The Tribune, Chandigarh, India

Haryana women lift the veil
Defy long history of patriarchal oppression

Women have been kept behind the veil for centuries, figuratively and literally, under different justifications produced through medieval history to modern times. The veil was supposed to protect them from the evil eye of soldiers of invading armies. In present times it is justified to protect their 'honour'. The veil is to a woman what the blinkers are to a horse. Both are imposed to limit the vision and perspective. To keep women behind the veil in the 21st century democratic India is not just ridiculous, it is not pragmatic for women doing odd jobs -- from tilling the fields to driving carts.

By keeping the veil, women underestimate their worth and perpetuate patriarchal myths such as a woman's status is lower than that of a man. Now, some thinking women in rural Haryana are taking up the cudgels to show their mettle, that is, show their face. They are doing so in a planned and organised manner. The sarpanch of Chappar village organises special lectures and interaction with rural women to help them come out of the "ghunghat". She was elected sarpanch with the support of women who wanted to defy the age-old practice but lacked courage to do so.

Making laws against social evils like "purdah" does not help much. The experience of prohibiting dowry through the legal way has hardly shown any positive results. On the contrary, the social evil has grown manifold. In the wake of stirrings of change even in the matters of marriage initiated by khaps, this campaign acquires significance. For any society to grow it is imperative that women acquire equal status. If they work towards a better society, to free it from the blemishes of dowry, female foeticide and honour killing, instead of succumbing to pressures of patriarchy, a true beginning would have been made by just lifting their veil. The rest would follow.

Thought for the Day

You can cut all the flowers but you cannot keep spring from coming. — Pablo Neruda

On this day...100 years ago

Lahore, Saturday, April 25, 1914

Aid to distressed Indians in England

The third annual report of the Distressed Indian Students Aid Society, London, of which Sir James Wilson is the President and Mrs. Herbert Whyte, Honorary Secretary, shows that the Society has been serving a most useful purpose. The objects of the Society are to assist deserving cases of temporary distress, to give loans to those whose remittances from India have been delayed and to prevent begging. During 1913 in all 47 Indian students applied for help of whom 39 applied for temporary loans. In ten cases the students were enabled to return to India. During the year loans were given to the total amount of £549 and £284 were received in repayments. The rest of the money is expected to be repaid during this year. In one case the student who had a loan £33-11-6 could not return the amount and so it had to be written off.

Licensed coolie recruiters

LABOUR recruiting in India, whether for Indian plantations or for colonies is done in a most unsatisfactory and injurious manner. The system must be thoroughly overhauled and entirely new and safe methods should be adopted in future. One important requirement is that the labourer should before signing the contract know exactly where he is to go and what conditions of life prevail there. It is of no use to leave this duty to the recruiters, who are paid at so much for a recruit sent. But a more responsible person should satisfy himself about the matter. Mr. T. Madhavan Nair, writing in the pages of the Hindu, Madras, gives a harrowing description of the villainies of the average coolie-recruiters in the South of India. Every kind of deceit is practised to induce the people to go to the distant plantations.

ARTICLE

The appointment of Army Chief
Political parties should stop scoring brownie points on the issue
Lt Gen Raj Kadyan (retd)

In India nothing of significance ever happens without kicking up political dust. Thus far mercifully the defence forces had been kept out of such controversies. Going by some recent media debates, this convention seems passé. The appointment of the next Army Chief, who is to assume office on retirement of the present incumbent, Gen Bikram Singh, on July 31, 2014, has aroused unprecedented interest of political parties out to score brownie points against the opponents in the ongoing parliamentary elections.

An Army Chief is appointed out of the Army Commanders. All the present Army Commanders, and their equivalent, the Vice Chief, have risen to that position through five selection boards. Since statistically only about 40 per cent get selected at each board, the Army Commanders form the top 1.024 per cent of their peers. An Army Commander's post is the highest operational command in our Army. The competence of all Army Commanders is therefore repeatedly established and no further selection is considered necessary. Each of them is capable of and fit for being appointed as the Army Chief. It is based on this premise that the senior-most Army Commander is elevated as the Chief. This convention has been followed almost without exception. Notably, seniority is decided not on a routine first-come principle; it is established on commissioning based on the merit list drawn after four years of training.

The appointment of Army Chief is cleared by the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet. The ACC comprises the Defence Minister, the Home Minister and the Prime Minister. Unlike a normal committee that sits together and deliberates, the ACC does not meet. Instead, the file moves to different members where it is vetted by the staff with inputs from other agencies such as the IB. The process normally takes two to three months. Besides, the appointment itself is announced two to three months in advance to enable the new incumbent to get a thorough briefing from all operational theatre commands and from different directorates at Army Headquarters.

Considering the above constraints, it is only correct that timely action is taken to process and announce the appointment of the new Army Chief. Delay will not be in organisational interest. It is unfortunate that some parties are giving it a political colour. The appointment of the next Army Chief has no relation to the moral code of conduct imposed by the Election Commission. That code only forbids actions that can influence the voters. To assume that the appointment of the Army Chief would sway public opinion and impact voting pattern against or in favour of a particular political party is indeed incredulous. The code is not intended to bring the defence forces to a standstill.

Some have equated the appointment of Vice Admiral Dhowan as the new Naval Chief, where the seniority principle has been violated, to the case of the next Army Chief. There is absolutely no parallel. The vacancy of the Naval Chief occurred after Admiral Joshi resigned owning moral responsibility for the spate of accidents that have dogged the Navy in the recent past. Admiral Joshi's action was in keeping with the highest traditions of the defence forces and has been rightly applauded. The leadership responsibility in any organisation, more so in the defence forces, is at two levels: the direct responsibility and the supervisory responsibility. Admiral Joshi as the Chief had only supervisory functions and was not directly commanding the ships or units where mishaps occurred. His action was on moral and ethical grounds. Stretching the same principle, the degree of supervisory responsibility of the Flag Officer-in-Command of the Western Naval Command, where most of the accidents occurred, was even higher. Rightly, the FOC-in-C Vice Admiral Shekhar Sinha should also have put in his papers following in the footsteps of his Chief. Alternatively, the government could have and should have asked him to quit, which did not happen. His being denied the post of Naval Chief, therefore, makes logical sense. None of this is relevant in the context of the new Army Chief. The only relevant point from the Navy's case is the time taken to process the files and choose the next Chief. The chair of the Naval Chief had unforeseeably fallen vacant on February 26. Considering the urgency, even though all processing actions would have been speeded up, it has taken 50 days to name the new Chief. The Army's case being normal, it would take even longer. The new government will take charge only in the latter half of May and would not be in a position to arrive at a decision in time to permit smooth changeover of the baton. The present government is not only right but in fact is obliged to make the announcement before demitting office. The government must ensure that the Army has a timely and smooth changeover of its Chief. Even the appointment of Gen Bikram Singh was announced three months in advance.

Interestingly, in 2004 the appointment of Vice Admiral Arun Prakash as the next Naval Chief was cleared by the outgoing NDA government on May 11, just two days before they conceded defeat. So why is all the political brouhaha being created in the case of the next Army Chief? According to the prevailing norms and convention, the senior-most Lt Gen must be elevated and well in time. Any off-the-perpendicular deviation, inspired by political or someone's familial preferences, must be eschewed as it will harm the institution of the Army.

Our country is unfortunately riven by religious and caste considerations. The defence forces have stood apart for their secularism, loyalty to the Constitution and for their apolitical character. This must remain so.

The writer is a former Deputy Chief of the Army Staff

MIDDLE

Bargaining in New York
Col (retd) D S Cheema

I had heard so many good things about America from some close relatives who live there that I decided to use my communication and persuasive skills to convince my not- so-keen wife to make a trip to the USA. Both of us applied for a visa to visit the country of dreams of millions of Indians and were excited when we were granted a visa for ten years without any hassles.

The experience of boarding an international flight at Delhi, spending a few hours at Amsterdam airport and landing the next day at Dallas, near Washington DC, was thrilling. We were taken around to all important landmarks like the White House, the Lincoln and Washington monuments, Capitol Hill and the air and space museum by our relatives who stayed close to the capital. On the fourth day, we moved out for other destinations.

Our first scheduled stop was at New York. The bus we boarded from Washington dropped us at about 6:30 pm local time in the heart of the city, a few yards away from Penn railway station. My first impression was that it was so much like our own metros; filth splintered around amongst magnificent sky-scrapers. We parked our large suit cases on the footpath and waved for a cab to take us to a hotel. After unsuccessful attempts for more than 20 minutes, a cab driven by an Indian youth stopped. When I enquired why no cab stopped on our request, his reply, "It is the closing time, that is why" shooked me to the core. How on earth 6:30 pm could be the closing time in New York out of all the places? Being Indian and from Punjab did not work and he also refused to drop us. However, he gave the parting advice, "Take the shuttle from Penn station".

For remaining in touch with folks back home, I had carried my Blackberry and managed the required SIM but forgot to get a charger. I requested the cab driver to take us to the nearest place where I could purchase the charger. He took us to the Times Square crossing and gave us 30 minutes to finish whatever shopping we had in mind.

We asked the Mexican salesman in a huge store to show us a charger for the phone. He promptly pulled out a charger wrapped in the plastic cover. When I looked at the price tag, it displayed $70 which I thought was too much for a charger and told the salesman accordingly. Ultimately, I mustered the courage to announce my acceptable price as $10. The owner accepted the price straightway and handed over the charger minus the wrapper which displayed the price tag. My insistence resulted in curt announcement, "Take it or leave it".

I had no choice but to accept the offer. Fortunately, the charger worked during our one-month stay in the US and is still functioning. One lesson I have learnt is that greed is an important ingredient of all humans.

OPED — Neighbours

A state of continuing anarchy, chaos
It was time for decisive action against the terror network in Pakistan. But the talks have provided Fazlullah and others a new lifeline
Zahid Hussain

Terror unleashed: Pakistani volunteers collect the remains of the blast victims at the site of a bomb explosion in a fruit and vegetable market in Islamabad AFP

The deaths of innocent people in terrorist attacks are not mourned anymore. Growing fatalities are mere statistics. What matters is only the safety of the ruling elite; never mind even if it is achieved by giving in to the barbarians.

Hours after the carnage of almost 30 poor labourers and vendors in Islamabad’s fruit market, the government announced the release of more Taliban prisoners. They were all non-combatants, we are told. So why were they held in the first place? Why were they not produced before any court of law to prove their innocence? No answer. That, however, would not satisfy the Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan leaders. Some 800 other prisoners must be released too as a show of sincerity by the government, they demanded. Refusing to further extend the truce, the TTP vows to resume attacks on the security forces.

Tolerance of violence

But it has not shaken the resolve of our national leaders to pursue the elusive negotiated peace. A statement issued after last week’s meeting of the Cabinet Committee on National Security declared that peace be given yet another chance. For sure it doesn’t matter if an army patrol is attacked in Peshawar, killing one soldier and injuring several others a day after the suspension of the ceasefire by the TTP. The fact is that the truce has never been fully complied with by the Taliban. But this government seems to have enormous patience to tolerate violence — no use of force come what may.

It has been several months now since the talks started, but there is nothing that can evoke even the slightest hope of them delivering peace. How many more chances is the government prepared to give to the militants while the erosion of its authority continues?

While the government still pins hopes on the talks making some headway, the TTP itself is broiled in bloody infighting that has killed dozens of militants. The fighting now seems to have stopped, but it has left the group more fragmented. It is apparent that Mullah Fazlullah, now operating from across the border in Afghanistan, cannot keep the fractious group united. It was time for decisive action against the terror network. But the talks have provided Fazlullah and others a new lifeline. This despite the fact that he has been responsible for some of the deadliest attacks on Pakistan forces from across the border in Afghanistan. Why the government wants to keep a man perceived as the Butcher of Swat alive is beyond comprehension.

Win-win situation for TTP

It has been a win-win situation for the TTP as it engages in negotiations with the government. While the terrorist network has secured the release of many of its activists, it has not conceded even an inch on the ground. So what have the talks yielded so far that the government is so desperate to give them another chance? It is clearly the TTP that is dictating the terms now. The biggest gain for the group is that it has now got the legitimacy to operate freely and propagate its violent narrative with impunity. The charade of talks has allowed the group to strengthen its lobby influencing mainstream politics. It is certainly a very dangerous situation for the country’s security.

Losing control

What is most worrisome is that the government seems to now be losing control over the capital Islamabad too. The mushrooming growth of radical madressahs affiliated with illegally constructed mosques is virtually placing the city under siege.

Recently, the notorious cleric of Islamabad’s Red Mosque renamed an illegally occupied children library after the slain Al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden. After lying low for several years following his release from prison, Maulana Abdul Aziz is once again at his vitriolic best, preaching the violent takeover of the state. But this brazen defiance of the law does not seem to worry a spineless administration.

The shrinking authority of the state has never been so palpable. The country has all the symptoms of a failing state with rising lawlessness and militant criminality. A weak and ineffective government has little practical control over much of its territory, including the nation’s capital. It has lost the monopoly on the legitimate use of physical force by embracing militant outfits challenging the very existence of this state. The events over the last few months bear testimony to the country’s rapid slide into anarchy and shameful abdication of the state of its responsibility to protect the lives of its people.

Tailpiece: Two leading journalists were shot at, one of them wounded, in broad daylight in the heart of Pakistan’s two biggest cities in the space of two weeks. But there is little hope of the culprits being brought to justice. The targeted attacks on Hamid Mir and Raza Rumi illustrate the deadly culture of intimidation and retribution used to silence critics.

Several journalists have been murdered in reprisal for their work over the past years. Hardly any case has been solved. This record of impunity has fostered an increasingly more violent climate for the press in the country. Not surprisingly, Pakistan today ranks among the world’s deadliest nations for the media.

These targeted attacks on journalists are, however, not isolated phenomena; they underscore widening ungoverned space conceded to non-state actors. The latest attacks involving high-profile media persons may have forced the government to take notice. But there seems to be no change in the government’s apathetic attitude in dealing with the rising militant violence.

All about Tehreek-i-Taliban or the Pakistani Taliban
Where is it based?: Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) is based in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas in Pakistan along the Afghan border.
How did it come together?: The TTP started to come together in 2002 when the Pakistani military started planned attacks into the tribal areas to battle against the foreign (Arab and Central Asian) militants, who had fled from the war in Afghanistan to Pakistan.
Many of the TTP members are fighters of the war in Afghanistan and have fought against the Nato forces.
In December 2007, TTP announced their existence under the leadership of Baitullah Mehsud.
On August 25, 2008, Pakistan banned the group, calling it a terrorist organisation and froze its assets, and also banned it from making media appearances.
The TTP is also referred to as the Pakistani Taliban. Regardless of the 'Taliban' in their name, the TTP are not directly affiliated with the Afghan Taliban, in fact they are resisting against the Pakistani state's laws and they want to establish their own version of Sharia in Pakistan.
Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan is also thought to have associations with Al- Qaida. According to Barack Obama's chief counter-terrorism adviser; TTP is a close ally of Al-Qaida. It's hard to differentiate between them. TTP has supposedly also played a role in the 2010 Times Square car bomb attempt.
Agenda: TTP's agenda remains to implement their own version of Sharia in Pakistan and to oppose the Pakistani government in the process; also to assist the Taliban in the war in Afghanistan.
Current status: Rivalry has developed within the group, as one faction aims to establish ties with the government of Pakistan and declares a ceasefire whilst the other is still aiming to launch attacks on the Pakistani soil.
Years of Action: December 2007 until present
Leaders: Hakimullah Mehsud; from August 2009 until present. Its first leader was Baitullah Mehsud (Dec 2007 - August 2009)
Areas of Operation: Khyber Pakhtoonkhwa and FATA
Way paved for another round of talks
The committees representing the government and the outlawed Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan decided to form a sub-committee to address complaints from the two sides. The sub-committee will comprise representatives of the federal and provincial governments and “other stakeholders” and members of the two peace committees.
This was announced by the head of the TTP committee, Maulana Samiul Haq, after a meeting of the two committees with Interior Minister Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan.
His committee would meet members of the TTP shura to decide the venue and time for the next round of direct talks. The exchange of non-combatant prisoners would be discussed at the talks and hoped that the issue would be resolved amicably. Maulana Sami said his committee would ask the TTP shura to extend ceasefire and avoid any action which could affect the peace process.
He confirmed that complaints of both sides were discussed at the meeting with the interior minister.
The government side said that dialogue would be meaningless in the absence of ceasefire and hoped that the Taliban would extend it before the direct talks. The government wants the TTP to extend the ceasefire and release non-combatants, including government employees and foreigners.
The official said a list of non-combatant prisoners in TTP custody would be formally handed over during the direct talks. The government also expected the Taliban to help identify people involved in recent incidents of terrorism.
— By arrangement with The Dawn.
Terror trail
Some major terrorist activities carried out by TTP are as following:
The Pakistani government accused the TTP for the assassination of Benazir Bhutto in December 2007. The group denies the charge but the US Central Intelligence Agency also confirmed its belief of TTP's involvement in the assassination.
Qari Hussain claimed, in a video posted on YouTube, that the TTP was behind the May 2010's attempted car bomb in New York City's Times Square.
TTP's Karachi leader, Abdul Qayyum Mehsud confessed that their faction was responsible for the murder of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Information Minister, Mian Iftikhar Hussain.

— By arrangement with The Dawn.