Pakistan flip flop policy

By Joginder Singh

Pakistan for the first time has half confessed about the role of its citizens and the terrorist groups operating from Pakistan, under world pressure particularly from India and the USA. They have agreed to treat the dossier sent as evidence, as against their earlier stand, of it being only ‘ information’.Previously it used to be only a one sided statements emanating from India, about the Pakistan’s ISI being the guardian angle of criminals, felons and outrageous offenders. Let us not jump to conclusion that dossier proof, which India has furnished, to Pakistan would in any way deter the super Pakistani arbiter, that is Army and ISI, from their long term objective of ‘ bleeding India, with thousand cuts and proxy war’. So called ‘ Pakistan democracy,’ not withstanding, the army is the main player, both behind and in the open.

Infact, the Civilian Government exists on the pleasure of the Pakistani Generals, who must be feeling uncomfortable, on what Talibans have called the 2nd ‘Surrender to India’, after 1971 surrender. Talibans, means "students of the Islamic knowledge movement", joined Pakistani and Arabs as mujahideens (holy warriors) , for fighting the Soviets and ruled Afghanistan from 1996 to 2001. In view of the difficult terrain of Afghanistan and NWFP of Pakistan, it is very difficult to contain e Al Qaeda and Taliban there, especially when the suit Pakistan’s both short term and long term objectives.

The only people who have been successful against the Afghans elements, were Sikhs, under the Generalship of Hari Singh Nalwa during the regime of Maharaja Ranjit Singh of Punjab.

Al Qaeda has already threatened India that they would carry out more Mumbai style attacks against India if India attacks Pakistan. In fact, Al Qaeda and Taliban are just as far away from the Indo-Pak border as Lucknow is from Delhi. Taliban terrorists unleashed a wave of terror in Kabul, storming, government buildings and leaving 20 people dead, in February, 2009. All had assault rifles and wore suicide bomb vests. Their aim was, to shoot dead, as many people as possible before blowing themselves up.Even the American, who gave full support in money and weapons, considered the Talibans, as freedom fighters when they were fighting against the Communists Soviets. When the Soviet Union collapsed and its forces withdrew from Afghanistan, the Talibans no longer remained strategically important to the Americans.

The War on behalf of the Americans, left behind battle-tested men and plenty of latest weapons. They had no more jihad or holy war to fight. So many of them, went to work for Pakistan, especially on Kashmir front. The clout of so called Talibans can be seen from the fact that Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani signed a peace deal on May 21, 2008 with Talibans in Pakistan’s North western valley, calling for, among other things, the withdrawal of Pakistani troops from the tourist region of Swat and the imposition, of Sharia or Islamic law there.In return the terrorists promised to close camps, hand over foreign fighters and halt suicide attacks on government posts and security forces.

A regrettable fact is "Talibanisation" is creeping in one form or the other on almost on all Muslim states from Morocco to Far East and Central Asia. Another common aspect is, Anti American and Anti Westernism, in almost all the countries, where fundamentalists have an edge. It is more so in democracies, like India where different parties depend upon the vote banks of minorities. India cannot help, being concerned, on our neighbours, becoming a heaven and sanctuary for fundamentalists and terrorists. If these continue to thrive, in Pakistan and Bangladesh, it is bound to affect us. As it is Talibans in Pakistan have banned music and video in buses in Northwestern Areas bordering Afgnanistan. Transporters in the NWFP have ordered the bus drivers to remove all audio and visual equipment from their vehicles.It had its multiplier effect in India, as can be seen the Muslims groups, in Srinagar, banned beauty parlours and ordered the closures of video parlours as unislamic.

A Muslim Board, in UP has banned the coeducation in the Madrassas. When all is said and done, the fact remains, that our own battles against terrorism and terrorists have to be fought and won by us and not by CIA or USA or other Western Nations. It may be recalled that neither USA nor other Western Nations were interested in the terrorism in India, till they themselves, felt the pinch, after 9/11 in USA and later on London and Glasgow Bombings.

All countries are basically concerned with their own problems. They become interested in others only, when it starts pinching them.Let us not raise our expectations too high from the change in regime, in USA or in other countries. Even USA will pressurise Pakistan, or other countries to the extent, they feel, should be done, without reaching the breaking point or even coming anywhere near the confrontation. They would not push Pakistan to the wall, for the sake of India.No worthwhile terrorist organisation in Pakistan can survive or even exist overtly or covertly , without that government, turning a Nelson’s eyes, to what is going on there.

By whatever name you call them, either Al Queda or Laskhar or Mujahdeen, their objective is, to decimate India, whom they call , as their common enemy.It fits, with in Pakistan’s policy so far. All these organisations, have a common handler, that is the ISI, which provides them the use of their hide-outs, sanctuaries and training centres. There is no fixed or sure method of dealing with and crushing terrorism, except to use offence as the best form of defence, especially at our entry points.

But one thing is certain, that a strike of the magnitude, which happened in Bombay on 26/11 and Parliament attack on 13/12/ or attack on Banagalore, Surat, Ahmedabad or Hyderabad, or Jaipur, could not have been done, without planning, reconnaissance and knowledge of get aways.

How Pakistan deals, with its interenal problems, of first rearing up terrorists, and now wanting to crush them, when they want to over throw the Government, it is their outlook. It cannot be, that the Government of Pakistan is helpless. You cannot run with the hunted and then also help the hounds or hunters. If Talibans want to over run the Government and take over, it is for the regime there, to decide, as to how it should tackle the problem.

Once bitten twice shy. But in case of our country, we have been bitten more often, than most people recall. India cannot afford, to take the assurances given, to take action, against those responsible for Mumbai attack, on their face value. Such assurances and politically correct statements, have been galore in the past, only to be broken by declarations, that Pakistan would always stand by the terrorists, whom it calls freedom fighters.

One small point, while talking about the Bombay Incidents, we should not forget that the basic element of terrorism is surprise, and let us not drop our guard in view of the right noises and statements made by Pakistan. We must not be lulled, when the terrorists might be preparing for an other spectacular strike somewhere in the country.Such elements are best eliminated at the entry point in India, apart from intelligence agencies, pulling up their socks, as they have been found wanting so far. Rats and cockroaches live by competition under the laws of supply and demand. The same is true of terrorists and terrorism. Unless we can reduce or eliminate their supply, we will be in danger of being overwhelmed by them, in our misplaced sense of mercy, and justice. Mercy to him, that shows it, should be our first rule and law. Best is to hand over such folks to God, for mercy and ourselves show none. (PTI)

Problem of child labour

By Ram Rattan Sharma

The problem of Child labour over the years has assumed international dimension. This phenomenon is prevalent through out India cutting across different sectors of the economy. According to an estimate child labourers in India number from 44 to 100 million with a bulk of proportion spread over the rural India. The magnitude of child labour in India has defined all attempts at reaching a solution. There are various factors responsible for the constant rise of child labourers in India such as poverty, economic backwardness, population growth, dispossession of the poor from their lands, defective educational system, insecurity familial problems, unemployment problems etc. These problems are deep rooted in Indian society.

Child labour assumes in human form when it degenerates and takes the form of slavery, prostitution, debt, bonded and employment in hazardous enterprises. According to an estimate conducted by International labour organisation, one third of 250 millions child labourers do work in hazardous conditions. A large chunk of these poverty ridden children reside in South Asian Countries. In India such children are groaning under slavery or forced labour systems. The system of debt bondage plays havoc with the lives of children, where they work to meet the obligations of their family. Children spend much of their time in such environments as they grow up so much that they hardly understand the difference between help rendered to their parents and child labour. Bulk of child labourers hail from poor socio-eco background, unable to provide two square meals a day to many of their children, parents under forced circumstances beyond their control, send their children to work as labourers with the hope of alleviating poverty and help the family to ease out a living.

The phenomenon of child labour and all the problems associated with it, are prevalent in developing countries. In India the conditions in which children are given to work, cripples, the child physically, mentally and emotionally. Some times children are made to work in such environment where they come in contact with harmful substances such as firework, industries, metals, lock chemicals and balloons or in glass industry or power loom industries where cotton dust cause irreparable damage to the lungs. India is welded to a democratic system of governance. Here labour laws are made banning children under fourteen years of age from working in any concern, children are prohibited from working at night. Inspite of laws made, children continue to work at night, sometimes young children between age of seven and eight are allowed to work under unsuitable conditions. Thus labour laws are blatantly violated without any fear of punishments by all and sundry.

Indian society is stratified between rich and poor, the "haves and have nots". Attempt should be made from all classes of people to correct the loopholes and remove the inherent wickedness of the society which perpetuates this social malady in the form of child labour.

Steps need to be taken are, open special schools for children coming from socio-economically poor sections of the society, measures may be taken to bring in socio-economic development of the families reeling under poverty. It should be remembered that solution to the problem of child labour lies in improving the socio-economic profile of the society for which conscious efforts should be made to launch long term plans. Such plans should involve not only govt. departments and public institutions but also the community for whom it was conceived and implemented.

Until and unless the political leadership and bureaucracy muster will and courage to achieve agricultural development, remove rural poverty, unemployment achieve food for all, "health care" Education for all children", children in India will not be able to enjoy a happy childhood and lead a life free from hunger and child labour.

The problem of child labour has drawn the attention of planners, labour administrators, researchers at the global and national level especially after the celebration of international year of the child 1979.

The basic cause of child labour is poverty of the family. Abject poverty is the main cause of child labour through out the world, poor parents treat children as economic assets and send them to work at an early age to ameliorate the poverty of the family.

Young children seek employment at very early because augmentation of their income is highly essential for the survival of the invariably large families, illiteracy, ignorance, low wage rate, unemployment, social prejudices, backwardness and poor standard of living are mainly responsible for the cause of child labour in poor countries like India. Also a fast growing population, migration to urban areas, family distintegration in adequate social security provisions, defective institutional arrangements and ineffective legal machinery contribute a lot to this problem. The mounting number of educated unemployed youth undermines the faith on the efficacy of education, leads to more drop outs and increasing child labour. Child labour exists due to low socio-eco status of poor parents on the one hand and the commercial and profiteering interest of the employers on the other.

The existence of child labour, therefore, is not due to poverty alone, it is the exploitation of that poverty in a profitable manner.

Child labour is a social evil. According to the world bank labour report 1972, child labour could be considered as forced labour, since children are not in a position to judge and consent the type of work they perform. Many children get bonded earlier to pay family debt and work under appalling conditions. It stands for economic exploitations, social injustice and degraded cultural and value system.

Govt. of India also drew up a large no. of schemes through its constituent ministries to deal with child labour. Despite the laws and measures dealing with child labour, the stark reality is that, the impact on child labour has been minimal. It has remained intractably a big problem since long. Children in our country will be able to lead a happy life with some amount of pol will to seriously address the issues of agricultural stagnation, rural poverty, unemployment, minimum wages, food security, health care and meaningful education to the millions of labour families.

Morality on the parts of parents and society adds much to this. A self regulatory course by the Industries that employ child labour alongwith removal of poverty only can save the society from this social crime.

Protectionism and great depression

By Dr Bharat Jhunjhunwala

Two mutually contradictory suggestions for facing the global recession are present before us. Most economists hold that we must avoid protectionism and embrace free trade yet more deeply. The mainstream view against protectionism was endorsed by the G-20 recently. Others hold that protectionism is the solution.

The case for free trade is based, in large measure, on the experience of the United States during the Great Depression of the thirties. The U.S. Congress passed the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act in 1930 and raised import duties. Other countries retaliated by raising barriers against U.S. goods. Soon the world economy got segmented into small markets defined by national borders. This relapse into protectionism is said to be one of the main causes of deepening of the Great Depression.

Stephanie Flanders, Economics Editor of the BBC, however, thinks otherwise. She quotes Peter Temin of Massachusetts Institute of Technology to the effect that exports were 7% of American GDP in 1929. They fell by a mere 1.5 percentage points in the next two years after enactment of the Smoot-Hawley Act. Given the overall fall in world demand in those years, even all of that small fall cannot be attributed to other countries’ retaliation against the U.S. tariffs. Furthermore, the theory fails to take not that the fall in GNP over the same period was a hefty 15%. A 1.5% reduction in foreign trade could hardly have caused a contraction of 15% in GDP.

Flanders suggests that the real culprit was the Fed’s failure to inject cash into a fragile banking system after the crash of 1929. I am not convinced of this. An easy monetary policy brings no free lunch. Such stratagems can possibly be helpful only in the short run. The injection of liquidity would lead to devaluation of the U.S. dollar and nullify the gains in the long term. The global crisis of the 1930s could scarcely be contained by such tinkering. In any case, both the theories fail to explain why the crisis of 1929 occurred in the first place.

Let us restate the sources of wealth of the nations. The first source is ‘natural resources’-countries like Dubai have become rich from export of oil, for example. The second source is hard labour. The free market system that creates efficiency in the utilization of labour would be part of this. This subsumes Adam Smith’s prescription in Wealth of Nations. The success of the U.S. in the last half-century owes itself much to the culture of hard work fostered by productivity-oriented labour laws. The success of China in the last two decades also owes to the policies requiring hard work with low wages. The third source of wealth is technology. The success of England in the 19th century was built on exports of steam engines and boilers. England was called ‘Workshop of the World’. The success of the U.S. in the last half-century, in part, owes to the exports of hi-tech goods like jet airplanes and internet servers.

The boom in the U.S. economy in the 1920s was based, it seems, on exports of hi-tech goods. Henry Ford had started mass production of cars on the assembly line. There was also a huge upsurge in communication technologies of telephone and wireless. The U.S. Companies got high incomes from export of these hi-tech goods. World capital flowed towards the U.S. to partake of the expected profits of companies as the Radio Corporation of America. This was the bedrock on which the boom of the twenties was built. Alas!

Technology has an inherent tendency to spread across the world like water in the sea. The pioneer status of the U.S. companies was soon lost and they could not sustain the expectations of high profits. This led to the collapse of the stock markets in 1929 and to the onset of the Great Depression. The overwhelming impact of loss of technological advantage dwarfs that of Smoot-Hawley Act.

The present U.S. crisis follows the same pattern as that of the 1930s. The special advantage enjoyed by the U.S. companies in software has lately been eroded. To give one example, the introduction of the Windows versions-1995, 1998, 2000 and XP-were all lapped up by the consumers; but not Vista. Further, even the few cutting edge technologies have spread far and wide quickly. FDI has brought these technologies to India and China. In the result, the U.S. is left with no ‘Unique Selling Point’ with which to obtain high prices of its goods. This loss of competitiveness is the root cause of the present crisis in the U.S.

Neither free trade nor protectionism will come to the aid of the U.S. economy at this juncture. Free trade will lead to more import of cheap goods made by the invincible combination of hi-technology and low wage labour that countries like India and China enjoy and hit at domestic U.S. production. Protectionism will bring retaliation from other countries and deprive the U.S. of markets for its few remaining exports like almonds, cotton and citrus. The U.S. economy has to go down in a free trade regime as well as in a protected regime because it has simply lost its technological advantage. Of the two, protectionism may be the lesser evil. It would allow the people of that country to at least enjoy the bounties provided by natural resources within their borders.

It seems to me that free trade is beneficial for those with a USP. Dubai will gain from free trade because it will get access to markets for her oil. The U.S. would gain if it had new technologies such as the nuclear reactors, internet servers and Windows software to sell to rest of the world. At the same time free trade is harmful for those without USP. India, for example, needed to protect her industries, howsoever inefficient, from being smothered by hi-tech imported goods. This was till now.

The tables have turned since. Now free trade is beneficial for us. It will get us access to world markets for our hi-tech low-wage goods. Conversely, protectionism is beneficial for the U.S. They will be able to keep out cheap imported goods and protect their high-wage industries. Therefore, let us try our best to keep the world economy anchored to the free trade regime.