E D I T O R I A L   P A G E

PERSPECTIVE

Save varsities from bureaucracy
Vikram Chadha
ONE of the university campuses in Punjab has been bitterly embroiled in a tussle for many years now. At times this strife manifests in tension between the authorities and the teachers, while at other times it surfaces in the guise of dissension among teachers or among university bureaucrats.

Education as commodity
Bhupinder Singh Khaira
THE essential characteristic which distinguishes Indian thinking from the post-modern one is through understanding of the nature of man and his relations with other beings in the universe and with the universe as a whole. Indians have approached nature through man and man as a part and product of nature. From time immemorial, this concept of knowledge and understanding has emerged as a centre of our culture and civilisation.

US makes world a less safe place
Steve Crawshaw
FIRST, the good news, which deserves to be savoured for a moment. The inauguration in the Hague two days ago of the first chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) marks a remarkable moment in history. Dictators and tyrants around the world can be brought to book, by a single court. It is an astonishing achievement — and one that seemed, until just a few years ago, quite unimaginable.

ON RECORD
NDA has ignored agriculture: Ajit
Satish Misra
RASHTRIYA Lok Dal leader Ajit Singh’s exit from the NDA government has hastened the realignment of political forces in the biggest state of Uttar Pradesh which sends 80 MPs to the Lok Sabha. The former Union Agriculture Minister accuses the NDA of working for the rich, the organised and the powerful and reels out facts to buttress his arguments.

ANALYSIS

Advani articulates India’s concerns
P. P. S. Gill analyses his visit abroad
WHILE India’s Deputy Prime Minister, Mr L K Advani, is back home after a “successful’’ politico-diplomatic “mission-with-a-purpose”’ visit to the USA and the UK (June 7 to 18), the Pakistan President, Gen Pervez Musharraf, is still there.

REFLECTIONS

Build on strengths
Kiran Bedi
MY duty and travels are enabling me to see, reflect and share what appears fascinating to me. Which I believe may be equally exciting and even informative back home, in my country, India.

KASHMIR DIARY

Army: symbol of patience
David Devadas
I was intrigued at first by the intensity with which the US has been pressing India to send troops to maintain order in Iraq. One would have thought Pakistani troops would be enough. They are after all fellow-Muslims and Pakistan has been a close enough partner in what the US likes to call “war on terrorism” to allow US troops to be stationed on its territory.

HEALTH

Mental games cut Alzheimer’s risk
WANT to ward off Alzheimer’s disease? Play some mental games or go dancing. Elderly people who frequently read, do crossword puzzles, practise a musical instrument or play board games cut their risk of Alzheimer’s and other forms of dementia by nearly two-thirds compared to people who seldom do such activities, researchers say.

PERSPECTIVE

Save varsities from bureaucracy
Vikram Chadha

ONE of the university campuses in Punjab has been bitterly embroiled in a tussle for many years now. At times this strife manifests in tension between the authorities and the teachers, while at other times it surfaces in the guise of dissension among teachers or among university bureaucrats. Nevertheless whatever be the form and face of campus turmoil, the intellectual and academic ethos are eroded and the universities fail to justify their objectives.

The teaching and student community seems to have lost its way in the haze of prosaic and zero-sum activities, resulting in low levels of performance. They seem to be utterly disillusioned and bewildered, and perhaps unsure of their innate qualities of head and heart. The campuses have been grimly politicised and academic excellence of the yore is the only causality. We need to ponder over the genesis and synergies accounting for the abysmal erosion of academic standards in our universities to help arrest the further rot.

Notwithstanding the murky selection and recruitment norms adopted for university appointments, which are invariably tempered due to extraneous “pressures and recommendations”, the selected teachers are hardly afforded distinct incentives and a propitious environment for propelling their further intellectual growth and academic excellence, except that they continue to belch out mediocre and shoddy stuff in the form of “research publications” in order to showcase them at the time of their personal promotions. Obviously, the so-called research exercise remains bogged down only to the utilitarian objective of scaling a few promotion ladders, which certainly is not commensurate with the enormity and nobility of the task assigned to university teachers viz growth and refinement of knowledge and wisdom. They instead feel complacent and preen over their trivial accomplishments, without ever struggling and straining to excel in the absence of bolstering incentives.

To cap that, whatever sparse inventory of erudite wisdom we have on our campuses is mindlessly wasted in the maze of highly disparate and discriminatory rules governing the academic and service conditions of university teachers, applied in a brazenly irrational manner which is sufficient to annihilate talent and drive. These rules, instead of facilitating and scaffolding higher-level achievements, are deployed to kill initiative and to daze out the thinking faculties of teachers on the campuses, with the result they are forced to hanker after drab files and wastefully engage in the energy sapping exercise of interpretation of rules to helplessly protect their minimal interests. Such an arbitrary and skewed application of messy rules has been the root cause of regimentation and group wrangling among the teaching community.

The norms and guidelines governing the service conditions of university teachers as recommended by the UGC, which emanate from a tremendous amount of debate, deliberations and discussions among the astute and experienced educational administrators, should be construed as mandatory for enforcement in universities. But most of the times these recommendations and policy instructions are contemptuously spurned by the state governments and university authorities, who instead coin their own, which results in a muddling overlap and confusion in the interpretation and implementation of service rules leading to anomalous effects. This more often than not causes resentment and anguish among the adversely affected teachers who are discouraged and distracted from the fundamental work and end up sulking and wasting time and energy to get the interpretation of rules in proper perspective. It also invariably results in rankling legal battles between the “left-out” teachers on the one hand, and the authorities and the government on the other, vitiating the academic environment and setting in a wild-goose-chase by the innocuous teachers.

The multiplicity of the rules interpreting officials and a pantheon of rule implementing authorities, including the state education departments, the finance department, university authorities and even lower level administrative staff, thus foment a rancorous and acrimonious situation on the campuses by creating a wedge between the “benefited” and the “side-tracked” teachers, and sets in an unending group tussle and a tug-of-war among the regimented teachers. The authorities continue to accentuate this hiatus by following the adage “show me the person and I show you the rule” instead of forging a reconciliation. The situation is deliberately perpetuated by favouring or disfavouring the warring factions of teachers, and the university campuses give the impression of nothing but an embattled arena of fist-fighting bunch of urchins quarrelling over trifles.

The question to ponder over here is: why should not the rules and guidelines envisaged by an expert and specialised institution like the UGC be made mandatory for adherence by all universities and the state governments, and why time and energy should have to be wasted on senseless and superfluous interpretation of the UGC guidelines and norms by the bureaucracy at the state and the university levels, which only results in unnecessary quibbling and bickering on the campuses? After all rules and norms are enacted only to facilitate uninterrupted work and to foster a congenial work environment, rather than to create hurdles and impediments for research and academics.

Arbitrariness in the interpretation and implementation of anomalous service rules has also induced an abominable tendency among teachers for flattery and sycophancy, which is entirely incompatible with the nature and nobility of teaching as a profession. Some of them wouldn’t mind sacrificing their productive academic time for trying to hustle near the power centres in the campuses in order to evoke a favourable tilt in rules for them.

This eventuates in a perceptible erosion of freedom of mind and intellect, which alone characterises the quest for knowledge and wisdom in universities. Likewise, some of them wouldn’t mind drifting into non-academic administrative jobs in universities in order to either themselves play the role of “arbiters” or use their bureaucratic power to bend rules in their own favour or to favour or disfavour others.

One of the prime demands of the university teaching fraternity has been that the top administration and authority on the campuses should rest with academicians, and so the top functionaries of the university administration should be from within their ranks. This is so, it is thought, would enable the top university executives to better appreciate the finer nuances of research and academic requirements of a university setup, and accordingly undertake appropriate measures to promote academic excellence. But the disgusting reality is that once these teachers turned administrators are ensconced in the higher echelons of power in the campuses, they disdainfully turn their eyes from the cause of teaching and research, and instead smugly identify more with the insensitive university bureaucracy, so that the teaching community is once more left to fend for themselves.

Just as in other bureaucracies, the university bureaucratic setup has usurped and concentrated overbearing powers to eke its own stature. The power centres on the university campuses, instead of emerging from knowledge and wisdom, have come to emanate from the entrenched university bureaucracy which makes its power felt by arbitering on even straight forward rules governing service conditions of teachers, forcing them to engage in the sordid pursuit of “non-academic” achievements.

The pre-audit system imposed on an otherwise autonomous university system has further aggravated the dismay for university teachers. Instead of facilitating work and bringing in spontaneity in provisions and dispensation for research work, a jumble of exasperating rules and their misleading interpretations is slapped on unsuspecting teachers, which seriously distracts them and jeopardises their research activity. It is not uncommon to see even senior faculty making a beeline to the audit department on the campuses, to engage in the futile exercise of arguing with uncompromising auditor in order to wriggle out of the cobwebs of pecuniary rules. Thus a precious research and academic time is sacrificed at the altar of nefarious bill clearing and accounting rules.

For promoting academic excellence, the brooding and sulking minds on the university campuses ought to be embalmed so as to induce them to focus and concentrate on their main task. For that, crass bureaucratisation of the campuses needs to be concretely bridled.

The writer is a Professor of Economics in Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar

Education as commodity
Bhupinder Singh Khaira

THE essential characteristic which distinguishes Indian thinking from the post-modern one is through understanding of the nature of man and his relations with other beings in the universe and with the universe as a whole. Indians have approached nature through man and man as a part and product of nature. From time immemorial, this concept of knowledge and understanding has emerged as a centre of our culture and civilisation. Knowledge is a vital organ of our culture, and a key to mental and social development. Guru Nanak briefs: “If one dwells on knowledge one becomes benefactor of all.”

The heaven of freedom and goodwill of Rabindranath Tagore reconstructs the Indian viewpoint of knowledge and understanding: “Where the mind is without fear and/the head is held high/where knowledge is free/where world has not broken up into/fragments by narrow domestic walls/where words come out from the depth of truth”...

In this way Indian paradigm of knowledge and understanding stems out of the value education. The five basic parameters of the value education are: tolerance, truth, creativity, vision (third eye) and harmony. Our universities should depict this paradigm of knowledge and understanding as our people have high hopes from these temples of humanity. Jawaharlal Nehru said: “The university stands for humanism, for tolerance, for reason, for the adventure of ideas and for the search of truth. It stands for the onward march of the human race towards even higher objectives. If the universities discharge their duties adequately, it is well with the nation and the people.” Are our universities performing their duties adequately? Do they stand for humanism, for tolerance? Let us introspect.

Time has changed. In the post-modern era, all social life is being regulated, not by reality, but by simulations, models, pure images and representations. Individuals and societies bear no relationship to any reality. Truth and reason are dead. Knowledge is acquired not through inquiry but by imagination. The concept of education has changed from “daan” (free education) to “dhan” (marketing education). Now knowledge can be managed, manipulated and bought and sold like any other commodity. It can be adulterated even. The ignorant is the potential customer. State governments have withdrawn their hand from the field of higher education. The grants to the universities are shrinking day by day.

Plagued by the financial crunch, unable to modernise and update the conventional programmes, our universities have joined the post-modern mission of globalisation and commercialisation of education. But some universities have limited their mission to degrees for money. Some universities which were “thumbs up” a decade ago are bottling “cola” today under the brand names of distance education programmes, study centres, off campus centres etc. The universities that were supposed to awake the people, are indulging in the unethical practice. Students be vigilant. All that glitters is not gold. Remember the story of a greedy dog and follow the policy of a thirsty crow. When you pay a hefty amount for a course, be sure it is of high quality and global in nature and multinational in character.

Distance education is not untouchable. The popular misconception that DE is somehow different in kind from formal education is not true. Both systems share the same goal and same educational philosophy but differ from each other in means and methods. DE provides knowledge and skills to larger sections of the population, particularly living in the rural and remote areas and the disadvantaged groups of society. What is wrong with the universities? They are collaborating with the private parties to mint money. Once the private parties enter in the collaboration, they influence and corrupt the university system. It is very difficult to repulse them. The UGC, AICTE, DEC and ACTE are well aware of the menace and do not allow any franchise. The UGC letter addressed to the registrars of all Indian universities on August 4, 2001, is a piece of literature and reads as:

“We have lately been witnessing many advertisements published in national dailies providing opportunities for the award of university degrees through various franchise programmes operated by certain private institutions. These private establishments being declared as the university study centres, are made responsible for student enrolment, teaching and conduct of examinations. The Faculty and infrastructure belong to these private agencies and the concerned university, besides providing syllabus and teaching materials, has no provision to monitor and maintain the academic standards of teaching being imparted at these centres. This compromise in standard of education has led to widespread criticism.

“The universities can conduct courses through their own departments, constituent colleges and/or through affiliated institutions. There is, however, no provision for leaving it to private institutions for conducting courses leading to the award of their degrees. As per recent UGC guidelines, the universities are permitted to impart education and award degrees through their own campuses located elsewhere in the country or even at their own off shore campuses with the approval of the UGC.

Looking into the widespread menace of franchising the university education through the private institutions, the University Grants Commission has decided that any university, which proposes to enter into collaboration with any private institution, would be required to take prior approval of the UGC. The Commission has also decided that no university should be permitted to go for off-campuses private educational franchise leading to the award of its degrees.

“Accordingly, all the universities are being directed to stop franchising their degree education through private agencies/establishments with immediate effect.”

Falling in line with the national bodies Punjabi University, Patiala, has put shutters on the franchise sale of degrees. The Vice-Chancellor was under immense pressure, but he did it and deserves applause. The other rogue universities of the region should follow suit. Remember Jawaharlal Nehru’s words: “the university stands for the onward march of the human race toward even higher objectives.”

The author is Professor and Head, Department of Correspondence Courses, Punjabi University, Patiala.

US makes world a less safe place
Steve Crawshaw

FIRST, the good news, which deserves to be savoured for a moment. The inauguration in the Hague two days ago of the first chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) marks a remarkable moment in history. Dictators and tyrants around the world can be brought to book, by a single court. It is an astonishing achievement — and one that seemed, until just a few years ago, quite unimaginable.

Even after the signing in 1998 of the Rome Treaty, which laid the foundations for the new court, many believed that the ICC would never become real. They were wrong. Last year, the number of countries ratifying the treaty reached 60, thus allowing the court itself to be created.

The prosecutor and judges have been selected. Now, to crown that process, the inauguration tomorrow of Luis Moreno Ocampo — a former prosecutor of the Argentine junta — means that the ICC show is well and truly on the road. Last July, when the court was constituted as a formal entity, it remained without practical power. From now on, its power will be tangible. The court will be authorised to prosecute some of the horrific crimes now being committed around the world - for example, in the Democratic Republic of Congo, which may provide the first cases.

Ninety countries, including almost all the world’s major democracies, have now ratified the treaty. But not the United States — which is where the problems begin. Those problems are increasing by the month and by the day. The US administration, not content with refusing to ratify, and then ‘unsigning’ the treaty (a murky legal concept, at best), seeks to prevent this crucial instrument of international justice from building up the strength it needs to do its work successfully. It is, in short, doing its level best to kill the court. (The ‘Hague invasion clause’, signed into law by President Bush last year, allows him to use ‘all means necessary and appropriate’ to free US servicemen detained by the ICC.)

In recent days, there have been small glimmers of light. A vote in the Security Council last Thursday was 12-0 in favour of a renewal of a special one-year deal that was agreed last July, allowing US peacekeepers immunity from prosecution. That sounds like another victory for the US hawks. But equally significant were the diplomatic dogs that refused to bark: France and Germany both withheld their vote, because they were so unhappy at the US pressures. Nor was this just the same old post-Iraq rift. Kofi Annan himself warned that the court —and the Security Council —would be undermined, if such renewals became an annual routine. Many countries — from Switzerland to South Africa - spoke out against the idea that the Security Council should start rewriting international treaties.

The irony is obvious: that Washington simultaneously demands complete co-operation with international justice at the Yugoslav war crimes tribunal (or else), and complete non -co-operation with international justice at the ICC (or else). Elsewhere, Caribbean countries have been told that they will no longer be eligible for hurricane assistance unless they give the Americans what they want, right now . Like every practised bully, Washington has given an early date for the implementation of its threats.

Justice may be blind but America is just short-sighted. — The Guardian

ON RECORD
NDA has ignored agriculture: Ajit
Satish Misra

RASHTRIYA Lok Dal leader Ajit Singh’s exit from the NDA government has hastened the realignment of political forces in the biggest state of Uttar Pradesh which sends 80 MPs to the Lok Sabha. The former Union Agriculture Minister accuses the NDA of working for the rich, the organised and the powerful and reels out facts to buttress his arguments. However, about the Mayawati government, the Jat leader points a finger at the Governor saying that Mr Vishnukant Shastri was functioning as an agent of the BJP and not like a representative of the President of India.

Excerpts of an interview

Q: The RLD’s withdrawal of support to the Mayawati government has not made a dent in Lucknow.

Indeed, it is strange. When the coalition government was formed it was a three-party coalition — the BSP, the BJP and the RLD. At that point of time, the UP Governor had openly announced that until he received a letter of support from the RLD, he would not invite Ms Mayawati to form the government. Now that the RLD has withdrawn support and the MLAs of the other two parties do not add up to a majority, it is incumbent on the Governor, rather it is his constitutional duty to either dismiss the government or ask it to prove its majority on the floor of the House. Earlier in 1993 when there was a SP-BSP coalition government in UP and Ms Mayawati withdrew support, the Mulayam Singh government was dismissed. Two months ago in Maharashtra, when five MLAs of the ruling party went to the Governor saying that they had withdrawn support, the Assembly was convened immediately and a vote of confidence taken. So constitutional propriety and democratic traditions demand convening of the Assembly in UP.

Q: What is the constitutional propriety when Governors are handpicked?

UP Governor Vishnukant Shastri is a highly educated and scholarly person. He is acting more like an agent of the party and not like a representative of the President of India. When the representatives of four parties went to the UP Governor and gave the letter of withdrawal of support, besides demanding convening of the Assembly for proving the majority, he did not say anything immediately but observed later that he was not satisfied. I don’t really know what he meant by not being satisfied. Does he want the MLAs to be paraded in the Raj Bhavan?

A suggestion came that the Governor should interrogate every MLA in private. Does he want the MLAs to give a guarantee on a stamp paper. After all in a democracy elected representatives have to decide. And the only proper place is the floor of the House. A recognised party, which was instrumental in forming the government, has withdrawn support. Independents have been voting differently in the recent past.

When Mayawati says she has the majority. Tandonji also claims majority, then why are they afraid of calling the House for proving the majority? If that is the case then where is the need for Mayawati to say it is either me or mid-term elections. In the last session, 20 of the BJP’s own MLAs voted against the BSP-BJP government. The case for their disqualification is still pending with the Assembly Speaker. The BJP does not want convening of the Assembly session as they fear that their own MLAs may vote against the coalition government.

Q: But your leaving the NDA was obviously not a sudden development!

You are right but before I come to that point, let us complete the UP story. When the Mayawati government was being formed, it was decided that a coordination committee will be formed for the smooth functioning of the coalition government. It was also settled that there would be a permanent consultation mechanism, but all this did not fructify. It appeared that the BJP had decided to go with the BSP surrendering its own identity and self-respect.

Q: Your opponents are accusing you of indulging in politico-tourism. You have been taking your party MLAs to different tourist destinations to prevent defections.

We went out for a while. But when Ms Mayawati came back to Lucknow, from that day our MLAs are also there. We are a small party. Since the crisis in the Mayawati government, our MLAs have been saying there is tremendous pressure on them.

Q: What kind of pressures?

Not only pressure on the MLAs but there are all kinds of pressures on their relatives who may be in government jobs....cases against their kith and kin etc. So they said they want to be together for few days. But now they are there. She will do whatever hanky and panky has to be done. The press has been reporting about the break up of the RLD. For the fourth time in a year the press is reporting that we are breaking. When the coalition government was being formed in May 2002 there were media stories about the RLD split. When the BJP MLAs revolted, then it was written that the RLD was splitting. When MLC election was being held, it was written that our party would break but our candidate Munna Singh Chauhan won. Now again stories are appearing. It has not broken in the past. In 1996 the Congress and the BSP splintered but we did not. Since then our strength has gone up and we are not breaking up.

Q: What went wrong with the NDA?

When we formed an alliance in UP, it was natural that we will support the NDA at the Centre. The NDA manifesto made a commitment for smaller states. It was our election promise also. But later they reneged on that. But more than that, it was a continuous confrontation with ministers and particularly the Finance Minister on anything concerning national issues.

In a democracy the government has to protect the unorganised, the poor. But this government is there only for the organised sectors. Last year we had one of the most terrible famines. Last July was one of the driest months since 1875. For agriculture rain in July counts. Then Rabi also was affected by drought. Do you know how much money the central government gave to 15 states affected by drought — mere Rs 2201.7 crore.

One is not talking of money given from the National Calamity Fund. That goes to states every year for disasters and was mandated by the 11th Finance Commission. From the National Contingency Fund, the outflow was only Rs 2201.7 crore. On the other hand, the outflow to IDBI and other similar institutions catering to big industries was Rs 2809 crore and then the UTI. Almost Rs 11,000 crore was given for saving every UTI investor. But when the issue of giving relief to farmers came up, they said that a farmer with 2 hectares holding would be entitled for relief. For the UTI, no distinction was made between the big and small investors but in case of farmers, discrimination was there. Every time such a question of giving relief to drought affected farmers or the minimum support price came up for discussion before the Cabinet there was silence.

There is continuous confrontation on what can and should be done for the poor and unorganised. Sugarcane farmers are in distress all over the country. After the drought the crisis has deepened. They are not even getting paid what they were getting last year. It is 25 per cent less than last year. Imagine its impact on the rural economy. The Sugar Development Fund has Rs 1400 crore. A sum of Rs 455 crore is required to pay to sugarcane farmers which falls short of what they are being offered and what they should get. Mr Sahib Singh Verma gave Rs 500 crore for maintaining the EPF interest rate. He said that the money was not from the government but from the Labour Fund. But then you have the Sugar Development Fund. Difference is that one is the organised sector and the other is unorganised. Both the Centre as well as the states formed committees to ensure that sugarcane farmers were paid last year’s prices and despite their recommendations nothing happened. ISMA is more powerful. The State failed to persuade ISMA. Manufacturers are more powerful than the States, can you believe it?

Q: Is the government captive in the hands of powerful lobbies?

Well, I think some arrangement has been made somewhere. Finally I said that we all say that agriculture is a priority sector. All over the world interest rates in the agriculture sector are less than other sectors. In India if you want to buy a car the dealer comes running with forms filled and loans are offered at 8 per cent but if you want to buy a tractor, then the farmer has to mortgage his land, you have to get no objection certificate from two government officials and then he has to pay an interest of 14 per cent. If you want to borrow money for a crop loan, one has to pay an interest rate of 14 to 19 per cent. If you want to build a house, loans are available at 9 per cent. Basically, all our resources which are even otherwise limited are going to the rich, the organised and the powerful.

ANALYSIS

Advani articulates India’s concerns
P. P. S. Gill analyses his visit abroad

WHILE India’s Deputy Prime Minister, Mr L K Advani, is back home after a “successful’’ politico-diplomatic “mission-with-a-purpose”’ visit to the USA and the UK (June 7 to 18), the Pakistan President, Gen Pervez Musharraf, is still there.

There is little doubt that Mr Advani has conveyed India’s concerns vis-a-vis Pakistan’s role as an ‘’epicentre of terrorism’’ to both Washington and London. This he did in his quietly aggressive, polite and firm manner, thereby showing his political sagacity, restraint and maturity. Contrast this with the aggressive posturing and dismissive attitude that Gen Musharraf has displayed through his conflicting, confusing and untenable signals in response to the Prime Minister, Mr Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s yet another offer for “peace’’ to Pakistan made on April 18 last.

Mr Advani was clear about the purpose of his visit. He wanted to impress upon the US President, Mr George Bush, and the UK Prime Minister, Mr Tony Blair, that despite the roadmap that Mr Vajpayee had unrolled at Srinagar two months ago, India’s peace gestures still clashed with Pakistan’s actions on the ground as it continued to encourage cross-border infiltration, provide sanctuary to terrorist outfits on its soil and refuses to dismantle all support to the jehadis. This was so despite the promises that Gen Musharraf had made to the international community on stop all three. Therefore, India expects both the White House and 10 Downing Street to tell Pakistan of India’s concerns and also that India is capable of and has the capacity to safeguard its ‘’security’ on its own.

Despite there being no perceptible change on the ground on the Kashmir front, where acts of terrorism and cross-border infiltration continue unabated, Mr Advani held Mr Vajpayee’s olive branch to Pakistan pleading that religious fundamentalism should not be used as a legitimate instrument for ‘’military adventurism’’ through jehadis. India was willing to talk on all issues, including Kashmir, as per the offer of a ‘’composite dialogue’’ for which Pakistan had not yet shown any signs to create a conducive climate. Notwithstanding Pakistan’s extreme postures on several issues, India has offered to hold a dialogue. All that Mr Advani stressed was that both President Mr Bush and Mr Blair must ensure that Pakistan stops killing of innocent people and cease all acts of terrorism in the Kashmir valley. ‘’Peace should not be held hostage till the resolution of differences between India and Pakistan. These differences are wide and deep but need to be bridged through dialogue. When that happens, compromise and give and take place’’. Now much will depend on the outcome of the Camp David meeting between Mr Bush and Gen Musharraf, who has already met Mr Blair. He had promised to Mr Advani to rein in Pakistan’s President.

There are issues on which New Delhi and Washington agree to disagree. Continuation of Gen Musharraf is one. India does not foresee any major upheaval, religious or political or militancy-related in Pakistan, if Gen Musharraf is not on the scene. Whereas, the US feels the other way round. It is keen to soft-peddle with Gen Musharraf, who has been a big help to it during the “liberation’’ of Taliban-rule Afghanistan.

Mr Advani is aware of Pakistan’s official stand and support to terrorism and how it still looked at the 1947 partition. While to Pakistan, partition was ‘’Necessary and inevitable (without incorporation of Muslim-majority Kashmir), India regarded it as unnecessary and tragic but fundamentally complete’’. Thus even though the two countries hold diametrically opposite views, India has given peace another chance to the mutual benefit of the two neighbours. India has thus provided Pakistan political space to resolve the differences without foregoing concerns for its own security.

The second key issue that came up high on Mr Advani’s agenda during the visit was Iraq. Without making any commitment on the deployment of Indian troops in volatile northern Iraq Kurdish dominated area for ‘stabIlisation and reconstruction’, as per the UN Resolution, India’s stand was adequately explained. India favoured a national consensus, as also to first assess the mood in Iran, Jordan and Egypt with all of whom India’s bilateral relations are very good. Thus, Mr Advani has sent a clear message that India takes it own decisions without succumbing to any pressures. Also, that India is poised to play a larger role outside the Asian orbit when it comes to sewing global coalitions for peace and combating terrorism. It could, perhaps, also be a ‘’balancing factor’’, particularly for the USA, in terms of China, still an unknown entity. Thus, the answer to deployment of Indian troops is both ‘’yes and no’’ depending what role the UN will play, as it did in Afghanistan and Kosovo. Both, India and the UK, are committed to enable the UN in such missions, as per the New Delhi Joint Declaration of January 6, 2002, signed by Mr Vajpayee and Mr Blair.

Therefore, when Mr Advani talked of ‘’strategic’’ partnership between India and the USA and India and the UK, he also included economic and trade issues besides co-operation in intelligence information sharing, defence, space and nuclear energy for power generation. He also sought exploration of economic horizons to harness human, natural and knowledge resources to combat old challenges of poverty, diseases, human suffering and of course, terrorism.

REFLECTIONS

Build on strengths
Kiran Bedi

MY duty and travels are enabling me to see, reflect and share what appears fascinating to me. Which I believe may be equally exciting and even informative back home, in my country, India.

Here is one such journey, which I made recently. The country I visited is thinly populated as compared to its size. It’s beautiful, very cold and fairly rich (in wealth). For many weeks in a year, its inhabitants live with the ‘stationary’ sun or the ‘fixed’ stars shining all the time.

That is to say, they have either the daylight all 24 hours or continuous darkness of the nights. And they have to wake up or go to sleep not by their body clock but the external alarms. As one person narrated to me saying, ‘we see our watches and when it is supposed to be time to sleep we draw our dark coloured curtains and tell ourselves to go to sleep and you know it does not work always’.

Compare this with our country…. Here the chirping of the birds, mosquito and ant bites, the grinding sound of traffic, yells of the pheriwallas or the wake up calls from godjees residing in churches/temples/ mosques/gurdwaras, (all part of our neighbourhood) wake us up. The exhaustion of daylong heat or the tireless work puts us to sleep not only in comfortable environment but anywhere. And the darkness of the night comes as a natural gift, just as the rays of the sun bring with them sunshine to brighten us. Of course it’s different for people, who do not get the sleep, for reasons of their own making or beyond their control. But the nature remains bountiful and gives it all, equally, and those who value these treasures of nature, get it all.

I was at a dinner where we got talking about the youngsters here. And what caught my ear and curiosity was the manner in which the State supports all the young men and women passing out of twelfth grade by a reasonable financial support, for a given period, to meet the costs of higher studies.

Also to enable move out of their parents homes if they wanted to. In fact the allowance was marginally higher if they moved out, presumably with the intention of self-sustenance and learning to be independent.

And what do some of them, reportedly do? They find partners; have live-in relationships, not necessarily to study. With pooled in money, there is a good amount to drink and make merry. There had been many cases of death/suicide by drowning. For some of them in drunken state, unknowingly walk into the seawaters. The suicide rate is high and perhaps the highest. Loneliness, under-work, individual stress, dark nights or ‘white nights,’ makes these young men and women waste away their precious potential.

On the issue of marriage it was very stark. Many young men and women no more really believed in the age-old institution of marriage. My host recalled two such incidents to me, which left an impression on my mind. He narrated to me, verbatim, how when he was receiving the guests, he innocently and respectfully asked one such guest arriving, ‘where is your spouse’? The reply he got was,’ in my family for three generations no one has ever married’!

And the second case where he made the same innocent query was, when he asked, ‘where is your companion?’ And the response was, ‘what companion are you talking of. In my family there has been no divorce for four generations and I have to be very careful in selecting mine’.

I was also informed that it is the mother’s name, including her maiden surname, which is insisted on for all matters in the country of my recent journey, in the same way, as fathers name is mandatory in my country. In fact I had to fill in my mother’s maiden surname in the form given in the airplane, for entering the country… And I loved it… But what does one make of it? Two extremes?

The same evening I was introduced to another a group of Indians living in here. They were with their married spouses and not partners. I was relieved. (I am still a conservative Indian in family values). But for how long I wondered?

And should we? I know one thing for sure, that if I had not had the kind of home I had, I would not have been, whoever and wherever I am today. And I believe this applies equally to many others, back home.

We need to value our strengths and build on them, while of course correcting the ills along the way. The West yearns for some of our values but has come so far away now that it will take them a wholesale culture change to do so which is almost next to impossible.

KASHMIR DIARY

Army: symbol of patience
David Devadas

I was intrigued at first by the intensity with which the US has been pressing India to send troops to maintain order in Iraq. One would have thought Pakistani troops would be enough. They are after all fellow-Muslims and Pakistan has been a close enough partner in what the US likes to call “war on terrorism” to allow US troops to be stationed on its territory. Clearly, however, the US and its key allies have been watching the way Indian troops have dealt with insurgency in Kashmir.

That is the only explanation for the presence of such a large Pentagon team in New Delhi last week to press for Indian troops. It was apparently a large part of what President Bush had to say when he broke protocol to spend half-an-hour with Indian Deputy Prime Minister L K Advani – when Advani had gone to the White House to meet the US National Security Adviser.

The plain fact is that Indian troops are innured to taking heavy casualties in battling guerrilla formations. Around 10,000 Indian armed forces have died in Kashmir over the past 13 years. On the other hand, a few dozen US body bags come with a heavy political price tag (and, remember, re-election year looms before Mr Bush).

The willingness to accept a higher death toll, however, is only part of the story. The other side of the coin is the Indian Army’s remarkable flexibility in forging the tactics required for battling guerrilla operations. It was only after I visited Jaffna, Gaza and the West Bank that I realised how tactically judicious the Indian Army has been in Kashmir. Not once have they brought out tanks – Sri Lanka’s favourite – or helicopter gun-ships – the Israeli staple. The Indians have rarely used even heavy mortar, except at the Line of Control. The result is that, while large parts of cities like Jaffna, Gaza and Ramallah have been razed to rubble, Srinagar has witnessed a property boom over the past decade.

Indian officers have at times exercised discretion to bypass threats, or even run the gauntlet, rather than call in the heaviest response available to demolish the threat. I am reminded of a story that Lt Gen Mohammed Ahmed Zaki related to me. He was Adviser (Security) to the Governor of Jammu and Kashmir when the Border Security Force went berserk after a Light Machine Gun was snatched from one of its bunkers. Scores of people were killed in their firing and a large market burnt to cinders. Zaki led a team of senior civilian officers to Sopore to assuage the irate people. He told me that the team was met with such fury that it was difficult at first to even approach the people. However, after the team had spoken to leaders of the gathered crowd and announced stern action and compensation, the people simmered down somewhat. The delegation was about to leave, he said, when a group of wailing women came up to repeat some of the points that had already been made.

Zaki told me that when the women finally let them go, he smelt a rat, wondering if they had been deliberately delayed. So on the way back, he instructed the drivers to watch out for an ambush and to race down the highway at top speed. His suspicion had been well founded: their vehicles were hit by gunfire on a lonely stretch soon after they had passed Pattan. Their speed ensured that there were no casualties but they had taken a huge risk. One wonders if an Israeli team placed in a similar situation would not have called in helicopters to scour the route and fire at any potential attackers.

The Indian Army, on the other hand, has opted for patience instead. For a couple of years before that incident, Sopore had been left alone, virtually ruled by militant cadres. Army convoys would take a detour to Kupwara during that period. It had opted to establish control over all parts of Srinagar and other key portions of the valley before tackling Sopore.

That too was done judiciously. Zaki told me of how he first re-established the control of the state in downtown Srinagar on October 7, 1990, after militants had roamed freely through much of that area for months. Whereas tanks would almost certainly have led such an operation by the Sri Lankan Army, the Indian Army opted for a flag march. Zaki, who was the Corps Commander in Kashmir at the time, personally led a column of troops that marched down the broad Nalle Mar road through the heart of downtown Srinagar.

It is this willingness to deploy a restrained amount of force from among the tactical options available to the Army – even at the risk of relatively high casualties – that has drawn the notice of the alliance that now occupies Iraq. Not willing to ask their own soldiers to take such risks, they would rather invite Indian and Pakistani soldiers to do it. Of course they want to retain command, since their generals could be safely billeted in headquarters while giving orders to the cannon fodder from the subcontinent.

HEALTH

Mental games cut Alzheimer’s risk

WANT to ward off Alzheimer’s disease? Play some mental games or go dancing.

“Although we didn’t analyse the intensity of the activity, I think that would influence your risk of dementia,” Verghese told Reuters.