 |
|
|
At long last Patents Amendment Bill has been passed by Rajya Sabha. Its clearance had remained elusive for a number of years. It was Narasimha Rao Government that introduced the same in 1995 but the bill fell through as Congress Government lacked simple majority in Rajya Sabha. It is pertinent to mention that on this very bill it was BJP which staged massive walkout....more Russian Prime Minister Primikov's visit to India has provided badly needed fillip to our ambitious defence plans to make this country a formidable power during next millenium. India is slated to get sophisticated defence equipment worth 16 billion dollars over the next few years. ..more |
|
Plebiscite
a dead issue in Kashmir By : Lt. Gen M M Lakhera, PVSM, AVSM, VSM (Retd) Kashmir has been on and off the centre stage
for the last 50 ..more Cracks in Taliban solidarity are widening, and the religious militia is fast heading towards schism ...more Why policies are The Vajpayee government has been engaged in ...more Education Teaching for transfer is one of the goals of new .more |
 |
||
EDITORIAL At long last Patents Amendment Bill has been passed by Rajya Sabha. Its clearance had remained elusive for a number of years. It was Narasimha Rao Government that introduced the same in 1995 but the bill fell through as Congress Government lacked simple majority in Rajya Sabha. It is pertinent to mention that on this very bill it was BJP which staged massive walkout and raised objections to the very concept of the bill as against the interest of the country. It is quite heartening to see the very same party introducing Patents Amendment Bill considering it to be indispensable in line with the ongoing liberalisation of economy and its total but gradual integration with global economic regimes. It has also been a mandatory requirement after India became member of World Trade Organisation (WTO). Some complaints had been filed by America and other countries against India on not conforming to the letter and spirit of WTO. The rulings were given in favour of the complainants and India was asked to strict religiously to the WTO regime or else face the consequences which would have been detrimental to our economic interests both in the short and long runs. The WTO also set the deadline for meeting the requirements in full for amending our old Patents Act by April 1999. It was thus a compulsions to fulfill the commitment made to the WTO when India was admitted as a member. As current winter session of Parliament concludes, there was not much time to either refer it to Select Committee or Standing Committee of Parliament, a demand made by traditional and regular opponents of liberal economy. There would not have been enough time for seeing the Bill through during budget session due to many reasons and likely changes in the governing apparatus and consequent change in stands. It must be recorded that Congress Party after its initial reluctance gave the nod for extending full support to the Bill. The only rider it imposed was an amendment which ultimately became an official amendment. The amendment says, "Provided that when EMR to sell or distribute will not be granted for an article or substance which is based on Indian system of medicine and is already in the public domain.'' To be precise many safeguards are already available to protect our interests to the extent permissible under WTO regime but Congress wanted to hog the limelight as having done something more. In the process Congress also appealed to CPI(M) to support the Bill as it was indeed in the larger national interests. It is a very healthy development that CPM obliged. Thus those who supported it are BJP and its allies, Congress Party and even CPM. This is a development which indicates pragmatic approach as far as economy of the country is concerned. Within the Congress all economic wizards like Manmohan Singh, Pranab Mukerjee were all for the bill but those with known socialistic leanings did oppose. It was here that Sonia Gandhi asserted her full command over the party MPs (she is chairperson of Congress Parliamentary Party) and thus the Patent Amendment Bill was passed. All the amendments moved by several MPs hailing from parties traditionally opposed to BJP line were defeated with full voting. This aspect is also a very healthy one in that dissent through debate is the real democracy and victory even by a solitary bote is victory. This is the greatest rebuff to those who are prone to bring the proceedings to a halt with their lung power and/or physical prowess by entering well of the house, snatching papers and throwing all types of missiles on the treasury benches. A healthy debate must remain the sole criteria and those who do not prescribe to this are indeed unfit to be peoples representatives. The Patents Amendment Bill shall now give EMR to all multinationals (Exclusive Marketing Rights). As a result particularly some branded and patented medicines could become costlier. But India also gains because of massive strides made in promoting Ayurveda abroad (Indian System of Medicines). It also includes Ayurvedic cosmetics range which is already earning good foreign exchange for the country. Many such local products could be patented with EMR in other countries. It is worth noting that as on date thirty thousand applications for grant of patents are pending with the concerned authorities in India. It will take at least two years to clear the backlog even as new applicants would be seeking the same for safeguarding their sole patent rights. To that extent it is definitely beneficial to our industry and economy. One hopes other legislations particularly relating to economic reforms and liberalisation would likewise be passed for the overall good of the country. AIADMK's suggestion to pass all such vital legislation with support of the BJP-led Government and Congress Party is worth pursuing and a special session of Parliament ahead of the Budget session could provide necessary inputs for taking the nation forward by putting it on the fast track. This should also include passing of the Patent Amendment Bill by Lok Sabha which could not be passed because of shortage of time as the winter session wound yesterday. Russian Prime Minister Primikov's visit to India has provided badly needed fillip to our ambitious defence plans to make this country a formidable power during next millenium. India is slated to get sophisticated defence equipment worth 16 billion dollars over the next few years. Although full details are not spelt out but obviously it includes Anti-Missile systems, technology transfers, joint ventures and very large defence cooperation. Earlier, India had only Friendship treaties of 1971 and 1993 but now there is definite mention of strategic partnership between the two countries. Not that India is going to pay in dollars for all the defence material thus suppplied but many urgently needed goods are sought to be included in the import list by Russia like tea. There is also the mention of joint ventures in oil exploration. One can have another view of such cooperation at a time when India has been denied technologies and equipment by America and instead exposed this country to large sanctions. Current agreement with Russia is a rebuff to America in that it confirms tacit recognition of our security concerns in the wake of Pokhran II blasts as far as Russia is concerned. Earlier France had moved away from American line and entered into many vital areas for constructive partnership including defence equipment. To that extent India's nuclear deterrent is now considered a necessity by at least two permanent members of security council. To that extent Vajpayee Government is right on course. Incidentally there is no mention of CTBT or NPT as far as Russia is concerned. It is apt to mention that earlier Russia and China entered into strategic partnership to checkmate American hegemony in South Asia. Thereafter it was constructive Cooperation with Japan. Now it is the turn of India to get that coveted status of strategic partnership. It is evident that Russia on its own is in no position to effectively counter American machinations. Such constructive or strategic partnerships with Asian giants like China, Japan and India assures it number one position of armament supplier which in turn would give badly needed fillip to sagging Russian economy. Primikov has already described India as a major power. Pakistan is nervous about Russian defence supplies and tie-ups with India. China has not outrightly rejected the concept of 'Strategic Triangle' mooted by Primikov as a good deal of spadework has to be done in that direction. |
||
|
||
Plebiscite a
dead issue in Kashmir Kashmir has been on and off the centre stage for the last 50 years. However after Pokharan II. Pakistan and some of the countries of the world, with vested interests in the subcontinent have renewed their efforts with vigour to project this area as one of the major danger points of the world. Even UN Secretary General Mr Kofi Anan has in his report released on the eve of 53rd UN General Assembly also listed Kashmir as one of the main issues world wide which are causing concern. Demands for a plebiscite are being voiced in various quarters including some of the so-called Human Rights groups in India. Is there a case for a plebiscite in Kashmir? Since human memory appears to be short, there is a need to go back in time and understand Kashmir problem in the right perspective, so that the question of plebiscite can be answered. Around 20 October 1947, tribals from Pakistan, actively aided and supported by Pakistan invaded the then state of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K). On 27 Oct. 1947, the Maharaja of Kashmir, at his own request, signed the agreement of unconditional accession to the Indian Union. Lord Mountbaten, the then Viceroy of India, in his reply dated 27 Oct 1947 to the Maharaja, while accepting his unconditional accession the Indian Union stated that it is his government's wish that ''as soon as law and order has been restored and her soul is cleared of invaders the question of accession should be settled by the people''. Subsequently on 01 Nov 1947, lord Mountbaten made an offer to MA Jinnah to resolve the Kashmir issue through peoples verdict. This offer was declined by Jinnah 01 Jan 1948 Government of India took the issue of invasion of J&K state by Pakistan, to the United Nations Security Council under article 35 of the UN Charter. Pakistan admitted before the UN Security Council the entry of Pakistani troops and irregulars including tribals and Pakistani Nationals into the State of J&K, which was described by the Council as a breach of international law. In Feb 1948, the Security Council established the UNCIP (United Nations Commission India and Pakistan). The Commission was to look into the question of settling the dispute. On 13 Aug 1948, UN passed the much-talked about resolution on Kashmir, which was immediately accepted by India. However, Pakistan only accepted this on 20 Dec. 1948 after raising a number of objections. Part-A-1 of this resolution states that, ''The Government of Pakistan agrees to withdraw troops from the State''. Part B-I of the same resolution states that, ''When the commission shall notify the Government of India that the tribesmen and Pakistani Nationals have withdrawn from the territory of J&K, thereby terminating the situation which was represented by the Government of India to the Security Council and further that Pakistani forces are being withdrawn from the state of J&K, the Government of India agrees to withdraw bulk of its forces in stages to be agreed upon with the commision.'' Ceasefire in Kashmir became effective from 01 Jan 1949. On Jan 05 1949, UN passed a second resolution on Kashmir. In para 2 of this resolution it stated that ''a plebiscite will be held when it is found by the commission that the ceasefire and the truce arrangements set forth in the UN resolution dated 13 Aug 48 have been carried out and arrangements for the plebiscite have been completed.'' It further clarified that when the commission is satisfied that the peaceful conditions have been restored in the state, the commission will determine with the plebiscite administrator and in consultation with the Government of India the final disposal of Indian and state Armed Forces, after giving due regards to the security and freedom of the plebiscite. Between 1951 and 1958, Security Council appointed five representatives, three of whom were US citizens, to go into the question of implementation of the UN resolution dated 13 Aug 48, thus leading to a plebiscite. None of those representatives could come to an agreement on the question of demilitarization i.e the very first prerequisite for plebiscite. They were all of the opinion that plebiscite would create more problems that it would solve. Their various reports were accepted by the Security Council. Since 1958 no representative has been appointed by the UN, to resolve this issue. Following points clearly emerge from the above. Firstly, Maharaja of J&K had unconditionally acceded to the Indian Union. Secondly, Pakistan was an aggressor in J&K State, a fact they admitted to the UN Security Council. Thirdly, holding of plebiscite in the entire state of J&K was conditional to, Pakistan first withdrawing all its troops including armed tribals and Nationals from the state. Before holding the plebiscite the UN representative in consultation with Government of India was to decide as to the quantum of Indian and state Armed forces to remain in J&K to ensure security and freedom of plebiscite. Fourthly, by 1958 all UN representatives were unanimous in their views that there could be no agreement on demilitarisation and a plebiscite would create more problems than it would solve. Fifthly, UN Security Council having accepted the UN representatives various reports and not having appointed any representative since 1958 implies their agreement to the recommendations made by these representatives. Thus it is clear that, as far as UN was concerned, plebiscite was a dead issue in 1958 itself. As regards the assurance of the Indian Government on this subject is concerned, in 1952 the J&K State Government decided with the approval of the Government of India to convene a constituent assembly, whose members were elected by adult franchise. This assembly was specifically asked to debate and give its reasoned conclusion regarding the accession of the state to the Indian Union. On this the Assembly stated that ''The State of J&K is and would be an integral part of the Union of India.'' This fact has been included in the J&K State Constitution that was adopted by the assembly on 20 Oct 1956 and came into effect from 26 Jan 1957. Thus it is clear that the assurance given by Lord Mountbaten on behalf of Government of India has also been fully met. If anything that now remains to be done is to hold a plebiscite in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir, after withdrawal of Pakistani troops and its armed tribals and Nationals from that part of Kashmir. Since 1958 India and Pakistan have fought two wars, in 1965 and 1971 and are now fighting a proxy war for over a decade. Though at the end of both the wars Indian Armed Forces had captured some chunk of Pakistan territory across the International Border as also liberated certain parts of Pakistan occupied Kashmir, yet for maintaining peace with its neighbour, India after 1965 war signed the Tashkent agreement with Pakistan and pulled back its forces from captured/liberated areas. Similarly after 1971 war when India was in a most commanding position where it not only helped Bangladesh to attain independence from Pakistan, but also held over 90,000 Pakistan Armed Forces personnel as prisoners of war, she signed the famous Simla Agreement with Pakistan on 02 July 1972. Para 4 of this agreement states, ''In order to establish the process of establishing durable peace, both the governments agree that ''Indian and Pakistani forces shall be withdrawn to their respective side of the International borders. In J&K the line of control resulting from the ceasefire of 17 Dec 1971, shall be respected by both sides without prejudice to be the recognised position of either side. Neither side shall seek to alter it unilaterally irrespective of mutual differences and legal interpretation. Both sides further undertake to refrain from the threat or use of force in violation of this line'. It is evident that at every stage India has gone out of its way to extend the hand of peace and friendship to Pakistan. India has also ensured greater autonomy for the state of J&K than for any state of the union. Inspite of repeated attempts by Pakistan to create law and order problems, off and on, in Kashmir, J&K has been mostly governed by an elected government, except for certain periods of Governor's rule. It is another matter that because of rampant corruption and mal-administration prevalent in the subcontinent, the full benefits of development have not reached the masses. Yet, it is a fact that conditions in Indian part of Kashmir are far better than in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir. On the other hand what is the record of Pakistan in Kashmir? There is hardly any autonomy to the local government, most Kashmir issues are controlled and directed from Islamabad. As regards the state of J&K, Pakistan since 1947 has repeatedly tried to annex it by force. However their evil designs have always been negated by Indian Armed Forces with the support of local population. They have now been waging a proxy war with mercenaries suppoted by them and trained and led by their ISI personnel. These mercenaries, in complete disregard for local population and their customs have indulged in rape and arson. They have damaged the very foundation of Kashmiriyat so dear to any Kashmiri. Today you would find hardly any children of well to do families of Kashmir studying in Kashmir. They have been forced to send their children away from the Valley. There is no wholehearted support for the mercenaries from the local population. How can Pakistan ever dream to assimilate this population in their midst? Enough blood has been shed on both sides of the border on Kashmir issue. It is futile on the part of Pakistan to continue harping on a dead UN resolution. They must now pick up threads from the currently in-force and binding Simla agreement and accept India's offer of not only resolving Kashmir but also other outstanding issues bilaterally with India. Should they fail to do this, they would openly become a pawn in the International power game to be exploited by western powers. How long are the people going to be fooled? For a bright future of the subcontinent let us forget the past and make a new beginning. (The author is a retired Lt Gen of the Army who has fought both 1965 and 71 wars in J&K Sector and was later actively involved in counter insurgency operation in J&K) |
||
|
|
Education Teaching for transfer is one of the goals of new education or modern education. Education is worthwhile if it has transfer value. In other words, all education should partake of the nature of transfer. The modern education stresses the needs of making education realistic, practical, and utilitarian. The school curricula should therefore be so constructed that their aims and content are closely associated with the day by day interests and needs of the learners. The subject-matter of study should point out towards a way of life, the fundamentals of which are mastered in such a way that the learner can apply them progressively in his various life experience. The learner should be helped to develop a point of view toward his present and future out-of-school living that will enable him to adapt to the demands of that living. A life-like situation in school is not enough, the pupil's attention must be guided and directed deliberately to the basic conflicts and problems of life. Teaching for transfer is most effective if it is the teacher's conscious goal and procedure to secure transfer. The teacher must always consider transfer as the ultimate goal of learning. Goals which are clearly defined and understood, facilitates learning and improves the amount of transfer. To accomplish transfer, the teacher must direct and guide the learner to see old problems in new situations and to stimulate him to be energetic toward, and responsible for such identification. The pupils must be made conscious of the general elements, aims, methods, content, or attitude involved. If the pupils are made conscious of the probability of transfer, transfer may take place in greater amount. The teacher is the motivating force in effecting transfer, not only from subject to subject, but from school life to life situations. The teacher must be conscious of this responsibility if transfer of learning is desired. Teaching for transfer is effective if the teacher know to the common elements or components between the subjects. The more in common are the elements between two situations, the more will any abilities of techniques acquired in one tend to transfer to the other. The learner must be made aware of the elements to be transferred and he must have opportunity to train them, if the teaching for transfer is to be effective. In order that transfer may take place, the elements involved should be identical, with the elements required in subsequent problems, and their identity must be recognised. Thorndike's study showed that one function improves the others insofar as the elements to be transferred can be made the objects of thought and generalization and the application should be amply illustrated. By skillful management of the learning process, the teacher can greatly facilitate the pupil's effort to identify the essential elements common to different situations. Teaching for transfer is effective if the teacher makes learning in school identical with what the pupils will encounter outside the school. Teaching effectiveness is improved by selecting learning experiences as much as possible like the life situations in which learning is to be used. The rules of transferability apply to making learning functional in school-life as well as to making it functional in our of school life. It is, therefore, the task of the teacher to utilize and activities, and the experiences common to t he pupils. If the amount of transfer depends upon the presence of common elements, it is obviously important to make the activities of the school as nearly as possible like those which actually occur in life. The near school-life is to real life, the more surely will the good reactions transfer to real life. The teacher must provide the pupils with opportunity to act in a life-like manner in life-like situations. In other words, attention must be directed constantly towards the similarity that exists between school and out-of-school experiences. Teaching for transfer is effective if the teacher sees to it that the subject matter to be taught will be in harmony with the principle of transfer. The chances that learned responses will be applied to new situations are increased by clear objectives. Learning activities, much like adult activities are anticipated, and there is conscious effort by the learner to generalize so that new opportunities for application will be recognized. The transfer of school learning may be considered in terms of specialized learning, on the one hand, and general learning on the other. In order to teach for transfer, the teacher should be guided by the fact that transfer of identical elements from the old to the new situations is desired. The teacher should organized and teach the subject-matter for transfer purposes if he is to achieve his goal. Teaching for transfer is effective if the teacher conserves learning through careful habit formation. Overlearning is an aid to transfer. Overlearning is more than rote repetition and memorization. It includes seeing what has been learned in several settings. Exercise or practice makes the idea clearer and free, and in turn the result makes exercise profitable. There is little transfer of good habits unless the teacher knows exactly what habits he wishes to develop and proceeds with care in developing them. The teacher should, therefore, provide situations where the pupils may apply the habits or skills they have formed. This principle of habit formation is well recognised in the development of skills. Drill review, and discussion of pertinent problems are distinct aids to obtaining more effective transfer. |
|
| home | state | national | business | editorial | advertisement | sports |
