 |
|
In the dark ‘Packaged’
funds |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Scandalous probe
Strained relations
A matter of roots
Encounters with
Nehru French reject
proposed EU constitution Delhi
Durbar
|
|
‘Packaged’ funds THE “economic packages” that the prime ministers announce during their visits to various states yield screaming headlines. The contents of the packages are spurious most of the time, considering that it is later found out that they mostly comprise money already committed to the state which is all added up to make an impressive total. To that extent, these packages are an exercise in good packaging and little more. There are reasons to apprehend that the “mega economic package” announced by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh during his summer excursion to Himachal Pradesh is not radically different. How nebulous the aid is can be gauged from the fact that its total value has been variously described as Rs 1,125 crore and a fantastic Rs 4,000 crore. How much of it is new and how much has been culled from the pipeline is anybody’s guess. Even if it is largesse for the cash-starved state, this tendency of the visiting prime ministers playing Santa Claus is none too healthy. There is no doubt that every state needs extra funds for its development requirements but these should not come to it by way of charity or special favour. That can lead to allegations of favouritism and partiality. This is all the more so when the state and the Centre are ruled by the same party. Other states which are under the control of parties which happen to be in the Opposition at the Centre may unnecessarily feel left out. Whatever is a state’s due should reach it as a matter of right. That does not mean that the Prime Minister should not have the powers to allocate special funds to a state. But this power must be exercised only in an emergency. Himachal Pradesh has special needs, which need to be fulfilled by various ministries. It is not very elegant to cajole the visiting prime ministers to do the honours. But all this presupposes that announcing such a special deal is a bother for the prime ministers. There are instances of some worthies specifically asking for the details of the money to be given to a particular state so that they could magnanimously declare that they were doling it out by way of a package. As said earlier, such “generosity” generates tremendous publicity. |
|
Scandalous probe THE Bihar Government’s belated response to the reports about the Rs 18-crore flood scam in the state does not inspire confidence. Even though it has lodged the First Information Report against 28 people and arrested five persons, after almost a month after the scam was exposed in the media, it is yet to lay its hands on the two main accused — former Patna District Magistrate Gautam Goswami and Santosh Kumar Jha, the contractor-recipient of the siphoned-off money. The state vigilance chief’s announcement of a reward for information leading to their arrest looks funny and ridiculous. The government should explain why it could not crack the whip and arrest Goswami when he was readily available for television interviews not long ago. The government’s slow response to the sequence of events seems to convey the impression that it had willy-nilly allowed both Goswami and Jha to escape and that all it was doing now was a cover-up operation to hoodwink the people. Reports of an important file missing from the offices of the Disaster Management Department and the Vigilance Department after the Accountant-General started scrutinising the flood relief papers also prove that the style of governance has not changed much after the state came under President’s rule. This is indeed sad. It is impossible to imagine that bureaucrats like the Chief Secretary and others down the line were ignorant of the loot. Soon after the floods receded in August 2004, the State’s Disaster Management Secretary recommended a thorough probe into embezzlement of relief funds. But it was not accepted. Why? Goswami’s sudden resignation from the IAS and joining a private airliner in Lucknow without the government’s approval is shrouded in mystery. Clearly, he has brought shame and disgrace to the IAS by his questionable conduct. The government would do well to step up efforts to nab him and the notorious contractor. Otherwise, the ongoing probe will be a futile exercise. |
|
It is always the best policy to speak the truth — unless, of course, you are an exceptionally good
liar. — Jerome K. Jerome |
Strained relations THE crisis in Sino-Japanese relations is taking an ugly turn by the day as the world’s second economy and the emerging world power glower at each other. Japan wants to be a normal country punching its economic weight on the world stage after decades of living under the shadow of its wartime record and defeat. China, on the verge of becoming a world power, is equally keen to deny Tokyo a place in the sun. The irony is that Japan’s recent economic recovery has been greatly helped by China’s insatiable appetite for Japanese products and investment, and China has replaced the United States as its largest export market. But an uneasy relationship traditionally held hostage to the Japanese past has broken the bounds of civility because Japan under Mr Junichiro Koizumi is no longer prepared to wear the sackcloth and ashes to atone for his country’s past. In recent weeks, anti-Japanese demonstrations and damage to Japanese diplomatic establishments and business enterprises in China bore the mark of official licence. The provocation was the whitewashing of the Japanese past in textbooks meant for limited circulation and the Japanese Prime Minister’s traditional visits to the Yakusuni shrine, which houses the remains of the wartime condemned, in addition to those of thousands of other war dead. China was, of course, brutally colonised by Japan in the past. Admittedly, the emotional base for anti-Japanese protests was there, but in a country in which demonstrations are carefully monitored and authorised, students’ ability to run riot one weekend after another sent a signal. Official China was angry with Japan because it had talked of Taiwan in association with the United States in the context of their military relationship and had objected to Chinese authorisation for gas exploration in disputed seas. Japanese moves denoted a change and the Chinese felt it was time to make its displeasure clear. After a time, attempts were made by both countries to steady the rocky relationship. Mr Koizumi made a handsome public apology for Japan’s past conduct at an international gathering. China, on its part, sent a senior minister to Japan only to botch up the move by snubbing the Prime Minister, departing before the meeting with Mr Koizumi, fixed earlier. It was later stated in Beijing that the Chinese were offended by the Prime Minister’s comments on Yakusuni quoting Confucius to suggest the people had a duty to honour their dead. Despite the emotional reactions the painful past arouse in China, recent Chinese moves and behaviour are indications of the Chinese leadership’s offensive to deny Japan the status it desires by virtue of its economic prowess and nascent military muscle. Beijing has made no secret of its opposition to Japan’s efforts to secure a permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council, a move specifically supported by the United States. Nor does it look kindly on the expansion of US-Japanese military cooperation under the treaty between the two countries. Japan’s decision to send a contingent of troops to Iraq for reconstruction work might be a symbolic gesture, but it presages a widening of Tokyo’s military role and hence unwelcome to the Chinese. China and Japan form a triangle with the United States, the traditional post-World War II hegemon in the Far East. While Washington realises that China is seeking pre-eminence in Asia, it is not willing to abdicate its own role. The problem is how to accommodate Beijing’s legitimate interests and power in the new scheme of things. Washington is keen for Tokyo to play a bigger military role, partly to share its burden and checkmate China. The Japanese approach to its past is often contrasted with Germany’s atonement for its Nazi past. On the other hand, it is suggested by some experts that unlike the “guilt culture” of the West, the Japanese are conditioned by a “shame culture”; there is, in fact, no word for guilt in Japanese. Although the Japanese might have difficulty in continuing to say sorry for their past, the Chinese leadership is increasingly giving the impression of using such inadequacies as there might be in Japanese apologies to pursue a single-minded resolve to deny Japan its due in Asia and the world. At the same time, Japan needs China for the growing trade relationship and economic links and help in moderating North Korean behaviour. Japan has not recovered from the shock of North Korea launching a missile across its territory a few years ago and it was one factor in Tokyo’s desire to intensify its military relationship with the US, particularly in the anti-missile field. Japan is also anxiously watching North Korea’s nuclear ambitions and is eager for the resumption of six-party talks under the aegis of Beijing. A nuclear-armed North Korea would represent an unacceptable risk for Japan and could lead to a Japanese backlash. It would seem that while China could delay Japan’s bid to secure its rightful place in the region and the world, it will be unable to block Tokyo’s progress for long. Many in the United States, particularly among the dominant neo-conservatives, are increasingly viewing China as a threat to American primacy and will help Japan develop its military muscle, a potentially formidable force, despite its designation as self-defence forces. In Japan, there are more voices calling for a revision of its pacifist constitution although for many in China, South Korea and South-East Asia, Japan’s past conduct is not forgotten. It would be ironic if the only country to suffer nuclear bombing (thanks to the United States) should feel compelled to be nuclear-armed. For both China and Japan, there will be enormous economic costs of their deteriorating relationship. Already, the Japanese are having second thoughts on making fresh investments, a number of tour groups have cancelled their China visits and calls for a boycott of Japanese products in China, if pushed to a logical conclusion, could cause irreparable harm. The answer lies in the two sides bringing down the political temperature although Beijing, the instigator of a vicious chain of events, bears the larger burden of displaying good sense and
moderation. |
A matter of roots
When my father died my mother sold the house in the village. I had never actually lived in the house. Years before, my father’s brother had been murdered. This bred a strong paranoia in my parents and they were convinced that I could be murdered too. As a result I was forbidden to eat or drink anything in the village and my contacts were of an extremely superficial nature. Hence I felt no sense of loss when the house was sold. Yet on the final visit I couldn’t help feeling that I had destroyed my roots. There was a luxuriant bougainvillea, growing over the porch. I took three cuttings from this and planted them in the house that I had bought in Lucknow. Perhaps through this I hoped to retain contact with my village and my roots. It was a huge rambling house with acres of unkept grounds. It had been the home of an erstwhile Talukdar and had been sold cheap by his widow. I couldn’t afford the massive upkeep it required and rented it out. Every month I went to collect my cheque and observed the bougainvillea take root and grow in abundant profusion.. The years rolled by placidly and then tragedy struck. I lost my first-born and my heart went out of Lucknow. I was offered a job in my old school and I moved away and when it was obvious that I would never return I sold the house. It had never been my home and I had developed no affection for it and yet on that final visit I felt a deep regret and took away a few cuttings of the bougainvillea. I bought a plot of land in Panchkula and it was here that I planted those cuttings. In due course the house came up. It was a beautiful house and I had worked very hard to build it. I owned the house for 20 years, visited it about four times and never lived in it and all the time the bougainvillea flourished. Then retirement loomed large and I decided to relocate in the Simla Hills where I had spent more than half my life. I sold my house remembering sadly all the hard work I had put into it. Again I took a few bougainvillea cuttings and planted them at my new place in Bamrol. It is a serene and peaceful place and the cool air echoes with the song of myriads of birds that flit through the close-growing trees. I have made friends with Kamaljeet, the village “pradhan” and Leena, my neighbour, sends me homemade chutney and a share of her apricot crop. Dharampal, the vegetable dealer, lets me know when his fresh stock of watermelons and melons arrives and Mohanlal, the barber, flatters my queer hairstyle. And the bougainvillea? It never did take root, but I don’t mind. It is time for me to grow my own roots and not depend upon the symbolism of the bougainvillea.
|
Encounters with
Nehru I
recall on the 41st death anniversary of Jawaharlal Nehru my series of discussions with him, mostly on affairs in Jammu and Kashmir, a subject which remained closest to Nehru’s heart till his death. I forced upon him my first appointment outside Parliament House. As soon as he got out of the car, I rushed to hand him over a brief memorandum on the situation in Kashmir. The securitymen had tried to stop me but in those days security was not so strict. Nehru waved them aside and quickly glanced through the memorandum. He agreed to give me an appointment for explaining the points therein. Thereafter, the Prime Minister always remained easily accessible. His response to requests for appointments and letters used to be very prompt. During the first year of my meetings with Nehru, I brought to his attention implications of indefinite prolongation of the Kashmir dispute and need for immediate setting up of a constituent-legislative assembly to which the government should become accountable. Otherwise the system was getting regimented and no voice of dissent was tolerated. In this context, I referred to the parting of the ways of Sheikh Abdullah and G.M. Karra, who was the number two in popularity and standing in Kashmir politics. I pleaded in favour of Karra’s right to dissent and argued that his loyalty to the country need not be routed through the Sheikh. Nehru conceded the theoretical soundness of my ideas but asserted that India’s policy in Kashmir revolved round the Sheikh who should in no case be weakened. Sheikh Abdullah’s Jammu policy was my other cause of grievance. I complained to Nehru that power was not shared with genuine representatives of Jammu. Nehru argued that the continuation of Maharaja Hari Singh as a constitutional head of the state was a concession to the sentiments of Jammu. In my view that arrangement was unfair to Jammu. For a constitutional head, who could neither provide active leadership to the region nor have any effective power, would continue to inhibit the growth of a democratic leadership and political process. Moreover, the Hari Singh — Abdullah team would create a divergent polity in the two regions — one based on a democratic leadership and the other on a hereditary ruler — which would lead to political instability. Nehru defended the arrangement which ensured a sort of “stable-instability” (or did he say instable-stability?”). However, other developments made the Maharaja’s continuation untenable. He abdicated in May, 1949. I urged the Prime Minister that power left by the Maharaja should be equitably distributed among the people of the three regions. Making a plea against regimentation of the state’s set-up, I demanded that the practice of government officers becoming office-bearers of the National Conference be stopped. In support of my contention, I produced a copy of an order of the Deputy Commissioner of Doda who had suspended a tehsil committee of the National Conference for its “anti-national activities”, in his capacity as president of the district committee of the party. Nehru agreed that the government and the party should be kept separate. In the early fifties inter-regional and Centre-state tensions started growing. I met Nehru on the eve of his signing the Delhi agreement with Adbullah on the Centre-state relations in July, 1952. I offered to support the agreement, which offered autonomy to the state, provided its logic was extended to the regions and they were granted similar autonomy within the state. Nehru appreciated the point and at a press conference on July 24, 1952, announced, in the presence of Abdullah, that the constitution of the state would provide for regional autonomy. I met Nehru again in January 1953 when the agitation of the Jammu Praja Parishad, backed by the Bhartiya Jana Sangh, had peaked. Opposing the anti-Kashmir movement of the Parishad and aggressive trends in Kashmiri nationalism, I demanded implementation of the idea of regional autonomy, which I believed, “would act as a unifying force between peoples of all regions”. Nehru admitted that Abdullah committed a mistake and was often led astray, but nothing justified the Parishad agitation which was anti-national. My sharpest disagreement with Nehru was on Abdullah’s dismissal and arrest on August 9, 1953. Having criticised the disposed leader for not giving freedom to his opponents, I could not reconcile myself to the denial of freedom to him, his dismissal without a no-confidence motion in the assembly and his detention without trial. Moreover, the action was bound to alienate the people of Kashmir from Indian nationalism. Nehru gave me a lecture on the primacy of national interest. After all, democracy was not everything, he argued and continued: “where is democracy? Is America a democracy? Even in India, it sometimes becomes a burden. Can we afford democracy in Kashmir? We are there at the point of bayonet. We have played a gamble at an international stage on Kashmir. You want us to lose it for the sake of democracy?’’ In December 1958, on the first day of the trial of Sheikh Abdullah and his colleagues in what was called the Kashmir conspiracy case, I was bodily lifted from the courtroom on the order of the IGP for wishing the Sheikh, and taken to the police guardroom where I was beaten. I came to Delhi and sent a one-sentence letter to the PM saying “I was involved in an accident at Jammu which I would like to bring to your notice personally.” Next morning, principal private secretary to the Prime Minister, K. Ram, rang me up, saving that the PM would be away for a few days and I could see him. Meanwhile the matter was raised in Parliament by an agitated Acharaya Kirpalani, supported by NQ Gore, Nath Pai and a few others. The Prime Minister offered his regrets over the incident. |
|
French reject proposed EU constitution French voters rejected a proposed European Union constitution on Sunday, igniting a
political crisis in the alliance and dealing a sharp blow to President Jacques Chirac. With nearly all ballots counted, the Interior Ministry reported that 55.5 percent of voters rejected the constitution and 44.5 percent voted for it. Although the defeat had been predicted in recent opinion polls, the result was nonetheless remarkable. France, a founder of the European Union and its powerhouse for decades, may well have scuttled an ambitious plan — written by a former French president — to make the alliance a stronger, more cohesive political entity. Nine EU nations have already approved the document, but in order for it to take effect, it would have to be ratified by all 25 members. While prominent French and European leaders warned that France’s rejection would doom the larger ratification process, others indicated that a second-chance vote down the road might be possible. The document would strengthen the EU presidency, its foreign affairs representative and its Parliament, and would streamline decision-making to ease the integration of 10 nations who joined last year. But many French voters expressed discontent with the EU, saying it has become an aloof, undemocratic bureaucracy that has grown too fast. They feared the new constitution would hurt French living standards by unleashing economic competition and immigration from poorer countries in Eastern Europe. The defeat was a devastating repudiation for Chirac, now in his 10th year in office. As the elder statesman among Europe’s leaders, he had gambled by submitting the issue to voters instead of following the safer path of legislative approval chosen by eight of the nine other countries that have endorsed the document so far. Some rivals demanded Sunday that Chirac resign, arguing that the dramatic result revealed a chasm between the government and an angry electorate. The 72-year-old Chirac ignored the sniping. He gave a short speech promising to respond to the voters’ concerns by quickly overhauling his government — a statement seen by many as indication that he plans to replace embattled Prime Minister Jean-Pierre
Raffarin. "Make no mistake, France’s decision inevitably creates a difficult context for the defense of our interests in Europe,’’ Chirac said. He added that EU leaders would consider their options at a regularly scheduled meeting in Brussels next month. Because the European Union is an arcane work-in-progress, an evolving alliance of nations with interconnected economies, predominantly open borders and often divergent political cultures, the next moves are not completely clear. EU leaders insisted the ratification process would continue because 15 members have not yet voted. Another referendum is to take place Wednesday in the Netherlands. Dutch resentment of immigration and vast subsidies to the EU have pushed the ``no’’ camp well into the lead there, opinion polls show. — LA Times-Washington Post |
|
|
Delhi Durbar Railway
Minister Lalu Prasad Yadav is trying to redefine his friends and foes after the electoral setback in Bihar. Lalu pre-empted the BJP’s gambit of having Nitish Kumar installed as Chief Minister by pressurising the Centre to dissolve the assembly on the ground of horse-trading. Meanwhile, Steel Minister Ram Vilas Paswan’s Lok Janshakti Party has come asunder in Bihar as its 29 MLAs had lost patience with their leader’s vacillation and decided to switch sides. There is now an element of consternation in the UPA government about the NDA moving the court against the dissolution of the assembly. This is particularly so as the strength of any party or coalition has to be necessarily decided on the floor of the legislature in keeping with the Supreme Court judgement in the S R Bommai case. Lata keeps off Rajya Sabha Lata Mangeshkar, a nominated member of the Rajya Sabha, has rarely been heard in the House of Elders. She, once again, sought leave of absence during the latter half of the budget session of Parliament due to illness. Lata Mangeshkar’s six-year term ends in November. Lata was nominated to the Rajya Sabha in 1999. She has not attended the House for most of her term. Most MPs acknowledge they have not heard her speak except on one occasion in 2002 when she posed a question about the derailment of trains. Her extended spell of absence from the Rajya Sabha has invited a harsh observation by former Deputy Chairperson Najma Heptullah. Tata and
Birla Ratan Tata and Kumaramangalam Birla do not seem keen to occupy offices being offered by the UPA government in Udyog Bhavan. While Tata is Chairman of the Investment Commission vested with the task of formulating strategies for wooing investment into India, Birla heads the reconstituted Board of Trade. Both the
corporate honchos prefer attending meetings in Udyog Bhavan and operating out of their corporate offices in the national Capital. Speaker’s dos and don’ts Speaker Somnath Chatterjee has reportedly drawn 19 commandments for the members of parliamentary committees. The basic theme is that an official trip cannot be converted into a pleasure trip. The commandments state that the spouse or companion must not accompany the member during his visit to any installation, office or establishment as part of the study or during informal discussions with officers concerned. The members will travel in AC coaches or cars with two sharing one car. None may accept gifts or invitations to lunch or dinner or offers of any other form of hospitality from any private party. And when they attend official lunches or dinners,
drinking is a no-no. Contributed by S Satyanarayanan, R Suryamurthy, Gaurav Choudhury and Prashant Sood. |
|
|
From the pages of Outrages on women
Like
robberies on the North-Western Railway, outrages on women in Indian Railways are becoming an institution of the country. A shameful and shocking outrage was made recently on a European lady travelling to Madras by a Military Officer and a Civil Officer. The lady was travelling in a second class carriage, into which the Military Officer twice entered and attempted to outrage her, on resisting which the lady was brutally attacked. The brute nearly tore off her clothes, and threatened to throw her out of the carriage, and actually attempted to carry out his threat into effect. The lady fought courageously, and at the next station complained to the Guard. To her astonishment she was put into another compartment, the Guard taking no notice of her complaint. Fearing further outrage, at another station the lady moved into a carriage in which there was a European gentleman. But in moving into this carriage she only threw herself from the frying pan into the fire, the so-called gentleman, who was a telegraph officer, assaulting her. |
Let a man lift himself by himself; let him not degrade himself; for the Self alone is the friend of the self and the Self alone is the enemy of the self. — Dr Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan They are not following dharma who resort to violence to achieve their purpose. But those who lead others through non-violent means, knowing right or wrong, may be called guardians of dharma.
— The Buddha  |
| HOME PAGE | |
Punjab | Haryana | Jammu & Kashmir |
Himachal Pradesh | Regional Briefs |
Nation | Opinions | | Business | Sports | World | Mailbag | Chandigarh | Ludhiana | Delhi | | Calendar | Weather | Archive | Subscribe | Suggestion | E-mail | |
