The press conference by the Mr Chidambaram, Ms Soni and Kapil Sibbal appeared to be a belated attempt to engage in 'legalese'. Being eminent lawyers, they could glibly explain their way out of the current predicament; or say they thought. They may be legally right but the whole question is political. Why cannot the government forward the Anna version of the Bill also to the standing committee of the parliament? The main sticking point is that although there is agreement on 34 of the 40 points or principles, the six points rejected by the govt are the ones that totally dilute the provisions of the bill. Yes others may have an opinion but surely no one would like to bring a 'toothless' Lokpal Bill. Let the parliament reject or modify 'Team Anna' suggestions. What is wrong in bringing senior bureaucrats, ministers, the PM and even the judiciary under the Lokpal? Let it be debated in parliament and rejected through a democratic process. Why is the govt pre-empting the outcome? Do not forget; the people are fed up of corruption and also the namby-pamby ways in which successive govts have handled cases of corruptions. I would request the Home Minister and Shri Sibbal to give the people of India just one simple answer. They know that most (not all) MPs and MLAs declare their assets before contesting an election. We have noticed and the govt can check this that in most cases when we compare the figures over five/ten years, there is a huge increase in their assets in just five years. What is this magic formula by which an MP or an MLA leave aside ministers make so much money when he/she is supposedly busy serving the people of the country? Will the PM like to try answering that? Will you share this magic formula with the Aam Adami? Why when the US and many other European governments have managed to get all details of moneys stashed in Swiss banks, it is only the Indian govt that finds it so difficult and gives lame excuses such as absence of bilateral treaties? I think the govt and many other well informed people have completely under-estimated the extent and scope of people's anger on this issue. If they do not find some effective ways to address people's grievances, our society could face very serious difficulties and our democratic system might come under threat.
Tuesday, 16 August 2011
Monday, 15 August 2011
Who is afraid of Anna Hazare?
Unlike numerous other protests that we see in India, the one spearheaded by Anna is not merely raising a regional issue like Gujjar, Telangana, Amarnath Yatra land allotment or even Bhatta Parsole land dispute or Adarsh in Mumbai but one on widespread corruption that has found resonance across the country and across all classes which means that it threatens the status quo and questions the legitimacy of our governing classes. No doubt the UPA has been democratically elected and has every right to continue to rule the country so long as it enjoys a majority in parliament. What the civil society activists are asking is to include their version of the Lokpal Bill for consideration of the parliamentary select committee. Why is the government scared of including it even for consideration is not understood unless it thinks that its mere inclusion would raise uncomfortable issues that will shake the very foundations of our democracy. The simple question is: What does an average citizen do if she or he is unhappy with the way the government is addressing her/his legitimate grievances? How can the government insist that all those who want to protest must first become members of the parliament? Does this mean that an average citizen cannot raise his or her voice against the ruling coalition? Yes, tomorrow, the UPA may arrest all these people for breaking the law but would that resolve the issue? The judiciary will in all probability strike down the government ruling and the civil society activists would once again be free to start their agitation. Would some one explain?
Monday, 11 April 2011
A Lost Cause?
When Shri Anna Hazareji began his fast unto death on the 5th some thoughts began to nag me. First, I thought all these candle carrying middle-class urban protesters would disperse sooner than later without achieving very much as happened in the aftermath of the tragic 26/11 attack. Second, I thought the government might not give in because it knew that those protesting did not belong to the well nurtured and protected vote banks. Third, I knew that many English speaking intellectuals or bleeding hearts for our revered parliamentary democracy would cry foul and repeat the same old mantra; ' If you want to change the system, fight and win an election, sit in the Lok Sabha and do what you have to. Fourth, many would suddenly remember that the Jan Lok Pal would become a tyrant and nothing would move as civil servants and politicians/ministers would be frightened into administrative paralysis to take any decision lest an invetigation was launched against them. But perhaps because of the turmoil in the Arab world and daily news reports of how even dictatorial regimes found it difficult to use force to quell such demonstrations and more so because of the elections to the state assemblies in five states, the Central Government decided to give in on the fourth day but not without first making noises about the supremacy of the parliament and the constitution. Some young columnists have also writen in the same vein but I know that they dont remember how Mrs Gandhi trreated all these pillars of democracy in June 1975 because they were still in primary school. The reason why a person like Anna took this unprecedented step at this time is simple. He had learnt after a quarter century long struggle that without arm-twisting the politician, nothing would change. Like Hon. Shri Sibbal has said, nothing may still change. Who would come to the help of the common man or the now famous ' Aam Aadmi' if the Neta felt powerless because of the Lok Pal? The fact is that the middle class, which is totally and comprehensively marginalised and in fact disempowered, cannot do anything to change the system simply because our electoral system is so beautifully managed and manipulated that even if all of them voted en masse, they still cannot dent the system of buying votes to prevent which even the CEC wants more stringent laws but is powerless as leaders promise TVs, money and mobile phones. A friend of mine who has just returned from Tamil Nadu which is in the midst of election fever, told me, "Now the electricity is switched at 10 PM sharp and within minutes unknown and unrecognised persons knock on the doors of rural voters and offer them Rs. 2000 or more to vote for their candidates but no one can prove anything as no one can recognise them. Whenever they want to enhance their pay and allowances or MPLADS funds all our honourable representatives of the people forget ideological and party differences and vote to ensure smooth passage of the bill. Nurturing their vote banks they never fail to support ever increasing quotas in reservations, say nothing about the Jat, Gujjar, Telangana Khap and numerous other such violent protests that are ignited by those in power. They dont care if public property is lost or damaged or public is inconvenienced, all in the name of democracy. They dont lose sleep when precious grain wrots in our FCI godowns and ordinary people buy Dals at Rs. 100 per kilo. They also forget to ratify the UN anti graft resolution for six years, do not sign the necessary protocols and treaties to get details of the money stashed abroad from foreign governments, downplay the losses of 2G scam, blatantly brush off CWG and Prasar Bharati hera pheri and still want the average, educated Indian to have faith in their brand of democracy. Sir, they forget that democracy is not merely holding periodic elections but ensuring the rule of law. Even though not one corrupt leader is in jail they continue to repeat that the 'Law would take its own course', unashamedly call upon the support of an MP in a jail to win a no-confidence vote, openly admit that Rajya Sabha nominations and elected seats are purchased and don't bat an eyelid while declaring a ten to hundred fold increase in their assets every five years and when the Supreme Court asks that this be investigated they simply stonewall the issue. And yet the guardians of this sham democracy do not want a veteran social worker who has no personal axe to grind with any of them to fast unto death because that is coercion, anti constitution, against the hallowed canons of parliamentary democracy. Why dont the common ignorant people understand? Why dont they permit the knowledgeable, well meaning democratically elected leaders to run the country for the collective good of the people??
Friday, 18 February 2011
India
Dr. Manmohan Singh's meeting with TV journalists came through as a poor attempt whitewash UPA II's weaknesses. Everyone believes that his personal integrity is beyond question but has he already overdrawn on his 'personal honesty' fixed deposits? A national leader must be good but also effective in making his colleagues work as honest and sincere servants of the people. Just being good is not good enough; good has to constantly fight the bad and win. The difference between a manager and leader is while the former may get work out of his followers the latter inspires them to work well beyond the call of duty. It is difficult to see how he can recover from this current tail spin of scams and loss of credibility? Equating the notional revenue loss in the 2G case with subsidy was a very big blunder that is bound to haunt him in the future. His views on compulsions of coalition politics have put DMK in a spot but other partners must also be extracting their pound of flesh. Does India deserve this?
Wednesday, 26 January 2011
Happy Republic Day
Happy Republic Day, my fellow citizens. I have resolved to write at least one post a week from now.
The main opposition BJP's attempt to score points on the question of Kashmir by trying to unfurl the Indian national flag at Lal Chowk in Srinagar have not worked out. If the aim was to embarass the UPA it hasnt worked either. Instead of that the J&K question, in my opinion, has been internationalised with the CM and other Kashmiris calling J&K a disputed are/territory. In the old days we used to call it, "To cut your nose to spite your face" I still dont understand the logic of this prank.
On the other hand, the UPA II could well have allowed the flag hoisting with some minimal security and nothing would have happened. Now Pakistan must be happy and thank India for doing its work of keepng the issue alive. When will we learn?? If ever??? Best wishes
The main opposition BJP's attempt to score points on the question of Kashmir by trying to unfurl the Indian national flag at Lal Chowk in Srinagar have not worked out. If the aim was to embarass the UPA it hasnt worked either. Instead of that the J&K question, in my opinion, has been internationalised with the CM and other Kashmiris calling J&K a disputed are/territory. In the old days we used to call it, "To cut your nose to spite your face" I still dont understand the logic of this prank.
On the other hand, the UPA II could well have allowed the flag hoisting with some minimal security and nothing would have happened. Now Pakistan must be happy and thank India for doing its work of keepng the issue alive. When will we learn?? If ever??? Best wishes
Tuesday, 9 November 2010
The Obama Visit
State visits are often like grand weddings. They generate much excitement and place huge and complex demands on all participants. But as Kabir once said, after the departure of the bride and bridegroom the ‘Baraat’ becomes lifeless. In fact every one gets back to the realities of the daily humdrum. While the Obama visit was undoubtedly important and he said many useful things, translating words into action is far more difficult.
Indians know the realities of South Asian geopolitics even if we sometime forget the constraints that geography puts on us. Simply restating that ‘safe havens for terrorist organisations are unacceptable’ would not get us anywhere. For that to work both India and the US have to severely restrict the political space that the sponsors enjoy. The US is deeply involved in Afghanistan for the long haul and despite best efforts it is not easy for it extricate itself in a hurry. Obama thus has to keep many unsavoury people happy.
Now that the G-20 has become a more active and influential grouping in the much-globalised world, one wonders if membership of the UN Security Council with, but most probably, without a veto would add any real clout to a new member. As we have seen in the past, powerful countries will not wait for the nod from UNSC to take action if that is the only way they can secure their interests.
Although both Iran and Burma were mentioned, every one again knows the limits to which any country can be coerced into accepting global norms. Even after the international investigation found North Korea’s involvement in the sinking of the Cheonan, no action has been taken against the alleged culprit simply because it has the backing of a powerful neighbour. That the country concerned is also a permanent member is incidental.
The recent Sino-Japanese spat over the Senkaku islands also demonstrated the limits of Japanese and indeed American power. Now that China has clearly included the ‘Spratlys Islands’ as its ‘core interests’ it is likely that the smaller neighbours will have to sooner or later fall in line.
Outsourcing was mentioned to please his domestic audience. Surely, Obama knows full well that when a country decides to outsource its less glamorous and low-tech manufacturing to other countries such as the four Asian Tigers and later the People’s Republic of China (PRC) its economy becomes dependent on imports of cheap goods with job losses. In a similar way outsourcing services too becomes tempting because of the lower costs. This is elementary even if experts use a lot of complex jargon to say the same thing. So long as India provides efficient and reliable services at low cost, the developed world will need it. India too needs the US for its hi-tech support. This, however, need not be restricted to only the defence sector. There are many other areas such as agriculture, renewable energy, clean coal, new fuels, education, space and a whole host of doable collaboration projects that would be easier to implement. Problems with LSA and CISMOA and nuclear liability bills can then be resolved more amicably. Some analysts have questioned the need for these agreements as they see no situation in which Indian armed forces would fight alongside their American counterparts and for disaster relief operations one does not need much ‘interoperability’. The US perhaps wants to obliquely tell India that it would in the not too distant future shoulder some very major responsibilities and for that a quasi-alliance type of relationship would be necessary. How India reacts to this would be interesting.
Strengthening people to people contact by sending ever more students to the US and in turn getting Americans to work in India would be one of the priority areas and that would also make joint ventures easier. It would also be interesting to watch how India and the US handle the tricky questions of up to 50 per cent offsets in the huge defence deals that are said to be in the pipeline. Would India dilute its 26 per cent cap in defence industry? Would the US defence majors invest in India with less than 50 per cent control? These are all moot points and would take time to resolve but that should not put brakes on essential and urgent indigenisation of our defence industry.
In the hullabaloo of the visit the Naxal and Bodo killings have received little attention but internal security and prevention of terrorist infiltration are bread & butter activities to which the decision makers must now return because when all is said and done India has to fight these battles on her own.
Indians know the realities of South Asian geopolitics even if we sometime forget the constraints that geography puts on us. Simply restating that ‘safe havens for terrorist organisations are unacceptable’ would not get us anywhere. For that to work both India and the US have to severely restrict the political space that the sponsors enjoy. The US is deeply involved in Afghanistan for the long haul and despite best efforts it is not easy for it extricate itself in a hurry. Obama thus has to keep many unsavoury people happy.
Now that the G-20 has become a more active and influential grouping in the much-globalised world, one wonders if membership of the UN Security Council with, but most probably, without a veto would add any real clout to a new member. As we have seen in the past, powerful countries will not wait for the nod from UNSC to take action if that is the only way they can secure their interests.
Although both Iran and Burma were mentioned, every one again knows the limits to which any country can be coerced into accepting global norms. Even after the international investigation found North Korea’s involvement in the sinking of the Cheonan, no action has been taken against the alleged culprit simply because it has the backing of a powerful neighbour. That the country concerned is also a permanent member is incidental.
The recent Sino-Japanese spat over the Senkaku islands also demonstrated the limits of Japanese and indeed American power. Now that China has clearly included the ‘Spratlys Islands’ as its ‘core interests’ it is likely that the smaller neighbours will have to sooner or later fall in line.
Outsourcing was mentioned to please his domestic audience. Surely, Obama knows full well that when a country decides to outsource its less glamorous and low-tech manufacturing to other countries such as the four Asian Tigers and later the People’s Republic of China (PRC) its economy becomes dependent on imports of cheap goods with job losses. In a similar way outsourcing services too becomes tempting because of the lower costs. This is elementary even if experts use a lot of complex jargon to say the same thing. So long as India provides efficient and reliable services at low cost, the developed world will need it. India too needs the US for its hi-tech support. This, however, need not be restricted to only the defence sector. There are many other areas such as agriculture, renewable energy, clean coal, new fuels, education, space and a whole host of doable collaboration projects that would be easier to implement. Problems with LSA and CISMOA and nuclear liability bills can then be resolved more amicably. Some analysts have questioned the need for these agreements as they see no situation in which Indian armed forces would fight alongside their American counterparts and for disaster relief operations one does not need much ‘interoperability’. The US perhaps wants to obliquely tell India that it would in the not too distant future shoulder some very major responsibilities and for that a quasi-alliance type of relationship would be necessary. How India reacts to this would be interesting.
Strengthening people to people contact by sending ever more students to the US and in turn getting Americans to work in India would be one of the priority areas and that would also make joint ventures easier. It would also be interesting to watch how India and the US handle the tricky questions of up to 50 per cent offsets in the huge defence deals that are said to be in the pipeline. Would India dilute its 26 per cent cap in defence industry? Would the US defence majors invest in India with less than 50 per cent control? These are all moot points and would take time to resolve but that should not put brakes on essential and urgent indigenisation of our defence industry.
In the hullabaloo of the visit the Naxal and Bodo killings have received little attention but internal security and prevention of terrorist infiltration are bread & butter activities to which the decision makers must now return because when all is said and done India has to fight these battles on her own.
Friday, 30 January 2009
Urgent Action Needed
As predicted, Pakistan is washing its hands off the whole affair by bluntly stating that the Mumbai attack was not planned on its soil. While there are some reports of Pakistan planning some action to prosecute those detained under cyber laws it is clear that India has not succeeded in getting Pakistan to act against the prepratators of terror strikes. In a way it is a good thing simply because India can now tell the world that it followed the so called internationally accepted norms and procedures to get to the root of the problem and now that Pakistan has not responded, India is free to take whatever action that may be necessary at the time of its choosing.
India is, of course, free to not say anything further as far as the kind, extent and scope of the action. Any layperson should know that it is time India tightened the noose around Paksitan.
First, it must immediately suspend the composite dialogue and other useless agreements such as the Joint Terror Investigation Mechanism, the various busses and trains running between the two countries and the so called people-to-people contacts. That way the one thing India can make sure is no undesirable person manages to enter India as a legitimate tourist/visitor. India should then suspend all the trade links with Pakistan. It should also declare that any attempt by Pakistan based entities to infiltrate India's international border or the LOC will be met with strong retaliatory action and that Pakistan would be responsible for any consequences. India should also tell the US that it must immediately stop the sale/transfer of sophisticated weapons such as the AMRAAM, JDAM and AAM missiles and F-16 fighters to Pakistan as these are not required to fight the Taliban and Al-Qaeda along Pakistan's western border but are in fact meant to boost Pak military's strength to stave off any military pressure from India. India could also very carefully calibrate its response in terms of sending troops to Afghanistan to protest the thousands of Indians working there to rebuild that war ravaged country. India should also increase its military to military contact with the countries of Central Asia especially Tajikistan where it already has a small contingent of air force personnel at Farkhar. It must also offer these countries training facilities by deputing Indian military instructors and troops for their modernisation. Needless to add that all these countries are also threatened by terrorism that emanates from Al Qaeda and Taliban combine and there is a huge amount of goodwill and affection for India.
Internally, there is an urgent need to take immediate action against all those elements that are presently threatening national unity such the MNS, Sri Ram Sena, SIMI operatives and above all the Maoists and the numerous insurgents in the Northeast. Unless the Central Government sends out a clear signal that it will actually not tolerate any disruptive and sepratist activity it will be difficult to defend our democratic system.
India is, of course, free to not say anything further as far as the kind, extent and scope of the action. Any layperson should know that it is time India tightened the noose around Paksitan.
First, it must immediately suspend the composite dialogue and other useless agreements such as the Joint Terror Investigation Mechanism, the various busses and trains running between the two countries and the so called people-to-people contacts. That way the one thing India can make sure is no undesirable person manages to enter India as a legitimate tourist/visitor. India should then suspend all the trade links with Pakistan. It should also declare that any attempt by Pakistan based entities to infiltrate India's international border or the LOC will be met with strong retaliatory action and that Pakistan would be responsible for any consequences. India should also tell the US that it must immediately stop the sale/transfer of sophisticated weapons such as the AMRAAM, JDAM and AAM missiles and F-16 fighters to Pakistan as these are not required to fight the Taliban and Al-Qaeda along Pakistan's western border but are in fact meant to boost Pak military's strength to stave off any military pressure from India. India could also very carefully calibrate its response in terms of sending troops to Afghanistan to protest the thousands of Indians working there to rebuild that war ravaged country. India should also increase its military to military contact with the countries of Central Asia especially Tajikistan where it already has a small contingent of air force personnel at Farkhar. It must also offer these countries training facilities by deputing Indian military instructors and troops for their modernisation. Needless to add that all these countries are also threatened by terrorism that emanates from Al Qaeda and Taliban combine and there is a huge amount of goodwill and affection for India.
Internally, there is an urgent need to take immediate action against all those elements that are presently threatening national unity such the MNS, Sri Ram Sena, SIMI operatives and above all the Maoists and the numerous insurgents in the Northeast. Unless the Central Government sends out a clear signal that it will actually not tolerate any disruptive and sepratist activity it will be difficult to defend our democratic system.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)