|
|
|
|
|
Cong’s lonely stars Third sex |
|
|
BJP should keep the faith of the secular
She left indelible imprints on many minds
Curbs against Russia an exercise in futility
|
Cong’s lonely stars The
Congress has set up for its Punjab state unit two new committees, one for campaigning and the other for election coordination. The timing of the move, coming barely 15 days ahead of polling, raises questions about both its purpose and effectiveness. Besides, the most prominent feature of the panels’ constituents is that most of them are what could be called disgruntled elements who have either been denied the ticket or are upset about their rivals being given more importance by the party. The exercise is thus more likely aimed at silencing them for the two weeks till the elections. But even that may be hard to achieve given that all of them are hardened politicos who would not be taken by such sops. It was a smart move for the party to have fielded its top-rung leaders in the state, but as things stand they all seem to be fighting their own lonely battles. Most MLAs are campaigning for their respective ‘camps’ — Capt Amarinder’s, Bajwa’s or Bhattal’s — rather than in their own Assembly constituencies. The campaign committee members are likely to be invited to canvass only by a few contestants, in line with the loyalties. In any case, only a few on the panel have state-wide crowd-pulling abilities. No national-level Congress leader has thus far campaigned in Punjab. The party was late in announcing its candidates in the state, but it turned that into an advantage by deciding its ticket after assessing the SAD’s line-up. That infused fresh life in the cadre, who sensed better results than initially expected. Were the Congress to give a solid united push, the party could reasonably have hoped to get six or more of the 13 seats in the state, the national anti-incumbency wave notwithstanding. But that ‘united push’ has remained elusive thus far. Rival SAD, which is facing anti-incumbency too, has, however, been relentless in its poaching campaign, chipping off at the Congress, howsoever small the chips. In Punjab — where not even the SAD-BJP refer to a Modi wave — the Congress would have only itself to blame if it fails to do better than the ruling combine.
|
|
Third sex From
social exclusion to equality under the law, the transgender community in India has come a long way. In what can easily be termed a historic moment, Indian transgenders have got legal status as the Supreme Court has granted recognition to them as the third category of sex. This would not only entitle the million plus population the right to record their gender identity in documents like the election card, passport, driving licence and ration card but also hopefully open many doors for them. However, it remains to be seen if this decision would put an end to the continual social discrimination. Social stigma and denial of basic rights such as education is a painful reality that dogs the transgender community in India. Confined to the margins, they are not only
ostracised, but also often shunned by family members. However, the movement to recognise their rights has gained momentum in recent years. Judgments have upheld their right to be elected. NGOs like India HIV-AIDS Alliance have focussed on key areas like identity recognition, violence, stigma, discrimination, access to health and legal services. Some years ago, the Election Commission introduced the “others” gender option. Thousands of Aadhar cards too have been issued to them. The latest Supreme Court ruling has asked them to be treated as Other Backward Classes and provided employment and educational opportunities accordingly. Indeed, it would be presumptuous to believe that the landmark ruling alone would bring a change in their unenviable status in society. However, recognition, coupled with measures recommended by the apex court, can in due time prove to be the crucial game changer. No doubt real acceptance has to come from society which must no longer view them as oddities or queer people, but treat them as equals with due deference. Bringing them into the mainstream is a challenge that can’t be achieved overnight. Both government and people must pitch in to ensure that their human rights are not violated, something that happens far too flagrantly.
|
|||||
|
Listen to your own voice, your own soul; Too many people listen to the noise of the world instead of themselves. —Leon Brown
|
|||||
Although the British Government does not openly acknowledge the fact, yet the Native States of India exert a powerful influence on the policy of the Government. The Native States are a force in the country for good and evil alike, and this has been proved indubitably by the Imperial and Provincial Governments. When the "Statesman" divulged official secrets, the Government of India resorted to the Mysore method of boycotting the paper by stopping to it the supply of official papers and advertisements. Mysore led the way in regard to Mining Regulation and the Press Act, and prepared the ground for the Government of India. Lord Minto openly pointed to certain methods adopted by Native States to deal with political unrest. He even issued a Blue Book containing extracts from correspondence between the Government of India and the Ruling Princes. On the other side we have from Baroda examples of compulsory education and separation of judicial and executive functions; and from Mysore examples of low assessment, liberal policy in respect of irrigation and tank restoration. Punjab Legislative Council At the next meeting of the Punjab Legislative Council to be held at Lahore on Saturday, the 18th April, the Hon'ble Mr. Kettlewell, officiating Chief Secretary and the Hon'ble Sir P.C. Chatterji will take the oath of allegiance. The Hon'ble R.B. Hari Chand will ask questions relating to the Provisional Judicial Service, the nature of their duties and their promotion. The Hon'ble R.B. Ram Saran Das will ask questions with regard to preparation of programmes of sanitary projects by district boards and minor municipalities and the Punjab Agricultural College, the prospects of its graduates and steps to attract students.
|
BJP should keep the faith of the secular I
may question the timing, practically on the eve of polling for the Lok Sabha elections, of the disclosure of the conspiracy behind the demolition of Babri Masjid at Ayodhya in 1992. I do not know how this has helped the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) at the polls during which it shed the development factor and came out in its true colours, the pro-Hindu stance. Its election manifesto is a bit accommodative on the mandir and seeks a solution within the constitutional framework. But the BJP remains adamant on Article 370, which is an integral part of the process of Jammu and Kashmir’s accession to India.
The other main party, the Congress, did not lag behind in communalising the environment. The party marshalled Shahi Imam Bukhari and other Muslim clerics behind it and did not care about the oft-repeated allegation against it that the Congress goes out of the way to appease the Muslims. Yet, I commend the meticulous job of piecing together the bits of information through sting operations spread over three years to bring to light the plan to destroy the masjid. The news portal, which has divulged the details, says that the demolition was an “act of planned sabotage.” It was meticulously planned, rehearsed and executed. This confirms what Justice M.S. Liberahan had said in his report on the demolition. He has reiterated in a press interview: “It stands beyond doubt that the events of the day were neither spontaneous nor unplanned, nor an unforeseen overflowing of the people’s emotion. Narendra Modi was part of LK Advani’s rath yatra in support of the mandir.” What has pained me is the fact that both Atal Behari Vajpayee and Advani knew about the proposed demolition — the plan and the exercise carried out for demolition. I was honestly taken in by Vajpayee’s argument that it was an act of people’s spontaneous emotions and had no prior planning behind it. When Advani resigned from the Lok Sabha taking moral responsibility, I really believed that he was speaking the truth. I feel cheated. The alacrity with which he withdrew the resignation within 24 hours indicates the hypocrisy. And Vajpayee still plugs the line that it was a spontaneous reaction of the crowd. This is not true because half a million sewaks had assembled from different parts of the country, particularly Maharashtra, on December 6, 1992. The Justice Liberahan report is an indictment of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), which has taken 22 years to complete the probe as it claims to have done. More than that it is an indictment of public figures that were part of the conspiracy but parade themselves as apostles of virtues. Other BJP leaders, some of whom I see on television channels, do not minimise the sin by arguing that no sting operation has been carried out in the case of corruption deals by the Congress. This can be done even belatedly. But the Sangh Parivar cannot be absolved of its nefarious activities. I knew all along that Narasimha Rao, the then Congress Prime Minister, had blessed the destruction. He had the Army deployed in the vicinity and was bound to use it when the Supreme Court had said the status quo should be maintained, that is, to protect the Babri Masjid. Not a single soldier was moved to defend the mosque, nor was there ever a proposal to surround the structure with tanks to ward off any attack. What socialist leader Madhu Limaye had told left me with no room for any doubt about Rao’s involvement. Limaye said that when the demolition began, Rao sat for puja. There were frantic calls from his colleagues who made an effort to reach out to him and ask him to take action against those who were engaged in destroying the mosque but he had instructed that he should not be disturbed. When the destruction was complete, Rao’s aide whispered into his ears that the process was complete. Rao finished his puja. The demolition was followed by communal riots, particularly in Mumbai. Rao invited some senior journalists to seek the media’s help to normalise the situation. I was one of the invitees. I asked Rao how a small temple had come to be built overnight when the centre had taken over the administration after dismissing the state government ruled by the BJP. He answered that the temple would not be there for long. Twenty-two years have gone by since the demolition. I had reminded Rao of his assurance on several occasions when he was still in power. But no action has been taken despite my repeated writings. The small temple stands there even today and the talk to accommodate the Muslims by building a mosque next to the mandir is not heard anymore. I can understand and even appreciate the arguments of those who claim that it was the Ram janmabhoomi and not the Babri Masjid. But when lakhs of Ram sewaks gather there and even beat up a few Gandhiites who objected to violence, the dictum sought to be proved is that the majority community would have its way through peace, if possible, or by force, if necessary. The Babri Masjid’s destruction is a watershed in our country’s ethos of pluralism. The Muslim community began to tilt on the side of extremists since. Its faith in secular society was shaken and it went even to the extent of not protesting against the terrorists. If I were to trace militancy among the Muslims, I would find the demolition of Babri Masjid as the beginning. The community feels insecure, particularly at the prospect of Modi becoming the prime minister. All I can say is that India has been a multi-religious society for centuries and we have learnt to live that way. If Modi tries to undo the reality, he will find defiance all over. He may even jeopardise the country’s integrity. I wish the BJP’s election manifesto had mentioned secularism once. The new converts to the BJP argue that when the party swears by the Constitution, it expresses its faith in secularism without spelling it out. I wish it were so because when the Babri Masjid was demolished it was done despite the Constitution.
|
||||
She left indelible imprints on many minds She was a regular at our cultural concerts, especially the ones in which leading Indian classical musicians. She could sing quite well herself. Surprisingly, while she could have always asked for special seats, often I would run into her in the audience. Clearly, she was not one to use clout to get special favours. An institution in herself, her stellar career spanned five decades in different official capacities. Over another three decades, she also contributed in honorary roles and helped to shape the educational landscape of Chandigarh and Punjab. Labelling her as an academician par excellence would not be doing justice because her contribution went beyond mere academics. Progressive, creative with her ideas and bold in executing them, she won the admiration not only of her students and staff but also government officials, bureaucrats and politicians. Her qualities won her the unflinching loyalty of those fortunate enough to work with her. As my involvement in running schools, a cultural centre and managing activities of our NGO grew, she lent her expertise to the administration. She was seen as a firebrand who would, on her scheduled visits, ask the most pointed questions to ensure that what was being claimed in terms of results was actually being delivered on the ground. An institution builder in the real sense of the word, Mrs Atma Ram left an indelible imprint and the city would do well in creating some a memorial for a woman who was way ahead of her times. She made significant changes in the way girls were taught and groomed at college. Her presence was so commanding that only a rare person would play truant in her company. It was easy to fall in line with what she said, pretty much the way I did, many summers ago when I made that first trip to her house, with a notebook and pen in hand. In her inimitable way, she taught me so much about life and yes, English expression too!
|
||||
Curbs against Russia an exercise in futility the
face-off between the US-led western powers and Russia over the annexation of Crimea seems to have cooled somewhat. Both sides appear to be backing off and President Putin has had the fifth telephone conversation with President
Obama, this time initiated by the former. Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov and US Secretary of State Kerry have met again in Paris, presumably to explore avenues to defuse the crisis.
Putin has ordered a partial withdrawal of Russian troops along the eastern borders of Ukraine that are poised as a warning to Ukraine to roll back its moves to join NATO and deal with its Russian minority sympathetically. Russia has also raised the price of gas that it supplies to Ukraine as a punitive measure. US Secretary of State continues to maintain that the Russian takeover of Crimea is “illegal and illegitimate”, but both sides have talked about using diplomatic means to resolve the crisis. This is shorthand for continuing talks and hoping that the crisis does not exacerbate. Meanwhile, the western powers have scrambled to provide support to the Ukrainian government struggling to maintain its writ over its Russian-dominated eastern region. After much posturing and rhetoric, the US and EU have resorted to sanctions against Russian officials and selected individuals, and Russia has retaliated with its own sanctions against US and European politicians and individuals. UN sanctions A noteworthy feature of this confrontation is the imposition of sanctions by the West and retaliatory sanctions by Russia. The nature of sanctions has also generated mocking comments from Russian and US politicians. Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin mocked the visa ban imposed on him, saying he had no intention of visiting the US. Senator John McCain, whose chest-thumping militarist posturing in defence of Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity has attracted much attention, mocked the sanctions imposed on him, saying that his Siberian holiday has been put on hold and his “secret account” in Russia frozen. International economic sanctions have been in use for a long time. Truly effective sanctions are those imposed by the UN Security Council when there is consensus among its permanent members. It has imposed such sanctions twice in the first 45 years since it was established — against Rhodesia (now Tanzania and Zimbabwe) in 1966 and apartheid South Africa in 1977. During the 1990s, it imposed partial or comprehensive sanctions over 16 times. The UN and US imposed comprehensive economic sanctions against Iraq for its invasion and annexation of Kuwait. After a period of diplomacy and military buildup, the first Iraq war led to the liberation of Kuwait and the defeat and overthrow of the Saddam Hussain regime.
About sanctions Military implications During and after the Cold War, the US has led the field in imposing sanctions in pursuit of its global geo-political goals. Such sanctions signal the US resolve to maintain the current global order without taking the route of military action. Smaller nations are never immune from western military actions (Yugoslavia, Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan and Syria) but larger more powerful nations deter the military option. Thus Russia, China and India have all faced sanctions on different occasions. The US imposed economic sanctions against the Soviet Union in 1983 after the downing of the South Korean airliner that had strayed into restricted Soviet airspace. The Tiananmen Square incidents led to the US imposing sanctions to assuage domestic US opinion and to make a moral statement. US sanctions against India after the 1998 nuclear tests were also designed to force India to sign the CTBT unconditionally. India was also sanctioned after the 1974 “peaceful nuclear explosion” and several technology denial regimes were created by the US and allied nations to coerce India into falling in line and sign the
NPT. None of these sanctions achieved their objectives. Stick to India The US is currently engaged in targeting the Indian pharmaceutical industry with threats of sanctions because it sees a threat to its pharmaceutical companies from generic drugs. It has used various methods to ban the export of drugs from Indian companies to warn against compulsory licensing and the refusal of the Indian judiciary to approve evergreening of patents. The US and India are friendly democracies with converging interests but that does not prevent the US and its bureaucracy, under the influence of powerful commercial lobbies, to target friends and foes alike. Such is the nature of a predatory global power, defending its waning hegemony in the global power hierarchy. More recently the UNSC and separate US sanctions against Iran, for its nuclear weapons
programme, have had adverse economic effects on Iran. US financial sanctions have led to reduction in imports of Iranian oil by many countries, including India. As long as tit-for-tat sanctions remains on the books against individuals, not much damage will be done, except to hit individual Russian billionaires and give an ego boost to the sanctioned individuals, as is evident from the reactions of US politicians. Counterproductive If real sanctions are imposed against Russia, they would hurt the West too, particularly Europe. Sanctions have always been seen as double-edged, hurting the economic interests of all concerned, living as we do, in a highly integrated world. If the US and EU decide to sanction Russia’s financial, energy and mining sectors, the entire situation will turn very nasty. Take the energy sector for example. Russia exports around 130 billion cubic metres of gas to the
EU, via pipelines, sections of which run through Ukraine. Banning gas imports will certainly hurt Russia to the tune of over $70 billion but it will also devastate EU countries that depend on Russian gas to the extent of 30 per cent. Poland depends on Russian gas to the extent of 91 per cent and Hungary for 86 per cent. Some countries like Greece, already reeling under an economic crisis, will simply collapse given its dependence on Russian gas to the extent of 55 per cent. French banks’ exposure is to the tune of over 20 per cent of their overall lending to Russian companies, 68 Russian companies trade at the London Stock Exchange and over a million Russian tourists keep the Italian tourist industry afloat. The EU will have no appetite for taking a masochistic approach to diplomacy. Germany, the largest economy in the
EU, can hardly stop consuming Russian gas (30 per cent) or risk putting $1.1 billion invested by its engineering giant Siemens in Russia. Punitive sanctions in the energy sector will impact US energy companies such as
ExxonMobil. For example, ExxonMobil and Rosneft of Russia signed an agreement in 2011 for oil drilling in the Arctic worth around $500 billion. If ExxonMobil has to abandon this agreement and other agreements with Russian companies, it will suffer a grievous blow and cause a huge upset in the global oil and gas market. There will be too many losers. Nor can the US replace Russian gas, though it has dangled the issue of exporting surplus shale gas and hinted that the EU should overcome its environmental-led diffidence in permitting exploration for shale gas in Europe. The infrastructure of exporting US gas to Europe cannot be created overnight. LNG terminals are highly capital intensive and building undersea pipelines can take decades and face technological challenges. The US companies are eager to open up the EU market for gas and have stared lobbying lawmakers, as is the military-industrial complex that seems to have smelt a golden opportunity to roll back cuts in defence expenditure by the Obama administration. UN
resolution Putin understands the challenges and vulnerabilities of the US and
EU. As a permanent member of the UNSC, Russia vetoed the resolution introduced by the US, calling upon countries not to recognise the Crimean referendum, though 13 countries voted for it, with China, another permanent member, abstaining. In a subsequent vote in the UN General Assembly, 100 countries voted against Russia, 11 for and 58 abstained in the 193-member Assembly, with 24 countries not voting. India abstained and has announced that it will not participate in any sanctions regime against Russia, while reaffirming its commitment to sovereignty and territorial integrity of nations. The West made much noise about Russia’s isolation. The fact remains that the UNGA resolution is symbolic and non-binding and has no effect on sanctions or anything else. Moreover, the large emerging economies like Brazil, China, India and South Africa
(BRICS), the countries of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) and many other countries will continue to ignore sanctions against Russia. Russia also holds other cards. Its gas will flow into China when Gazprom signs the deal for supplying 3.75 billion cubic feet of gas for 30 years, beginning 2018. This deal could be worth over $1 trillion. India will also look forward to investing more in the Russian oil and gas sector to meet its energy requirements. Russia and China may well decide to deal in either yuans or
roubles, severely undermining the petrodollar that has ruled the roost. This would be another step towards nudging the dollar of its perch as the international reserve currency. Most countries would agree that Russia violated international law by sending military personnel into Crimea and “arranging” the referendum for annexation. There would be consensus that western nations have intervened in Serbia, Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan and Syria. The West takes the moral high ground when its suits its interest and pretends that its intervention is good for rights, democracy, open markets and a liberal order. Yet the outrage against Russian annexation makes it a champion of hypocrisy. Crimea was a part of the Russian empire since 1783, and in 1921 it became a Soviet autonomous republic. In 1954, the Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev, a native Ukrainian, decided to hand over Crimea to the Soviet Socialist Republic of Ukraine. In 1991, Crimea became a part of independent Ukraine. Russia’s takeover was not inevitable but the West crossed a line when, after months of unrest, it caused the overthrow of the pro-Russian Ukrainian President. The prospect of Ukraine joining NATO was too much of a provocation for Russia to swallow and that explains its reaction to protect its interest in Crimea. Russian troops remain deployed along Ukraine’s eastern border. The writer is a former ambassador and has served as a Secretary at the Ministry of External Affairs, New Delhi, besides Indian Missions abroad.
|
|
| 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 | |
My
