|
|
No arbitrary removal
The gas price row |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Power of civil society
A nuclear big leap
Two extra hands!
India lags in self-reliance
Need to regulate Internet-enabled mobiles
Chatterati
|
No arbitrary removal
The Supreme Court has aptly ruled that the Centre cannot remove the governors of states in a capricious manner with the change of political dispensation in New Delhi. The ruling is welcome because it restrains the Centre from taking any arbitrary action against a governor without a valid cause. A five-judge Constitution Bench consisting of Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan, Justice S.H. Kapadia, Justice R.V. Raveendran, Justice B. Sudershan Reddy and Justice P. Sathasivam has ruled that the court can interfere if the government fails to give “cogent reasons” for removing governors. It held that a governor can be replaced only due to “compelling” reasons for proven misconduct or other irregularities as stipulated in the Constitution, not otherwise. Significantly, the Bench has said that if an aggrieved governor could demonstrate prima facie that his removal was arbitrary, whimsical or mala fide, the court will ask the Centre to justify the action by revealing to it the material on which the President had taken the decision. The landmark judgement comes after six years of a PIL filed by Mr B.P. Singhal, a former BJP MP. He had questioned the peremptory removal of four governors by the UPA government after the NDA lost the Lok Sabha elections in 2004. Appearing for him, Mr Soli J. Sorabjee had said that governors should not be made sacrificial goats at the altar of electoral politics and should be treated with the dignity they deserve. Unfortunately, this office has been politicised for decades, first by the Congress government and then by both the BJP-led NDA and the Congress-led UPA governments at the Centre. The Bench having made it mandatory for the Centre to justify the grounds under which a governor has been dismissed is bound to act as a shield for him/her against the use of the political axe in the future. Ruling parties at the Centre appoint favoured politicians and bureaucrats to the Raj Bhavans to gain advantage during the formation of a state government (the governor decides which party to invite first in the case of a hung Assembly) and to keep the state government under pressure (the governor can recommend dismissal). The politicisation of this most important office can be checked only when the Centre, in tune with several recommendations of expert committees in the past, and the apex court’s latest ruling, appoints apolitical persons of exceptional integrity, acumen and wisdom. |
|
The gas price row
It will be a while before the full implication of the Supreme Court’s judgment on the gas-price row between the Ambani brothers sinks in. The landmark ruling, which ended possibly the longest and certainly the bitterest corporate war in recent times, is bound to impact the government policy as well as business in future. The apex court has laid down a benchmark by ruling that national interest would always override private interest. The court has further ruled that natural resources are held in trust by the government on behalf of the people and, therefore, the government has the absolute power to determine its pricing and distribution. Even when the government delegates the responsibility of “exploration, extraction and exploitation” of natural resources to private players, the latter do not enjoy unfettered rights, the court added. Since these natural resources are national assets and belong to the people, corporate bodies exploiting them are subject to constitutional restrictions, maintained the Bench headed by outgoing Chief Justice KG Balakrishnan. Another significant fallout is that part of the ruling which says that a private, family arrangement not approved by the shareholders is not legally binding. The agreement, thrashed out while distributing the assets between the two brohers, the court observed, was never really made public. The three million shareholders of the two groups never had any access to the agreement, which was revealed only in parts during the hearing in the court. The court observed that the Board of Directors was also not taken into confidence and, therefore, held that the agreement reached between the two brothers had no legal validity. It is pertinent to note that there was indeed an agreement and even Mukesh Ambani did not dispute that he had agreed to supply natural gas from the Krishna-Godavari basin to Anil Ambani’s Reliance Power at a fixed price. While the younger brother had cried foul over the breach of agreement, the elder brother had pleaded helplessness in supplying gas at rates lower than what was fixed by the government, though admittedly at a later date. By declaring the private agreement illegal, the court knocked out the petition filed by the younger Ambani. But would the ruling have been different if the agreement had been circulated to the shareholders or if the Board of Directors of Reliance Industries had endorsed it? Indeed, would that have made the agreement legally binding? There are no easy answers even as the only lesson for the government is to lose no more time in formulating a national policy on the exploitation of natural resources. |
|
|
Power of civil society
When the United Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) gave a call for a massive May Day rally and an indefinite strike to force the Madhav Kumar Nepal government to resign, no one expected any opposition to them. But Maoist leaders were surprised to find on the sixth day of their agitation that they could no longer continue to paralyse life in the strife-torn country. The Maoists met their match in the civil society members, who held a largely attended peace rally in Kathmandu. The peace-seekers issued an ultimatum to both the Maoists and the government to settle their disputes within 48 hours and allow people to lead a normal life, or else get ready to face the challenge. The message was clear as daylight: if the warring parties ignored the appeal of the civil society the streets of Kathmandu and other major cities would be filled with people to oppose both sides with full force. The result was the withdrawal of the strike by the Maoists immediately. Of course, there was also considerable pressure from the international community, including the donor countries, not to add to the suffering of the people. But the resistance put up by the civil society members — doctors, engineers, national celebrities, lawyers, teachers, students, journalists, et al — who waved the national flag and held placards with messages like “stop the bandh” and “we want peace”, was too powerful to be ignored. Had the Maoists not listened to the call for peace, they would have been held responsible for the large-scale violence that was bound to ensue. The Maoists say they have changed their style of protest in deference to the wishes of the suffering people. This means they will continue to work against the government, but avoid taking any step that may cause violence. Only time will tell how they conduct themselves in the days to come. On Saturday they issued a two-day ultimatum to Prime Minister Madhavkumar Nepal to accept their demands, including resignation by the goverment. This is not the way to solve Nepal’s complicated problems. Nothing should be done that can disrupt the drafting of the constitution within the stipulated timeframe. The Himalayan country requires the constitution as the first thing for establishing peace through democratic and non-violent means. |
|
|
They are ill discoverers that think there is no land, when they can see nothing but sea.
— Francis Bacon |
A nuclear big leap
Mastering technology and production of heavy water — the key material indispensable in operations of India’s indigenous nuclear reactor system, pressurised heavy water reactor — is a complex scientific and engineering assignment not many countries can tackle. Yet India had to meet this challenge, for heavy water is the mainstay of the country’s nuclear power programme, valuable also in areas of industrial build up. The results — a veritable miracle is unfolding. In the early seventies, India was accused by the West of “stealing” heavy water from Canada. Those were the years when the US and its allies applied sanctions on India after the 1974 test of a nuclear device at Pokhran. When India was scurrying around the world for meagre quantities of heavy water, the West was in denial mode, and Canada violated terms of collaboration for setting up a heavy water plant in India. In contrast, today India has emerged as the largest producer of high quality heavy water in the world. Heavy water from India is sought by many advanced countries because of its quality and price — South Korea, China, even US research bodies such as Spectra Gas and Cambridge Isotope Laboratories. The later are astounded over Indian achievements in the sanctified area of nuclear grade heavy water production, and want to dissect the Indian product. To put the phenomenon in the words of the chairman and CEO of the Heavy Water Board, A.L.N. Rao: “India has emerged as the largest producer of high quality heavy water in the world, operating six heavy water plants, mastering the two leading technologies - bi-thermal hydrogen sulphide-water exchange and mono-thermal ammonia-hydrogen exchange. (In the process) we have also developed the water-ammonia exchange-based front-end process for ammonia-based heavy water plants, making them independent of fertiliser plants.” And he adds: “Dr Bhabha’s dream of producing cheapest heavy water to not only meet our requirement but also export has been effectively realized by the Heavy Water Board. Consequently, we have successfully met the primary mandate given to the HWB with respect to the first phase of the Indian nuclear programme.” From the production of the first drop of heavy water at Nangal in 1962 to the first export of heavy water in 1998 has been an arduous journey --- a revolution of a sort. How has this been achieved? Not attempting to overburden the story with scientific and technological aspects of this undertaking, some glimpses of this three-decade journey may nevertheless be worthwhile. The beginnings of India’s heavy water endeavour were modest; it is dedication and mission mode application by a highly trained manpower with the goal of making India self-sufficient in nuclear-grade heavy water production that has brought about the big results. Technology attainment has come the hard way, in which two distinct phases can be spelt out. With the start-up project for heavy water production with Candaian collaboration left in the dumps after the 1974 Pokhran test, the first generation heavy water plants had to rest on indigenous capability plus whatever was gained from the short-lived collaboration with Canada. Some first generation plants were based on bi-thermal hydrogen sulphide-water exchange technology. After initial experience, almost in parallel, plants began to be built with foreign assistance based on the mono thermal NH2-H2 exchange process. The technical competence generated from design, construction and commissioning of these plants resulted in a sizeable quantum of industrial operation skills, and the urge for excellence paved the way for consolidation. In what might be described as a higher phase, the second generation plants were built with larger capacities, and construction was taken up using indigenous design and engineering capabilities. The core of these experiences is summed up in a report of the HWB, “Odyssey of Excellence”: “Development of heavy water technology in India has gone through a complex process of selection of materials, safety system design, process synthesis, operability studies, analytical science development, and overcoming early limitation of fabrication and infrastructure.” At present, the heavy water production capacity in India is over 500 tonnes, production being undertaken at six plants. These are situated at Baroda (Gujarat), Kota (Rajasthan), Manuguru (Andhra Pradesh), Hazira (Gujarat), Thal (Maharashtra) and Talcher (Orissa). Of late, the plant at Talcher has stopped production - mainly due to the stoppage of work at the associated fertilizer plant - and its infrastructure is being used for R&D and diversified work. Dr A.L.N. Rao says: “On moving from concept to commissioning and then to consolidation, we have increased the production of heavy water more than the rated capacities. No less significant, we have reduced specific energy consumption considerably. (Thus), we have scaled new peaks in the areas of productivity, capacity utilisation, energy conservation, safety and environment protection.” Significantly, the HWB is advancing further to activities of diversification to meet the emerging needs of the second phase of the Indian nuclear programme. Among the latest achievements are commissioning of the Boron enrichment plants at Talcher and Manuguru, and the Elemental Boron Plant at Manuguru. A bright vista has opened up pushing the HWB’s creative work to a new high. “With the confidence gained in the solvent extraction process of rare metal recovery from wet phosphoric acid at bench scale, a Technology Demonstration Plant is being set up. This will also give additional confidence to the fertilizer industry that there will not be any change in the characteristics of phosphatic fertilizer, after the rare metal is recovered from phosphoric acid,” says Dr Rao. The HWB has capped these achievements by entering into an MoU with external agencies for the transfer of Flue Gas Conditioning Technology patented by the
HWB. |
||
Two extra hands!
THROW a vegetarian into Korea and you are asking for non-stop entertainment — at the cost of the vegetarian, of course. I had been forewarned that I must shed my vegetarian scruples while in Seoul or be prepared to eat dry food carried from home. My colleagues and I began our odyssey with ready-to-eat packs with some bravado. Not for long, however. The Indian preference for cooked food every day is difficult to shake off. Our considerate and efficient hosts had tried to cater to our peculiar dietary preferences, or so they thought. Alas, we could not share their enthusiasm for grilled shrimp or the Sashimi Donburi decoded as ‘diced halibut sea bass sashimi on salad’ — both of which were marked prominently with a V for Vegetarian sign in the menu. The broiled eel braised in soy sauce, the steamed mandoo (pork dumplings) and the Korean favourite, Bul-go-gi (sauteed strips of seasoned beef) were also vegetarian according to the head waiter. When we began our standard recitation of ‘no fish, no chicken, no beef...’, he shrugged his shoulders in helplessness. His ungrammatical but adequate response : ‘Sorry, we no do.’ On one of our site visits, we saw a youth with golden corn and a bright paper takeaway bag in his hands. We decided that this seemed safe for vegetarians and requested the coach driver to wait for a few minutes to help us check out this important lead. The prospect was tantalising to those who had not sampled freshly cooked food in days and were living off cereal in milk or bread and jam. A closer inspection, however, revealed that it was not that great an option. The smells wafting up in the air were distinctly non-vegetarian though the recent converts to vegetarianism in our group could not precisely identify the creature being ‘grilled’ there. A dozen ears of corn simmered amidst spices on an aluminium griddle, along with round patties made of potato and other unidentifiable stuff. Hoping for bulk orders, the young woman at the counter waited patiently. When we asked her what the patty consisted of she replied, “Ojinguh”. Chung, the young intern who accompanied us on our forays, translated it with a frown as “squid — very spicy and very crunchy, but not vegetarian.” A debate arose on what squids were really like. Our resident marine zoologist reminded us that they resembled octopuses and belonged to the mollusc family. “Oooh, octopus !” shrieked a particularly squeamish colleague as the others laughed in merriment. The woman at the counter beamed at us and said encouragingly, “Squid, just like octopus, but more tasty, because he has two extra hands!’ We trusted her judgement. But we had to regretfully request Chung to explain to her in a torrent of Korean that we would not be able to sample her wares. How Chung defined ‘vegetarian’ to her, we never knew, for by then, Kim, the driver, walked over to us with a bag of wholewheat biscuits and a big grin on his face, urging us back onto the bus. There is very little that tourist-friendly coach drivers have not seen and heard before, I
guess! |
||
India lags in self-reliance
More than five decades after it began its quest for self-reliance by establishing a series of government-owned defence research and production units, India has been unable to indigenously develop, produce and export any major weapon system. It remains overwhelmingly dependent on foreign vendors for about 70 per cent of its defence requirement, especially for critical military products and high-end defence technology. India’s defence ministry officially admits to attaining only 30 to 35 per cent self-reliance capability for its defence requirement. But even this figure is suspect given that India’s self-reliance mostly accrues from transfer of technology, license production and foreign consultancy despite considerable investment in time and money. Although it would be unrealistic to expect any country to be cent percent self-reliant (even the most advanced countries are not), India has not been able to develop any core strength in defence technology to enable it to be placed on the world map, except arguably to a limited extent in missiles and warship design and production. In contrast, the world’s major and middle-rung military powers, which possess a strong and well-established defence industry and military-industrial complex, are largely self-sufficient in some, if not all, critical cutting edge military technologies. In addition to being major producers of defence technology, these countries are also major exporters of defence equipment, which, in turn, serve as a source of influence in their foreign policy. This is especially true of all five permanent members of the UN Security Council and also several advanced countries or middle-rung powers such as Israel, Germany, Italy, and the Netherlands. Even though China is a major importer of defence hardware – it is the second largest recipient (in US dollar value) and has signed the third highest number of transfer agreements of defence equipment among developing countries between 2000 and 2007 – yet at the same time it is self-sufficient in certain key military technologies and emerged as the fifth largest exporter of defence equipment to developing countries between 2000-2007. In contrast, India’s modest record of producing and exporting weapon systems is evident from the fact that India’s defence annual exports averaged a meagre US$ 88 million between 2006-07 and 2008-09. Imports have also meant infrastructure and product support problems for an Indian Air Force (IAF) fleet that comprises 26 different types of fighter, transport and trainer aircraft and helicopters sourced from at least six different countries. The same holds true for the IAF’s air defence comprising surface-to-air missiles, radars and aerostats. The issue of sourcing equipment and its product support from different countries also holds true for the technology-intensive Navy. Its air wing comprises UK-supplied fighter aircraft; surveillance aircraft sourced from Russia, the US and Germany; and a wide range of helicopters sourced from Russia, UK, France and the US. The submarine fleet is sourced from Russia and Germany with France in the pipeline while aircraft carriers are sourced from the UK with a Russian-made aircraft carrier in the pipeline. Similarly, all high-end technology equipment and even some low-end equipment in even the comparatively less technology intensive Army is similarly equipped with imported weapon systems and other equipment that ranges from tanks, artillery and air defence systems to even high altitude clothing including jackets, shoes and gloves. India’s over dependence on imports comes at a tremendous cost that includes re-negotiations, cost escalation, delay in delivery, problems in product support, denial of technology and technical glitches. An adverse fall out of India’s over-dependence on imports is the regular occurrence of either proven or alleged scams in procurement from foreign vendors which, on occasions, have led to cancellation of deals. This has ramifications for the armed forces which fear that their operational preparedness and modernisation will suffer. For example, in 2005 alone, the CBI was investigating 47 cases of procurement. In the last five years alone, the defence ministry cancelled deals involving import of 400 anti-material rifles, 197 light helicopters and 400 pieces of 155 mm towed artillery guns after years of technical trials and negotiations. In addition it has temporarily suspended contracts worth US$ 279 million and even black listed four foreign and three Indian companies. As such, India’s over dependence on import is fraught with concerns for the armed forces in particular and the country’s security in general. Since military technology is constantly changing and potential adversaries making new procurements, there is no weapon system that is likely to remain relevant for the future. A weapon system, such as for example, a submarine bought in the 1980s becomes inflexible to meet the technological challenges posed by an adversary’s procurement of a sophisticated anti-submarine warfare technology some years later. Although import of weapons ‘supplies technology’ it does not necessarily transfer technology. Neither do sellers transfer the ability to upgrade the technology when the need arises. Countries remain reluctant to part with critical and strategic technology both because it has power in it and because it has involved considerable monetary, technological and human resource investment. Further, the maintenance cost of weapon systems keeps increasing whereas its effectiveness remains constant at best and, at worst, keeps reducing vis-à-vis potential adversaries. In the absence of any serious indigenous capability, foreign suppliers become the reference point for the Services which usually want the most sophisticated (and therefore expensive) equipment. In many cases, India’s defence acquisitions have been plagued by both indecisions and by cumbersome decision-making and procurement process. The long procurement process has, in turn, been afflicted by protracted negotiations followed by long delivery schedules and problems of product support. The net result is that the Indian armed forces are affected by a combination of depleted and antiquated equipment, deficiencies in training and a questionable operational readiness. A majority of the Army’s artillery, air defence artillery, and armour dates back to three decades and more. Both the capital and technology-intensive Navy and IAF are suffering from either a depleting strength or ageing technology. The Navy’s fleet fell to 129 warships in 2008 notwithstanding the Defence Acquisition Council’s stipulation to maintain a minimum-must force-level of 140. Its fleet of submarines – a stealth platform critical for sea denial – has fallen from 22 to 16. The IAF’s fighter squadron strength has fallen to 32 from a sanctioned strength of 39.5, and as, currently envisaged, will still be two squadrons short of the authorised strength even at the end of the 12th five-year plan period (2012-2019). Besides, technical obsolescence has affected the trainer aircraft fleet and air defence radars, while the transport fleet is suffering from a perennial shortage of spares thus adversely affecting its serviceability. The situation hardly augurs well for a country that boasts of the world’s third largest military located in a difficult and hostile neighbourhood and views its strategic interests as extending from the Strait of Malacca to the Strait of Hormuz. |
|
Need to regulate Internet-enabled mobiles The Pew Research Foundation survey last December found that for the first time the Internet had crossed newspapers as the main source of information. Seventy one per cent of those surveyed said they got national and international news from TV, 42 per cent from Internet and 33 per cent from newspapers. While the government is seriously contemplating regulating the electronic media, it is oblivious to the fact that internet-enabled mobile may emerge as one of the most powerful source of information. Is there any method to regulate this global interaction process? The issue will become more serious when 3G and 4G technology is made functional. It will replace TV with mobile phones carrying visuals alongside data. The recent Google-Chinese Government controversy is a case in point to suggest transnational implications of any attempt at regulating the Internet and impracticability of such an endeavor by state actors. Be it newspaper, television, Internet (through PC, Laptop, mobile handset or any other internet-enabled device like smart-phone, e-book or tablet PCs) or any future mode of communications, it is just a medium —a product of technological innovation that is changing at a breakneck speed and in an increasingly cost-effective way. Even the Tele-communication and IT industry is stunned by its speed. In 2009, India registered a four-fold increase in internet-enabled mobile users. Today India is home to 520 million mobile users. The ratio of PC to mobile is 1:6 with the latter growing at a much faster speed. With introduction of IMT–2000-certified 3G technology mobile industries have almost succeeded in replacing heavy and cumbersome PCs and Laptops by internet-enabled all-in-one mobile handset. Information vendors are faced with two problems. Nearly 70 per cent Internet users are in the 18-35 years age bracket. Nearly 35 per cent are college students and 33 per cent young adults. They have to see whether this new generation is interested in information and, if so, of what kind. Private players may try to work with missionary zeal to shift this segment to information, news and infotainment. But the fight is going to be tough in the face of all-out efforts by the entertainment industry to inject a heavy dose of entertainment – an addiction-inducing phenomenon. The threat is that these players would embark on a ‘no-holds-barred’ to shift the stationary TV viewers to their fold by giving even prurient and pornographic pictures in the name of news. Second, whether the players are dynamic enough to foresee the fast expanding user segments in society. As cost-effective technology ensures downward expansion they will have to plan for not a decade but beyond if we have to stay in the market. Since 3G is almost a reality allowing usage of mobile TV and since 4G too is knocking at the door, any strategy should take care of both the problems in conjunction and not in isolation. Since airwaves are public property, TV news channels can be shackled into submission. But what about these future internet-enabled mobiles in which unscrupulous business houses can show anything to catch public attention. It must not be forgotten that while technology tends to spread downwards, the lower segment of society always seeks to move up the ladder. We have to identify that meeting point. Even this meeting point keeps changing because both factors mentioned above, i.e. the upwardly mobile new social segment and downwardly spreading technology-driven products are both variable. A youth from semi-urban area possesses a mobile phone but strives to get a job in a sunrise industry like software, IT etc. For him, information means a little different. For an NRI who is more interested in events in his hometown, information has a different meaning. Again, a young IT or MBA student or a candidate for the Civil Services examination needs and in-depth analysis that can update and improve his quality of knowledge and therefore his influence among those with whom he interacts. |
|
Chatterati
Mayawati is the flavour of the season in the capital. This dalit leader had made a smart choice in choosing the party symbol an “Elephant”. She actually walks the walk of an “Elephant” squashing what she does not like while not paying an iota of attention to the world. You may like or dislike her, but you cannot ignore her. After supporting the cut motion in Lok Sabha, she has squashed a lot of her detractors. Her dictatorial press announcement on it was a television treat. Congressmen in Delhi, including the Uttar Pradesh General Secretary Incharge Digvijay Singh, are enforcedly in praise mode for this state chief minister. All of a sudden, Congress MPs from Uttar Pradesh are silent about their future role as opponents to the BSP government in the state. They have no idea how to respond. On the other hand, Amar Singh seems to have discovered good virtues in Mayawati. Not only has been admiring the way Mayawati apparently hates sycophancy, but he has been full of praise for Mayawati’s secular credentials. Well, the stance of two politicians connected directly with Uttar Pradesh and the attitude of the state Congress MPs along with local Congress units has left the public confused. On the other hand, Attorney General G.E. Vahanvati appeared for the Lucknow Development Authority (LDA) in a case at the request of the Mayawati government. Vahanvati has been appearing on behalf of the CBI in a case against Mayawati. The CBI is investigating a case against the BSP chief for amassing assets disproportionate to her known sources of income. Is this once again the same old game of politics of survival while scratching each other’s back? There are murmurs in the capital about Maya’s popularity hitting a new high. Forget about demolishing her parks and statues, she may soon have her statue in a temple.
All in the family
Now to another dalit leader of the South. Being a dalit, the tainted minister, A. Raja, during Karunanidhi’s rare visit to Delhi, created a flutter. Karunanidhi and his huge family are a class apart. The allegation of corruption against A. Raja in the spectrum scandal was the reason behind his visit. But it is all in the family for the ruler of Tamil Nadu. Every person, whether it is Stalin in the state or Kanimozhi at the Centre, is a close relative. Kanimozhi, it is said in Delhi circles herself prevented Dayanidhi from getting the Telecom Department. Thanks to their opponent in Tamil Nadu, Jayalalita, this scandal about the liaisoning of the DMK is out in the open. Every other person in the capital seems to possess a script of the telephonic conversations which created an uproar in Parliament. But then the DMK is a precious ally of the UPA government. So A.Raja’s head has been saved. The Congress has also been embarrassed by Karunanidhi’s son MK Alagiri. This Union Fertilizer Minister has till date not attended a single Cabinet meeting. Nor is he present during Question Hour in Parliament. Once again the UPA partners with the Congress have managed to get away with all their scandals.  |
|||
|
|
| 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 | |
