The Tribune, Chandigarh, India

Ominous attack
Terrorists show their reach in Pakistan

WEDNESDAY’S attack on Pakistan Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gillani’s motorcade is ominous. Mr Gillani was not in the car, but the bullet marks that the terrorists left on the vehicle are proof enough of their reach. It is apparently the handiwork of Tehreek-e-Taliban which has threatened large-scale suicide bombings if military action in the tribal areas does not stop forthwith. Right now the government itself is in disarray and does not know which way it wants to go. It has used the advent of the holy month of Ramzan to declare a complete cessation of military operations in the region, but cannot use that fig leaf for too long. The civilian government will have to make up its mind soon enough whether it wants to hunt with the hound or run with the hare.

Pakistan’s dilemma is the result of the dual policy it has followed all along, under which it is a partner of the US war on terror on the one hand and an active perpetrator of terrorism on the other. The killers are now turning their guns on the patrons themselves and Pakistan does not know where to run.

But India will have to be on guard. The internal trouble in Pakistan does not mean that India will get any respite from the mischief planned in and executed from Pakistan. Whatever may happen to Pakistan itself, it is ever ready to foment trouble in India and Afghanistan. The recent incidents of terror in Kashmir and also the concerted efforts to make militants cross the international border in the Jammu sector while the ceasefire is violated repeatedly by the Pakistani Army are an indicator that it will continue to inflict “a thousand wounds”. Ironically, its game plan has been exposed fully before the international community, though the latter is not too keen to curb it. As far as India is concerned, a democratic and stable Pakistan suits it the best. After all, no one wants its nuclear arsenal to fall into renegade hands. It is another matter that Pakistan cannot get over the phobia that India is out to destabilise it.

Prachanda gets going
Deeds can speak louder than words

WITH the expansion of Nepal’s first post-monarchy cabinet bringing on board other members of the Maoist-led coalition, Nepalese Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal ‘Prachanda’ appears to have overcome some of the starting trouble. His government can be said to have a full and functional cabinet that reflects the colours of the coalition. With the induction of 15 more members, the Communist Party of Nepal-UML and smaller coalition partners, too, have joined the government. The CPN-UML, which is the third largest party in the Constituent Assembly, had boycotted the swearing-in ceremony of the new cabinet on August 22 after the CPN-Maoist refused to meet their demands. The CPN-UML wanted that its leader Bam Dev Gautam should be ranked No. 2 in the cabinet with the Home portfolio. The Maoists, who had wanted the finance minister to be designated as the No. 2, have now relented.

With the elimination of the strains that had resulted in a stand-off between the CPN-Maoist and the CPN-UML, and Mr Gautam being appointed as the second-ranking minister and given charge of Home, the worst of the differences have been put behind. Mr Prachanda has a full-fledged council of 24 ministers, including three deputy prime ministers, and his emphasis on accommodation rather than confrontation is reassuring.

Mr Prachanda has identified three key challenges: concluding the peace process, writing a new constitution and ushering in economic progress. Few would disagree that these are compelling priorities for the government to address, though there may be differences on the principles and methods of doing so. In this context, Mr Prachanda’s efforts to ease the “fears” of the international community about the policy implications of his promised “economic revolution” will be measured against the actual initiatives his government takes. As he himself admitted, transforming the international community’s fear into trust will determine the pace of Nepal’s economic progress. Therefore, the first steps should be calculated to create a climate of trust founded on consensual decision-making.

Thought for the Day

When good people in any country cease their vigilance and struggle, then evil men prevail. — Pete Seeger

ARTICLE

Pak power structure & India
30 ceasefire breaches convey a message
by Inder Malhotra

MORE than 30 violations of an across-the-board ceasefire that had miraculously endured for nearly five years by the Pakistan Army, not by non-state actors, in a matter of weeks cannot be a mere accident. Ominously, the latest, though by no means the last, breach took place not across the Line of Control (LoC) but across the international border in the Jammu sector. The relentless firing enabled infiltrating terrorists to get in and immediately perpetrate the chilling outrage on the outskirts of Jammu City.

Remarkably, all this has happened amidst deep turmoil within Pakistan itself of which Wednesday’s attack on Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gillani’s motorcade is an alarming symbol. Quick on the heels of the ouster of the former military dictator, General (retired) Pervez Musharraf the fragile coalition between the Pakistan People’s Party, led by Asif Zardari, who also runs the government while Gillani is the nominal Prime Minister, and Nawaz Sharif’s party, the Pakistan Muslim League (N), broke down without threatening the government’s continuance for the present, Zardari’s announcement of his candidature for the presidency without consulting anyone has annoyed friends and foes alike even if his election is all but assured. Pakistan’s Thereek-e-Taliban is threatening large-scale suicide bombings if military action in the tribal areas does not stop. The beleaguered government has used the advent of the holy month of Ramzan to declare a complete cessation of military operations in the region.

This is by no means all. The country’s economy is a shambles. The inflation rate is 25 per cent or twice as high as in India. Foreign Exchage reserves have plummeted. Above all, atta, the most essential requirement of the average Pakistani, is often not available because of huge smuggling to Afghanistan to feed NATO troops and the Afghan Army..

All this, however, is for the civilian government leaders to sort out as best it can. India policy, America policy and nuclear policy are the exclusive preserve of the Army. So, in relation to ceasefire with India, it is literally calling the shots. It would be wrong to assume that in reversing the past policy General Ashfaq Kiyani and his Corps Commanders have acted casually or in a fit of absent-mindedness. They have thought things through and concluded that as long as they do not allow things to go too far, they need not expect any major military riposte from India.

Another crucial calculation of the Pakistani military evidently is that it would be remiss if it does not exploit to the full the horrendous mess India itself has created in Jammu and Kashmir Communally surcharged regional rivalries do provide Pakistan with an opportunity, even if the situation slowly simmers down, as it seems to be. The water would remain troubled enough thanks to the free run of the valley the separatists and secessionists have had, for others to fish in.

There is also an American dimension to the matter. Of late, the United States has intensified its pressure on Pakistan to either take firm military action in its tribal areas against hose who offer the Taliban of Afghanistan sanctuaries and support for attacks across the Pak-Afghan border or risk direct American military action in these areas. Only the other day General Kiyani was called to a secret mid-Ocean meeting, aboard a US naval ship, with the US Chairman Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen.

According to Ayesha Siddiqa, one of Pakistan’s best informed and most respected analysts, in Gen. Kiyani’s view unilateral American action in the borderlands is turning from “possible” into “probable”. Yet the high-level meeting of civilian and military leaders, held before the breakdown of the ruling coalition, at which the General gave his assessment, decided to follow in the tribal areas “a mixture of both political negotiations and military operations”. This is a measure of the contrary pressures on the civilian leaders. If some are asking for stringent action, others argue that peaceful negotiations with tribal leaders are “not merely the best but also the only way forward”.

In the intense US-Pakistan interaction - Gen. Kiyanai has also been on a secret visit to Kabul to talk with American and NATO commanders - Afghanistan occupies a key position, This has given Pakistan room to press home its objections to India’s growing presence and influence in Afghanistan. Pakistan’s “enemy”, India, Islamabad says, “is squeezing us from both eastern and western borders”. Pakistan wants the US to “do something about it”. .

It is in this context that National Security Adviser M. K. Narayanan’s two recent statements about Musharraf should be viewed. Some days before the retired General’s inevitable departure, Narayanan drew flak for saying that Musharraf’s exit would create a “vacuum” in Pakistan. Continuing faith in, and support to, the discredited military ruler who had outlived his utility jars. In any case, the people of Pakistan who had welcomed his coup in 1999 had turned against him by last year. The February 18 general election was a clear verdict against him.

Yet the NSA’s latest statement in a TV interview, though elliptical, is more to the point. He has stated that since Musharraf’s departure, the notorious Pakistani Intelligence agency, ISI, has become “hyperactive”. The increase in ceasefire violations and in attempts of ISI-backed Pakistani terrorist groups to infiltrate into India, especially J & K supports his point. Without saying so, Narayanan is drawing attention to this country’s dilemma in dealing with Pakistan.

Unquestionably, a democratic, strong and stable Pakistan would be in the best interest of India and conducive to peace in the subcontinent. But the trouble is that all attempts to bring back democracy or civilian government to Pakistan so far have been at best spurious. aThe reality in Pakistan since at least 1958 has been that the man with the gun either directly rules the country or stands behind the throne when it is expedient to have a civilian president or prime minister or both. Benazir Bhutto took the lid off when she told the Americans after her dismissal as prime minister that the Army, and the then President Ghulam Ishaq Khan, had kept her in the dark. She told Shyam Bhatia, her biographer, that when she asked General Aslam Beg for a briefing on the nuclear programme he referred her to President Khan who tersely told her that there was no need for her to know. Basically that situation hasn’t changed and will not change even after Zardari becomes president. To have any illusions would be dangerous.

MIDDLE

Mauke ka Afsar!
by S. Zahur H. Zaidi

Some years ago, when I was still a student, I used to often wonder, “What is the Government?” I knew Abraham Lincoln’s definition that our government was of the people, by the people and for the people etc. etc. But I could never figure out what it really meant.

Later, I went on to discover that government actually refers to a set of omnipotent human species called Afsar who represent the mighty government in many forms. A brush with the government is always an experience. Good or bad depends broadly on two factors: how you deal with the Afsar and your luck — which Afsar you land up with.

Given these two factors the officer on the spot assumes great significance. Simply put, we Indians live by the maxim — Never antagonise the Mauke ka Afsar. All successful fellow countrymen have learnt this lesson by heart. Those who haven’t can only be pitied.

I learnt this valuable lesson from a senior colleague while training to join the government. He said, “Remember always that Mauke ka Afsar is very important. No matter who he is or what his rank is.”

I had just become an Afsar myself and had delusions of grandeur. He noticed my skepticism. To convince me he went on to narrate a personal experience.

He was posted as an ADM when he attended a training course. He, along with a colleague was to return by a train that left at a late hour from Old Delhi Railway station. They reached the station early. It had been a long day and it was close to midnight. They needed to rest.

They found a bench. But it had a police constable sleeping peacefully on it. This seemed a minor problem for the two senior magistrates. They did what came obviously to them. They shook him rudely and when he woke up to a start they asked him to get up to make space for them.

The fellow got up slowly and extricated his lathi. Then in the foulest Policiya language he asked them to stand up. My friend’s colleague shouted, “Speak with courtesy. We both are senior government officers.” A volley of abuses came as an answer after which the cop added, “I’ll set that seniority right once I have deposited you both at the police station. Now will you two jokers get up or I use my lathi to drive some sense in you.”

My friend was smarter. He quickly got up lest the cop actually implements the threat. His companion also obeyed. As soon as they got up, the cop snarled, “Look what you both were sitting on?” The two realised that they were sitting on the cop’s khaki beret cap. Big mistake indeed. One of them said, “We are sorry Bhaisaheb. We didn’t notice”.

“To hell with your sorry”, said the constable. “Now pick up my cap and examine it carefully”, he thundered.

The duo complied dutifully. “What do you see? I’ll tell you idiots. See the metal piece pinned on it. This is the Lion of Bharat. I wear it with pride, on my head and you buffoons parked your ample backsides on it. This is sacrilege. Disrespect to the nation. It is a big offence. Come with me to the thana where we will set you right”.

Both the magistrates used all the diplomacy they could muster at that hour of crisis to get out of the sticky situation. At the end of it all the cop was magnanimous enough to pardon their grave act of causing insult to the nation but only after they had apologised profusely before the Mauke ka Afsar.

OPED

Europe’s dilemma
What to do about Russian bullying?
by Mary Dejevsky

Whatever you think about the conflict in Georgia – and opinions about the rights and wrongs of it could hardly be more polarised – there is one aspect on which there could surely be wide agreement.

This fast and furious little war, with far wider implications, was an ideal opportunity for the European Union to show its diplomatic mettle.

Countries the world over have been crying out for the EU to take a more activist role as mediator, where better to start than with South Ossetia – potentially highly dangerous, but potentially soluble, too?

In fact, the EU’s first moves were positive, as international responses go. The French presidency of the EU placed the onus on Nicolas Sarkozy and his foreign minister, Bernard Kouchner, to react in the name of Europe.

Exhibitionist and interventionist politicians both, they made an admirably prompt start, exchanging their sacrosanct August holidays for a few rounds of shuttle diplomacy.

Within days there was a six-point agreement, validated by the signatures of both sides. It was a promising start: a single message, activist diplomacy, and a realistic awareness of what was possible on the ground.

At which point everything fell apart, and a head of steam built up once again behind the rhetoric – except that this time it was not just Russia and Georgia doing the shouting, but their respective cheerleaders, which meant pretty much everyone against the Russians.

And the EU voice of reason, as exemplified by the mediators, M. Sarkozy and M. Kouchner, was progressively drowned out by a different and more diffuse argument: not the small question of how to solve the problem of South Ossetia, but the big question of what to do about Russia.

The reason the focus shifted was that the east and central Europeans – who became full members of the EU in 2004 – could see the war in Georgia only through the prism of their bitter experience.

For them, it was just another example of Soviet-style Russian bullying and a red flag they could wave at “old” Europe to illustrate the justice of their fears.

Now I yield to no one in my delight at the fall of the Berlin Wall, the liberation of east and central Europe and the death of Soviet communism.

These “new” European countries are fully-fledged nation states with a reclaimed sense of their own identity. Visit any one of them, and I defy you not to sense, and share, their sheer joy at being able to be themselves.

Given history and geography, their preoccupation with the perceived threat from the east can also be understood. In seeking not only EU but also Nato membership, they were defending their vital interests as they saw them. Their single-mindedness paid off.

The trouble is that while the “old” Europeans left past enmities at the door when they joined the EU – that was the whole point of joining – too many of the “new” Europeans saw the EU, like Nato, as a means of pursuing old quarrels from a new position of strength.

Recent recriminations in “new” Europe about who did what under communism demonstrate how much is still not resolved. For these countries, the prospect of a new Cold War is ever-present quite simply because, for them, the old Cold War is not yet at an end.

In 2000, Jacques Chirac’s fears about EU enlargement drew reproaches of condescension and worse. The official US and British view was preferred; that these countries would form a “bridge” to Russia.

Over time, though, M. Chirac looks more right than wrong. Popular European opposition to the Iraq war was less effective than it could have been because of divisions between “old” and “new” Europe that were well exploited by the US.

As Iraq faded as an issue, EU efforts to reach a realistic and mutually beneficial relationship with Russia were repeatedly thwarted by a chorus of “new” Europeans warning of the worst.

There are many reasons why the EU should review relations with Russia, most of which predate the recent conflict over South Ossetia. A mutual – yes, mutual – interest in reliable energy sales and supplies is one.

Moscow’s relations with the ethnic Russian populations living within the EU is another; and the permanent demarcation of post-Soviet borders, which requires a resolution of the so-called “frozen conflicts” such as South Ossetia, is a third.

That discussions on all these issues are coloured by the very particular experience of the “new Europeans” is a good part of the explanation why no solutions are being reached. Alas, that failure is now water under a premature enlargement that has proved more of a block than a bridge.

By arrangement with The Independent

An uphill task for Mayawati in Lok Sabha polls
by Satish Misra

THE prevailing media perception is that Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Mayawati is going to repeat her electoral performance of the 2007 assembly elections in the coming Lok Sabha polls.

Almost every day one or the other knowledgeable expert or newsperson writes confidently that the BSP is going to romp home with a much larger share of the 80 Lok Sabha MPs, which the biggest state sends to Parliament in every general election.

But the ground political reality in the light of the emerging understanding between the Samajwadi Party and the Congress tells a different story. Even if we don’t take the performance of the two parties in the 2004 Lok Sabha elections in consideration and make our assessment on the basis of the assembly election results, the conclusion may be different to the media perception.

The BSP had won the assembly elections on the slogan of “Sarvjan Samaj” and Mayawati was hailed as the architect of “social engineering” and a new era had dawned on Uttar Pradesh and from now on all other political parties had been reduced to the number two, three and four positions.

Within a period of 16 months of her governance, disillusionment with her style of functioning and governance appears to be growing.

The first indication of the phenomenon was available when Mayawati announced at a mass rally in Lucknow that she had decided on her successor and he or she was from her caste.

The much hyped Brah-min-Dalit understanding, which catapulted the BSP to its unprecedented victory in the assembly elections, appears to be fragile as serious complaints against her Brahmin lieutenant, S C Mishra, can be heard on dhabas and street corner beetle shops.

Brahmins at large accuse him of showering favours on his close relatives and his legal colleagues. Other denominations of Brahmins are not willing to accept Mishra as their leader.

Even in bureaucratic circles, her graph has been going down because of her swinging mood and style of taking impulsive decisions. Her short temper and arbitrariness have annoyed many.

She has made herself inaccessible to the common man and, as a result, is not getting any feedback from the grassroots. Even journalists, who normally have an access to a Chief Minister, are a disappointed lot.

“She should have concentrated on UP and then should have aspired for Delhi’s throne”, a cobbler observed at a street corner in Barabanki and added “we voted her for improving the conditions in the state”.

With her popularity graph going down, SP leader Mulayam Singh Yadav’s announcements that if returned to power he would get all statues of Mayawati bulldozed has pleased many.

Large sections of the people, who discuss and debate in localities and street corners, feel that her programme of erecting her statues along with that of late Kanshiram and other monuments across the state is a utter wastage of precious resources, which could and should have been used for creating infrastructure and other public utilities.

In short, she and her government have failed to ignite the popular mind. In this background, the SP-Congress electoral alliance is going to pose a major electoral challenge to her.

The SP-Congress alliance has a major advantage. The Muslim vote, which matters in at least 28 Lok Sabha constituencies, is going to be consolidated in favour of this alliance. In these 28 constituencies, the Muslim electorate ranges between 42 per cent and 18 per cent. In the rest of the 52 constituencies, it ranges between 17 per cent and 6 per cent.

With the Muslim-Yadav combine consolidating, Brahmins would like to back the winning horse. This would not only help the SP to retain, if not increase, its tally of the 2004 general election but would also benefit the Congress.

The Congress is again in discussions. Congress General Secretary Rahul Gandhi’s matter-of-fact speech and his recent visit to the flood-affected areas on a boat have impacted the popular mind. He has also started stepping out to other areas of UP. His interactions with the poor and Dalits make Mayawati furious and people compare the two.

“Rahul at least meets some of us. Behanji, like an empress, only waves at us from a distance”, said Ram Sanehi, who works as a gardner in Akbarpur. Akbarpur, incidentally, is the Lok Sabha constituency from where Mayawati had won the last general election with 43.83 per cent of the votes.

The BJP, which won 10 Lok Sabha seats in 2004, appears to be in disarray. Its vote share stood at 19.67 per cent in 2004, which was down by 7.31 per cent compared to 1999. With the charisma of former Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee eluding the BJP in the coming Lok Sabha polls, it is difficult to imagine that its performance would improve. Its vote share may go up because of its shrill campaign on the Amarnath and Muslim appeasement issues, but its tally is sure to come down.

Those were the teachers
by Kailashnath Sud

Sixty-two years ago on my first day in school, I was crying and holding on to the skirts of Miss Stella Andrew and Miss Salima Atkins, both kindergarten teachers at St. Edwards School.

Kind faces, cajoling me not to cry: “Mom and Dad are outside”, they told me. Miss Salima gave me a toffee, the taste still lingers in my mouth and their beautiful faces still clear in my mind’s eye.

The parents hand over their little ones to teachers in nursery schools. With the finest chisel and hammer, they shape the little ones into engineers, lawyers, administrators and doctors. All from tiny tots handed over to them...crying.

“Can we ever repay our teachers”? I often ask myself, no one ever can... A robust teacher can teach excellence…and make the nation robust. We all know what we were before some teachers came into our lives

Shimla boasts of teachers like Principal W.I. Mc’Keogh of St. Edwards, Mr. Goldstein of Bishop Cotton, Satya Parkash and SR Batra. They were teachers who modified the thinking of thousands of students and turned them into fine human beings. All giants in their respective fields.

A boy, aged four, was brought by his father from Libya to the famous Master Sita Ram with a request “Sir, please put your hand on his head, the way you put on mine”

The great teacher turned up in the evening with some marbles in his pocket and started the little one to count, with fabulous results 25 years later. Six decades ago he had taught the father how to write with a “bamboo kullum, an ink pot, and a takhti”. He was right when he had said: ”this is a sure way of having a good handwriting”

Principal Santokh Singh Anand of the Medical College, Amritsar, had taken up our third-year class to teach surgery in 1960. He was asked by Chief Minister Partap Singh Kairon to set up the PGI at Chandigarh. Half way into teaching surgery to our class and to set up the PGI was a challenge.

He drove to Chandigarh twice a week and taught us, “his third year students” the rest of the week. One and a half years later he shifted to Chandigarh to take charge at the PGI. Then he would come twice a week to Amritsar to finish the surgery course with the final year class, our batch now.

The peak of his commitment to teaching came when one cold, wet January morning in 1963, he turned up at the lecture theater, dabbing his badly blistered face with a white handkerchief. While driving he had some engine trouble.

In a hurry to reach Amritsar in time, he opened the car radiator cap which spewed boiling hot water on to his face, causing second-degree burns.

He reached the lecture theater at the appointed hour “lest I should fail my commitment to my final-year class,” he was heard saying later.

Great teachers leave this world to ascend to those immortal mansions above, whence all goodness emanates. “They live in the minds, nay, in the hearts of those they taught”.

I have loved my teachers starting at St. Edwards through BM College, Shimla, and at the Medical College, Amritsar. They live in me… and I like it. All honour and glory to them. They made me whatever I am. God bless them!