Daily Excelsior... Editorial

EDITORIAL

Finance ministers neglect unorganised sector

By Sisir Basu

Every year the Union finance minister has the enviable task of delivering a budget that will promise prosperity for each and every member of the 100-crore strong Indian population. Is it feasible for the finance minister to accomplish the job? One fears that his greatest ..........more

Rang De Basanti
rekindled nationalism

By Vijay Bhat

After a long time a movie like "Rang De Basanti" came on the silver screen which tried to make an effort in awakening the young generation of modern India. This movie tried to kindle the latent fire of nationalism in the hearts of Indian youth. This movie taught a lesson of nationalism in different way unlike the traditional ways of stories of heroes of war of independence .. .......more

US war on Iran?

By Sreedhar

Before analysing the prospects Iran-US confrontation on Tehran's quest for nuclear weapons, three factors need to be taken into consideration. First after the US led operation Desert Storm in 1991 and 'Operation Iraq Freedom in 2003, it became clear to every one in the Persian Gulf region that the US can go to any length to achieve its objectives. Iran, having already been described as part of the axis of evil by the US, wanted to protect itself against any repetition of Iraq on it, by the US. . ........more

EDITORIAL

Clear message

United States President George W. Bush's visit to the sub-continent has sent a few clear messages. These need to be taken note of in particular by those who are propounding a ridiculous "Bush, Mush push" theory for grabbing their pound of flesh in "finishing the unfinished agenda of 1947" in Jammu and Kashmir. First, the American President has made it abundantly clear that his country will not mediate on the issue. Secondly, and he has repeated this in Islamabad as well that it is really up to the leaders of India and Pakistan to "step up and lead" as the issues like Kashmir could only be solved through confidence-building measures (CBMs). Thirdly, he has left no doubt that the US would always prefer a democratic order to despotic and military regimes. One firm indication of this is the US's landmark nuclear deal with India clinched during his visit. Another is that the Bush administration has time and again reminded Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf of his frequent pledges to restore democracy in his country. For his part Gen Musharraf has fixed 2007 as the final deadline for this purpose. Till then all and one including two former Pakistan Prime Ministers Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif will have to keep their fingers crossed. So far as we in this State are concerned we can't miss that Mr Bush has thrown back the ball tossed to him by Pakistan into the court of two neighbours. He has made it known that New Delhi and Islamabad will have to sort out their bilateral irritants and the US will be happy if they do so. This is in tune with his stated position especially after 9/11, 2001. It is possible --- actually it is more than plausible --- that his interest for peace in our part of the globe may have been motivated by his own priority of "smoking out" Osama bin Laden and his notorious Al-Qaeda network entrenched in the vicinity around Pakistan and Afghanistan.. He can't lose sight of the possibility that an armed confrontation between India and Pakistan can derail his mission. However, he is simultaneously looking beyond this. After his personal experience he is better informed about the threat of terrorism India has been facing. One can notice that anti-India voices raised by so-called "Kashmiri freedom fighters" from the American soil have been by and large silent for the last nearly five years. He has also acknowledged India as an emerging superpower. Nothing explains it more than the nuclear agreement.

The US's haughty intervention in Iraq notwithstanding its increasing emphasis is on dialogue for peaceful resolution of contentious matters. It has also understood that terrorists don't want to go by the language of reason. Evidently that is why Mr Bush has lauded the CBMs in this region during his inter-action in Pakistan. This more than anything else should convince some of our State "leaders" to look inward instead of up to alien powers. They need to learn that the world is growing intolerant of patrons and practitioners of gun culture day by day. In international diplomacy the space is shrinking for those who stake claim to freedom but in reality encourage intrigues and distrust between nations. There is enhanced awareness about the filthy role of money in this business. It is not for nothing that a section of security experts of the neighbouring country has also let it be known that they were misled by their contacts on this side of the Line of Control into attacking India in the past. They were made to believe that the entire State would rise in their support. In the present scenario only those will matter who can demonstrate the courage of conviction and prove their strength in a non-violent manner. At the same time one can notice that the countries are respecting each other's sovereignty. New Delhi has been quick to deny the charge of meddling in Balochistan. It has done even better by ruling out a change in boundaries of the country by redrawing them. Such firmness is only to be expected from a country that has suffered in the past for having placed trust in others. Pakistan has not only illegally and forcibly occupied a part of the State but also ceded 5180 kilometres of this territory to China under the Sino-Pakistan Boundary Agreement. India had on March 2, 1963 formally declared this contract as "illegal" and, hence "invalid and unacceptable". On the other hand, China too had torn the Panchsheel accord into shreds in 1962 and unlawfully occupied about 38000 square kilometres of this State. Of late, however, India and China have been acting in accordance with "commitment to seek a fair, reasonable and mutually acceptable solution of the boundary issue through peaceful negotiations in a bilateral framework". Modalities are being worked out within the contours of an "Agreement on Political Parameters and Guiding Principles for Settlement of India-China Boundary Question".

With this background in view there can't be two opinions that there is universal urge for normalcy and tranquility. There is keen desire to achieve this without compromising any country's unity. The Bush visit has served to underline this truth. Those individuals and nations which don't join this well-intentioned race would fall by the wayside.

Challenge ahead

It is not without any reason that President A.P.J. Abdul Kalam often drives home the necessity of ameliorating the lot of people living below poverty line (BPL). His overview of India's Mission 2020 is to make the country a developed nation. This envisages that 540 million population below the age of 25 will be a big resource for the focus to increase the Gross Domestic Product to at least 10 per cent per annum. This will be utilised to raise the 260 million BPL people to a good life. The thrust areas for this purpose would be agriculture and food processing, education and health care, information and communication technology, infrastructure development and self-reliance in critical technologies. It will be a pity were our State to lag behind in such forward movement. According to the available Planning Commission estimates the BPL population in the State is 3.46 lakhs, an overwhelming 2.97 lakhs of them in rural areas. They may appear to be a small number considering the huge total referred to by the President. However, we should not overlook the fact that the size and population of our State is also comparatively less. Moreover, we are not even counted among industrially developed areas. Private enterprise is distinctly lacking. We need to get our act together to meet the challenge ahead.

Finance ministers neglect unorganised sector

By Sisir Basu

The task confronting the minister is colossal to say the least. A quick review of the statistics exposes the absurdity. Around 1.9 crore of the Indian population work for the government, while another 0.8 crore are employed in the organised private sector. The total of 2.7 crore constitutes what is commonly referred to as the organised labour force, the lucky few whose rights to decent living are protected by law. These are the ones who bicker about caps on government guaranteed savings schemes and interest earnings there from. They are also the ones who insist on raising the ceiling on tax-exempted incomes to Rs. 2 lakh.

Like this or not, it is only a handful of persons in the country who can even dream of earning incomes so high. The number of people working in the unorganised sector is estimated to be around 32 crore. Not all of them are finance minister's worry, since a section should be successful professionals.

But the reigning majority of the unorganised class enjoys no benefit guaranteed for the country's work force; leave alone contribute to small savings schemes. We come across them every day in the wayside tea stalls: underage, underpaid, underfed, overworked, impoverished, with bleak futures stretching as far out into the horizon as one's senses can travel.

Miserable or no, however, they are employed, and, taking into account the organised labour class, aggregate employment in the country would be in the vicinity of 35 crore. Of the remaining population of 65 crore, around 30 crore are unemployed a 7 crore above the age of 65. Which leaves a balance of 28 crore, who are either lucky children who do not have to seek a means of livelihood or those unemployable for some reason or the other.

Clearly, the hallowed common man deprived of small savings opportunities is not the poor man finance minister has to provide for. The poverty that exists in this society is truly bottomless. A person is defined to be poor in India if he earns an income below Rs. 350-400 per month approximately, that is, less than Rs. 13 a day. Statistics says that there are at least 30 crore of them in this country. Interestingly enough, the World Bank uses a much higher benchmark to identify the poor, Rs. 1,410 per month. If we were to adopt the World Bank definition, the poor in India would vastly exceed 30 crore.

Finance minister then has to satisfy this diverse multitude of human beings, help the better-off rise higher at the same time that he protects the economically condemned from further degradation. And he needs to do this keeping one more stark reality in mind, that India adds 2.7 crore of new people to its population each year. What is the direction in which economic policy should move to impart an element of self-respect to the citizens? Should we deliberate on tax saving schemes and low interest rates? Or should we think about offering purchasing power to the poor? The answer seems all too clear.

Our planning era earned us self-sufficiency in one respect at least, food production. The flip side of the coin though is that around 60 per cent of our labour force is engaged, with or without work, in the agricultural sector.

The liberalised era of the 1990s saw magnificent growth of the services sector, a sector that can mostly absorb the highly skilled, and a scarce commodity in India relative to the size of its population. The road sign for engaging the unemployed and poor gainfully points therefore towards manufacture, the only sector that has the potential to rescue large numbers of unskilled or semi-skilled workers from languishing in rural areas or amongst unorganised masses. It is exactly here that the five-year plans let us down. Manufacture failed to flourish and the legacy of sick industries hangs like an albatross around the neck of the present generation policy maker.

Economic policy, and hence the budget, have to respond to the clarion call for industrial progress, but how is this to be achieved? Notwithstanding Marxist rhetoric, efficiency is the prime casualty in publicly-operated organisations, which, by nature, are apathetic to profit opportunities. It is clear that ongoing industrial privatisation moves must be pushed further, even if they call for inflows of foreign direct investment. Removal of poverty demands job creation, even at the cost of profit repatriation to investing countries. The alternative to this scenario is continued misery caused by a lack of purchasing power. No amount of slogan shouting on an empty stomach can compensate for square meals, education for children and a roof above the head.

Industry, though, cannot flourish in an infrastructure-less vacuum. Roads, power supply, airports, seaports, hospitals and a healthy legal system for settlement of industrial and other disputes are a sine qua non for inducing the private sector to come forward with investments. The public sector though will need financial resources for infrastructure to grow in tandem with private enterprise. What is the state of such finances?

The government has conceded that the current trend in collection of direct taxes suggests a shortfall vis-…-vis the budget estimates for 2005-06, which had been pegged at Rs. 1,80,000 crore. The direct tax collections up to January 31 stood at Rs. 1, 09,831 crore. The precarious state of the government's finances is further revealed by the fact that the department of revenue has so far refunded VAT claims only for April and May of last year, as per responses from 100 per cent export oriented units surveyed by the FICCI.

Yet the economy must grow and the government has pledged to keep the ball rolling through infrastructure development. Clearly it lacks the funds, which explains why it settles for compromises such as the rural employment scheme. The project is at best a glorification of the concept of a dole. It will be easier for the finance minister to fund short-term employment than to create large-scale infrastructure and create mass education opportunities that alone can win for the poor the freedom they need to choose their own means of livelihood.

A paradox arises from the fact that the savings rate of the economy has now risen to a respectable 29 per cent. Households contribute the lion's share to this figure. A decision to tap these, however, is fraught with difficulties. Infrastructure projects are not likely to generate guaranteed revenues to cover interest payments on public loans, unless of course one believes that in the long run infrastructure-supported growth of the industrial sector will generate tax revenues large enough to repay loans with interest.

Since the basic structure of our economy has in-built shortcomings, budget dole for the poor does not hold a long-term solution to remove poverty and deprivation. INAV

Rang De Basanti rekindled nationalism

By Vijay Bhat

Film industry in India can play a leading role in spreading the feeling of nationalism in the young generation of modern India. It is already well known to everybody that film industry had a deep impact on Indian society especially in younger generations. Young generation tries to live the characters of movies in real life, which is the reason that nowadays Romeo and Juliet are found everywhere. If the movies like "Rang De Basanti" are made on large scale then it is definite that we would have large numbers of Mangal Panday, Bhagat Singh, Rani Lakshmi Bhai, Azad in India who can openly and proudly sing the song "Sar Phiray javan hum hai maut se na daray, aanch aaye desh par na gawara hum karay, mulak par qurban ho yeh aazroo is dil maein hai."

It is said that Modern Indian youth is slowly getting deflected from the way of nationalism. They are self-centered. Their personal interests are greater than interests of nation. They are not concerned with the political cultural or historical aspects of the nation. Recently NDTV conducted a survey on the eve of Republic Day "Is Republic Day outdated and Irreverent" shameful was the result 39% voted for "Yes". Some even dared to write that celebrating Independence or Republic Day is only wastage of both time and money.

Actually it is not the fault of modern generation that they are indifferent towards nationalism, but the fault lies in the traditional ways of thinking of our parents. Right from the beginning they inspire us to become a doctor, engineer or a scientist etc., but they never told us to become Indians. We were just told that money is everything in life. We are successful only if we have a long car, a big house, a big bank balance and high social status in society. It was right here seed of corruption was sown in our minds. We do everything to get these possessions at any cost by fair or unfair means hardly caring for anyone not even nation.

If we really want the aim of the "Rang De Basanti" achieved then the seeds of nationalism be sown and watered in nursery which were to spring up and from the future generations. The tactical aim to achieve nationalism should be to win the heart of a child. It should be taught to each and every child that "Do not forget you Indian child that you are an Indian first and Indian last and you are the future of India and remember you little girl one day you must have to be a mother of an Indian and you have to be an Indian mother and your responsibilities are greater."

During the academic sessions the History Subject is considered as most dull and boring. The teaching of this subject is middle schools is quite unsatisfactory. It is surprising and disgusting to know that very few people knew the first Martyr and hero of First war of Indian Independence Mangal Panday until the movie "Mangal Panday. The Rising came on the silver screen. Very few people realize that real purpose of teaching history, it is not only remembering few dates and facts for passing the exams, but history is a light from past enlighting the future history makes us realize the mistakes made by us in past so to avoid them in future. History can rightly be called as a "Guiding Force" which guides our future. Unfortunatley our traditional way of thinking this most important subject is considered as useless. We say what is the use of studying pass, what it has to do with future. Wherever the political, cultural or historical greatness of a country is concerned, it should be taught in most subjective ways that one can imagine. Only then we have a new generation of modern India for whom India would be first and India will be last. They will proudly say anywhere. "Yes I am an Indian", and only then Swami Vivekananda's saying that "My faith is in the younger generation, the modern generation, out of them will come my workers, they will work out the whole problems like loins, and they would be muscles of iron and nerves of steel," will come true.

US war on Iran?

By Sreedhar

Since its nuclear programme started in 1967, Iran is in the process of acquiring the needed infrastructure and technological manpower in nuclear weapon manufacturing capability. Iran's nuclear facilities at Busher, Natanz, Isfahan, Arak and Lashkar Albad amply demonstrate this aspect. In the post Islamic Revolution Iran, the emphasis on higher levels of physics education gives further credence to this aspect.

Second, from the International Energy Agency's records, Iran appears to have opted the clandestine route for acquiring nuclear weapons capability, the same adopted by Pakistan. In the post 9/11 when Pakistan was cornered by the US, Islamabd appears to have not only confessed its involvement in Iran's nuclear programme but also provided the details of how drug mafia active in the Golden Crescent provided the necessary networking facilities for movement of nuclear related goods. There were also unconfirmed reports in the media of how North Korea and China transferred nuclear technology via-Pakistan.

All this examined together, it became clear to the Great Powers that Iran is preparing itself to acquire nuclear weapons as deterrence against any external aggression.

Lastly, Iranian association with radical Islamic groups, which was a low key affair in 2003, resurfaced in a big way in 2004 and 2005, especially after developments in Iraq. It became a bone contention for the Great Powers that if as and when Iran acquires nuclear weapons, it will not hesitate to share them with Islamic radicals. Such a development could result in serious complications in the US War on terrorism.

The developments of past few weeks on Iran's nuclear weapons ambitions including the US Secretary of Defence's reported observation that 'military action cannot be ruled out on Iran' indicate that coercive diplomacy is being given a fair chance to force Iran to retrace its steps on its nuclear programme. The not too subtle Iranian response (Israel has no right to exist"' "we will teach a lesson to any aggressor") indicate that things are moving in the direction of a possibility of another war in Persian Gulf.

The first question that arises in this emerging new situation is how far Iran can with stand another long drawn out war and that too with the US. The available evidence suggest in the event of our break of hostilities, with the exception of Syria, other Islamic countries are highly unlikely to join in any Iranian confrontation with the US. The Iranians with their Shiaite credentials may stir some commotion among shiaite groups in other Islamic countries. Even on this count eight year long Iraq - Iran war (1980-88) had demonstrated that Shiaites outside Iran are not enthusiastic in the revolutionary causes expoused by Tehran. In addition, the absence of a charismatic leader like late Ayatollah Khomeini made Iran a less attractive in terms arousing the Shiaites outside Iran.

Iran is also yet to recover from the trauma of Iraq-Iran war. Its post war reconstruction programme is moving at a snails pace; and all the economic indicators like unemployment are not moving in any direction.

In these circumstances, US war on Iran could be in two directions :-

* Launch an air strike on Iran's nuclear installations either from its military bases in Pakistan or in Afghanistan. The US military base facilities in Oman, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia can also come handy in making a well coordinated air attacks.

* Simultaneously launch a psychological warfare for a change of regime in Tehran. There are enough number of overseas Iranians who are against Tehran's policies; and they will be too glad to step in to fill the power vacuum created by any sudden change of regime in Tehran. Already the US announced that it has provided more than US $ 80 million to mobilizing dissent groups of Iran across the globe.

Since the US attacks are going to be precision guided targets and not a ground war, like in Iraq, the war in the immediate response terms would be localized.

The Iranian response for such an attack could be to cope with the damage and ensure a retaliation, the Iranian retaliation could be:

* To attack western targets in and around Iran. The Tehran based group, Esteshadion, (Matyrdom of Seekers) spokesman, Mohammad Ali Samadi, announced on February 19, 2000 that with "more than 1,000 trained martyrelam seekers, we are ready to attack American and British sensitive points if they attack Iran's nuclear facilities." He went on to add "if they strike, we have a lot of volunteers. Their sensitive sites are quiet close to Iranian borders." He also reviewed suicide bombing as a weapon, praising it as the most effective Palestemiani tacke in their confrontation with Israel.

* If the response from the fellow Islamic states to the US attacks on Iran are lukewarm, Tehran may try repeat the Iraqi strategy of choking the Straits of Horrmuz, through which almost 50 percent global oil trade moves. Here too Iranian capacity to inflict selective damage of oil tankers is possible than blocking the entire Straits of Hormuz.

* Another option Iran may explore is seeking the help of Al Qaida for retaliation against the US targets. If we go by the experiences based on war in Iraq, such an Iranian action may trigger short term upsurge in crude oil prices in market, than disrupting oil supplies to any country.

Currently all this indicate that Iranian capacity to retaliate against the US, in the event of later's aggression on its nuclear facilities is limited by its capacity, Tehran may inflict some damage on the US interests. But the damage the US could inflict would retard Iranian economic growth rate by atleast two decades. Even after 17 years of Iraq imposed war on Iran, Tehran is yet to reach the 1978 levels of living in the country. If another war is imposed on Iran, things can go wrong seriously and may even threaten the regime. Which Iranian would like to see his country being turned into Iraq?

The saner elements in Iran, led by former President Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, are advocating moderation in the entire nuclear issue. How far they will succeed only time will tell. The Iranians will climb down if they are assured that there will not be another Iraq in Iran by the US.-CNF