 |
|
Times of terror Prisoner of conscience |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Tessy Thomas
China’s nuclear subs
Bas bas, Mr Bus!
Get the route right Firms seek patents on ‘climate-ready’ GM crops A historic conflict over military pay
|
Times of terror THE killing of 60 persons in the serial bomb blasts in Jaipur on Tuesday night is fresh proof, if it is needed, that terrorism continues to remain a serious threat to peace and stability in the country. The detonation of improvised bombs kept on bicycles is believed to have been primarily aimed at disturbing communal harmony as one major explosion occurred near a temple. The authorities should, therefore, see through the terrorist designs and ensure that communal peace in Rajasthan and elsewhere remains undisturbed. Communally sensitive areas call for special attention. The imposition of curfew in many Jaipur localities is the right step that has been taken. Jaipur, which is part of the Delhi-Jaipur-Agra tourist triangle, draws a large number of foreign tourists during this season. Adequate security arrangements should be made to make the tourists feel safe. It is a matter of concern that the intelligence agencies did not get a clue about such a major destructive plan which must been hatched by the enemies of the nation much in advance. Whenever and wherever terrorists strike, as they did in Ajmer eight months ago, they do it with the help of some misguided local people. Those responsible for intelligence gathering must be taken to task for their failure to identify the local modules of terrorists. A thorough overhaul of the intelligence network will be in order. The intelligence people should have shown no complacency particularly after the Ajmer incident. What is the point in telling now that the blasts must be the handiwork of the Bangladesh-based Harkatul Jihad-e-Islami (HUJI) or the banned Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI) when the damage has already been done? After every such unfortunate happening, political parties invariably indulge in a blame game. This is not the way to fight the menace. Keeping politics aside, there is need to rethink our anti-terrorism strategy. Anybody against whom there is enough proof of involvement in terrorism must be dealt with sternly. But care must be taken to prevent the harassment of innocent people. This, of course, is not an easy task, but must not be ignored in the interest of freeing the country from the scourge.
|
|
Prisoner of conscience THE chorus of pleas for the release of human rights activist and physician Binayak Sen from a high-security prison in Chhattisgarh has intensified. On May 14, he completed one year in jail. He has been kept in a small, dingy cell like a condemned prisoner. On the face of it, the grounds on which he was arrested under the Chhattisgarh Special Public Security Act, 2005, and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, are unfair and unwarranted. These laws are meant to tackle the increasing Maoist violence in the state. However, targeting and victimising a sincere and dedicated person like Dr Sen for his criticism of the government-sponsored Salwa Judum movement is against all canons of justice. The Chhattisgarh Special Public Security Act, enacted after the lapse of the Prevention of Terrorism Act, is more draconian than any other piece of legislation. It makes one punishable for saying anything relating to Maoist activities. Dr Sen was arrested on the ground that he had handed over some letters from a Naxalite, who was under his treatment, to another prisoner. While this charge is yet to be proved by the prosecution, the police have refused to reveal the contents of these letters. Worse, the investigation has been painfully slow. Though there are as many as 83 witnesses, only six have been interrogated so far. In view of the shabby treatment being meted out to Dr Sen as also the slow pace of investigation, the case needs to be transferred to another state. The Raman Singh government cannot stand any criticism of Salwa Judum. It has rounded up several journalists and human rights activists. How can criticism of the movement be construed as a crime when the Supreme Court has directed the National Human Rights Commission to probe the excesses committed in the name of Salwa Judum? In a democracy, the state cannot stifle dissent and perpetrate repression. Clearly, the state government would do well to heed the appeal of the 20 Nobel-laureates and others and allow Dr Sen to receive the prestigious Jonathan Mann Award for Global Health and Human Rights in Washington on May 29.
|
|
Tessy Thomas DRDO scientist Tessy Thomas is all set to head a project to develop an advanced version of the Agni-II missile. She is the first woman to ever head a missile programme in the country. The 45-year-old scientist is a veteran of the missile programme, having been associated with the entire Agni series. While she has risen to the top purely on merit, the fact of her being a woman is definitely a cause for celebration. In a world of ‘missile men,’ Dr Thomas is a ‘missile woman’ spearheading the rise of women technologists and scientists in the DRDO, where they number about a thousand in a workforce of over 7000. It will be a morale-booster for all women employees in the country. Dr Thomas will head a secret project to upgrade the 2000-plus km Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile, the Agni-II. Public domain information suggests that this might be the so-called Agni II AT, the AT standing for Advanced Technology. While the newly designed Agni-III and Agni-IV extend the range of the missile, new materials and technologies on the AT are expected to boost the range of the Agni-II itself, even doubling it for lighter, nuclear payloads. She herself specialises in solid propellant systems the Agni missiles use. Worldwide, science and technology have not been able to attract and retain women personnel. A Harvard University president recently gained notoriety by throwing up the possibility of innate gender difference to explain it. But studies have found that there are plenty of qualified women who, however, leave the workforce at some point. On-site attitudes and the glass ceiling are factors, as are the pull of family commitments. Both the private and public sector organisations should work on improving attitudes at the workplace and providing more flexible schedules so that the talents of almost half of society are used optimally.
|
|
Depth of friendship does not depend on the length of acquaintance. — Rabindranath Tagore
|
China’s nuclear subs
IT was entirely unbecoming of a country of India’s size, power and potential to have shouted and screamed over China’s nuclear submarine base at the southernmost edge of its territory in Hainan Island. Sadly, the brouhaha was also typical of the ill-informed panic or excitement that often grips “rising India”. Indeed, the dismal event’s beginning could not have been more bizarre. Just one London newspaper, Daily Telegraph, had published a satellite photograph of the Chinese N-Sub base. It did so because this particular imagery was based on a “better satellite resolution” than the previous satellite maps. Inevitably, the new map also found its way to Internet. Even so, this would not have caused much reaction because no newspaper across the world thought it necessary to follow up the Telegraph story. However, the BBC chose to broadcast an item on the Telegraph map. Immediately, all hell broke loose here. TV news channels went nearly hysterical about the “Chinese nuclear peril confronting India”. Pundits of the print media followed suit. The Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS), they reported, was meeting to consider the grim situation. After all, weren’t the Chinese nuclear submarines only 2,000 nautical miles away from the “chokepoint” of Malacca Strait? One paper even reported that the CCS meeting was an “emergency” one, as if those in charge of safeguarding the country’s maritime security had so far been ignorant of the dimensions of the developments on Hainan Island. At this stage, the Chief of the Naval Staff, Admiral Sureesh Mehta, decided to calm those who were pressing the panic button every hour. He declared that it was immaterial where a base of nuclear submarines was located because the range of these subs was huge. One only needed to keep an eye on how many submarines were being deployed. It might have been better if the statement were made by the Navy’s PRO rather than the Chief. In any case, the truth is that at least since 2004 the Indian Navy and the agency for foreign intelligence — the Research and Analysis Wing, better known by its delightfully appropriate acronym, RAW — have known exactly what the Chinese have been up to on the Hainan. In order that the unseemly show — that persisted even after the Admiral’s clarification — is not repeated in future, the government should be more forthcoming about information on crucial aspects of national defence. It can be sure of getting much useful help from the numerous security think-tanks across the country. To diffuse the fog of ignorance and folly, let a few fundamental facts be stated. First, Vice-Admiral (retired) A. K. Singh, a former Flag-Officer-Commanding-in-Chief of the Eastern Naval Command and an experienced nuclear submariner, has pertinently pointed out that China is building up a powerful blue water navy to take on the United States, not India. The Chinese do want to be present in the Indian Ocean where the most powerful navy is not Indian but American. Moreover, this state of affairs is bound to last for as long as we can foresee. Secondly, nuclear submarines do not sail through narrow waters such the Malacca Strait or the various Straits close to Indonesia. China’s N-Subs heading for the Indian Ocean would have to sail between Indonesia and Australia, which is most likely to cause a deep dent in Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd’s exuberance about China. With a gram of nuclear fuel a submarine can circumnavigate the globe. But then, there is such a thing as the limit on the duration for which the crew of a nuclear submarine can remain submerged under water. This limit does not usually exceed 90 days. Consequently, China’s nuclear submarines cannot frolic around in the Indian Ocean unless, of course, they can get a “home base” in a country like, say, Pakistan. Such a development would ring alarm bells not just in India but, more to the point, in Japan and America, though the US Navy happily has home bases in Diego Garcia and at Yokosuka in Japan. There can be no stopping the Chinese conventional submarines coming in because they can make use of the “necklace of pearls” that China has built, or is in the process of building, in Myanmar, Sri Lanka and Pakistan. Some naval strategists therefore urge that India must not isolate itself from nations that alone can counter an expanding Chinese sea power. What this country must do is to introspect why its efforts to build a nuclear submarine have been excruciatingly slow. According to Vice-Admiral Singh, India is 10 years behind China in this respect. The talk about developing a nuclear reactor for submarines had begun as far back as the late sixties. The development of the nuclear submarine, codenamed “ATV” or Advance Technology Vehicle, began in the 1980’s. Some years later, India acquired on lease from the Soviet Union a nuclear submarine for training. But not only was the idea of leasing a second N-Sub given up but even the first one was abruptly returned before it need have been. Now, negotiations are on with Moscow for “leasing” at least one, perhaps two, nuclear submarines. The Russian response, as it has been most of the time, is positive. In addition, the Navy is buying some more conventional submarines from Russia. These, of course, are not available off the shelf. It may, therefore, take two years before the new submarines arrive. Meanwhile, the work on the ATV, or an indigenous nuclear submarine, has progressed most tardily, and would have been even slower but for timely Russian help. According to the best available information, sea trials of the ATV would begin next year. Even so, the introduction of nuclear subs into service in requisite numbers would take a very long time. The tale of the Light Combat Aircraft (LCA), which has been flying for years but is “still miles away” from induction into operational service in squadron strength, should be warning enough. As for Arjun, the main battle tank produced by the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) decades ago, the Army — for reasons convincing enough to the government — is ordering Russian T-90 tanks for its current requirements. It is also placing a small order for Arjun tanks to “keep the DRDO project going”. It is this sorry state of affairs that we should be lamenting, and doing something about. Screaming about Chinese doings on Hainan Island will be of no
help.
|
Bas bas, Mr Bus! FOOD Ambassador Ramphall from Farmana in Haryana, and Petroleum Ambassador Piara Singh from Patran in Punjab, meet George Bush in the White House to brief him on what is to be said in relation to the consumption levels of the Indians, when it comes to filling their bellies, or fuelling up their automobiles. “Hey guys, tell me saamthin abut yer great country’s burning up, I mean, eating habits.” Bush said. “Sirji, I can only say that ‘Rice’—no pun meant pleej — tastes better than bheat.”Ramphall said with some sense of conviction. “But haw cain you say so?” questioned Bush when Ramphall described the vicarious pleasure he once had on tasting rice, “Sirji I never ate rice myself, I only saw the S.H.O. of Sampla police station in my state, partaking of the dhaula dhaula white stuff.” “Ther you er! It means only when your poorchasing puwer increases, you can be in a place wher you cain buy even the caaps. And dat, then only you st‘u’art likening yourselves to the Ess-Etch-Os. Bi-laang to d middle class, no?” Bush said and swanked, “Naw look at their aadacity, they even scorn the wooerld Ess-Etch-O! Phew!” “Bus bus, Mr Bus! We can’t take your contempt lying down, rather standing up, and I pray you could well repeat what the French queen said, that is remembered till today.” Ramphall tried to sound well-versed in history. “What-what did d French Kween say?” a bamboozled Bush asked and Ramphall promptly reminded him of the famous quote, “If they can’t eat bread, let them have cakes!” “Yup yup! Intelligent Kween indeed. I shad say saamthin to dat effect. Thank you.” Then Bush turned to Piara Singh: “Hey man! Haif d taxies in New York are driven by you guys. You seem to have been born with screws and spanners (laughs with a wink at Rice by his side) I mean with the knowhow to run the machines .Do ye bleeve the aatomobeels in the U.S. consume more gas than those in your country?” he said. “Oh na, naji! Aidhar thoda, yani Dubye da dab-daba hai ji. Sadde kani te Jugaar chalde ne jehre sadde apne aap de banaye hoye Sky-Lab ne ji. O thora zyada deejal-patrol khande ne! (O’ no, Sir! Here Dubya has a grip over the things. In our country we run our own manufactured hodgepodge assortments which have quite a semblance with the vehicles. Yes they consume a little more diesel and petrol)” Piara Singh bragged with a sparkle of sorts in his eyes. “Ther yu er again! Your aatomobeels too eat a lil more than what is required. Aren’t you guys adding to the woes of the wooerld! Bush concluded and again winked at Rice: “I think now I can name dat country with Chinkies as well, for creating a mess with the wooerld’s ecaanaamy.” “Yes I think you cain do it now Prez but a bit maayaldy, you know why!” Rice pitched in grinning. Just then First Lady Laura called from inside, “Hey Jaaj, tell these guys to rush aid to people in cyclone hit Myanmar immediately. Being fairly well-off, now they can afford some charity. Let’s have some basmati rice, our own patented of course, I cooked for
you.
|
Get the route right LAST year the Government of India announced the establishment of a dedicated freight and industrial corridor covering the area from Mumbai to Dadri. An area approximately 150 kms wide (described as the “influence region”) has been identified on both sides of the corridor for development. The route of these corridors (Mumbai to Dadri) passes through Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan and Haryana. On representation by Punjab it has now been extended to Ludhiana via Chandigarh. The Yamuna provides the boundary between the states of Haryana and Uttar Pradesh on the eastern sides. The proposed route runs close to the Yamuna from Delhi to Karnal, a distance of approximately 150 kms. The land on the eastern side of this route from Delhi to Karnal is a narrow strip. The main trade would therefore come mainly from the western side. This corridor is already developed and can handle increased cargo. Investing money on improving it may give some more benefits in the short term but developing an alternate route through the interior of both Haryana and Punjab would provide much higher returns and benefit a considerably larger section of the people. It would be much more inclusive. After partition of India in1947, industrial development was denied to Punjab first on the rationale that it would be vulnerable to the enemy and later on the consideration of retaining Punjab as the bread basket of India. Whatever industrial growth took place was mainly around the periphery of Delhi. On the division of Punjab in 1966 these industrial areas went to Haryana. Here again, while the state of Haryana around Delhi and along the eastern end of the corridor benefited, the interior was left undeveloped. The land along the corridor up to Karnal is highly fertile khadher land and should be reserved for agriculture. On the other hand, the land along the proposed alternate corridor passing through middle Haryana, is semi-arid land where the water is highly saline and not suitable for agriculture. In the Punjab section of the proposed route the sub-soil water, apart from being saline, is receding. The average depletion rate is 30 to 40 cm and goes up to 1 metre in some places, conjuring up images of desertification in the very near future. Another advantage in choosing an alternate corridor is a lower cost of land acquisition. The alternate route would serve almost all the important towns in both the states of Punjab and Haryana. It would have a shorter distance. It would help to strengthen and extend industrial growth around these towns. This in turn would generate employment and absorb surplus farm laborers who are committing suicide in thousands. The proposed alignment travels along the middle of both Haryana and Punjab drawing maximum benefit of industry on both sides. This travels along Delhi, Rohtak, Jind, Narwana, Tohana and Jakhal in Haryana, and in Punjab it goes through Sunam, Dhuri, Malerkotla, Ludhiana, Jalandhar and Amritsar. It passes through the middle of Haryana and Punjab and is well served by the railway network through junctions at Rohtak, Jind, Narwana and Jakhal in Haryana, which link Bhiwani, Panipat, Kaithal and Hissar. In Punjab, Dhuri, Ludhiana and Jalandhar junctions connect Patiala, Bhatinda, Khanna, Gobindgarh, Ferozepur and Jammu. Connectivity by road is good but it requires further strengthening. An eight-lane road from Delhi to Rohtak has already been taken up. The corridor needs to be extended up to Ludhiana and the single rail track needs to be upgraded to a double track. No major obstacles such as rivers fall in the way of this route. This proposed corridor would also serve as a backbone to the network of strategic defense roads along the Indo-Pak border. Over the past few years, commerce and industry has grown at the rate of 8 to 9 per cent whereas growth rate in agriculture has been stagnating at around 1.5 to 3 per cent. 70 per cent of the population lives in the villages of rural India. Even in urban areas the actual beneficiaries of this development are not more than 4 to 5 per cent of the people. In 1971, the Central government clamped a ceiling on rural land holdings but left urban holdings untouched. In addition, the government has been enforcing an unremunerative MSP regimen. From ancient times North India was crossed by trade routes on a roughly north-west south-east axis that connected Central Asia with the Gangetic plains. With the division of the country in 1947 and the ensuing bitterness with Pakistan, this trade was disrupted. The northern trade was diverted through the ports of Gujarat and Maharashtra. Since the time the corridor plan was thought out, our relations with Pakistan have undergone a sea-change. Democratisation of Pakistan has made trading with our neighbor not only possible but imminent. In response to this opportunity the corridor project route needs to be revised. The alternate corridor proposed would provide access to all the three main trading routes to Pakistan, i.e. Hussainewala, Attari and Dera Baba Nanak. The northwest-southeast overland route is beneficial to the industrial growth of north India as it provides a two way trading opportunity and a much shorter distance. Unofficial trade is large, and with the opening up of the border, it is expected to increase dramatically. Amritsar to Lahore is a mere 50 km and the Hussainiwala border from Ferozepur is just as close. In addition there are trade advantages of trans-Pakistan commerce with Central Asia and beyond, and fringe benefits such as growth of our goods transport sector or diversification of agriculture to cater to cross-border demand. Punjab, a land whose roads lead only inward to the Gangetic plain, can once again become the gateway of India. The writer is a former Punjab MLA
|
|
Firms seek patents on ‘climate-ready’ GM crops
A handful of the world’s largest agricultural biotechnology companies are seeking hundreds of patents on gene-altered crops designed to withstand drought and other environmental stresses, part of a race for dominance in the potentially lucrative market for crops that can handle global warming, according to a report being released Tuesday. Three companies – BASF of Germany, Syngenta of Switzerland and Monsanto of St. Louis – have filed applications to control nearly two-thirds of the climate-related gene families submitted to patent offices worldwide, according to the report by the Ottawa-based ETC Group, an activist organization that advocates subsistence farmers. The applications say that the new “climate ready” genes will help crops survive drought, flooding, saltwater incursions, high temperatures and increased ultraviolet radiation – all of which are predicted to undermine food security in coming decades. Company officials dismissed the report’s contention that the applications amount to an intellectual-property “grab,” countering that gene-altered plants will be crucial to solving world hunger but will never be developed without patent protections. The report highlights the economic opportunities facing the biotechnology industry at a time of growing food insecurity, as well as the risks to its public image. Many of the world’s poorest countries, destined to be hit hardest by climate change, have rejected biotech crops, citing environmental and economic concerns. Importantly, gene patents generally preclude the age-old practice of saving seeds from a harvest for replanting, requiring instead that farmers purchase the high-tech seeds each year. The ETC report concludes that biotech giants are hoping to leverage climate change as a way to get into resistant markets, and it warns that the move could undermine public-sector plant-breeding institutions such as those coordinated by the United Nations and the World Bank, which have long made their improved varieties freely available. “When a market is dominated by a handful of large multinational companies, the research agenda gets biased toward proprietary products,” said Hope Shand, ETC’s research director. “Monopoly control of plant genes is a bad idea under any circumstance. During a global food crisis, it is unacceptable and has to be challenged.” Ranjana Smetacek, a spokeswoman for Monsanto, said companies deserve praise for developing crop varieties that will survive climate change. “I think everyone recognizes that the old traditional ways just aren’t able to address these new challenges. The problems in Africa are pretty severe,” she said, noting that Monsanto and BASF are participating in a project, funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, to develop drought-resistant corn that would be made available to farmers in four southern African countries royalty-free. “We aim to be at once generous and also cognizant of our obligation to shareholders who have paid for our research,” Smetacek said. Gene patents allow companies to limit others from marketing those genes. The 35-page ETC report, “Patenting the `Climate Genes’ ... and Capturing the Climate Agenda,” documents about 530 applications for climate-related plant genes filed at patent offices in the past five years. A few dozen patents have been issued; hundreds of others are pending. Of the 55 major gene families at the heart of those applications, BASF filed 21, the report says. Other major players include Syngenta, seven; Monsanto, six; and Bayer of Germany, five. Among the report’s concerns is the breadth of many applications. Protective genes are usually discovered in one variety of plant, and after minimal testing they are presumed to be useful in others, Shand said. In one typical case, a BASF patent claim for a gene to tolerate “environmental stress” seeks to preclude competitors from using that gene in “maize, wheat, rye, oat, triticale, rice, barley, soybean, peanut, cotton, rapeseed, canola, manihot, pepper, sunflower, tagetes, solanaceous plants, potato, tobacco, eggplant, tomato, Vicia species, pea, alfalfa, coffee, cacao, tea, Salix species, oil palm, coconut, perennial grass and a forage crop plant.” Publicly funded developers of freely accessible plant varieties could succumb to biotech’s market dominance, the report warns. One of the biggest is the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research, which runs 15 research centers worldwide and is funded by several international aid organisations. CGIAR has long emphasised non-biotech breeding to develop varieties ideal for subsistence farmers and local conditions. Facing big budget cuts from its traditional funders, CGIAR is now a central player in the Gates-funded collaboration with Monsanto and BASF – a project that a CGIAR spokesman defended as a “global public good.”
|
|
A historic conflict over military pay THERE is a little known instance of a quarrel between Lord Dalhousie, the Governor General and his C-in-C, Sir Charles Napier. The latter had been especially selected to be the C-in-C by the Duke of Wellington during the Second Sikh War to replace the earlier C-in-C, who had suffered a few reverses. The war had ended, however, before Napier assumed command of the Army. Napier made a small increase in the pay of troops at Wazirabad on the recommendation of Brigadier Hearsay, the Station Commander, which did not conform to an order of Lord Hardinge, the previous Governor General, regarding increase in pay as compensation for high prices. Napier, who was the next senior to Dalhousie, simply accepted the recommendation, without any reference to the civil government, and was accused of having assumed the functions of the supreme government. The C-in-C explained that he had increased the pay of troops at Wazirabad to mollify a state of insubordination in some Regiments and that he was confident of support from the supreme government regarding pay increase. Lord Dalhousie did not think it appropriate to reverse the orders of the commander-in-chief in view of his explanation of the circumstances under which he had to increase the pay of the troops, but he conveyed to the Commander-in-Chief: ‘for the future guidance of his Excellency, that the Governor-General-in-Council will not again permit the Commander-in-Chief, under any circumstances, to issue orders which shall change the pay and allowances of troops serving in India and thus practically to exercise an authority which has been reserved, and most properly reserved, for the supreme government alone’. The C- in -C took the Governor General’s communication as a personal insult and reprimand. He wrote a memorandum, in which he argued in support of the just exercise of his own authority and against the unjust reprimand of the Governor General. Napier blamed Dalhousie for not supporting him when he was faced with the mutiny of troops and declared that he was not sure of the support of the Governor General if such a situation reoccurred and on these grounds he gave out his intention to resign from service. The Governor General’s attitude became more stiff. He argued further that the claim of the Commander-in-Chief of the army of power to alter the pay and allowances of troops under his command, if conceded, would amount to giving two masters to the empire of India and would render the sure administration of the government plainly impossible. The Duke of Wellington, though a valiant soldier himself, supported Lord Dalhousie and remarked that Dalhousie was right in giving this direction even if there was a mutiny among troops because it was not unusual to instruct a C-in- C on the terms offered to the mutineers, and that the C-in-C had no right to increase the pay of troops without government’s approval. He recommended to the Crown to accept Napier’s resignation and the same was accepted and thus the authority of the civil government was vindicated. Repeated pointers by the C-in-C that the Indian Army units had been off and on in a state of mutiny never cut ice with the civil government and the price for the same was paid in the Mutiny of 1857.
|
| HOME PAGE | |
Punjab | Haryana | Jammu & Kashmir |
Himachal Pradesh | Regional Briefs |
Nation | Opinions | | Business | Sports | World | Letters | Chandigarh | Ludhiana | Delhi | | Calendar | Weather | Archive | Subscribe | Suggestion | E-mail | |
