 |
|
Credible victory Support to terrorism |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A president at last
Life after July 22
Food for thought
Wind and sun energy Obama shuns foreign journalists Inside Pakistan
|
Credible victory THE UPA government has every reason to be elated over the confidence vote it has won in the Lok Sabha. The margin of victory — 275 votes for the confidence motion and 256 against it —is quite convincing. Abstentions on the Opposition benches helped the ruling combine. More significantly, the UPA got a clear majority in the House, i.e., not only of those who voted on Tuesday. In retrospect, the Prime Minister’s statement in an interview to a Kolkata daily that he was prepared to risk withdrawal of support by the Left parties that set in motion a chain of events that led to the vote turned out to be propitious. The vote implies many things for both the government and the Opposition. First of all, nothing now prevents the government from operationalising the 123 Agreement Dr Manmohan Singh had signed with US President George W. Bush. The government will no longer be guided by the Left parties which have been taking a consistently anti-American and, therefore, anti-nuclear deal position. Not only that, it will also be free to implement measures like pension reforms and liberalisation of insurance which the Left parties have been opposing. In fact, the little time the government has at its disposal before the next elections are called can be utilised for carrying out economic reforms which stood stymied. It will also be in a position to choose an appropriate time for holding elections. Of course, this does not overlook the fact that the UPA will have to listen to new allies like the Samajwadi Party which has its own agenda be it on the Women’s Bill or on the windfall tax. The two-day debate on the confidence motion had its high and low points. While some speeches were of a high calibre, the spectacle of a BJP member bringing to the House wads of currency notes to show that attempts were made to buy Opposition votes marked a new low in parliamentary practices. It is for the Speaker to ensure that whoever is guilty is given exemplary punishment. The vote has ended the political instability ever since the Left withdrew its support to the government. For the BJP, the UPA government’s victory is a major setback inasmuch as it won on the issue of the nuclear deal with which it has little complaints. The vote marginalises some of the smaller parties which thought they could call the shots in a situation of political instability. The unwarranted projection of UP Chief Minister Mayawati as the Third Front’s prospective leader and, perhaps, the next Prime Minister only helped the government to fortify its position. Having won the vote, nothing prevents Prime Minister Manmohan Singh from concentrating his attention on issues like the price rise.
|
|
Support to terrorism IF Foreign Secretary Shivshankar Menon did some plain speaking at the fifth round of the composite dialogue process between India and Pakistan on Monday, it was not by choice but by compulsion. There is growing evidence that forces inimical to India but with bases in Pakistan have been working steadfastly to create mayhem in this country. The recent attack on the Indian Embassy in Kabul in which two diplomats were killed among others had the clear imprint of the Pakistani Inter Services Intelligence (ISI). This had forced National Security Adviser M.K. Narayanan even to demand in desperation that the ISI should be disbanded in the interest of both countries. Even Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai had hinted at the Pakistani involvement in the attack on the embassy. The sudden spurt in terrorist attacks in Jammu and Kashmir and ceasefire violations could not have happened without the active support from across the border. It is nobody’s contention that the democratically elected government in Pakistan is responsible for the violent activities in the Valley during the last few weeks. But having given a commitment that Pakistan would not allow its territory to be used for planning and executing terrorist operations in India, it is obligatory on its part to cut off the hands that feed terrorism. That the ISI is not amenable to suggestions and is a law unto itself may be truthful but that it is hardly an excuse for the Pakistan government to shy away from its responsibility of reining in those running the ISI. As Mr Menon, who is otherwise a suave, soft-spoken diplomat, told his Pakistani counterpart Salman Bashir, perhaps, a bit harshly, the peace process would be adversely affected if the Pakistan Government did not address India’s concerns. Terrorists are first and foremost enemies of peace. So long as Pakistan is perceived to be backing terrorists, its credentials to take part in peace talks will be questionable. The confidence-building measures the two countries have taken, including Monday’s decision to increase the periodicity of the cross-LoC bus services, have kindled hopes on both sides of the divide that better bilateral relations are possible. But such hopes will vanish into thin air if the terrorist groups based in Pakistan are not kept on the leash.
|
|
A president at last THE election of Dr Ram Baran Yadav as the first president of Nepal is cause for celebration for all those who favour republican values. The world’s newest democracy has, for the first time ever, elected a head of state, thus writing finis to the tradition of kings ruling by ‘divine right’. In political, constitutional and electoral terms this is an extraordinary advance of the democratic process in Nepal. More significant is that Dr Yadav is truly representative of the people in more ways than one. Born to a peasant family and, as a Madhesi Yadav, belonging to a doubly disadvantaged section of the Nepalese population, it is education that enabled him to gain the recognition — as a physician and public figure — that eventually took him to the highest office. If his victory is a blow to the single largest party in the Constituent Assembly, his background, personality and popular appeal make the Maoist’s defeat even more crushing. Understandably then, the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) may not be celebrating his success in the presidential contest, especially as it was the outcome of a run-off and it followed the defeat of the Maoist nominee for the office of vice-president. Prior to his election, Dr Yadav was the general secretary of the Nepali Congress and vice-president Parmananda Jha was the choice of the Madhesi People’s Rights Forum (MPRF). The victory of Mr Jha and a tie in the presidential contest made the NC, MPRF and the Communist Party of Nepal-United Marxist-Leninist forge an alliance to ensure the defeat of the CPN-M’s nominee. Shaken by the outcome of the two elections, the CPN-M has announced that it will not form or join a new government which has to take office after the Constituent Assembly elections held on April 10. It is ironic that the Maoists, who are constitutionally mandated to form the government and have been asserting their right to do so, should now back away from this democratic responsibility. Should they actually carry out this threat, the NC, CPN-UML and the Terai parties may be encouraged in their efforts to keep the Maoists out of government. Opting for such a course would mean instability and put at risk the peace process as well as the task of drafting a new constitution. |
|
By convention there is colour, by convention sweetness, by convention bitterness, but in reality there are atoms and space. — Democritus
|
Life after July 22
The
Doomsday people seem to doubt if there can be life after July 22. Indian politics has so degenerated as to have hollowed out the political process. Democracy is dead. Little parties will now mushroom and the future national coalitions will be held to ransom by nondescript elements, rendering India ungovernable. So, long live the mafia and the great parliamentary bazaar where everything is on sale and self-interest trumps national interest. This is the apocalyptic vision, wrapped in rumour and gossip, held out by political fortune tellers whose every word has been printed and broadcast by irresponsible sections of the media that have stoked the “numbers game” and trivialised the real debate. Yet, there is another side to the story. Unlovely Shibu Sorens, Deva Gowdas and others having emerged out of the woodwork and enjoyed their brief hour of glory, may soon be dumped in the dust-bin of history. July 21-22 witnessed a prolonged debate on the merits and mythology of the nuclear agreement, admittedly not all of it relevant or meaningful, sometimes with deliberate intent to obfuscate the critical issues. Other matters of popular interest were brought up such as the price rise, India’s sovereignty, crime and governance. In how many countries can or does such an open debate take place? Few. And politics everywhere can be cynical and self-serving. So what we have seen is not uniquely calamitous and suggests that Indian democracy is alive and well though still in the process of maturation. It needs reform, but works. Whatever the July 22 vote, there are lessons to be learnt with regard to refashioning the basis of coalition politics. It is fatuous to cavil at small parties and so-called “solitaires”. They are an integral part of “the People”. Each MP represents a population larger than that of many UN members. Moreover, with the continuing empowerment of a vast, voiceless under-mass, new identity formations and parties and local interest-groups will continue to emerge for many years and demand a place in the sun. Collectively, they represent many tens of millions. So large coalitions will not disappear in a hurry. Some tiny plural interests and women could perhaps be more appropriately represented through a mixed first-past-the-post-cum-PR system within a larger House. The coalition dharma must, however, change. Once a party joins a larger formation like the UPA or the NDA it cannot be allowed to dictate the name(s) and portfolio(s) of its representative(s). This must remain the prerogative of the Prime Minister. This principle has been sadly breached to the detriment of discipline, integrity and good governance. Such conventions can grow, given a firm example. Few will be prepared to “break” a government on Day One when there is too much to lose. All parties must obviously take more care in selecting candidates of character and calibre, not the flotsam and jetsam of politics who too easily find berths for dubious considerations. Inner-party democracy and some informal system of primaries, possibly through a panchayati raj/municipal filter, could help. Those convicted by trial courts should not be eligible for nomination and if convicted after election, should be barred from voting and holding office until cleared through appellate proceedings. To claim today that convicted MPs/MLAs on appeal should not be allowed to vote would be a travesty as the law permits them to do so. Rules of the game cannot be changed during play. Defectors or party-hoppers should be subject to a “cooling off” period of, may be, six months after crossing the floor before assuming office. This will dampen horse-trading. Another convention should provide for corporate or professional MPs to shed their extra-parliamentary interests by law or convention so that they are and remain true servants of the people The July 22 vote was forced by the Left’s walking out on the nuclear agreement, with strong BJP support on this issue. That both parties then relegated the matter to electioneer is indicative of the premium on expediency while talking principle. Yet the debate does not create any precedent whatsoever to argue that future international treaties must be subject to parliamentary ratification. This would be destructive of principled negotiation in the national interest. Those dissenting can have recourse to moving no-confidence in the government. This should not, however, preclude more intensive debate on all complex and controversial matters in parliamentary committees to which expert witnesses can be summoned. The government, too, can be more transparent and reach out to all sections and interest groups and go beyond the national motto, Satyameve Jayate. Whichever way the vote goes, there will be elections within four to eight months. The churning witnessed will impact all parties as well as the formations in being or projected. The meaning and purpose of leadership will also be questioned and hopefully redefined. All this could herald a cleansing process and a refurbished polity. Admittedly, not everybody is smelling of roses. Some stink. The electorate is watching and is not altogether amused. There will be life after July 22. Prepare for
it.
|
Food for thought
It’s
funny. We are in the midst of both food and fuel crises now and with no easy solution in sight”, lamented my septuagenarian mother who reads a newspaper as attentively as she reads any book. Before I could rattle off a few hackneyed reasons behind the twin crises she chipped in with her trademark impatience, “Forget the fuel for the present and tell me how our one billion plus which you never tire of referring as India’s demographic dividend, can subsist if food prices keep spiralling upwards”. Let me give you a different perspective, I implored. As she settled in her easy chair, I picked up my scribbling pad and said, “Do you know that the Americans who recently blamed shortage of food on growing diet of the growing Indian middle class actually feed 70 per cent of their foodgrain production to cows and pigs for producing meat? It is estimated that to develop one kg of beef, a cow consumes 16 kg of foodgrain and 10,000 litre of water”. Really! she sighed. I nodded and continued. On the other hand, if human beings consumed that foodgrain directly instead of feeding it to a cow for the purpose of beef, I see no reason why shortage of food should ever arise. There would be enough food to feed the entire world. “Do you agree?” Hearing her “yes, of course, agreed”, I held forth. An average American eats 125 kg of meat every year and the entire America consumes 350 million ton annually, whereas the corresponding figure for China is 70 kg and 100 million ton. In the last 50 years the world meat consumption has increased five fold so much so that Thailand’s diversion of the foodgrain to animals has jumped from 1 per cent to 30 per cent. For these countries meat is food. As long as meat prices are under control they don’t care. Look at China, which keeps a strategic reserve of hundreds of thousands of live pigs to release them in the market to keep pork prices under check. As many as 50,000 million, eight times the human population, animals are raised for meat production. Where is the rangeland for so many animals to graze and where is the grain to feet them? Not to mention that animals fed on foodgrain grow faster and produce better quality meat. And do not forget that India’s average per capita consumption of meat is 3 kg per year and with growing population and rising standards of living, they would need as much meat as China needs today, in the near future. Where is the land, water and other resources on this planet to support such a large number of animals, not to talk of humans? Not only meat production and processing need chilled storage and transportation for retailing, such energy intensive activities do not sit well with the energy crisis staring the world in its face. One shudders to imagine a scenario where one billion cows and as many pigs of rich countries will compete with the world’s poor for food, water and power. At this my mother smiled as if she had won an argument and said, “Now I have some more reasons to ask everyone to turn vegetarian and stay
vegetarian.”
|
Wind and sun energy Bob Dylan
said it best: “The answer is blowin’ in the wind.” While politicians and environmentalists have been busy arguing about how best to require that greenhouse gases be curtailed, the world around them has changed. The precipitous rise in oil and gas prices over the past year has made the debate on greenhouse gas emissions moot. The reduction in the output of those gases will move forward at warp speed, not because of rules, regulations and cap-and-trade decrees but because of free markets and economics. Two factors are driving this sea change. First, the price of our traditional fuels – oil, gas and coal – has risen dramatically. Second, the silent and inexorable march of technology has dramatically reduced the costs of clean alternative energy sources such as wind turbines and photovoltaics, which converts sunlight into electricity. The result will be a dramatic reduction in the emission of greenhouse gases – without politicians passing a single additional piece of legislation. How have we come to this point? Blame it on oil prices and technology. The extraordinary increase in the price of hydrocarbons and coal has created a price umbrella under which competing technologies can flourish. Already, clean wind energy is increasing by leaps and bounds. In the past five years, more than 5 gigawatts of wind turbine capacity has been built in the American state of Texas alone; on days when the winds whistle along the plains, wind energy represents just under 10 percent of the electrical supply in the Lone Star State. Today, wind energy is economic at about 7 cents per kilowatt hour, and that is without factoring in production tax credits. A few years ago, that cost was 15 to 20 cents. Compare the 7 cents for wind energy with the 12 cents per kilowatt hour required to build a gas-fired power plant, and you can see why there is a veritable land rush to harness wind energy. Texas is not the only state in the US where the gravitational pull of economics and markets is working. Across the country, the price of electricity has skyrocketed for homeowners and businesses. This steep increase is creating a wide opening for technologies such as photovoltaics. The cost of this technology has fallen over the past few decades and is about ready for prime time. That retail electricity prices are increasing by as much as 30 percent this year will only accelerate the arrival of the “liftoff” phase of photovoltaics. Also, retail electricity prices in New York may soon be headed to 30 cents per kilowatt hour. At those prices, an investment in a photovoltaic array on the rooftop of a house will pay for itself in fewer than 10 years, resulting in a greater than 10 percent return on one’s capital cost. Compared to the sub-5 percent yield on municipal bonds, this return represents an extraordinary investment. So, without a gavel coming down in a single additional legislative session, wind and the sun will become much bigger contributors to our national electricity mix. And an added benefit is that they generate absolutely no greenhouse gases. One more fast-approaching major change will all but guarantee that curtailment of greenhouse gases becomes an issue of the past: the advent of the electric car. Improvements in battery technology mean that in the next five to 10 years, plug-in hybrid electric vehicles will finally be on our roads. Within the next two to three decades, the gasoline-fired internal combustion engine automobile will no longer be sold. Since gasoline accounts for more than a third of worldwide oil demand, the rise of plug-in hybrids represents a mega-change in terms of emissions. Plug-in hybrids are dramatically cheaper to operate than today’s cars. They will consume about 2 cents’ worth of electricity to travel one mile, compared with the current 20- to 25-cent cost of driving a mile using gasoline. If consumers flock to them because of their lower operating costs, and they will, the resulting reduction in greenhouse gases will be a benefit of extraordinary proportion –one that the Kyoto crowd thought could be achieved only through draconian regulation. These changes will take place not only in the United States but worldwide. These technologies will be adopted simply because they are cheaper than their hydrocarbon-burning cousins. The old world of burning hydrocarbons to generate energy and power automobiles is on the way out because it is being priced out of the market. In the next few decades, it is possible that the only thing oil products will be used for is to power airplanes, heavy vehicles and ships. All that is required on the part of those wanting to reduce greenhouse gases is a little patience so these new technologies can be adopted by the market. So there is a silver lining in the run-up of hydrocarbon prices. These elevated costs are causing a dramatic change in our energy and automobile mix that will result in significantly less greenhouse gas emissions in the next few decades. The change is already on the way based on today’s technology, and it will only quicken with the technological advances that are sure to come. Without a doubt, the answer is blowin’ in the wind. The writer works with companies with interests in offshore drilling and
natural gas. By arrangement with LA Times-Washington Post
|
|
Obama shuns foreign journalists WASHINGTON – Barack Obama is on his way to Europe, where an adoring public awaits. But I wonder if the reception would be quite so enthusiastic if Obama’s fans across the Atlantic knew a dirty little secret of his remarkable presidential campaign: Although Obama portrays himself as the best candidate to engage the rest of the world and restore America’s image abroad, and many Americans support him for that reason, so far he has almost completely refused to answer questions from foreign journalists. When the press plane leaves tonight for his trip, there will be, as far as I know, no foreign media aboard. The Obama campaign has refused multiple requests from international reporters to travel with the candidate. As a German correspondent in Washington, I am accustomed to the fact that American politicians spare little of their limited time for reporters from abroad. This is understandable: Our readers, viewers and listeners cannot vote in U.S. elections. Even so, Obama’s opponents have managed to make at least a small amount of time for international journalists. John McCain has given many interviews. Hillary Clinton gave a few. President Bush regularly holds round-table interviews with media from the countries to which he travels. Only Obama dismisses us so consistently. In September 2007, I gave a lecture in Iowa titled “The U.S. in the World: How They See Us.” People in the audience asked me about the working conditions of foreign journalists and were surprised to learn how little access Obama had given us. Several Iowans wrote to his campaign to protest. In contrast to me, they did hear back: In a letter dated Nov. 24, the campaign assured one of these people that Obama cares about the foreign media and wants to increase openness. The letter even said that my contact information had been forwarded to the campaign’s communications department. There was no follow-up Since I followed the Obama campaign in its early stages and published a sympathetic (and widely read) book in German about the Illinois senator, I probably have more access than most. I know the Obama “policy advisers” in Washington think tanks and the like; sometimes I manage a fleeting encounter with the senator’s press staff at campaign events. Yet I can only dream of an interview with the candidate. To my knowledge, no foreign journalist has had one. A reported interview in France’s Politique Internationale last summer turned out to be a fake. In February, Obama gave Israel’s Yediot Ahronot written answers to written questions about his views on Israel and the Middle East. Perhaps Obama considers members of the foreign media a risk rather than an opportunity. Or perhaps we’re witnessing the arrogance that comes from being so close to power. One of his campaign advisers told me recently: “Why should we take the time for foreign media, since there is Obamania around the world?” The writer is Washington bureau chief of Der Tagesspiegel, a Berlin-based daily. By arrangement with
LA Times-Washington Post
|
|
Inside Pakistan Pakistan’s new trade policy, announced last week, has led to an intense debate with India figuring in it prominently. The provocation is the enlarged list of items which can be imported from India. As a result of this, India’s annual exports to Pakistan are expected to rise to $4 billion annually against the present level of $1.8 billion. Pakistan’s exports to India are worth $350 million. Some analysts, who have the habit of looking in a negative way at anything in which India finds a mention, have dubbed Pakistan’s Trade Policy 2008-09 as “India-specific”. According to these critics, “this will bring Pakistan in a relationship of further ‘inequality’ with India”. Criticising those indulging in scare-mongering for the heck of it, Daily Times says, “From General Zia’s 40 items we are now importing 1500, most of them strategic raw materials. And we have not been ‘let down’ or become ‘dependent’ on India in any negative way. On the basis of this experience, in fact, we would be well advised to create an ‘interest group’ in India comprising exporters to Pakistan. (There is already a beginning of it in the Punjab, Haryana and Delhi Chamber of Commerce and Industry.) “The intermeshing of economic interests is always more reliable compared to political compacts made when there is little mutual trust. On the other hand, the ‘profit motive’ is blind to politics and endures beyond the alarums of war and finally compels states to allow peace to prevail ‘for profit’.” According to Business Recorder, “…it cannot be denied that importing from India has one in-built advantage that must far outweigh all other considerations: its proximity renders transport costs much lower than if we import from anywhere else in the world. In this context, the decision of the Commerce Minister to further liberalise Indian imports is to be appreciated. In the context of overall Indo-Pak trade relations, it seems politic to making this unilateral gesture at this time when the signing of the Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline deal is expected shortly... It is the economic partnership between the two countries that will eventually lead to peace in the region….”
Unimpressive speech People in Pakistan are unable to understand why Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani chose 11 pm, not a viewer-friendly hour, for his maiden televised address to the nation. The specific reason for the speech is also not known. Some papers say he might have decided to explain why his government remains almost dysfunctional. The News commented, “The Gilani-led government needs to prove it is able to deliver. Mere pledges are no longer enough. These mean putting in place concrete steps to offer people relief and an end to the sense of drift that has persisted for the last three months. The fire seen when the Prime Minister put his initial 100-day programme before people needs to be re-discovered.” Merely saying that “good news” will be there soon on the issue relating to the deposed judges will not do. Time is running out, as the Pakistan Bar Council has announced a “disobedience movement” to be launched on August 14 if the status quo ante is not restored by that date. According to Business Recorder, Mr Gilani “skipped over the hundred-plus days of his government, not surprisingly blaming his inability to turn the tide on the previous government. What really matters is not what Prime Minister Gilani said in his maiden address to the nation, but what he did not or could not say.”
There is widespread uneasiness among the people about the Pakistan government’s inability to take on terrorism, “ravaging the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) and parts of the NWFP”. As The Frontier Post described it, “What the (Pakistani) nation is up against is visibly not an ordinary phenomenon of extremism or militancy… The new leadership must bear in mind that the challenge it is up against is stupendous…. This hydra-headed monster needs a no-nonsense approach to deal with it.” The Peshawar-based Left-leaning paper’s comment has come in the context of a meeting of leaders of the ruling coalition called by Prime Minister Gilani on July 23. In an article in Dawn (July 22), Mahmood Shah, a former Secretary (Home and Tribal Affairs), NWFP, says: “The fact is that Talibanisation is taking over the country rapidly due to the lack of any tangible counter-strategy from the government’s side.… The government appears to be clueless about how to respond to the crisis.”
|
|
|
|
| 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 | |
