 |
|
|
There are enough of indications to suggest that Prime Minister A B Vajpayee has at last decided to become assertive. He appears to be in quite buoyant mood to say things and do it which is the prerogative of any Prime Minister in democratic set-up. One can divide recent announcements/actions into three distinct compartments namely J&K, ...... more It is ironical that many films cleared by the Censor Board continue to cause heartburns, violence and large scale resentment. The latest film to join this bandwagon of being highly explosive and controversial is 'Fire' which has led to abortion of its screening. It is not the question of ideology, individual conceptualisation or touching religious susceptibilities of the public. The all , ...more |
 |
National
Security council: How effective? By: Saumitra Mohan The National Security Council (NSC)
has finally come ......more The Prime Minister, Atal
Behari Vajpayee, has outlined the facilities proposed to
be extended ....more A disturbing scenario has emerged, with the Sangh Parivar crossing swords with ,......more Saving our economy |
 |
||
EDITORIAL There are enough of indications to suggest that Prime Minister A B Vajpayee has at last decided to become assertive. He appears to be in quite buoyant mood to say things and do it which is the prerogative of any Prime Minister in democratic set-up. One can divide recent announcements/actions into three distinct compartments namely J&K, national and international. There is enough of evidence to suggest that Vajpayee is not only wiser by the recent debacle in the assembly elections but also watchful of the activities of Sangh Parivar besides the alliance partners. The J&K two day visit at a time when Parliament is in session shows the priority he accords to the troubled State despite very busy routine. The fact that he has chosen to visit almost all border areas from Kargil to Hiranagar which have persistently remained exposed to firing from across the border causing immense hardships to the people of border areas shall equip him fully to understand Pak game plan and how best it could be neutralised. It also reassures the hapless border people that Government is alive to their problems and that everything possible will be done to mitigate their hardships caused by frequent dislocation from their hearths and homes. Interaction with troops raises their morale sky-high and personal appraisal of their onerous task being done under heavy odds shall always remain uppermost in his mind. By far the greatest and most significant element of his visit pertains to making it amply clear that Article 370 granting special status to the State remains in place and none should nurse any apprehensions on this score. This means those trying to foment trouble and engage in destabilising moves stand humbled as Prime Minister is very firm on sticking to National Agenda which has excluded tempering with Article 370. To that extent bonds of relationship at the personal level between Farooq and Vajpayee are on firm footing and both are all decided to do everything possible to help each other at all levels. This stands substantiated with Prime Minister desiring to help the State ride over its financial problems to the extent possible for which State functionaries are being called to Delhi during current month for further discussion. During the last 8 months of BJP rule, the bail-out for the State has been more than what any other predecessor Government did in such a short span. Yet another point mentioned by him relates to opening of Kailash route via Ladakh which would be a boon for tourism in the cold desert in particular. Lastly, he minces no words that there is no question of converting LoC as international border and that Parliaments resolution on J&K is the last word on it which clearly States that entire J&K including POK is integral part of India. This in fact tells Farooq not to rake up such formalisation of LoC frequently as it has many ramifications. At the national level Prime Minister has never been so assertive during the last 8 months as during the last 8 days. By inducting three of his confidants in the cabinet despite opposition and pressure from the RSS, he tells them finally that either he is functioning as the Prime Minister with least interference or he would prefer to quit. Jaswant, Mahajan and Jagmohan are three valuable additions who are filling up important vacant slots. This would not only reduce the burden on him but gives correct direction to take the country forward. By snubbing RSS hardcores within the party he leaves no doubt in anybody's mind about his capacity and capability to rule. Another aspect reiterated by him with full force pertains to protection of minorities and following the secular agenda in its totality and not as per whims and fancies of Sangh Parivar which frequently undo what the PM do. This is as well an assurance to the alliance partners that national agenda of secularism as enshrined in the constitution remains in place and none would be allowed to temper with it. As regards prices, it is to be seen that cabinet committee on prices which was earlier headed by Finance Minister Yashwant Sinha is now led by Prime Minister himself. That shows the concern for the common man which has remained exposed to unprecedented rise in prices of essential commodities. At the international level, Prime Minister Vajpayee tells Pakistan very clearly to let the status quo in J&K be maintained while taking the agenda of trade and commerce forward. This means no compromise on respective stands and implies freezing of borders like India-China border. Prime Minister is indeed encouraged and one can take it as diplomatic victory when Clinton rejects Sharif's line of approach of linking signing of CTBT to resolve of Kashmir imbroglio. Clinton administration has put its foot down that there is simply no co-relation between these two link-ups. Likewise Clinton tell Sharif clearly that American mediation is ruled out unless India desires it that way. Otherwise, bilateralism should continue addressing to all the contentious issues between India and Pakistan. Likewise, Clinton has refused to give any more economic or military aid to Pakistan unless it follows the IMF and Non-Proliferation concerns positively without ingress of any extraneous issues. Assuring alliance partners of more and appropriate representation in the Union Cabinet after the winter session, he has not allowed the current cabinet expansion to become sour issue. One hopes that henceforth it is going to be meaningful Governance with people friendly policies to retrieve the lost ground in terms of popularity with masses. It is the most apt democratic response to the mistakes and faux pas of the recent past that caused immense resentment amongst the people. It is ironical that many films cleared by the Censor Board continue to cause heartburns, violence and large scale resentment. The latest film to join this bandwagon of being highly explosive and controversial is 'Fire' which has led to abortion of its screening. It is not the question of ideology, individual conceptualisation or touching religious susceptibilities of the public. The all important question revolves round avoiding such things which lead to riotous situation resulting in immense loss to those who produce and finance the films. The question again crops up whether the censor people are really doing their job. Sometime scripts have been referred even to Court's intervention and restraints. This State has also experienced violent protests over some objectionable scenes in the film 'Kuchh Kuchh Hota Hai' which brought Kathua in limelight as also one of the nerve Centres that can generate enough of heat over such trivial matters which should have been left to the Censor Board whose primary job is to see that none is hurt. Films are for education, entertainment and of course money-making for some. Recently, there was that awful experience of 'Major Sahib' being objected to as reflecting untruth of real soldiers training life and other diversions. This Amitabh Bachchan production and starrer was ultimately cleared only after top brass of the Army found it in order. There was that awful experience of that song, 'Choli Ke Peechhe Kaya' which too cast aspersions on the credibility of Censor Board as regards vulgarity. Censor Board needs refinement if not total revamp with more clear guidelines than hithertofore. |
||
|
||
National
Security council: How effective? The National Security Council (NSC) has finally come into be-ing after more than a decade on the anvil. The three-tier NSC to be headed by the Prime Minister is supposed to undertake an array of complex tasks pertaining to national security management and linking it to the country's overall development process. But one wonders how effective it would be without full-time professional analysts to help it along. It was Rajiv Gandhi who first experimented in 1985 with a variant of NSC, by setting up a committee named "Policy Planning Committee on National Security.'' A few ministers including two Chief Ministers, officials and non-officials were designated as members. The Chairman, Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC), was made the secretary. Mooted by Arun Singh, then Minister of State for Defence, this predecessor of NSC which could have successfully performed the role of a think-tank, decision-maker, policy arbitrator and performance-monitor died an early death since conventional channels of decision-making like Cabinet Committee on Political Affairs (CCPA) and the Committee of Secretaries (CoS) were already available. After that V P Singh Government's NSC, which included a multi-member advisory group, did not take off since no one was clear on its functioning. As a compromise, the Narasimha Rao Government set up a "security Strategy Group'' to include the service chiefs also, who were not part of the decision-making process earlier, but nothing like NSC came up more because of clamour from retired civil and military officers. The NSC also featured in the present coalition Government's national agenda for governance following which a task force to go into various aspects of an NSC was formed in April this year under the chairmanship of former defence minister K C Pant. The task force submitted a detailed report on June 26. The present NSC is based on its recommendations. Headed by the Prime Minister, the high-powered panel will have the home minister, the defence minister, the external affairs minister and the deputy chairman of the Planning Commission as its members. It will have a three-tier structure. Principal Secretary to the PM will be the national security advisor and channel for servicing the council. The Joint Intelligence Committee which is to be revamped to suit the demands of its new role. Satish Chandra, India's high commissioner to Pakistan has been appointed as its chairman. The Strategic Policy Group will be strengthened and will provide inter-ministerial coordination and back-up for the council. It will comprise the Cabinet Secretary and the union secretaries from the departments concerned including external affairs, home, defence, finance, revenue and defence production besides three service chiefs, the Reserve Bank of India governor and the director, Intelligence Bureau. The present structure combines the two posts of secretary to the Prime Minister and the National Security Advisor. Both are full time jobs and are quite taxing. Combining the two posts will result in either or both tasks not being managed effectively. Since the secretaryship to the PM involves day-to-day running of the Government, it is likely that the long term planning in national security management is bound to suffer in the proposed dispensation. The Strategic Policy Group is an expanded secretaries' committee. It can only make generalist comments on papers produced by others and can't by itself do any original work. It is to carry out a strategic defence review, then there must be a group of experts who should produce a draft on which the secretaries can make non-specialist observations. It is not quite clear which structure will do that basic work. This is not very different from the present procedure. The Government has fallen back on the eight-year-old proposal by the V P Singh Government of converting the JIC into an NSC secretariat. This confirms that this Government like all its predecessors can't appreciate that national security planning must start with a long-range intelligence assessment made by professionals. By making JIC secretariat, the long-term intelligence assessment is bound to be neglected and the strategic defence review will not have any solid foundation on long-term assessments but will be a collection of ad hoc views of individuals. The Government's attitude towards intelligence assessment is evident from the post of chairman, JIC being left vacant for nearly a year. There is mention of a National Security Advisory Board comprising persons of eminence outside the Government covering expertise in various fields. They are to meet once a month and more frequently as required. They are to provide long-term prognoses and analyses for NSC and recommend solutions and policy options. It is not clear whether they will be full-time or part-time functionaries. Unless they are constituted into a single coherent body and made full-time staff, they will not be able to discharge their functions effectively. If that is done, the person who heads the board, will be the key person in national security planning. Such a person will have to be of the rank of secretary to the Government and have adequate background in national security affairs. One wonders whether in the set up proposed one could expect him to be independent and not tailor his views to align with those of his seniors who will advance his career. As envisaged, the pioneering national security advisership is not the best way to initiate a modern and efficient national security management structure, however meritorious, competent, knowledgeable and dedicated the incumbent may be. A major blind spot of the official Indian midset concerns the axiomatic truth that centralisation of authority degrades effective exercise of power. Successive Indian leaderships have failed to nurture modern management concepts such as power-sharing and responsibility, delegation and team work for common goals and objectives. The purpose of setting up the NSC was to purge the present system of ad hocism in decision-making and replace it with a collegiate, deliberative and information-based approach. This aim would be defeated by centralisation, generalist supremacy, rigid hierarchy and bureaucratic circumambulation which are the basic defects of the proposed structure. It is not known whether this decision was arrived at after an informed deliberation in the cabinet committee, or was taken by the Prime Minister alone. The JIC was shifted from the jurisdiction of the chiefs of staff committee and made an autonomous assessment body in the cabinet secretariat in 1965, after it became clear that the 1962 debacle was the result not of absence of intelligence but of a failure to assess the regular inflow of data. However, the tendency of intelligence agencies to withhold information from the committee, and the inability of the ministers and senior civil servants to appreciate that long-range intelligence assessments are essential inputs for policy making, combined to undermine the efficacy of the arrangement. A cardinal principle in national security decision-making is not to mix up responsibilities for intelligence assessment and policy making; one process influencing the other to the detriment of optimal decision-making. The assessors must have access to all available intelligence and should be free to reach their own conclusions without any external pressures. Most countries have highly equipped professional analysts continually on the job. Despite the dawn of the information age our politicians and bureaucrats have yet to realise the need for assessed intelligence. This refusal to learn is rooted in the endemic authoritarian style of official functioning, marked by an unwillingness to submit to the discipline of information, expertise and reasoned decision-making. All this is reflected in converting the JIC into a secretariat. As the NSC and its supporting structure are being set up under an executive order, one can only hope that further improvements and amendments will be possible taking constructive suggestions into account.—PTI Feature |
||
|
|
War of attrition between Sangh
Parivar and its adversaries A disturbing scenario has emerged, with the Sangh Parivar crossing swords with their adversaries. Significantly, quote a number of these adversaries belong to the Hindu community. And their loaded question: Have the citizens of India to take orders from the Sangh Parivar parties on what books to read, what restaurants to frequent, what games to play, what films to see, what paintings to possess, what theatres to visit, which nations to befriend and what Gods to worship? These questions just cannot be left unanswered at a time like this when the stage seems to be dawning speedily when law-abiding citizens will have to get clearance from the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) or the Bajrang Dal or the Shiv Sena before undertaking any of the above mentioned activities which in civilised societies are considered to be part of the legitimate exercise of the citizens' fundamental rights and privileges. All Hindus in the country do not support the VHP and the Bajrang Dal taking the law into their own hands in order to "liberate'' a Hindu-Muslim shrine from "Muslim control''. And all Hindus do not support the Shiv Sena supremo, Mr Bal Thackeray, warning no less a constitutional authority in the country than the Prime Minister himself that Pakistan will not be permitted to play a cricket match anywhere in India and definitely not in Maharashtra. The Shiv Sainiks targeted the painters, MF Hussain and Jatin Das, for daring to insist on their right to exercise their artistics freedom. Galleries displaying their works were forced to shut down, while Jatin Das was chased by a yelling mob of religious fanatics out for the kill. There were agitators setting fire to restaurants marketing fried chicken. The Central Government was forced a few years ago to ban the entry of Salman Rushdie's book into the country. The Education Minister of Delhi under the BJP dispensation issued an order prohibiting girl students from wearing skirts and asked them to wear salwar kameez or saries instead. A couple of years ago, under the orders of Maharashtra's Minister for Culture, Mr Pramod Navalkar, cinema theatres in Mumbai were barred from screening films starring A K Hangal on the grounds that the actor had attended the National Day function at the Pakistani High Commission. The actor himself received threats to his life. Four months ago, Education Minister of Uttar Pradesh, Mr Ravinder Shukla, issued an executive order for compulsory enforcement in the State's 1,27,000 Government primary schools of the Kalp Yojna reform scheme under which all pupils are required to recite Saraswati Vandana and sing Vande Mataram before going to their class rooms. When the Muslim cleric, Ali Mian, protested, his house was raided and his library ransacked. And now under the inspiration of Mr Pramod Navalkar, slogan-shouting, stone-throwing Shiv Sena mobs have forced a few cinema theatres in Mumbai to stop the screening of the film fire on the ground that is theme lisbianim-was against "Indian culture and tradition.'' The Minister said that a delegation of the Shiv Sena's women's wing had protested against the screening since the theme of lisbianism is morally offensive and an insult to Indian womanhood. The Maharashtra Chief Minister, Mr Manohar Joshi, not only supported the protesting demonstrators but congratulated them. Fully justifying the forceful closure of the theatres, Mr Joshi said" "Culture is more important than glorification of art.'' Some Muslim and Christian leaders have informed Prime Minister, Mr Atal Behari Vajpayee, that the Sangh Parivar groups have been active in many parts of India of late, and particularly in the northeastern States, terrorising Muslim and Christian minorities. Indeed, it has been alleged that their activities draw inspiration from the Parivar's fanatic assertion of the Hindutva philosophy which often manifests itself in religious, social and political intolerance. From an era when Hindutva parties talked of Indianisation of the polity, people have reached a stage where Governments themselves abet intolerance and condone violation of the laws of the land. Has the Shiv Sena and the likes of Mr Pramod Navalkar become the custodians of India's culture, tradition and heritage? As the well-known cine director, Mr Mahesh Bhat, has rightly pointed out, the film Fire does not tackle a Western issue but a human issue. The growing attempt at Talibanising India's polity, in the name of preserving Indian tradition and culture, flies against the face of established authority and the concept of a pluralistic society. True, in certain pockets of the country, groups of Muslim hardliners have already been found by Government sleuths involved in extreme fundamentalist activities to suit the requirements of anti-Indian forces and agencies across the border, particularly the Pakistani ISI (Inter-Services Intelligence). But this does not suggest that all Indian Muslims require to be placed under surveillance. |
|
| home | state | national | business | editorial | advertisement | sports |