 |
Monday,
March 31, 2003, Chandigarh, India  
|
India on Iraq war Back to the roots |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Pak-sponsored
terrorism in India
Wokha’s
splendid isolation
China
unprepared to risk its economic interests
Cars
will be ‘wise’ enough to prevent mishaps
|
India on Iraq war THE Opposition, especially the Congress, has been strongly critical of the NDA government’s conduct vis-a-vis the US-led war on Iraq. There is nothing surprising in it. What else could one expect from the Opposition? It has to play its role not only to keep the government on tenterhooks but also to make its presence felt. Keeping that aside, perhaps, the feeling in the dissatisfied sections is that official India should have been more vocal on disapproving of the American action than what it has done to occupy the moral high ground as it did when it refused to join any international power bloc during the days of Nehru. This looks nice theoretically. But when we examine closely the complex global reality today, we come to the conclusion that the country’s leadership has been in highly difficult straits for some time. We must realise that we are not France. Nor is India in the position of Russia, militarily speaking. Then India has a knotty problem called Pakistan in its immediate neighbourhood, always looking for an opportunity to exploit adverse circumstances. But more than any other factor, no country can ignore the reality of a world with a single super power having acquired awesome military and economic might. Thus, it is an optionless situation for India. Even the countries which vehemently opposed the US action against Iraq in the UN Security Council could not go beyond that. This is not a happy development. But that is the painful truth. Any party or group of parties in power could have taken the stand which has been voiced by the Vajpayee government. On principle, India has been against any military solution to the Iraq crisis unless endorsed by the UN Security Council. It has also been stated off and on that no outside agency should seek a regime change in any sovereign country as that will amount to jeopardising that nation’s independence. India has also expressed its inability for any kind of logistics support though America does not require it for implementing its scheme in Iraq. As External Affairs Minister Yashwant Sinha has admitted, “there is a certain helplessness in the international community... apart from saying that war should not have happened, war should be brought to an end, there is not much that is being done.” A restrained approach seems to be a pragmatic approach, particularly under the prevailing circumstances. It is time for an extremely cautious approach in the matter of foreign affairs. Anti-Americanism is sweeping across the globe, more so in the Arab world, the biggest source of oil supplies to India. We, of course, cannot afford to join the ranks of those who have done everything they could to stop the USA from taking resort to the military action against the Saddam Hussein regime in Iraq. But India should not appear to be siding with the super power even in a disguised manner in the long-term interests of the country. Under no circumstances should it give the impression of conducting its foreign policy under pressure from any foreign source. India’s own national interests should be the main guiding factor. It is not a bad idea to go in for an all-party consensus on the Iraq crisis, as stated by Prime Minister A. B. Vajpayee. The earlier it is done, the better. |
Back to the roots SUCCESS in the recent state elections has done the Congress a lot of good. There is a bounce in its walk and it is preparing for the forthcoming elections with a renewed sense of hope and purpose. For the first time in over a decade, it held a two-day convention of block presidents in Delhi over the weekend, where more than 8,000 hardy “points men” of the party had a chance to rub shoulders with the central leadership, including Mrs Sonia Gandhi herself. This was a surefire way to remove their feeling of neglect and despondency. Another aim apparently was to remove the impression that the Congress President was accessible only to a small coterie of hangers-on who had no grassroots support. She made it a point to paint a different picture. This not only provided a great photo opportunity to these men and women from small towns, it also gave them a platform to call a spade a spade. While quite a few delegates utilised their allotted minutes for eulogising Mrs Gandhi, the rest got engaged in a bout of plain-talking which is becoming rare in the Congress. They took legislators and ministers to task for ignoring them. It was rare indeed to see so many party men giving vent to their ire at the central level. Mrs Gandhi went out of her way to assure the visitors that their views were vital for the rejuvenation of the party and would be incorporated in the party strategy. Mrs Gandhi’s response had three specific strands. One, Congress-ruled states should involve party workers in their constituencies. Two, Congressmen should hold rallies and demonstrations from the block to the state level to apprise the public of the vital challenges facing the nation and, three, make an all-out effort to expose the “failures and scams” of the BJP-led government. Taking a cue from the stylebook of Mrs Indira Gandhi, she appeared to have identified the downtrodden, women and dalits as those who need to be won over on a priority basis. The old “gharibi hatao” slogan has been recycled to read “Congress ke
haath, gharibon ke saath”. Catchphrases do not win elections on their own, but if these are backed by an aggressive campaign, they do prove to be a potent tool. To make an effective use of the device, Mrs Gandhi will have to enthuse her colleagues at the Centre to repair their channels of communication with the people at the lowest rung. |
Pak-sponsored terrorism in India A
spate of terrorist acts all over the country in the past few weeks once again highlight the challenges that lie ahead for the nation. There is a pattern in this sudden spurt in terrorist activities. Bombs are being planted in vehicles. Buses and the trains are being targeted to create fear psychosis amongst the public, cause disruption in administration and commercial activities and provoke communal outbreaks. Such coordinated activities cannot be engineered unless there is a proper network being overseen by a central authority. It only highlights the fact that Pak (ISI)-sponsored terrorism remains a potential threat, periodic interludes of comparative peace notwithstanding. Unfortunately, there are some misguided elements in India who facilitate and complement Pak plans. Pakistan remains fully focused on its objectives, despite repeated US advice to curb such acts of depredation. The USA is aware of Pakistan’s hand in terrorism in India. US Ambassador to Pakistan Nancy Powell was forthright in describing Pakistan as a “platform for terrorism”. Obviously, the Bush Administration has enough evidence of Pakistan being the fountainhead of terrorism. But due to circumstances it is not in a position to act against it. The USA needs Pakistan more than Pakistan needs the USA at this juncture. The USA has its own international agenda. Afghanistan and Iraq are its two immediate concerns. It needs continued help from Pakistan in nabbing Al-Qaida and Taliban leadership entrenched in Pakistan. It also needed Pakistan’s cooperation in the Security Council. Pak vote in favour of the USA had assumed great importance in the light of strong opposition from Russia, Germany and France and some undecided fence-sitters. Although Pakistan continues to oppose US invasion of Iraq for domestic reasons, the USA can ill-afford to annoy it. The USA has no option but to continue to woo Pakistan despite its duplicity. The USA has been rewarding Pakistan for its so-called cooperation. It lifted the remaining military sanctions imposed after Musharraf’s coup in October, 1999, only to persuade Islamabad to go along with the requirements of Washington. Surprisingly, the wording of the waiver alludes to Pakistani help in the struggle against international terrorism. The waiver comes at a time when the democracy in Pakistan is far from being restored. On the contrary, it’s a subject of ridicule and controversy at present. Earlier, the USA had lifted nuclear related sanctions on military sales and training, pumped in more than $ 1 billion in aid, paid $ 600 million for using Pak air bases, rescheduled $ 3 billion debt and promised to write off another one billion. The Bush Administration has its own political and strategic considerations for which it can go to any length to appease Pakistan. Pakistan is conscious of its strategic importance to the USA and aware of the fact that it cannot afford to push or penalise it for its policies. The janus faced Musharraf, playing the double game with great finesse accepts the US demands now and then by handing over at critical times some senior Al-Qaida activist to secure a lease of life and the economic bailout for the country. He arrested recently Al-Qaida kingpin Khalid Sheikh and Yassir Al-Jazeeri, a senior leader. This is Musharraf’s way of ensuring immunity from retribution from the USA. It’s not that he is unable to control the jehadis, he is unwilling to do so. Surprisingly, Pakistan doesn’t even feel the need of being circumspect about the way it’s going about its business. India thus remains on the receiving end of Pakistani intransigence. In a significant change of strategy, Pakistan has begun to pay more attention to Jammu region and other parts of India than the valley as hitherto. The fact of the matter is that it will maintain its offensive against India knowing the constraints of the USA full well. There is another reason for Pakistan’s compulsive antagonism. India’s failure to intimidate Pakistan with unprecedented mobilisation of its troops along the border after December 13, 2001, terrorist attack on Indian Parliament and their subsequent tame withdrawal without achieving any of the explicitly declared objectives re-enforced Pakistan’s conviction that its nuclear posture had been able to put India on the defensive. India waivered even after the terrorists struck Kaluchak army camp during the height of deployment, killing innocent family members of army personnel deployed along the border. Looking for an opportunity provided by successful assembly elections in J&K, India “relocated” its troops. It hurt India’s credibility immensely and led Pakistan to simultaneously believe in its capability to dissuade India from such ventures. Because of its firm resolve to take on India without succumbing to intimidation, Pakistan emerged on the top. Its nuclear capability and the First Use strategy paid off, felt Pakistan. Musharraf even claimed that Pakistani armed forces were able to defeat the enemy without fighting the war. This perhaps is the reason for heightened terrorist activities in India lately. As the snow melts and the USA gets more engrossed with Iraq, terrorism will hit new heights. Political rhetoric will not help much. There are other reasons for Pakistan’s confrontation with India. Its sense of failure after India occupied Siachen in 1984 and its earlier desire for revenge for the 1971 defeat are other compelling factors for its present mindset. Additionally, its assertion of its Muslim identity, concern for the Muslim living in “Hindu” India and the desire for leadership of Islamic world with similar proclivity for leadership in the subcontinent in stark defiance of economically stronger and militarily superior India are some of the other goading factors that compel it to take on India. The genesis of Islamic bomb in fact lies in this very dream. Instead of striving to come up as an independent and powerful nation and developing economic and cultural relations with similar India for mutual development of both, Pakistan sought to move on an entirely different course. It chose to challenge India. It sought military parity, started to nibble at India’s vulnerable parts and began to patronise Indian Muslims. Ambition for leadership and its denial to India became its core foreign policy objective. Migrant Muslims from India who had an ideological bias against Hindu India and who formed the ruling elite of Pakistan emerged as an important factor behind anti-India stance. The political instability in Pakistan gave place to military bureaucracy which is the root cause of most of the Indo-Pak problems. Military’s sole aim is to de-stabilise and possibly balkanise India. Pak ISI has been operating in the North-East, UP, Delhi, Mumbai and in fact in all parts of India. Absence of any political infrastructure has led the religious groups to occupy the available space. These religious groups practising rabid Islam are collaborating with the army-led government in fomenting trouble in India. And as along as the army remains in power, it will not allow the democracy to take roots in Pakistan. A long haul of strained relations with Pakistan seem obvious. Air Marshal Bedi (retd) is a former Director-General, Defence Planning Staff. |
Wokha’s splendid isolation WOKHA was the smallest place where I had accompanied daddy on one of his far-flung fauji postings. It lay in what in early 1960s was called Naga Hills Tuensang Area. It was then an unheard of a place as compared to the well known Kohima and lesser known Mukokchang and Haflong though the place is now district headquarters in Nagaland. The 80-km drive on the “jeepable” road from Kohima to Wokha which should have ordinarily taken a few hours, was an exhausting but a memorable journey, taking a full day. Our jeep just trudged along on the bumpy unmetalled road. Every few minutes we jumped out of the vehicle for our safety, as hill sides came hurtling down, devastating rocks, stones and trees et al in their descent. Reaching there, we found that cantonment was too big a word for Wokha’s tiny army station in an equally small village. It lay literally in quietude away from hustle and bustle. Its one (rather one and a half)-room concrete hut with an attached bath, was daddy’s i.e. the commanding officer’s privilege. In the army, the commanding officer is termed as the tiger. It was popularly joked then that all the other animals i.e. lesser ranking officers lived in huts with bamboo walls. In between lay, the honoured mess. To enter the cordoned off army area, troops had to know the password. We were cut off from what civilians term as “comforts of modern civilisation” though we never ever felt discomforted. Wokha had no electricity. Monday evening was the “electricity night” when the much awaited open-air weekly film shows were organised for the entertainment of troops. The thrilling air dropping operations during my stay in Wokha are still etched in my memory. Once a week, a helicopter hovered overhead to drop supplies of army rations and other necessities. Bundles of the week’s newspapers and mail, especially letters from back home, were dropped down followed by sacks of vegetables, fruits, tins of condensed and evaporated milk, blankets, medicines, etc. I remember live goats tied by ropes, come tumbling down to earth, as the main ingredient for mutton curry for the army unit. Who says that the army is not looked after? Walking in and around Wokha led to a discovery of local culture where unwritten laws bind each tribe together. Literally meaning “census,” Wokha is the home of Lotha tribe. Ever-smiling friendly folk of Indo-Mongoloid stock usually wore their native black dress with orange-red, green and yellow geometrical patterns with multi-colour beads adorning their necks. The Nagas with their joie de vivre, would often sing and dance with a robust rhythm, it being embedded in their life. On a visit to a local house, a wizened old man proudly pointed to heads of wild animals like rhinos killed by him, hanging on walls. Hospitality included local rice beer in long bamboo glasses. We visited a native senior civil administrative officer. Sitting in the lawn, a wasp hovered over flowers. He expertly caught it with his bare hands and put it in his pocket. With a sheepish grin, he informed us: “What a tasty thing!” |
China unprepared to risk its economic interests IF we can be certain of one thing in the Iraq crisis, it is that China’s ambivalence is not inspired by any notion of Asian solidarity. But it may not be unrelated to the delicate game China is playing over North Korea where it has a far more vital stake as part of its overall strategy of achieving supremacy in Asia. Washington, Tokyo and Seoul appear surprised and annoyed at Beijing’s apparent silence over Pyongyang’s nuclear plans. According to American intelligence, North Korea already has two or three bombs and can make several more within six months. Its Yongbyon reactor was earlier expected to provide enough plutonium for five to eight nuclear warheads by May. Chairman Kim Jong Il’s regime, which supplies military and missile parts and technology to Pakistan, has also reportedly developed a Taepodong-2 missile that can reach New York in three stages. It can already hit the 100,000 US troops in Asia, stationed in South Korea, Japan and at sea. In 1994, when two million North Koreans perished in a devastating famine, Mr Kim took huge financial and food aid from the Americans, the South Koreans and the Japanese, and, in return, promised former President Bill Clinton that he would dismantle his nuclear facilities. Instead, he secretly continued the programme. Recently, Pyongyang expelled International Atomic Energy Authority inspectors, began to reprocess spent fuel at Yongbyon, and announced that it would resume construction of the much bigger Taechon reactor and accelerate its enriched uranium programme. China’s only public response when North Korea went on to announce its withdrawal from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty was to make known its “disagreement.” Here then is the core of Beijing’s dilemma. China’s global role today is due entirely to the exigencies of US realpolitik which demanded that a wedge be driven through the Communist camp, and the Soviet Union deprived of its most powerful Asian ally. Now, China’s booming economy demands a constant flow of American investment as well as open American markets for its cheap textiles, footwear and electronic goods. Strong mutual advantages keep that economic partnership going. But China’s political vision is not synonymous with America’s, and it is no secret that the Chinese see President George W. Bush’s more robust relationship with Taiwan as well as the American military presence in East Asia as a challenge to Beijing’s own authority and aspirations. Worse, some of the right-wing Christian think-tanks that back Mr Bush’s militancy have recently suggested that a more assertive American military role in Asia would force the pace of democratic change within China. Beijing may well calculate in the circumstances that one way of persuading the USA to withdraw might be to encourage fears of a nuclear Armageddon. Since the USA is not considering either an Iraq-style invasion of North Korea or an Israeli-style attack on the Yongbyon and Taechon reactors, it might feel that its military presence in Asian countries could compound an already explosive situation. There are constant protests in Japan about American troops. Many South Koreans are also intensely unhappy about them. The threat of a conflagration in North Korea might be just the right catalyst, especially if Mr Bush has greater immediate need of his soldiers elsewhere. In the longer run, however, the Chinese are not at all happy with Mr Kim’s erratic and secretive policies. The Middle Kingdom’s lofty self-perception will not tolerate another nuclear power right on its borders. The prospect of an eventual union of the two Koreas makes that prospect even more unacceptable. For if China’s friendship with the USA is
nuanced, its relations with the two Koreas have also been finely tuned ever since it established diplomatic ties with Seoul in the early 1990s. Beijing’s economic relations with South Korea have improved phenomenally since then. Mr Jiang has also shown great appreciation of the efforts by the outgoing South Korean President, Mr Kim Dae Jung, to improve ties with his northern neighbour. The USA, South Korea’s closest ally, is less appreciative of what Mr Kim called his “Sunshine Policy.” But, of course, there can be no comparison with the depth and extent of Beijing’s ties with Pyongyang. A turnover of more than US$700 million (it went up 30 per cent last year) makes China North Korea’s most important trading partner. China supplies about 70 per cent of the oil North Korea needs, and has doubled sales of grain and vegetables. Though military support is no longer promised, except in the case of external attack, “consultations” are. No less to the point, North Korea’s military and missile equipment supplies to Pakistan could be on China’s behalf. The Chinese were adept at using Hong Kong (when it was a British colony) as their conduit to trade with countries that Beijing affected to despise and ignore. This is a channel that China may wish to keep open for reasons of geopolitical strategy. Where China would seem to differ with impoverished North Korea is over economic reform. Caught in their own rampant catch as catch can capitalism, the Chinese have no patience with Pyongyang’s command economy. When Mr Kim Jong Ill does attempt reform, he seems to get it wrong. His price liberalisation last year was a fiasco. More recently, he chose a man who was wanted in China for tax and corporate fraud to head the ambitious project for a capitalist enclave, the Sinuiju Special Administrative Region. Being very close to the Chinese border in north-east North Korea, the choice of site fuelled rumours that it might really be intended to serve China, as Hong Kong used to. But such speculation petered out when the Chinese arrested Mr Yang Bin, a 39-year-old ethnic Chinese orchid grower and property developer with a Dutch passport, whom Pyongyang had selected to head the zone. The proposal itself was also curious. Apparently, the plan was to drive out about 200,000 residents — mainly soldiers — from the hallowed territory and replace them by 500,000 new citizens with proven technical and other skills. Foreign executives would serve as legislators, though heaven alone knows what laws they would have enacted or enforced. North Koreans would not be allowed to step across the walls of this paradise-to-be where the American dollar would reign supreme. But foreigners, meaning well-heeled Europeans and Americans, not Bangladeshi or Indonesian workers, would be able to come and go as they pleased, without even the formality of visas. The Sinuiju plan may have been placed on hold, but not the principle of modernisation. China fears that North Korea’s economic collapse would burden it with hundreds of thousands of refugees. So would another outbreak of hostilities in the Korean peninsula. At the same time, the Chinese may not be terribly keen on South Korea’s strategy of investing in the North so as to gradually narrow the difference between the two Koreas. It would take a long time for one thing. It would also extend the influence and importance of a country with strong military ties with the USA. China probably believes that its own special position in North Korea would be best preserved if the North Koreans are allowed to develop their country in their own way. That calls for time as well as an assurance that Mr Bush will not try any “regime change” in Pyongyang. China would like to see the USA engage North Korea. As convener of a dialogue that benefits both countries, China expects to safeguard its own interests, present and future, in the region. |
Cars will be ‘wise’ enough to prevent mishaps RESEARCHERS have developed “intelligent” new cars that caution drivers to potential collisions, blind spots, lane deviations and their own inattention — thus helping to prevent many road accidents. According to the new study, published in latest issue of Mechanical Engineering, the active cruise-control systems already installed in some luxury cars will also greatly improve traffic flows and prevent road blockage. “In the future, at least every second road traffic accident could be prevented if vehicles are equipped with suitable assistance systems,” predicted Professor Klaus-Dieter Vvhringer, research and technology director of European-based global car manufacturer DaimlerChrysler. Most accidents result from human error, and the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Intelligent Vehicle Initiative has identified eight areas where drivers can be helped by computerised safety systems. These include avoiding collisions (especially rear-enders, lane-changes and intersection crashes), enhancing vehicle stability, vision and driver monitoring. These cars will soon be safer for pedestrians too, the report notes. DaimlerChrysler is developing a more ambitious “urban assistant system” to recognise pedestrians by using sensors and software that can distinguish surface texture, silhouettes or gait patterns.
ANI |
God is pleased with the exalted soul who is not treacherous to his friend, master and teacher and who has no craving for another’s wife or wealth. *** The Lord is pleased with the noble soul who sees everything in Krishna and Krishna in everything and who is endowed with wisdom. —
Vishnudharamottara I.58 |
 |
| Punjab | Haryana | Jammu & Kashmir | Himachal Pradesh | Regional Briefs | Nation | Editorial | | Business | Sport | World | Mailbag | Chandigarh Tribune | Ludhiana Tribune 50 years of Independence | Tercentenary Celebrations | | 123 Years of Trust | Calendar | Weather | Archive | Subscribe | Suggestion | E-mail | |
