The Tribune, Chandigarh, India

Kaiga sabotage
Alarming, even if “insider mischief”

THE consequences of any sabotage or mischief at an atomic power plant can be catastrophic. As such, it is natural that the news about drinking water being contaminated with radioactive material at the Kaiga plant in Kaiga has caused nationwide concern. The authorities have come out with the hurried explanation that the radioactive material tritium stolen from the reactor building was put in the water cooler by a disgruntled scientist. Presumably, he or they played this vicious prank to get even with colleagues, who are now under treatment for having received radiation doses higher than the prescribed limits.

The Nuclear Power Corporation of India and the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board have been stressing the point that there was no radiation leak in the plant itself and no violation of the operating procedure. Nor was there any security breach, it is claimed. But apprehensions in the public mind remain. If an employee could thus place the lives of his colleagues at risk, where is the guarantee that something even more sinister cannot be done to the plant itself? There is urgent need to go through the entire safety-related procedure with a fine toothcomb. After all, there can be no compromise with security at such vital installations.

As a matter of abundant caution, it will also be necessary to double-check through independent agencies whether the incident was indeed as trivial as it is made out to be. It is yet to be fully explained how the highly radioactive tritium could be taken out of the fortified Kaiga nuclear reactor building at all. What has to be borne in mind is that the Indian atomic power plants are very much on the hit list of the terrorists and it is necessary to maintain a zero-tolerance vigil. It must be underlined that whether it is an insider job or not, India cannot afford to have a repeat of such a shocking incident.

Technical glitches at CAT
Many aspirants face harrowing time

Meritorious students appearing for the highly competitive CAT examination for entry into India’s prestigious business schools are expectedly under great stress, worried that they may miss the bus. This year they were more apprehensive than usual for the pattern had changed from the traditional pen and paper to online. To top it all, in the last couple of days they faced anxious moments that could have easily been avoided. Technical glitches marked CAT entrance in centres across the country affecting hundreds of aspirants, who couldn’t take the exam that went online for the first time. With chaos and confusion reigning at many centres, doubts have been raised about the new system. The fact that the problem continued for two days implies that the glitches were not minor but were a systemic failure that cannot be dismissed as teething problems.

Software experts have already dismissed the virus theory. The stark reality is that there was lack of preparedness and proper redundancies were not built in the system. Clearly, Prometric, the US-based company conducting the examination, had not done its homework well despite being given adequate time to set up the systems. Given the prestige value attached to the CAT examination, the least they could have done was to have conducted extensive mock trials. Several educational institutions in the country have switched to the online system successfully. The first ever online CAT examination has already seen a decline in the number of registered aspirants due to the change in format. Students who could not take the examination were not only inconvenienced but also faced uncertainty.

It is only in the fitness of things that examinations are being rescheduled for those who missed out for no fault of theirs. But it is crucial that students are informed properly. While caution has to be exercised that such incidents do not recur, accountability too must be fixed. For at stake is not only the future of students but also the credibility of the business schools’ admission process. The challenge of taking the CAT should not be allowed to turn into a wasted opportunity for aspiring students, howsoever small their number might be.

Thought for the Day

The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all possible worlds, and the pessimist fears that is true.— James Branch Cabell

ARTICLE

PM’s visit to US and after
Washington makes balancing moves
by S. Nihal Singh

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s visit to the United States and the honour he received as the first state guest of the Obama administration yielded predictable results. In essence, the United States wanted to convey the message that India mattered to Washington despite the new administration’s preoccupations with China and Pakistan. India, on its part, made clear its problems with an assertive China and a Pakistan that seemingly refuses to face the terrorism threat that is now rebounding on its own security forces and civilians.

In the throes of deciding the future strategy on Afghanistan, President Barack Obama would have found it useful to listen to the Indian perspective and would perhaps have been encouraged by New Delhi’s belief that any effort to cut losses and run would be disastrous. In other words, New Delhi’s vote was for sending the right American signals that it would remain in Afghanistan till the local establishment was ready to take over full responsibility.

But the India-US relationship encompasses a broader canvas that takes in Pakistan, China and questions of the nuclear treaty and trade and climate issues. Dr Manmohan Singh has said that he was at a loss to understand Chinese motives in the new assertiveness it has adopted in relations with India. He would have sought to probe the American understanding of China’s attitude to the world and how it sees regional equations.

The nuclear issue became a new irritant in the Indo-US relationship because New Delhi’s perception was that the new administration was tardy in completing the processes required to implement the provisions of the reprocessing part of the deal. How effective American assurances are on this score will be apparent with time. Trade issues involve the pace and extent of the opening up of the Indian economy and the procedural hurdles that stand in the way.

President Obama, of course, has many problems on his plate and he has to balance the compulsions of following a conciliatory policy towards China, stemming in part from the salience of US treasury bonds China holds, with US strategic interests in Asia and the world. The extravagant rhetoric used by President Obama’s Secretary of State, Mrs Hillary Clinton, in describing the US-China relationship and the anointing of a Big Two condominium by Mr Jimmy Carter’s National Security Adviser, Mr Zbignew Brzezinski, to solve the world’s problems had alarm bells ringing in New Delhi. By inviting the Indian Prime Minister as his first state visitor, President Obama has sought to correct the balance to an extent signalled by Mrs Clinton’s early visit to Beijing and his own journey there, taking care not to meet the Dalai Lama before he went.

Given US responsibilities, such exercises in realpolitik are par for course. What concerns India is that President Obama’s distractions in Afghanistan and Pakistan and in building an understanding with China do not hurt Indian interests. A case in point is the gratuitous reference to Indo-Pakistani relations in the joint statement he chose to issue in Beijing. It is, of course, no secret that Beijing has been consistently playing a pro-Pakistan role in South Asia for its own reasons and any attempt to legitimise China’s role in the subcontinent by the sole surviving superpower can only be at India’s expense.

The US is understandably focused on Pakistan in relation to the war it is fighting in Afghanistan. The bumper civilian aid given to Pakistan over and above the military aid that continues to flow to Islamabad presents problems for India, given the history of how American arms have been employed against India and the mindset of the Pakistani military establishment. Nor is it a secret that Pakistan looks at India’s effective aid programme in Afghanistan with suspicion.

The different Indian and American perspectives are understandable, given Washington’s worldwide interests and the starkly contrasting neighbourhoods. The basis of an understanding is the convergence of interests in a number of areas. India can provide the only meaningful counterweight to China in Asia despite the formal denial by the two sides. Second, the Indo-US nuclear treaty does represent a big push by President Obama’s predecessor to give India a freer hand. It was not a popular measure in many circles in the US and it is up to the present administration not to fritter away the gains made during the George W. Bush era.

India has an obvious interest in cultivating good relations with the US in a number of fields: the burgeoning trade, the links forged by a growing Indian American community, the climate issue, India’s future ambitions to secure a permanent seat in the United Nations Security Council, the tempering of the US arms trade to Islamabad and the emerging scenario in the new world that is beginning to take shape. Perhaps, the most difficult task is to sensitise the Obama administration to the state of power play in Asia. It is foolish to work on the basis of a US-China condominium because it will not work.

The success of the Manmohan Singh visit will be determined by the policies President Obama pursues in areas of vital Indian interest. Washington’s record has not been encouraging. The US chose to turn a blind eye to Pakistan’s nuclear weapons programme because it needed Islamabad’s help in defeating the Soviet Union in Afghanistan, and Washington desperately needs Islamabad’s cooperation in salvaging America’s war on terrorism in Afghanistan.

Admittedly, Pakistan has suffered in the process, but India has had to pay a big price as well because American priorities in Pakistan take precedence over the collateral damage such policies cause New Delhi. The basic value of the Prime Minister’s visit, therefore, boils down to making President Obama aware that there is an Indian dimension to the policies he might choose to follow with Pakistan and China.

Perhaps, Dr Manmohan Singh’s understated style of diplomacy suits President Obama’s own temperament. But the Indian Prime Minister is a long way to giving him the ultimate accolade he gave President Bush of “India loves you”.

MIDDLE

The Commissioner’s Assistant
by Robin Gupta

After a painstaking search in the Bengal Moffussil, a suitable tutor to instruct me in the finer nuances of Bengali was discovered in Siliguri of which I was Magistrate-in-Charge.

Mr B.N. Chakraborty, a tall thin gentleman in his early 70s with aquiline features, dressed in starched white apparel strode into my camp office early one morning. He had been advised by the English Office of the Collectorate to train me in appropriate application of the language.

When I offered him a cup of tea he tersely replied: “Horlicks please, if it is going”. Lowering himself into a chair Bishnu Babu, laid down the ground rules: “We shall cleave to the classics for there can be no short cuts or re-definition. I have taught three British members of the I.C.S. an acceptable degree of perfection”.

I was mesmerised by Bishnu Babu who seemed to have stepped out of the archives. “Never be indiscreet in word or action”. “Remember always, in high office wind and water carry forth your name far and wide, your reputation shall precede every post that you hold” quoted my mentor. Everything that happened or was worthy of happening, according to him would, in fact, happen “just then” (“Theek She Shamay”). Also he had internalised a sense of the immediate for the fiat of the Sarkar had to be executed without a moment’s delay. “Thatkhanat”.

Bishnu Babu told me about the affectionate eccentricities of a British Commissioner of the erstwhile Rajshahi division who would sit late in the evening clearing confidential papers in his large bungalow by the Teesta river, with his Confidential Assistant for company. After the day’s work, the Commissioner would call for his sundowner. Subsequently for a silver cutlery box.

The Confidential Assistant was stood against the opposite wall with the Commissioner darting knives outlining him. “After working with such an officer,” reminisced Bishnu Babu, “every vestige of fear was drained out of my system”.

Bishnu Babu was determined to ingrain in me classical Bangla, the exquisite language of bejewelled princes reclining on cushions in their marble palaces. We progressed slowly in syntax, inflection, eloquence and grammar.

In the process my tutor wafted me to the majestic peaks scaled by British Administrators in India. “Be prepared to lead the District from the front”, said Bishnu Babu in strangely martial tones. While grudgingly accepting the need for a British Colonel in the Cantonment, he shuddered at the albeit stray threat posed by any Police Superintendent to the magistracy. “Have you not heard of Mr Pennel, District Magistrate Midnapore at the end of the 19th century? You know, he went by the book and one morning placed the Police Superintendent under house arrest for insubordination after which he sailed away in his launch on tour for a month”.

Awestruck I meekly addressed my tutor: “You have witnessed the Empire in its full splendour”. “Yes, indeed,” said Bishnu Babu, “I will now tell you about the last British Deputy Commissioner of Darjeeling who at his farewell accepted a bouquet of flowers and handed them over to me stating “Bishnu Babu, Janin! Aiye Zila ta Apni Chaliye chen” (Do you know, it is you who have administered the District). He then handed me an envelope and can you imagine what it contained? It was the key of a house in Hakimpura that he had bought for my retirement”.

At sunset the District Magistrate saluted the flag outside his court and left for England.

OPED

Is Commonwealth’s role still relevant?
by Daniel Howden

IN an international calendar full to bursting with uncomfortable acronyms it's time for one of the worst of them: CHOGM. The Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting convened in Trinidad and Tobago on Friday for its bi-annual get together, which can ordinarily be counted upon to be in one of the warmer member states. Last time it was Uganda.

The agenda this year was dominated by the expected acceptance of Rwanda into the fold, something which nations such as Britain, Australia, Canada and Uganda have lobbied hard for.

Those less happy with the newcomer to the club are the agencies that have examined Rwanda's troubled record on human rights and found it wanting. They have lobbied against the central African country's acceptance.

What exactly is the Commonwealth?

That depends, both on who is asking and who is answering. Formerly the "British Commonwealth", the modern version came into being 50 years ago, shedding the British part of its tag and becoming the Commonwealth of Nations. The old club of the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa has since swollen to 54 countries, until it lost Zimbabwe, and is expected to return to that number.

To its supporters it is a British foreign policy success story that has come to encompass every region, religion and race on the planet, something no other organistation apart from the UN can boast.

It enables otherwise isolated and impoverished nations to network with powerful allies and be, in the words of one booster, "a decent club... which confers a sense of identity... no more no less."

While its membership is almost entirely made up of English-speaking former colonies that share a legal system and often a constitutional framework, Britain is no longer dominant in what is a voluntary association.

Are there any dissenters?

Yes. Many. Some see the Commonwealth as a peculiarly British consolation prize for the loss of Empire, that bolsters the UK's sense of importance while doing almost nothing else. A collection of not very important states brought together by the unhappy accident of having been colonised by the English.

It talks in high ideals but trades in a much more compromised reality, offering abusive regimes a fig-leaf of legitimacy and a platform that they would otherwise have to look for at the more crowded but equally grubby UN.

Considering that it confers no trade priveleges, has no influence on defence or economic policy, no executive authority and no sensible budget to play a global role it remains a talking shop at best and at worst a costly junket.

The countries that can would be better served by spending their time and money on organisations like Nato, the UN or trade blocs like the European Union.

Does anyone else want to join and, if so, why?

Yes they do. In fact, there's a queue. Sitting behind expectant Rwanda are Madagascar, Yemen, Algeria and Sudan. Previous unsuccessful suitors have included Cambodia and Palestine, while those with an appetite for being shouted at have even suggested this year that Ireland might rejoin.

As to why – there are several suggestions, and different aspirants offer differing explanations. Meetings like CHOGM give smaller nations the chance to lobby for bi-lateral trade deals, to influence the positions of bigger powers at forums with real bite like the World Trade Organisation (WTO).

Its formal and informal channels benefit the little guy, something that Guyana demonstrated when it floated its offer to protect the entirety of its standing forest in return for development aid on the sidelines of the Uganda meeting in 2007. Britain, eventually, declined but the idea got media coverage and Norway took them up on it this month to the tune of $250m.

Are those the only reasons?

Not exactly. A second look at the list suggests some worrying truths. Nations like Sudan, Yemen and to a lesser extent Madagascar may well like the Commonwealth precisely because it doesn't have the power to enforce international norms and has to rely on "constructive engagement" - a staple of regime's from Khartoum to Pyongyang in North Korea.

A talking shop which offers access to development aid and informal trade talks while conferring prestige and an international platform is hard to dislike. Let's not forget it also offers access to the Commonwealth Games, an international sporting event where the competition is so modest that even the UK can expect a decent medal haul and which was memorably introduced by the sports writer Frank Keating as "a bucketload of pointless contrivance."

Which high ideals does Commonwealth espouse?

On the tin it says that the grouping is about promoting democracy, good governance, human rights and prosperity. The Harare declaration in 1991 is billed as the Commonwealth's core set of principles and values.

Those include: world peace, economic development, the rule of law, a narrowing of the wealth gap, an end to racial discrimination, liberty regardless of race or creed and the "inalienable right to free democratic processes".

The setting for this declaration could hardly be more poignant. Since 1991 Zimbabwe's life expectancy has imploded, the regime has stoked vicious racial politics, collapsed the economy and stolen elections.

The reaction of the high-minded Commonwealth was labelled "spineless" in 2002 by this newspaper, as it dithered over ejecting Robert Mugabe's government, which walked out by itself the following year. Since then it has, in the words of the eminent constitutional expert Yashpal Ghai, "looked desperately for ways of doing nothing" about a host of crises. And only reluctantly suspended Pakistan, twice, and Fiji, once. Professor Ghai's assessment is that the grouping "couldn't care less about human rights".

What about the Queen?

All this leaves Her Majesty on a plane to Trinidad and Tobago, where she attended the latest CHOGM with typical seriousness. This despite 33 of her family of nations being republics, five having their own monarchs and only the remainder having her as their head of state.

Of them, Australia and Canada now openly debate and ocassionally vote on whether they still want Elizabeth II. When looking for a reason why the Republic of Ireland will not rejoin one need look no further, and it's hard to see Omar al-Bashir of Sudan rewriting the constitution in order to curry favour.

— By arrangement with The Independent

Fires of tribal oppression
by Kalpana Dharini

THERE are fourteen hairpin bends on the coiling hillroad that leads to Yelagiri; each one offers a view of 3,500 acres of verdant forest lands that surround this tribal hill station in northern Tamil Nadu. But with increasing regularity, this view also offers another spectacle: of long tongues of forest fire snaking their way through the trees and huge tracts of forest land disappearing under massive flares.

Suspicions arose and questions were raised about how ’natural’ these fires were, as the Forest Department continued to claim. But the truth, as the perpetrators themselves unhesitatingly admit, is simple. The fires are lit by the tribals.

Yelagiri is a tribal settlement of about 14 villages, flanked by four hills, in the district of Vellore, Tamil Nadu. Lying about 258 km to the north of Chennai, the people here speak Tamil and Malayalam, and call themselves the ‘Karalars’ which means ‘the people of the clouds’, or sometimes the ‘Malayalees’, ‘the people of the mountains.’

When the Forest Dwellers’ Act was passed in 2006, it was hailed as a revolutionary step, a long-awaited recognition of the rights of traditional forest dwellers. The ground realities, however, are vastly different. Riddled with loopholes and left to the discretion of the forest guards, the implementation of the Act has been one that has created several problems along the way. Yelagiri is no exception.

Under constant pressure from the forest officials to leave the jungles, the tribals have been fighting a losing battle to reclaim their rights to the lands that they have inhabited for generations. These communities are regularly served notices by the department concerned demanding that they move out. And when they refuse to obey, the harassment becomes more brazen.

Forest officials deny them entry into the jungles. And for communities that depend extensively on forest produce for their livelihood by collecting fruits, honey and vegetables that they sell in the local market, this effectively severs their lifeline.

“The families are too few in number to warrant a struggle. Moreover, this place has become a real-estate market with the local people selling off their lands,” said K.S. Ramamurthy, who started the Society for Development of Economically Weaker Sections in Yelagiri in 2004, which has been active in promoting primary education and computer training in schools in Vellore district. So the tribals hit back at the officials by setting the forests alight and hundreds of acres of land burn to cinders.

It is a fact that land prices in this pristine natural habitat have skyrocketed. Ten years ago, an acre of land in this relatively isolated hill station could be bought for Rs. 1 lakh. Now, the same plot of land costs over Rs.1.50 crores, a 150-fold increase. This means the pressure on the tribals to vacate their land is already immense.

Moreover, as real-estate sharks rip up the forests and sell them to the highest bidder, the land available for grazing and farming has shrunk drastically and the tribals are already struggling to escape this tightening noose. And in the case of a conflict between commercial interests and traditional rights, it is not difficult to say which one triumphs. So, this denial of access to common property resources comes as a fatal blow, ill-timed and devastating in its impact.

Interestingly, there is no concrete data available on the area of forest cover destroyed in a year, and nor are there any inquiries conducted to ascertain what caused a particular conflagration. “These fires are mainly because of the foreigners. The tribals are in no way connected to this,” said an official from the Tourist Information Centre in Yelagiri. The forest department also continues to claim that the fires are caused by transformer bursts, and tourists careless with their cigarettes and bonfires.

They added that the only way that the tribals are involved is the odd incident occurring owing to their superstitions. For instance, the officials allege that there is a belief among the tribals that burning crops can cure chronic stomach ailments, and that setting the remnants of harvested ‘manjam pul' (a yellow grass that carpets the hills) alight helps them to sprout again in the summer. They flatly refuse to consider these occurrences as a sign of protest of the tribals remonstrating their unfair actions.

What smoulders in Yelagiri is much more than the trees or the forests; it is the anger of a community abused and denigrated; their call for help when they fear no one is listening. For them, placing a burning torch to a tree is no easy option , it has been their source of life, shelter and edification for generations, and the desperation that drives them to it is perhaps beyond our comprehension. It is their last stand, their last resort. Whether we take heed is the only question that remains.

— Charkha Features

Delhi Durbar
Amar Singh unhappy in SP?

Amar Singh seems to be going through an existential crisis in his political life. Since Samajwadi Party president Mulayam Singh Yadav's trusted lieutenants Azam Khan, Raj Babbar and Beni Prasad Verma started walking out on Netaji, blaming Amar Singh for Mulayam's political degeneration and disconnect with people, Amar has been in a bit of a spot in his party.

And to make matters worse for him, Mulayam has appointed son Akhilesh the president of the UP unit of his party. Perhaps seeing no more future in the SP, Amar has once even threatened to quit the party.

Whether that was a serious threat or just an attempt to draw Mulayam's attention, Amar is clearly looking at other avenues to channel his political energy. He and his friend, Jayaprada, have started heaping praises on Rahul Gandhi.

Simultaneously, he has started making overtures to the BJP. First he went and met Advani. Last week he declared his affection for Sushma Swaraj before TV cameras on the doorstep of Parliament House.

Even his mock fight with S.S. Ahluwalia over the Liberhan report in the Upper House ended in both disclosing their long-standing camaraderie from the days they were college students in Kolkata and Youth Congress activists.

The clash had a queer side to it also. While the BJP members shouted “Jai Shri Ram”, Amar Singh raised the “Ya Ali” slogan. But this came after the pushing and jostling between the SP and BJP members.

However, as tempers cooled in the House, Ahluwalia looked toward Amar Singh and came out with a remark which had most amused. He said, "Kamaal hai, Musalmanon ko bachane ke liye, ek Sikh ko maar rahe ho (How ironic, to save Muslims you are beating up a Sikh).”

Slip of tongue

Speeches in the Rajya Sabha at times bring out some of the most amusing unintentional slips and one was from Sports Minister M.S. Gill as he replied to the calling attention motion on the preparations for the Commonwealth Games to be held in Delhi next year.

Giving details of the preparations, Gill, while pointing out that the Games Village was coming up near the Akshardham Temple, unintentionally pronounced the temple as Akash Darshan Temple. Incidentally, such unintentional errors do definitely make the proceedings of the House more interesting.

Copenhagen summit

The PM is not going to Copenhagen for the UN summit on climate change. This has disappointed the Danish authorities. The Danish Ambassador recently met the Foreign Office mandarins and reeled out the names of the world leaders who were coming for the summit.

He wanted that India should also be represented at the PM's level. But he did not get a positive response. What if Obama attends the summit, he asked a senior Indian official. The reply was: it is entirely for the PM to take the final call. Indian Ambassador to Denmark Yogesh Gupta also enquired if the embassy needs to book rooms for the PM's entourage as well as journalists in connection with the summit. He too was told that there was no need.

Contributed by Faraz Ahmad, Girja S Kaura and Ashok Tuteja

Corrections and clarifications

n The intro of the report “Delhi HC to go paperless” (Page 23, Nov 28) is poorly written. “Yesterday” should not have been preceded by “The”, “has brought a good news” should have been “is welcome news” and “there” should have been “their”.

n Instead of asking the readers the question “Is Headley distantly related to Pak PM?” (Page 19, November 29) the headline should have been “Headley may be distantly related to Pak PM”.

n The headline “Tears, memories & Mumbai moves on” (Page 1, November 27) should instead have been “Tears, memories but Mumbai moves on”.

n The headline “Log into Nordic countries, Nasscom tells IT companies” (Page 14, November 27) is inappropriate. A more accurate and apt headline would have been “Localise to succeed in Nordic bloc: Nasscom.

Despite our earnest endeavour to keep The Tribune error-free, some errors do creep in at times. We are always eager to correct them.

This column appears twice a week — every Tuesday and Friday. We request our readers to write or e-mail to us whenever they find any error.

Readers in such cases can write to Mr Kamlendra Kanwar, Senior Associate Editor, The Tribune, Chandigarh, with the word “Corrections” on the envelope. His e-mail ID is kanwar@tribunemail.com.

H.K. Dua,
Editor-in-Chief