EDITORIAL
Need for
caution
The new Government
of the State appears to have become aggressive on
two fronts. One is the contacting the
administration and the other releasing the jailed
terrorists. It is definitely no mean feat to have
concerned as many as nine District Development
Board meetings within a fortnight. The Government
seems to be proceeding with fine speed towards
development and toning up the administration when
it was expected to get busy displacing the
administration with a big shovel. Even if the
same NC Government had been returned to power,
one would have seen many administrative heads
rolling for flimsy or facetious reasons. The new
Government had a bigger ‘reason’ to
revamp the administration. Instead it has
promulgated an order banning all transfers. From
a constructive point that declaration was quite
in order as many of the administrators expected
to be shifted and had been waiting for their
orders. Now they can settle down and see to
ministering the people and solving the problems,
which is their primary job.
It would be a
great thing if the Government can make the
discharge of duties and not the personal
loyalties matter in placements and postings.
There is a crying need to free the Government
machinery from the shackles of
‘commitment’ to persons and parties.
The on-job performance has decidedly taken a
backseat in the cares and calculations of the
members of services whether in the administrative
or other cadres. The work ethic of an impartial
officialdom has for long been under unholy
strain. It would be fine if the cadres are
allowed time to reorient their attitudes and be
assured that there would be no vindictive
actions. There the action of the Government,
together with the open and responsive attitude
towards the problems and demands of the people,
must be vastly reassuring to all manner of
people. The same, however, cannot be said of the
promptness with which the terrorists jailed for
long are being released. Indeed, it is raising
the fears of different sections of the people,
though it must be very ‘healing’ for
the families of the released men. But it is not
the sundry families but the total security and
safety of the people and state as a whole that
has to be looked to. There does appear to be a
hurry of sorts to fulfill the promise of clearing
the jails, but these jails also keep many
hardcore terrorists away from mischief.
One in fact would
have expected the political prisoner or the
political leaders who have been interned to be
released. Many of these internments were, in
fact, anomalous. Thus Yasin Malik, who stands
accused of heinous crimes including the one of
killing as many as a dozen officers, was booked
late in a fera/hawala case. Then POTA was applied
rather indiscriminately for every act that
appeared even remotely linked to terrorism. That
was how the earlier TADA became an anathema
instead of a tool to fight terrorism. But that
does not discount the fact that there are
terrorists, foreign, marauding terrorists booked
thereunder. While the lesser fry still remain
behind the bars, known terrorists are being let
free at a fast rate. Geelani continues to be in
prison while the known criminals of Hizbul
Mujahideen are already free or in the process of
being freed. Unless the Government has sound
reasons that it has not divulged the actions
appear rather too injudicious if not outrightly
careless. There are apprehensions, sound
apprehensions, lest we end up healing the wounds
and filling the gaps in terrorism itself.
Colonial
sins
British foreign
secretary Jack Straw has definitely made ‘a
sensible statement on the history of his
nation’ by admitting that many of the wrongs
in today’s world are the direct results of
the British colonialism and the sins that the
colonialists committed in those areas. More than
that, it is a statement of the facts that the
British have failed to acknowledge all this
half-century since the end of colonial rule. Most
of the disputes, frictions, divisions and
attritions that are afflicting the world today
did not arise as indirect byproducts of the
colonialism but were actively inflicted upon the
peoples, nations and countries they had held in
imperial slavery. While many of those sins are
traceable to their erstwhile policies, others are
too subtle to be even seen as a British
invention. The matters were not helped by the
rise of the incisiveness and relentless logic of
rights and identities. If any thing, the new
found identities and rights aggravated these
divides so drastically, that for many they became
de facto phenomena in their own right. Yet they
had been carefully cunningly engineered.
And that was not
done by the colonial administrators alone but was
got pursued through social workers, scholars and
social scientists who formulated whole theories
to fit the designs of colonialism. Other
scientists and investigators then began to chide
their own people for ‘blaming the British
for all their ills’. It is true that the
inaptitude of the subsequent, local leaders too
added their mites and made a confusing mess of
all, but the British sins could just not be
wished away. Instead they had acquired a life of
their own, under the aforesaid rights and
identities, and continue to bedevil the people.
Today, it is difficult to say that the results of
those sins can be washed out even if instead of
‘sensible statements’ admitting sins.
the British were to submit details of how they
did this to all these different peoples. For
there were minor fractures here and there which
were split wide and through, there mere surface
grievances and they were made into basis for
uncompromising nationalism, there were chance
disaffections that were built upon till whole
edifices of deprivations were erected. Few of
them can be wished out of the world today and so
much the pity. If only the British had grown
wiser earlier!
|
 |
Time
to engage China
By Maj Gen V K
Madhok (Retd)
As
Vajpayee and Fernandes contemplate to
visit Beijing at China's invitation in
the coming months and when there are
major changes in Chinese top political
hierarchies during and the 16th People's
Congress which commenced on Nov 8, 2002,
four issues need a national debate on a
dispute which has been pending for nearly
40 years.
These
being: the specific purpose and
objectives of this visit? Chinese fears
of a possible Indo-US alliance?
Initiatives, India can and must consider?
Progress on the Sino-Indian border
dispute ?
To take
the last issue first: China is in
possession of 43,180 sq kms of Indian
territory alongwith another 5180 sq kms
ceded to it by Pakistan in 1963 for
constructing the KK Highway from west of
Xinjiang to Pakistan. Besides, Beijing
claims another 90,000 sq kms of Arunachal
Pradesh which is shown as Chinese
territory on its official maps. It does
not recognise Sikkim as part of India.
After numerous Joint Working Group and
Expert Committee meetings, so far only a
map of the middle sector (545 kms of
Sino-Indian LAC) has been exchanged. A
common view is that New Delhi is lost in
Confidence Building Measures (CBMs) and
forgotten to resolve the border dispute.
Thus, there is no real progress: India's
lethargic attitude suits China.
As regards
the purpose? The questions which arise
are : Why shouldn't the meeting take
place in a 3rd country, such as Kathmandu
or Bhutan? After all, India and China are
adversaries with their armed forces
deployed in an eyeball to eyeball
position. And China has, on more then one
occasion been labelled as an enemy
including by Fernandes. So why a visit or
a meeting in an enemy's country? Further,
is te visit aimed at engaging, containing
or sizing up China's new leadership? Or
is it the other way around where the
Chinese leadership wants to size up
Indian leadership? Or is the visit
primarily to articulate the outline of
economic expansion as proposed by
Beijing? Where Beijing has suggested
opening of the land route from the Chumbi
Valley via Sikkim to Kalimpong. A
proposal which has serious security
implications. Or the PM intends to speak
up for resolving the border dispute or to
propose more CBMs and leave the issues to
future generations?
As regards
an Indo-US alliance; with a nuclear base
in Diego Garcia; the trump cards of
Taiwan, technology denial and trade
competitions- armed with aggressive
unilateralism, Washington has been
pressurising China on violating MTCR,
launching of a spy satellite and
supplying spares to Pakistan. More
important, Beijing fears, an anti-Chinese
'Tibetan Card' from the Indian soil.
So far
India has not launched any initiative
which can be termed as bold. But India
has a bag full of political and
diplomatic initiatives but lacking the
will: These vary from engaging Burma
(China's protege), neutralising Beijing's
growing influence in Nepal & Bhutan
to lodging protests against Chinese maps
showing AP as Chinese territory or
supplying spares to Pakistan or a move to
recognise Dalai Lama's Government in
Dharamshala, establishing credible
nuclear deterrence launching a spy
satellite, to discussing an Indo-US
alliance and so on.
Note :
Burma has already become a Chinese
satellite. Its army, equipped with
Chinese military hardware has expanded
from one to four lacs. Chinese are
constructing roads and Burmese markets
are bursting with Chinese goods. Yet our
PM or the President have not visited this
country with which India shares a border
of 1350 kms.
Further,
insufficient attention is being paid to
the happenings in Nepal and Bhutan. The
Maoist movement which is determined to
remove the Nepalese monarchy and
establish a communist State- with PLA, is
obviously getting some sort of indirect
direction from China, while the Chinese
have kept the Sino-Bhutanese border
dispute alive. And so far, India refuses
to recognise the Tibetan Government in
exile.
Thus, it
is apparent that China has been buying
time and New Delhi's compromising
attitude suits it. It has been building
up Pakistan so that the latter can stand
up to India. Infact, Pakistan & Burma
have become flourishing arms markets for
Chinese military hardware. And this
influence is expanding.
Finally,
if the visits are undertaken without
preparation, debate, professional and
national participation, these will also
end up as a damp squib like ex-President
Narayanan's visit in May-Jun 2000. That
visit achieved nothing and ended up with
Narayanan's apologetic assurance to Jiang
Zemin that India will not permit any
anti-Chinese Tibetan activity from its
soil. It is time that India showed a
pro-active stance and launched some
initiatives which would stop China from
taking their neighbour for granted.
|
Taking
stock of the politico-strategic shift
By B K Karkra
With the
two widest oceans of the world washing
its flanks to the east and west and with
weak neighbours on its north and south,
the U.S. always felt safe and got used to
this feeling. Over the years, it had
nearly forgotten that a living being was
always exposed to some danger or the
other and only a dead man could be a safe
man. September 11 last year brought its
vulnerability rudely in focus and gave it
a shock of its life. Undoubtedly, eleven
million Americans had fought in the World
War II and suffered their share of
casualties. However, no battle was fought
on its soil for nearly a century and a
half. It had, therefore, never known
unnatural death on such a high scale on
its territory since its civil war of mid
eighteenth century. This peace and
security brought it prosperity and
afforded it an opportunity to go for the
higher goals in the areas of science and
technology and thus, emerge as the most
powerful nation of the world. In the
process, it came to think in terms of
total security as a possibility. The
negative manifestation of this illusion
was that it started believing that
American lives were more valuable than
those of others.
Initially,
it thought that the only danger came to
it from expansion of the communist
ideology. So, it brought the NATO,
CEN.T.O. and S.E.A.T.O. in to being to
cordon the communists. These ideological
fears had barely got buried when Russia
occupied Afghanistan in its age-old
thirst for warm waters. This could never
be to the liking of the Western world.
The U.S. immediately set up a command
post in Gen. Zia's Pakistan to frustrate
the Russian advance towards the warm
waters of the Arabian Sea. The world,
thus, saw the birth of a problem child
known as Taliban. As long as it did not
pose a direct danger to the Americans, it
was tolerated and in the meantime the
U.S. obsession with safety spent its time
urging the world to sign the C.T.B.T. and
selling its idea of the National Missile
Defence Plan. Now that its mainland has
been directly threatened by the jinni
that it created, it is trying hard to put
it back in bottle. It is a great irony of
fate that the threat to the lone super
power of the world emanated from one of
the weakest entities of the world,
fighting on empty stomachs, with an
assortment of abandoned obsolete weapons.
However,
all said, it goes to the credit of the
Americans that they were the first to
realize that the religions had an
honourable place for themselves in the
shrines and they must stay in dignity
just there. The politics could very well
do without them. This, ahead of
everything else, enabled them to go
galloping forward and eventually emerge
as the sole super power of the globe.
Turning
now to the Islamic world that once
triggered the first wave of renaissance
in Europe, the general perception is that
it takes pride in looking backward and
has, for this reason, fallen on bad days.
But for the discovery of the massive
deposits of oil on its soil, it would
have been still more badly off. The
petro-dollars in some pockets, however,
cannot make up for a sort of intellectual
stagnancy that has set in their psyche.
It does have some highly learned scholars
in its ranks. However, their number is
too small to make an impact- the Muslim '
ummah' can boast of just five hundred
Ph.D.'s whereas India alone produces
around five thousand in a year. The end
result is that the self-seeking mullah's
have much greater hold on their lives
than the thinking elite have. It has
become impossible for them to understand
even the plain truth that life comes
directly from Allah, whereas the
religions are the creation of man. One's
faith is meant to soothe the souls and
not to bleed the bodies. Thus, while
retaining their love for their faith,
they need to shed their fanaticism.
The roots
of Islam, indeed, lie in the Arabian
region. At this point of time, however,
Pakistan is seen as its most powerful
bastion __ a sort of sword arm of Islam.
This country may take pride as the lone
possessor of the Islamic bomb, but it has
done little to bring glory to their
faith. Rather than being of some service
to Islam, it has always tried to take
advantage of the religion to push its
territorial ambitions in Kashmir. The
religious fervour of its people and
patriotism of its leadership are not in
doubt, but its priorities seem to have
gone completely haywire. First comes
one's commitment to truth, then the
commitment to humanity and every thing
else has to follow afterwards. It has
persistently put faith in roguishness in
its relentless quest for parity with
India, a country around seven times its
size in population and ten times in terms
of the G.D.P. In this vain effort, it not
only ensured its own economic bankruptcy
but also brought untold misery to its
neighbour, Afghanistan, where it sought
strategic depth.
One's
heart really goes to the people of
Afghanistan. For around two decades they
suffered bullets and bombs from all
directions for machinations of others.
The Taliban government, foisted on them
from across the border, subjected them to
barbarities of the worst order. Some
years back this outfit not only granted
asylum to a maniac, but also allowed him
to indulge in most inhuman acts from
their soil. And all this, went in the
name of Allah! After Afghanistan was, at
long last, got rid of them, they had only
one place in the world to escape to i.e.
Pakistan, curiously, the very ally of the
Americans in their fight against
terrorism ! That is where they and their
honoured guests, the Al Quida, are
believed to be biding their time now.
We have to
now weigh dispassionately what this
sudden shift in the global geo-strategy
holds for us. It should be clear to us
that the main factor behind the
aggressive stance of Pakistan in Kashmir
has been the backing that it got in some
form or the other from the U.S.A. (the
lone super power of the world), China
(the regional power) and the fifty odd
Islamic countries. This support acted as
a sort of insurance policy against its
military defeat at the hands of India.
Pakistan, thus, got the necessary
leverage for its proxy wars in Punjab and
Kashmir. This insurance cover has since
worn quite thin. The Americans may still
have some reasons for alliance with
Pakistan, but they quite know where the
roots of terrorism in fact lie. They
cannot afford to close their eyes to a
reality that poses a mortal danger to
their own security also. It is therefore
reasonable to presume that this source of
encouragement behind Pakistan's proxy war
is going to dry up quite rapidly forcing,
it to seek a solution on peaceful lines.
On our side of the L.O.C., a new
government with some freshness of outlook
is in place now. The time is, thus, ripe
to make another effort at putting an end
to the blood bath in the valley and on
the borders. As everybody can see the
final solution to the Kashmir tangle can
emerge only around the 'L.O.C.
Plus/Minus' principle. Sooner, this
reality sinks home on both sides of the
border, better it would be for the
subcontinent.
|
10th
plan and relevance of reforms
By R C Rajamani
The
economic liberalization in India, which
had its modest beginning in the mid-1980s
under the late Rajiv Gandhi, has had a
bumpy journey in the last one-decade and
a half. Described as the huge, slumbering
elephant, Indian economy was given a rude
prod in 1991 at the height of a debt
crisis that saw the virtual scraping of
the foreign exchange barrel. Under the
dictates of International Monetary Fund
(IMF) and the World Bank which had pulled
the country out of a dangerous debt trap,
a la Brazil, the subsequent Government of
Prime Minister P V Narasimha Rao pursued
the reforms process in right earnest.
Under the
single party Congress Government there
were few problems in furthering
liberalization as the career economist
Dr. Manmohan Singh guided the country
towards gradual integration into
globalization. Not that there was no
criticism or opposition to the reforms.
But whatever was there could be handled
with little or no fuss as there was
general agreement within the Government
on the new philosophy. So far so good,
and considerable strides were made in
taking India towards integration with the
world economy.
The
coalition era had dawned with the exit of
the Narasimha Rao Government in 1996. The
inherent pulls and pressures, the
constant danger of instability and
strident, dissenting voices within
successive coalition Governments under
Deve Gowda, I K Gujral and Atal Bihari
Vajpayee had all created frequent
roadblocks on the liberalization lane.
Forward-looking Finance Ministers like
Palaniappan Chidambaram and Yashwant
Sinha had to constantly do a frustrating
balancing act.
Prime
Minister Vajpayee, who is running his
third term, the previous two being
extremely brief lasting 13 days and 13
months, has had to constantly look over
the shoulders of his coalition partners
of satisfy himself that his reforms push
got their approval.
The
opposition he had faced from the
Congress, the original proponents of
liberalization, and the Left Parties on
the pace and content of the reforms has
been politically understandable. What has
been galling to Vajpayee are the constant
pinpricks he has been receiving from some
of his Cabinet colleagues belonging to
his own BJP as well as his coalition
constituents.
To make
matters worse there are the front
organizations of the Sangh Parivar who
never tire of drumming up the Swadeshi
beat now and again. This scenario finally
saw the virtual sacking of Yashwant Sinha
after he had presented five successive
pro-reforms budgets. Recently swapping
places with Sinha, the new incumbent
Jaswant Singh predictably and promptly
played the "please-all" tune by
promising more paise in the common
man’s pocket.
While,
ironically Jaswant Singh has escaped
criticism from within and without the
Government, the Dismantlement Minister
Arun Shourie has become the target of
attack in the performance of his duty. As
Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) began a
gradual decline for a variety of reasons,
including uncertainty on the reforms
front, Government has had to look at the
disinvestment route to mop up resources
needed to fund key infrastructure
sectors.
When it
came to disinvesting in the oil majors
Bharat Petroleum and Hindustan Petroleum,
all hell seem to have suddenly broken
out. The critics, Cabinet ministers and
members of the Sangh Parivar included,
have cried foul. An already beleaguered
Prime Minister has finally found himself
pushed to the wall.
For anyone
in that position there is no other way
but to hit back. And Vajpayee’s
resounding response came during his
address to the full meeting of the
Planning Commission recently. He chose
this highest policy making forum to
settle his tormentors’ hash.
After the
recent noises within the Government about
the wisdom of Foreign Direct Investment
(FDI), Vajpayee has conclusively set at
rest the controversy over FDI and by
implication the Reforms process itself.
His unequivocal assertion could not have
come at a more opportune time. He made
his views clear on FDI as a spur to
Reforms at the full meeting of the
Planning Commission on the eve of his
week-long tour abroad that took him to
Cyprus, Denmark and London. The high spot
of his tour is his participation at the
third India-European Union Summit in Copenhagen.
The Prime Minister’s remarks to a
British Newspaper that India is on track
on the liberalization journey and the
Reforms process is irreversible must have
sent the right signals to these countries
which are India’s major business
partners.
In a clear
message to the doubters of Reforms within
his Cabinet, Vajpayee said at the Plan
panel meet that he would actively pursue
the disinvestments of PSUs. He, however,
hastened to add that he would not follow
such an FDI policy as would weaken Indian
industry or hurt national interests.
The Draft
of the 10th Five Year Plan (2002-07),
formally cleared at the meeting, aims at
an annual growth rate of eight per cent.
This means an ambitious quantum jump of
2.7 per cent from 5.3 per cent in the
Ninth Plan.
The draft
has since been approved by the Union
Cabinet and now awaits ratification by
the National Development Council (NDC)
comprising State Governments and Union
Territories.
Among
other targets approved is creation of 50
million new jobs, almost wholly in the
non-formal, non-industrial sector. For
this, the growth rate has to keep pace
with the new entrants into the job
market. Another significant goal is
reduction in the population below poverty
line from 26 per cent to 21 per cent. All
children are to complete at least five
years of schooling by 2007 and Literacy
rate to be raised from 65 to 75 per cent.
Gender gap in Literacy is to be halved.
Drinking water in all villages. Infant
mortality rate to be reduced from 72 per
thousand births in 1999-2000 to 45 in
2007.
Despite
the controversy over FDI, largely
surrounding Oil Majors Bharat Petroleum
and Hindustan Petroleum, the Draft Plan
adheres to original projections of around
Rs.800 billion of disinvestments over
five years and increasing FDI inflows
annually to at least US dollars 7.5
billion. To achieve all these coveted
goals, the Prime Minister has recommended
a strong dose of reforms-oriented
prescription. This, includes reforms in
taxes, labour laws, the administrative
system and enforcement of existing laws.
Another area identified is the need for
urgent focus on power sector reforms.
Vajpayee said he is deeply worried at the
very slow pace of reforms in this sector.
He has called for immediate removal of
bottlenecks in this area.
Yet
another imperative is to get the Central
and state budget deficits back under
control as quickly as possible. Vajpayee
has stressed that it was time we stopped
worrying if FDI would weaken Indian
industry or hurt national interest. The
fears are groundless, he said, noting
that it is important to concentrate on
making our economy competitive with the
rest of the world.
Answering
criticism of a perceived
foreign-dominated development models, the
Prime Minister stressed that planning in
India is not a static concept and not
enslaved by dogma. "It has to take
into account the dominant new trends in
the national and global economies,"
These are, of course, words reflecting
the mature wisdom of a world leader
reconciling to the realities of a brave
new world order under the all
encompassing globalization.
As
Vajpayee said, India has no choice but to
achieve its goals by its own efforts and
by harnessing its own resources.
In this
context, the implementation of the 10th
Plan targets presupposes pursuit of
reforms in right earnest. Whether a
pragmatic approach to reforms will
prevail or politics of convenience could
plague both the Plan and Reforms remains
to be seen.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
