Daily Excelsior... Editorial

EDITORIAL

Vajpayee fails to remove
India’s big brother tag

By Atul Cowshish
If Kargil was a surprise, what was
the Bangladeshi incursion and sub-
sequent inhuman killing of BSF ......more

Getting technology
without capital

By Bharat Jhunjhunwala
We were told that India has scarcity of capital therefore inflow of foreign capital will be beneficial for us. We ......more

India and new
global strategy

By K.N. Pandita
A hue and cry has been raised by some quarters against NDA government responding favourably to President Bush’s new missile .....more

India: Distress After
the Drought

By M Martin
Even though most have forgotten the hardships which the people of Orissa faced after a severe drought more than a year ago, the people of the state........more

EDITORIAL

J&K ELECTIONS

Farooq Abdullah, Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir though, is an ace political actor as well. Outwardly, he goes about as a non-serious person with child-like idiosyncrasies more often than not. Obviously, it is a deliberate attempt by him to conceal his skills as a shrewd strategist. Since all is fair in love and war, Farooq Abdullah cannot be faulted for his talk of Assembly elections in his State ahead of the scheduled time. And the talk about early poll has, significantly, begun at a time when all eyes are focussed on New Delhi’s chief negotiator for Kashmir, KC Pant. As head of the National Conference Government, Farooq Abdullah can’t be expected to surrender his party’s interests simply for the proposed rehabilitation of various categories of militants and secessionists. And since a solution to the Kashmir crisis is unlikely to be made available in the near future, the J&K Chief Minister has every right to think of his as well as of his party’s future. Why shouldn’t he advance elections when all mainstream opposition parties in Jammu and Kashmir are in a state of disarray? True, anti-India sentiment in the Valley is too evident to be missed. But, happily for Farooq Abdullah and his party, the separatist camps have no organisational structure to mobilise the support of people against the National Conference. Nor is it all. There is an inescapable necessity of raking up the subject of delimitation of constituencies in J&K afresh. Farooq and his establishment cannot deny the fact that several gross infirmities have crept into the body politics of the State, leading to recurring heartburns and tensions. There is the usual noise about injustice, discrimination and hegemony of one region over the other. The leadership is often hard put to balance the act. This is because corrections and remedies are possible only if the basis is rational and logical. If the base itself is full of contradictions, corrections are next to impossible. One would have thought that the last delimitation was the final word as far as fairplay is concerned. True, there was upward revision of constituencies from 76 to 87. But as far as ration and magnitude of discrimination is concerned, it remains uncorrected. As per this delimitation exercise, Jammu region has 37 Assembly seats against 46 for the Kashmir Valley and 4 for Ladakh. In addition, as per Jammu and Kashmir Constitution, as many as 24 seats remain in the name of occupied territory, officially known as PoK. It would be in fitness of things to talk only about the Assembly seats on this side of the Line of Control (LoC). On the face of it, we find that both J&K Constitution as well as the Representation of the People’s Act have not been scrupulously followed. This aspect was highlighted by the then Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) of India, TN Seshan, when he refused to append his signatures to the Delimitation Report. The Jammu and Kashmir Constituent Assembly which framed the Constitution for the State and became the basis of Article 370 subsequently was indeed based on the outdated Census figures of 1941. It was almost tailor-made Assembly in that all the 75 members thus elected belonged to the National Conference. It was strange and highly suspect that 73 out of 75 were elected unopposed. It was the same Assembly that framed the Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir with visible tilt towards one region. As per the Administrative Report of 1940-41 and the Census of 1941, the total population of the State was 40,21,616. Of this, Jammu province accounted for 20,01,557, while Kashmir (excluding Gilgit, Skardu and Ladakh) had 17,28,686 people. The 1941 Census obviously became completely defunct in the wake of the partition of India, leading to large-scale influx or exodus of population from one region to another. National updating of the population data in 1951 in the same ratio was, therefore, highly defective. Further, it was laid down that on an average 40,000-strong population would be there in one Assembly segment. It is to be noted that strength of Assembly was deliberately kept around 60,000 average in Jammu region, while it was far less than 40,000 in Kashmir region and that too based on the 1941 Census as the 75 constituencies were delimited. This was infirmity number one. Again, the total area of the State as per pre-partition figures was 2,22,236 sq km. Nearly 54 per cent of the area is under the illegal occupation of Pakistan. The 54 per cent can be broken up region-wise as 18 per cent of Jammu province, 27 per cent of Kashmir province and 64 per cent of Ladakh region. This means the area or population that came under the control of PoK was far less in Jammu when compared to Kashmir. And this indicated infirmity number two. Again, even the 1981 Census revealed a bad trend. The population of Jammu region was 27,18,113, while Kashmir accounted for 31,34,904. Area-wise, however, Jammu is 26,293 sq km while Kashmir region is spread over 15,948 sq km. As per the spirit of the Constitution and Representation of people’s Act (RPA), five aspects are to be kept in mind while delimiting the constituencies. They are: geographical compactness, nature of terrain, communication facilities, population and welfare motive. All these factors were not taken cognizance of. And this, therefore, indicated infirmity number three. One is forced to recall that the Wazir Commission had recommended creation of 9 districts in Jammu region, while allowing Kashmir only 7. The existing figure is 6 each in the two provinces of Jammu and Kashmir. The report was shelved for reasons best known to the authorities. And one can call it infirmity number four. Lesser districts obviously deprive the region of district-wise development funds which would have otherwise accrued to Jammu province. This is infirmity number five. Elected members to the Legislative Council from Kashmir region are only 12, as against 14 from Jammu region. Compare it with Assembly seats. It is 46 for Kashmir and only 37 for Jammu province. Here lies the real mischief, one can say. When the number of districts is same in each province and when MLCs (elected) are more for Jammu than for Kashmir region, how come that Kashmir has astronomical 9 Assembly constituencies more than that of Jammu region? It is this infirmity that has led to tensions and charge of discrimination in all other fields. Since he took over as the State’s Chief Minister in 1996 after his National Conference party secured an absolute majority in the Assembly polls, Farooq Abdullah talked, more often than not, about equitable devolution of power to all the three regions. In this connection, much has not happened so far. Farooq will have to correct the infirmities by ordering fresh delimitation. Unless this is done, there cannot be equitable political and economic devolution of power. Does Farooq Abdullah want hegemonic dispensation to persist in its most sinister form?

Vajpayee fails to remove India’s big brother tag

By Atul Cowshish

If Kargil was a surprise, what was the Bangladeshi incursion and sub-sequent inhuman killing of BSF soldiers? Is the government at New Delhi so occupied with its relentless spin exercise, post-Tehelka, that it has no time for the remote but sensitive regions of the country? Or, is it that the present Indian government truly believes in turning the other cheek when someone slaps you? Good principle, but alas, not good enough to erase the adverse Big Brother image of India among all its seven countries in the neighbourhood.

The present rulers in New Delhi had come to power professing to follow hot pursuit of terrorists, correcting relations with neighbours- and providing a clean government. In the three years of its rule, the NDA government has achieved none of these three objectives. Often it has acted with pusillanimity, though the dominant party in the ruling coalition can certainly not be accused of such an act when it comes to breaking ''symbols of slavery''.

It is only the BJP pedagogues like Jaswant Singh who can advance the claim that all is well between India and its neighbours save the petulant Pakistan. The fact is that all the SAARC neighbours of India see New Delhi as symbolising at Bad Big Brother. The Vajpayee government may claim to have done something to erase this impression, but the ground reality does not support that. On the other hand, there have been a series of serious setbacks in relations with neighbours, beginning with the implacable western neighbour.

The government thought talking tough to the inveterate India-baiters in Islamabad would be a better policy than the previous (I K Gujaral) government's'' open door'' policy towards Pakistan. Hawks like L K Advani and loud mouths like M L Khurana sprayed their audiences with talks of hot pursuit of terrorists in Kashmir. But when the masters and patrons of the Kashmiri terrorists replied with a stealthy attack on Kargil the government and its then Defence Minister, a master in double speak and changing cloaks, looked towards America for easing the situation.

The ''pursuit'' of the terrorists took the self-styled 'Chanakya' of BJP to the southern Afghan city of Kandahar with a bunch of Pakistani killers of innocent Indian, freed from the custody of Indian prisons and delivered to the safe heaven of the bearded fundamentalists of the Taliban.

In Nepal, nearly the whole nation rose against India, aroused by a Pakistani-inspired whispering campaign against a young film actor from Mumbai. All that we could do was to damn the infamous ISI. If relations between Nepal and Bhutan (over the issue of citizenship of a section in Bhutan) are strained, India has to bear their cross.

Now its Bangladesh's turn to sock and stun Big Brother India by not only killing, but also brutalising in most inhuman fashion nearly a score of BSF jawans. Everyone has forgotten how Pakistanis had cut the limbs of an Indian Air Force officer before killing him in cold blood when he fell into their hands at the beginning of the Kargil war.

Yet, pro-establishment papers- the Izvestias and Pravadas of India- inform us that the government has been wise in adopting a low-key approach. A harsh Indian government reaction would have jeopardised Indo-Bangladesh relations. It would have also strengthened, it was said, the hands of anti-Indian forces in Bangladesh. No time to think that the strong anti-India lobby taces its origin to the pre-independence days of Bangladesh and is sustained by most of the Opposition political parties of that country.

The kind of heinous crime perpetrated by the Bangladesh soldiers in an Indian enclave at the border would have seen a strong country react with appropriate strictness. For a nation and its government, it is more important to care about the dignity of the dead soldiers and the morale of the fighting forces. After receiving a series of bloody nose, the ruling party, its wide network of allies among political parties and other wise men, all have forgotten about ''hot pursuit''.

That is just as well, as there is no telling how much more humiliation such empty boasts would have brought us. Within months of assuming power the government had informed the country that it has rid India of its Big Brother image, implanted among the neighbours because the previous governments had followed unwise policies towards them. The Vajpayee government's ''success'' on this score is now for all to see.

Not only are we passing through a bad patch in our relations with neighbouring countries but also secessionists in the north, south and the eastern parts of the country are getting more active. The Big Brother is receiving a battering from Small Brothers, but the infamous tag will not go.

The Big Brother image will, of course, not go because India is BIG. Also, it is Pakistan, which worked, with direct or indirect blessings from Beijing and Washington, to project India as a nasty Big Brother. There appears little or no chance of Islamabad adopting a different attitude on this. Perhaps, Pakistan need not be equated with the other neighbours. But in other South Asian countries also, the connotation of the Big Brother label of India has acquired a bad tone.

Sensitive to political and economic policies pursued by India in respect of its neighbours, these countries fault India for taking them for granted. The concerns of the neighbours might be misplaced, but the government has not been able to take them along. There has been, therefore, no change in India adverse image in the other neighbouring countries.

In matters of trade with neighbours, the Indian government has shown less than adequate concerns for the smaller neighbours--Nepal, Bangladesh-- when a bit of concession would have gone a long way in arresting a negative image of New Delhi.

The BJP friends and allies in Tamil Nadu make sure that Sri Lanka remains suspect of Indian intentions and keep an accusing finger pointed towards its northern Big Brother. The Maldivian president may be a frequent state guest in India, but this has not brought any particular warmth in people to people relations between India and that tiny tourism heaven in the Indian Ocean.

It is almost a matter of routine to hear the government accuse Pakistan (ISI) for most of the anti-Indian outbursts in the neighbourhood. That may or may not be true. But it suggests that the Pakistanis have succeeded even in territories (Nepal in particular) where Indian intelligence should have been the more obvious winner.

It is clear that Indian intelligence agencies have been working with poor directions from above. Otherwise, there is no reason why they should have been such a failure in neighbouring countries, which are certainly far less hostile than Pakistan.

If the failure is at the field level, it is a serious matter. But a beginning could be made by cutting down the number of such agencies that operate in the neighbourhood. There is no role for more than one agency operating in a foreign country. However, improving the image of a country is not the job of these agencies either collectively or individually.

It is the job of the government of the day, its leaders, its policies-- and even the people. Boastful talk and thoughtless words and actions cannot find a place in any policy that is designed to improve the image. Post-Tehlka, the present government has shown that it has an effctive team of spin-doctors for operations within the country. Perhaps, this skill should be exported to change the face of the Big Brother from an ugly one to a benign one. (Syndicate)

Getting technology without capital

By Bharat Jhunjhunwala

We were told that India has scarcity of capital therefore inflow of foreign capital will be beneficial for us. We would be able to build roads and power plants with this foreign money. The truth, however, as told by none other than the World Bank, is that globalization has now become a route to the export of capital from the developing countries. That leaves us with the argument that foreign investment brings latest technologies. This too is a weak case indeed.

Let us get the facts straight first. In its latest publication Global Development Finance the World Bank has given its estimates of FDI flows. In 1991 the flow of investment from industrial to developing countries was 143 billion dollars, and in the reverse direction it was 17 billion dollars. In 2000, the flow from industrial - to developing countries doubled to 299 billion dollars, but the flow in the reverse direction jumped twenty times to 307 billion dollars. The developing countries have exported 8 billion dollars of their capital to the industrial countries. The Ganga is flowing in reverse.

Free movement of capital cuts both ways. Swiss investors, searching for profit opportunities, may invest in India. But Indian investors, looking for security and safety, may invest in Switzerland. It is not certain what will be the end result. After the Asian crisis, investors in developing countries appear to have developed a liking for safety. 'Globalization' is now standing on its head --- it leading to us loosing our capital to the industrial countries. Nevertheless, there is a case for some FDI if it brings technologies otherwise unavailable.

The two arguments in favour of FDI are capital and technology. Capital flows have gone negative. If we can get the technologies too then the case for Foreign Investment will fall.

It is true that the quality of cars and TV produced in our country has much improved since the MNCs have arrived. But Tatas have built the Indica and Bajaj has been able to ward off global competition without having to bring in a FDI partner. There are clearly other ways of getting the technologies.

Often it is the case that foreign investors themselves buy technology in their own countries and bring it along with their FDI. A foreign consultant had an interesting story to tell about the link between FDI and technology. The Malana Power Company in Himachal was negotiating with Hydro Quebec -- a Canadian MNC -- to promote a 86 MW hydroelectric project jointly. Hydro Queber is one of the largest private hydroelectric power producer in the world. Hydro Quebec was to both bring capital and technology. The potential for hydroelectric power generation in the West has more or less be exploited. Grand opportunities remain in Inida and Africa. Hydro Quebec wanted to enter the India market. Officers of Hydro Quebec came and saw but would not respond quickly.

It then dawned upon Malana that Hydro Quebec was itself getting the technology from another Canadian technical consultancy firm RWSM. Malana then made a tie up with RWSM and entered into a Joint Venture to provide hydropower technical consultancy to Malana as well as other projects in India. Now the Company has acquired technical capability to establish up to 500 MW hydropower projects. Malana was able to get the technology without the capital.

The idea that MNCs bring technology is often correct. But that ignores the fact that the same technology may be available from other sources without necessitating the import of capital. Let us remember, the argument for FDI is that we need the technology. It may not be necessary to give MNCs a foothold into the country to get many of the technologies.

This view is echoed by our scientific advisor Dr A P J Abdul Kalam who said couple of years ago that there is "no need to import technology. "Every denial was an opportunity to develop indigenous technology. The denial of Cray supercomputers to India pushed us to developed our own. Today we have an indigenous supercomputer while Silicon Graphis --- the company that manufactures Cray -- is in the process of laying off its staff.

There is increasing evidence that MNCs are coming to developing countries to capture their markets. The last World Investment Report isused by UNCTAD points out that most FDI is now coming in the form of acquisition of domestic firms by MNCs. In 1999 acquisitions constituted about 82 percent of FDI -- up from 38 percent in 1993. These acquisitions do provide host countries which money but FDI through this route "is less likely to transfer now or better technologies or skills, at least at the time of entry." UNCTAD gos on to speculate that such acquisitions 'can be' followed by transfer of new technologies later. Of course, they can, but ther is little evidence that such is taking place.

The picture that is emerging is clear. 'Globalization' of capital is neither leading to greater investment inthe developing countries nor bringing new technologies.

It is yet possible that some technologies may be available only through the FDI route. In such cases there indeed exists a case for allowing FDI to come in. The Foreign Investment Committee in Malaysia -- equivalent of our Foreign Investment Promotion Board - provides that the FDI should lead to "upgrading of local raw material, training, efficiency, and research and development." We need to similarly make a technological audit of all FDI proposals before grating them approval. But the 'open door' policy has become a smokescreen behind which we are losing our own capital.

It appears that we should reconsider the role of portfolio investments. There is a basic difference between the impact of FDI and FII on the host economy. Foreign capital received as FDI competes with domestic companies. The same capital when received as FII strengthens our domestic companies. In fact FII is, in a way, answer to the predatory tactics of FDI.

Let us we get one billion dollars as FDI in LG Electronics. LG competes with Videocon and may force the latter to go under. If the same billion dollars were to be invested in Videocon shares in the Mumbai Stock Exchange then it would strengthen Videocon. It might make it possible for Videocon to compete with LG in third countries. FII may even make it possible for Videocon to but TV technology from say Mitsubishi. We get the money in both cases but their impact on domestic firms is exactly opposite.

The Government needs to attract foreign capital to improve the liquidity in the domestic money market so that it can complete its borowing programme at low rates of interest.

This objective is served equally well by attracting portfolio investments.The main argument against portfolio investments in that their sudden withdrawal can lead to sudden devaluation of the rupee.

This can be swarded off by measures such as imposing taxes on short run capital inflows as Chile has done successfully. The case for foreign investment is becoming weaker everyday. It is getting us neither capital nor technology. We should, therefore, focus on retaining our own capital within the country.

India and new global strategy

By K.N. Pandita

A hue and cry has been raised by some quarters against NDA government responding favourably to President Bush’s new missile deployment programme. Why make a haste, they ask. Moscow has already expressed her reservations to the programme. A significant statement has come recently from Armitage saying that the programme is not aimed against Russia or China but against the "rogue states". The critics of NDA government should try to understand the significance of this statement, which is rather undiplomatic in the context of US political philosophy.

With the rise of Islamic fundamentalism based in Pakistan and the overgrowth of extremist religious groups in that country supported by a non-accountable military regime, not only the Asiatic region but even the larger interests of the United States remained threatened. The Frankenstein is looking straight into the eyes of the Saudi monarchy. Even Pakistan’s military regime is not outside the ambit of drastic action by the armed religious groups. It is evident that charged with religious fervour and frenzy, the Islamists, if able to capture political power in Islamabad, will have the least hesitation to use the nuclear weapon against its perceived adversaries, India, Israel and the US in particular.

There are Working Groups against Terrorism between the US and Russia and also between the US and India. These groups have been making their recommendations based on their ground studies, some of which were reflected in the latest report of the US State Department entitled " Global Patterns of Terrorism". While extremist religious groups with armed wings in Pakistan have been exuding anti-US and anti-India rhetoric in their congregations and conventions, the military regime is unable to check their words and deeds that are in blatant violation of international law and protocol of international relations. This means that the actual dictating segment of Pakistani society is the extremist religious chapter, which has no accountability to international fraternity. The nexus between these groups and their supporters and sympathisers within and outside Pakistan is quite alarming because they have roped in the drug Mafiosi on global level besides receiving enormous funds from ardent supporters of Islamic fundamentalist ideology.

The fundamentalist – terrorist threat has begun to engulf other and more vital regions that have far less capability of meeting the challenge on their own. These are the countries, including the nascent republics of Central Asia, that have the Muslim population but of liberal and secular disposition. The Wahhabis raised in Pakistan – Afghanistan seminaries have been eyeing Central Asian states and have actually carved out some stronghold like the one in Ferghana valley in Uzbekistan. This threatens the larger and vital economic and political interests of the United States as well as Russia and Iran. India is already targeted for subversion and sabotage and she is deeply involved in countering these challenges.

Obviously this common threat should induce the actors to chalk out some common strategy to meet the challenge. After all the challenge has to be met both militarily and diplomatically. But taking into account the type of orientation given to the jihadis, it becomes clear that nothing short of full-blooded military action can quell the menace. Thus if the new missile programme of the United States is undertaken to counter this challenge and eradicate this menace, India has only pushed its national interests by giving an outright support to the contemplated programme. We have been fighting militancy in Kashmir for last eleven years. Likewise our eastern border is also in turmoil providing opportunity to our adversary to hit us in our underbellies.

Additionally the role of China is very dubious. Having equipped Pakistan with latest weaponry including nuclear warheads, a grim situation has developed in the sub-continent that calls for revised and largely upgraded security arrangement. The Taliban are openly receiving high-tech war equipment from Beijing via Pakistan, a part of which is diverted to Kashmir insurgents. This means that China, as usual, has been playing the villain of the piece. In fact it is not Pakistan but China that is keeping the Kashmir turmoil pot simmering. She has deep interests in Kashmir and it will be reminded that in some of the Chinese maps, the region up to Zoji La pass has been shown as the region of Chinese sphere of influence. Pakistan has already ceded over five thousand square kilometers of Aksaichin (the area of what she calls "disputed territory") to China and built the Karakorum Highway connecting Lahore with Beijing over the Karakorum heights.

Kashmir is increasingly becoming the hot bed of power rivalry among big powers. In this scenario, India has to seek the support of allies and her seeking support does not necessarily mean that she is entering into some sort of military blocs. Every sovereign country has a right to care for its security and safety. This is precisely what India has been impressing upon the Russian foreign minister that visited New Delhi recently. Russia’s concern is that the balance of power in the East should not get tilted. But it has to be remembered that the Soviet Union, despite being a bulwark against imperialism and colonialism, could not avoid joining the Allies when a menace of Nazism attained a crescendo.

Iran’s vital interests are more than one. She feels morally ostracized on finding the Shia massacres in Herat, Bamiyan, Mazar-e-Sharif etc. at the hands of the Wahhabi-Sunnis murderers. The Taliban are threatening punitive measures against the Afghan Shia refugees now in refugee camps in Khurasan province of Iran. She wants that the only outlet from Central Asia to the Persian Gulf through Sirakhs – Bandar Abbas route should remain intact so that Iran is assured of huge income from octroi tolls for carrying goods from international companies to Central Asia. Then Iran needs protection of the waterway of Persian Gulf vital to the world economy. 90 per cent of total oil consumed in the world today passes through the Straits of Hormoz and Iran must retain control over it. And finally, Iran’s moderate theocratic regime wants to stay put for a longer period of time so that smooth and gradual return to non-communal dispensation is gradual and acceptable. These are Iran’s stakes. It therefore follows that in the changed circumstances global strategies are being redrawn to accommodate liberal and more moderate elements of Islam into the Islamic society.

India: Distress After the Drought

By M Martin

Even though most have forgotten the hardships which the people of Orissa faced after a severe drought more than a year ago, the people of the state continue to bear the consequences even today. And suffering more than most are women, who are reportedly migrating from the drought-hit western parts of the state because of food, fodder and labour shortages.

According to a status report by Paschim Orissa Krishijeevi Sangh (POKS - Western Orissa Farmers' Organisation) erratic rains in western Orissa soon after the drought meant that crop and seed production were badly hit, raising fears of continued misery. A 'drought alert' has also been issued by Oxfam India and these two organisations have raised concerns about more women joining the migration flow in search of casual or contract labour in cities to escape from unemployment and hunger.

A decrease in the last harvest has led to a reduction of labour opportunities and wages in a region where the labour rights scenario is already very grim; there is no government mechanism to ensure minimum wages or minimum labour rights. Oxfam has noted that the advance amounts given for migrant labourers are lower than usual and significant issues like women's rights are at threat. A report by Oxfam's Bhubaneshwar office also notes that there have been instances when women have been forced to stay back at labour sites while their men take occasional breaks to visit relatives left back home. These women are a 'guarantee' to ensure that their men return.

According to activists working for Oxfam, this forced confinement raises serious questions about the women's physical safety and dignity. This is a new concern raised in the decades-old history of labour migration from this region. Migration from the area attained huge proportions after the drought of the mid-1980s and more recent figures suggest that over 200,000 villagers migrate annually from Bolangir and Khariar districts. A number of issues related to health have been raised periodically due to this desperate labour migration. To begin with, the people who migrate live on shoestring budgets in dirty shanties at the labour sites, working overtime to pay off advances or saving enough to return home with. According to local doctors, when the migrants return, it is a public nightmare. Many labourers come back sick with infections especially during the monsoon season when there is a spurt in gastrointestinal diseases in western Orissa.

Moreover, the migration spots offer no special antenatal care to expecting mothers. Coupled with rampant malnutrition, inadequate care makes deliveries difficult and risky. At the same time, the nutritional status of the children of migrant labourers is suspect. Children also suffer in other ways because migration means a break in their studies. Instead, children have to work to add to family incomes.

Health workers have also noted instances of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) among some of the migrant workers in certain pockets of Khariar district.

The key concern shared by agencies like Oxfam India, local healthcare personnel and social workers is that migration remains an unaccounted activity. Labour contractors are legally allowed to take only a few workers on the assurance of minimum wages and other amenities. But in practice, they take hundreds of thousands of labourers in unreserved compartments of trains, bribing their way through.

Being largely an unaccounted activity, the labourers cannot be insured or compensated against the losses they might suffer on account of sickness or accidents, which are not rare.

Local doctors and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) have realised that the biggest health threat in the region is endemic poverty. This in turn has given Orissa the dubious distinction of having one of the worst records in maternal and infant mortality. Malnutrition and anaemia are rampant and the health map is further made grim by a huge presence of malaria, especially in western Orissa, where over half of it is the virulent falciparum type.

What is in question here is the inadequacy of government and voluntary intervention that often look at specific health issues in a non-concerted manner. For instance, the government's mother and childcare programmes do not take into account the issue of migration. Voluntary agencies' concern about environmental care and food security too does not necessarily take into account the dismal health status of the people.

Western Orissa remains a grim case study that demonstrates the gross inadequacies of governmental and voluntary efforts aimed to make a dent in poverty. The continuing distress after drought is a challenge for meaningful intervention. (WFS)