|
|
Major setback for Obama
No corruption? |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Height of illiteracy
Hopes from Obama’s visit
The Good Samaritan
Market-friendly transition in Brazil President-elect's
economic proposals
|
Major setback for Obama THE US voters have given their mandate on the expected lines in Tuesday’s mid-term elections, the costliest in American history. They have overwhelmingly cast their vote in favour of the Republicans, giving them a comfortable majority in the 435-member US House of Representatives. The Democratic Party of President Barack Obama has succeeded in retaining its control over the 100-member Senate, but with great difficulty. The Democrats also suffered crushing defeats in most of the contests for the governorship, even in the states where Obama’s “Yes, We Can” magic was most visible during the 2008 Presidential election. The powerful Republican wave that could be easily noticed throughout the length and breadth of America felled even those stalwarts who were considered unassailable. The prestigious Senate seat from Illinois, earlier held by President Obama, has gone to Republican Mark Kirk. In the crucial Congressional elections, considered a referendum on President Obama’s policies and programmes, the voters have clearly expressed their lack of confidence in the present US administration’s ability to improve their economic condition. There is widespread fear that unemployment may continue to rise if no drastic steps are taken. The Americans do not seem to believe that their economic worries were caused by the unimaginative policies of the George Bush administration, which preferred to spend billions of dollars on fighting wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, emptying the US coffers. The fact that the economic slowdown began during the regime of former President Bush has no meaning for the voters. President Obama has clearly failed to come up to the people’s expectations. The election results have cast doubts on President Obama’s chances for a second term. He has very little time to start his campaign for the purpose. Keeping this in view, there is the likelihood of his indulging in hard bargaining with India during his November 6 visit. Either he may keep quiet on controversial subjects like the job outsourcing issue or announce strict curbs on the US companies engaged with the BPO units in India. He, perhaps, expected the major setback to his party, as his visit has already been focused on clinching business-oriented deals with India. |
|
No corruption?
Sometimes, what is left unsaid rings louder than what is forcefully articulated. That is what happened at the AICC session in Delhi on Tuesday where leaders like Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi, Manmohan Singh and Pranab Mukherjee held forth on everything from communalism to Naxal violence but did not say anything about corruption, which is exercising the minds of the people like never before. That is baffling indeed because normally, the topic figures prominently in the speeches of Sonia Gandhi. But by sidestepping the issue, the Congress has only brought it into sharper focus. In fact, it is already on top of everyone’s discussion list, thanks to the scams in the Commonwealth Games, Adarsh housing and 2G spectrum allocation. If the Congress thinks the dust will settle down on its own if left untouched, it may be mistaken. On the contrary, the silence may be seen as an admission that many of its leading lights happen to be involved in these unholy dealings. Perhaps to divert attention from the raging controversy, the party chose to come down heavily on the RSS for its alleged involvement in the acts of terror. That is a good stick to beat the saffron organisation with, but does not in any way lessen the intensity of the dislike for those who perpetrated the numerous frauds. Involvement in terrorism is terrible; so is involvement in large-scale corruption. By castigating the wrong-doers, the Congress might have distanced itself from them and their reprehensible deeds. Even a two-line mention might have passed muster. But the total silence has been counter-productive, giving the unintended impression that when Congressmen themselves are involved, the “grand old party” is willing to apply a different value system. It has unwittingly given a handle to the BJP to give it a tough time. The delay in taking action against Maharashtra Chief Minister Ashok Chavan may also come in handy. |
|
|
Height of illiteracy
Education
in Punjab is going from bad to worse due to lack of funds and poor
governance. As a three-part survey in The Tribune has revealed,
government aid to colleges is shrinking. Whatever limited funds are
available a large part is diverted to colleges in the Malwa belt.
Staff shortage plagues almost every college. Regular teachers are not
hired. The appointment of 70 per cent of the new teachers is financed
by parent-teacher associations. These guest lecturers are paid a
paltry Rs 175 per hour. The teacher-student ratio has deteriorated to
1:60 against the desirable 1:30. Since the government has not stepped up its budgetary spending on education, the rot has become self-evident. To foot their rising salary and pension bills, the universities resort to unethical practices and are increasingly starting self-financing courses, which are beyond the reach of students with modest backgrounds. Higher education has gone beyond the reach of even middle-class students. Punjab Agriculture University, Ludhiana, has been bailed out by a hefty Central grant. For long the Punjab government has been dragging its feet on meeting its financial commitments to Panjab University, Chandigarh, but resisting the grant of Central status to the university. Now Panjab University has happily announced that it is fully funded by the Centre. About
school education, the less said the better. There is a shortage of
teachers, playgrounds, laboratories and even toilets. Teacher
absenteeism is widespread and the dropout rate is high. The Punjab and
Haryana High Court had intervened to prod the sleepy state government
to control the disturbing dropout rate, but with limited success. Even
children of the poor are deserting government schools. The government
is opening new colleges and universities in the state while
infrastructure in the existing institutions is crumbling for want of
money for maintenance. Students are forced to join private
institutions, which charge astronomical fees. The Chief Minister is
stuck with “Adarsh” schools, ignoring the degradation
elsewhere. |
|
|
With malice towards none; with charity for all; with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in.— Abraham Lincoln
|
Hopes from Obama’s visit
US President Barack Obama’s coming visit to India is the toast of the media It is being looked at in terms of its likely substantive impact as well as its symbolic value. Think-tanks in India and the US have been giving their views on the visit liberally, as they would not like to miss their advisory role. Experts are viewing this visit as “transformational” and a “defining moment”. The dominant question is whether it would be a big-ticket visit, like that of President George Bush in March 2006, when both the US leader and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh single-mindedly and jointly pursued the crucial India-US Civil Nuclear Cooperation Agreement, opening the doors to acquiring hi-tech dual technology items for India’s requirements for civil nuclear energy, space, telecommunications, defence and other related areas. The mood this time is somber and exuberance is lacking, notwithstanding the importance of the visit. A major concern has arisen that the Civil Nuclear Liability Act would come in the way of the American business in taking their share of the nuclear energy market. American commercial firms are averse to taking responsibility as suppliers of nuclear equipment and would rather like this to be restricted to the operators. India is not in a position to amend the Act, as its hands are tied domestically. Would it be willing to dilute the Act’s impact — a possibility that is being explored? This may not become a reality. If it so happens, then the United States would find itself in an unenviable position of a crusader that has lost the benefits of its crusade. It is not only the Civil Nuclear Liability Act but other issues also that have surfaced. A debate has been going on as to what each country is prepared to do for the other. It takes us back to John Kennedy’s days when the question was raised as to what you can do for your country instead of asking what your country can do for you. Will Obama support India’s candidature for permanent membership of the UN Security Council and what will be the extent and manner of this support if it comes about? Will Obama manage to come out of the protectionist mould, even though he has “Bangalored” his visit to this hi-tech city so as not to give any message that he supports Indian IT presence in the US? Will he even make a small gesture in removing Indian companies from the blacklisted “entities’ list” that are ineligible to receive dual technology items? Will India, on its part, be prepared to spice Obama’s visit with the signing of defence deals in view of its reluctance to make any change in the Civil Nuclear Liability Act? How far will India-US strategic partnership further unfold in ensuring greater cooperation in tackling terrorism, going beyond the exchange of information on arrested terrorist David Headley? Will it result in India acquiring a greater role in Afghanistan if the US realises that the Afghanistan issue has to be seen not as an Af-Pak problem but as Pak-Af one, requiring tackling of global terrorism in Pakistan? For the US State Department there is no “stronger partner when it comes to countering terrorism” than Islamabad. How far are India and the US willing to reach an understanding, open or tacit, as they share views and approaches on dealing with China, which has started flexing its muscle, based on its growing economic strength? To what extent India may be prepared to commit on the CTBT, having come out of nuclear apartheid? Will Obama gently nudge or push India in that direction? These and other issues may engage the minds of our leaders as it is their wish to take bilateral strategic relationship to greater heights by widening and deepening the same. India-US relationship is built on shared common values — democracy, pluralism, diversity, rule of law, etc. Will the visit impart a new thrust to these values? How will the two countries cooperate in widening the circle of friends, based on these shared values? In the past, an American initiative on democracy could not be taken further, as many countries shied away, as they would like to see democratic institutions take roots in home grounds and not transplanted from outside? Will we see another joint initiative on shared values? Will it then become a value-based visit in a world that is becoming more pragmatic? This takes me back to 1985 to Rajiv Gandhi’s visit to the US in which I was involved as Minister (Commerce and Supply) at the Indian Embassy in Washington. He succeeded in unlocking India’s relationship with the US, with his message for India in the 21st century. He endeared himself not only to President Reagan but also to Congressional and other leadership, as he captivated Americans with his youthful charm. His visit remained symbolic, as we could not invest this with substance, as India then was in a protectionist mould and had not liberalised its economy. We are now in the 21st century. We have another opportunity to build more bridges, as today India-US relationship is on a different plateau. Will the youthful American leader, given his charisma, impart a new vision to this relationship, which is not only strategically important but is also built on shared values? Will Obama, on the other hand, find himself tramelled with domestic compulsions with the results of the mid-term elections going against his Democratic Party? Will he come out of this situation and realise the importance of the involvement of the IT industry in the United States, as a “win-win” relationship, as stated by Narayana Murthy of Infosys? Let us hope that some substance is added to the bilateral relationship and it does not merely turn out to be a visit where symbolism prevailed. The signing of agreements should “broaden and deepen our strategic partnership”, as sought by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh during his visit to the US in November 2009. Will Obama provide this visit with a visionary stamp in the mould of the “We Can” spirit in the US domestic
context?
The writer is a former ambassador.
|
|||
The Good Samaritan
OUR trip to Darjeeling and Gangtok was a memorable one. The weather was pleasant and people were decent. My son had taken a break from his management institute to accompany us. His company had added a new charm to the trip. Since the advent of corporate culture, children’s company, whenever possible, comes as a bonus to the parents! As I was in my young days, my son too is awfully fond of photography. He had recently purchased a camera, loaded with a big storage memory card, by saving his pocket money over many months. He used the camera to capture the scenic beauty of the hills and innocent faces of the people. The collection, as we watched on the PC after our return, was breathtaking. After our return, my son, before going back to his institute, planned to visit Bhakra dam along with his friends. En route, they visited Gurdwara Anandpur Sahib. My son was told to leave the camera outside. Before depositing the camera, he took out its memory card and put it in his shirt pocket. After visiting the gurdwara, they came out and collected the camera. As my son groped into his shirt pocket to take out the memory card, he received a rude shock. The card was not there! Obviously, it had slipped out of his pocket when he had bent on his knees and bowed inside the gurdwara. Short of breath, he and his friends re-deposited the camera and again went inside the gurdwara to search for the memory card. The tiny item, however, couldn’t be located despite a frantic search and enquiries. Heavy-hearted, my son returned home, minus the treasure of photographs. I tried to console my son. ‘More opportunities will arrive. Buy a new card,’ I said but he remained inconsolable. A few days later, he returned to his institute. Two months later. I was sitting in my office when I received a call from some unknown number. ‘Are you Mr Goyal speaking?’ the man at the other end asked. ‘That’s right.’ ‘Sir, had you lost your camera memory card sometime back?’ ‘Yes!’ I instantly remembered the already forgotten card. ‘Is it with you?’ ‘Yes, sir. Can I get your postal address so that I may courier it to you?’ ‘Of course!’ I gave him my address. ‘But how did you find it? How did you get my number?’ ‘Sir, I found the card at Anandpur Sahib. I brought it home and could check its contents on my PC. In one of the pictures, a hotel’s name could be read. I searched for that hotel on Google. It was located in Gangtok. I found the hotel’s phone numbers and rang them up. Some of the photos had the date imprinted on them. I emailed your photo and the likely dates of your stay to the hotel manager. Soon, they came out with your name and contact number. As simple as that!’ I profusely thanked the person. He disclosed his identity as Nikhil, a postgraduate student of Panjab University, living in Chandigarh. Next day, the memory card arrived at my
residence!
|
|||
Market-friendly transition in Brazil Brazilian President-elect Dilma Rousseff named a market-friendly transition team on Monday as she prepares to take the helm of a booming economy that runs the risk of being tripped up by heavy government spending and an overvalued currency.
Rousseff, who based her campaign on extending the legacy of President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, won her first election on November 1 as Brazilians voted overwhelmingly for continuity. After a bitter campaign in which she offered few specifics on her policy plans, Rousseff chose a seven-member transition team that draws heavily from the moderate wing of her left-leaning Workers' Party, a close aide told Reuters. Chief among them is Antonio Palocci, a well-regarded former finance minister under Lula who is popular with Wall Street and is likely to take a prominent post in Rousseff's administration, potentially chief of staff. Others include Jose Eduardo Dutra, president of the Workers' Party and a former chief executive of state oil giant Petrobras; Fernando Pimentel, a former mayor of Belo Horizonte; and Marco Aurelio Garcia, Lula's foreign policy adviser. One of Rousseff's first challenges when she takes office on New Year's day will be to address Brazil's hard-charging currency, which is trading near a two-year high and damaging exporters. In a series of interviews with TV networks, Rousseff said on Monday there was evidence the world was in a currency war and it was up to multinational institutions to ensure that countries did not unfairly keep their currencies weak. "I start to devalue and another country starts to devalue and this blocks trade. ... It creates a trade war," she said on TV Record. At Lula's suggestion, Rousseff will travel with the president to the G20 summit in South Korea on November 10-12, where the leaders of the world's top economies will discuss global currency tensions. Rousseff has stressed heavily since her election victory that she will run a prudent government, keeping a check on public spending and maintaining the stability of an economy that is among the world's hottest emerging markets. "We will not play around with inflation," she said in one of a series of interviews with TV networks before taking off for several days to rest after an intense four-month campaign. "We will have a government that uses inflation targets in the same way that the Lula government did." Rousseff spent most of the day meeting with advisers and talking to foreign heads of state by telephone at her home in Brasilia. Financial markets reacted positively to her acceptance speech, in which she pledged to rein in government spending while maintaining the social welfare policies under Lula that lifted millions out of poverty. "Markets reacted well to her words, especially when she carefully spelled out the delicate issue of public expenses," said Fernando Mendes, head of fixed-income trading at Lerosa Investimentos in Sao Paulo. The possibility of greater fiscal discipline led investors to bet on a medium-term decline in interest rates, which are among the highest in the world and one of the main causes for the currency's constant appreciation. Brazil's stock index rose more than 1 percent. Palocci, the face of fiscal austerity in Lula's first term, suggested the budget could be adjusted to slow spending. "There's no fiscal crisis in Brazil today ... but we have no problem in finding the savings that Brazil needs to keep its debt projections on a downward trend," Palocci said in an interview with Folha de Sao Paulo newspaper. Still, analysts worry Rousseff is not sufficiently committed to broader changes, such as an overhaul of the nation's bloated social security system and its suffocating bureaucracy that are crucial for long-term growth. Rousseff must now emerge from Lula's shadow and overcome the perception, still held by some Brazilians, that she is an inexperienced acolyte with little experience of her own. The headline in Monday's O Estado de Sao Paulo newspaper was simply: "Lula's victory." Rousseff pledged in her victory speech to extend a "new era of prosperity" that has lifted 20 million Brazilians into the middle class and thrust the country into the BRIC club of emerging economic powers alongside Russia, India and China. She took 56 percent of the vote. Her rival, Jose Serra of the centrist PSDB party, had 44 percent. Rousseff will continue to push Lula's flagship initiatives, including reforms to give the state a greater role in developing vast new oil wealth and ambitious infrastructure plans as Brazil prepares to host the 2014 World Cup and the Olympics two years later. — Reuters
 |
|
President-elect's economic proposals Dilma Rousseff
of the ruling Workers' Party who won Brazil's presidential election is a former chief of staff under President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva. Rousseff, 62, endorses the pillars of economic policy that have made Brazil one of the world's hottest emerging markets. Here are some of her positions on key issues: ECONOMIC STABILITY Rousseff would maintain the mostly market-friendly policies that have provided economic stability over the past decade: a free-floating currency, inflation control and fiscal discipline. FISCAL DISCIPLINE The career civil servant whose party has strong ties to public sector unions, Rousseff proposes maintaining fiscal discipline with gradual adjustments but has ruled out the kind of drastic austerity measures that marked the first year of Lula's administration in 2003. She has said Brazil does not need to rein in public spending for the economy to keep growing at a robust pace. She has pledged to keep a primary budget surplus target of 3.3 percent of gross domestic product until net debt falls to 30 percent of GDP in late 2014. It was 41 percent of GDP in September. The government still expects to hit its primary budget target in 2010, after a large one-off payment by state oil company Petrobras helped it partially offset a ramp-up in public spending this year. STATE ROLE IN ECONOMY Rousseff favours a strong state role in strategic areas, such as banking, petroleum and energy, but she insists private companies in those sectors would not be crowded out. She also pledges to promote government efficiency and a meritocracy while cutting red tape. A former energy and mining minister under Lula, Rousseff may also increase state intervention in the mining sector, which could create risks for iron-ore giant Vale. Rousseff is likely to push on with efforts to boost access to broadband Internet services among low-income households through the revived state-run Telebras, whose assets had been privatised in the 1990s. CENTRAL BANK Rousseff said she would maintain the central bank's operational autonomy and the status of its president as a cabinet minister. Brazil's central bank follows an inflation-targeting regime that investors say is crucial for price stability in the country. Rousseff praised the central bank for successfully steering Brazil through the global credit crunch that began in 2008. STRUCTURAL REFORMS Rousseff has made an overhaul of Brazil's complicated tax system a top priority and could push a series of microeconomic reforms to improve the investment climate. Her proposals include capital investment and payroll tax breaks and harmonizing tax levels among states. Rousseff favours a piecemeal reform of the costly pension system that would raise more money to finance the growing social-security deficit and alter some retirement rules. MONETARY POLICY Rousseff has said that until Brazil's debt burden falls considerably, the central bank will have to focus exclusively on inflation, rather than looking at the broader economy, including job growth. Rousseff has said she wants to bring down Brazil's interest rates, which are among the world's highest and are a major factor keeping the currency strong. But she is not expected to strong-arm the central bank into lower rates. OIL INDUSTRY Rousseff fully supports the Lula government's drive to heighten government control over massive newfound oil reserves, and she helped draft the proposal. CURRENCY Rousseff has ruled out targeting a specific exchange rate for Brazil's currency, which is trading near a two-year high and hurting exporters. The Lula administration has taken steps to limit the flow of foreign capital into Brazilian financial markets in a bid to curb the real, but so far has had little success in reversing the currency's rally. FOREIGN POLICY Rousseff favours continuity of Lula's foreign policy objectives, including regional integration in Latin America and a greater say for developing nations in the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. She has proposed to create a bi-national energy company with Bolivia. But given her priority on domestic issues and her lower international profile, she is less likely to continue Lula's high-profile diplomacy. — Reuters Brazil: Bare facts Official name:
Federative Republic of Brazil Size: 85,11,965 square kilometers) Population: 1,98,739,269 as of July 2009 Official Languages: Portuguese (official), Spanish, English, French. There are over 120 Amerindian languages. Literacy:
Overall, 88.6%. Male 88.4%, Female 88.8% (2006) Climate: Mostly tropical; cooler in the south Currency: 1 real = 100 centavos Products: Coffee, soybeans; beef; iron ore; footwear, motor vehicles (Statistical source: Reports by UN bodies) |
|
|
| 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 | |
Capital: Brasilia