The Tribune, Chandigarh, India

Nobel controversy
India did well not to wilt under Chinese pressure

THE Norwegian Nobel Committee’s decision to confer the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize on Liu Xiaobo for his “long and non-violent struggle for fundamental human rights in China” has led to the communist giant feeling greatly uncomfortable. Liu, jailed last December for 11 years after he co-authored “Charter 08”, calling for democratic reforms in China, has exposed his country’s poor human rights record. China has levelled subversion charges against him and wants tomorrow’s Nobel award ceremony in Oslo to be boycotted by as many countries as possible. Nineteen countries, including Iran, Iraq, Pakistan and Egypt, have fallen in line after China issued a demarche to the heads of diplomatic missions in Beijing a few days back. India has rightly decided to go ahead with its usual practice of participating in the Oslo function, arguing that the prize ceremony cannot be considered a bilateral issue.

But China has warned that the countries ignoring its pressure tactics will have to face the “consequences”. This is very insulting for a proud democratic nation like India, which cannot allow its foreign policy decisions to be dictated by other countries, howsoever powerful they may be. China has emerged as a great Asian power, but so has India. China, perhaps, believes that its word cannot be taken lightly as it is being understood as the future super power. That is true to some extent, but Beijing is not realising that its own image is getting disparaged by its arrogant behaviour.

India had been reluctant in taking a clear stand because of Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao’s scheduled visit to New Delhi next week. The factor of fast growing trade between India and China was also coming in the way. India, however, does not have to worry about the economic relations with China because both sides will be affected if any untoward development occurs. Beijing does not bother about the economic factor when it denies visas to Indians from Arunachal Pradesh trying to visit China, or when it refuses to end the practice of issuing stapled visas to visitors from Jammu and Kashmir. For some time India and China have been pragmatic in not allowing their boundary dispute and other irritants like the Tibetan leader Dalai Lama’s permanent presence in India to affect their economic relations. Let us hope the flow of trade between the two sides will continue undisturbed.

Redefining torture
Victim-friendly changes in Bill

WHILE rewriting the torture Bill, a select committee of the Rajya Sabha has made it more victim-friendly than the orginal passed by the Lok Sabha without debate on May 6 this year. The Prevention of Torture Bill 2010 had attracted sharp criticism for limiting the definition of torture to exclude torture techniques which inflict severe pain but cause no physical damage to a victim for obtaining information or a confession. The select committee has widened the ambit of torture and included sexual assault as well. Since India signed the UN Convention Against Torture in 1997 the country has taken long to meet the obligation of having domestic legislation to outlaw the barbaric practice of torture.

The redrafted Bill has been extended to all government offices as well as schools and colleges. The scope for mischief is obvious. Any student or employee can allege “mental agony” at the hands of a teacher or the boss and land him/her in jail provided prior sanction from a superior authority is available before proceeding against the accused. The new draft introduces a minimum punishment of three years and a fine of Rs 1 lakh, missing from the earlier Bill. The maximum punishment has been raised to death or life sentence from the previously suggested 10-year jail, which was considered soft in case of a custodial death.

Coming soon after the Dantewada massacre, the Bill, which was cleared by the Cabinet in April, was opposed by the BJP on the ground that it would result in a terrorist alleging “mental torture” and creating trouble for securitymen. The Left had favoured a law which takes good care of the torture victims and the changes suggested by the select committee support that view. Though it may be unfair to treat sexual offenders and terrorists alike, the new law should aim at curbing widespread inhuman practices and third-degree methods used against persons in custody before their guilt is established.

Thought for the Day

Repetition does not transform a lie into a truth.— Franklin D. Roosevelt

ARTICLE

Welcome development in Myanmar
Polls give hope for gradual change
by G. Parthasarathy

Myanmar’s President and military strongman Senior General Than Shwe, accompanied by his wife, paid an official visit to India on July 25-29, evoking both criticism and satisfaction. Critics berated the Government of India for receiving a “dictator” who was set to hold “fraudulent elections,” while sceptics wondered if by visiting India before heading for China, Myanmar’s ruler was signalling to his Chinese partners that Myanmar would play the “India card” if China continued to support armed insurgent groups along the China-Myanmar border. The insurgent groups include the United Wa State Army, the Kokang Militia and the Kachin Independence Army. The reality was, however, somewhat different. Like most of his countrymen, General Than Shwe is a devout and superstitious Buddhist. He and his wife spent over five hours in prayer in Bodh Gaya, no doubt, seeking blessings of Lord Buddha, before he moved into the uncharted waters of a post-election Myanmar. Every devout Buddhist ruler believes that while a visit to China may be the road to meeting worldly needs, prayers in Bodh Gaya are a pre-requisite for the road to salvation!

Despite the Western world condemning the elections in Myanmar, held on November 7, as “fraudulent” and “flawed”, the small opening of the door for ushering in an era of greater participation in Myanmar’s national life has been welcomed within that country and by its Asian neighbours, who realistically recognise that military dictatorships — whether in Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia or Thailand — only cede political authority incrementally and not instantaneously. Aung San Suu Kyi, long given to being uncompromising in her demand for an expeditious transformation to Western-style parliamentary democracy, has been noticeably conciliatory after her release from detention. In an interview to Asahi Shimbun, Suu Kyi signalled a new approach to future dealings with the country’s powerful military establishment.

Rebutting criticism in distant Western capitals, she said the military junta had recognised the importance of at least presenting the appearance of moving towards democracy. The recent elections demonstrated that recognition. Referring to her earlier uncompromising stand on dealing with the military, she said: “If one believes in dialogue, one has to believe in compromise as well.” Moreover, responding to critics in Myanmar’s ASEAN neighbours that she is an Anglo-American trojan horse in the region, Suu Kyi stressed that she would seek greater dialogue with China and India, when asked about relations with other nations.

India can look back with satisfaction on the development of its relations with Myanmar, a country with which it shares a 1640-kilometre land border involving four states — Mizoram, Manipur, Nagaland and Arunachal Pradesh. A policy of unremitting criticism of the Myanmar regime adopted in 1988 led to serious concerns being voiced with the Chief Ministers of north-eastern states complaining of increased drug smuggling and infiltration across the border. Moreover, when India remained aloof, Chinese influence in Myanmar grew, backed by economic and military assistance and diplomatic support. More importantly, by casting its lot with distant Western powers in attempting to ostracise the Myanmar regime, India found itself out of step with Myanmar’s ASEAN neighbours, who had adopted a policy of “constructive engagement”. In strategic terms, India recognised that engagement with the military rulers was essential for the security of its Northeast, to pre-empt a Chinese presence east of Irrawaddy river and to ensure that China did not get military access to ports in Myanmar.

It soon became clear that a policy of engaging Myanmar would pay dividends. Following the signing of agreements on cooperation in drug smuggling, terrorism and border trade, cooperation in border security was enhanced. With the Khaleda Zia government in Bangladesh providing support to north-eastern insurgents in India ever since it assumed office, Myanmar had become the infiltration route for groups like the ULFA, the PLA in Manipur and the NSCN in Nagaland. In May 1995, the Indian and Myanmar armies mounted coordinated operations against these groups, inflicting considerable damage on them. Similar operations were mounted against the NSCN (Khaplang) in Nagaland in 1999 and the mutual confidence built between the two armed forces has been enhanced in recent years.

This mutual confidence is essential, as we now face new challenges along our borders with Myanmar. The Sheikh Hasina government has cracked down on the ULFA leadership, which had received support and sustenance in Bangladesh. This leadership has now moved into the Kachin State, where the Kachin Independence Organisation has given them haven. While the Myanmar government does not exercise control over this area bordering Arunachal Pradesh, the KIO has a cosy relationship with China, now suspected of fishing in the troubled waters of our Northeast.

Diplomatically, Myanmar now is no longer exclusively dependent on China because of its membership of ASEAN and its growing relations with India. Shedding earlier inhibitions, Myanmar, a member of BIMSTEC, now regularly participates in joint exercises in the Andaman Sea with the Indian Navy. It has supported our candidature for a permanent seat in the Security Council. We have now secured access to the sea for our north-eastern states to the strategic Bay of Bengal port of Sittwe (being developed with Indian assistance) and Indian companies like ONGC, GAIL and Essar have secured oil exploration contracts. However, thanks to bungling and procrastination by our Ministry of Petroleum and some of our public sector undertakings, we have lost and may be set to lose several economic opportunities in Myanmar.

It would be pointless to blindly compete with China in every area of development in Myanmar. Given its resources and its interest in using Myanmar territory for oil and gas pipelines to its Yunnan province, bypassing the Straits of Malacca, China will play a crucial role in Myanmar’s development. What we should ensure is that the Chinese presence in Myanmar does not threaten our maritime security or become a source of concern in our north-eastern states. We have every reason to be satisfied with what has transpired on this score in the recent past.

India’s engagement with Myanmar has to be constructive and not perceived as constituting interference in its internal affairs. The effort should be to encourage national reconciliation that Suu Kyi has spoken of, without intrusive involvement or unsolicited public “advice”. Armed insurgent organisations like the Kachin Independence Organisation have indicated that they welcome Suu Kyi’s involvement in seeking the long-denied autonomy. One hopes that Myanmar’s post-election dispensation will deal with these issues in a spirit of accommodation and understanding, and efforts by its neighbours will facilitate reconciliation, stability and peace in Myanmar. Hopefully, the Americans and the Europeans will join them in this endeavour. Suu Kyi herself now recognises the harm done to Myanmar’s people by Western sanctions.

MIDDLE

Nazrana, shukrana, jabrana
by V.K. Kapoor

We are legatees of feudal hypocrisy, and slavering psychophancy. It is a personality-driven culture, where family bonds and relationships are important, ideologies and programmes are not.

Al-Beruni described the Indian character as “sentimentality with brutality, family ties with well-concealed adultery, and old world caring with brutal ferocity, renunciation with avarice, and chastity with sex obsession”.

In the days of rajas and nawabs people presented them with gifts as ‘Nazrana’. It was a mark of respect and loyalty. It included beautiful and young women. The conquerors after victory looked for ‘Khazana’ (treasury) and ‘Zenana’ (harems). This culture induced in Indians a ‘doormat syndrome.’ Indian ethos promotes denial, passivity, and living defensively.

Indians always prostrate themselves before the authority. I remember a businessman who went to see a politician in his new Marcedes. The politician liked it, and the businessman presented it to him as ‘Nazrana’.

The people of the subcontinent have a weakness for adulation and titles. The Englishman understood this weakness, and created a class of Rai Bahadurs, Khan Bahadurs and Sardar Bahadurs. They were loyalists and served the interest of their masters.

On a visit to Lahore with the hockey team for the World Cup, I met many senior civil and police officers who were addressed as ‘Khan Zadas’, and “Sahib Zadas’. Some of the scions of the princely states of India are called ‘Maharajas’ and Maharanis’. They enjoy the decayed remains of past glory. Napoleon called these people “hereditary asses, imbeciles, and the curse of the nation”. Privilege breeds boredom and boredom breeds empty people. Behind the hero stands an invalid.

The tradition of ‘Nazrana’, gradually became ‘Shukrana’. For every privilege enjoyed, some return favour was given as ‘Shukrana’. A businessman handed over to a VVIP a registered deed of five acres of prime agriculture land around Delhi. This was “Shukrana” for the lucrative contract allotted to him. Opportunity and temptation go along with the territory. Being on the inside not only brings opportunity, but temptation also. Developing one’s usefulness is the surest way of attracting notice and success. The clever, the strong, the ruthless will always have the upper hand on the lawless frontiers of life.

In Bombay, I met a bureaucrat’s wife in a party. It was attended by many film celebrities. She was sparkling with diamonds. Somebody complimented her on the choice of diamonds. She told him that it has been presented to her on Raksha Bandhan by a leading filmstar, as she was his ‘Dharam Behan’.

A businessman (sweets business) went to meet a senior politician for some work with a box of sweets. The politician liked the taste of sweets and asked him to send him 50 boxes of ‘ladoos’. The next day the poltician’s friend reached his office. He was ready with ‘ladoos’. The man told him that 50 boxes of ladoos meant 50 lakh rupees. He had no alternative, but to shell out the demanded amount. For desired effect, a police Gypsy was made to stand near his establishment.

The villains vary, the results don’t. The essential ingredients of sin have always been the same. Words have no fixed meaning; treachery comes easy, and truth is so slippery that it cannot be seized.

From the constable on the beat to the seniormost politician and the bureaucrat no one can escape the curse of ‘Jabrana’ in one form or the other. I remember a senior politician advising me when I was a district SP: “Do Lakh Rupia To Yahan S.P. Ki Dharam Ki Kamai Hai’ (Two lakh rupees per month is the S.P’s holy income).

To survive in this system one needs guile, grit and craftiness. To be honest and straightforward is like wearing a chastity belt in a brothel.

OPED-SUBSIDIES

No reckless subsidies for political expediency
The former Finance Minister, who left the Badal government on the issue of debt and subsidies, responds to The Tribune report (December 7, 2010) exposing how he himself had availed sops for kinnow farmers. He now claims, that while he is against wasteful subsidies and unjustified government expenses for ministers, he supports the atta-dal scheme that benefits the poor
Manpreet Singh Badal

I am glad that The Tribune carried a detailed news report about an agriculture marketing subsidy. In my view such reporting is essential to bring things in the right perspective and facilitating a comprehensive debate about Punjab’s terrible fiscal situation. However, I disagree with the headline of the report that mentions that there is a “question mark” over my subsidy stand.

As earlier, my stand on subsidies remains unequivocal. I have always maintained that there is no place for subsidies that do not serve their desired purpose and are more of a political tool. I am not saying so now because of this news report. This information was always in public domain and it was never hidden/suppressed.

The scheme was initiated by the previous Akali government as an incentive to promote crop diversification in the state. Since I and my family members have been growing citrus fruits, we got small benefits out of it. But the scheme has definitely benefited many needy farmers.

I can quickly think of one example of Sukhpal Bhullar, a farmer who is feted internationally today for his remarkable citrus production and technique. Before this scheme, Mr Bhullar was a small-time agriculturist, growing wheat and rice. The scheme allowed him to benefit and today he has emerged as exemplary for several farmers in the state who are keen to break out of the wheat and rice cycle.

This brings me to my original point that I was, I am and I will continuously be opposed to reckless subsidies initiated for political expediency. But once it is shown that a subsidy is helping the targeted beneficiary, it is in fact desirable. For instance, as a finance minister, I never questioned the merits of the atta-dal scheme, which was the brainchild of the honourable Chief Minister. Though the scheme’s annual cost was Rs 500 crore, it ensured that 14 lakh families got its benefit.

Similarly, when I was representing Punjab at the Centre, I did my best to ensure that the Centre’s subsidies should be flexible enough so that Punjab derives the actual benefit out of it. For example, like all states, Punjab is entitled to a lot of money under the mid-day meal scheme.

But I argued with the Centre and the Planning commission that a mid-day meal is not a big allurement in Punjab’s villages. So instead Punjab should be allowed to spend this money on upgrading school infrastructure and hiring more teachers.

Similarly, under the Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana (RKVY) I repeatedly had arguments with the Planning Commission members that Punjab should be allowed to spend this money to improve its irrigation infrastructure. To reiterate it, a subsidy should reach the desired beneficiary, who in turn should be in need of this.

But at the same time, reckless expenditure and bad subsidies have to be avoided. As a member of the government, I saw that free power was costing the state government a massive Rs 3,500 crore per year but was not giving its intended benefits.

Many times, groups of farmers themselves came to the government claiming that rather than having erratic free electricity they would rather have regular, consistent electricity supply for which they don’t mind paying. Also the biggest beneficiaries of this subsidy were the big farmers with huge land-holdings.

What makes this particular subsidy all the more troublesome is that it exacerbates Punjab’s agriculture situation and prevents diversification. Free electricity motivates unhindered tubewell usage, which is worsening the state’s already abysmal groundwater situation.

I was and continue to remain dead against free electricity to big farmers but I am in complete favour of providing free electricity to small farmers. Unfortunately, this is not what is happening right now. As a recent survey done by The Tribune itself showed that bulk of free electricity is being cornered by big farmers.

Let me say it once again that I am totally against bad subsidies as well as unconscionable expenditure and there is no change in my position on this issue. This of course includes bad subsidies as well as unconscionable expenditure.

Newspaper reports in the past had shown how certain ministers and even some people who were not even elected, were spending crores of rupees on their personal petrol expenditure and passing their bills to the government. Likewise, in certain cases the reimbursement of medical bills is amounting to several hundred crores.

Even security bills, for instance. While I could understand the need for tight security for the Chief Minister and one or two top functionaries, I saw no merit in every member of the government travelling with an elaborate cavalcade of vehicles and security paraphernalia -- all at the cost of the common man’s taxes. Similarly, I rubbed a lot of people the wrong way when I went after persistent tax defaulters.

During my tenure as the finance minister, I never recovered any travel expenditure I made. This was a personal choice and I did not expect my Cabinet colleagues to emulate it. But certainly, I felt that they could have spared the state an expenditure of several crores that came from flimsy foreign trips, unjustified security entourages, continuous upgradation of their official vehicles -- all at the cost of the exchequer.

I ceaselessly argued with my Cabinet colleagues to plug the loopholes in our tax collection system. Similarly, the fact that most states had better tax collections than Punjab caused immense discomfort to me. I maintained that we needed to bring all tax evaders to book, irrespective of whichever political lobby they belonged to.

I am no one to question the merits of subsidies that are justified. The most famous of all economist, Lord Keynes, himself voted for targeted government subsidies when he showed that the idea that the government should not intervene in nonsensical matters. But again, he was dead against wasteful government expenditure that benefited no one.

Similarly, our own renowned Nobel laureate, Professor Amartya Sen, in his numerous dissertations on welfare economics calls for expenditure on primary education -- again a domain where subsidies are highly desirable. The realisation that subsidies should reach where they are meant to is dawning upon everywhere, including the Centre, which is why we see the UID project being spearheaded by Mr Nandan Nilekani. The primary purpose is to ensure that a subsidy reaches those for whom it is meant. The same thing has to happen in Punjab.

The laser leveler subsidy in Punjab was example was highly beneficial as it allowed the smoothening of vast tracts of rough land and made it arable. But now I feel its maximum benefits have been achieved and it should make way for something where there is a genuine privation in the state, for instance, I think we can provide better subsidies for machines to make bales after paddy harvesting. I must tell, that both the centre government as well as the Planning Commission was not averse to such subsidies in Punjab’s case. In fact, they were very open to it, as long as they could be assured that the need was genuine. Similarly, the marketing subsidy for citrus fruits is justified. The Tribune article mentions that Deputy Chief Minister, who too owns a citrus farm is not claiming any of this subsidy. But this is because, he has given the farm on contract to someone else and as per the scheme, if the farmer who owns the land doesn’t market it himself, he is not entitled to the subsidy. But that is besides the point. The argument is that this subsidy has allowed Punjab to have a reasonable degree of success in citrus cultivation. Today our farmers are selling high quality citrus to export markets. Certain beverage companies are procuring citrus from farmers directly, assuring guaranteed returns to farmers. If you remove this subsidy, citrus cultivation, especially the marketing will not be sustainable and there would be glut of citrus production with no takers, adversely affecting the farmers. This in turn would be a big set back for the state. I maintain that I was not wrong in claiming this subsidy because I am an agriculturist and do not have other businesses such as real estate, television networks, hotels etc.

To conclude I would just say- get rid of wasteful subsidies and unjustified expenditure by members of the government. Have as many subsidies as you want, but make sure they are required and most importantly ensure that there is sufficient resource mobilisation. We should have our money to provide subsidies. We cannot show charity at someone’s else expense!

Certain ministers and even some non-elected people spend crores of rupees on petrol and send the bills to the government. Likewise, the reimbursement of medical bills is huge. So is the security bill. The Chief Minister and one or two top functionaries may need tight security, there is no point in every member of the government travelling with an elaborate cavalcade of vehicles — all at the cost of the common man’s taxes