 |
|
Deal in coma Pact with Benazir |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Televoyeuristic channel Muck in the name of ‘public interest’ THE judicial inquiry ordered by the Himachal Pradesh High Court has given a clean chit to former HP tourism minister G.S. Bali who was caught on camera by a private TV channel allegedly dancing with bar girls at a party organised to celebrate his birthday.
Don’t kill the N-deal
Direction device
Build an energy-efficient India China not a threat but a promise States want to modify
RTI Act
|
Deal in coma THE India-US civil nuclear deal is almost dead. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has informed US President George Bush about the difficulties it has run into. Four days earlier, he and United Progressive Alliance chief Sonia Gandhi said in unmistakable terms that they were not prepared to forsake the government for the sake of the deal. They came to this conclusion following the realisation that the Left parties supporting the government would not compromise on their opposition to the deal. And when the Congress’ allies like the NCP, the DMK and the Rashtriya Janata Dal made it clear that they favoured junking the deal to facing an immediate election, the two leaders decided to complete the full term of the government, rather than risk an election at this juncture. In retrospect, Manmohan Singh’s plain talk to the Left in an interview to The Telegraph and Sonia Gandhi’s stout defence of the deal at a public rally in Haryana were all “sound and fury signifying nothing”. From the beginning this newspaper has defended the nuclear deal on the ground that nuclear energy was indispensable for sustaining the country’s economic growth rate and also because it opened up new opportunities in science, technology and agriculture. However, while spending over three years of governmental energy, first in inking the deal and then defending it, the government was clueless about the kind of opposition it would encounter from within the political parties supporting it. It either underestimated the rigidity of the Left or overestimated its own ability to bring it around. As DMK chief M. Karunanidhi has revealed, the UPA was not even united when it came to pursuing the nuclear deal to its logical conclusion. Consequently, the government had to suffer embarrassment after embarrassment in its bid to operationalise the 123 Agreement. Even if elections are advanced for one reason or another, the ruling party does not seem to have the political conviction to make the nuclear deal the mainstay of its campaign. It already fears that some sections of its traditional voters like the minorities would not take kindly to the deal. Besides, there is little to believe that a one-party rule will become a reality in the foreseeable future. All this implies that it would be virtually impossible to resurrect the nuclear deal. Under these circumstances, the country will have to think of alternatives to deal with the growing energy requirements.
|
|
Pact with Benazir PAKISTAN President Gen Pervez Musharraf appears to be having second thoughts on operationalising the unsigned deal he had entered into with PPP leader Benazir Bhutto. This can be inferred from his government asking her to put off her plan to return home. Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz has also stated that she will be dealt with according to the law of the land despite the National Reconciliation Ordinance issued by the General, exonerating Ms Bhutto from the charges levelled against her. The ordinance idea was part of the General’s grand strategy to win the presidential poll with the PPP’s help and, in return, allowing Ms Bhutto to come back to Pakistan and share power with the Musharraf-backed PML (Q) and its allies after the coming general election. General Musharraf is, perhaps, unable to bear the mounting pressure from the leaders of the ruling alliance who see in the deal with Ms Bhutto a threat to their own political survival. They know it too well that any arrangement with her will mean a secondary role for them in the new government that may be formed after the January 2008 elections. The General’s position may also get weakened if the growing turmoil in the ruling camp leads to large-scale desertions. In fact, that may be suicidal for the General particularly when he will have to shed his “second skin” --- the post of army chief --- which has helped him retain power so far. Besides this, the PML(Q) may find it difficult to explain to the electorate what prompted the General to grant amnesty to the PPP leader. The failure of the deal to fructify will be a serious blow to Ms Bhutto’s plans. She has already been facing opposition from her party ranks to the idea of signing an accord with a military dictator. She had been accused of indulging in opportunism to bail out the military ruler when he was passing through the most difficult period of his rule. Ms Bhutto, who reportedly got her public following eroded considerably after agreeing to joining the Musharraf camp, may suffer more if the General ultimately backs out of the promises he is believed to have made to her. |
|
Televoyeuristic channel THE judicial inquiry ordered by the Himachal Pradesh High Court has given a clean chit to former HP tourism minister G.S. Bali who was caught on camera by a private TV channel allegedly dancing with bar girls at a party organised to celebrate his birthday. But the news channel that telecast the clips has been severely indicted for doctoring them. Justice O.P. Garg, a former Judge of the Allahabad High Court, who conducted the inquiry, has also raised serious doubts whether any “larger public interest” was involved in the sting operation and its telecast. The inquiry reportedly expressed apprehension that it was done at the behest of some agencies inimical to Mr Bali. The case is illustrative of a fairly widespread misuse of the media for political purposes. TV channels become a willing tool in this sinister game. They are more than willing to sell their soul to the devil for the sake of popularity ratings. The end result is that the dividing line between public interest and commercial interest has been totally blurred. Sting operations have particularly degenerated into devices of blackmail and arm-twisting. The mushrooming of TV channels has ensured that far too many reporters are vying for the viewers’ attention. To fill in round-the-clock telecast time, and to prevent the viewers from flipping channels, they think they have to lace their offerings with a liberal dose of salacious stuff. That is bad enough, but there is more. When they don’t find it, they invent it, as was done by a Delhi TV journalist who concocted a tale that a schoolteacher was pushing her students into prostitution. Electronic media is still in its infancy. If it indulges in such practices at this stage, its growth will be stunted. It is not as if the print media is 100 per cent blame-free. There are bad pennies there too. The good ones must come together to make sure that they do not bring a bad name to the whole profession. |
|
The dawn of legibility in his handwriting has revealed his utter inability to spell.
|
Don’t kill the N-deal
THE coming conclave(s) between the UPA government and the Left on October 22 and thereafter will to a large extent decide the fate of the Indo-US civilian nuclear accord. As of now, the impasse continues; the fate of the civilian nuclear agreement hangs in the balance. That is, unless the CPM and its Left allies do a rethinking — or at least readjustment — of their posture vis-à-vis the nuclear accord. There are two aspects of this issue: one, the Indo-US nuclear agreement per se, and, two, the United States power play and diplomacy covertly linked to the nuclear accord. For fructification, the most important need is decoupling the presumed linkage between the nuclear accord and the US foreign policy power play. The Left has to re-examine its position on both aspects. The UPA side, too, has to bend on the second aspect, and play a more effective role in convincing the Left on the full value of the agreement for India’s energy security and the economy of this country. On the other hand, the UPA government has to come forth categorically on the impact of the agreement on India’s foreign policy. It is worth having a second look at both aspects of the Indo-US civilian nuclear agreement. While the CPM leaders have not explicitly opposed the nuclear accord as such, they have downgraded its vast import for India by giving interpretations based on incorrect evaluation, stemming partly from incorrect information. In the first place, the worth of the agreement is considerably diminished if it is seen only — or mainly — as an Indo-US accord on civil nuclear cooperation. In fact, the most important aspect of the nuclear accord is that it removes the barriers for India’s nuclear interaction with the world as a whole — in nuclear trade — and, no less important, in keeping pace with advancing nuclear science and technology. As IAEA Director-General ElBaradei emphasised the consequence of the nuclear accord would be to end the stifling sanctions regime and bring India into the global nuclear mainstream. Equally outstanding is the de facto recognition of India as a nuclear-weapon state. The IAEA will seal what is already encased in the agreement, India’s status as a weapon state with all the benefits and duties that this implies. A notable feature of the nuclear accord is that there will be no tampering with India’s military facilities and the full range of facilities and operations outside the safeguards. The value and importance of this facet on India’s security concerns can hardly be over-emphasised. Another notable issue on which there is lack of clarity is the IAEA safeguards, as stipulated in the agreement. This is an issue that is widely misinterpreted. The India-specific safeguards are not a halter round the neck of the Indian nuclear programme. In fact, the safeguards are a two-faced process — beneficial to India in the prevailing scenario, on the understanding that all indigenous or imported reactors placed within safeguards must be ensured adequate uranium fuel. The American desire for widening the safeguards net is to ensure that imported nuclear material is not diverted to India’s military programme. India has no need for this, since its credible nuclear deterrent is adequately ensured with fuel, fissile plutonium, and R&D facilities, all outside the safeguards. Moreover, the agreement embodies the understanding that India is free to build any facilities for its security concerns, outside the safeguards area. There is some questioning on future fast breeders — other than the Fast Breeder Test Reactor, operational for nearly a decade, and the prototype 500 MW fast breeder under construction. That future fast breeders have to be built within safeguards is essential for India’s long-term indigenous programme, since the plutonium-uranium mixed fuel for fast breeders can come only by reprocessing the spent fuel from the reactors within the safeguards. The reverse is also true. If future fast breeders are not built within the safeguards, where will the plutonium from the reprocessed spent fuel from reactors within the safeguards be used? These and all other vital aspects of India’s nuclear programme, such as the right to reprocess spent fuel from reactors, have been fully protected in the course of tenuous, hard-fought negotiations under the watchful eye of the Indian nuclear establishment. And India has scored on all aspects, the only concession being on the American law of buying back its nuclear material in the event of a rupture. But here, too, there are adequate counter-points: India has to be ensured adequate compensation and alternate fuel supplies; India need not buy US reactors exclusively, and go in for Russian and French reactors, not subject to hazards. India can also stipulate financial terms for purchases which negate possible US unwarranted actions. A close look is needed on the second facet, namely the impact of the agreement on India’s foreign policy. In other words, the CPM’s anxiety is that American imperialism has no altruism for handing over goodies without extracting a price. Will India have to be a tail of American policy — for instance, vis-à-vis Iran? The answer has to be an emphatic ‘no’, and the Left has to be unambiguously assured on this score. India will emerge stronger from the nuclear accord and, therefore, better able to assert its independent foreign policy. If China could do it — the Indian 123 Agreement is better than China’s — why not India? Dr ElBaradei is another example of self-assertion against wayward American foreign policy intrusions. He asserted on Iraq, though Washington overruled his findings. He has done the same on the issue of Iran, asserting the need for negotiations and diplomacy rather than the use of force. To the demand of US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice that he should stick to his domain of technicalities and refrain from diplomacy in dealings with Iran, he has rebutted that his United Nation’s mandate impelled him to use both diplomacy and the technical apparatus under his care. He continues to be assertive — and thereby render a great service to humanity. While it is true that the CPM’s ideological positions on the world today are out of place, it would be dangerous to ignore the follies that US foreign policy under Mr George Bush is capable of. Vietnam is now history, but the havoc and devastation wrought in Iraq and for the global economy can hardly be forgotten. Should such a folly be repeated in Iran, and if so, will India be a passive watcher? The Left has a right to be assured on this count. The ultra-strong stand taken by the Left on the Indo-US nuclear deal can, in fact, prove useful. It helps the UPA government to reject extraneous demands of Washington in regard to Iran or other international issues. The strategic partnership between India and the US cannot be at the expense of India’s national interests or directed at countries such as Russia and China. The India-China relationship has to be built bilaterally, sorting out the issues between the two countries. So, in the balance, the CPM has a great opportunity — not to obstruct the Indo-US nuclear agreement provided the UPA government gives the necessary assurance on foreign policy orientation. The Left can at any time bring down the government if it goes back on the assurances. The nuclear accord, however, should fructify — it is a great boon to India not only in meeting its medium and long-term energy security but also in boosting the Indian economy as a whole, and giving Indian science and technology a great spurt. n
The writer specialises on nuclear issues and is the author of a book, “India’s Tryst with History”.
|
Direction device
Technology may actually steer some authors and social commentators to rewrite their works. The driver navigation system, powered by GPS satellites, that's all set to hit our city roads is a leap in vehicular sophistication that could accelerate literary upgradation. For, nothing could upset certain basic premises of works like John Gray's “Men are from Mars and Women are from Venus” or Richard C. Francis' “Why Men Don't Ask for Directions…” than a male population who won't need human assistance in navigating the streets. Now, that would call for rewriting of the rules of male and female behaviour in such gadget-enabled driving conditions. Hardly is there a couple for whom the car hasn't been a seat of squabbling. Nothing quite races a relationship to braking point than a girl saying “left” and the guy turning “right” to show he's right, and both ultimately going, where else? — their separate ways. Or, if they're matrimonially affixed co-travellers, down the sulk route. The unsolicited direction dispensing by the female and its determined resistance by the male has been the roadmap for many a car conversation. Now, those darned machines are set to usurp from the Eves their right to geo-positionary prattle. Henceforth, digital devices will do this talking. But, it's advantage Adams. Glad tidings for the male ego. Simply no need to ask for directions. Little chance, hence, of the blokes appearing directionally challenged. What better to keep the collective male self-esteem in good running condition than touch-screen companions instead of touchy ones. If road conduct gets redefined, can lexical revision be far behind. Gizmo mapping may spell the end of the road for “backseat driving” and like terms. And prove a blessing for the entire fraternity that populates our roadsides —the rickshawwaalas, puncturewalas, mochis, nais, et al. Digital car maps will be a boon for their naps. No longer will their siestas be interrupted by pesky honks-honks. No geographically disoriented travellers pestering them with: Arre bhaiya, yeh 1090 kahan padega? No scope too of contrary counsel compounding the confusion: the “mochi” pointing hither, the cyclewala thither, causing the driver to dither. But it'll not all be a smooth ride. The PDAs won't be programmed to warn you against those four-legged strollers who dart on to Indian roads with scant regard for traffic etiquette — the stray cattle. Boo to gizmo sophistication! So, while techies are driven to chew on these bovine challenges, writers can gear up for reprints or sequels: Why Women Look in Opposite Direction When Men Talk To their Digital Partners…. |
Build an energy-efficient India India is a country of extreme weather. It has large regions with burning hot seasons in summer and freezing cold winters. Buildings have very little resistance to outside temperatures. When ice cold winds strike exterior surfaces of a building, the inside becomes ice cold. In the same way, when the sizzling hot sun hits the walls and the roofs, the inside turns into a hot furnace. With current construction methods with plentiful use of concrete, steel and brick in-fills, there is very little resistance to transference of extreme temperatures from outside to inside the buildings. Windows are mostly steel framed with thin plate glass and often leaky, providing virtually no resistance to outside temperatures and wind blasts. In order to create comfortable living conditions in extreme weather, we must therefore insulate the inside of buildings from outside temperatures as much as possible. The more the building is insulated and the more the resistance to outside temperatures, the more comfortable is the living environment inside the building. This resistance factor is commonly known as the R factor. The R value indicates insulation resistance to heat flow. High R value means that resistance of heat transfer from outside to inside would be high. Metal has zero R value. One inch thick concrete has R value of only 0.3 while one inch thick wood has value of 0.91. One inch fiber glass has value of 3.9 while sprayed polyurethane has R value of 6.88. Four inch of expanded polystyrene would provide R value of 16. Just one inch of insulation is equal to 30 inches of concrete in its R value. Use of non-toxic, non-pollutant polyurethane and expanded polystyrene panels is common in the colder climates of the western world to save on energy cost of heating and cooling. Temperature transfer takes place from walls, roofs, windows, doors, fireplaces, vents, water and drainage lines, air conditioning openings and air conditioning units. People cover themselves, with layers of clothes from head to toe, to keep warm in winter and in summer people use very light clothes. Buildings are similar to people. The walls and roofs of a building should be insulated with temperature resistance materials, roofs should be made into “cool roofs” reflecting and emitting sun’s heat back to the sky instead of transferring it to the building below. The other option is to have a garden on the roof. The soil and plants keep heat in during the winter and reduce heat gains during summer. The soil is about 8”to 12” thick and the plants are mostly succulents to reduce the need for frequent watering. Windows should be vinyl or wooden framed with insulated double-glazing with low e-coating to fit tightly with zero leakage. Doors should be thick wood or insulated metal, tightly fitting into frames. Water and drainage lines should be insulated. Air conditioning openings should be air tight and so on. In short, the building should be well-designed, well-detailed and well-built with strong emphasis on a comfortable living environment. An energy efficient building saves on electricity bills by reducing summer cooling bills and winter heating bills. It reduces air pollution and smog formation. It reduces the heat “island effect” in cities and suburbs. An urban heat island is an invisible dome of hot air that heats cities up to 8 to10 degrees hotter than the surrounding countryside. Unfortunately, the building industry has not kept pace with available technologies in India. Windows are still being manufactured the way these were 50 years back. Non-toxic, environmentally friendly insulating panels are not being manufactured for common use in the building construction industry. Architects, engineers, developers and builders do not seem to show any interest in making homes and buildings energy efficient. There is not much awareness of the potential savings in use of electricity by insulating walls, coating roof surfaces, using air tight windows with insulated and reflective glass, weather-stripping exterior doors and so on. One would think that electricity, which is such a dire commodity in the country, would be used more effectively and prudently. Yet, there are no city codes in the entire country, which stipulate energy-efficient construction that result in saving of electricity. The Government of India has not set any standards for energy-efficient buildings. India boasts of having the world’s largest programme for renewable energy of for its needs such as biogas, biomass, wind energy, solar power, hydro power and so on. India has made impressive strides in production in each of these areas. But has there been a focus on saving of use of energy through efficient use in buildings, in manufacturing building products and setting standards of efficiency in appliances? Buildings consume a substantial portion of overall energy production. The U.S Department of Energy’s Building Technology Program has set a research goal of making commercial zero energy buildings marketable by the year 2025. Currently, an assessment of the commercial sector to evaluate the technical potential for meeting this goal based on possible technology improvements for year 2025 is being conducted. China is building communities of housing which are to be the cleanest, most energy-efficient structures in China or anywhere in the world.
The writer is an architect-planner living in Southern California |
|
China not a threat but a promise THE conventional wisdom is that China is rising and the United States is on its way down. According to this view, the 21st-century challenge for US foreign policy is to manage its inevitable decline as gracefully as possible as the new superpower of the East reaches for the stars. The conventional wisdom almost always sounds smart – and almost always is wrong. The US doesn’t need to contain China, and it doesn’t need to fight China either. Nor does it need to prepare to gracefully let China replace the United States as the world’s leading power. The first reason is simple. The rise of China is only part of a much bigger story – the rise of Asia. China isn’t ascending in a vacuum, destined to dominate its region the way the US dominates the Western Hemisphere – or the way Germany once tried to dominate Europe. China is rising, but so is India. So are Vietnam, Indonesia, Thailand and Korea (where South and North might be united before too much longer). Japan will remain a powerful economic, military and technological force for the foreseeable future. Taiwan is not sinking into the sea; Australia is prospering as never before. Bangladesh is beginning to industrialize; even Myanmar possibly might follow the road to prosperity through global economic integration that has made East and South Asia growth rates the envy of the world. Some Americans look at this picture and think that the other rising Asian powers can help the US contain China. This is a mistake not only because other Asian countries are uninterested in hostile relations with a rich and powerful country like China but because it looks less and less likely that the US will need to contain Beijing. The new Asia taking shape is too big, too diverse, too independent and too rich for one country to rule. Not China, not the United States, not India. Asia’s Big Three – China, India and Japan – are in rough balance. Any two of them are economically and militarily strong enough to prevent the third from dominating the region. India and Japan could balance China. China and Japan could balance India. And Japan’s dreams of dominating the Pacific died in 1945. With the US also prepared to defend the balance of power in Asia, it seems unlikely that China, or any other nation, will waste time and money in the effort to overturn it. China will continue to modernise its military and test the limits of its power. But for it to build armed forces that could overcome the combined might of the US, India and Japan is not now, and probably never will be, a feasible project. In terms of world power, there will be five big players – the US, the European Union and the Asian Big Three. But of these, the US will continue to play a unique role because it will be a vital part of the Asian balance of power as well as of the European one. In looking to Asia’s future, it’s important to realize that numbers aren’t everything. In 1700, China, India and France all had more people and bigger economies than Britain – but it was Britain that became a world power. The US today is bigger, stronger and richer than Britain ever was; our share of world gross domestic product is three times Britain’s share at its peak. Thanks to the one-child policy, China’s population might have peaked – and the US is still rapidly growing. If demographers are correct, by 2050 there will be about 1.4 billion Chinese (up from 1.3 billion) and about 400 million Americans (up 100 million). The comparison between the two countries is even more dramatic in terms of labor forces. Today, there are about 948 million working-age people in China and about 202 million in the United States. Because of the one-child policy, China’s population will age faster than in the US and, in 2050, there will be about 248 million working-age Americans – and 860 million Chinese. Preoccupied with their own problems and concerns, Americans often miss how serious other countries’ problems are. China’s population crisis means that it will face a greater crisis caring for an elderly population with a smaller work force. The country’s other problems are formidable as well and will keep it busy for decades: cleaning up its environment, developing a financial system that can keep pace with a modernising economy and creating an effective health-care system. Then there is the question of devising a system of government strong enough to administer a country the size of China yet flexible enough to meet local needs – and that allows dissent and political competition but does not fly apart into disunity. There is one other factor at work. Ever since the US moved to rebuild relations with China under President Nixon, it has been trying to persuade China to engage with the international system – to behave more like a “normal” country. That policy over time has been a spectacular success. Although the transition is not yet complete, China has come to believe that its interests are best served by participating in regional organizations and summits and by joining such organizations as the World Trade Organisation. China’s pride at hosting the 2008 Summer Olympics is a sign of how far this transformation has gone. Just 40 years ago, it was news when the Chinese invited a group of Americans to play ping-pong. Now China has the ability – and the will – to host the most high-profile, expensive and complex festival in the world of international sport. Promoting the peaceful development of Asia, ensuring that smaller countries are not threatened by their large neighbors and helping the Asian superpowers to find a set of economic and security relationships that can keep the region peaceful as it passes through the greatest economic and social transformation in world history – those should be the goals of US policy in Asia this century.
The writer is a senior fellow at the US Council on Foreign Relations
By arrangement with LA Times-Washington Post
|
|
States want to modify
RTI Act Information Commissioners of different states meet in New Delhi on Wednesday to assess the implementation of the Right to Information Act since it was launched two years ago. The exercise will involve making suggestions for a revamp to strengthen its implementation. All the State Chief Information Commissioners, state information commissioners and the central information commissioners will call upon Pratibha Patil, the President, apprising her about the developments. Suggestions made for improvement of the Act’s implementation during the interactive session will be compiled and forwarded to the Centre. The meeting will underline the weak links in the Act which could be recast for a possible strengthening. An interactive session will take up autonomy and other administrative matters relating to the commission; effective enforcement of decisions and penal clauses of the Act; future evolution of the RTI regimen; and creation of E-districts, besides other aspects. States have asked whether organisations which are not strictly public authority, but are rendering public services including education, health, banking, electricity supply, can be covered under the Act? If an NGO is registered in one state and working in another, how can a common citizen seek information regarding its work? In the definition clause of the RTI Act, NGOs substantially financed are interpreted by different authorities in a different manner. The matter needs to be clearly defined. It has been pointed out that Under Section 4(1) of the Right to Information Act, it is obligatory for the pubic authorities to maintain all its records duly catalogued and indexed. Under Section 4(b) every public authority is required to publish within 120 days from the enactment of the Act as many as 17 manuals. It has been noticed that the obligations have not been fulfilled by the public authorities and the Act is silent on its enforcement. Andhra Pradesh has sought that Central and State governments must make adequate fiscal allocations for computerisation and connectivity from the central level to district and block levels of the commission. Unless this is done, the implementation of the Act will be constricted and handicapped. The Mizoram Government has pointed out that there are several offices of the public authorities under the central government and located in far flung areas where information officers have not been appointed till date. The Meghalaya government says, “it has been observed that certain citizens request too many questions covering a long period of time under one application. This has posed a great constraint on the PIO to furnish the information within the prescribed time limit”. The Rajasthan government adds: “Although the Act envisages that reason or purpose behind seeking the information will not be asked, this has given rise to undesirable type of applications and applicants. Information Commissioners should have some powers where they can look into the purpose and motive behind seeking the information and should have powers to deny if found to be undesirable or having ulterior motives.” West Bengal has sought that the term “commercial confidence” under Section 8(1) d be defined clearly. Rajasthan has asked for clarification on the terms ‘fiduciary relationship, personal information and third party information’ used in the Act. It has also been pointed out that there was still a latent hostility in the public servants against the act. There is a need to work on developing a changed ethos. |
| 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 | |
