Peace: Chicks coming home to roost!

By Dr. R. L. Bhat

"Those who decide in haste must repent at leisure."

Some things which are clear must never be willfully confused, must never be got blurred, whatever the motive. Peace with Pakistan verily is such an issue. It must be - must have been - tackled with utmost caution and not in haste; never with half-cogitated premises. For here seemingly good decisions which may either be out of tune with ground realities or contrary to them are liable to be taken. Without full appreciation they would end up serving no useful purpose. Worse, they may become actually counter productive and derail whatever progress might have ever been attained. For progress we must. There is no alternative to peace and brotherhood. But how we proceed and at what cost are questions that must not be brushed aside in the rush of the moment. Thus nobody seems to have visualized that the first thing the love-stricken brothers/sisters from across the border would do would be to claim property and rights to it. Shouldn't that have received serious thought and a well thought out policy been arrived at?

Indeed, there are many other things which have not yet come to fore but have a sinister potential. Less than a month ago this state was agog with the brouhaha of the Muzaffarabad bus. It was to join hearts.

Those hearts are still a-joining, but which hearts and with what love would probably be a question this state would have long to ponder over - at leisure, probably with a renewed helplessness! Whatever it may do, or might have done, to peace process, the Muzaffarabad bus, especially the beloved brethren alighting there from, threaten to polarize this state along the inevitable fault lines that were papered over either in ignorance or naïve goodwill. As history, particularly of this state, has shown time and again, the flimsy paper is wrenched sooner than later and you are back to the square one. Well, not exactly back to the square one. It is a fouler hole than ever envisaged. There is a renewed risk, a renewed threat and all has not been seen yet!

After the fanfare at Srinagar the bus is now proposed to leave from a place much nearer the border so that the stress on securing the whole of 'path of peace' is lessened somewhat. Yet nobody may dare to ask what peace is it that has to be secured on every inch of its passage, in every peaceable person that cometh in 'love', to be carried on and on under heavy security and military presence which every passerby would discern and decry? "The terrorism has come down, the terrorists have become lean, they are crying for arms and ammunition and money, and peace is advancing apace"…are all goodly thoughts that need corroboration from sources other than those who are pushing this particular line and solution. For they have a motive to overlook patent dangers, to un-see open reverses, even to discount rising incursions. In fact, the number of killings, infiltrations attempts, and targeting of high security targets has been the highest since peace rode out and in. they may be acts of 'cowardice' and 'frustration' of the 'driven-to-wall' terrorists, but hasn't one been hearing those words at least for the last ten years! The frustrated gather strength, the cowards march in and the driven-to-wall ones strike and mow down close-kin of the Chief Executive of this state!

Now, who would have thought that the very people who mooted the hearty proposals of 'confederations' and what-not at the height of terrorism of nineties would be rushing to Supreme Court seeking injunctions against the fruits of their own desire and design! Wouldn't a little prior thinking have helped a lot here? Now attitudes which may have been softened are getting hardened. A new quest of deprivations is beginning. The people are in turmoil. The leaders are in quandary and the state, instead of clearing the air, is confusing it with conflicting stances and interpretations. The State Home Minister is on record having called the Resettlement Bill a 'law enacted by the state'. A Government department is already accepting claims and processing them. With eight claims from two buses, one could expect a host of claims pouring in and much rush in the buses. The passengers have not given much evidence of appreciating the advance and progress as expected. If interviews of some eminent passengers published in the Srinagar weekly, Chattan are any indication, they are far from impressed. But then, did many people there, where they come from, object to devastation of Afghanistan at the hands of Taliban?

Peace is a good thing, but to presume that Pakistan was created and carved out to have a better relation with the rest of the people of India, is neither peaceable nor practical. Nor true. Brotherhood needs more than a certain bridge being painted white, or a bus being decorated like an old-time ddooli to a Mogul court. Brotherhood is a noble feeling but it must be real to become noble. Else it becomes a one up-man-ship or down-man-ship under international and other pressures. Probably, the bus from Muzaffarabad has thrown up tremors a little too early in the day. But that the fracas has come after the first ferry is something, which needs be pondered over more deeply.

Here, it would certainly help to remember that Musharraf is only one of the Pak phenomenons, all of which may not be as compelled into peace. Thus Custodian Deptt is only a part of the large range of properties, lands, businesses etc. that were lost or left behind in 1947. All properties and compensations would have to be talked about and reckoned in a composite way, only after the possessions, across both sides of LoC, have been taken into consideration, accounted for and restored. It must not decide nor decree on its sweet will or compliance to a particular interest.

The straits of this state are complex. Resolution would have to be full not casual. Nor must every urge be landed onto the peace wagon. Peace is a fine thing, but needs finer thought.

It also needs a more comprehensive homework. Otherwise its chicks would always keep coming home to roost as they are doing right now.

Press and privacy

By Aditi Singh

Our friends in the fourth estate are becoming every bit as raucous, devious and manipulative as their deviant brethren in the developed world. Incorrect facts do not shame them nor do sensational headlines. In fact, most film magazines thrive on them. Sleaze sells in the mad scramble to outsell rivals on the news-stands or TRP ratings in the case of electronic media.

But even my sensitivities, hardened now by so much exposure to the sexual goings-on of page three types, was shocked out of my skin to see the ubiquitous spy camera bring us live footage of bedroom antics of regional netas on prime time of a TV Channel.

Why am I so surprised? After Tehelka, this was a natural extension of the media's expose style mania for cheap publicity.

Sensational journalism prevails all over the world. The paparazzi felt it is their birthright to invade the private lives of public figures. But there is a word called "Humane' in the English language, and I think journalists and information mongers need to look it up and consider it seriously. I am not a prude and overly concerned about the nocturnal habits of public figures, but there is such a thing as responsible journalism.

What was this so-called expose of the boudoir by Channel meant to achieve? Being timed just before the assembly elections in Bihar, Jharkhand and Haryana, one suspects it was only to hurt the electoral prospects of the candidates in question. The Clinton experience is enlightening. In the post-Watergate era. American media extended investigative journalism to the bedroom, and scoop after scoop followed. But it didn't prevent Clinton from winning a second nomination even as the Jenifer Flowers and Paula Jones scandals dogged him throughout his campaign.

This clearly suggests that though the press may still be obsessed with the sex lives of the famous, electors don't think it matters greatly. If Clinton would rather sleep with somebody other than his wife, well, then this is Hillary's problem, not the electorate's.

While newspapers went into every bit of titillating detail, what they didn't tell you was that these exposes almost tore apart a family, who by all accounts were devastated by the public parading of their naked shame courtesy an insensitive media. The ethical question is: What public interest was being served by this so-called expose of the TV Chanel? To a certain extent you can stretch the boundaries of acceptable behaviour and accept the Tehelka sting operation as it exposed the rot in our system.

Justice PB Sawant, who headed the Press Council of India, the organisation that hears complaints against media and has the power of censure, contended that the Website's exposure was not only ethical but was, in fact, fundamental to the existence of free press in the country. If any individual or someone holding public office was indulging in actions having a bearing on public interest, then he can be exposed in any manner.

However, to invade the privacy of a person's bedroom is certainly going beyond the norms of decent behaviour and stretching journalistic licence too far. In the Tehelka scam, too, there were whispers of journalistic impropriety. The Venkataswami Commission probing the scam took strong exception to the release of the unedited Tehelka video clippings on the use of prostitutes for the portal's sting operation. And the government had to urge an in-camera hearing of the case following the scurrilous excerpts of the video tapes. Clearly, TV Channel had decided to borrow ideas from Tehelka's modus operandi.

Along with using technology to bring transparency and probity in public life, there is also the question of a sense of responsibility. The much touted freedom of the Press is openly misused and made an instrument of blackmail. In the case of the Shahid-Kareena kiss photograph in Midday, it was certainly an invasion of privacy. They were enjoying a private moment and not expecting it to be splashed all over page 1 the next morning. However, journalists generally agree that if the two had kissed in their bedroom, it would have been an invasion of privacy. Look at what the television channels did during the Gudiya episode. Innocent people were held hostage for days by a vicious media that clawed into their vitals for every private detail.

It is time the media asked itself some hard questions. Stars and politicians may be public figures, but they are also human beings, entitled to their privacy. What goes on behind the closed doors in the privacy of a home is out of bounds. At least that was the unspoken assumption till sometime back. Spare a thought for the innocent family members who are affected by this shameful and unwarranted display on national TV. Before the Tejpals and Rajat Sharmas came along, the rule used to be that "all public figures have a right to privacy except, movie stars". Maybe there are still some right-thinking editors who have the moral backbone to set the tone right. It is time to remember that if the media doesn't own up its responsibility freedom will gradually wither away. INAV