The Tribune, Chandigarh, India

Lethal kuttu
Food laws are blatantly lax

North India is celebrating the nine pious days of the Navratra festival during which the kuttu ka atta (buckwheat flour) is the staple diet for those observing a fast. But this year, the holy occasion for the purification of the body and the soul has turned into a nightmare for many, thanks to some unscrupulous traders who sold adulterated or old flour which has landed many in hospitals. Reports of people falling ill after eating preparations made from such flour have been pouring in from places as far apart as Dera Bassi, Abohar and Fazilka in Punjab, Hisar and Ghanaur in Haryana and Bulandhsahr and Saharanpur in Uttar Pradesh. In the Trans-Yamuna region of Delhi alone, more than 200 people have reported sick. The total number of people suffering from various degrees of food poisoning may run into thousands.

Some of the contaminated stock has been traced to a trader in Ghaziabad but it is hard to believe that the supply to the entire North India originated from a single place. On the face of it, it appears that there were several traders who supplied such spurious eatable. There are reports that the husk of cereals and pulses which was very old and unfit for human consumption was mixed into the atta. That means that even if it had not been toxic, the traders were playing with the sentiments of the people who ate the kuttu ka atta in the fond belief that it was non-cereal.

As it always happens, the administration woke up only after the damage was done. Raids are continuing but the implementation of anti-adulteration laws is so lax that it is unlikely that the real criminals would be punished adequately. Ironically, when some mills producing the suspect flour were sealed by officials in Bulandshahr, traders gheraoed the police station in protest against the operation. The government tends to succumb to such pressure tactics, thus encouraging the wrong-doers. Adulteration of food-items is a crime of the gravest kind, which must attract exemplary punishment. In practice, exactly the opposite happens.

Handling rural debt
Waivers alone won’t help

Punjab Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal has sought a Rs 35,000 crore rural debt waiver from the Planning Commission. How he has arrived the figure is not clear. A similar figure created a storm last year when former Finance Minister Manpreet Singh Badal claimed a conditional loan waiver offer from the Centre. That was about the government debt. The Chief Minister has taken up the issue of rural people’s debt. Mr Badal is too experienced a politician not to realise that the Centre does not normally offer concessions to a particular state. How can the Centre write off rich farmers’ loans? With elections approaching, he is playing politics.

The Rs 71,000 crore Central package announced in 2008 was meant for distressed farmers countrywide. Not many Punjab farmers could benefit because of lack of data and the conditions attached. Had the government been serious about rural debt, it would have first studied the extent of debt and then sought Central help for the needy. In 2010 a study by an eminent economist, Prof H.S Shergill, had estimated the cultivating farmers’ debt at Rs 30,500 crore for the year 2008-09. There has been no recent government data about rural indebtedness. Indebtedness among the landless and farm labour has seldom been assessed or even discussed. The 2011-12 state budget does not even talk about rural debt. There is no state-level policy to deal with the issue.

It is due to such lack of preparedness and casual approach that Punjab often misses out on Central incentives and aid. It is one thing to show concern for the rural poor, and quite another to do something genuine to remove poverty. Data required is either unavailable or inadequate. Professor Shergill’s study revealed that 17 per cent of the farmers are caught in a debt trap. They need help. Instead of announcing waivers, the Centre and the state should set up an institutional mechanism to fight indebtedness on a regular basis. Mr Badal can take the initiative and set an example if he is really serious about farmers’ plight.

Thought for the Day

He who opens a school door, closes a prison. — Victor Hugo

ARTICLE

US falters on Af-Pak policy
India needs to play a pro-active role
by Harsh V. Pant

The situation in Af-Pak is getting complicated by the day and the Obama Administration is bitterly divided over its future course of action to fashion a coherent strategy towards the region. Recent events have only compounded the confusion. On March 20, Terry Jones, pastor of a tiny Florida church, declared Islam’s holy book “guilty” of “crimes against humanity” and ordered it set ablaze in a portable fire pit. Days later, after Afghan President Hamid Karzai decided to ask for Jones’ prosecution, Afghans took to the streets in protest against the burning of the Quran in Florida. An angry mob killed at least seven foreigners in northern Afghanistan and set fire to a United Nations compound in Mazar-e Sharif, a city where NATO forces have transferred power to the local Afghan forces. Another bloody day followed in Kandahar, when the police fought with protesters, leaving at least nine dead and more than 80 injured.

The ongoing tumult prompted Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top NATO commander in Afghanistan, and his civilian counterpart, Ambassador Mark Sedwill, to issue a statement reiterating “our condemnation of any disrespect to the Holy Quran and the Muslim faith.”

“We condemn, in particular, the action of an individual in the United States who recently burned the Holy Quran,” the statement said. “We further hope that Afghan people understand that the actions of a small number of individuals, who have been extremely disrespectful to the Holy Quran, are not representative of any of the countries of the international community who are in Afghanistan to help the Afghan people.”

When Mr Jones threatened to burn a copy of the Quran on the anniversary of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks last year, Mr Petraeus was among several top US officials who strongly urged against it and warned about the troubling consequences that could arise in Afghanistan. Mr Jones eventually called off the event only to announce earlier this year in January that he was going to “put the Quran on trial.” He said he didn’t hear a single complaint. The “trial” was held on March 20, and the holy text subsequently burned, leading to turmoil in Afghanistan.

Meanwhile, suicide bombers struck a Sufi shrine compound in Pakistan, killing more than 40 people. The Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan, which has repeatedly aimed attacks at Sufi shrines across the country, along with government targets and security forces installations, promptly claimed responsibility for the attack. The latest attack is another attempt by militants to exacerbate the ideological divides that exist within different schools of Sunni Islam. There have been growing concerns that militants from the tribal regions of Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa province, formerly North-West Frontier Province, have been using Dera Ghazi Khan, where the shrine was based, as a route to enter Punjab.

This turmoil comes at a time of growing tensions within the Obama Administration over the size and pace of the planned pullout of US troops from Afghanistan this summer, with the military seeking to limit a reduction in combat forces and the White House pressing for a withdrawal substantial enough to placate a war-weary electorate. At a time of economic turmoil in the US, the war’s cost estimated to reach $120 billion this year is leading to increasing public disenchantment with the war. Attention is shifting to 2012 Presidential elections and the political class, including Mr Barack Obama, will be reluctant to challenge public opinion. Nearly two-thirds of Americans, according to latest surveys, no longer find the war in Afghanistan worth fighting.

Mr Obama’s failure to take complete ownership of the war that he had once described as the necessary one is becoming a big liability. Moreover, he has failed to reconcile the differences among his advisers even as the perception is gaining ground that the war is going nowhere for the NATO forces. Though Mr Obama made it clear that the current war strategy will continue and not be altered, there is a grudging acknowledgment in the US policy-making circles that Mr Obama’s surge is not showing any signs of success so far. Although military officials contend that the surge has enabled US forces to blunt the Taliban in key areas over the past several months, White House officials remain sceptical that those gains will survive without the presence of American troops and without US financial aid.

Mr Obama had approved a 30,000-troop increase sought by the military in 2009 but at the same time he had made it clear that the surge forces would begin returning home by July 2011. The pace of that reduction, however, was ambiguous, with Defence Department officials describing the initial reductions as minor and some of Mr Obama’s other advisers, including Vice-President Joe Biden, saying the pullout would be as rapid as the deployment of the surge troops.

Meanwhile, a major Pentagon task force that has sought to help Afghanistan exploit its mineral wealth and expand private sector employment is facing a crisis with the resignation of several of its members alarming senior military officials, who view the group’s job-creation efforts as an important component of the overall US counter-insurgency
mission.

As the US struggles with its Af-Pak policy, India needs to be acutely aware of the implications of the rapidly deteriorating security environment in its neighbourhood. America’s diminishing capacity to come to terms with the challenges in Afghanistan will have long-term implications for regional security in South Asia. New Delhi will have to fashion a pro-active foreign policy response that relies less on Washington in crafting an appropriate response to the changing dynamic in Af-Pak. Whether a government mired in scandals can step up to the plate remains an open question.n

The writer teaches at King’s College, London.

MIDDLE

Going back
by Harish Dhillon

REVISITING a place from your past is usually an emotionally disappointing experience. We go back in the hope of finding things the way they were when we were there – some vestige of permanence in an impermanent world. We also expect to find some little part of ourselves there, some footprint that we have left behind, a measure of immortality, no matter how small. Disappointment stems from finding that the place has changed beyond recognition and the people we knew have moved on. More often than not we fail to find the footprints that we came to look for.

I spent nine glorious,valuable years in Lucknow University, years of self-discovery, of spreading my wings to see how far and how high I could fly. All the peaks and depths of my life, emotional, intellectual and even physical, were experienced during this time. I know that I did leave a mark on the minds, and in some cases, on the lives of those I taught.

Then years later I went back. The ambience of the university was alien and uncomfortable. All those whom I had known were gone. It was as if I had never been here. My heart ached with an aching emptiness. I stopped near the gate at a stall where we had always come for a mid-morning snack of samosas. I ordered samosas now. The stranger at the stall smiled and said, “And you, of course will not have any chutney.” I looked closely at him. He was the little, sniveling child who had always held onto his father while he served the samosas. He had remembered. Some of the emptiness left my heart.

Sanawar was home to me for 30 years of my life and for 17 of those years I know I exercised a considerable influence on many, many lives. I have always been diffident about going back to Sanawar, partly because my last tenure there was a disaster and partly because I have learnt my lesson and have no intention of looking for the past. I do go to Sanawar but purely in my capacity as a father and a grandfather. But no matter how resolutely you push it away the past tends to catch you unawares.

I went for a house show recently and suddenly, after all these years, my heart ached because I did not know any of the children and when I walked to my daughter’s house it was as if those 30 years had never been. Then I was greeted by two boys, one of whom asked:

“Are you an old Sanawarian?” I said yes and couldn’t help adding that I had also been the Headmaster. He looked at me unbelievingly and then his eyes lit up.

“You are the one who is smiling,” he was referring to the photographs of past Headmasters in Barne Hall.

My immortality lies in the fact that I eat samosas without chutney and in the smile in a black and white photograph. But even this is enough. I am content.

OPED DEFENCE

Defence procurement and production policies seek to expedite and simplify provisions and establish a level playing field for the public and private sector to achieve self-reliance, besides encouraging participation by the academia. The policies, however, lack the teeth for proper execution. The academia and the private sector have considerable talent and energy that can be liberated for defence development and production provided a conducive environment is facilitated by the defence ministry
Academia-Industry interaction is key to cut imports
Air Cmde J.S.Kalra (Retd)

Over 50 per cent of the annual defence budget goes towards imports. The production of defence equipment, until recently a government function, was reserved for ordnance factories and defence public sector undertakings (DPSUs), supported by research through DRDO laboratories. Production as well as research has been seriously constrained both in quality and quantity, thus keeping the import bill high. By the time a weapon system is developed, it is far behind the new technology in the contemporary world. Most weapons systems ex-Soviet block were reasonably priced, which India could afford to meet its minimum requirements. Western technology was far superior though very expensive and the country imported some percentage of its defence requirements from these countries. With the fall of the Soviet bloc, the emphasis shifted towards indigenous substitution and import from western countries.

The IAF’s Russian-made SU-30 MKI frontline fighters at an air display. Even 63 years after independence, India remains dependent on foreign military suppliers for all its critical defence requirements, including weapon platforms and spares. This makes the country strategically vulnerable.

The hostile attitude of countries in our neighborhood has become increasingly paramount, requiring higher defence expenditure. With good performance of the national economy, investments in the defence production sector could also be increased. Since DRDO and DPSUs alone would not be able to meet the current and future requirements, the government is steadily liberalising its Defence Production and Procurement Policy to involve the private sector.

Defence Procedures and Academia-Industry Interaction

Over the years, the government has assiduously tried to increase capabilities in defence R&D, ordnance factories and DPSUs to provide armed forces with all types of equipment. Simultaneously, the better performance of the private sector has made it possible to consider off-loading defence development and production to the civilian industry. Besides, eligible corporates can also apply to be Raksha Udyog Ratnas (RURs). All viable approaches such as formation of consortia, joint ventures, and public private partnerships have been permitted. The government has decided to set up a special fund for providing necessary resources to the public and private sectors including SMEs as well as academic and scientific institutions to support research, development and production.

Defence Procurement Procedure-2011
The Defence Procurement Procedure (DPP) is the defining document published by the Ministry of Defence to enable decisions regarding defence capital acquisition for the Indian Armed Forces to be made in a cost effective, timely and transparent manner.
DPP-2011 aims at expanding India’s defence industrial base, encourage indigenous defence production and reduce defence imports. It aims at simplification of procedures, speeding up of procurement and enhanced benefits to the Indian defence industry. Keeping in view the strategic importance of the ship building sector, seminal policy changes have also been incorporated in the ship building procedure. It also covers the civilian aviation sector.
The thrust of the policy is to provide a level-playing field to the defense public sector undertakings, shipyards as well as the private sector. The scope of the DPP has been enlarged gradually over the years through amendments in 2003, 2005, 2006, 2008 and 2009. The basic thrust of the enlargement has been to promote development of indigenous military industrial complex.

The Defence Procurement Procedures laid down in 1992 have been fully revised with the issuance of Procurement Procedures--2011. The aim is to expedite decision-making, simplification of contractual and financial provisions and establishing a level playing field, for both public and private sectors. The scope of the offset policy mandating foreign suppliers for indigenous procurement with orders totaling more than Rs 300 crore has been expanded to include civilian aerospace, internal security and training.

Today higher education institutions (HEI) and the industry are keen on building strong and purposeful partnerships. The existing system through internships, student projects and representation of industrialists on academia boards has not brought about the requisite quality improvements in student’s learning. This needs greater monitoring by academic institutes and serious involvement of industries as they are fully interested in better work force. Industries also seek partnerships because of complexity of scientific and engineering knowledge, competition and the drive for innovation. Academia finds industrial collaboration important for their research initiatives and students placements.

Over the past 20 years, US major private laboratories AT&T, Bell, IBM and Xerox etc. have down-sized considerably. Today their focus is entirely products related and have shifted the other research task to universities and are funding the same. Given the current high rate of growth and dynamic investment climate in India, the demand for knowledge workers will only increase.

Execution of the Defence Production Policy

The defence ministry has done well to issue the Defence Production Policy and updated it in January 2011 as a New Year gift to the nation. It has the characteristic features and objectives to achieve self-reliance in the design, development and production systems, and create an environment for the private industry, including SMEs, to play an active role. It also encourages inv olvement of the academia, R&D institutions, etc. outside the DRDO and to synergize efforts in defence production and set up a separate fund to provide resources to all development and production stake holders.

The policy document, however, lacks the teeth for proper execution. Let us discuss some of the significant deficiencies

We have to move from state controlled defence research and production to a process of liberalisation as was done for economic liberalisation in 1990s. Moment the government shackles were withdrawn, the economy grew at a fast rate. Particular example is the IT sector where bureaucratic controls were absent by default.

Second, we have advanced the concept of RURs but have limited the scope to corporates with a minimum turnover of Rs 1,000 crore. This will have to be expanded to bring many more players to compete and unleash their talent and latent energy.

Third, the role of academia--industry interactions has been highlighted without providing methodologies for its achievement. Incentives need to be provided both to academia and industries to strengthen partnerships.

Fourth, it has been found that service headquarters, while formulating general staff requirements (air force and navy including), are unrealistic both in terms of qualitative requirements and timeliness. It has to be appreciated that development is an incremental process and one should not expect disruptive technologies to appear overnight.

Fifth, it is nice to hear that the government will setup a private fund for research and development in the private sector outside the DRDO, but no provisions appear to have been made in the 2011-12 budget.

Sixth, the DPP must carefully appreciate that DRDO has more than fifty full-fledged laboratories but has failed to compete in technology and timeliness with global standards. Delayed production of the LCA and MBT are glaring examples of time and cost over runs.

Seventh, defence services are also seen as a source for easy funds for the politicians because of kickbacks. We have to find a solution and operate in the most transparent and merit based manner.

Implementation of the Procurement Procedures

The MoD deserves compliments for issuing the procurement procedures in 2011. This document needs to be introspected. Three models for defence procurement have been introduced in the past namely “Buy”, “Buy & Make” and “Make”. The last two models require heavy investments on the part of the industry. The savior of course is the offset policy that so far has not produced the desired results. The MoD should engage organisations like the CII, FICCI, PHDCCI and ASSOCHAM for publicity and feedback. DPP--2011 has also provided relief by removing the mandated requirements for licensing as a pre-requisite for being an Indian offset partner. Banking of offset credits has also been introduced, but this area still remains murky. The government has is also interested in Headquarters Integrated Defence Staff sharing the public version of the 15 years procurement plan with the industry, but we have yet to see its execution.

The private industry has been found to be wary of the defence procurement procedures and delays in payments. I have met many top industrialists in North India whose experience with defence procurement agencies is rather bad and they are scaring off other industries also. Today, an original equipment maker runs around the entire South Block or service headquarters and gets frustrated. There must exist a single window system where all concerns are addressed.

The Department of Defence Production has made a lot of progress in formulating the policy as well as the procedures. Several issues have been highlighted to improve competition on a level playing field for the private sector (corporates and SMEs). Regular seminars should be held to ensure that we progress fast in meeting defence requirements and enhance import substitution through academia–industry interaction. The private sector has tremendous amount of energy that can be liberated for defence development and production if a conducive environment is facilitated by the MoD.

The writer has been the chairman-cum-managing director of two public sector undertakings