|
Son and substance Surging rupee |
|
|
Guest extraordinary Ahmedinejad deserved better at Columbia THE President of Columbia University in New York, Mr Lee Bollinger, showed exceptional courage in inviting Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad to the world-famous institution to address an American audience.
The ‘ultimate prize’
Love story
Support Burma’s cry for democracy Bhagat Singh’s thoughts on love Legal Notes
|
Surging rupee THE Reserve Bank of India has doubled the overseas investment limit for individuals to Rs 80 lakh per year. It means any Indian can take abroad this much amount by opening an overseas account and invest in property, shares or in any other asset. This is in addition to the money allowed for studies, travel and treatment abroad. Companies, too, have been allowed to invest overseas up to 400 per cent of their net worth and prepay their external loans up to $500 million. The RBI has also raised the foreign investment limit for mutual funds from $4 billion to $5 billion. These measures, which are in line with the recommendations of the committee on fuller capital account convertibility, are aimed to check the massive dollar inflow and appreciation of the rupee. The US central bank, the Federal Reserve, cut the interest rates by 50 basis points on September 18 to release more money in the system to meet the housing crisis. However, with the US faced with the possibility of a recession, dollars are finding their way to the emerging markets like India and China. In just three days (September 19 to 21) India received $1.54 billion of foreign investment. Small wonder that the BSE Sensex rose 1,000 points to touch the 17,000-mark in just five trading sessions. The RBI is furiously buying dollars, but this has not prevented the rupee’s relentless rise, which is hurting exports. The measures the RBI has announced to encourage the rupee outgo will not make much impact. When the Indian stock markets are giving excellent returns on investments and the interest rates are comparatively high, why should anyone invest abroad? NRIs, too, are parking their excess cash in Indian banks and shares. At the most, mutual funds may look for opportunities in other Asian markets which, too, are rising. The government should ease interest rates and channel foreign investment in infrastructure building — the way China has been doing. |
Guest extraordinary THE President of Columbia University in New York, Mr Lee Bollinger, showed exceptional courage in inviting Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad to the world-famous institution to address an American audience. It was an excellent idea to allow a ruler most hated in the West, particularly the US, to express his views directly to the people. This could lead to lessening of tensions between Washington and Teheran over the Iranian nuclear issue, which may result in another war the world can ill-afford after what has happened in Iraq and Afghanistan. But the treatment the president got from his host belied the hopes of those, including a large number of Americans, who stand for dialogue for the resolution of disputes under all circumstances. Unbelievably, the “welcome address” by Mr Bollinger had expressions like “you exhibit all the signs of a petty and cruel dictator”, “you are either brazenly provocative or astonishingly uneducated” and “ I doubt that you have the intellectual courage to answer these questions”. Perhaps, the Columbia University don succumbed to the criticism his decision evoked from different quarters. Or, may be, he intended to provoke Mr Ahmedinejad to reiterate his controversial views on the Holocaust, Israel’s right to exist and the human rights abuse in Iran. But this time the Iranian leader was a little diplomatic. He refused to describe the Holocaust as a “fabricated legend” again. Instead, he called for more research on the cruel development and put a counter-question: Why is it that the Palestinian people are paying the price for an event they had nothing to do with?” However, when it came to explaining his government’s poor human rights record, Mr Ahmedinejad exposed himself by saying that there are no homosexuals in Iran, though reports say they are persecuted for being what they are. Boos and jeers he received were unavoidable with the kind of image he has in the US. But all this is not going to defuse the crisis created by Iran’s nuclear ambitions. Even at this late stage efforts must be renewed for an end to the crisis through dialogue. Boos and jeers will take the world nowhere. |
When I want to read a novel, I write one. — Benjamin Disraeli |
The ‘ultimate prize’
THE question most often asked these days is why the US is continuing with its occupation of Iraq. Why is US President Bush so adamant? Almost all opinion polls in the US and in the outside world show an overwhelming number of people thoroughly disillusioned with the Iraq war. Even the Democrat-controlled US Congress has expressed its opposition. Leading Republicans seem to be breaking ranks with the President almost daily, although not enough to give the Senate or the House of Representatives the veto power. The US alone has suffered over 3500 dead and 25,000 injured with about $500 billion spent since the invasion. And yet the occupation continues. The answer is not far to seek Sometime in 1999, speaking at a function in London, Mr Dick Cheney, the present US Vice-President, said that governments and national oil companies controlled about 90 per cent of the world’s oil assets. He went on to highlight, “while many regions of the world offer great oil opportunities, the Middle-East with two-thirds of the world’s oil and the lowest cost is still where the prize ultimately lies.” Earlier US administrations had also recognised this truism, as can be seen from numerous National Security Directives issued by successive US Presidents. True to Mr Cheney’s word, the present US administration has never faltered in pursuing this prize! It was in the early 1900s that the great strategic value of oil was first recognised. At that time British realised that the US-based oilfields were on the decline and, in any case, most of the production would be required for the growing US economy. Therefore, not enough would be available for export for the needs of the British Empire. The British were aware of the great potential that existed in the Middle-East. An added advantage was that it was close to India and thus could easily be policed and dominated with the help of the British Indian troops. Utilising the opportunity created by World War-I, the British quickly drove out the Ottoman Turks from this area. They could now carve out new states from the defunct Ottoman Empire to suit their imperial interests. It goes to the credit of Sir Maurice Hankey, the Secretary of the Imperial War Cabinet, who realised the importance of oil and the need to secure for the British the Ottoman provinces of Basra, Baghdad and Mosul. Although under the secret Sykes-Picot Agreement, Mosul was to be in the French sphere of influence, the British were determined not to let it go. Earlier on July 30, 1918, Hankey had emphasised that a “proper strategic boundary” would be necessary to cover these areas. As a consequence, British troops were urged to push on and, despite the armistice, captured Mosul. The British were aware that Mosul and Basra were oil-rich areas. Thus was born the new state of Iraq. The British, relying on the tried and tested methods of governance that they had evolved and perfected in their Indian Empire, now set out to fashion the new state of Iraq. Its boundaries were fixed taking into account British imperial interests alone. Most promises made to the Arabs on self-governance to win their support in ousting the Ottomans were soon forgotten. A new ruler, a Sunni Arab, was installed on the throne of Iraq, after a sham referendum. Thankful to the British, the new king was happy to let British interests prevail on most matters! Any dissent was ruthlessly put down. The British were the first to introduce the concept of using mustard gas and aerial bombing of hapless civilians in Iraq. Having installed a ruler of choice, the British set out to exploit the oil resources of Iraq. Swiftly, the Iraq Petroleum Company, owned by British interests, was set up and given most of the concessions to exploit, produce and market Iraqi oil on very favourable terms. The British were now reasonably secure in the belief that they “controlled” nearly 50 per cent of the world’s proven oil reserves. This was largely the position that obtained when World War-II broke out. At the end of the War, Britain was replaced by the US as the principal Western power in the region. The US strategic interests were practically the same, except in one vital sense. The US also carried the additional baggage of protecting the newly formed state of Israel. Thus, apart from desiring unfettered access to the oil wealth of the region, the US was also keen to ensure that no Arab ruler emerged strong enough to challenge Israel. The safety and security of Israel has been one of the prime objectives of successive US Presidents. But why is Iraqi oil so important? And why is it necessary to have a “friendly” leader in position in Baghdad? Generally speaking, three reasons are given. Firstly, Iraqi oil is plentiful. It is estimated that Iraq sits on nearly 112 billion barrels of oil. A large area in Iraq is yet to be fully surveyed and it is said that it might even contain more oil than anticipated. Secondly, most of Iraq’s oil wealth sits just below the surface (about 600 metres) and is thus very easy to exploit. Consequently, the cost of production in Iraq is only about $ 1 per barrel! If we compare it with the cost of production elsewhere in the world, the Iraqi figure is truly astounding. Thirdly, the quality of oil is extraordinarily good. It contains very few impurities and is thus very easy to refine and market. And it is expected to last well into the next century! Of the big four Arab states, Iraq not only has vast reserves of oil, but, as a result of the Euphrates-Tigris river system, also has sustainable agriculture. It can feed itself. It is also not overburdened with a large population. Its people were the best educated and most technologically advanced in the Arab world. In comparison, Saudi Arabia has oil, but no sweet water resources and too small an indigenous population. Egypt has the Nile, but hardly any significant oil reserves and is burdened with a huge population. Syria has neither oil nor any other significant resources. Is it any wonder then why Iraq is so eagerly sought after. So long as Saddam Hussein was “amenable” and helped in protecting the US interests, he could do no wrong. Most of his misdemeanours were overlooked. Saddam was always described as “authoritarian”, but never a “butcher”, “murderer”, etc. The latter epithets were only reserved for him after he invaded Kuwait. Stepping out of line meant removal. This was what Saddam was to discover to his cost in Iraq. If he had been aware of history he would have noticed that a similar fate befell his predecessor, Brig. Qassem, and Prime Minister Mossedeg in Iran in 1953 when they dared to step out of line. Thus, with the “ultimate prize” within its grasp, however tenuous, the US is not about to give up on it just yet! Even the Baker-Hamilton report only calls for a “phased withdrawal” and none of the present Democratic presidential contenders has advocated a full and complete pullout immediately. A phased withdrawal would also mean that Iraq would have to be suitably “pacified”
first.
The writer is a former Ambassador of India to Iraq. |
Love story
As most Bollywood-wallahs proclaim before the release of their film, my story is zara hatke, so here goes…. My happily married, and dare I add middle-aged, colleague with two grown-up daughters has a girlfriend. She lives in a flat in his neighbourhood, in fact the same building where he resides. Well, the “love affair” has been going on right in front of the eyes of his wife and daughters, of whom one is also married (and by that you can guess the age of this colleague). Now how this affair began is difficult to explain. “It just happened one day….we started meeting and since then it has continued,” he says. So the situation now is that every evening this girlfriend of his patiently waits for him to come back from office so that she can sit in his lap for a cosy chat and sip a warm bowl of soup, prepared by his very devoted wife. And to top it all, the girlfriend considers the hour she shares every evening with him ‘her time’ and vehemently objects if he dares to answer a call on his landline, or mobile, or share it with his wife and daughters, let alone any other human being. The colleague’s wife doesn’t mind her husband sharing evenings with his girlfriend. In fact, the lady dutifully carries on with the job of preparing soup every evening to serve it to her husband and his girlfriend on time. The bottom-line is that his girlfriend is totally devoted to him, so much so that she objects even if he talks to people from his own sex, little boys as well. “The other day a cousin’s son was talking to me and she told me to send him away, saying she doesn’t like him,” the colleague said, while instructing another colleague not to call him up in the evenings”. She gets upset yaar…doesn’t like anyone encroaching upon ‘her time’,” he explained. Now before women and human rights groups start protesting outside my esteemed colleague’s home, let me clarify a few details — first and foremost the age of this girlfriend. Well, the girl is precisely four years old, studies in pre-nursery and is “involved” with this colleague a la “Cheeni Kum” style. Remember Amitabh Bachchan’s girlfriend “Sexy” in the movie. Well, my zara-hatke love story proves that anything that happens in reel-life can also happen in real life. Also that some of us are well and truly blessed. After all, to be able to evoke devotion and love in a small child, and someone who is not even related to you, can be nothing but a true blessing from
God. |
Support Burma’s cry for democracy IT is hard to believe the extraordinary courage of tens of thousands of Burmese people, led by Buddhist monks, who continue to protest peacefully across Burma against the savage, bestial regime which terrorises its people. Images of saffron robes filling the streets of at least 25 towns and cities in Burma are nothing short of inspirational.
At long last Burma, one of the world’s most under-reported human rights tragedies has begun to claim the attention of politicians. I returned last week from a visit to the India-Burma border, with the human rights charity Christian Solidarity Worldwide and my Parliamentary colleague Caroline Cox. I heard tales of unimaginable brutality. I met people from Chin State in western Burma who had fled for their lives bearing tales of daily fear and misery-a cocktail of torture, killings, forced labour and rape, combined with more insidious policies of forced marriage, religious persecution and cultural genocide served up by the military. I met a boy who had been abducted by Burma Army soldiers when he was just three years old. His father was an opposition activist, and had escaped from jail. As bait, the regime held this boy in a cell with no windows and a mud floor in an army camp for eight hours. He was given neither food nor water. That is an example of the depths to which this despicable regime will plunge in order to cling onto its ill-gotten gains. The litany of terror does not end there. I met a man whose son had been beaten and tortured so badly that he is now paralysed. Another man described how he had been hung upside down and tortured all night, his body swung repeatedly against a pillar. While the regime’s tactics may vary subtly throughout the country, its character is consistent. It has no compunction whatsoever about raping, torturing and killing its people. Prior to my journey last week, I have made two visits to the Thai-Burmese border in the past three years. There I met children who had seen their parents killed in front of them, and parents who had seen their children killed in front of them. I met people who had endured excruciating water torture. I heard tales of people who had been used as human minesweepers, forced to walk across fields of landmines. Burma’s junta is guilty of every conceivable human rights violation. It has the highest number of forcibly conscripted child soldiers in the world. It spends more than 40 per cent of its budget on the military, and less than 60p per person per year on health and education combined. Since 1996, the regime has destroyed more than 3,000 villages in eastern Burma alone. More than a million people have been forced to flee their villages, and are on the run in the jungle without adequate food, medicine or shelter. British Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s statement on Monday is to be welcomed. For the second time in two weeks, the Prime Minister has turned his attention to Burma. He has called for “immediate international action”. His attention is unprecedented. No previous prime minister has specified action on Burma. British Foreign Secretary, David Miliband, has called for Nobel Laureate Aung San Suu Kyi to be allowed to take “her rightful place” as Burma’s elected leader. Her party, the National League for Democracy, overwhelmingly won the 1990 elections-but the illegitimate military regime rejected the results, imprisoned the victors and intensified its grip on power. Now there are signs that that grip may be weakening. But fine words from world leaders are not enough. An urgent, explicit and robust challenge to the butchers of Rangoon is a vital prerequisite of progress. Most importantly, the UN Security Council must address the crisis in Burma. Yesterday Buddhist monks marched to the UN offices in Rangoon, pleading for the Security Council to act. A binding resolution should be passed, setting out specific benchmarks, accompanied by deadlines, which the regime should meet. These include freeing Aung San Suu Kyi, releasing political prisoners, and starting meaningful dialogue with the National League for Democracy and the ethnic national groups about the transition to free and fair elections. The junta must be left in no doubt that it will be targeted as a pariah state if it does not comply. The EU should strengthen its measures. Current EU sanctions are symbolic but they do not bite. Stopping European companies from investing in a pineapple juice factory is laughable when the junta is propped up instead by a surge of funds into the oil, gas and gem sectors. Such investment must be banned. Agreement on a stronger EU common position is desirable but, without it, the UK should act unilaterally. Burma’s neighbours should play their part too. India has until now pursued a policy that is both immoral and irresponsible. Refusing to criticise the regime, India has instead provided arms and military training. How can that be, in the nation of Gandhi and Nehru? Similarly, China and the Association of South-East Asian Nations must be prevailed upon to end their complicity with the thugs in Burma. One man summed up his country to me last week: “We have no freedom. People always live in fear. We are prisoners in our own country. We urgently need democracy.” The world urgently needs to hear that cry – and respond. By arrangement with The Independent |
Bhagat Singh’s thoughts on love LIFE is very lovely, but it must be made lovelier still.” No one can even imagine that Bhagat Singh, who uttered such beautiful words and possessed greater beauty as a person, who was everybody’s darling and the prince of martyrs, could ever be in love himself. The immortal Bhagat Singh was an extremely pleasant, lively, innocent and emotional person. Always humming some tune, this young man would have probably become an emotional poet, a sensitive writer, a tender singer or even a philosopher, if he had not been hanged. There was a rare grace in the way he ate, dressed and carried himself. Apart from mere external good looks and neatness, a sense of inner beauty and orderliness was deep rooted in him. He did not eschew external filthiness as much as he disliked inner slime. A lovely girl, who was studying in college and who always smiled at Bhagat Singh, joined the revolutionary party only because of him. When the issue of throwing a bomb in the Assembly was being discussed in the party meeting, the whole party said that the party was greatly in need of Bhagat Singh and they refused even to accept the possibility of some other name being considered for the mission. Closest to Bhagat Singh in those days was Sukhdev. Sukhdev said: “You don’t want to throw the bomb because of the girl. You are afraid to die. You love her...” Sukhdev frequently used to engage Bhagat Singh in discussion on women, love and sexual relations. But this accusation broke Bhagat Singh’s heart. Though a deeply emotional person, Bhagat Singh was also a studious, thinking young man who had a balanced and sophisticated mind. That night he wrote a letter to Sukhdev, which articulated his balanced views on women, love and tender human sensibilities. We must be grateful to Sukhdev. Had he not provoked or taunted Bhagat, we would have been deprived of the views of a scintillating revolutionary and brilliant philosopher on such delicate subjects as ‘love’ and ‘woman’. Bhagat Singh insisted on getting his name approved. Just before going to throw the bomb in the Assembly, he wrote this significant letter to Sukhdev on April 05, 1929... “Dear Brother: By the time you receive this letter I will be gone, going to a far off destination. Let me assure that I am prepared for the voyage in spite of all the sweet memory and in spite of all the charms of my life here. Up to this day one thing pinched in my heart and it was this that my brother, my own brother, misunderstood and accused me of a very serious charge – the charge of weakness. Today I am quite satisfied, today more than ever do I feel that was nothing, but a misunderstanding, a wrong calculation. I must say that I cannot help arguing once again my case in the matter under discussion. Again do I emphasise that I am full of ambition and hope and of full charm of life. But I can renounce all at the time of need, and that is the real sacrifice. These things can never be a hindrance in the way of man, provided he be a man. You will have the practical proof in the near future. While discussing anybody’s character you asked me one thing, whether love ever proved helpful to any man. Yes, I answer that question today. To Mazzini it was. You must have read that after the utter failure and crushing defeat of his first rising he could not bear the misery and haunting ideas of his dead comrades. He would have gone mad or committed suicide but for one letter of a girl he loved. He would as strong as any one, nay stronger than all. As regards the moral status of love I may say that it in itself is nothing BUT PASSION, not an animal passion but a human one, and very sweet too. Love in itself can never be an animal passion. Love always elevates the character of man. It never lowers him, provided love be love. You can’t call these girls – mad people, as we generally see in films – lovers. They always play in the hands of animals passions. The true love cannot be created. It comes of its own accord, nobody can say when. It is but natural. And I may tell you that a young man and a young girl can love each other, and with the aid of their love they can overcome the passions themselves and can maintain their purity. I may clear one thing here; when I said that love has human weakness, I did not say it for an ordinary human being at this stage, where the people generally are. But that is the most idealistic stage when man would overcome all these sentiments, the love, the hatred, and so on. When man will take reason as the sole basis of his activity. But at present it is not bad, rather good and useful to man. And moreover while rebuking love, I rebuked the love of one individual for one, and that too in idealistic stage. And even then, man must have the strongest feelings of love which he may not confine to one individual and may make it universal. And may I, without fear at all or misapprehension in my mind, request you do kindly lower the standard of your over-idealism a bit, not to be harsh to those who will live behind and will be the victims of a disease as myself ? Don’t rebuke them and thus add to their woes and miseries. They need your sympathy. But you cannot realise these things unless and until you yourself fall a victim to this...Wish you all success and happy life. Yours, B. S.”
The writer is Sr. Director Programmes, DD Bharati |
Legal Notes The Supreme Court has taken note of the ongoing conflict between the high courts and the state Public Service Commissions (PSC) on selection and appointment of judicial officers in the subordinate courts, as the conflict is resulting in vacancies not being filled in time. The problem has mainly arisen after a resolution passed by the high courts’ Chief Justices in a conference earlier, laying down that the exams for the appointment of judicial officers should be done solely by the high court administration. The PSCs in a majority of the states has taken it as a challenge to their authority and encroachment upon their powers. The stand of the PSCs is that they are entities established under the Constitution, given power to make all public appointments, including the judicial officers, while the essence of the Chief Justices’ conference was that the commissions, which effectively function under the control of the states, have not been able to meet the demands of the judiciary. Though the Supreme Court is seized of a case relating to the judicial officers’ appointment, a bench headed by Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan has asked the Centre, high courts and state governments to resolve the issue amicably with mutual understanding, while hearing a case relating to appointments in Tamil Nadu, where some 78 posts of lower court judges are vacant. As per the available data, 2,768 posts of judges are presently laying vacant in the subordinate judiciary all over the country. States slow on police reforms Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI), an NGO functioning under the aegis of the UN Economic and Social Council programmes and taking deep interest in police reforms in the country, has taken strong exception to most of the states diluting the Supreme Court’s seven-point directives on firming up the police administration. Many have not even taken steps to pass a model police Act to replace the centuries-old, outdated laws regulating police force. So far eight states – Assam, Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Kerala and Tripura – have followed the apex court directives to put in place the law relating to police reforms, while the legislations pertaining to it were at the drafting stage in Andhra Pradesh, Arunachal Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir, Jharkahand, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Manipur, Orissa, Punjab, Rajasthan, Sikkim, Tamil Nadu and West Bengal. CHRI says no information was available whether any initiatives had been taken by the remaining states of Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Maharashtra, Mizoram, Meghalya, Nagaland and Goa. The Centre has to formulate the law for the Union Territories. A study done by CHRI says that though the real impact of poor policing is directly on the public, the state governments have not sought any input from people and social organisations. The apex court had earlier rejected the petitions of some states for review of its judgement ordering overhaul of police administration to overcome modern day challenges. Spurt in medical admission cases The casual approach of state governments in dealing with matters relating to admission in professional institutions, particularly medical and dental colleges with high stakes for students, has resulted in a sudden spurt in admissions-related cases in the Supreme Court. The academic session in medical colleges has to start from October, and students have been either denied admission due to wrong application of rules or have faced authorities raising certain technical questions while remaining insensitive to their problems. The students have no option but to approach the court, several lawyers pleading their cases say. They say that the authorities are mostly unresponsive and simply not ready to listen to students’ problems. This is putting heavy burden on them as they have to shell out a hefty fee to the lawyers in spite of risking admission changes. This is really taxing them heavily, when the fee in medical and dental colleges, especially those in the private sector, is very high. The minimum fee charged by an apex court lawyer per hearing is in the range of Rs 30,000 and if the relief is not forthcoming in the first or second hearing, the cost to be inflicted on students could be very high. |
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 | |