|
|
Higher
wages for rural poor Shiv
Sena’s brazen act |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A
positive step
Winds of
change in Africa
Joy of
writing
Most Pakistanis ought to have realised long ago
that if Pakistan has a future — and it's arguably a bigger 'if' now
than ever before — it lies in consolidating civilian rule,
establishing a coherent modus operandi for coexistence with India, and
easing out of the clutches of the US Mahir Ali WHATEVER may lie ahead, it hasn't been a happy New Year for Pakistan's ruling party. Should the hectic efforts to salvage what's left of its coalition and to bolster it sufficiently to fend off potential parliamentary motions of no-confidence come to naught, perhaps the likeliest outcome will be another bout of direct military rule. At war
with itself
|
|
Shiv Sena’s brazen act
It
is a sad consequence of the abdication of authority by the Congress-NCP government in Maharashtra that a group of political activists belonging to the youth wing of the Shiv Sena was able to dictate the selection of the Mumbai University hockey team for an All-India Inter-University Hockey Tournament and force the exclusion of some outstation players. Reports say around 50 Shiv Sainiks marched into the Khalsa College campus in Mumbai on Wednesday afternoon, where the Mumbai team for the fortnight-long tournament was to be announced, and told those in charge to give preference to locals if they didn’t want the matter to be taken up by “higher authorities” of the Sena or its youth wing, the Bharatiya Vidyarthi Sena. After spending a couple of hours on the campus, the activists left with the team they wanted. Out of the five outsiders who were from Haryana and Rajasthan but were studying in Mumbai, three had been dropped. One can hardly hold it against the team selectors when the state government’s own record of protecting the people against political goons has been pathetic. Indeed, the Shiv Sena’s record in the past year speaks for itself. It thrashed non-Marathi auto and taxi drivers, attacked movie theatres that screened “My Name Is Khan”, threatened to sabotage Rahul Gandhi’s Mumbai tour, banned and burned a book written three decades ago and anointed Shiv Sena supreme Bal Thackeray’s son Aditya as the future of the party. As so often in the past, the government in Maharashtra timidly acquiesced in all the excesses of the Sena activists. It is this attitude that has turned the Shiv Sena into a Frankenstein monster whose one call for a bandh paralyses life in the entire business capital of the country. Hitherto, the Shiv Sena’s connection to sporting matters was normally restricted to cricket and Pakistan. The latest action will embolden the Sena goons to extend their destructive influence to other sports too. It would be unfortunate indeed if such attitude as was displayed in the latest incident leads some other states to act in retaliation against Maharashtrian youth. It is time the state government called a halt to this brazen parochialism. If it does not, the consequences could be grave.
|
|
|
A positive step
In
a progressive step, the government has decided to allow private shipbuilders to construct warships. The measure comes as a sequel to a series of measures taken by the government during the last decade to involve the private sector to bolster India’s self-reliance in defence hardware. Until the 1980s, private sector participation had been non-existent in India’s state-owned military industrial complex. At best, the private sector played an ancillary role. It was after the disintegration of India’s main weapon supplier, the Soviet Union, that the Indian defence establishment, further induced by its economic liberalisation policies, began to reach out to the private sector. In 2001, the government took the unprecedented step of permitting 100 per cent Indian private sector participation (and even foreign direct investment up to 26 per cent) in the defence industry. Since then there has been a steady involvement of the private sector in the defence industry. But India is still far behind advanced democracies such as the United States where the military-industrial complex has a huge private sector involvement. The Indian private sector’s success in the civil sector is only too well known. And so, there is no reason why India’s private sector cannot deliver in the defence sector. Obviously, the issue is not that simple. Many private companies do not find the defence sector lucrative enough because not only is their client likely to only be the Indian armed forces, but they are unlikely to be able to compete in the highly competitive world armament market dominated by both big and well established players. Also, despite the government continuously revising the defence procurement procedures, many in the private sector are still finding it difficult to do business with a defence ministry dominated by civilian bureaucrats and steeped in bureaucratic mindset. All said and done, however, there is no doubt that private sector participation in the defence sector is imperative for India’s quest for self-reliance, especially in core weapon technologies, which foreign countries are either usually reluctant to export or sell only with a high price tag.
|
|
|
To be trusted is a greater compliment than to be loved. — George MacDonald
|
Winds of change in Africa
The
decade that began on January 1 will be Africa’s decade. Unprecedented opportunities are opening up for India-Africa cooperation in Africa’s rise in several areas, notably higher education, industrialisation and agriculture. There is a new awakening in Africa about its place in the fast-changing world of the 21st century. There are breakthroughs in several areas — a remarkable decline in the incidence of AIDS and malaria, a tangible reduction in poverty, a substantial increase in longevity, a rise in primary school enrollment from 58 per cent in 2000 to 74 per cent in 2008, and a general decline of violence. Provision of fertiliser and new varieties of seeds by governments to poor farmers in countries like Malawi has increased agricultural yields, and surpluses of tropical crops are finding markets abroad. In the continent as a whole, 2010 was exceptional in the number of elections. Burundi, Guinea, Ethiopia and the semi-autonomous region of Somalia had elections early in the year; Tanzania and Chad followed. The referendum in Kenya was another successful democratic exercise giving that country a new constitution, which is helping to resolve ethnic tensions. Increasingly, the voters are holding politicians accountable, and that bodes well for Africa’s future progress. The economy of the continent has shown much strength in a period of global recession. According to an IMF report, Sub-Saharan Africa grew at more than 5 per cent during the period 2000-2009. The spike in commodity prices contributed only a quarter of the growth. Even countries without mineral resources grew at a healthy rate of more than 4 per cent. The consumer spending of the continent, with less than 1 billion people in 2008, was $860 billion, more than that of India with a population of 1.2 billion. As many as 316 million mobile phones were added between 2000 and 2008. There are likely to be shortfalls in the achievement of Millennium Development Goals, largely because of the shortfalls in financial support promised by rich Western countries; but the broad picture is one of dynamism, hope and the promise of continuing advance in the years ahead. At a recent discussion in Delhi, Rwanda’s young and dynamic High Commissioner, Mr Nkurunziza, spoke of a new paradigm in India-Africa partnership. India, he said, should lead the industrialisation of Africa and it should help with the human resource development in the continent by setting up model institutions like our own IIMs, IITs and universities. In fact, the recent turn-around in Rwanda from a nation devastated by genocide to a peaceful, vibrant, electoral democracy is a great story in itself. Till the traumatic genocide of 1994, in which 1 million people were killed and 3.5 million had fled the country, Rwanda was a virtual dictatorship. The next eight years marked the transition under a multi-party, national government. A new constitution adopted in 2003 laid the foundation for a new democratic Rwanda. In the 2003 elections, Mr Paul Kagame was elected President. Under his leadership peace was fully restored, the country gained stability and reconciliation between the Hutus and the Tutsies, the two major ethnic groups of the country. In addition to solid progress in economic and social development, constitutional processes in the fledgling democracy were strengthened. The majority party, for example, can hold only the post of Head of State; the posts of the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House have to go to the Opposition. The election in August 2010, in which Mr Kagame was re-elected President with a tally of 93.8 per cent of the votes cast, was a remarkably peaceful exercise. The turnout in the election was 95.4 per cent of the 5.1 million electorate despite the fact that voting in Rwanda is not compulsory. Both figures have been questioned by some NGOs and the media in the West. It stands to reason, though, that a nation new to democracy will demonstrate great enthusiasm for the electoral process and register a large turnout at the polling stations. We experienced this here in India in the early years of Independence. Also, in nascent democracies leadership and a leader’s charisma and record of service matter. President Kagame, in his first term, had endeared himself to all sections of the population by not resorting to retribution for genocidal crimes. Socio-economic progress achieved under his leadership and the virtual elimination of corruption in his first term as President had increased his popularity. Women now enjoy a special status: they are in majority in Parliament, and 40 per cent of the Cabinet posts are held by women. There is near 100 per cent health care and immunisation. Enrollment in primary education is 97 per cent. Nearly all girls have access to education. The number of universities, one in 1994, increased to 16. The World Bank recently judged Rwanda as the best governed state in Sub-Saharan Africa, and the top country for doing business in. Under a single-window scheme introduced by President Kagame, it takes just three days for a foreigner to start a business enterprise in Rwanda. The country, impoverished beyond imagination by predatory colonialism and torn by ethnic conflict for decades, has become a development model in a rising Africa. In the success stories coming out of Africa, there are lessons to learn for the world, and a message for India in particular — Africa looks to India, not for patronage, not for roads and railways enabling exploitation and export of its vital resources, but for cooperation in activating its indigenous talent and in harnessing Africa’s resources for Africans. Happily, some limited but impressive Indian engagement with Africa of the kind that the Africans want already exists. For example, the Pan-African e-network, an idea of Dr Abdul Kalam, is helping in e-medicine and e-education. Some of India’s better-known corporate houses — Tatas, Bajaj, OVL, Essar, Sanmar, Ranbaxy and Reliance — have their presence in Africa. The acquisition of Zain telecom by Bharti Mittal has made it the biggest telecom company in Africa. There is good, though rather small, cooperative activity in agriculture also. Karuturi Global has taken a large acreage in Ethiopia for horticulture, and Punjabi farmers in East Africa are growing high-value crops, including pulses and maize, for local consumption and for export. The rice cultivation project in Senegal by Kirloskar is often cited as an example of South-South cooperation. NIIT has done pioneering work in IT training in countries like Nigeria. An African leader said recently that, in Africa, China was doing more, but India was doing better. We can and should be doing more, especially by way of cooperation in higher education — in engineering, business administration and medicine — and in the development of indigenous industry. And with an improved record of performance, we can do even better than we are doing now. Indian universities, think-tanks and the media have a great role to play in increasing awareness in our country about a new wind of change blowing across Africa. Our government, on its part, should give a much higher priority in India’s foreign policy to diplomatic relations with African countries. An African Head of State should be the chief guest on the occasion of Republic Day, 2012. India’s engagement should move away from sporadic events to a continuous activity and engagement, and the implementation of identified projects should be carried out as
scheduled. Mr M. Rasgotra is a former Foreign Secretary and Mr Viswanathan has served as India’s Ambassador in many African countries.
|
|||||||
Joy of writing I
spent
a weary day, trudging form one laboratory to another, intimidated and frightened by the competitively futuristic ambience of each and by the cold, clinical detachment that the technicians brought to their dealings with me. I survived because of the comfort and constant reassurance provided by the presence of my children. This process had been occasioned by the occurrence of occasional spells of dizziness, culminating in a collapse on the roadside. Late in the evening, when the results of all the tests had come in, I met my medical specialist. Atul studied the reports carefully and then smiled his usual reassuring smile. “Nothing to worry about,” he said. “It is a disease which upsets the fluid in your ears and causes this disbalance. It can be controlled through medication but you will have to accept it as part of the process of ageing.” The quiet acceptance I had brought to all the difficult cards that life had dealt me slipped away from me to be replaced with blistering, searing anger with life and with the world, not only at this latest blow but also for having denied me the opportunities that I knew I could have done so much with. But even as the anger flashed through my mind I saw an opportunity staring me in the face. The two interests in my life have been my teaching and my writing. For 47 years the time I have spent with my students in the classroom, has been the focus of my existence and a source of great joy. With my writing I have not been so lucky. Hampered as I was with the knowledge that my limited writing talent would not permit me to earn a livelihood, I could not bring to my writing the passion and enthusiasm that I brought to my teaching. I have written a number of books, short stories and an endless stream of middles and found pleasure in this writing. But it had always remained, at best, a secondary activity. Most of my writing had also been compromised because it was commissioned work, written more with an eye on the payment received than for the pure joy of writing. Now with a modest, but steady, income to give me financial security, and having been told that I am too old to be given a teaching assignment, I could do what I have always wanted to do and fill the vacuum that I have always felt while embarking on a book: write for the sheer joy of writing without a thought to contracts, royalties and reviews The anger slipped away from me as suddenly as it had come to be replaced by a thrill of anticipation. I would waste no time on useless regrets, on futile guilt trips, the sense of loss at the silence of so many of friends. I would concentrate now on all the things I had wanted to write and not been able to. I was
content.
|
|||||||
Most Pakistanis ought to have realised long ago that if Pakistan has a future — and it's arguably a bigger 'if' now than ever before — it lies in consolidating civilian rule, establishing a coherent modus operandi for coexistence with India, and easing out of the clutches of the US Mahir Ali
WHATEVER may lie ahead, it hasn't been a happy New Year for Pakistan's ruling party. Should the hectic efforts to salvage what's left of its coalition and to bolster it sufficiently to fend off potential parliamentary motions of no-confidence come to naught, perhaps the likeliest outcome will be another bout of direct military rule. That has always been a profoundly unpleasant prospect. It was particularly so in 1977, when Gen Zia-ul-Haq's coup pre-empted a formal truce between Zulfikar Ali Bhutto's government and its political opponents, and led to the murkiest phase in Pakistan's history, whose appalling repercussions continue to reverberate. But even in 1958 and again in 1999, when sections of the population welcomed military intervention as a form of temporary salvation from the shenanigans of self-obsessed politicians, the consequences were largely
unsalutary. Most Pakistanis ought to have realised long ago that if Pakistan has a future — and it's arguably a bigger 'if' now than ever before — it lies in consolidating civilian rule, establishing a coherent modus operandi for coexistence with India, and easing out of the clutches of the US without conceding ground to violence-prone obscurantists. It's a tall order, no doubt, and the task is obviously confounded by the calibre of the politicians Pakistanis have to contend with. But there are no other feasible options. Direct military rule — and the deliberate implication in describing it as 'direct' is that the army has effectively never been completely out of power since 1977 — would be a case of two steps back without a face-saving one step forward. At the same time, it ought to be acknowledged that the PPP's political rivals offer little scope for comparative advantage. The MQM accurately accuses Nawaz Sharif's faction of the PML of having been created by the military, but in doing so overlooks the circumstances of its own genesis in the early 1980s under a more ethnically specific nomenclature, when its emergence was facilitated by a regime that welcomed civil strife on the basis of ethnicity as a distraction from political challenges to its legitimacy. Both these parties have evolved since then, but hardly in directions that could be deemed politically desirable. Much the same could be claimed about the PPP, of course. Notwithstanding its transformation within the first decade of its foundation in 1967 from a potential vehicle for social democracy into a profoundly personalised political entity characterised by autocratic zeal and a high degree of opportunism, circumstances in the late 1970s propelled it into the role of a pro-democracy force. The popular enthusiasm that greeted Benazir Bhutto's return to Pakistan in 1986 must have caused the spontaneous soiling of more than one pair of khaki pants. She lost little time, however, in demonstrating a tendency to imbibe the wrong lessons from the nation's recent past. She had seen how her father had incurred the wrath of Uncle Sam by ploughing his own furrow in the field of international affairs, and by openly pledging to build a Pakistani nuclear deterrent after India had carried out a test in 1974. Although there are no WikiLeaks cables to substantiate the claim, it is widely believed that the US was complicit in Bhutto's overthrow in 1977 and put up no meaningful resistance to his judicial murder two years later. At the very least, one would think a certain wariness of Washington ought to have been the logical response of a bereaved daughter. She evidently decided, instead, that the only feasible route to power in Pakistan passed through Capitol Hill. And the extent to which she was willing to ingratiate herself is demonstrated during a particularly cringe-worthy movement in Bhutto, the documentary produced by her lobbyist-publicist friend Mark Siegel, when in an audio-clip Benazir seeks to clarify that Henry Kissinger's notorious threat to ZAB, to the effect that a "horrible example" would be made of him should he persist with his nuclear ambitions, was, in fact, "a friendly warning". She evidently couldn't bring herself to suspect — or at least to say — that the US could do any wrong. Which helped, of course, to propel her to power in 1988, after Zia got his comeuppance in midair. Perhaps, “power” is something of an exaggeration, given that the PPP did not have a parliamentary majority, compromised on continuity (with a hostile President and a military-affiliated Foreign Minister), and left hardly any discernible marks on the political landscape. The credibility of Benazir's return to office in the following decade was compromised when her husband was appointed Minister for Investment, of all things, and a bitterly public estrangement with her mother ensued over the return to Pakistan of Murtaza Bhutto. Murtaza's murder in 1996 at the hands of a police posse on the streets of Karachi, just metres from his home, effectively sealed Benazir's political fate for the time being. Her mortal fate was sealed 11 years later, at least partly on account of her willingness once more to be a pawn in the hands of powers she appears never to have fully understood. Her political and personality flaws do not substantially detract from the intensity of the tragedy on Dec 27, 2007. In the film “Bhutto”, though, the attempts to strike a balance are somewhat superficial and ham-handed. A proportion of the sound bites are allocated to detractors, though, including Fatima Bhutto - whose visceral reaction to those she deems responsible for the assassination of her father, Murtaza, is much more human than that of her aunt. The movie provides a momentary counterpoint to the official narrative on this score with the image of a clean-shaven Asif Ali Zardari at a condolatory function in the aftermath of his brother-in-law's demise. A considerably more poignant clip - unlikely to have ever been seen before - depicts, all too briefly, ZAB in his prison cell. It serves as a reminder of what has been lost since the fleeting period back in the early 1970s when there were grounds for being optimistic about Pakistan's future. Who on earth can bring back that feeling? By arrangement with Dawn
|
|
At war with itself
THE assassination of Punjab Governor Salman Taseer has unleashed a torrent of commentary about the decline of society, and rightly so. The story of the latest political figure killed at the hands of an extremist, though, has a twist to it: Mr Taseer broke no law, temporal or spiritual, but was instead killed for questioning a law. That unprecedented motive for an assassination ought to be reflected on. The country appears to have lurched to the conservative right even further and more abruptly than ever before in recent years. Consider that when Gen Musharraf (retd) attempted to revisit the issue of the blasphemy laws, he quickly had to back down and was only able to make some procedural changes. But just those few short years ago the level of vitriol and anger the Musharraf-led effort stirred up was nothing in comparison to what has been on display since the conviction of the Christian woman, Aasia Bibi, for blasphemy late last year. Clearly, the forces of extremism are on the march like never before and they are determined to bully and threaten people, with death even, to push them out of the public discourse. Yet, this is not just an issue about social and religious conservatives versus liberals competing to define Pakistan. The fact of the matter is, increasingly even moderates are being shouted down and bullied out of the public space. Moderates coming from the conservative right who dare to pronounce that man-made laws are always open to scrutiny and revision have been threatened. Those espousing interpretations of Islam that are removed from the literalist, narrow interpretations of ultra-conservatives and extremists have been killed. The war to define Pakistan is not just being fought between the `liberal` and `conservative`, but between the ultra-conservatives and everyone else, liberal, moderate and even mildly conservative. What truly makes the societal war so frightening is the fertile ground the extremists have to plant their millenarian ideology. Mr Taseer`s killer may have been an `elite` policeman, but the educational system and cultural environment in which he grew up likely never equipped him with the tools to rationally reject the poison flowing in the milieu in which he lived and worked. As long as the state ostensibly fights extremism without even a
semblance of a counter-extremism strategy, more tragic deaths like that of Governor Taseer`s may be inevitable. Punishing those who incite violence would only be a starting point. The shameful heroic reception accorded to Mr Taseer`s killer indicates how complex the task is, how deep-rooted the problem has become. Truly, we are at war with ourselves. And at the moment, it looks like the extremists are winning. An editorial in Dawn
|
|
|
| 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 | |
