Mainstream Weekly

On Parliament's Monsoon Session

SC — 2010-09-08T08:50:26Z

The monsoon session of Parliament has come to an end. But before the curtains came down on the session on August 31, the government was forced to retreat on several Bills.

In fact the Rajya Sabha on August 31 was witness to a rare spectacle: one of the elders from the Congress benches, a former Minister for Education in Andhra, K. Keshava Rao, expressing his strong dissent with the manner in which the Education Tribunal Bill was being rushed through by the Union HRD Minister, Kapil Sibal. Rao was not opposing the Bill per se, but objecting to the rejection of the parliamentary Standing Committee report on the proposed legislation by the Minister. It was he who triggered the Opposition members' opposition to the legislation in the Rajya Sabha even though their colleagues in the Lok Sabha had supported the Bill in the Lower House last week. The Bill was eventually deferred.

The last day of the session also saw a visibily embarassed Union Food and Agriculture Minister Sharad Pawar telling the Lok Sabha that the government “respects the decisions of the courts” and “whatever needs to be done will be done”. He was responding to the members' persistent demand for a reply from the Minister regarding the Supreme Court view that foodgrains be distributed to the poor free. The SC, on its part, clarified on August 31 that its August 12 directive to the government to distribute grain at “no cost” or “very low cost” to the poor instead of allowing it to rot (something which has exercised the whole country) was not a suggestion but an order. (Earlier Pawar had said it was not possible to implement the SC suggestion as the government was already providing subsidy.) The SC Bench also maintained that statements like the one of Pawar that sugar prices might rise in the near future “would encourage hoarding of sugar”.

The SC order has been aptly interpreted in sections of the media as a severe indictment of the UPA Government in general and the Food ad Agriculture Minister in particular, and has been welcomed by the public at large as it is in defence of the poor.

The PM, of course, was focused on the passage of the Nuclear Liability Bill in parliament before the forthcoming visit to India of US President Barack Obama, and it was achieved after much painstaking spadework and legwork by the government functionaries to bring the BJP on board. Interestingly, highlighting the BJP's inability to corner the Congress on either price rise or the Bhopal gas tragedy, Deputy Leader of the RJD in the Lok Sabha Raghuvansh Prasad Singh made a highly perceptive observation on the overall national parliamentary scene in the light of the increasing BJP-Congress bonhomie:

In the circumstances, it seems fairly clear that the two so-called national parties have turned Indian politics into a cricket game in which only the Congress has left the others with no option but to field. The great pity for the owling side is that the pitch is a batting paradise! [The Asian Age, September 2]

No amount of ‘explanations' from the BJP side can refute the essence of this observation.

September 2 S.C.

Bol Kisana, Halla Bol

Surendra Mohan — 2010-09-08T08:48:23Z

On Thursday, August 20, the farmers of western Uttar Pradesh jammed New Delhi and held an impressive rally at Sansad Marg. They were agitating for the repeal of the Land Acquisition Act of 1894. The British imperialists, having claimed land and forests for the Raj under the Law of Eminent Domain, adopted this piece of legislation in order to acquire lands to be used for public good. Independent India did not remove this Act, the reason being economic development which the government wished to pursue. The Act ought to have been given up so that the government, or any public authority empowered by it, would buy land from its owners, generally the farmers, on market rates. But, public good, as defined by it, demanded otherwise. The government did not pursue equitable land reforms so that it could argue that it was not dispossessing the poor cultivators, but the landlords. However, quite a large number of small cultivators were dispossessed of their lands, while getting very little compensation. When Chandigarh was built to serve as the capital for the State of Punjab in which the present Haryana and Himachal Pradesh were included, the farmers resisted its construction because they were losing their landholdings which were their only source of livelihood. Similar situations existed elsewhere too. In a large number of cases, the State governments acquired lands not for any public good, but to help industrialists to start their industries. They robbed poor Peter to pay purpled Paul.

When the Delhi Development Authority started to acquire land and kept it vacant for years together for selling it later at high prices, the farmers started agitations in the Capital too. The Central Government, faced with agitations all over the country, revised in 1968 the sections of the Act which were concerned with compen-sations. But, as the prices of urban land rocketed, the farmers found that the DDA was getting sky high prices. They again started to agitate. Earlier, during the Emergency, Parliament had passed the Urban Ceiling Act, which was generally ignored later. That was another reason for the agitations of the farmers. After a series of rallies in Delhi, attended by the farmers of the neighbouring areas, the Act was amended again in 1984. The cultivators wanted not only higher prices, but to retain their lands and livelihood. Therefore, their simple demand was that the Act be repealed.

After the Government of India adopted the so-called economic reforms which favoured privatisation, it became easy to acquire land. The law was changed to redefine public good so as to include the private companies' demands. The Government of UP, headed by BSP supremo Mayawati, launched a big land acquisition exercise. First. a Ganga Highway Project was conceived so that the bank of the river was accompanied by roads on either side. This would have displaced large numbers of farmers in the rich fertile lands in the neighbourhood of the mighty river, considered sacred by millions. Now, the State Government is acquiring the land from NOIDA, near Delhi, up to Agra, about 260 kilometres away. These lands are irrigated by the Yamuna river, and are formed by equally rich alluvial soil. The government desires to sell them to property dealers who will build posh residential colonies and malls. It is difficult to see the logic of this policy when one recalls that Uttar Pradesh is one of the BIMARU States where economic development is slow. The proportion of the people below poverty line is also quite high.

•

IT is not realised that the cultivators are engaged in a losing vocation and are, therefore, burdened by debts. In the case of UP, their proportion is abut 60 per cent, while the All India figure a few years ago was 48 per cent. Losing the holdings which give them livelihood would be extremely hard for them. They would have to sell all their belongings to settle the debts. But, Mayawati and her colleagues are unrelenting. The government unleashed violence and repression on the agitating farmers in Aligarh. In other places also it adopted harsh measures. All this has compelled the kisans to resist the government's plans with all their might. The kisans being displaced are generally medium landholders, growing wheat, rice and sugar-cane. Moreover, they are the hardy Jats, Yadavs and Gujjars who were known as martial communities. Western UP, along with Haryana and Punjab, has a long tradition of kisans agitations under the banner of the Bharatiya Kisan Union, once led by the famous Mahendra Singh Tikait. The Yadav community is strongly represented in Agra, Mathura and Aligarh. Therefore, the fight that Mayawati has picked up is against a strong peasantry.

The Samajwadi Party, the Rashtriya Janata Dal, the Janata Dal (U), the Janata Dal (S) and the two Lok Dals led by Ajit Singh and Om Prakash Chautala are the offsprings of the Socialist Party, which was a strong advocate of justice for farmers, but along with that, the Janata Party and Lok Dal. Socialists in UP had fought several battles for remunerative prices of sugar-cane and its products. Genda Singh became famous as Ganna Singh for this reason. Dr Lohia offered satyagraha against the betterment levy on farmers. Hence, the agitation has received spontaneous support of these parties.. Rahul Gandhi also lent his support to the agitation. He met the Prime Minister a couple of days before the Sansad Gherao of the farmers, and got the PM to promise that amendments to the Act would be made in the winter session of Parliament. But, the Central Government would not scrap the Act. Although it should do so in order that the farmers get market prices. They should not be treated as inferior to the industrialists whose products sell at market prices. There is a whole history of the deception played on the farmers because the government after government had decided to raise capital for industry by fleecing them. That is why the prices of their products are fixed by the Centre and, generally, they are not remunerative. Banks give them loans at higher rates of interest as compared to the loans given to industry. The farmers have to pay compound rates of interest while the industrialists pay simple rates of interest.

The Commission of Farmers, headed by Dr. M. S. Swaminathan, had found that over 40 per cent kisans had said that if they could opt for some other vocation, they would willingly do so. Farmer's leaders point out that a medium farmer earns less than what a fourth class permanent employee gets as his salary and DA. The result is not only a burden of debt, but also failure to secure quality education for the children thereby putting them at great disadvantage in the job market and other careers. High rents, rising costs of inputs and unremunerative prices of the produce have made millions of petty farmers turn into landless workers. The anger of the kisans has been accumulating for generations. It has started to explode. The Halla Bol in Parliament Street signified it.

The author is one of the country's leading socialist ideologues.

Lok Pal Bill-Promises to Redeem

Rajindar Sachar — 2010-09-08T08:42:47Z

The controversy following resignation of Justice Santosh Hegde, the Lok Ayukt of Karnataka, and the subsequent amends purported to have been made by the Karnataka Government has again highlighted the failure of the Lok Pal legislative history at the Centre and equally the passivity and reluctance of all political parties to pass this legislation, which is most urgently desired, if the attempt to control the rapid drift downward to political corruption, that is eating into the vitals of our nation, is to be stemmed.

The Gujral Government's unsuccessful attempt to pass the Lok Pal Bill in 1997, after five attempts since 1968 had been frustrated, was followed by the Vajpayee Government again introducing it in 1998 and 2001 but, as expected, it was talked out.

When the UPA Government came to power at the Centre Prime Minister Manmohan Singh had in September 2004 commendably stated: "The UPA Government would lose no time to enact the Lok Pal Bill and the need for it is more urgent than ever." That it could not be passed was because of concerted opposition by a small clique within the UPA and also helped by quite a few in the Opposition with their not-so-clear move to start a controversy by seeking to include judges in the Lok Pal Bill (which was constitutionally impermissible). That promise has yet to be redeemed.

A routine exercise is done by Parliament to appoint a Select Committee to go into the Bill and this process goes on endlessly with predictable inaction till Parliament's life comes to an end.

The Gandhian brigade, consisting of respected Gandhians in their eighties and nineties, have been in long communication with the Prime Minister's Office about the desirability of passing the Bill. Many of them regularly observe a one-day fast-of course for the media of soccer-hype mentality, it is no news. Law Minister Moiley on paper shows deep concern and has been promising a legislation soon. But it is still not on Parliament's agenda.

A facile excuse for not passing the Bill is deviously put forward by the legislators that there is a strong opinion, both among legislators and outside Parliament, that the Prime Minister should not be included in the purview of the Lok Pal Bill. This is totally unconvincing because there had been detailed discussions on this aspect since 1996. Vajpayee and Manmohan Singh have openly said that the Prime Minister should be included in the Lok Pal Bill-so who are these worthies to take up cudgels on the Prime Minister's behalf? There is no mystery in this. There are about 70 tainted Members in the present Parliament. Naturally the public is skeptical.

Even though I do not find any understandable reason for excluding the Prime Minister, still the Lok Pal Bill could have been introduced by excluding the Prime Minister from its purview, so that the legislation could come into existence. The debate on the propriety of inclusion or exclusion of the Prime Minister could continue and, if approved, the Prime Minister could be included later on. But why should the enactment of Lok Pal legislation be delayed?

IT is no secret that the reason for this apathy is the unwillingness of legislators to face scrutiny by the Lok Pal. This has been brought into sharp focus in the aftermath of Justice Hegde's resignation story. Whereas the Congress rightly lambasted the shabby treatment of the Lok Ayukt by the Karnataka Government, it without batting an eyelid supports the Karnataka Government's disgraceful stand of keeping high officials and legislators out of the jurisdiction of the Lok Ayukt, on the specious plea that legislators should not be under the Lok Ayukt. No wonder the Members of Parliament will not pass the Lak Pal Bill lest they are put under the watchful eye of the Lok Pal. Does hypocrisy in politics have no limits? Is the fear of public wrath even at election time looked upon with contempt by the political parties? The argument that legislators cannot be put under the cover of a single person, even though he may be a retired judge of the Supreme Court is ridiculous. Legislators forget the basic philosophy of republicanism running through our Constitution, namely, 'Be you ever so high-the law is above you'.

The hypocrisy is further heightened when Parliament spends extra time to pass the National Judicial Bill to enquire into the misconduct of judges. No, I am not objecting to it-rather, I welcome it. Because I firmly believe that it is only the incorruptible judiciary that can maintain the democratic structure. I am all for Parliament to pass even in the next session the Judicial Accountability Bill. But legislators need to remember that unless the other wings of the state, namely, the executive and legislature, are equally free from the taint of corruption, society will remain infected and ill. As JP, the socialist leader, sorrowfully put it, I know politics is not for saints. But politics, at least under a democracy, must know the limits which it may not cross. Otherwise, if there is dishonesty, corruption there can be no government, no public order, no justice, no freedom, no national unity, in short, no nation.

Again, as John Adams, one of the founding fathers of the US Constitution, said,

the people have a right, an inalienable, indisputable, indefeasible, divine right to that most dreaded and envied kind of knowledge-I mean of the character and conduct of their rulers.

One can understand the pain felt by Somnath Chatterjee, the former Lok Sabha Speaker, when he said:

Large sections of the people are greatly worried about the nexus between crime and politics as well as administration in the country. I am saddened to observe that politics in the country has to a large extent, become criminalised and crime has become politicised.

So let not the Members of Parliament hide their real motive for opposition under the hypocritical concern for the Prime Minister's status by stalling the passing of the Lok Pal Bill.

Let the Lok Pal Bill be passed by even excluding the Prime Minister; this will somewhat satisfy the people at large that the government is serious about meeting the menace of corruption in public life. The question of inclusion of the Prime Minister can be deferred and debated independently and decision taken subsequently.

The author, a retired Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court, is the Chairperson of the Prime Minister's high-level Committee on the Status of Muslims and the UN Special Rapporteur on Housing. A former President of the People's Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), he is a tireless champion of human rights. He can be contacted at e-mail: rsachar1@vsnl.net/rsachar23@bol.net.in

A United Struggle for United India-Azad Hind Fauj

Ajeet Jawed — 2010-09-08T08:34:30Z

September 1 this year marked the sixtyeighth anniversary of the formation of the Indian National Army (INA). The following article, bringing out the detailed history of the INA, is being published on that occasion.

In the history of India's freedom struggle, the INA occupies an important place. At the time when there were all round divisions on the Indian national scene, the INA exhibited complete national unity. The Indian soldiers fought unitedly for a united India. This armed struggle of the INA forced the British to realise that they could no longer depend upon the loyalty of the Indian Army for the maintenance of their rule in the country. Besides, the countrywide support and sympathy of the Indian masses for the INA and the opposition of the Indian section of the British Indian Army to the INA trials led the British to transfer power through a negotiated settlement. Thus the INA revolt hastened the end of British rule of India.

The INA was organised during the Second World War on September 1, 1942. It was first raised by Captain Mohan Singh and Mohammad Akram, both from Punjab. The two were cut off from the British Indian Army and were wandering in the jungles of Malaya when they came across Giani Pritam Singh, an Indian revolutionary and Secretary General of the Indian Independence League of Thailand and Malaya, with some Sikhs and Major Fujihara from the Japanese forces. Giani Pritam Singh informed them that if they took up the cause of their motherland, the Japanese would welcome it and render all assistance to them. Captain Mohan Singh seized the opportunity without hesitation. He with Japanese help contacted Indian soldiers and persuaded them not to fight for the British Empire but to utilise the opportunity presented by the war for the liberation of India. This plan was started by the end of December 1941 and by the end of August 1942, more than 45,000 Indian soldiers, who had been taken as prisoners of war by the Japanese, had joined the INA. To materialise the plan of India's freedom, it was decided by the Indian and Japanese Army officers and civilians in Malaya and Thailand to send a select team to Tokyo for consultations with the Japanese High Command as well as with well-known revolutionaries residing there, namely, Raja Mahendra Pratap and Rash Behari Bose. The team included Captain Mohan Singh, Mohammad Akram and Niranjan Singh Gill from the Army side and K.P.K. Menon, N. Raghvan, S.C. Gopi and N.K. Ayer, all leading lawyers, and Giani Pritam Singh and Swami Satyanand Puri from the civilian side. Along with the Japanese team, they flew to Tokyo in two planes in March 1942. Unfortunately the plane carrying Mohammad Akram, Giani Pritam Singh and Swami Satyanand Puri crashed, killing them all. They were thus the first martyrs of the INA movement.

At Tokyo, the Indian team met General Tojo, the Japanese Premier, Raja Mahendra Pratap and Rash Behari Bose. The latter had founded the India Independence League first in Japan and then in all the areas of South-East Asia occupied by Japan that had small pockets of Indians. It was at Tokyo that the decision to form the INA was taken. It was also decided to hold a conference at Bangkok to seek the co-operation of three million members of the Indian community living all over the East. This was held from June 15 to 20, 1942 and attended by 150 Indian delegates. The conference commenced with the raising of the tri-colour flag by Rash Behari Bose. Captain Mohan Singh spoke for several hours emphasising the importance of and need for Indian freedom. The Conference decided to set up the INA comprising Indian troops and civilians of East Asia with Captain Mohan Singh as the Commander-in-Chief with the objective of fighting for the freedom of India. According to A.C. Chatterji, who was also present at the Conference, a question was asked by one of the military representatives as to what would happen if the President did not act faithfully or select a suitable successor. Rash Behari Bose replied that as the whole movement was revolutionary therefore if the President failed in his duty and was unfaithful, he could be legitimately shot by his followers. A Council of Action was formed with Rash Behari Bose as its President, Major General Mohan Singh-head of the INA and in charge of Defence Affairs, Lt Col A.Q. Gilani-Military Training, K.P.K. Menon -Publicity and Propaganda, N. Raghavan-Organisation of Independence League and Niranjan Singh Gill-Chief Advisor to the INA. By September, three Brigades were formed. The Gandhi Brigade was commanded by Lt Col M.Z. Kiani, Nehru Brigade by Lt Aziz Ahmed Khan and Azad Brigade by Col Prakash Chand. The INA was non-communal with Muslims quite prominent among its officers and ranks. The members of the INA were exhorted to adopt three principles, that is, Unity, Faith and Sacrifice. The Conference, in one of its resolutions, invited S.C. Bose to East Asia to lead the INA movement.

After attending the Bangkok Conference, all the members returned to their respective areas and started establishing India Independence Leagues, raising funds and recruiting members. The INA opened its headquarters at Mount Pleasant in Singapore, the place where no Indian or Asiatic was allowed even to walk. Papers were published to rouse the Indians living abroad for the cause of the INA. Voice of India and Azad Hind in English, Awaz Hind and Azad Hind in Hindustani and Swatantra Bharat in Tamil, published from Singapore, were quite popular. An INA Officers' Training School was opened with Lt Col Shah Nawaz as the first Commandant. Besides, an institution was established under Lt Col Ehsan Quadir for imparting military training to volunteers. The Qaumi song was 'Sare Jhan Se Acchha Hindostan Hamara'. The first parade of the INA was held in August 1942; the tri-colour flag was hoisted and a revolutionary speech was delivered by Captain Mohan Singh. However, differences arose between the INA officials and the Japanese. Captain Mohan Singh wanted the Japanese to recognise Indian independence immediately while the Japanese officials were reluctant to do so. Mohan Singh became suspicious of the Japanese motives and on December 21, he announced the dissolution of the INA.

However, on Februry 15, 1943 with the help of Rash Behari Bose the INA was reorganised with Lt Col Bhonsle as the Director of the Military Bureau, Lt Col Shah Nawaz as the Chief of the General Staff, Major P.K. Sehgal as the Military Secretary, and Major Habibur Rehman as the Commandant, Officers Training School, Major Mata-ul-Mulk [brother of Lt Col Burhan-ud-Din] as the Reinforcement Commandant, Major A.D. Jahangir, in charge of Enlightenment and Culture. Lt Col Ehsan Qadir was appointed Secretary of the Recruiting Department; he had earned wide popularity by putting up thrilling and patriotic programmes from Saigon Radio, especially in Punjabi. Apart from this policy-forming body, there was the Army itself under the command Lt Col M.Z. Kiani. This was the organisation which held the INA together until the arrival of Subhas Chandra Bose from Berlin six months later.

BOSE was a disciple of C.R. Das in politics. He was a secularist and an uncompromising enemy of the foreign rule and had been jailed eleven times. Unlike Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru, he was not provided any facility or comfort but was beaten and tortured in jail. Once he was kept in Mandalay jail. Within the Congress he belonged to the Left Group and was no less popular than Pandit Nehru. However, Gandhi preferred Nehru than Bose as he could win over Jawaharlal with love despite the latter's differences with him but not Bose. Besides, Bose earned his wrath when he stood and won the election second time for the post of President in 1939 despite Gandhi's opposition. He defeated Gandhi's candidate, Dr Sitarammaya. In spite of winning the election Bose had to resign because of Gandhi and his supporters' displeasure. He was also suspended from the Congress, A non-elected Congressman, Babu Rajendra Prasad, was appointed as the President of the Congress. When Second World War broke out the British put Subhas in jail and later under house arrest due to his opposition to the war efforts. Bose's desire to liberate India led him to seek support and help of the Axis powers. He escaped from Calcutta in January 1941 and reached Berlin via Peshawar and Kabul in March 1941 with the help of Akbar Shah, Mohammad Shah, Abad Khan and Bhagat Ram Talwar. In Berlin he founded the Free India Centre and created the Indian Legion consisting of 45,000 soldiers out of the Indian prisoners of war. In the first official meeting of the Free India Centre on November 2, 1941 he was conferred the title of Netaji. 'Jai Hind', was introduced as the national greeting and Jana Gana Mana was adopted as the national anthem and Hindustani, the most widely spoken language, as the national language of Independent India. Azad Hind Radio too started functioning by the end of the year and Azad Hind, a bilingual journal, was published regularly. Bose met both Hitler and Mussolini but resented the attack on Russia by Germany. However, he was enthused on hearing the phenomenal success of the Japanese against the British. He accepted the request to lead the INA and proceeded to Japan along with Abid Hasan of the India Independence League of Germany as his sole companion. Bose reached Japan by a German submarine accompanied by Abid Hasan.

The day after his arrival, Bose was invited by Japanese Premier Tojo to the Japanese Parliament [Diet] where, in his presence, the Japanese Premier made an official declaration affirming full and unqualified support to the cause of Indian independence. Bose spoke from Tokyo over the radio of his firm determination to launch an armed fight against the British from India's eastern border. The overseas Indians were thrilled with delight at the prospect of participating in this venture.

Bose arrived in Singapore on July 2, 1943. There he was welcomed as a man of destiny. On July 4, Rash Behari Bose handed over the leadership of the India Independence League and INA which still existed despite its dissolution by Captain Mohan Singh. On July 5, Bose took the salute of the INA soldiers, himself dressed in military uniform. He addressed them:

Today is the proudest day of my life. Today it pleased the providence to give me the unique privilege and honour of announcing to the whole world that India's Army of Liberation has come into being. Comrades, let your battle cry be "To Delhi!" How many of us will individually survive in this war of freedom, I do not know. But I do know this that we shall ultimately win and our task will not end until our surviving heroes hold the victory parade on the graveyard of the British empire, at the Lal Qila, the Red Fort of ancient Delhi.

On August 26, 1943, he become the supreme commander of the INA renaming it as Azad Hind Fauj. He issued the following order:

…when we stand, the Azad Hind Fauj has to be like a wall of granite, when we march, the Azad Hind Fauj has to be like a steam roller. With the slogan "Chalo Dilli!" on your lips, let us continue to fight till the national flag flies over the Viceroy's House in Delhi and the Azad Hind Fauj holds the victory parade inside the ancient Red Fort..

Then he visited various centres in Malaya, Penang and Bangkok to spread this message and was given huge funds for the cause of the motherland. At one such gathering Bose's garland was sold for five lakhs dollars. Bose had asked for 30 million from South Asia. More than double that amount was donated by the Indian public. At Burma one Mr Habib donated his whole property including land, houses and jewellery valued at over one crore of rupees and himself placed his life at Bose's disposal. Mr Ram Das Khanna gave all his belongings, valued at about one million dollars, and offered his life too for the cause. Mr Bashir gave half a million, Mr Nizami half a million, Mr Madha half a million. Mr Pitchai, a local Muslim merchant, gave three of his printing presses and his entire property. All of them were personally decorated by Netaji with the medal of Sewak-i-Hind. It was there that Bose gave a clarion call to the youth: 'Tum mujhe khoon do, mein tumhein azadi doonga. [Give me blood, I will give you freedom.]' Bose also visited the tomb of the last Indian Emperor of free India, Bahadur Shah, to pay his humble homage to the great soul.

In September a new brigade, known as the Guerrilla Regiment, was raised. Shah Nawaz was appointed its Commander. The soldiers themselves gave it the name Subhas Brigade. With Bose taking over the command, the INA's number rose to 60,000. He addressed several women's gatherings, exhorted them to come forward for the service of the country. 'He reminded us,' writes Laxmi Sehgal [previously Swaminathan], 'of Rani Laxmi Bai of Jhansi and the other valiant women who had opposed the British with arms and then he made special mention of young women revolutionaries of Bengal, Shanti, Suniti of Comilla, Kalpana Dutta and Pritilata Wadedar of Chittagong… there was a moment of silence followed by a thunderous applause and thousands of women rushed to the dais offering to volunteer then and there.' Thereupon a regiment of women was organised on October 23 under Captain Laxmi Swaminathan, a doctor. She left her lucrative practice and gave her rich dispensary for use as the INA hospital. The regiment was named after Jhansi Ki Rani Laxmibai. A nursing unit of women too was formed and it was named after Chand Bibi.

ON October 21, 1943 Bose announced the formation of the Provisional Government of free India 'Aarzi Hakumat-i-Azad Hind' with himself as the Head of the State and Supreme Commander of the Azad Hind Fauj. The members of his Cabinet were: Captain Laxmi Swaminathan, Col A.C. Chatterji, Mr S.A. Ayer, Lt. Col Aziz Ahmed, Lt Col N.S. Bhagat, Lt Col M.Z. Kiani, Lt. Col. A.D. Logananthan, Lt Col Ehsan Qadir, Shah Nawaz Khan, Messers A.M. Sahay, A. Allapa, A.N. Sarkar, Lt Col A.N. Raju, Dev Nath Das, Karim Gani, D.M. Khan, J. Jhivy and Ishwar Singh. Rash Behari Bose and Bashir Ahmed were appointed Advisors. Then the ceremony of taking the Oath of Allegiance commenced. Subhas read out the oath: 'In the name of God, I take this sacred oath that to liberate India and 38 crores of my countrymen, I, Subhas Chandra Bose, will continue this sacred war of freedom till the last breath of my life…' According to Col A.C. Chatterji, 'at this point Subhas was visibly moved. His eyes glistened and filled with tears and his voice failed.'

The government was immediately recognised by the Axis powers and countries under their control. The Japanese also handed over the Andaman and Nicobar Islands to Subhas. Bose visited the Islands in November 1943 along with Major Hasan and Sahay. He renamed the Islands as 'Shaheed' and 'Swaraj' and appointed Lt Col Loganathan as the Chief Commissioner of these Islands and Major Alwi as his second-in-command.

Indians, irrespective of their caste, creed or religion, united under his inspiring leadership. In the beginning of the INA formation, some Muslims had raised objection to singing the Bande Mataram song as its last two stanzas were anti-Muslim. The matter had been deferred. After taking over the INA, Bose, in order to remove any kind of antagonism and barrier in the way of unity, appointed a committee to suggest a new song acceptable to all. Finally, a song, Subha Sukha Chainki Barkha Barse, composed by a Muslim named Hussain, was approved. It was most willingly accepted by all concerned and became extremely popular. The national salutation was changed from Bande Mataram to Jai Hind. Bose also decided that the tri-colour flag should be retained but without the charkha. Thus the two communities completely integrated and there was no antagonism, animosity or suspicion.

Bose had written to the trustees to the Chettiar temple, located at Tank Road, Singapore, for contribution. They replied that they were willing to contribute provided Bose visited their temple and spoke there. Netaji did not like going to a temple as he believed that state matters and religion should not be mixed. On the repeated requests from the trustees, Netaji agreed on the condition that he would take with him officers irrespective of caste, creed or religion. The trustees agreed and Netaji took with him Muslim, Sikh and Christian officers. They went not only into the inner courtyard of the temple but also close to the door of the sanctum sanctorum where only Brahmins could set their foot. The Brahmin priest put tilak over the forehead of all the officers. Bose's leadership greatly promoted fellow-feeling among all his followers. On Eid all the Hindu officers went to the mosque and listened to the khatam dawa on that day. According to A.C. Chatterji, who was also present at the occasion, they all participated in the festivities and enjoyed the food served to us on the occasion… Similar was the case with the Muslim officers on the Diwali day. Likewise, Hindu and Muslim officers along with their Sikh brother officers went to the Sikh Gurdwaras….Thus gradually a sense of tolerance, love and respect for each other increased more and more.

That is how Subhas' secular outlook, selfless patriotism and inspiring leadership instilled the feeling of Indian-ness among all the Azad Hind Fauj men. No one thought in terms of Hindu, Muslim or Sikh. There was no communal or separatist feelings and the number of Muslims in the Fauj was predominant. There was a common kitchen and complete harmony.

To liberate India an action plan was drawn up and accordingly the headquarters of the Provisional Government were shifted to Rangoon in January 1944. The Azad Hind Bank was also opened. The Subhash Brigade, with a strength of 3000 soldiers under the command of Shah Nawaz Khan, reached Burma to take part in the battlefield first. So much was the enthusiasm among the soldiers to join the first batch that all the sick and physically unfit soldiers, whom the doctors had ordered not to join, went to the station and lay down in front of the railway engine and refused to allow the train to start unless they too were permitted to go to the front.

In the middle of March 1944, the INA soldiers inflicted a defeat upon the much praised Negro-troops from Africa in the British Army while engaged in constructing a bridge over the Kaladan river. The INA troops, reinforced by Japanese troops, then advanced towards the Indian border. The INA was in action on two fronts-one in the Arakan areas and the other along the Imphal Road. The nearest British post on the Indian side was Mowdok. It was captured in May 1944. The entry of the INA on Indian territory was a most touching scene. Soldiers laid themselves flat on the ground and passionately kissed the sacred soil of their motherland which they had set out to liberate. A regular flag-hoisting ceremony was held amidst great rejoicing and singing of the Azad Hind Fauj national anthem.

Under the inspiring leadership of Bose the INA moved towards Kohima and along with the Japanese forces captured Kohima in March 1944. But by the end of May the Allied forces were well prepared for the offensive. The INA men at Kohima held their post and gallantly fought the British forces. It is said that soldiers tied explosive bombs on their back and hurled their bodies under the heavy British tanks to explode them. In these operations the INA lost nearly 4000 men. Torrential rains cut off the supply of ration and ammunition. The British forces then moved towards Burma. The Japanese retreated. Rangoon, which was left in the hands of the INA, was occupied by the British in May 1945. The women of Jhansi Ki Rani Regiment fought alongside the men, suffering equally high casualties. When the Army was forced to withdraw, the women along with men marched for more than 1000 kilometres. In Europe, Italy had fallen and Germany was collapsing. There was no alternative before the INA than to surrender. They were disarmed and made prisoners and brought back to India.

BUT Bose, the head of the INA, still hoped to continue the fight. He left Burma for Singapore where in early July he laid the foundation stone of the INA Memorial. The words inscribed upon the Memorial were Ittefaq [Unity], Etmad [Faith] and Qurbani [Sacrifice]. Later it was destroyed on Mountbatten's orders when the Allied forces reoccupied the city. Japan surrendered after the bombing of its cities, Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Bose then planned to go to Russia. But before his plan could materialise it is alleged that he died in a plane crash. [In 1941 when the British learnt that Bose had sought the support of the Axis powers, they ordered their agents to intercept Bose and assassinate him before he reached Germany. An Allied news agency had declared Bose dead in a plane accident in March 1942.] His death brought an end to the INA movement. According to Nirad Choudhury,

For the Gandhian Congress, S.C. Bose provided a windfall by his death. Had he lived and come back to India, he would have swept public opinion in the whole of the country to his side and for the Congress not to have identified itself with him would have been suicide. But going to him would hardly have been much better. He would have left only a minor role to play for the Gandhi and Nehru leadership and could have dictated his terms.

Bose's death ended the INA fight for India's independence. However, their sacrifice did not go in vain. The entire country unitedly rose against the British when the INA soldiers were brought to India and put on trial. Jawaharlal Nehru, who had earlier said that he himself would go carrying a sword to fight Bose if the latter came to India with his INA, and had not laid a wreath on the INA Memorial at a public function in Singapore, sensing the mood of the masses and demise of Bose, his rival, changed his tone. He not only glorified the INA now but also took over its whole cadre as his lieutenants in the elections. He also adopted Bose's slogans 'Dilli Chalo!' and 'Jai Hind'. Heavily garlanded photographs of S.C. Bose in the Presidential chair, from where he was mercilessly removed and suspended from the Congress, were displayed in all its public meetings to get votes. The INA trials roused the entire country including the Indian sections in the armed forces. The ageing Congress leaders saw success slipping out of their hands; so while they apparently took up the INA cause, they were only biding their time for a safe transfer of power in their hands even at the cost of partition of the country. On the recommendation of Lord Mountbatten agreed to by Nehru as a pre-condition for independence, the INA soldiers were not re-inducted into the Indian Army.

There were strikes and violent demonstrations against the British and these exhibited complete unity. In Bengal, the protestors destroyed military lorries, removed the Union Jack when seven years rigorous imprisonment was announced for Captain Abdul Rashid. The British opened fire on protestors killing 53 and injuring more than 500. On November 20, 1945 in a confidential report, the British Indian Government admitted:

There has seldom been a matter which has attracted so much Indian public interest and it is safe to say sympathy…this particular brand of sympathy cut across communal barriers.

The virus of communalism had not affected the INA. B. Shiva Rao, a well-known journalist, visited the Red Fort prisoners and reported that there was not the slightest feeling among them of being Hindus and Muslims. He also stated that the majority of the men awaiting trial in Red Fort were Muslims. By uniting the Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs under one banner for not only independence but also the unity of the country, Subhas had achieved what the Congress had failed to accomplish. The INA struggle had also shown that the Muslims were no less aspirants of the freedom of India than their Hindu brethrens. Had the INA succeeded or Bose remained alive, the country would not have perhaps been divided.

Dr (Mrs) Ajeet Jawed is an Associate Professor, Satyawati College, University of Delhi.

Why the Moratorium on Bt Brinjal should Continue

Bharat Dogra — 2010-09-08T08:26:29Z

On February 9, 2010 Jairam Ramesh, the Union Minister of State for Environment and Forests, announced the important decision of a moratarium on Bt brinjal which was widely welcomed-not just in India but also at the global level-on grounds of health, environment and safety. However, a relatively small but extremely powerful section of vested interests set in motion high-power efforts to remove this moratorium.

To give an idea of how strong these vested interests are, we may mention here just two facts. Firstly, some extremely powerful politicians and technocrats have been behaving as though they are the brokers or employees of these vested interests. Secondly, the MNC which most visibly represents these interests has got away so far with the most shocking unethical practices, including large-scale bribery to get its highly harmful products/crops approved.

So now the democratic forces fighting for safety, health and environment protection have to initiate an even bigger effort to counter these extremely powerful forces. This effort can start with the excellent document which Jairam Ramesh released while announcing the moratorium on Bt brinjal. In this document the Minister clearly stated how widespread the opposition to Bt brinjal was. To quote from this report, "All States which have written to me have expressed apprehension on Bt brinjal and have called for extreme caution. Because this is extremely important in our federal framework and agriculture is a State subject, I summarise below the views of the State governments that have been submitted in writing to me by the Chief Ministers/Agriculture Ministers:

"Andhra Pradesh: 'It is clear that the data generated, the tests conducted and the information disseminated by GEAC are not sufficient for suggesting the commercial release of Bt brinjal….Until safety parameters in terms of environment, human and animal health are clearly established, release of Bt brinjal for commercial cultivation is to be deferred.'

"Kerala: 'Considering all this, Government of Kerala has taken a decision to prohibit all environmental release of GMOs and keep the state totally GM free. We would request the Honorable Prime Minister to reconsider the policy of GM in a national scale and declare a moratorium at least for the next fifty years.'

"Chhattisgarh: 'Before giving permission for commercial cultivation of Bt brinjal, all tests to establish full impacts, including negative impacts, on human and animal health and on the environment should be carried out.'

"Karnataka: 'The commercial release of Bt-brinjal should be deferred till the issue is thoroughly examined from all the angles by taking into account the views of all stakeholders and conducting a long-term research for its bio-safety and its consequent contributions to food security and farmers well-being.'

"Bihar: 'The Rajya Kisan Ayog is not in favour of the introduction of Bt brinjal in the state at this point of time. The recommendation of the Rajya Kisan Ayog has been considered by the State Government and the State Government fully endorses the view of the Ayog.'

"West Bengal: 'I have got the report of the Expert Committee of the GEAC downloaded. I feel that the matter needs thorough examination by the experts in the field. I am requesting some members of the erstwhile State Agriculture Commission to examine the report and forward their views to the government to enable us to take a holistic view on the subject.'

"Orissa: 'The Government of Orissa does not support the introduction of Bt-brinjal at this stage and until sufficient trials are made and interests of small and marginal farmers of the state are safeguarded.'

"In addition, the CM of Uttarakhand has spoken to me and conveyed the decision to ban Bt brinjal in that State. The Chief Secretary of Tamil Nadu has informed me that the state of Tamil Nadu is not in favour of commercialisation of Bt brinjal now. The Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister has told me that Bt-brinjal should be introduced only after all doubts and fears have been properly dispelled."

Secondly, this document stated that as far as the objective of reducing pesticide use is concerned, other proven alternatives are available. This document informed: "it is worth recalling that there are now close to 6 lakh farmers in Andhra Pradesh fully practicing NPM (non-pesticide management) agriculture over an area of about 20 lakh acres. I have myself been seeing this initiative over the past four years. The advantage of NPM is that it eliminates chemical pesticide use completely whereas Bt-technology only reduces the pesticide spray, albeit substantially. Incidentally, one of the eight missions under the National Action Plan on Climate Change is the National Mission on Sustainable Agriculture of which NPM is an integral part."

Thirdly, this document clearly said that the tests on the safety of Bt brinjal conducted so far are not adequate.

"While there may be a debate on the nature and number of tests that need to be carried out for establishing human safety, it is incontro-vertible that the tests have been carried out by the Bt-brinjal developers themselves and not in any independent laboratory. This does raise legitimate doubts on the reliability of the tests, doubts that I cannot ignore."

Fourthly, the document stated that the contamination threat is very real: "The fact that brinjal is very largely a cross-pollinated crop according to the generally accepted scientific consensus makes the threat of contamination with the use of Bt-brinjal on other varieties a particularly worrisome issue."

Fifthly, the document also confirms that the loss of biodiversity threat is very real. "Apart from being the world's largest producer of brinjal, India is undoubtedly the country of origin as far as brinjal is concerned as testified by Vavilov in 1928. Data that has been made available to me by the National Bureau of Plant Genetic Resources of the ICAR reveals that there are 3951 collections in the Bureau and the number of diversity-rich districts is 134. The Bureau also points out that diversity-rich regions are likely to be affected by the introduction of Bt-brinjal due to gene flow. The loss of diversity argument cannot be glossed over especially when seen in light of the experience we have had in cotton where Bt-cotton seed has overtaken non-Bt seeds."

Sixthly, the document has also refuted the oft stated claim of GM-crop supporters that China is going in rapidly for these crops. Jairam Ramesh has written very clearly: "I have spoken with my counterpart in China and he has informed me that China's policy is to encourage research in GM technology but to be extremely cautious when it comes to introduction in food crops."

IN addition Jairam Ramesh has mentioned the negative views on Bt brinjal he received from several eminent scientists.

Prof G.E. Seralini from France, in a detailed report, has pointed out several flaws in the EC-II report and concludes that "the risk on human and mammalian health is too high for authorities to take the decision to commercialise this GM brinjal".

Dr David Schubert of the Salk Institute of Biological Studies, USA says that Bt brinjal should definitely not be introduced in India since it poses serious environmental and health risks, will increase social and political dependence on private companies and will entail higher costs at all levels of the food chain.

What is most interesting is the expert advice Jairam Ramesh got on health impacts. As he has written, "I have had a discussion with both the Director-General of the Indian Council of Medical Research as well as with the Drug Controller to the Government of India. Both have recommended that chronic toxicity and other associated tests should be carried out indepen-dently. The parallel has been drawn with drugs where during the crucial clinical trials phase, independent testing is carried out on human beings instead of relying on just the data generated by the developer companies themselves. The DG, ICMR told me that in the face of contradictory evidence of the health effects he would advocate more caution and further tests.

"Doctors for Food and Safety, a network of around 100 doctors across the country, have sent a representation on the health hazards related to GM foods in general and Bt-brinjal in particular. They have drawn attention to the recommendations made by the American Academy of Environmental Medicine that GM foods have not been properly tested for human consumption and that there are substantial risks associated with the use of GM foods.

"I have also been informed that the Indian Systems of Medicine including ayurveda, siddha, homeopathy and unani use brinjal as a medicinal ingredient, both in raw and cooked form, for treatment of respiratory diseases and that the entire brinjal plant is used in such preparations. There is fear that Bt-brinjal will destroy these medicinal properties due to loss of synergy, differences in the alkaloids and changes in other active principles."

Jairam Ramesh has emphasised legal support as an approach based on caution. The Supreme Court has invoked the precautionary principle as a guiding instrument in environmental decisions [AP Pollution Control Board versus M.V. Nayudu (1999(2)SCC718)] by relying on the following:

"There is nothing to prevent decision-makers from assessing the record and concluding there is inadequate information on which to reach determination. If it is not possible to make a decision with 'some' confidence, then it makes sense to err on the side of caution and prevent activities that may cause serious or irreparable harm. An informed decision can be made at a later stage when additional data is available or resources permit further research."

Keeping in view all these factors, Jairam Ramesh had chosen his words carefully while announcing the moratorium on Bt brinjal. "Based on all the information presented in the preceding paragraphs and when there is no clear consensus within the scientific community itself, when there is so much opposition from the state governments, when responsible civil society organisations and eminent scientists have raised many serious questions that have not been answered satisfactorily, when the public sentiment is negative and when Bt brinjal will be the very first genetically-modified vegetable to be introduced anywhere in the world and when there is no over-riding urgency to introduce it here, it is my duty to adopt a cautious, precautionary principle-based approach and impose a moratorium on the release of Bt-brinjal, till such time independent scientific studies establish, to the satisfaction of both the public and professionals, the safety of the product from the point of view of its long-term impact on human health and environment, including the rich genetic wealth existing in brinjal in our country.

"A moratorium implies rejection of this particular case of release for the time being; it does not, in any way, mean conditional acceptance. This should be clearly understood."

Thus it is clear that within this basic document, there is very strong and solid evidence and argument in favour of moratorium on Bt brinjal. If to this we add the vast and growing opinion of many eminent scientists on the manifold hazards and uncertainties of GM crops in general, then it is very clear that the moratorium should definitely continue as basically vested interests were trying to use Bt brinjal to clear the path for introduction of many other GM food crops as well.

Exploring the basics of this issue, a leading researcher and activist Kavitha Kuruganti has written: "Bt brinjal is a genetically modified (GM) food crop created by inserting a bacterial gene from the soil bacterium Bacillus thurengiensis into the brinjal DNA to make the plant produce a toxin against a particular pest (fruit and shoot borer). This is being sought to be introduced in India, the Philippines and Bangladesh on the claim that it will bring down pesticide use in brinjal/eggplant/aubergine cultivation, reduce pest-related losses and increase yields and bring in better incomes for farmers. While these are the claims around this novel produce, there are many unaddressed concerns around Bt brinjal even as there are also unanswered questions on the very rationale extended for wanting to bring in the Bt food crop.

"Bt brinjal was sought to be made into the Trojan horse by the biotech promoters and proponents for an easier entry of various GM seeds and such technologies into India's food and farms sector. This was quite apparent to everyone and the ones who were resisting Bt brinjal were also aware of this."

So the issue at stake is very big indeed as what the vested interests want is not just Bt brinjal but to use Bt brinjal to open up India's entire food and agriculture system for GM crops. It has been pointed out trials on about 40 such crops have been taking place, including such basic staples as rice. The basic issue is that multinational companies want to gain control of India's food and agriculture farms and spending billions of rupees, they have already captured the support of some of India's leading politicians and technocrats. Now it is for the democratic forces to prepare for a long peaceful struggle to prevent these corrupt forces from destroying India's food and farming system. The author is currently a Fellow at the Institute of Social Sciences, New Delhi.

Millennium Development Goals (MDG) in Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa

Gilbert Etienne — 2010-09-08T08:21:52Z

On September 21 will take place an important international Conference on the Millennium Development Goal (MDG). It was launched by the United Nations in 2000 with the aims to reduce acute poverty by half, to promote rapid progress of basic education and health, as well as gender equality.

Half-way through, there has been some progress in education and health, but, as stated by Ban Ki-Moon, the Secretary-General of the UN: "We are not on track to fulfil our commitments." (The MDG Report, 2008, UN) This is not surprising because the strategy selected and the priorities were ill-conceived-to use an understatement-by both the donor agencies and the governments directly concerned.

Although the estimates given below are not too reliable, they indicate rather correct trends: the percentage of people living with less than $ 1.25 per day amounts to 51 per cent of the population in SSA (Sub-Saharan Africa), 40 per cent in South Asia, 17 per cent in East Asia (mostly China), only 3.6 per cent in the Middle East and North Africa, eight per cent in Latin America. Malnutrition is also much more widespread in the first two regions: 25 per cent in SSA, 21 per cent in South Asia (2005 estimates). It is no less striking that in SSA and Asia, particularly South Asia, agriculture and the rural world play a much larger role than in the Middle East and Latin America. The urbanisation rate is around 60 per cent of the total population in the former and 70-80 per cent in the latter, whereas one comes across about 30 per cent in India, 35 per cent in Pakistan, 46 per cent in China, less than 30 per cent in Vietnam or Bangladesh. Employment in agriculture ranges from 50 per cent in India to 45 per cent in Pakistan, 40 per cent in China. In SSA about 65 per cent of the workers depend on agriculture. As to the contribution of agriculture to the GDP, it is around 35 per cent in SSA versus 10-20 per cent in Asia.

It is no less clear that, usually, acute poverty is more widespread in villages than in cities.

On the basis of these elementary facts, the major emphasis of the MDG should have focused on agriculture and rural infrastructures, particularly in the poorest regions of the world, which has not been the case, even if, as seen below, the situation in Asia is much better than in SSA.

In the 19th century, Westerners wanted to save the souls of Africans and Asians by converting them to Christianity. From the 1990s onwards a new gospel became prominent in North-South relations: democracy and good governance, faster social progress would save the poor. A number of donor agencies followed that line. The World Bank put great emphasis on social projects, neglecting agriculture and infrastructures, even banning the construction of big dams, following the pressures of militant NGOs (non-government organisations). The share of agriculture in total public aid fell from 18 per cent in 1979 ($ 8 billion) to 3.5 per cent ($ 3.4 billion) in 2004. In 2002, the President of the Rockfeller Foundation deplored "the dramatic under-investment in agricultural research". In the 1990s the number of foreign agriculture experts declined sharply, by 80 per cent for US AID. Several international conferences and reports played on the same tune. (See for instance, A Better World for All, OECD, World Bank, IMF, 2002, Overcoming Poverty, UNDP, 2002, and MDG Reports) _ THE responsibilities of African and Asian governments are no less heavy. In Sub-Saharan Africa, since 1970, the population is growing faster than agriculture, leading to growing grain imports mostly devoted to cities. Today, many countries still face a population growth of two per cent or more for lack, until recently, of family planning policies. Besides, countries particularly vulnerable to draught have been unable to implement proper policies of storing grain. As to roads and electricity, the gap between investments needed and the actual disbursements exceeds 50 per cent. (UNCTAD, Investments Report, 2008)

Foreign aid, which plays a much bigger role than in Asia (up to 70-80 per cent of public expenditures), has been rather poor. Countless reports underline waste, ill-conceived projects, corruption, uneven calibre of expatriates. The result has been slow growth and rising poverty.

Unlike in SSA, Asia has benefited from a substantial agricultural growth supported by rural infrastructures leading to a reduction of poverty. The Green Revolution gave a big push to agriculture thanks to Ford and Rockefeller Foundations and thanks to the commitment of governments. Yields of clean rice and wheat grew from 1000-1200 kg/ha to 2000 or more in one year, reaching later 3000-4000 kg/ha. In a few years time grain imports fell down substantially. Rural infrastructures expanded. The rural economy became more diversified with rising non-agricultural jobs in services, small industries. Small farmers and landless labourers benefited from the overall development in terms of income. (See my paper in Mainstream, May 22, 2010) Such changes are common to areas fit for the GR, thanks to irrigation, the key factor in the GR which relies on new seeds and chemical fertilisers. In rainfed areas of most countries, plateaux with mediocre soils, progress has been much slower, and poverty alleviation remains limited. In India one must also mention the slow development, and often severe poverty in the Eastern plains, with limited irrigation in spite of a large unused potential.

With the GR came in China, India and other countries grain storage policies, whereby the government buys and stores part of cereals, to constitute buffer stocks compensating for a bad monsoon, or being partly distributed at a subsidised rate to the poor people.

Between the 1980s and 2004, agriculture and infrastructures have been neglected in many countries, leading to a slowdown of growth, many areas remaining very poor. _ HOW to envisage the future of the two continents? By an odd coincidence, from China to Pakistan, in 2004, agriculture made a comeback. Govern-ments became more concerned with growing gaps between urban and rural incomes, social tensions or incidents, especially in China and India, rising grain imports in some countries. This renewed interest for agriculture and rural infrastructures is welcome. China is investing heavily in villages. In other countries present efforts still seem limited.

One hears now Asians and foreign experts claim that it is time for "a second Green Revolution". This is a dangerous illusion, because the GR of the late 1960s was relatively easy and simple to implement. Today the tasks are much broader and costly. One has to considerably improve rural infrastructures. Electricity and roads, after being engines of growth, have become stumbling blocks to progress, with tubewells lacking power, roads poorly maintained. Similar shortcomings are not lacking in several other countries. Extension services have also deteriorated, research lacks funds and scholars. Post-harvest losses amount to 30-40 per cent of vegetables and fruit in China, India, Pakistan, at a time when the demand for such items is rising. Better marketing, including contract farming, is needed. Costly and complex efforts are required in the vast rainfed regions, where watershed development projects are progressing too slowly among populations often very poor.

As to SSA, one shudders when Jeffrey Sachs, one of the main architects of the MDG, claims that the GR could treble yields in Africa in a few years on the Asian model. (Financial Times, September 14, 2006) The continent faces severe constraints. Large river basins with rich alluvial soils, which accommodate the GR in Asia, are much less numerous south of the Sahara. In Asia in the late 1960s, irrigation amounted to 30-70 per cent of the total cultivated land, as against five per cent in SSA today. Agricultural productivity is also much below Asia thirty years ago. Shifting and burning cultivation technique with the hoe, is still widespread. It had its own rationale, saving much work but it relies on 10-20 years of fallow after a few years of cultivation. Under the population pressure, fallow is being curtailed, resulting in soil deterioration. One must also bear in mind that, by the end of the 19th century, the plough-except in Ethiopia-had not crossed the Sahara, nor the wheel, irrigation techniques, manuring except for kitchen gardens. Extension services, rural infrastructures, district administration are also much less developed than they were in Asia in the late 1970s. While changes are coming, such handicaps take time to overcome.

On the other hand, African farmers, illiterate or not, like farmers in Asia, are able and willing to innovate when their interests are involved. Since the 16th century, they adapted groundnuts, maize, tapioca, chillies coming from America. The first cocoa plantations in Ghana, at the end of the 19th century, were created by small local farmers. In Kenya there was a rush to grow coffee when, following the Mau Mau uprising in the 1950s, the British allowed the natives to do so. More recently, around big cities have appeared vegetable belts. Hybrid maize is progressing in Kenya, in Malawi. Thanks to a most efficient French development agency (CFDT) cotton has spread, after World War II, to West Africa. In the Sahel, farmers are adopting the Asian wells technique: a pulley, rope and bucket pulled by a camel or a horse. Ploughing with bullocks is no more so rare.

The big issue is to promote policies following a strict order of priorities: irrigation, thanks to the rivers Senegal and Niger in the Sahel, so draught prone, land reclamation in central and southern Africa, which enjoy better rainfall, including minor irrigation in lowlands. Considerable efforts are needed in research and extension services, promotion of roads and electricity. All these tasks are bound to be costly, complex and time consuming.

To sum up, in Asia, the level already reached by agriculture combined with the governments' storage policies prevent any risk of large scale famine or other catastrophes. Besides, the rural world benefits from the growth of industry and services, at least in the emerging countries. However, greater efforts are needed to accelerate poverty alleviation. Except in the least developed countries of the continent, massive aid is not needed, because the governments could bear the main efforts needed in terms of human and material resources. In SSA, any more efficient development policy implies considerable foreign aid, more concentrated with some agencies, instead of countless projects from NGOs, bilateral and multilateral channels, and in a number of cases more able and committed expatriates.

Finally, among the aid agencies, mindsets need to be reorientated towards peasants, by overcoming the lack of Western agricultural experts enjoying a solid grassroot experience. In SSA and Asia the gap between urban elites and villagers keeps on becoming wider. Already in 1975, the late M.N. Srinivas, a leading anthropologist, wrote about "the emergence of dual cultures" the former "based on urban middle classes", the latter on the "rural poor". And Srinivas added: the ignorance of the urban middle class about rural life, agriculture and values would not matter much but for the fact that officials and specialists hail from it and have an important say in decisions which affect villages. (M.N. Srinivas, On Living on the Revolution, New Delhi, Oxford University Press, 1992, pp. 79, 80)

Such comments apply equally to the other Asian countries as well as Africa.

Gilbert Etienne is an Emeritus Professor, Institute of International and Development Studies, Geneva.

South-South Cooperation with Special Reference to Sub-Saharan African Countries

Anshuman Gupta — 2010-09-08T08:15:49Z

I. Introduction

After independence from colonial rule, which most of the countries of Africa were reeling under, these countries set out on the course of their economic development independently. Though some development had taken place even under colonial rule, it was circumstantial, based on the needs of the colonial masters, devoid of any proper planning and vision. So, virtually almost all countries of Africa had to start their journey of development from the scratch. In the 1950s and 1960s, the economic models available were indicating towards the North for meaningful and productive cooperation on the premise of comparative advantages arising from differences in factor endowments between the South and the North. This was also appropriate at that time owing to the similar positions of the countries of the South on the economic front. Northern countries, rich in capital and technologies, were the only viable option for any economic cooperation. The North too took it up as an appropriate policy, both morally and economically, to forge economic cooperation with these economies and return to them in some forms what they had extracted from these economies during the colonial rule.

This cooperation came through many channels including the unilateral channel, bilateral channel and multilateral channel. The cooperation found more unilateral elements in it as these countries had little to offer in reciprocation. It was in the form of direct aid related to some development projects, concessional loans and market access to products originating from the African countries on a non-quid-pro-quo basis. The African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOVA) by the US was an example in this regard. Bilateral channels included something on the basis of mutuality. They mainly constituted FDI in these countries primerily in extractive industries. The multi-lateral and regional channels comprised the World Bank, IMF, EU etc. The EU has the 'Everything But Arms' Agreement with poor countries of the South, under which it unilaterally provides products coming from these countries access on preferential basis. This is being replaced by Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) which is based on the principle of quid-pro-quo.

The Bretton Woods institutions (World Bank and IMF), which are virtually run by the North, also opened a window of cooperation by providing soft loans for development purposes and loans for meeting the BoP crisis respectively. However, something fundamentally has gone wrong with North-South cooperation. Its testimony is the per capita incomes of most of the Sub-Saharan countries, most of which have been dependent on such cooperation right from the beginning; these have either gone down or stagnated at the level of 1980, though other factors, like political instability, locational disadvantage etc., are also responsible for it. A major part of the economic plight of the Sub-Saharan countries was due to their reliance on Western technology, which did not match their basic endowments. (Sharma, 1993) As a whole, the Sub-Saharan region's per capita Gross Domestic Product declined by 1.2 per cent during the period 1981-1990 and by 0.2 per cent over the period 1991-2000. (Dupasquier and Osakwe, 2007) During 1980-2002, its share in the world trade fell from 4.6 per cent to less than 1.8 per cent.1 The Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP), initiated by the IMF in these economies, also did not produce the desired results.2

The monetarist model, prescribed by the IMF to the African countries going for help to it for their BoP problems, produced more ill-effects than doing good to them.3 Moreover, it has been ironical that in spite of their industries being at a nascent stage invoking the infant industry argument and all the conditions of the market failures (warranting protected markets for the nascent industries in Africa in general) prevailing there, the IMF prescribed for them the open market policies designed under the Washington Consensus, which either destabilised their infant industrial base or did not let it come to a critical level. This becomes more surprising because these market failure conditions and infant industry argument giving preferences to the protected market over the open one have been espoused by the Western economists only and they are well documented in the textbooks. They are referred to as the theory of the second best.4

The African countries were fit cases for the theory of the second best though some economists argue that instead of using the theory of the second best, it is more appropriate to deal with the market failure directly. For example, if there is excessive unemployment in an economy, it is better to subsidise the labour-intensive industry directly rather than protecting them from free trade by using tariff or non-tariff means. This would at least avoid the consumption distortion in the economy.5 However, this argument is more relevant in cases of developed or emerging economies. In case of poor countries, it would be even more harmful as it would be resulting in extra burden on their exchequers, and these countries already run in deficit owing to the narrow tax bases of their economies. Further, the removal or reduction of tariffs would make these tax bases still more thin. Moreover, the free trade policy would not let even these subsidised industries come up to a critical level owing to intense competition from outside. So this argument is more relevant in the countries where industries have set their feet firmly, not in countries where things have to start from the scratch.

All the policies stemming from the Washington Consensus based on neo-liberalism, including privatisation, liberalisation and deregulation, without proper attention to pre-conditions for them and their pace and sequencing, only harmed the countries seeking help from the IMF.6 Excessive obsession about fighting inflation at the cost of growth and employment creation took its toll on the IMF disciples' economies.7 In fact, the countries which bypassed the advice of the IMF performed better.8 Even bilateral relations, ostensibly based on mutuality did more good to the countries of the North by bringing little benefits to the African countries, as they could produce little positive externalities.9 Though two important agreements-like AGOVA and Everything But Arms (EBA)-opened the markets for the goods originating from Africa, their positive impact eroded in the backdrop of the overall reduction of tariff and non-tariff barriers by the North in the multilateral framework10 and the still persistent unfair trading system, whereby the North is till date maintaining huge subsidies in the agricultural sector, an important sector for the African countries. So in a nutshell, North-South cooperation has not brought the desired results for these economies. It did more good to the economies of the North than the economies of the South in general and the Sub-Saharan African countries in particular. More often than not, it turned into a donor-donee relationship which brought in the exploitative elements.

It is in this background that the present paper tries to see critically the case of South-South cooperation and attempts to find out some bases for increasing trade and investments within the South in general and between India and the African countries in particular. It analyses the present trends in trade and investment between India and the African countries. It tries to explain the reasons as to why the trade and investment ties have been low between them and attempts to give some recommendations to improve the economic ties between India and the African countries. The second section analyses the justification for South-South cooperation and seeks to find a basis for increasing trade and investment between India and Africa. The third section critically analyses the recent trends in trade and investments in Africa. The fourth section attempts to critically examine the reasons for the low level of trade and investment relations between India and Africa with empirical analysis. The fifth section gives results of the augmented-gravity model to show the factors impacting the decisions of the Indian exporters for the destination of their exports, especially in Africa. The sixth section comes out with conclusions and some policy recommendations on the basis of discussions and the results of the gravity model.

II South-South Cooperation: Bases for Increasing Economic Ties

THOUGH talk about South-South cooperation is not a new phenomenon, and its genesis can be traced to the time of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) [even if, at that time, it was more in reference to the political considerations)], it got a new impetus especially after the 1997 currency crisis. The idea again shot into prominence after the recent financial crisis, when it became evident to many countries from the South that they could no longer be dependent on the North. The profligacy on the part of one country (the US) has brought the whole international financial system and eventually the world economic system to a virtual halt. It resulted in a massive shrinkage of the world economy with a substantial scale down of the GDP and large scale unemployment, and the phenomena continue to this day. No country is totally unaffected by it. The scale of damage is dependent on the degree of integration of the respective country to the world economy, especially to the North. All-round measures are being initiated to salvage the world economy from slipping into deep recession. Though the major economies of the world are now showing signs of recovery, it has already inflicted much damage on the world economy, especially the African economies, much dependent for the export of commodities to these markets.

Now the countries of the South in general have realised about the fundamental problem of over-dependence on the North, especially the US. They have started looking at some alternative economies for playing the role of a power-house, currently being played by the North, especially the US. They are also mindful of the fact that in the current scenario, some countries in the South also, such as Brazil, India, China, South Africa, can assume the same role. They have developed indigenous technologies in many fields. There is re-intensification of efforts for looking inward to the South, whose testimony is in the all-round attempts to forge new regional agreements and strengthening the old ones in the South. The usage of inappropriate Western technologies, which are highly capital intensive, by the Sub-Saharan countries resulted in the decline of the marginal return on their investments and near absence of backward and forward linkages. So there is a strong case for South-South cooperation. (Sharma, 1993) India can help the Sub-Saharan countries especially in small-scale industries and agriculture.11

It is in this backdrop that the African countries, which got adversely affected in a large measure by the recent economic turmoil, have also realised the systemic problem of being excessively dependent on the North. African countries as a whole recorded reduction in the growth of the GDP from 6.2 per cent in 2007-08 to 5.2 per cent in 2008-09, which has been further projected by the IMF to go down to two per cent in 2009-10.12 The countries of the Sub-Saharan region are still worse. They accounted for reduction in the average growth of the GDP from 6.9 per cent in 2007-08 to 5.5 per cent in 2008-09. This has been further projected to scale down to 1.7 per cent in 2009-10. In this recessionary situation, in fact, the reasonably good growth rates of China and India, which recorded nine per cent and 7.3 per cent respectively during 2008-09, and their increased trade relations with the African countries have come as a saviour for these economies. Furthermore, the gradual democratic movement in African countries, making their governments more accountable to the people, has forced the ruling classes in these countries to be more introspective and come out of the narrow, self-serving policies to do real good in general. They want to break out of the donor-donee relationship and seek ties based on mutuality. This mindset of the African countries is providing a good platform to the giant countries of the South, especially India, to forge economic ties with the African states, especially Sub-Saharan countries, based on mutuality. These economic ties with the countries of the South will give many additional advantages to the African nations, something that is often missing in the case of ties with the North. They are:

• The technologies developed in the South would be more suitable to the endowments of the African countries. (Kumar 1987)

• These technologies can be further adapted to the scale and other conditions of the recipient countries.13

• These economic ties are more likely to provide the backward and forward linkages with other sectors in the economy.

• Since these technologies and related capital goods would be cheaper than what they were importing from the North, it would save their precious foreign exchange.14

• Since these technologies are relatively simple, they will reduce the dependency on foreign experts, saving further their hard currency.15

• It will diversify their economies into the genuine industrial sector, which will reduce their over-dependence on primary products for exports.

• And finally, these would be helpful in meeting the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)._

REFERENCES

Dupasquier, Chantal and Osakwe, Patrick N. (2007), "Trade Regimes, Liberalisation and Macroeconomic Instability in Africa" in Senghor, Jeggan C. and Poku, Nana K. (eds.), Toward Africa's Renewal, Ashgate Publishers, England.

Kumar, Nagesh (1987), "Transfer of Industrial Technology to Africa: Prospects of South-South Cooperation" in African Economic Development: An Agenda for Future, Crescent Printing Works Private Limited, RIS, New Delhi.

Kankwenda, Mbaya J. (2007), "Revisiting the African Development Trajectory: From LPA to NEPAD" in Senghor, Jeggan C. and Poku, Nana K. (eds.), Toward Africa's Renewal, Ashgate Publishers, England.

Krugman, Paul R. and Obstfeld, Maurice (2003), International Economics: Theory and Policy, Dorling Kindersley, India.

Sharma, Raj (1993), The Missing Middle in Sub-Saharan Africa: Role of South-South Cooperation, RIS, Interest Publication, India.

Stiglitz, Joseph (2002), Globalisation and Its Discontent, Penguin Group, India.

WEO (2009), Crisis and Recovery, World Economic Outlook (IMF), April.

WTDR (2007), "Building a Development-Friendly World Trading System", World Trade and Development Report, RIS, Oxford University Press.

FOOTNOTES

1. Dupasquier and Osakwe (2007).

2. Kankwenda (2007).

3. Ibid.

4. Krugman (2003).

5. Ibid.

6. Stiglitz (2002).

7. Ibid.

8. Stiglitz (2006).

9. Kankwenda (2007).

10. WTDR (2007).

11. Sharma (1993).

12. WEO (2009).

13. Kumar (1987).

14. Ibid.

15. Kumar (1987).

Dr Anshuman Gupta is the Head of Economics and International Business Department, University of Petroleum and Energy Studies, Dehradun.

Kyrgyzstan: A Pawn in the Geopolitical Game

Ash Narain Roy — 2010-09-08T07:54:42Z

Not content with having one finger in the Afghan pie, the United States is trying to pull out a plum in Kyrgyzstan and other Central Asian republics too. The "Tulip Revolution" of 2005 in Kyrgyzstan and the earlier "Rose Revolution" in Georgia and the "Orange Revolution" in Ukraine were all engineered by the Americans primarily to undermine Russia and to weaken its regional clout. Today, all these manufactured revolutions are floundering, with Ukraine having crossed over to the Russian side and Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili getting a bloody nose after his misadventure in 2008 against Russia.

It is an open secret that Georgia's "Rose Revolution" had been planned and centrally coordinated by the US Government. The Wall Street Journal had credited it to "a raft of non-governmental organisations supported by American and other Western foundations." It was a similar story with Ukraine's "Orange Revolution". In 2005 when the corrupt Kyrgyz President, Askar Akayev, was toppled, the Bush Administration celebrated it as a victory of democratic values. Now that the utterly corrupt and repressive successor regime has been toppled, the Americans see a Russian hand.

It is of course easy to blame Russia. Moscow has become a favourite whipping boy of the West. But the reasons lie elsewhere. Last June's pogroms were the handiwork of the remnants of the Bakiyev political machine, prominent mainstream politicians and organised crime. Given the interim government's inability to handle the situation and addressing the causes and consequences of violence, the danger of another explosion is quite high.

The turmoil in Kyrgyzstan will have a destabilising impact on the already fragile situation in Central Asia. A climate of bitterness and resentment has been created which could poison all of Central Asia for generations. One only hopes Central Asia does not see the cycle of ethnic violence that former Yugoslavia witnessed a few years ago.

For some reason the present President, Roza Otunbayeva, has desisted from seeking external help. Unlike in 1990, when Soviet troops were deployed there to normalise the situation, this time, Moscow has declined to send peacekeepers. The UN Security Council too has done precious little. The country is virtually divided. The writ of the Central Government does not run in the south where the authorities are engaged in a punitive anti-Uzbek policy. Kyrgyzstan is 75 per cent Muslim, with 65 per cent of the population ethnic Kyrgyz and 14 per cent Uzbek. Russians constitute 12.5 per cent of the population.

The US has an air base in Manas which is a key hub for troops, equipment, ammunition and other supplies for the NATO forces in Afghanistan. There are indications that the US may use the current volatile situation in Kyrgyzstan to strengthen its hold in Central Asia. Since the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 NATO troops and warplanes have operated out of bases in Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan. The Pentagon has announced plans to open training centres in Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan in addition to the transit centre at Manas through which 50,000 US and NATO troops pass each month to and from Afghanistan.

The five former Soviet Central Asian Republics -Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan-are NATO's Partnership for Peace members. Going by the recent aggressive US postures towards China in its vicinity, analysts believe the same tactics will be used against Central Asian countries who are slowly moving back into the Russian fold. The joint naval exercises with South Korea, that consisted of 200 aircraft and 8000 troops in the Sea of Japan, and a spirited diplomatic defence of the freedom of South China Sea are clearly meant to convey a message to China and Russia.

During her trips to nine nations from the Baltic to the South China Sea, especially during her stays in Georgia and Vietnam, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton made a startling revelation. She said that the US recognises no "spheres of influence" by any other nation anywhere in the world, including the ones by Russia and China on their borders and in their immediate neighbourhoods and that Washington reserves the exclusive right to intervene in regional conflicts around the world and to internationalise them when and how it deems fit.

WASHINGTON'S intentions are clear. The US finds Kyrgyzstan a perfect place to implement its coercive strategy. Kyrgyzstan has all along offered the coalition forces unrestricted overflight rights for aircraft flying combat, humanitarian and search-and-rescue missions. Some years ago, when Bakiyev threatened to shut down the base, the US promptly tripled the annual rent. It is very clear Washington wants to use the Manas base for carrying out its game plan for Central Asia.

Manas is the only NATO military base in the region outside Afghanistan since 2005, when Kazakhstan closed a US support hub there. Such is the geography and strategic importance of the Manas base that the US will never give it up. Not many believe America's mission in Afghanistan will be over soon even though the bulk of US troops is withdrawing. Central Asia is far more important than Afghanistan in terms of energy resources.

The way world politics is evolving, the US will continue to see Russia and China in antagonistic terms. Promotion of democracy is a façade; it is the new "Great Game" that is being played all over again for supremacy and strategic control over resources. What Afghanistan is going through may happen elsewhere in the region as well. The Great Game will be soaked in blood and may turn into the devil's tears for the Central Asian region and its hapless people. The playing fields will be dirtied by oil barons and multinationals, corrupt leaders and warlords.

Russians have reasons to worry. It has to ensure Kyrgyzstan does not become a Kosovo. There is already growing resistance to the deployment of even a symbolic police force from the Organisation for Cooperation and Security in Europe (OSCE) into the two troubled cities in south Kyrgyzstan. The Americans could be behind this.

Hundreds of people were killed last June when ethnic Kyrgyz and Uzbeks had clashed in and around the cities of Osh and Jalalabad. If such eruptions resume, the local police will not be able to contain such violence. The Mayor of Osh has opposed the deployment of foreign force. Posters and banners like "No Kosovo" and "No Yugoslavia in Kyrgyzstan" could be seen in many parts of the country.

Controlled chaos seems to be the strategy that the US is following in its bid to gain firmer hold in the region. If there is destabilisation in Central Asia, the US will be tempted to bring in part of its contingent from Afghanistan. Such fears are being expressed in Russia and Central Asia. Kyrgyzstan is incendiary enough. One hopes it does not become a tinder box.

The author is the Associate Director, Institute of Social Sciences, New Delhi.

Bijbehara: A Challenge to Nation's Conscience

Nikhil Chakravartty — 2010-09-08T07:50:46Z

Autumn has set in-the chinar in its gorgeous robe. But it is an autumn of bitter sorrow for the hapless people of Kashmir. The Valley which was known as the paradise on earth has been turned into a trough of hatred, of blood and tears.

On Friday last week the portals of Hazratbal were barred as the Indian Army had laid siege of the mosque complex in pursuit of the militants. To protest against this siege of the holy of holies for every Kashmiri Muslim, the common folk in the small town of Bijbehara took out a demons-tration which was angry in its mood but indulged in no acts of violence. But the defiance of the curfew by the marchers enraged the BSF which went berserk and mowed down to death more than 50 and wounded another hundred or more.

These were no armed secessionists, but unarmed citizens. The authorities promptly barred mediapersons from getting into the town-some were beaten up and their cameras seized-but one intrepid among them who could manage to sneak in, has reported that the dead were young boys, including a Hindu boy. The searing poignancy of this act of barbarism was brought out by his reporting that "not even a single family has remained unaffected by Friday's violence" and when the bodies arrived after post-mortem, "the wails of womenfolk reached a crescendo" as these were lowered into graves.

This way, mourning turns into anger and unwillingly, the security forces instead of quelling the secessionists seem to unwittingly help to swell the ranks of the adherents, supporters and fellow-travellers of the secessionists in the Kashmir Valley. A thousand cordons along the border shall not help to avert the catastrophe as the mounting anger against the armed might of India antagonises the people of the Kashmir Valley.

Six months ago, a very senior office-holder under the government with wide experience of administration was explaining to the present writer that while Nagaland in the sixties had lapsed into insurgency, he would not say the same thing about Kashmir as, according to him, the people in the villages were not offering active support to the militants. After the siege of Hazratbal and its fall-out with such a bloody shooting spree at Bijbehara, are not the security forces helping to breed a state of insurgency?

The government has announced a grant of one lakh rupees for the family of the slain and has instituted a magisterial enquiry into the shooting. Do the government high-ups feel that such rituals would mollify the people at Bijbehara and the Kashmir Valley? What a world of make-believe are our authorities living in! Even in normal conditions, a police firing in any part of the country raises the demand for judicial enquiry. And here after the massacre-a massacre indeed!-at Bijbehara there would only be a magisterial enquiry. The BSF version was that a mob attack on the police station led to the shooting, but the SHO himself denied any such mob attack. Kashmir's Divisional Commissioner visiting the town next day observed: "There was no witness to confirm firing on the BSF at Bijbehara." And with all this, the government is fighting shy of commissioning a judicial enquiry into the gory incident.

No, this is not a matter for quibbling over enquiries, magisterial or judicial. Bijbehara has thrown up a challenge to the conscience of the entire nation. It has brought out that in the name of fighting out secessionist militants, those responsible for the governance of this great country are themselves hitting at the very foundations of our democratic republic. Such acts of folly, leading to insensate violence on the part of those entrusted to govern, do not evoke respect and consent but provoke revulsion and angry insubordination. A republic does not last by enforced submission of its people at gun-point. It has just the reverse effect.

Against this ghastly brutality perpetrated at Bijbehara, it's time for our political leaders to hang down their heads in shame and remorse. For they share, in diverse measure, the guilt for letting things drift into this shocking state of affairs that security forces should be so dehumanised as to run amuck committing such a crime. And is Bijbehara a solitary case of security forces transgressing into barbarity by the strength of the gun? All these four years, the government told the public that the militants provoked violence and the security forces had to bear the burnt of it. So much so that our government resorted to an ingenious argument that sought to put the security forces on a par with the aggrieved citizens in the matter of many violations of human rights in Kashmir. It's time that the true state of affairs in Kashmir were brought out in the sun and let the nation judge for itself whether the Republic is reinforced or undermined with the way our government is dealing with the people of Kashmir.

Every democrat in this great democracy of ours has to stand by the people in Bijbehara at this moment of sorrow and despair. And our leaders from Kashmir, where are they, what are they doing? Mufti Mohammed Sayeed, who became the Home Minister of India, is a native son of Bijbehara. Its lane and by-lanes, its street-corners and maidans have witnessed Mufti Sahib growing up in the politics of Kashmir. He could not possibly be sleeping in peace, tormented as he must be-at least, should be-by the trauma of his fellow-citizens at Bijbehara. Why don't you go there, Mufti Sahib, at this hour of agony and bring strength to their spirits? And if you stand by them, you will add strength to your own arms and help this Republic of ours. This is the way the sinew of a nation's morale is built, which no amount of politicking from a distance will do.

In our midst, in virtual exile of political isolation, there is Syed Mir Qasim, whose maturity and experience the Prime Minister could have harnessed with profit if he so desired. Isn't it time for Qasim Sahib to go on his own to his native soil, facing all the hazards thereby? When people are in a state of emotional shock, they look upto their leaders to come and stand by them. Such a moment has come for all our Kashmir leaders. If they miss to respond in these testing times, they will become castaways of history. Forgetting petty squabbles and irritations, if they all join hands and put their heads together, there must come a way out of the tragic impasse into which this picturesque corner of our great subcontinent has been forced into. More than at any time in the past, the people of Kashmir today cry for the healing touch and that alone can bring back peace and harmony. And if we succeed in the Valley, it will bring back amity with our neighbour, Pakistan.

Guns on either side do not solve crises. What's needed today is the courage to call for peace-the courage that made Gandhi into the Mahatma.

(Mainstream, October 30, 1993)

Letter to the BJP President

Shabnam Hashmi — 2010-09-08T07:48:12Z

The following letter was sent by the ANHAD Managing Trustee, Shabnam Hashmi, to Nitin Gadkari, the BJP President, on August 21, 2010.

Dear Mr Gadkari,

I am absolutely shocked to see a BJP advertisement issued by your party in The Indian Express on August 20, 2010 and Navbharat Times on August 21, 2010 wherein a photograph of an ANHAD demonstration at Jantar Mantar, New Delhi, held on July 8, 2010, has been misused. In the said advertisement on top of the photograph appears the slogan of your party "Kashmir Bachao Divas" being organised by the BJP today at 3 pm at the Mavlankar Auditorium, Constitution Club, New Delhi.

ANHAD, which was formed in 2003 in response to the hate ideology of the Sangh Parivar displayed during the Gujarat carnage of 2002, is an anti-communal organisation. ANHAD has worked for the last eight years against communal activities in India and for upholding the values of the Indian Constitution.

To use our photograph in your advertisement is not only an insult to ANHAD but it also grossly defames our organisation because it seems to suggest that ANHAD has given the consent to the BJP to use the photograph of its demonstration. Nothing could be further from the truth.

THE demonstration organised by ANHAD was specifically regarding the excessive acts of violence by the security forces in Kashmir. Our dharna was essentially against the methods of the Army and paramilitary forces against unarmed civilians and innocent persons. The dharna highlighted the fact that the policies of Kashmir and Delhi governments are resulting in the alienation of the people of the State who have been suffering violations of their civic rights for years. Rather than understanding the grievances of the people and addressing them through peaceful negotiations, the authorities have decided to increase deployment thus worsening the situation. The dharna was to urge the govern-ments to reverse their policies and to show remorse and to apologise for the deaths of innocent people. This is in total contrast to the BJP meeting which is unconcerned about the plight of the people of Kashmir and looks at the issue as a law and order problem and calls for even more severe repression by the use of the security forces.

To connect our photograph with your programme is defamatory and illegal. Our grievance with respect to the use of a photograph about our dharna in your advertisement goes beyond your Kashmir Bachao Divas as ANHAD and BJP are two diametrically opposite organi-sations as per our understanding of upholding the constitutional values in the country.

To carry a photograph of people associated with Anhad in association with your party itself, irrespective of the issue, is defamatory, unethical and illegal as it gives a clear impression to the public at large that our organisation and those associated with Anhad whose photographs are clearly visible in your advertisement are associated with the BJP and associate with your views.

Mr Gadkari, we are a small voluntary organi-sation but we see every word before it goes out in public, perhaps a small tip to learn from. It definitely gives us some comic relief about the total ideological bankruptcy of the BJP which uses the ANHAD photograph with slogans "10,000 Missing in Kashmir-who is responsible? Stop Killing Innocent People in Kashmir", while having a diametrically opposite understanding about the issue.

We call upon the BJP to issue an advertisement of equal size in all the newspapers in which this advertisement has appeared apologising for the use of that photograph and stating therein that ANHAD and the persons who are shown in the photograph have nothing to do with the BJP.

If we do not receive a satisfactory answer within one week we will be at liberty to take further action in accordance with law.

Yours sincerely,

Shabnam Hashmi

Russia and Pakistan after the Quadrilateral Sochi Summit

Sergei Kamenev — 2010-09-08T07:42:54Z

The August 18-19 Sochi summit, attended by the leaders of Russia, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Tajikistan (the second quadrilateral one after the July 2009 Dushanbe meeting), showed that the format indeed helps to address the geo-political problems of Central Asia and to strengthen peace and security in the region.

The Sochi agenda was topped by the struggle against drug trafficking and terrorism and by the economic cooperation between the region's countries. The tragic situation in Pakistan, the country where unprecedented floods have caused a national disaster, drew special attention at the summit. The leaders of the four countries also discussed joint antinarcotics efforts and the prospects for stabilising Afghanistan-particularly its border zone adjacent to Pakistan-and Pakistan's tribal zone in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province (previously known as the North-West Frontier Province).

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev and his Pakistani counterpart, Asif Ali Zardari, confirmed at a bilateral meeting during the summit that the two countries are interested in broader cooperation in economy and international politics. At the opening of the meeting, the Presidents offered each other condolences as Russia had recently faced an unusually intense drought and forest fires and Pakistan had suffered devastating floods. Due to the critical situation in Pakistan, President Zardari had to leave the summit in several hours instead of staying for two days as was previously planned. Stressing that Russia is seeking closer economic partnership with Pakistan, President Medvedev expressed regrets that little had been accomplished up to date the hoped that the cooperation will grow more dynamism in the nearest future.

Pakistan, hit by floods, is watched with compassion across the world. Socio-economic consequences of the disaster will spread beyond the Pakistani borders and affect entire Central Asia. According to current estimates, some 20,000,000 people have suffered from the catastrophe which left almost 1700 dead and 2090 injured and hospitalised. The floods in Pakistan destroyed 576,000 residences and the country was forced to set up 1520 provisional camps, but large numbers of people still remain unsheltered and have to survive on small pieces of land not yet inundated. At the moment Pakistan is facing the threat of a famine and epidemics. UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon described the situation in the country as terrible and heart-wrenching. He said he had never seen a natural disaster of such proportions and called for faster international relief.

Even though the majority of countries and international organisations have already responded to Pakistan's call for help at the moment, the international relief could still be more extensive. The Asian Development Bank is expected to extend a $ 2 billion emergency loan to Pakistan, the World Bank has already given the country $ 900 million, and the UN intends to provide $ 460 million, of which $ 272 million have already been delivered. Saudi Arabia and the Organisation of the Islamic Conference have pledged $ 70 million and $ 11 million respectively (the latter is allocating funds via the Islamic Development Bank). Russia has also taken an active role in the relief campaign-several IL-76 aircraft of the Russian Ministry for Emergency Situations have already landed in Pakistan with humanitarian aid.

AS for the current state of the economic relations between Russia and Pakistan, it is true that it leaves much to be desired, and the country's Presidents had to admit in Sochi that no progress is being made. The trade turnover between Russia and Pakistan barely passed the $ 400 million mark (in stark contrast, Pakistan's trade turnover with India-the country Islamabad clearly can't count among its friends-has broken the $ 2 billion ceiling and continues to post steady growth). It is a serious result of the Sochi summit that-as the Russian and Pakistan leaders have decided-the inter-government commission on bilateral cooperation established several years ago will finally hold its first working conference in September after a protracted period of inaction. President Medvedev expressed Russia's interest in joining the $ 7.6 billion Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline construction project (the pipeline will stretch over 1000 km) and in helping Pakistan upgrade the Karachi metallurgic plan, built in 1985 with Soviet assistance (the capacity of the plant, currently having 1.1 million tonne output of steel annually, should reach 1.5 million tonnes and 3 million tonnes after the first and second phases of the upgrade). Russia and Pakistan will also look into the existing opportunities for cooperation in the rail transit and energy sectors. The Russian President suggested that greater numbers of Pakistani students seek admission in Russian universities. As a significant initiative, Russian banks will likely open divisions in Pakistan to service export and import operations. Russia's Foreign Minister S. Lavrov told the media that economic cooperation should be the engine of growth of the relations between Russia and Pakistan.

President Zardari invited Russia to invest in the Pakistani energy sector, mountain industry, and manufacturing infrastructures. It was agreed that President Medvedev would visit Pakistan, and President Zardari stressed that as a superpower Russia is playing an important role in maintaining stability in South and Central Asia.

This is not the first time a Russian leader has been invited to Pakistan-so far the tours by lower-ranking Russian officials have produced minimal results. What could be the explanation behind the stagnation? I spent years searching for the answer as a scholar professionally interested in Pakistan. Can't Russia join as an observer the international organisations where Pakistan is present? In the past, Russia supported Pakistan's successful bid to join the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation as an observer. Pakistan assisted Russia in entering the Organisation of the Islamic Conference where Russia currently has an observer status.

From the standpoint of the development of relations between Russia and Pakistan, it would be beneficial for Moscow to get incorporated into such groups as SAARC (South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation) and Friends of Democratic Pakistan (its current membership includes Australia, Great Britain, Italy, Canada, China, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, the US, Turkey, France, Japan, and representatives of the UN and EU).

At present Pakistan is led by a new civilian President and a new government, reaffirms its commitment to building up economic and political relations with Russia, and even to opening negotiations with Moscow over arms trade. Somehow, Moscow seems to avoid practical steps and routinely limits its involvement to fairly unproductive discussions. It should be realised that concerns over the potential discontent in Delhi which no doubt would react negatively to Russia's rapprochement with Pakistan reflect an obsolete political vision. For ages India has not been regarding Russia as the number one partner in many spheres, its 2010 nuclear energy deal with the US and Canada and massive acquisitions of Israeli military electronics exemplifying the trend. For Russia, ignoring Pakistan-the country with a population of 175,000,000 located in a strategic region and neighbouring Afghanistan, India, and China-is an ill-conceived strategy. Moreover, New Delhi's willingness to normalise its relations with Islamabad, that was clearly demonstrated during the talks between the Indian and Pakistani Foreign Ministers on July 15, should also be taken into account. Today, ample opportunities are available to promote the economic-and even political-relations between Russia and Pakistan.

Sergei Kamenev is the head of the Pakistan sector of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences in Moscow.

China and Pakistan Relations: A New Chapter

Gunjan Singh — 2010-09-08T07:37:14Z

During the recent visit by the Pakistani President, Asif Ali Zardari, to Beijing both sides declared to take forward the ‘all-weather friendship'. China and Pakistan have declared that they intend to build a railway line which will connect the Khunjerab Pass with Chinese towns including Kashgar. In addition to this, both the countries signed six agreements which covered areas ranging from health care and technology, justice and media, and agriculture and economy. During his visit President Zardari also met with the President of Exim Bank as well as the President of the Three Gorges Corporation. What was declared is that the company is interested in building dams at the Pakistani regions of Bunji and Kohala. It is expected that these dams will generate about 7000 and 12,000 megawatts or power respectively.

The next year marks the establishment of 60 years of diplomatic relations between Pakistan and China and Beijing insisted on starting the preparations for celebrations in time. Both sides also agreed to maintain contacts with respect to the reformulation of the United Nations Security Council. In another important development the Chinese military with its Pakistani counterparts undertook a joint anti-terrorism exercise from July 1 to 11, 2010 at the bordering province of Ningxia. What was surprising is that the Chinese officials did not specify the status of the nuclear cooperation between both the sides.

This move by Beijing becomes interesting when viewed in the context of its domestic developments. This step gives Kashgar the status of a special economic zone. This will provide encouragement in the establishment of business and industries in the city. By connecting it to Pakistan, Beijing is also ensuring an easy and direct access to an untapped market. This will definitely boost the status of trade between both the parties. On the other hand, so far the north-western regions of China were underdeveloped as most of the economic development happened along the coastal belt. With this move, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is attempting to prove to the domestic constituency that it is equally committed to the development of the inland provinces as well. The CCP is also worried about the increasing discontent which is brewing among the ethnic minorities. Last year witnessed one of the most severe riots in Urumqi, Xinjiang. Beijing was also taken aback by the severity of that riot. By giving access to Pakistan, the CCP is also hoping to control the Islamist elements in this region. China is using its friend Pakistan to the fullest extent in order to maintain peace and stability within its borders.

This opportunity is one which Islamabad will also love to exploit to the fullest. In addition to the promise of the rail link that promises to boost the already fragile Pakistani economy, they have also reached a tacit agreement for the conclusion of a nuclear deal from Beijing, that will be on the lines of the Indo-US nuclear deal. It is a known fact that the Pakistani nuclear industry is heavily dependent on Chinese support. Beijing has consistently provided Islamabad with the required help for the building of nuclear capabilities.

•

HOW should India perceive this development?

As far as India is concerned, this is a ‘glass-half-full' situation. There are negative as well as positive consequences. One could be worried about the negative consequences of the rail link as this development following the emergence of ports surrounding India looks like the Chinese are working on a plan vis-a-vis India. It could possibly give China unhindered access to the Indian border regions. The rail link will provide for easy transport of people and other requirements near the Indian border. From a clear strategic point of view, India needs to streamline its development goals in the regions bordering Pakistan as well as China. In a situation of conflict, Beijing can successfully mobilise its troops on either side of the Indian border with unprecedented ease.

On the other hand, this very development can be perceived positively as well. The projection of the success of this move can bring about some stability in the already fragile Pakistani economy. Connectivity and access to markets can integrate the economy with the world and as it becomes more globalised and as the people start to reap the benefits and become prosperous, there will be a compulsion on Islamabad's part to keep distance from extremism. One explanation for the extremist tendencies of Pakistan has been its sense of insecurity fuelled by the backward state of the economy. Once the people start to have better opportunities of employment and also a meaningful stake in maintaining law and order, it can be hoped that Pakistan would move away from extremism. Ultimately, a stable and peaceful Pakistan is what New Delhi wants and it will be in the larger interest of the region.

It is an unfortunate fact that India's lack of initiative stands in stark contrast to Chinese actions in South Asia. India could have gained more than China ever can from the South Asian neighborhood. However, India's regional policy has never had a long-term perspective. The fact that China is willing to overcome geographical constraints to reach to Pakistan shows that it is a long-term player in the region. Therefore, it would serve India better to embark on a course in our neighbourhood with a note of optimism in developing common ground and with a sense of purpose guided by a long-term perspective.

Gunjan Singh is a Research Assistant, Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses, New Delhi.

Crossing the Rubicon: Indo-Japan Nuclear Cooperation

Prakash Pillai — 2010-09-08T07:35:01Z

The Indo-Japan relationship scaled a new height after Japan successfully opted to negotiate with India regarding civil nuclear cooperation between the two states. The ice-breaking decision was taken on the sidelines of the G-20 summit in Toronto, where for the first time Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and his new Japanese counter-part, Naoto Kan, discussed the global security situation, including the civil nuclear cooperation. On the following day (June 28, 2010) India and Japan commenced the first round of negotiations discussing the core issues between India and Japan in Tokyo where the Indian side was represented by Joint Secretary Gautam Bambawale from the Ministry of External Affairs, while Deputy-Director General of Foreign Affairs Mitsuru Kitano led the Japanese side. Thus formally commenced negotiations between India and Japan to help secure a nuclear deal. Three fruitful sets of discussions on the strategic issue entered the crucial fourth round recently on August 21, 2010 in New Delhi where Japanese Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada met External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna and discussed a whole gamut of issues, including the nuclear deal. Besides, the Okada-led team met Prime Minister Manmohan Singh regarding the ongoing nuclear talks; thereafter the team met Deputy Chairman of the Planning Commission Montek Singh Ahluwalia and Minister of State for Environment and Forests Jairam Ramesh before returning to Tokyo.

The visit of Okada, prior to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's visit to Tokyo on October to finalise the Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA), exemplifies the Japanese commitment towards India in strengthening the bilateral relationship. It is expected that the partnership will increase India-Japan commerce tenfold. Meanwhile, the 2+2 dialogue, established between India and Japan, helps both the countries to cooperate in the field of maritime security and counter- terrorism. Both in the economic and political realms, India-Japan relations are materialising fast. However, the question remains: will Japan cross the nuclear Rubicon by signing the nuclear deal with the non-NPT member, nuclear India? The question is important because Japan, as a victim of the use of nuclear weapons, unilaterally renounced nuclear war and signed the NPT in 1970 which was ratified by the Diet in 1976.

Since the end of World War II Japanese are sensitive towards nuclear related issues. The three non-nuclear principle (Hikaku San Gensoku) strongly advocate Japan "not to possess nor manufacture nuclear weapons, nor to permit their introduction into Japanese territory". When India conducted its 1974 and 1998 nuclear tests, Japan imposed economic sanctions and criticised India's nuclear policy in various disarmament fora. In a recent development the anti-nuclear lobby/group along with the frontline Japanese media launched an anti-nuclear campaign against the ongoing nuclear talks between India and Japan. The Hiroshima and Nagasaki Mayors protested publicly and called upon the Japanese Government to terminate the discussions on the nuclear deal with the non-NPT member, nuclear India. Further, the duo met Japanese Premier Naoto Kan in his office to persuade him not to encourage non-NPT members like India for civil nuclear cooperation. The Premier also showed concern over the issue and assured that he would pursue "nuclear disarmament, non-proliferation and step up our effort to get India to sign the nuclear non-proliferation treaty".

THE major challenges to the nuclear deal emerge from two quarters-first, the anti-nuclear lobby backed by prominent members like Nagasaki Mayor Tomihisa Taue. Secondly, from the fragile political leadership; former Prime Minster Hatoyama Yukio's inability to handle the issue over the Futenma air base in Okinawa led him to resign from office. Thus Kan is constantly counselled to exercise caution in formulating the nuclear deal with India. Unlike the Indo-US nuclear deal, India and Japan fixed no time limit in formulating the deal; therefore Premier Kan has the option to postpone the deal indefinitely in order to pacify rousing Japanese sentiments over the issue.

Nevertheless, the nuclear deal remains priority number one in Indo-Japan relations. India is a growing double-digit economy, and has the potential to impart a geo-political impetus. This is a major factor that compelled Japan to embark on negotiations for the civil nuclear deal. Meanwhile, leading Japanese companies Toshiba, Mitsubishi and Hitachi constitute the core lobbying group encouraging the Japanese Government to work out a possible nuclear deal with India. The chairman of the core lobbying group accompanied Masayuki Naoshima, the Minister of Trade and Industry, in his visit to India to participate in the fourth ministerial-level India-Japan energy dialogue. Moreover, Japanese companies are major shareholders in General Electric (GE) and Westinghouse, besides both GE and the French company Avera use reactor vessels manufactured by the Japan Steel Work Ltd. Japanese technology is primary for the US and French firms to start the construction of the nuclear reactors for India. Therefore, it becomes difficult for India to implement nuclear deals with the US and France without reaching a consensus with Japan.

India maintains a good track record on non-proliferation. This will positively help it to reach an agreement with Japan on the nuclear deal similar to that of 123 agreements between India and America. The nuclear deal has entered a crucial phase in Indo-Japan relations. The sixty-year Indo-Japan diplomatic relationship demands a major diplomatic initiative in solving the nuclear tangle. The US and France will certainly mount pressure on Japan to conclude the deal as early as possible. However, crossing the nuclear Rubicon is not an easy task for the Japanese politicians. In the process both the credibility of the Indians' commitment towards nuclear disarmament and the political synergy of Japan are likely to be subjected to severe test.

The author is a Research Scholar, Centre for East Asian Studies, School of International Relations, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.

Crossing the Rubicon: Indo-Japan Nuclear Cooperation

Prakash Pillai — 2010-09-07T22:57:24Z

The author is a Research Scholar, Centre for East Asian Studies, School of International Relations, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.

Vivekananda—The Revolutionary Swami

Ashok Celly — 2010-09-07T22:18:51Z

Vivekananda was one of the most amazing personalities of modern India. Perhaps India has never witnessed a religious figure of the kind Vivekananda was. Far from renouncing the world, he was deeply involved with it. He completely redefined and revolutionised the concept of the Mahatma. The traditional Mahatma was supremely indifferent to his surroundings and the suffering of the people around him and sought his spiritual salvation alone practicing laissez faire of the spirit. Vivekananda completely rejects that ideal. Therein lies his greatness; it required extraordinary empathy and tremendous daring as he rejected the personal salvation line in the teeth of resistance and ridicule of his own colleagues of the Ramakrishna Mission who accused him of being Westernised. In his characteristic forthright manner he declared:

Him I call a mahatman (great soul) whose heart bleeds for the poor, otherwise he is a duratman (wicked soul)… So long as the millions live in hunger and ignorance, I hold every man a traitor who, having been educated at their expense, pays not the least heed to them. I call those men who strut about in their finery, having got all their money by grinding the poor wretches so long as they do not do anything for the two hundred millions who are now no better than hungry savages!

Also, Vivekananda's attack on the self-centred middle class sounds very contemporary. For there is no dearth of duratmans in the post-1990 India who strut about in their finery and are completely untouched by the miserable plight of their not-so-fortunate countrymen.

It is extremely important to visualise the historical context of Vivekananda's life and work. Otherwise one is likely to miss its full significance. More than a century of British rule with its vicious suggestions of racial superiority had generated a strong feeling of inferiority among most Indians. This was compounded by the residual medieval ethos of fatalism (leaving things to a non-human agency) and asceticism with its devaluation of earthy life.

Vivekananda's emphasis on physical strength [his celebrated and apparently shocking observation, “Better to play football than read the Gita”], his contempt for the chattering classes who just talk and do nothing else, and above all his extolling the message of Vedanta regarding the divinity of man, “Tat Tawan Asi” (Thou art that) must be seen in that context. Time and again he returns to the message of Vedanta and never fails to exhort his countryman to shake off their sense of inadequacy and have faith in themselves as they carry a divine spark in them. The pragmatic intent is all too clear in this observation:

We have lost faith in ourselves. Therefore to preach the Advaita aspect of the Vedanta is necessary to rouse up the hearts of men (emphasis added), to show them the glory of their souls. It is therefore that I preach the Advaita.

It is indeed remarkable that he uses the Vedanta for secular, this-worldly ends. (Could there be a cue here for the social activist?) This must indeed have been chicken soup for the souls frightfully low on self-esteem.

•

AND what can be a better moral basis for a socialist society than the belief that there is a divine spark in every human being? It is true that Vivekananda didn't believe in class war, but if empathy for the underdog is a distinguishing characteristic of a socialist, he was a better socialist than most present-day socialists—of all hues red, pink and the rest. (V.K.R.V. Rao, the eminent economist and a great admirer of Vivekananda, described him as a Vedantic socialist.) Even in the hour of his triumph at Chicago, he agonised over the miserable condition of his countrymen. He denounced caste as “the negation of Vedanta” and passionately advocated a better deal for the Dalits. He himself lived with a family of sweepers during his travels through Central India. He was proud of his spiritual heritage, but it never came in the way of calling a spade a spade. He denounced the deformities and perversions in Hinduism in no uncertain terms:

No religion on earth preaches the dignity of humanity in such a lofty strain as Hinduism, and no religion on earth treads upon the necks of the poor and the low in such a fashion as Hinduism. The lord has shown me that religion is not at fault, but it is the Pharisses and the Sadduces in Hinduism, hypocrites who invent all sorts of engines of tyranny.”

Also, he was deeply distressed by the condition of Indian women who were condemned to a life of ignorance and backwardness. He believed there was nothing in Hindu tradition to justify their marginalisation and cited the glorious examples of Gargi and Maitreyi, and motivated Margaret Noble—better known as Sister Nivedita—to start a school for the education of girls in Kolkata.

In recent times the Sangh Parivar has tried to appropriate Vivekananda as a kindred spirit, a proto-saffronist of sorts. The truth is: there is nothing in common between the two. It is true that Vivekananda laid a lot of emphasis on physical strength but it was never glorified for its own sake, and was not divorced from intelligence and empathy. Also, the man who declared “all religions are sacred to me” and who had the highest regard for Islam for its love of equality, would make a very odd member of the Parivar. Vivekananda was no cultural chauvinist. Far from it. In fact, his denunciation of the prevailing rituals and ceremonies of Hinduism as “religion of the cooking pot” reminds one of Kabir. In the light of all this, would it be fair to describe him as a revivalist and bracket him with Bankim Chandra and Dayanand Saraswati as historians generally do?

The author, a freelance writer, retired as a Reader in English from Rajdhani College, University of Delhi.

Should India Set Up a Sovereign Wealth Fund?

Kavaljit Singh — 2010-09-07T22:16:12Z

New Delhi's proposal to establish a $ 10-billion sovereign wealth fund should be treated with caution. The necessary preconditions for setting up an SWF are squarely lacking in India. Besides, the purported objectives of the fund to pursue strategic investment opportunities abroad are highly debatable.

It appears that New Delhi is blindly following a "me-too" approach rather than understanding the rationale behind setting up such funds. What are sovereign wealth funds? In simple terms, the SWF is a large pool of assets and investments owned and managed (directly or indirectly) by a national or State Government.

Rationale behind the Fund

THE main policy rationale behind setting up an SWF is not to acquire strategic assets and secure supply of natural resources, as proposed by New Delhi. Such funds are established to manage excessive foreign exchange reserves, commodity exports, the proceeds of privatisations and fiscal surpluses. For instance, China established its SWF, China Investment Corporation, with a $ 200 billion corpus to manage its excessive forex reserves, which reached $ 2.4 trillion by end-June 2010.

SWFs help in diversifying and improving the return on a country's foreign exchange reserves or commodity revenues. Like central banks, SWFs deploy surplus forex reserves; but since SWFs are set up to diversify investment, they undertake long-term investments in illiquid and risky assets, whereas central banks typically undertake short-term investments in low-yielding liquid assets, such as government securities and money market instruments.

At present, there are more than 50 SWFs in the world, managing assets worth around $ 3 trillion. Of the top 20 SWFs, 14 are funded from commodity revenues, predominantly from oil and gas exports but some from metals and minerals (such as Russia's Reserve Fund or Chile's Social and Economic Stabilisation Fund). The revenues are generated in a variety of ways, including profits made by state-owned companies, commodity taxes and export duties. Non-commodity SWFs are largely funded by transferring assets from official foreign exchange reserves, although some are based on fiscal surpluses, proceeds from the sale of state-owned enterprises to the private sector, and direct transfers from the state budgetary resources.

Unlike China and other East Asian countries, which have established such funds on sustained current account surpluses, India has been running persistent current account deficits. Its current account deficit touched $ 29.8 billion in fiscal 2009 as against $ 15.7 billion in fiscal 2007. Unlike West Asia, India does not have any dominant exportable commodity (such as oil or gas) so as to generate significant surpluses. It continues to be a huge net importer of oil and gas. The country's current account deficit is widening despite steady growth in software services exports and a rise in workers' remittances from overseas Indians.

Its persistent current account deficits have been financed by large capital inflows in the form of portfolio investments and other volatile capital flows that are subject to capital flight. Given the overriding presence of volatile capital flows in India's forex reserves, coupled with vulnerability to external shocks, it would be erroneous to consider its foreign exchange reserves ($ 280 billion) as a position of strength.

India's external debt has been rising steadily for the past few years on account of higher borrowings by the Indian companies and short-term credit. Besides, India also runs a perennial fiscal deficit which means that raising substantial money for sovereign fund from budgetary allocation would be extremely difficult.

Santiago Principles

AS far as the proposed fund's objectives to invest directly in strategic cross-border assets are concerned, the Indian policy-makers need to recognise that the overwhelming majority of sovereign funds are passive investors. In the rare cases where SWFs have made direct investments, they have not sought controlling interests or active roles in the management of invested companies, as private investors do. Even the large-scale direct investments made by SWFs in US and European banks during 2007-08 were minor in terms of bank ownership and did not come with any special rights or board representation.

Any direct investment in strategic assets by a sovereign fund will invite severe criticism for its alleged political and non-commercial objectives. Not long ago, the Western world had characterised SWFs as "villains" and introduced new policy measures, popularly known as the Santiago Principles, to regulate the investments of SWFs globally. Thus, acquisition of strategic cross-border assets (including natural resources) will not be a cakewalk. Also $ 10 billion is not enough to acquire strategic assets abroad-unless they become very cheap.

Furthermore, there is no guarantee that investments made by the Indian fund will be profitable. As witnessed during the global financial crisis, SWFs from West Asia, China, Singapore and Norway suffered huge losses for their investments in Western banks and private equity funds.

Paradoxical as it may sound, extreme poverty and hunger still pervades India. For New Delhi, the first priority should be to free the nation from hunger, malnutrition and illiteracy rather than financing the acquisition of strategic assets or rivals abroad.

In this regard, a portion of the country's forex reserves could be prudently used in the improvement of physical infrastructure, education, health and financial services, particularly in rural India.

(Courtesy: Business Line)

The author is the Director, Public Interest Research Centre, New Delhi. His website is www.madhyam.org.in