 |
|
Dispossessing farmers Campus rumpus |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
South Asian power play India must raise economic stakes FOR decades now, New Delhi and Kathmandu have been talking about — and around — joint power projects in Nepal, which invariably get spooked by one obstacle or another. Now China is poised to steal a march over India, and by actually taking a cue from India.
Laws for defence forces
An unsung death
Heart of terror Workshop of
evolution threatened In Russia, cautious generosity Chatterati
|
Dispossessing farmers IN the absence of a fair and transparent policy on land acquisition and payment of just compensation to the farmers, state governments’ plans to forcibly take over land for special economic zones (SEZs) have met with stiff opposition. In Punjab while the proposed SEZs at Amritsar and Mohali have not yet made much headway, the state government has taken away farmers’ land and given it to companies for setting up housing, infrastructural and commercial projects. The Prime Minister has in a letter told the Punjab Chief Minister to ensure that the dispossessed farmers’ interests are protected and they are given a stake in development projects undertaken on their land. As The Tribune series “Govt as a land-grabber” has highlighted, the government has emerged as a nasty broker. Apart from serving the interests of companies, the Punjab Urban Development Authority (PUDA) has been taking citizens for a ride. It buys land at cheap rates, carries out some development work and sells plots to citizens at exorbitant profits. Farmers not only lose their only source of livelihood but also helplessly watch the government agency and private firms collaborate and make huge profits. Why should the government come between the farmer and the company? A farmer should decide whether he wants to sell his land or not and at what price. The government should only ensure that the procedures are transparent and uncomplicated, and there is no fraud or evasion of the stamp duty. The Land Acquisition Act, 1894, was meant to help the government acquire land for projects of public interest like building roads and railway tracks. Now the Act is used to forcibly take control of land on behalf of companies. The government acquiring certain land for a SEZ is still understandable, but why should it be seen as an agent of commercial interests? The Centre proposes to lay down guidelines for land acquisition and to ensure that the SEZs also have sufficient social infrastructure like schools, hospitals, roads and parks. This will, hopefully, minimise disputes over the takeover of land.
|
|
Campus rumpus IT was not only parliamentary and legislative elections which were being conducted like no-holds-barred battles. Students union elections, too, were fought equally spectacularly and bitterly. Now that the former have been made to pipe down with the help of a model code of conduct, it is but natural that the Supreme Court has put curbs on the campus elections. An honest implementation of the report by former Chief Election Commissioner J.M. Lyngdoh ordered by the apex court will go a long way in controlling the flow of bad blood on the campuses. The situation there was indeed critical. The murder of Ujjain professor H.S. Sabharwal was also a direct fallout of ugly election politics. Being of impressionable age, students get more emotionally surcharged than their mature counterparts, and the rivalry generated during the elections lingers for long. The court has sought to keep out the money and muscle power, as also the all-pervasive political influence. This has been sought to be done by putting a blanket ban on the funding of student elections by political parties. Not only that, those contesting the elections themselves would have to keep the expenditure below Rs 5,000. That is not impossible, considering that it has been ordained that no printed posters, pamphlets or poll material can be used during the elections. To keep out the undesirable elements, anyone with a criminal record or subjected to any disciplinary action by the university would be ineligible to contest. Not only that, a contestant will have to attain a minimum permissible percentage of attendance. Then there are students who enrol not to study but only to indulge in “netagiri”. To keep out these professional netas, there will be only one opportunity to contest for the post of an office-bearer and two for the post of an executive member. If only political parties sincerely adhere to these norms, the vitiated atmosphere on the campuses can be brought back to normal.
|
|
South Asian power play FOR decades now, New Delhi and Kathmandu have been talking about — and around — joint power projects in Nepal, which invariably get spooked by one obstacle or another. Now China is poised to steal a march over India, and by actually taking a cue from India. It is all very well for New Delhi to flatter itself that India, along with China, is an emergent power in the global economic sweepstakes and that India’s economic reforms, unlike China’s, are rooted in democracy. While that wins the political argument, it does not earn the country any economic dividend and China pumping in $200 million for tapping the hydropower potential of Nepal is another warning of India being overtaken. That this should happen in the South Asian neighbourhood where India is the dominant power, and particularly in Nepal where New Delhi has high stakes, suggests that we should get our act together. It is not just the Government of India but also Indian investors who need to move swiftly to deepen the content of bilateral economic engagement if India has to retain its primacy as the facilitator for Nepal’s economic transformation. At a meeting last month of the India-Nepal Inter-Governmental Committee, the two countries agreed to explore a Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement that was mooted by India. However, nothing moves on the fast track when it comes to India-Nepal economic cooperation, either because of political sensitivities or because of disagreement over the terms of a project. Nepal’s strategic importance, India’s support to democratic processes in the Himalayan state and the long-standing economic and cultural bonds between the neighbours never really help when it comes to proceeding with joint projects. And Beijing is quick to take advantage of the gaps in bilateral economic cooperation. This is true not only of India’s relations with Nepal but also with others in South Asia such as Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. Although the course of politics in these countries is influenced by dominant perceptions in India, when it comes to economic influence New Delhi often is unable to stay ahead of China. This is an aspect of foreign policy, increasingly driven by economic objectives, that needs to be finetuned for better results.
|
|
The lion and the calf shall lie down together but the calf won’t get much sleep. — Woody Allen
|
Laws for defence forces
THE Parliamentary Committee on Defence has proposed a “makeover” for the defence forces laws, to make them less harsh and oppressive and more democratic in the interest of the morale of the troops. It also wants the three Services to have a common law and do away with separate Acts to bring about uniformity in the dispensation of justice. These recommendations, if implemented, will have far-reaching consequences. Defence forces have so far escaped political meddling and remained somewhat isolated. That is why they are still fully operative and responsive. They can deliver on time and almost at no notice. Ethos, traditions and continued good leadership have sustained them through many wars after Independence. For the Indian Army, there has been a continuous stressful period of “no war, no peace” in between. In all this, the rules, regulations and the defence forces laws have played no less significant a role. For a layman, it is near-impossible to understand how all these factors coalesce to create that chemistry spirit and morale which make troops give up their most precious possession, their lives, by rushing into a hail of bullets and exploding shells on a simple word, “move”, from their commanders. When troops are subjected to prolonged periods of stress and danger, and they suffer heavy casualties, discipline can give way to disorder and eventual mass desertions, as it happened, first, to the French army and there to the redoubtable German army during World War I. Indiscipline is highly contagious and if not stemmed with the greatest promptitude (as the French under Marshal Petain were able to do) it can spread like wildfire. That is why powers are vested in commanding officers and formation commanders. Military law and the summary powers were evolved over centuries of experience of organising armies, maintaining their discipline and leading them into battle. War by its very nature is an extraordinary situation and, therefore, calls for a law quite apart from the civil law, which operates in a totally different setting. When ethos, tradition and good leadership are operative, military law merely provides a backdrop. Military law, except for some cosmetic changes in the fifties and the abolition of field punishments and induction of the requirement of recording, “speaking order” by a court martial in 1992, has remained unchanged and operated efficiently for the last 100 years and more essentially because it is based on sound principles of fair play and justice, and the situation under which the army has to operate has, by and large, remained unaltered. Of course, there can be in an odd case aberrations in the application of the military justice system and for any higher court to rubbish the entire system would be unfair and unjust. Civil courts’ own justice system is a total mess. earlier higher civil courts had opined that the court martial should give a “speaking order”. Now members of court martial are akin to a jury, except that they are well versed with the working of the military, its methods and military law. Jury is neither competent nor ever required to record a “speaking order”. The recording of a speaking order has resulted in the Judge Advocate branch officer on the court marshal, who is there only in an advisory capacity relating to points of law and no more has come to exert unwanted influence on the court because he is the only one trained and capable of writing a speaking order. There was a time not long ago when if an officer or a soldier in the defence services committed an offence or seriously defaulted, he made a clean breast of it and that resulted in some leniency in dealing with the case. Such conduct is nowhere to be seen now. Any one who is caught doing something wrong has the standard defence of being victimised and targeted. No one ever admits his wrong-doings. But this then is in keeping with the national trait and practice in the civilian life. Though the punishments ascribed against the various Acts of the military law may be severe, rarely is the full punishment awarded. Much of it acts as a mere deterrence and creates a salutary effect on the potential offender. It is the certainty of punishment and not the severity that finally comes into play. The Tehelka offenders from the army have all been punished but those from the Ministry of Defence are a happy lot as they continue to enjoy the money the Tehelka team gave them and the benefits of civil law. The Additional Secretary, who accepted a gold chain from the Tehelka team was soon promoted. His benefactors contented that he did not take the gold chain home but kept it in his office. Obviously, that contention is enough to render the civil law inoperative. Applying similar law to the military would render it an ineffective instrument of state power with disastrous consequences. With the passage of time and changes in society’s perception of civil liberties, human rights and social environments, the laws must be altered to fit the changing circumstances. For the military, little has changed; in human behaviour, living with extreme stress and danger and the individual’s natural instinct for self-preservation. The contagious nature of ill discipline has remained the same. So military law, unlike civil law, could do with minimum changes. The very nature of working in each Service is quite different and a common law is against common sense. Contention that the military law demoralises troops is based on incorrect inputs. Of the military’s cases that are taken up with high courts and the supreme court, only 5 to 7 per cent are struck down. Compare these to those of civil courts and the figures prove the fairness in the application of military law. The commanding officer’s summary powers too seem to rankle the committee, little realising that he is the cutting edge of the military’s delivery system and unequivocally accountable for the discipline of his troops. He is a father figure in the unit. When all attempts to correct a habitual offender have failed and the possibility of ill discipline spreading in the unit exists, recourse to summary court marshal is taken. Most commanding officers, after punishing one of their men, remain sad and sullen for days. For them it is like punishing their erring child. Making the Defence Services Tribunal contingent on the adoption of common law for the three Services is misconceived and a nonstarter. Three earlier attempts at working out a common law have failed. The tribunal must have a retired officer from each of the three Services as member so that cases pertaining to each Service are dealt with by a bench consisting of a judicial member (high court judge/JAG) and a member from the concerned Service. Ill-disciplined troops are worthless, a menace and a danger to the nation. No other statute in the military’s law books has contributed more to maintaining discipline than the summary powers of the commanding officer. Taking away these powers of commanding officers will have yet another fallout. As in the civil courts, it will clog the military’s justice system, result in delays in the disposal of urgent cases and deliver the final fatal blow to the discipline in the military. Bringing military law in tune with the civil law will have grave consequences for the military and eventually for the country and its
security.
|
An unsung death
Independence morning came with death for this labouring adivasi (Jharkhandee) family. Satram and Shanti Oroan’s son Krishna was killed in a deadly landslide. The family are daily wagers at an illegal hotel building site situated off the Dharampur-Kasauli road just as it enters the military cantonment of this old hill station. The on-site contractor moved fast on a night of thunder, lightning and rain. He got Krishna’s parents to bury the child post-haste to avoid complications. But, sometimes news can also travel fast. Social activists, freelancers and the police arrived on the scene to a deadly environment of private sector and governmental culpability. Over a dozen green trees felled; the parapet of the main road smashed; the hillside carelessly dug out with a JCB machine; shanty tenements erected for daily wagers on steep infirm ground; telephone cables ripped apart; water pipes endangered; a fake and false H.P.P.W.D. signboard to deceive passers-by into believing that official work is in progress. The police has been alert and efficient. Investigations are on; the situation is being monitored by activists, the family being looked after. Hopefully, there shall be prosecutions, there shall be compensation. But the matter does not end there. The Kasauli hills are being turned into killing fields in the name of tourism and industrial development, and for attracting careless, irresponsible investment in questionable projects that are violative of natural as well as
statutory laws. Ecology and environment are being led into graveyards of no return. Gross exploitation of labour is being perpetrated with the patronage of the government. The hoteliers, property developers and contractors are guilty of criminal acts of omission and commission. The labourers are paid a pittance of a daily wage, the bare minimum to keep within the “law”. Women are discriminated against and paid as little as Rs 70 per day. There is no medical aid, no creche facilities, no sanitation; the dwellings for labourers are a pathetic mix of plastic and tin sheets. Fancy holiday resorts are coming up, golf courses being planned for a parasitic class of no-gooders on the blood, sweat, toil labour and corpses of the little Krishnas of our land. Krishna’s ghost shall (should) haunt the conscience of this nation as it celebrates the rituals of Independence and Janamashtami. Krishna, let it be understood, lost his life to private and public sector developmental terrorism. But, given the way in which the civil and military establishment functions, there shall be no security checks to protect the Krishnas of this our cancerous contemporary
civilisation.
|
Heart of terror THE Afghan President Hamid Karzai, in his address to the UN General Assembly on September 20, made it abundantly clear that US and NATO troops in Afghanistan would not be able to end attacks by Taliban militants unless steps were also taken to destroy “terrorist sanctuaries” outside the country. Though he did not name the country it was obvious he was referring to Pakistan. Karzai told the General Assembly that outsiders were behind the new surge in violence in Afghanistan. “We must look beyond Afghanistan to the sources of terrorism. We must destroy the terrorist sanctuaries beyond Afghanistan, dismantle the elaborate networks in the region that recruit, indoctrinate, train, finance, arm and deploy terrorists.” Even as President Karzai was delivering his speech in the General Assembly, General Abizaid, the US commander overseeing Afghan operations, expressed concern on Tuesday about Taliban military activity being organised and supported from inside Pakistan. President Bush is to have a joint meeting with President Karzai and General Musharraf shortly. Meanwhile General Musharraf told the Clinton Global Initiative Summit that “military action against al Qaida or militant Taliban continues and Pakistan has not withdrawn a single soldier”. He complained that there was a misperception that Pakistan was a base for terrorism. He clarified: “Yes, indeed there are people who are abetting and supporting the terrorists in the tribal agencies. As I said, al Qaida had its base there with more bias in Pakistan, less in Afghanistan. But Taliban, the command echelon, the control of Mullah Omar, is in the Southern Provinces of Afghanistan.” Pro-Taliban militants and the Pakistani government reached a deal on September 5, under which the militants agreed to stop attacks in the country and in Afghanistan in return for a halt in the government operations in the region. This has been criticised by many as the Pakistan government’s caving in to the militants’ demands and that the strategy risked creating a safe haven for Taliban insurgents and their al Qaida allies. General Musharraf argues that the deal was with the tribal elders, who are men of honour and who are expected to keep their world. Hamid Karzai’s speech makes it clear what he thinks of this agreement. Recently, the NATO Commander, General Jones, visited Afghanistan and said that more NATO troops were required to deal with the Taliban threat. While in India there are complaints that the US is not adequately supportive of Indian concerns about Pakistani cross-border terrorism, here we have President Karzai and the commander of US forces expressing concern about the cross border Pakistani support to Taliban forces threatening the lives of US and NATO servicemen and attempting to derail the international effort to rebuild Pakistan. Yet the US is keeping silent and from time to time certifies that Pakistan is in the forefront of the war on terrorism. General Musharraf has the effrontery to assert that Mullah Omar is in Southern Afghanistan when many Pakistani journalists say he is living in Quetta in Baluchistan. General Musharraf implies that the US and NATO troops, in spite of all their sophisticated equipment, have not been competent enough to capture Mullah Omar in territory over which they have operational control. It is necessary to reflect on this strange US behaviour. Why are they so soft on Pakistan when General Musharraf is doing all he can to nullify their military victory in Afghanistan and raising the risks to the lives of US and NATO servicemen in Afghanistan? While the issue features in the US press and in a few think tank writings, it does not raise the degree of public concern that is warranted. The US government, on the other hand, rewards Pakistan with F-16 aircraft and certifies to Pakistani cooperation in the war on terror. There must be a reason for the US caving in to Pakistani terrorism vis-à-vis Afghanistan, support to Taliban and permitting a continued safe haven to the al Qaida leadership, Osama Bin Laden and Ayman al Zawahiri, who continue to issue their video and audio manifestoes from their hideouts. Even in the most recent plot uncovered in the UK to blow up transatlantic airliners, a major accused has been arrested in Pakistan and many other participants based in the UK traveled to Pakistan for training and indoctrination. The terrorist infrastructure was not in tribal agencies but in the rest of Pakistan, in Punjab and Pakistan occupied Kashmir. Yet the US government is silent, even when it involves their own security. Nothing has been said about Jaish-e-Mohammed, an internationally proscribed terrorist organisation which continues its activities under a different name. In Afghanistan the prestige of the US and NATO is involved. US cannot afford to allow the Taliban to wreck their achievements. In his 9/11 anniversary speech President Bush cited Talibanised Afghanistan as the example of what would happen if the extremists succeed. He said, “We have learned that their goal is to build a radical Islamic empire where women are prisoners in their homes, men are beaten for missing prayer meetings and terrorists have a safe haven to plan and launch attacks on America and other civilised nations. The war against this enemy is more than a military conflict. It is the decisive ideological struggle of the 21st century and the calling of our generation.” Why is the US President who holds such views so helpless in controlling Pakistani support to Taliban against his own forces and those of NATO? Why is he unable to hold Pakistan accountable for extending a safe haven to Osama bin Laden and Ayman al Zawahiri? There is only one logical answer. The US is under Pakistani nuclear blackmail. Pakistanis do not want the terrorist campaign to end since that would mean the end of US interest in them. Nor do they want the US to be totally defeated and forced to withdraw. They want the US to be engaged in a prolonged campaign so that they can continue to milk the US as they are doing at present. If the US were to lean on them to stop their support to the extremists General Musharraf is in a position to tell them, if he went that far, his own life is in danger and he cannot guarantee that his successor will not be a jihadi general and nuclear weapons and materials will not fall into the hands of jehadis.
|
|
Workshop of evolution threatened THE Galapagos Islands, the world’s “workshop of evolution,” could be set to witness the first disappearance of a species in the 170 years since Charles Darwin’s historic visit. There are less than 50 pairs of the tiny Mangrove Finch, the rarest of all Darwin’s finches, left on the archipelago. Despite occupying just one square kilometre of mangrove forest, their habitat is under threat from the arrival of humans. Darwin’s finches are the primary example of evolution through natural selection and a living link to the scientific breakthrough that enabled us to understand our own ancestry. The Galapagos islands, a volcanic archipelago 150 kilometres off the east coast of Ecuador, are a treasure trove of rare species, whose isolation from the outside world has made them a vital area of study for natural scientists. Dr Glyn Young, from the Durrell Wildlife Foundation, said: “To lose one of the species of Darwin’s finches would be to lose a vital chapter of scientific history.” The mangrove finch is an elusive bird and Darwin himself never saw the bird during his survey of the archipelago on the famous voyage of the Beagle. Today it survives in just two patches of mangrove forest on the northeast coast of the largest island in the chain, Isobela. The arrival of ever greater numbers of people on the islands has had the unwanted side effect of introducing species to their unique eco-systems. On Isobela this has meant the invasion of rats, cats and a voracious species of parasitic flies that attack the nests of the mangrove finch. To these threats has been added the expansion of the illegal fishing sector, where fisherman have begun harvesting sea cucumbers and cutting down mangrove forests for firewood. According to Dr Young, the mangrove finch has the smallest range of any bird in the world and the destruction of its habitat has left it dangerously isolated. Darwin’s finches are composed of 13 discreet but closely related species, collected during the naturalist’s stay on the islands in 1835. Although of a broadly similar size, the differences in the size and shape of their beaks demonstrated a high level of adaptation to different food sources. “The Galapagos is the workshop of evolution,” said Dr Young. “We have one last chance to keep an oceanic archipelago eco-system intact. Hawaii, the Pacific Islands, Madagascar they have become an absolute mess, their losing tortoises, bats and snails.” Today, as many as 27,000 people live in Galapagos and more than 100,000 tourists visit the islands every year. The pressure of this human influx has been compounded by a voluble and politically organised fishing lobby that has sought, often by illegal means, to expand fishing in the Galapagos marine reserve. The harvesting of the islands’ undoubted marine riches has seen the introduction of long lining – an indiscriminate form of fishing that has devastated stocks in other areas of the world. Leonor Sztjepic, from the Galapagos Conservation Trust said: “And this is an iconic species. One that has impacted on our understanding of history. We have a duty to protect it.” By
arrangement with
|
|
In Russia, cautious generosity MOSCOW – Russia’s tycoons, whose flamboyant spending has rung cash registers from the Mediterranean isles to London’s Mayfair district, have found a new use for their supersize wallets: philanthropic foundations. The rich are awarding thousands of scholarships to the brightest, promoting arts and culture, funding libraries, schools and universities, supporting the Russian Orthodox Church’s growth and improving health-care facilities in a country where 20 percent of the population lives in poverty. But the long and growing list of worthy projects has a striking absentee, the development of democracy. Donors “are afraid of the political consequences,” said Maria Chertok, head of the Charities Aid Foundation in Russia. “For now, areas like human rights and social justice are just too controversial.” This vast country, with its troves of natural resources and strong science education, has generated 33 billionaires and 90,000 millionaires since the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991. “I believe that any businessman who has enough funds, who has more than he needs, has an obligation to give back. It’s his destiny,” said Dmitry Zimin, 73, who built Russia’s second-largest cellular phone company, VympelCom, and created the Dynasty Foundation to support fundamental science, particularly physics. All giving in Russia, including corporate charity, now totals about $1.5 billion a year, a tiny fraction of the U.S. figure. But it has risen exponentially since the figure of $1 million in 1992, when the idea of private philanthropy, after decades of communism was completely alien. However, in a country where political power is increasingly centralized in the Kremlin, the funding of groups that promote democracy-building has come to be regarded by Russia’s elite as exposing their riches to retribution from the state. Mikhail Khodorkovsky, the oil baron who plowed $60 million into private democracy-oriented projects, is in a Siberian prison camp. His foundation, Open Russia, has been shuttered by the authorities as part of a probe into alleged tax evasion by Khodorkovsky and the company he created, Yukos. By arrangement with
LA-Times–Washington Post
|
|
|
Chatterati NOW that the Prime Minister, President and sundry Chief Ministers like Narendra Modi have had their say about the Mumbai blasts, it is now the turn of the MPs. In true Bollywood style, Milind Deora, the MP from South Mumbai, has come up with a documentary with terrorism and national unity as the theme. To emphasise the point, he has roped in Mumbai brand ambassadors like Sachin Tendulkar and Shahrukh Khan to star in it. And in nearby Bangalore, industrialist turned first time MP Rajeev Chandrasekar has shot off his first parliamentary salvo. In a letter to the prime minister he lauds Manmohan Singh’s statement on terror as “the firmest indication of resolve that I have heard from you since you assumed office as PM.” Clearly Chandrasekar is a fast learner of parliamentary rhetoric where compliments come packaged with censure. Perhaps Deora should get him to script his movie.
A terrible world A minister from South India came back in tears from his recent trip to America. He was strip-searched twice for security reasons. We stand in lines for hours at the American Embassy for some one to collect our documents. Then we wait for hours while they verify them. Then a call will come for an interview months away. It is absurd! If you are lucky you get the visa after paying thousands of rupees. The minute you reach the airport you are searched head to toe. No medicines, snacks or cosmetics. You have to taste baby milk before you are allowed to enter. You reach America and you are looked down upon as are all Asians. Finger prints, pictures and dirty glances. If you are taking a shuttle service ahead, you have to sit with your seat belts on. No loo, no medicines and no hand baggage. If you check in your baggage, then it has to be without locks. Well, if any thing goes missing you have to suffer the loss. Our Defense Minister was strip-searched. A senior officer of the PMO was left standing in his underwear, while Amitabh Bachchan was asked to take off his socks. We have lived in the fear of terror for ages but we are not that paranoid. My question is, why don’t we also check the foreign VIP delegations who enter our country? We are the ones who have been suffering, running from pillar to post crying for the world to help us. Now see what happens when terror strikes the West. How many 9/11’s have we suffered?
|
Only when man has his fall of material objects, does he care to raise his eyes upwards. —The Upanishads None should boast of what they cannot achieve. Called to the challenge, they are forced to seek wild excuses which convince none and make them a laughing stock. —The Mahabharata Worship nothing but God; be good to your parents and relatives, and to the orphan and the poor. Speak nicely to people, be constant in prayer, and give charity. — The Koran
|
| 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 | |
