The Tribune, Chandigarh, India

Up in smoke
Tobacco use in India is alarming

That tobacco is a ruthless killer is well known. Yet, India’s romance with cigarettes and bidis continues unabated. Apparently, stark warnings on their packs are not having the desired impact. Then there are also those who use smokeless forms like khaini (a tobacco-lime mixture). In all, the country has 274.9 million tobacco users, according to the 2009-2010 Global Adult Tobacco Survey conducted by the Health Ministry and the Indian Institute of Population Sciences, Mumbai. That is about one-third of the total adult population of the country. Ironically, nearly twice as many have full awareness about the debilitating consequences of smoking. Still, such a huge population does not mind lighting up.

Even more unfortunate is the fact that 20.3 per cent of adult women use tobacco. The male percentage is much more at 47.9. Yet, even 20.3 per cent is an alarming figure. Mizo women happen to be the most addicted, with 62 per cent using tobacco. Mercifully, the number of tobacco users is much less in Punjab, because of the abhorrence for it among the Sikhs, but the national figures call for a concerted drive against the evil.

More men may be smoking than women, but the fair sex is much more nicotine dependent than men, according to the survey. The number of cigarettes smoked per day is higher among women (7 cigarettes a day) than men (6.2 a day). The awareness about the dangers of tobacco is increasing in urban areas, but not so in rural areas. There, both men and women can be seen puffing away merrily. Why, they even start at a fairly early age. The effects manifest themselves after a long interval, and by that time it is already too late. The ban against smoking in public places needs to be enforced more strictly. Such people not only ruin their own health, but also make others victims of passive smoking.

PM under Lok Pal Bill
It’s time Parliament enacted legislation

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s reported endorsement of the fresh proposal to bring his office into the ambit of the Lok Pal Bill is heartening. As he is a leader of high integrity and is sincerely interested in setting up the institution of Lok Pal at the national level to check corruption in high places, he should use his good offices to impress upon the Union Cabinet and Parliament the need to hasten legislation in this regard. Unfortunately, though the issue has been hanging fire for over four decades, there has been no consensus among the political parties which seem to be following a pattern. Whenever the issue comes to the fore, in the name of sorting out differences over the provisions of the Bill, they refer it to the Joint Select Committee of Parliament. This panel takes its own time to study the issue, and when it is about to give its report, the Lok Sabha’s tenure comes to an end. There is a glimmer of hope this time that the Prime Minister will grasp the nettle and do the needful.

The re-drafted Lok Pal Bill envisages a three-Judge body, bringing all political functionaries at the Centre, including the Prime Minister and his Council of Ministers, MPs and members of the defence services under the ombudsman’s purview. However, it would not be fair if a number of constitutional functionaries such as the sitting judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts, the Chief Election Commissioner, the Comptroller and Auditor-General of India, among others, are excluded from the Lok Pal’s ambit. Consider the increasing cases of corruption involving the judges nowadays. Indeed, there is ample justification for including them in the Lok Pal Bill in addition to the measures the Centre is taking like the Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill for dealing with corruption among them.

As the experience with the Lok Ayukta in many states shows, a lameduck ombudsman at the Central level, without teeth, will fail to check corruption in high places. If the Centre means business, the proposed Lok Pal should be given adequate powers to do justice to his work and act as an effective deterrent to corruption and nepotism. Of course, there is need for safeguards, including exemplary punishment, to check frivolous complaints against ministers and other VIPs.

Thought for the Day

Time is a violent torrent; no sooner is a thing brought to sight than it is swept by and another takes its place. — Marcus Aurelius

ARTICLE

Unending jihadi terrorism
India needs to maintain tight security
by T.V. Rajeshwar

As the year 2010 is coming to a close, we find jihadi terrorism on the rise and seeking to strike at more and more Western countries. Al-Qaida remained the main source of inspiration and encouragement to jihadi elements. The militant outfit is served by various organisations and groups whose common objective is to spread terror.

There was a report from Washington towards the end of August that shedding its India-centric phobia, Pakistan’ s main spy agency, the ISI, had in its new threat assessment determined that Islamist militants, not India, posed the main threat to Pakistan. The report went on to say that in a recent internal assessment of security, the ISI had come to the conclusion that much of the threat to Pakistan emanated from Islamist militants. This marked a major change in the ISI’s perception of threat assessment. Prof Hoffman of Georgetown University, considered an expert on counter-terrorism, characterised the change of stance of the ISI as “earth shattering and a remarkable change” .

The reported change of stance on the part of the ISI, however, brings no consolation as far as India is concerned. Hamid Gul, a former ISI chief who was considered as the person responsible for raising the Afghanistan Taliban in the wake of Russian occupation of that country, declared in mid-August, 2010, that the Pakistani military would remain India-centric so long as the Kashmir dispute remained unresolved. Gen Ashfaque Kayani, the Pakistan Army Chief, had openly declared that he was India-centric. His preoccupation with Kashmir is well known. Having rejected the four-point formula of Gen Pervez Musharraf, who was General Kayani’ s boss and mentor, the present Army Chief of Pakistan has reportedly promised a better solution to the Kashmir problem than was promised through the Musharraf formula.

This could only be by intensifying the activities of Kashmiri militants trained and pushed into Kashmir from Pakistan, particularly from PoK.

David Headley’ s revelations during his interrogation by the National Investigation Agency threw sufficient light on the close collaboration between the ISI and LeT.

Hafiz Sayeed, chief of LeT, remains firm in his unceasing support to terror organisations and in their activities not only in Kashmir but also elsewhere in India. It may be mentioned that during one of Headley’ s reconnaissance visits to Delhi, the ISI’s targets included the National Defence College, Raksha Bhawan as well as the Prime Minister’s residence — 7 Race Course Road. The 26/11 Mumbai attack was only a precursor. Headley revealed that several Pakistan Army officers and retired officers were continuously operating with the help of the ISI. One of the more alarming reports was that the ISI and LeT had discussed launching of more attacks in India on the Mumbai pattern by deploying militants who would be sent through Nepal or Bangladesh.

Bob Woodward, a celebrated investigative journalist and author, recently revealed that within 48 hours of the Mumbai attack Lt-Gen Ahmed Shuja Pasha, head of the ISI, was summoned to Washington through diplomatic channels where he admitted that among the planners of the Mumbai attack were at least two Pakistani Army officers who had been closely associated with the ISI. However, General Pasha reportedly claimed that the Mumbai attack was not an authorized operation but was a rogue one, whatever it might have meant.

The FBI and the CIA had done their own analysis of the Mumbai terrorist strike and felt that American cities were as vulnerable as Mumbai. They were convinced that LeT was created and continued to be funded by the ISI.

President Obama reportedly told President Asif Zardari on May 7, 2009, according to Bob Woodward, that the US did not want to arm Pakistan against India. However, the US had not been able to make things move in a positive direction and get the desired cooperation from Pakistan in the war on terror despite having increased the aid to Islamabad.

The journalist also referred to an American retribution plan, according to which the US would bomb or attack every known Al-Qaida compound or training camp which figured in the intelligence data-base of Washington DC. The retribution plan called for a brutal punishing attack on at least 150 or more associated camps, reveals Woodward’s book, “Obama’ s Wars”. For all practical purposes, this plan would remain so in the foreseeable future.

The recent disclosures by Saudi intelligence agencies that the Al-Qaida elements based in Yemen were planning attacks on several cities in Europe like Paris were interesting. The ISI’s plans for Afghanistan are of particular interest to the US. The WikiLeaks website, after having analysed thousands of documents, showed clearly that Pakistan was allowing ISI operatives to meet Taliban terrorists to organise an attack in Afghanistan and also another one on American soldiers there. The two attacks on the Indian Embassy in Kabul were at the instance of the ISI as established by various intelligence inputs. Islamabad was reportedly confronted by the CIA with facts in this regard and the ISI had no credible evidence to deny the role.

Topping them all comes the report that an Al-Qaida manual has surfaced in Yemen and it is a manual with numerous tips on how to carry out random terror attacks on innocent civilians in the West, including US citizens. It contains articles like “How to make a bomb in the kitchen of your mom”. The key player behind the magazine is reportedly an American who had declared that he was proud to be a traitor of America.

The depressing narrative makes it clear that the Western countries, the US in particular, have to be prepared to face acts of terrorism at any time which the jihadis may choose. India is the prime target because of the unending hostility of Pakistan over the Kashmir question and the unseizing activities of LeT and other allied jihadi organisations. India should be prepared to face the prospects of unending jihadi attacks not only in Kashmir but also in any part of the country. Eternal vigilance is the price India has to pay.

The writer is a former Governor of UP and West Bengal.

MIDDLE

My lost home
by Pritam Bhullar

SIR Cyril Radcliffe’s pencil divided India and sealed the fate of millions like me. I lost my home for ever and became rootless. Sixtythree years have rolled by. Yet I am filled with nostalgia when I think of my childhood home.

My home is (yes, is) in Lyallpur (now known as Faisalabad in Pakistan), a town 80 miles south-west of Lahore. My village — Sardar Sunder Singhwala — was named after my grandfather. Being on the periphery of municipal limits, the village enjoyed the benefits of both the village as well as the city life.

A landlord was virtually a “monarch” of his village; more correctly of his estate. His mansion with a luscious garden in front and open space on the other three sides looked really majestic. On the outer perimeter of his estate usually stood a hundred or so tenements in which lived his farm workers, artisans and a few others whom he liked to keep there.

In the beginning of the 20th century when all others from his family from village Bhullar in tehsil Batala, district Gurdaspur, refused to go to Lyallpur where the land had to be developed from scratch, my grandfather accepted the challenge, went there and started his new life with 125 acres of arid land. Being a land lover, he kept on adding to his land with the weat of his brow so much so that he owned 878 acres of land in Punjab and Sind at the time of Partition. But he remained poorly compensated in East Punjab as after applying various cuts, including the crippling “Punjab cut”, the government slashed his entitlement to 140 acres. Of this, he was allotted only 134 acres.

The day of parting is indelibly printed on my memory. Our workers, most of them Muslims, gave us a tearful send-off. They gathered with chhannas (shallow utensils) filled with milk and made a fervent appeal to us to drink it. The milk still tastes fresh in my mouth.

I was so much in love with our race horses that I could not think of leaving them behind. While all other family members left for India in the first week of September, my grandfather and I decided to stay back and travel along with a kafla (caravan). I was only 20 years of age at that time.

Since the kafla was moving very slowly, after the first night’s halt, my grandfather advised me to take the horses separately, while he himself continued to travel with our bullock carts with the kafla. So the next morning, I and three of our servants trotted our horses towards India. We rode on nonstop during the day, but halted with one of the kaflas at night.

On the second morning, when the kafla that we had halted with at night started crossing the Ravi bridge, a battalion of the Bloch regiment opened fire and killed about 30 people. On the third night, about 15 people from another kafla that we were halting with died of cholera. Finally, our tortuous journey came to an end when we crossed the Sutlej to enter into the Indian territory in Ferozepur.

Though the “cruel divide” had separated me from my home, I had left my heart behind. Now even in the twilight years of my life, a question that keeps crossing my mind is: Would I ever be returning to my lost home?

OPED

Countering China's strategic encirclement
Brig Kartar Singh (Retd)

DRAGON’S FIRE: Chinese self-propelled rocket launchers during a field exercise

The Defence Minister and Army Chief have voiced concern over China’s increasing assertiveness on the political, diplomatic and military fronts. Though there is no cause yet to sound an alarm, the Indian establishment should be prepared to checkmate the Dragon’s moves

Look at some of the past and recent developments and then perceive the scenario of a Sino-Indian thaw. The occupation of Aksai Chin by China since 1962, construction of the Karakoram Highway connecting Pakistan, supporting insurgency in India's North East since 1965 and claiming areas like Sikkim and Arunachal Pradesh have been some of the direct interferences of China in Indian affairs.

A few recent developments, however, are more disturbing then the earlier ones. These include :

A proposed rail link, via Myanmar, to Chittagong port in Bangladesh

Construction of Sona deep sea port at Cox Bazaar in Bangladesh

Construction of Hambantola port in Sri Lanka

A full facility at Gawadar port, west of Karachi, in Pakistan

Occupation of northern areas of Gilgit by regular Chinese troops

Interference in internal politics of Nepal

Intruding in various places along the borders in the guise of herd-grazers

Construction of nuclear power plants in Pakistan

Sino-Indian relations started on a warm note after independence. Both countries were in search of their place in the new World Order and trying to find bread for their people. All this changed in the aftermath of the 1962 Sino-Indian war, which has left China and India in state of flux that continues till today. China started her economic development in late 80's and became a popular investment destination for Americans and Europeans.

Today she is poised to become an economic superpower and is in close competition with the US and Japan, leaving India far behind. China knows it well that after Japan and United Korea, no other country can compete with her. With India waking up very late to the new realities of economic developments, China now perceives India as a potential competitor in Asia and Afro-Asian regions. China has become the largest user of oil in the world overtaking USA. Her growing economy has also become the third largest economy of the world and she is fully a developed nuclear state with the largest Army in the world.

It is reported that China consumed 2,200 million tons of oil in 2009. Her consumption of energy in future is well perceived and in order to maintain future import requirements, she definitely requires a supply chain management system from the Gulf countries. Gawadar-Xinjang highway, gas pipeline from Myanmar and intermediate refueling facility at the port of Hambantola in Sri Lanka may be her genuine requirements.

These facilities may legitimatise as geo-economic necessities for the future. But her regular troops occupying Gilgit region in POK, direct support to the Maoist party in Nepal and openly declaring Kashmir as a disputed area prove her hidden intensions of deploying herself in the geo-strategic encirclement of India.

Recent developments in the Indo-US relationship paradigm may have also irked Beijing. US civilian nuclear deal with India, enhanced mutual trust between the two democracies, Obama's forthcoming visit to India, purchase of defence hardware by India from the US and Obama's clear indications of upgrading mutual relations with India could be seen as unwelcome developments by China.

China follows well-practiced strategies with her neighbours, like "teaching them a lesson", as she did with Vietnam in 1978. She also follows a strategy of "tactical arrogance", which she repeats with India, Nepal and Bhutan over and again during the livestock-grazing season. She also believes in the strategy of "bullying"' neighbours by actions more than words. Recently she denied a visa to one of our Army Commanders posted in Kashmir.

These postures and actions prove yet another point that China has grown so powerful that it does not bother about anyone, including Uncle Sam. She believes in having its cake and eating it too.

One of the biggest and saddest event that has gone in favour of China is downfall of the erstwhile USSR. The present Russian federation cannot engage China due to its internal problems and weak economy. So, what does it boil down to? What should India do to engage her bullying neighbour meaningfully?

One of the options available to India, as our economist Prime Minister stated, is that our engagement with ASEAN countries is a key element of India's vision of an Asian economic community. If we can meaningfully engage ASEAN countries in economies ties, then these countries will definitely look up to New Delhi in a supportive and friendly gesture. These countries will definitely upgrade India in their priorities over China. India should also keep close watch on SAARC countries and help them in their genuine economic development. This would remove their fear of India's big brother attitude and bring about an economic change in the region. We, therefore, must agree upon an economic development programme for SAARC countries to enhance their confidence in India and not leave them to any vulnerable threat from outside.

China knows it well that India today is not what she was in 1962. With a credible nuclear deterrence, a fairly well trained and well deployed army, India cannot be bullied or treated with arrogance. India could do well by organising some sort of offensive capabilities along the north-eastern borders. Indian defensive capabilities are fairly well developed and she is capable of countering any limited misadventure by China. A large-scale Chinese offensive, of course, would dictate different options for India.

In all fairness, China is definitely not an irresponsible state and recognises India's regional and international aspirations. If New Delhi and Beijing can settle their long-standing border disputes and engage in economic development between themselves as well as ASEAN and SAARC countries, then the 21st century definitely belongs to these Asian giants. After all, Panchsheel, the basic document guiding India's foreign policy, was first signed by these two countries.

Ominous moves across the Himalayan borders
Wg Cdr N.K. Pant (Retd)

Much water has flowed down India's rivers ever since former defence minister George Fernandes declared that the 1998 Pokharan nuclear tests had been aimed at the Peoples Republic of China (PRC). In 2008, Pranab Mukherjee, the external affairs minister, repeated this, calling the security challenge posed by Beijing as an important priority for New Delhi. These were not off-the-cuff remarks by politicians, but a clear comprehension of the impending threat looming large on our northern mountainous borders since 1950 when the Peoples Liberation Army (PLA) overran Tibet.

Tibet had racial, cultural and religious characteristics entirely different from China. It was rightfully emerging on the world stage as an independent nation, but PLA's brutal military occupation and human rights abuses altered the course of history. Subsequently, mass migration of Hans to the so-called Tibetan Autonomous Region (TAR) from the Chinese mainland rendered Tibetans a minority in their own homeland.

The myopic leadership in New Delhi, with exception of then deputy prime minister Sardar V. Patel, at that crucial time failed to see the writing on the wall and went ahead to recognise China's sovereignty over Tibet. This shortsighted approach to China's Tibetan invasion has cost the country dearly in terms of the defence of our Himalayan borders. After strengthening its grip on Tibet and improving road communication till the Indian borders, Beijing invented a thorny boundary dispute with New Delhi, which it is unwilling to resolve. In 1962, Communist China, that lays claim on vast areas in the Himalayas and refuses to recognise Arunachal Pradesh and Sikkim as integral parts of India, launched a humiliating military attack on India.

That China's hostile policy towards India is not going to change, is clear from a recent online poll conducted by a Chinese website, huanqiu.com, which stated 90 per cent participants believed India posed a big threat to China. About 74 per cent said China should not maintain friendly relations with India anymore, while 65 per cent thought India deploying additional troops in Arunachal was damaging bilateral ties.

Recent reported confiscation of tourism brochures by the Chinese police from the Indian pavilion at the Shanghai Expo because these showed Arunachal Pradesh as part of India is perhaps a forewarning of a military blitzkrieg across our Himalayan frontiers. New Delhi must take foolproof countermeasures to avoid a 1962 type fiasco.

Despite rapidly rising trade relations, China has, off and on, been provoking India on military and diplomatic fronts. The year before, there were media reports about increasing incursions by PLA along the borders. China has now reportedly deployed 11,000 regular troops in Gilgit-Baltistan region of Jammu and Kashmir that is under Pakistan's occupation. China is the only country that issues stapled visas to Indian citizens from J&K and Arunachal on the pretext that these territories remain disputed. Last year it raised objections when Prime Minister Manmohan Singh visited Arunachal Pradesh. As quoted in the media, Singh now rightly wants the nation to be prepared in view of the new assertiveness among the Chinese, which "is difficult to tell which way it will go".

Beijing's refusal to issue visa to Lt Gen B.S. Jaswal, the Northern Command chief, for a high-level military exchange visit on grounds that he commanded troops in the disputed area of J&K has added salt to the injury, leading New Delhi to cancel defence exchanges with China. Indian officials found China's behaviour particularly provocative because in August 2009, Gen V.K. Singh, currently the Army Chief and then the Eastern Army Commander, had visited China for a similar exchange. If territorial sensitivity was the issue, then Gen Singh's visit should have been even more problematic because, as the Eastern Army Commander, he had jurisdiction over Arunachal Pradesh, which China has provocatively started calling South Tibet.

It now transpires that besides amassing troops along the 1,700-km Indo-Tibet border, China has menacingly deployed nuclear-tipped missiles aimed at the Indian mainland. Last year when India decided to bolster defences in Arunachal, Global Times, China's English language mouthpiece, in an editorial termed it "dangerous if it is based on a false anticipation that China will cave in". It also commented India's current course can only lead to rivalry between the two countries and cautioned that India "needs to consider whether or not it can afford the consequences of a potential confrontation with China". The bottom line, unambiguously, was India should not have any illusions as China would neither make any compromise in border disputes nor would sacrifice its sovereignty in exchange for friendship.

Should India not revisit its policy on the Tibetan issue in view of China's continued aggressive intransigence? Sometimes in the middle ages, China may have had "suzerainty" over Tibet, but the territory has always functioned as a free nation till Mao's army annexed it in 1950. In fact, the region, in cultural, trade and religious spheres, was much closer to India than to China. Some imperial dynasties ruling Chinese mainland in the distant past had association with Tibet that can be loosely compared to the British monarch's connections with some Commonwealth countries like Canada and Australia. However, present-day Britain never laid territorial claims on these sovereign nations that had once been its colonies. New Delhi, besides bolstering defences on the Indo-Tibet border, must strive to create a strong international opinion for creating a genuinely autonomous Shangri-La where indigenous Tibetans can preserve their vanishing cultural and religious identity.