there are peaceful ways of resolving the crisis in Iraq and making it confirm to the will of comity of nations, war rhetoric should be kept to the minimum and the military machine kept on a tight leash. The European nations have suffered the most in the two world wars and are right in opposing of waging of war unless it is absolutely necessary and unavoidable.

OPINION

Helping the disadvantaged students
Innovative fund-raising is necessary
Amrik Singh

During the last few decades, the character of university education has undergone one significant change; the strength of middle class students opting for professional education has gone up steeply. A certain proportion of the disadvantaged students has also been able to join universities and colleges. But, on balance, it is the middle class students who have benefited more from the growth of facilities. Thus, two parallel processes took place; one was the growing proportion of students who belonged to the disadvantaged category joining the professional stream and the other was a much larger number of middle class students benefiting from the changing situation.

Since the fees charged were on the low side throughout this period, this acted as an incentive to students to join the professional courses. Today a situation has been reached where, in the interests of sheer survival, the state has no choice except to raise the tuition fee all along the line. A beginning is being made with the professional courses. In course of time non-professional students would also be charged more than what they are paying at the moment. The issue, however, is: what will happen to the disadvantaged students in this fast changing situation?

Unless a positive intervention is made by the state in favour of those who are unable to join professional courses for lack of resources, the situation is likely to worsen. To put it plainly, a systematic effort has to be made to help the disadvantaged students.

One thing is clear. While the affluent students would pay more than they were paying, something like 50 per cent of the new entrants would have to be supported by the state. This would put additional burden on it. It is, however, possible to lighten the burden provided two things are done. One, to evolve a system whereby funding from the state flows readily as well as consistently. Two, instead of the bureaucracy handling the job, as at present, a considerable part of the responsibility is taken over by the teachers.

They are in daily contact with students. It may be possible for a student to pretend to be poor and get state support. But, sooner or later, this pretence will get exposed which no one, other than the teachers, would be able to judge. To put it another way, while those connected with administration can be hoodwinked, the teachers cannot. This shift of responsibility is important and its significance must be understood.

The job of identifying those who are to be given half fee concession is most often handled casually. In the changed situation, this job should be handled primarily by the teachers. If this can happen, the situation would visibly improve. The involvement of the teaching community in a much more thorough manner than what happens today is thus almost a prerequisite for the transition to be undertaken successfully.

The situation on the teaching front today is somewhat mixed. While a small proportion take their job seriously, this is not true of the large majority. To start with, therefore, the job will have to be delegated to those who are genuinely involved with students and enjoy their confidence. In other words, if the bulk of the students are satisfied with the new arrangement, this would lead to a marked change of atmosphere in the educational institutions. Not only that, it would bring teachers and students nearer each other and generate a kind of atmosphere which does not obtain today. The right kind of leadership by the Principal or the Dean of the Faculty who would be basically handling this job would therefore be crucial.

Identifying students who are likely to be given whole or partial fee concession is the smaller part of the job. The bigger part is that almost 50 per cent of the students who are duly qualified and competent to pursue that course would not be able to join unless they are given substantial help so as to cover not only the tuition fee but also other expenses. In certain cases, stay in the hostel would also have to be underwritten. Indeed a decision in regard to this matter would have to be made at the time of admission rather than after the admission has been made.

Where would funds for helping approximately 50 per cent of the students come from? Some 10-15 per cent of them are already receiving help from the state through one channel or another. The real problem is about the remaining 35 or 40 per cent. This is not a small number and funds could have to be raised and/or provided in order to meet the needs of the students.

In this connection, it may not be out of place to refer to an experiment which the UGC has already initiated. As is widely known by now, five universities have been indentified by the UGC as having a potential for excellence. Each one of them is being given an additional sum of Rs 30 crore for a period of five years. Out of this, Rs 1 crore has been set apart as “seed money” for financial aid to students and half a crore for the scheme “earn while you learn”.

Every university is expected to raise at least four times as much as it is given. That is to say, as against Rs 1 crore being given by the UGC, each university will have to raise another Rs 4 crore in order to be eligible for it. Otherwise, this amount could lapse. Each one of the universities is being told that it is expected to raise nothing less than Rs 10 crore in the course of the current Plan period.

How will the university go about the job of raising this amount? It would have no option except to organise things differently from how they are organised today. For instance, apart from other things, it will have to pay special attention to the Alumni Association, remain in constant touch with old students and put an innovative and dynamic persons — may be more than one — in charge of this operation. His job would be to establish and maintain contact with the old students and devise ways and means of getting them interested in the welfare of the disadvantaged students.

Such a proposal could not have been thought of earlier. As argued above, a substantial number of students who even though they came from affluent middle class families had the advantage of studying at a low cost. What is more, several of them have gone on to do well either in India or abroad and are in a position to either adopt a student or respond to some equally imaginative approach which the university may devise.

So far, hardly any institution in India has opted to initiate a fund-raising campaign as proposed here. The truth of the matter is that there is considerable potential for raising funds, more particularly for helping those who need help. Raising funds for the institution may not enthuse many people. But helping the disadvantaged students to train for a new profession is another thing. Many more people are likely to respond in a positive manner than can be visualised today by most people.

The problem is not as formidable as it may appear to some people. approximately 50 per cent of the students would more or less pay for their own education. Out of the remaining 50 per cent, 10-15 per cent would be covered by the schemes already in force. That leaves out something like 35-40 per cent students. As already stated, some of them will have to be looked after by an increased outlay by the state itself but some of them will have to be supported by the funds which the educational institution would be raising.

It is for each state government to decide whether the percentage to be supported by the state would be 15-20 per cent or more or less. Perhaps, in the beginning, the state would have to accept a higher order of responsibility. It would take some time for each educational institution to get into stride, organise itself and launch a campaign. In the beginning, the institution may not be able to raise funds even for 10 per cent of the claimants. This would therefore oblige the state government to get after the educational institution so that the latter can be made to step up its efforts. Perhaps some kind of a yearly target would have to be fixed or a mid-year review undertaken to see how well the institution is doing, what change of strategy requires to be made, whether it is necessary to replace certain individuals put on the job and so on.

Once this kind of a thing starts happening in professional colleges, the overall situation would start changing. It cannot be argued that the same system can be extended automatically to colleges other than professional in character. The situation in those colleges is markedly different. These institutions play the role of “baby sitting” for that category of students who were not training for anything specific and wanted to pass time. In most cases, the parents were affluent enough to maintain them in college. This process has been at work for several decades now.

Indeed one reason whey the tuition fee has not been raised at that level all these years is that the state did not wish to charge more for the job of “baby sitting” than the students were accustomed to paying. With the passage of years and with the worsening state of joblessness, the situation has changed. Whatever might be its other dimensions, one thing is unmistakable. The cost of maintaining students in college has been rising and the state is finding it difficult to maintain the existing somewhat expensive (and ultimately wasteful) mode of keeping the young people engaged. One looks forward to a higher rate of economic growth in the years to come. Should that come to pass, it may become easier to charge higher fees even in the non-professional colleges.

This brief argument is an attempt to pose issues to some of those who are concerned with policy making. The Centre does not matter all that much. All that it does is to lay down policies which it cannot have implemented. The real job has to be done at the state level. With the kind of Education Ministers we mostly have and the frequent transfers to which bureaucrats are subjected, things have remained virtually unchanged during the last several decades. If the described changes are to take place, corresponding changes at the state level will have to be made. If this can be ensured, some of the issues raised above and some more which could not be raised for lack of space would demand active intervention. The question to ask is: would be state governments rise to the challenge?

The writer is a well-known educationist and former Vice-Chancellor of Punjabi University, Patiala.

ANALYSIS

The Bush logic on Iraq: heads I win, tails you lose
A. Balu

“Who can blame Saddam Hussein if he does not know how to respond to Bush? If Saddam admits he has weapons of mass destruction (WMD), then he has breached the UN/US stipulations and Bush may attack him.

If Saddam says he has no WMDs, Bush has already announced that he won’t believe Saddam and reserves the right to bomb the hell out of Iraq, any way. If the weapons inspectors find no evidence of WMD, Bush has said simply it means that Saddam has actually succeeded in hiding them and the US will bomb the hell out of Iraq on that assumption, and get rid of Saddam.”

This letter from an irate American to an anti-war website aptly sums up the mindset of President Bush, who is itching to finish what a US Congressman calls the “left-over business” of Bush Senior, who launched the Gulf War more than a decade ago.

The former President had orchestrated the US-led coalition against Iraq, and sent a force of 700,000 (largely American but including troops from 21 nations) to drive Iraq out of Kuwait. The mission succeeded, but Mr Saddam Hussein was allowed to survive with his power and army in tact.

The current mission of President Bush is more ambitious than that of his father. No matter what the cost of war is — estimates range between $ 50 billion and $ 140 billion — or what the consequences of war will be, Mr Hussein’s regime must go.

US warships and troops have already sailed to the Gulf on the assumption, as spelt out by Secretary of State Colin Powell, “a persuasive case” that Iraq was not cooperating with the UN weapons inspectors. Media reports suggest that about 150,000 ground troops and naval forces may be poised to attack Iraq within a month, despite the White House insisting that President Bush has set no timetable for war and prefers that Iraq disarm peacefully.

Mr Powell seeks to justify the buildup of US forces as being “part of supporting the diplomatic pressure to make Iraq perform,” to make Iraq comply with the UN Security Council resolution 1441 despite the overwhelming opinion all over the world that the USA has not made out a case that Iraq poses a threat to the US or international peace and security.

UN weapons inspection team chief Hans Blix’s interim conclusion is that there was no “smoking gun” or key evidence that could provoke a US-led invasion. In a recent interview to the BBC, he said he did not know how long the American government was willing to wait for the inspectors to complete their searches. It could be that “one day it will say, ‘move aside boys, we are coming in.’”

The inspectors have said they need more time to assess if Iraq has weapons of mass destruction. They have determined that that there are “major gaps” in the 12,000-page Iraqi declaration submitted to the UN which need to be filled. They are pressing the Iraqis to be more pro-active in their cooperation. The inspectors are to report to the Security Council on January 27, giving an update of their work in Iraq.

According to the UN Secretary-General, Mr Kofi Annan, Security Council resolution 1441 is quite clear that the council will have to meet, and based on reports from the inspectors, determine what action it should take. He would expect that if the inspectors find anything, they will report to the council, and the council will take a decision. “And depending on that decision, we will see where we go from there,” Mr Annan told the media in New York the other day.

But the USA appears to have a wholly different position from what the Secretary-General spelt out. According to Mr Powell, the USA will act without a second resolution if it is of the firm view that Iraq still has weapons of mass destruction or wants to produce new ones. “If you are looking for proof of weapons of mass destruction, I can show you pictures,” says Mr Powell. Despite these assertions, the Bush administration is yet to provide convincing proof that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction or an active nuclear weapons development programme.

Not all US Congressmen are happy with the Bush obsession with Iraq. Pertinent questions have been raised on Capitol Hill about the justification of a pre-emptive strike against Iraq: If Iraq’s alleged violations are given as reason to initiate an attack, is it not true that hundreds of UN resolutions have been ignored by various countries with impunity? Is it not true that the intelligence community has been unable to develop a case linking Iraq to global terrorism? How can the USA’s declared goal of bringing democracy to Iraq believable when it props up dictators throughout the Middle-East and supports military dictators like General Musharraf in Pakistan, who overthrew a democratically elected government? Did the USA not assist Mr Saddam Hussein’s rise to power by supporting and encouraging his invasion of Iran and supplied him with every weapon he wanted, often secretly or illegally? Is it not true that a war against Iraq rejects the sentiments of the time-honoured Treaty of Westphalia nearly 400 years ago that countries should never go into another for the purpose of regime change?

Well, more such questions can be raised, but President Bush does not know the answers or does not care to answer them. He is “sick and tired” of Iraqi “game of deception”, and he is determined to eliminate Mr Saddam Hussein, “the guy who tried to kill my dad.”

SIGHT & SOUND

Violence at midnight
Amita Malik

I had mentioned the flaunting of porn after midnight on Indian channels in a previous column. But what is even more disturbing is the flaunting of violence on foreign channels. Not channels such as National Geographic and Discovery, but the other channels. I have tested this out on three subsequent nights and if there was not a woman being raped, it was a woman being strangled, or both. Shootouts on streets, children being threatened by ghosts, monsters, both human and supernatural, is the order of the day. One wonders if research in foreign countries served by these channels, and these tend to be American rather than European, has revealed that people like being repulsed, frightened to death or, plain, morally outraged before going to sleep. Or, perhaps, they want to be kept awake. But I wonder even more if this is what Indians of the educated or sophisticated variety really watch and enjoy these programmes at that hour. These are hardly a cure for insomnia.

Curiously enough, these same channels, particularly Star World, serve some enthralling programmes at 11 pm with a firm legal background and based on real life which are among the best that foreign channels offer with our more humble ‘Bhanwar’ offering some sort of parallel. I never miss two absorbing programmes, ‘The Practice’ and ‘Law and Order’, based on actual cases solved by the Special Victims Unit of the New York Police Department, the second programme dealing mainly with crimes related to sex. They could have been pornographic, lurid, melodramatic, but scrupulously avoid that, depending for effect on court-room scenes with the kind of aurtheticity and legal expertise which even Soli Sortabji would find difficult to fault. With brilliant acting, mostly quiet and under-stated, authentic sets, scrupulous observance of exemplary police methods, the whole programme is so convincing that sometimes one gets startled when it says at the end that the case is fictional and not real, although sometimes it is the opposite.

Yet, there is room for real violence-based programmes which can be exciting as well as legitimate. One such is Discovery’s programme on modern scientific methods for solving crime, where the FBI, different police departments or whoever painstakingly follow a crime, sometimes over years and to which they apply the most amazing modern discoveries in forensic science whch make one envious and feel sorry for our police struggling with antiquated equipment and financial constraints. I also thoroughly enjoy the programme ‘Most Amazing Police Videos’, thrilling without being unpleasant, which are actual visual records of police chases of various kinds, entertaining as well as fun to watch.

Another programme which I watch, and it is of a different kind, is ‘Bakra’ on MTV, where innocent bystanders are persuaded by the cunning Cyrus into doing the most idiotic things only to be told to their chagrin at the end that it only a fun TV programme. Most people take it with good humour. It always takes me back to the first programme of its kind which I saw on Russian TV in Moscow. A young man appears on the crowded street with a baby in his arms. He asks individuals on the street to hold the baby for a moment while he attends to something urgent. It is amazing how everyone responds, from polite old gentlemen to pretty young girls and from tough-looking workers on street repairs to young students. The man disappears for about four or five minutes until the victim gets really worried and then appears with a smile and assures them it was a joke for a TV programme. Most of them forgive because of having been given the chance to be on TV. It would be pretty much the same in India and most other places. And very good for a good-natured laugh.

Following up my careful viewing of two serials which are slightly different, of the two episodes of ‘Public Hai Sab Janti Hai’ the second one came off better on the topical subject of the NRI convention in the Capital which was mercilessly spoofed with some delectable acting by a team of three, particularly Sushmita Mukerji, one of the best TV actresses. But alas, ‘Astitva’ is going from bad to worse. The woman doctor’s father and mother-in-law are going beyond all credibility with their rudeness and unreasonable tantrums. And least convincing of all is the woman doctor who not only submits to it all, but continues to act the saintly dharam-patni at the cost of her professionalism, even when her hot-headed young husband lands her in a strike at her hospital because he slaps a ward boy. One would like to ask, why does he keep coming to his wife’s office so frequently in the first place. If the serial continues in this soppy manner after a good start, it would have forfeited the sympathy of most discriminating viewers.

TRENDS & POINTERS

Yes, your baby really is watching that TV

Babies are not just passing idle time when they state goggle-eyed at the television — they are actually learning about the world.

Perhaps may want to limit what their infants see on television, based on the study, said Donna Mumme, assistant professor of psychology at Tufts University in Boston.

“Children as young as 12 months are making decisions based on the emotional reactions of adults around them,” Mumme, whose research is published in the journal Child Development.

“It turns out they can also use emotional information they pick up from television. This means that adults might want to think twice before they speak in a harsh or surprising tone or let an infant see television programmes meant for an older person.”

Mumme’s team already knew that babies watch other children and adults for cues about the world. A mother urging her baby to eat some “yummy” soup or a brother crying in fear when a dog approaches can influence an infant’s reaction.

But can television? Mumme’s team tested babies, showing actors reacting on a videotape to objects such as a red spiral letter holder, a blue bumpy ball, and a yellow garden hose attachment.

Ten-month-olds did not seem to be influenced by the videos, Mumme’s team reported. But the 1-year-olds were.

When the actors acted neutrally or positively to an object, the babies happily played with them. But if the actor had seemed afraid or disgusted, the infant would avoid the object. Reuter