 |
|
Give
N-deal a chance Targeting
a doctor |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Why a
coach?
US concern over Pak
nukes
Cricket
crazy
Religion and politics
don’t mix Maharashtra’s young
mothers Delhi Durbar
|
Give N-deal a chance THE discussion on the Indo-US civil nuclear deal in the Lok Sabha on Wednesday was elucidatory in that the nation has now a clear idea of where the government and the Opposition BJP stand on the issue. For all the ballistics that Leader of Opposition Lal Krishna Advani resorted to, it is transparent that his party’s opposition to the deal is more for the sake of opposition than for substantial reasons. At the end of the day, all that the BJP wants is to renegotiate those clauses in the deal that “encroach” on India’s sovereignty. In other words, it does not want a repudiation at this stage of the deal arrived at through painstaking negotiations spread over two years. While some of his complaints like the government’s failure to evolve a political consensus on the deal are in order, he has, unfortunately, stopped short of admitting that the BJP will support the government if such concerns are addressed. The BJP leader is not alone in expecting the government to elaborate on what the UPA-Left committee on the nuclear deal has decided. All that is known is that the Left parties have allowed the government to discuss with the International Atomic Energy Agency India-specific safeguards with the proviso that they should be taken into confidence before inking any agreement. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has in his intervention made it clear that the 123 Agreement did not take away the right to conduct further tests from India. What this implies is that if at any point of time India feels that Pokharan III is necessary, no power can prevent it from doing so. This categorical assertion — the first since the national debate began — should put to rest speculations about India’s ability to test should an exigency arise. As for Mr Advani’s question about Pokharan III, former Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee had, while announcing Pokharan II to the world, self-imposed a moratorium on testing. It was claimed at that time that the scientists had gained adequate knowledge and had built such a database that there was no necessity for further tests. Even so, no country would like its sovereign right to take such decisions become a casualty of a bilateral agreement. Given this explanation, it is incumbent upon the Opposition not to create any roadblocks in the operationalising of the 123 Agreement which will be in the long-term strategic interest of India, notwithstanding Mr Advan’s sophistry.
|
|
Targeting a doctor The
ostensible purpose of the All-India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) and Post-Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER) Bill 2007 passed by the Rajya Sabha on Wednesday and the Lok Sabha earlier may be to fix the age and tenure of the directors of these two premier medical institutions situated in Delhi and Chandigarh, respectively. But the real purpose is only to fix the head of AIIMS P. Venugopal by law or otherwise at the instance of the recalcitrant Health Minister A. Ramadoss who has been engaged in a running feud with the eminent surgeon. When nothing else worked, the minister has managed to bring in a Bill which will ensure that the heart surgeon will have to bow out. What is worse is that Parliament has gone along with the minister, who is unable to swallow his pride bordering an arrogance, and is hell-bent on throwing out Dr Venugopal. That should be the first time that a Bill has been brought in to show the door to an eminent doctor who has given new life to thousands of people. That is a dangerous precedent unfit for a democracy. Dr Venugopal has challenged the decision, saying that it smacked of mala fide and arbitrariness. Politicians’ depredations have played havoc with the nation’s leading institute. The only way to bring it back on the rails is by giving it autonomy, freeing it from ministerial whims. It should be run by professionals and the government should have nothing to do with its day-to-day affairs. But the new Bill is a step in exactly the opposite direction. It will push AIIMS even further under the thumb of the minister who is not going to be in the saddle all the time. That is an unacceptable situation, particularly when the minister happens to be as erratic as Dr Ramadoss. The PMK representative is not likely to understand on his own that AIIMS is not his personal fiefdom. The Prime Minister may have to intervene to ensure that an institute like AIIMS does not suffer. The doctors of the institute are agitated. But they too should not do anything which inconveniences the public.
|
|
Why a coach? It
says something about the BCCI’s psyche that just when things are going well and team India is winning again, we revive the old bugbear of a foreign coach. Clearly, Indian cricket’s parent organisation has not learnt anything from either Greg Chappell’s tumultuous tenure or subsequent humiliating episodes in the search for a foreign coach. The American pop wisdom of “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” should have applied. Team India posts its first overseas series victory in England in a couple of decades, the first ODI series win against Pakistan at home in a couple of decades, besides picking up the maiden Twenty20 trophy, not to mention a satisfying Test win under new captain Anil Kumble. The BCCI does not seem to be impressed by either great talent in India or its victories. And what do we do? Offer the coach’s position to Gary Kirsten. Primarily, this is not about Kirsten. Why does India need a coach? Do champion players like Sachin Tendulkar and Rahul Dravid need a coach? Does a veteran like Anil Kumble need coaching about strategy or bowling? Why hamper M.S. Dhoni’s fledgling leadership with a coach breathing down his neck? Even a top talent like Virendra Sehwag was more harmed than hindered by a coach. Cricket in the subcontinent has a style and culture all its own, and we have to evolve winning ideas and approaches on our own, to be implemented by home-grown talented cricketers who have shown that they are among the world’s best. This is not the fear of coaches “phoren”. The real problem is that the concept of a foreign coach is something akin to that of a “super Captain,” a mastermind behind the scenes, who can make or break a game, a series, or even the careers of individual players. This is plainly an idea that needs to be given up before Kirsten lands here with his kit and a backpack.
|
|
We have just enough religion to make us hate, but not enough to make us love one another. — Jonathan Swift
|
US concern over Pak nukes AMERICA’S repeated “appeals-cum-warnings” to Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf to lift the emergency and restore democracy have become pathetic cries in the wilderness. For, thanks to the packed and pliant Supreme Court, he has got all he had wanted. Nor, after President George W. Bush’s extraordinary approbation of Musharraf as a “democrat at heart” is Washington likely to do him any harm. However, there is nothing spurious about the United States’ grave concern about the safe custody of the Pakistani nuclear arsenal. In the words of Stratfor, a think tank having close links with the Pentagon, the fear of Pakistani nuclear weapons falling into the hands of jihadi terrorists is keeping US policy makers “awake at night”. For the obvious reason that there is little it can do about it. Musharraf is telling them emphatically that the weapons are “absolutely safe”. All this, one might say, is old hat. The only new element in the situation is that, for the first time in nearly a quarter of a century, some members of the American strategic establishment have begun to admit what they had been denying so far. “America’s own nuclear chickens are coming home to roost”, commented George Perkovich of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and author of a book on India’s nuclear bomb. Other commentators have declared bluntly that for the sake of “short-term gains of getting Pakistan’s cooperation in fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan in the eighties, the US had created a long-term problem for itself about which it was “helpless”. Yet there is no dearth of policy prescriptions. In The New York Times of November 18, Frederick Kagan and Michael O’Hanlon — a former military bureaucrat at the Pentagon and a young security analyst at Brookings respectively — went so far as to advocate “military action” to take over Pakistani nuclear arsenal. There were angry rejoinders. The proposed misadventure, said critics, would require at least a million soldiers. Where would the US find them? Interestingly, on the same day, The Times also published a news item — on which it had sat for three years at the Bush administration’s request — to the effect that over the last four years the US had spent $ 100 million on a secret scheme to train the Pakistanis in improving the security of their nuclear weapons but had denied them some technologies. Islamabad has remained silent on the subject. Stratfor claims that soon after 9/11, Washington had given Islamabad “an ultimatum” that if Pakistan did not allow the United States to “control its nuclear facilities”, the US would be left with no other option but to “destroy these facilities, if necessary with Indian cooperation”. The think tank adds that the American demand was accepted though Musharraf emphatically denies this for “obvious reasons”. Many American sources dispute this. They say that Pakistan accepted the help and gave the US access to some nuclear installations and laboratories but never disclosed the locations at which its nuclear weapons were dispersed and stored. Yet the US at best had knowledge about only a few of these sites, but not of all of them. In any case, these locations can also be changed, and the bottom line is that any action that is seen to be an infraction of Pakistan’s sovereignty would have precisely the opposite of the desired result. It is in this context that policy makers in Washington just do not know what to do and are losing sleep. All of a sudden a large number of influential Americans have started criticising the Bush administration for its “stark failure” to secure from “much-pampered Musharraf” direct access to the most notorious Pakistani nuclear scientist, A. Q. Khan, who is the world’s biggest nuclear proliferator. Ironically, on this score, the most outspoken has been John Bolton, a “neocon” to the core, who was the undersecretary for arms control in the state department and later ambassador to the UN. He had to resign because the Democratic-controlled Congress just would not confirm him. He is demanding that the US must get the custody of Khan who, though nominally under house arrest, lives in luxury and is revered as a national hero. By sheer coincidence not one but three books by American authors have appeared in the midst of the current agonising that expose American “deception” and “duplicity” far more trenchantly than before and in great detail. The most important of these books is “Deception: Pakistan, the United States and the Secret Trade in Nuclear Weapons” by Adrian Levy and Catherine Scot-Clark. The titles of the other two are also self-explanatory: “The Nuclear Jihadist and America” and the “Islamic Bomb: The Deadly Compromise”. The main merit of these books, especially of Deception is that, with inevitably differing emphasis, they reach roughly the same conclusions from which western sources and the Pakistani authorities of all hues have been shying away. First, that A. Q. Khan could not and did not act alone. Successive military chiefs and government leaders colluded in, or at least overlooked, his nefarious activities that earned him the nickname “Nuclear Wal-Mart” that was coined, incidentally, by the Director-General of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Mohammed ElBaradei. From this it follows that neither Musharraf — who is personally involved — nor any other Pakistani leader would permit the Americans to interrogate Khan even in Pakistan leave alone outside. For, he could spill the beans. Strangely, the books do not examine Benazir Bhutto’s role. As the Prime Minister of her country in the nineties, she had visited North Korea at a time when A. Q. Khan was travelling there frequently. Other recipients of Khan’s brisk sales paid in cash; North Korea bartered its missiles for nuclear technology Khan had stolen from Europe. The second incontrovertible conclusion these three books reach damns the United States and Britain for being accomplices of Pakistan despite their overblown rhetoric about nonproliferation. Their intelligence agencies, authors of Deception hammer home, knew a hell of a lot about A. Q. Khan’s dangerous exploits long before “this bitter egomaniacal physicists” was able to sell nuclear technologies and equipment to Iran, Libya and North Korea, but did absolutely nothing to stop him. Jimmy Carter was the first to know what was afoot. Both he and successive presidents indulged in “massive deception” to let Pakistan go ahead with bomb building. On the burning issue of the day, how to prevent Islamic extremists from laying their hands on Pakistan’s nukes, the books offer no hope at
all.
|
Cricket crazy CLEARLY, cricket has lost some of its innocence since the time George Bernard Shaw dismissed it as a “game played by eleven fools and watched by eleven thousand fools”; or when an Archbishop of Canterbury described it as “organised loafing”. Cricket is now not merely a game but a religion, as well as a business. Racial taunts, too, have become a part of the game. In a sub-continent which has spawned four major religious, cricket has become yet another religion. Like religion too, cricket comes in for its share of blood letting. In Jammu, celebrations of the Twenty20 Team India’s triumph acquired a religious overtone which set off disturbances. This was a spillover of the growing radicalisation of the game in the subcontinent. In fact, Bob Wolmer, the Pakistan cricket coach, had complained about the radicalisation of the Pakistani cricket team before his mysterious death at Kingston (Jamaica) after the defeat of Pakistan in the World Cup. His plaint rang true when the Twenty20 Pakistani skipper, Shoaib Malik, thanked hisco-religionists for their support — which no doubt ensured that Pakistan lost the game by only five runs. As the richest cricket association in the world, the BCCI is well-placed to promote the deification of the Men in Blue by handing out massive cash awards to them on their win at Johannesburg. Each Team India member will get Rs 80 lakhs from the BCCI — apart from awards from other quarters —, while Yuvraj Singh will get Rs 1 crore for his 6 sixes in an over, plus a Porsche. This is riches beyond the dreams of avarice. In addition to their takings from the pitch, cricketers earn tons of money by becoming “brand ambassadors” — persuading couch-potatoes that the shaving brush they use is better than other shaving brushes, or that the car they drive is better than other cars. They are mere caricatures as brand ambassadors, but they really rake in the shekels. On the other hand, a paltry 1.6 million dollars is what a Nobel laureate receives (when he wins the Nobel solo) in the evening of his life, for devising a life-saving vaccine or for inventing something like the transistor, which has changed our daily life. Everybody wants to climb on the cricket bandwagon, but there is little justification for Civil Aviation Minister Praful Patel announcing out-of-turn promotions to the cricketers working in Indian Airlines and Air India. It is not as if cricket is a game purely, or mainly, of skill. Its “glorious uncertainty” may see a champion run-getter getting a duck. In recent years, dodges like ball-tampering, doping and match-fixing have been used to reduce some of the glorious uncertainty, with cricketers paying the price for it. Possibly because of the double life they lead, and partly because physical fitness declines in the mid-thirties of life, cricketers suffer premature burn-out. However, they can still aspire to a second innings as team selectors, as members of the BCCI, or as authors of “as-told-to” newspaper columns on cricket. To the original wielders of the willow, cricket was more than a game: it was also a way of life, standing for things like fair-play and the rule of law, as implied in the phrase “It ain’t cricket”! To the non-Englishmen who took over the cricket part of the White Man’s Burden, the game has also been a sort of surrogate nationalism. For example, Brit-Indians root for “their” country when the Indian cricket team wins in Britain. About the best thing that can be said about the game in India is that it is a national unifier, like the Bollywood movie: wherever four Indians are forgathered, there will be five opinions on any one subject, but on cricket they will have only one
opinion!
|
Religion and politics don’t mix One
is horrified over the Punjab government’s decision to provide members of the Shiromani Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee (SGPC), a religious body, with gunmen and red beacon lights on their vehicles. These symbols of authority are said to be a reward to the SGPC members for their “loyalty” to chief minister Parkash Singh Badal. The loyalty demand never gets satiated and they would demand more and more as the days go by. What is worrying is the extent to which the Akali Dal-led government can go even when the treasury is empty. Even otherwise this kind of burden on the public exchequer is neither permissible nor justified. Similar concessions must be in the pipeline for Hindu organisations in the state because the BJP is the coalition partner in the government. The manner in which the BJP stalled the withdrawal of subsidy to electricity in cities has indicated the clout it has. If gurdwara functionaries can get gunmen and beacon lights on their vehicles, why not the Hindu mahants and the few maulvis since a substantial number of Muslims have come to live in the state? I shudder to imagine the repercussions if chief ministers of other states were to follow the Punjab example. Congress chief minister N.D. Tewari reportedly lost at the polls in Uttrakhand, the state seceded from UP, because he would give beacon light vehiclse to every loud opponent. The voters took their revenge at the time of election since they had suffered the nuisance of beacon light vehicles. Badal does not face that probability yet. But a few such mistakes can cost him dear. The worst trait of the Akalis is that they mix religion with politics. After reducing the state to less than half of its original size by unthinkingly pursuing the demand for Punjabi Suba to get a Sikh majority, the Akalis should have been chastened and shed their obsession with religion. They should have concentrated on more important things like the development of Punjab, which is languishing because of neglect. Forward-looking Punjabis have little scope in the small area to which the state has been reduced. Can Punjab, Haryana and Himachal Pradesh think of a sub-federation retaining their identity and legislature but having common subjects like water, road and planning? Both Haryana and Himachal Pradesh are so close to the Punjabi language and Punjabi culture. Coming to the state, Punjab once enjoyed the highest standard of living in the country. Today it is way down. Not finding enough openings in their own state, the people are going abroad, whatever the cost. Depressed as they are, they have taken to drugs. The youth wonder how it should fashion the future, something which the state government should be worried about. The SGPC members can take care of themselves since the gurdwaras in Punjab earn millions. Punjab in Pakistan, despite the pressure of fundamentalists, has not mixed religion with politics. Religious parties on their own did not get more than four to five seats in the National Assembly although General Zia-ul Haq did everything to help them. It was General Pervez Musharraf who rigged the elections in such a way that he reduced the space for liberal members and brought in religious parties, which were once his main support. In fact, mixing religion with politics has been the bane of India. The country has suffered because of this malady. Still, some political parties like the Shiv Sena in Maharashtra and the Akali Dal have not changed their course because they have found that by plugging the religious line they have gained at the polls. What they have not realised is the harm they have done to the polity. Every religion has noble teachings and lofty moral goals. Yet, in each religion these high standards are often far removed from what that religion seems to be in its actual thought and practices of most of its followers. Take the case of Taslima Nasreen. She is a courageous writer from Bangladesh. Her fault is not that she is less Muslim but that she wants Muslims to remember the teachings of Islam – of equality, tolerance and submissiveness. Still she was hounded from her country because she said those who raped women of the minority community vilified Islam. It is sad to see that the Muslims of fundamental leanings in India are following their counterparts in Bangladesh. They too cannot tolerate dissent although they swear by the freedom of expression. What it means to them is their own freedom to say or write in their bigoted way. The question that Taslima’s case has raised in India is whether its democratic, secular society has a place for a political refugee or whether the fanatic forces would dictate their terms. Even a person like former chief minister Farooq Abdullah has said that Taslima must apologise. What for? Her fault is that she dared the mullahs and maulvis in Bangladesh. It pains me when West Bengal chief minister Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee refuses to answer the question whether Taslima can return to Kolkata where she has been living. True, a visa is issued by the centre. But when it does so, it has the authority on behalf of all the states. Our country’s federal structure does not give a state any right to stall the working of subjects which the constitution has given to the centre. Visa issuance is one of them. West Bengal cannot say that Taslima must not stay in the state. There is something fishy about the faceless Muslim organisation which raised the question of her visa along with the protest against the Marxist mayhem in Nandigram. Maybe, she has come in handy to divert the attention from Nandigram. The CPM could not have imagined anything better. While the country is debating the case of Taslima, it should also discuss M.F. Hussain, India’s topmost painter, whom Hindu zealots are not allowing to return. How he paints is his prerogative, as is that of Taslima about what she writes. This is the freedom of expression which our Constitution guarantees. Yet, the way in which Hussain has been treated indicates that the pro-Hindu elements are there to destroy the Constitutional right. The propaganda by the parties which have made religion as their tool is contaminating the nation. There is only a thin dividing line between right and wrong, moral and immoral. That line is getting erased rapidly. Bigotry is raising its ugly head. It is a pity.
|
|
Maharashtra’s young mothers Marriage was no joy. By the age of 19 she had two children and lived in a joint family. Pressured with household work, the responsibility of two children and subjected to domestic violence, she has become anaemic and malnourished. Both her children are low birth weight babies. But Rekha’s story is not unique. There are thousands of young girls like her in Maharashtra where 49 per cent of rural and 29 per cent of urban girls are married by the age of 18. A study by the Institute of Health Management (IHM), Pachod, showed that over 58 per cent of the girls had their first conception when they were adolescents, just 15 to 19 years. Instead of going to school or junior college and preparing for life, these adolescents had been trapped in the cycle of procreation and responsibility. They suffered further trauma when their babies died within days and months of their birth. Neonatal mortality was 54 per cent when the mother was an adolescent and infant mortality was 76 per cent. The study also revealed that 26 per cent of the babies were of low birth weight. When the alarm bells about the neonatal and infant deaths began ringing, with support from MacArthur Foundation an intervention was made by the IHM between 2003 and 2006 in 50 villages and 29 slums across the 10 high risk districts of the State. The objective of the pilot project was to improve the sexual and reproductive health of the married adolescent girls and develop a model for married adolescents of rural Maharashtra. IHM’s strategy was to win the confidence of the couple and develop in them a positive approach to reproductive health. Some 2000 pregnant, married adolescents were covered in the programme. A surveillance in which the community was involved led to early detection of pregnant girls. The couple was encouraged to avail of health care services and nutrition programmes. Peer educators like Sunita and Pramod went from village to village, home after home offering advice as well as support. When Rattan mausi, 56, a member of the village health committee, learnt that a young couple had approached a doctor for sex selection, she went to the doctor and threatened to report him. She told the young father to be that she would keep his wife with her unless he signed on official stamp paper that he would not try to terminate the seven months pregnancy of his wife. She even volunteered to adopt the little girl. Now the parents have happily accepted their baby girl. Probably the most heartening story is of Anjana who was pressured into marriage when just 16. In 2003 she joined the IHM’s programme for married adolescent girls and learnt of the dangers of early conception. She convinced her in-laws and husband that her first pregnancy should be delayed. She persuaded her husband to use the condom till she could start on the oral pill. For two years she was on the pill and had a healthy child in 2006 when she was 19. The IIHM programme was also able to treat those suffering from reproductive tract infections (RTIs). In the study area in rural Maharashtra in 2003 over 36 per cent of the women had RTIs. By 2006 this dropped to 27 per cent. Take the case of Rupali, 17, and married for eight months. She had a white discharge for several months but never got it treated. On a routine visit, a community health worker learnt of her problem and after taking her husband into confidence, she referred her to a hospital for treatment. Rupali has been cured and for the first time after her marriage feels well. At the end of three years of intervention the percentage of institutional deliveries went up from 61 to 64 per cent in the rural areas and 81 to 85 per cent in urban areas; there was greater involvement of ANMs in post-natal care and a significant reduction in post natal complications like excessive bleeding, high fever and pain in the lower abdomen; the prevalence of low birth weight babies dropped from 35 per cent to 25 per cent in rural areas in three years and from 27 per cent to 18 per cent in urban areas. Dr Ashok Dayalchand, the director of IHM, says the key outcomes of the pilot model are a 30 per cent reduction in birth of low weight babies; three fold increase in the use of contraceptives; delay in the median age of conception by a year; reduction in post-natal complications, significant reduction in RTIs. The most significant gain is the reduction in the number of low weight babies because it means an improvement in maternal nutrition which in turn leads to reduction in maternal morbidity and mortality and reduction in neonatal mortality. Based on the success of the model pilot intervention, the Maharashtra government is already replicating it in 10 high risk districts. Dr Prakash Doke, Director, Health Services, says the challenge is to make the pilot intervention a part of the government health system and integrate it into the RCH
programme.
|
|
Delhi Durbar While the BJP has declared its Chief Ministerial candidate in Himachal Pradesh, the Congress is unlikely to change its official stance of not projecting a leader before the polls. The BJP finally deemed it proper to end speculation and ambiguity. Though there is no obvious alternative to Chief Minister Virbhadra Singh for the Congress, those having differences with him are likely to decide their course of action only after the poll results. Not the one to surrender, Virbhadra Singh has deftly handled earlier challenges to his supremacy within the party. He was apparently not happy over remarks by some senior leaders about not projecting a Chief Ministerial candidate. Those close to him felt that not projecting a chief ministerial candidate was the norm in the party but frequently reiterating the position can impact morale of party workers.
Bush’s ‘advice’ As CPI(M) is under unprecedented attack from all quarters on the Nandigram issue, a joke is doing the rounds in political circles these days, equating the party action there with those of its ideological enemy number one, US President George Bush, in Iraq. The essence of the joke is that beleaguered West Bengal CM Budhadev Bhattacharjee had received a secret tip from Bush as to how to tackle the Nandigram problem by asking him to go all out with the propaganda on non-existent naxalites’ presence in the village and and getting them attacked by his cadres. Bush is said to have done something similar in Iraq with the worldwide campaign about Saddam Hussain’s WMDs.
Denying advantage Miffed over the BJP’s attempts to seek a moral high ground on the Taslima Nasreen issue, the Congerss launched a counter-attack that sought to deny the saffron party any credit for its supposedly liberal stand. The Congress said that it was the UPA-led government which had extended her a visa and the BJP government in Rajasthan had not kept her in the state after she left Kolkata following threats. While party spokesman Abhishek Singhvi dismissed as hypocricy Gujarat CM Narendra Modi’s offer to host her in the state, Parliamentary Affairs Minister P.R. Dasmunsi said that the party had no objections if Modi wanted to atone for his sins.
Defence brains With defence research facing trouble due to defence scientists opting for the private sector rather than the public sector, the Government has been forced to commission a study and suggest certain incentives to retain tatent. While various monetory and non-monetory benefits are being proposed for the scientists in addition to the recommendation for a better pay package to the sixth Central Pay Commission, it was also considered appropriate to have an in-depth study commissioned through an independent agency. The study was assigned to the Administrative Staff College of India (ASCI), Hyderabad which has now submitted its report and the same is under the active consideration of the Government. Contributed by Prashant Sood, S.S. Negi and Girja Shankar Kaura
|
| 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 | |
R