EDITORIAL SAMARTH: EDITORIAL 06.05.10

Please contact the list owner of subscription and unsubscription at: editorial@samarth.co.in

media watch with peoples input an organization of rastriya abhyudaya

Editorial

Month may 06, edition 000500, collected & managed by durgesh kumar mishra, published by – manish manjul

Editorial is syndication of all daily- published newspaper Editorial at one place.

For ENGLISH EDITORIAL http://editorialsamarth.blogspot.com

For TELUGU EDITORIAL http://editorial-telugu-samarth.blogspot.com

THE PIONEER

BLOW TO INVESTIGATORS
CALLING CONGRESS'S BLUFF
SURRENDERING TO AMERICA - SHOBORI GANGULI
RURAL HEALTHCARE NEGLECTED - RANJIT KUMAR PAUL
MADE IN PAKISTAN - B RAMAN
LONDON DREAMS - SHIKHA MUKERJEE
IT LOOKS LIKE A PEN BUT IT CAN FOIL A BOMB - A HOFFMAN
THE UNEQUAL SIDES OF THE SLAVIC TRIANGLE - NIKOLAI TROITSKY

THE TIMES OF INDIA

TERROR TRAIL
FINE COWS AND ENGLISHMEN
RASHMEE ROSHAN LALL
TOURISTS ARE NOT THE PROBLEM
SURVIVAL IS THE PRIORITY - RUPA SENGUPTA
END GAME AT ARTHUR ROAD - BACHI KARKARIA

HINDUSTAN TIMES

LITTLE COMFORT IN NUMBERS
A PHOTO-FINNISH - STEAK IN HELSINKI.
A COMING-OUT PARTY - KUMKUM DASGUPTA
NO TO MIND GAMES - AJAI SAHNI

THE INDIAN EXPRESS

NO OFFENCE
CATCHING MAMATA
TRUTH TO POWER
LOOKING FOR DIFFERENCE - DHIRAJ NAYYAR
COURTING A BALANCE - VINAY SITAPATI
BETTING THE FARM(VILLE) - SARITHA RAI
ANATOLY DOBRYNIN, AMBASSADOR NON-PAREIL - INDER MALHOTRA
LOVE AND DISHONOUR - SHAILAJA BAJPAI
VIEW FROM THE RIGHT - SUMAN K JHA

THE FINANCIAL EXPRESS

DISTRIBUTING POWER
GREECE AND BEYOND
WHO IS THIS BAILOUT REALLY FOR? - K VAIDYA NATHAN
REGULATORY LESSONS FROM GOLDMAN - SAUGATA BHATTACHARYA
HOME GROWN - NIKHILA GILL

THE HINDU

RETROGRESSIVE INTENT
NEW GUIDELINES FOR RATING AGENCIES
UNFINISHED TASKS IN BANGLADESH - HAROON HABIB
MEN OF LETTERS, UNMOVED READERS - P. SAINATH
THE FLURRIES OF VOTING DAY IN MAURITIUS - PRANAY GUPTE
U.S. DISLIKES THOSE WHO ROCK THE BOAT - SIMON TISDALL
HIV SUMMIT IN AFRICA FOR GRANDMOTHERS - DAVID SMITH

THE ASIAN AGE

DNA

SUPREME COURT GETS IT RIGHT
WALTZ OF STATES
FRACTURED STATE POLITIES - R JAGANNATHAN
MEN, THE HUNTERS; WOMEN, THE GATHERERS - ANTARA DEV SEN

THE TRIBUNE

SC BAN ON NARCO TESTS
POPULISM IN RETREAT
BATTLELINES ARE DRAWN
REVIEWING THE NPT - BY HARSH V. PANT
PICASSO AND HIS PAINTINGS -BY ROOPINDER SINGH
UNCERTAIN BRITONS VOTE TODAY
TWO-PARTY ERA IN TWILIGHT
NICK CLEGG: RISE OF THIRD FORCE - BANGALORE DIARY
GURU THROWS LIGHTS ON SEX SCANDAL

MUMBAI MIRROR

THE LONG-DISTANCE RUNNER

BUSINESS STANDARD

GIVING SPORTS A CHANCE
SUGAR FREE
CHINA CLUB INSTEAD OF BOMBAY CLUB? - SHYAM PONAPPA
A GLUT OF MBAS? - ARVIND SINGHAL
IRRAWADDY'S GHOSTS - BARUN ROY
UNDER THE WEATHER - SURINDER SUD

THE ECONOMIC TIMES

SOUND MOVE MR SIBAL
NEW CJI MUST PUSH REFORMS
DIVIDE & RULE DOESN'T WORK
NIFTY MAY FIND STRONG SUPPORT AT 5000 LEVELS
ESSAR STEEL DEFERS BOND SALE ON EURO DEBT CRISIS - SHELLEY SMITH & KATRINA NICHOLAS
TRUTH, NOT SPIN, WINS - SHANTANU UDHAV NAGARKATTI
WHO SHOULD PAY FOR CREDIT RATINGS?
EXPLORE HYBRID OPTIONS; USER-PAYS MODEL IS DIFFICULT TO IMPLEMENT
ISSUER-PAYS MODEL ENSURES RATINGS ARE AVAILABLE TO THE ENTIRE MARKET
NO, HOW CAN IPL VALUATIONS DROP?
IPL IS LIKELY TO BE TONED DOWN
FOOD SECURITY NOT BY FOOD ALONE - T K ARUN
SIMPLIFIED OPTIONS LED TO FINANCIAL CRISIS - JAIDEEP MISHRA
'INDIA IS A PERFECT MATCH FOR EUROPE'S CAPITAL POOLS' - SUDESHNA SEN
'MORE TURMOIL IN GLOBAL FINANCIAL MARKETS' - JIM ROGERS ANDY MUKHERJEE
CONNECT WITH USERS NOT EASY TO REPLICATE: SHIVANI HEGDE, NESTLE

DECCAN CHRONICAL

WILL NY PLOT MAKE US SHED BLINKERS?
THE NEW JUNGLE WAR - BY S.K. SINHA
MR OBAMA, DON'T LET US GET LEFT BEHIND - BY THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
PLAYING HARDBALL - MILKHA SINGH
THE LIMITS OF POLICY - BY DAVID BROOKS
DETACHMENT IN KALYUG - BY YOGI ASHWINI

THE STATESMAN

OFF TRACK
TENURE LIMITS
DAIMARY IN NET
SAARC AT 25 - SALMAN HAIDAR
BREAKING THE 'CYCLE'OF EXCLUSION
GHOSH TELLS ADITI ROY GHATAK
THE LAMP OF LEARNING - KK KHULLAR

THE TELEGRAPH

BE A SPORT
BASIC RIGHTS
CUT TO THE CHASE
NOTEBOOK - IAN JACK
SCRAP IT OUT - BIKASH SINHA
NOT A SINGLE DROP TO DRINK - MANIPADMA JENA
THE HILLS HAVE HEARD THAT BEFORE
STALEMATE

DECCAN HERALD

CZARS ON WARPATH
ABORTED ATTACK
IT'S A THREE-HORSE RACE - COLIN TODHUNTER
SYSTEMIC NEGLIGENCE OF CONSUMERS' RIGHTS - PRABHAKAR KULKARNI

THE JERUSALEM POST

DON'T BELIEVE ALL YOU READ - EXCEPT THIS - BY DOUGLAS BLOOMFIELD
FUNDAMENTALLY FREUND: THE ROAD TO NOWHERE - BY MICHAEL FREUND
THE HOUSING SOLUTION
IF ONLY ISRAEL HAD COOPERATED - BY RICHARD GOLDSTONE
IN PAIN AND ANGER - BY AVROM KRENGEL
CAMPUS FEARS HERE AND THERE - BY BRENDA KATTEN

HAARETZ

NETANYAHU'S HUMP
THE FRIEND - BY GIDEON LEVY
WHO'LL BE OUR NICK CLEGG? - BY ARI SHAVIT
NOT TAKING LISTENER REQUESTS
PROTECTING OUR CHILDREN FROM OURSELVES - BY AMALIA ROSENBLUM

THE NEW YORK TIMES

SAVING THE TEACHERS
FEAR ITSELF
VIDEO GAMES AND FREE SPEECH
HE PROBABLY DIDN'T MEAN TO
AL QAEDA'S NUCLEAR PLANT - BY CHARLES FADDIS
WAITING AT THE TOP OF THE WORLD - BY MANJUSHREE THAPA
CONGRESS, UP IN ARMS - BY GAIL COLLINS
NEW ALARM BELLS ABOUT CHEMICALS AND CANCER - BY NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF

USA TODAY

OUR VIEW ON THE WORLD ECONOMY: GREEK DEBT CRISIS OFFERS PREVIEW OF WHAT AWAITS U.S.
OTHER VIEWS ON THE WORLD ECONOMY: 'TIP OF THE ICEBERG'
6 PLAC ES TO START CUTTING GOVERNMENT
AN ELECTION LIKE NO OTHER - BY CHUCK RAASCH

TIMES FREE PRESS

LOW TURNOUT, BIG PROSPECTS

NATIONAL DAY OF PRAYER

HULLANDER UPSETS TRUSTEE LEVI

PRIMARY WINNERS FOR COMMISSION

'SAFE' WINNERS AND OTHERS

'51ST STATE' BAD IDEA

TEHRAN TIMES

CLEGGMANIA LIFTS LIB DEMS AS LABOUR CHICKENS COME HOME TO ROOST - BY GUL JAMMAS HUSSAIN

HURRIYET DAILY NEWS

FROM THE BOSPHORUS: STRAIGHT - TIME FOR A BOUNDARY DEAL IN THE AEGEAN
CAN HISTORIC FIGURES BE SUBJECTS OF RIDICULE? - SEDAT ERGİN
STRATEGIC DEPTH AT HOME - JOOST LAGENDİJK
SALVAGING AKP'S HONOR - YUSUF KANLI
TURKISH FOREIGN POLICY AND IRAN - MURAT MERCAN
IS YOUR LINE OF WORK INTERESTING ENOUGH?

I.THE NEWS

TOTAL CONFUSION
TERROR EXPORT
POLITICISING POWER
AFTER THE UNITED NATIONS INQUIRY - AMEER BHUTTO
THE SCYLLA OF VIOLENCE - DR MOHAMMAD TAQI
THE THREAT TO CYBERSECURITY – IKRAM SEHGAL
THE REAL HAZARA PROBLEM – KASHIF JAHANGIRI
KHAWAJA'S MURDER: A DARK INDICATOR - KAMILA HYAT
CHAMELEONS – FAROOQ SULEHRIA

PAKISTAN OBSERVER

IT IS FAISAL SHAHZAD, TOMORROW MAY BE SOMEONE ELSE
FM QURESHI'S PRINCIPLED POSITION ON KASHMIR
ARE WE HEADING FOR CIVIL WAR?
A FAILED WHITEWASH IS HOGWASH & SWILL!—III - HUMAYUN GAUHAR
MINDSET REVIEWED - AYESHA ZEE KHAN
CONTROVERSY OVER NATIONAL ANTHEM - BURHANUDDIN HASAN
UK ELECTIONS 2010
OUR LIBERTY IS OUR BEST DEFENCE - WAJAHAT ALI

THE INDEPENDENT

TAKING ON BCL
BRITISH POLLS
THE PIOUS RAPIST..!
GETTING RID OF THE EXCESS BAGGAGE - M HARUNUR RASHID
UK GENERAL ELECTIONS 2010 - ARANYA SYED
GEOTHERMAL ENERGY AND LITTLE PEOPLE - DR. TERRY LACEY

THE AUSTRALIAN

WHY FISCAL DISCIPLINE PAYS
TOO MANY TWITS ON TWITTER
NO NEED TO LEAD FROM THE FRONT ON ETS ACTION
GREG SHERIDAN
THIS TAX WON'T WIN ANY RESPECT - HENRY ERGAS
RUDD HITS FLAT NOTE WITH UNFINISHED SYMPHONY
LET'S NOT BEAT ABOUT THE BUSH, THERE'S ROOM APLENTY
POST-CRISIS, PM SHOULD HAVE LIFTED SIGHTS
JULIA'S TEFLON WEARING A BIT THIN - DENNIS SHANAHAN
STATE OF DISUNITY TROUBLES LEADERS
DEPUTY SIDESTEPS HEAT FROM KITCHEN - SAMANTHA MAIDEN
LEAGUE BARKING MAD UP WRONG TREE OVER BETTING - PATRICK SMITH JOHN DURIE
CLEGG'S CAVALRY ADDS LIFE TO FIGHT
SOME PEOPLE START TALKING WITHOUT WORRYING ABOUT WHAT THEY ARE SAYING, UNTIL IT'S TOO LATE

THE SYDNEY MORNING HERALD

CLASS WARFARE MUST END
QUESTIONABLE QUARTERMASTERS
A FINE REMINDER OF HALCYON BAIZE
SCHOOL BUILDING PROGRAM SCORES A BARE PASS

THE GUARDIAN

POLLING DAY WEATHER: WHEN THE SUN WINS IT
DAVID CAMERON
GREECE AND THE SINGLE CURRENCY: EUROPE'S EXISTENTIAL CRISIS

DAILY EXPRESS

GET THESE EURO IDIOTS OUT
HE HAS RAGED, LIED AND DRIVEN BRITAIN TO THE BRINK OF RUIN - BY LEO MCKINSTRY
WHY WE ARE THE CENTRE OF WORLD - BY JOHN DILLON
CONSIDER THIS WHEN YOU VOTE - BY ANN WIDDECOMBE
FINALLY, THE BRITISH PEOPLE CAN DECIDE LABOUR'S FATE

THE GAZETTE

POLITICIANS HYPOCRITICAL ABOUT THEIR EXPENSES

THE KOREA TIMES

A DIPLOMATIC THREESOME
NONPROLIFERATION REVIEW
EQUAL JUSTICE, BUT NOT EQUAL ACCESS
BOY SOLDIERS AND ABUSED GIRLS - BY CLEMENTE FERRER
TWO EXPLOSIONS REFRAME ENERGY DEBATE - BY DALE MCFEATTERS
TAKE VACATION; IT'S YOUR RIGHT

THE JAPAN TIMES

BANKRUPT THEOLOGY LIVES TO DISTRACT ON ANOTHER DAY - BY HECTOR R. TORRES
THE LONG DOWNHILL ROAD
NEW ROUNDS OF BUDGET SLASHING
BRAND, BUT DON'T BAN, CREDIT DEFAULT SWAPS - BY LUIGI ZINGALES

THE JAKARTA POST

THE INDONESIAN 'TRAGEDY'
ETHNIC CHINESE AND THE TEACHING OF HISTORY - ASVI WARMAN ADAM
ASIA PACIFIC LEADING THE GLOBAL RECOVERY - MIRZA DIRAN
WHAT CAN WE EXPECT FROM NPT REVIEW CONFERENCE? - ANDY RACHMIANTO

THE MOSCOW TIMES

TWO HEADS ARE BETTER THAN ONE - BY NIKOLAI PETROV
THE KREMLIN'S SHOCK TROOPS - BY MICHAEL BOHM

THE KOREA HERALD

ID CHECKS
SEOUL-BEIJING TIES
TERRORISM SHOULDN'T CHANGE AMERICA'S VALUES
HOT MONEY FINDS FAMILIAR HOME FOR EURO REFUGEES - BY WILLIAM PESEK
UNWED BIRTH RATE SIGNALS THE COLLAPSE OF MARRIAGE - BY JENNIFER A. MARSHALL
REFORMS REQUIRED TO SAVE THE EURO - JOSEPH E. STIGLITZ
RELEARNING LESSONS FROM U.S. OIL SPILL
WAYS TO PREVENT ECHOES OF GREEK TRAGEDY

CHINA DAILY

RECOVERY HOPES FADING
CUT RED-TAPE IN EDUCATION
NOT THE RIGHT APPROACH
TAX RESOURCES PROPERLY
FACTUAL FACTORS IN WEIRD WEATHER - BY JOHN E. COULTER (CHINA DAILY)
CHINA STILL A DEVELOPING NATION - BY FENG ZHAOKUI (CHINA DAILY)
RICCI, RELEVANCE OF TOLERANCE - BY CHEN LONGXIANG (CHINA DAILY)

DAILY MIRROR

PR SYSTEM THAT BRITAIN WANTS
NUTRITION STATUS OF SRI LANKANS: SOLVING EXISTING ISSUES - BY VISAKHA TILLEKERATNE CONSULTANT
NUCLEAR POWER: IS IT THE 'ENERGY MIRACLE' IN THE POST FOSSIL FUEL ERA?
A DEAL IS A DEAL - BY: B SKANTHAKUMAR

***************************************

******************************************************************************************

THE PIONEER

EDITORIAL

BLOW TO INVESTIGATORS

RULING ON NARCO-ANALYSIS REGRETTABLE

The Supreme Court ruling declaring the use of narco-analysis, brain mapping and polygraph tests — unless consent is secured from the person being subjected to them — as 'illegal' and 'un-constitutional' comes as a big blow to investigative agencies. The apex court has determined that the use of these scientific techniques is in contravention of Article 20(3) of the Constitution which says that no person accused of any offence shall be compelled to be a witness against himself or herself. This newspaper believes the Supreme Court has, in this instance, erred in its narrow interpretation of a constitutional provision and in the application of moral principles of an individual's right to privacy. India is not a police state and narco-analysis, brain mapping or polygraph tests are not conducted at random on anybody and everybody, or to browbeat critics and opponents of the Government into submission. There are proper procedures in place to ensure that these techniques are not misused. Besides, narco-analysis, brain mapping and polygraph tests are resorted to by the police when they hit a wall while investigating serious crimes such as murder, financial fraud and terrorism to achieve a breakthrough that can, in turn, be used for gathering corroborative evidence. The results of these tests by themselves do not constitute evidence. In other words, they are useful for investigators in cases where hard or circumstantial evidence is virtually impossible to come by despite best efforts. For example, a person suspected to have plotted or aided a terrorist attack may have covered up his tracks. Or a fraudster may have taken care not to leave a paper trail. Or, as in the infamous murder of Arushi, the killer may have destroyed all evidence. In such cases, investigators do require means like narco-analysis, brain mapping and polygraph tests for a vital clue or to simply determine if the person suspected to have committed the crime is, in reality, innocent. We live in troubled times and in an imperfect world. Utopian values rooted in constitutionalism are desirable, but for that we must wait for a while. In any event, busting crime is a messy affair around the world; there is nothing unique about India.

Rights activists opposed to narco-analysis, brain mapping and polygraph tests absurdly claim that these scientific investigative techniques amount to obtaining confession through torture. This is absolutely untrue. Putting a suspect through what is commonly referred to as a 'lie detection' test is not the same as water boarding and similar methods that are used for extracting confession under duress. Custodial torture is abhorrent and has no place in a civilised, democratic country. But surely supervised, benign scientific lie detection tests do not qualify as custodial torture? As for an individual's right not to give evidence against himself or herself is concerned, taken to an extreme it could lead to a situation where men — and women — could disown paternity and paternal responsibility through the expedient means of refusing to undergo a DNA test. Would that be in order? More importantly, would the courts uphold the right of an individual to refuse to undergo a DNA test? Absolutism does not necessarily contribute to a better society.

***************************************

THE PIONEER

EDITORIAL

CALLING CONGRESS'S BLUFF

CONFIDENT MAMATA GOES IT ALONE

The Trinamool Congress's days of dependence on political aristocrats like the Congress is nearing an end, signalling the confidence of Ms Mamata Banerjee on pulling off a spectacular victory in the coming elections to 81 municipalities, including the crucial Kolkata Municipal Corporation. By effectively breaking off the partnership with the Congress, by refusing to submit to its request for more seats in Kolkata, declaring that she would convert it into a 'signboard' and so outraging members of the 125-year-old institution, Ms Banerjee is making it known that she expects to emerge as an independent regional power in West Bengal ahead of the 2011 State Assembly election. Even if Ms Banerjee's ambitious solo flight appears fanciful to her critics, given that both the Congress and the CPI(M) have become rivals, if not bitter foes, albeit separately, as the about to emerge Queen Bee, the capacity to attract drones like the mercurial Subrata Mukherjee, who has crossed and re-crossed the floor, is a confirmation of the Trinamool Congress's status as the only alternative. To test her power is a temptation that Ms Banerjee has clearly succumbed to; failure will not destroy either her or the Trinamool Congress, but will certainly injure her pride and the prospects of the party in 2011.

For, the Trinamool Congress has come of age. It is no longer a breakaway group from the Congress. It is no longer a subordinate of any larger alliance that it may choose to be a part of in order to become a stakeholder in any Government at the Centre. It is a full-fledged regional party with its own history, quirks and successes. Between 2006 and now, Ms Banerjee and the Trinamool Congress have travelled an incredible distance. By clambering on to the various anti-land acquisition, resistance against police atrocities platforms in Singur, Nandigram and Lalgarh, stubbornly denying the legitimacy of the anti-Maoist policy and operations to the point of denying that there are Maoists operating in West Bengal, by driving out the Nano manufacturing facility and then setting up an auto logistics hub under the Railway Ministry, Ms Banerjee has proved that she can turn cartwheels, somersault and get away with more than any other political party in the State without losing her popularity. During this last vertiginous ride, Ms Banerjee has acquired dubious associates and has unabashedly wooed minority voters that has provoked the CPI(M) into branding her a Maoist stooge and made the Congress wrinkle its nose in disapproval. Therefore, what appears as recklessness to others is probably a carefully calculated risk that Ms Banerjee has taken keeping in mind the need to ensure that there are no free-loaders when the 2011 election comes around. By Ms Banerjee's reckoning, the Congress has hitched a ride while the Trinamool Congress has done all the hard work. Now and in the future, it appears, Ms Banerjee wants to reap what she alone has sown.

***************************************

THE PIONEER

EDITORIAL

SURRENDERING TO AMERICA

SHOBORI GANGULI

When a Pakistani official lauds an Indian Prime Minister (in this case Mr Manmohan Singh) for his "vision" and welcomes the "legacy" he wants to leave behind, it is cause for grave worry. Ahead of the meeting between Mr Singh and his Pakistani counterpart Yousuf Raza Gilani in Thimpu last week, Pakistan's Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi said the Indian Prime Minister is "a well-meaning individual, he has a vision, he wants to leave a legacy behind". Surely, a vision that pleases a visibly and audibly intransigent Pakistan cannot be one that will particularly benefit India. Nevertheless, Mr Singh seems to be acquiring quite a fan-club across the border.

Apart from calling India's dossiers of evidence against the 26/11 terror perpetrators pieces of fiction and refusing to display any meaningful action against terrorism emanating from its soil, Pakistan now says India's linkage of talks and action against terror has "dragged too long" and that "nobody is buying that anymore". Mr Qureshi is right. Apart from the Pakistanis themselves, now the Americans are not buying it. Hence the eminently avoidable Prime Ministerial-level meet in Thimpu.

One is perhaps unable to understand the logic underlying the current exchange between India and Pakistan but the subcontinent's history says Pakistan's intentions are not exactly well-meaning. Therefore, when senior Indian officials talk about a certain "chemistry" between Mr Singh and Mr Gilani or speak of how the latter "batted" for Mr Singh after the ignominious Sharm el-Sheikh meeting last July, citizens of this country need to know whether all that bonhomie is not actually compromising our national interest and security. Are all those virtues in our Prime Minister, so suddenly visible to the Pakistanis, or the mere chemistry between two individuals, on which Indian officials are pinning all their hopes, really geared to address India's genuine concerns vis-à-vis Pakistan? Perhaps, Mr Singh is indeed on his way to creating a legacy: That of India's abject surrender to those who bleed and terrorise its innocent civilians. Little else explains the Manmohan Singh Government's inexplicable moves to keep the veneer of diplomacy with Pakistan on despite the latter emerging more recalcitrant after each dialogue initiative.

From the arrest of a Pakistani-origin man in the Times Square bombing attempt to a Pakistani who will be sentenced — hopefully, to death — in Mumbai today for the 26/11 attack, Pakistan's footprints indeed span from Mumbai to Manhattan. While the United States may have its own set of reasons to humour such a Pakistan, there is no rationale whatsoever for India to repeatedly expose itself to Pakistani bluster. Incidentally, only two days after the Times Square incident, seven people are arrested in Pakistan; nearly two years after Mumbai, we are still sending across dossiers. From Yekaterinburg and Sharm el-Sheikh to New Delhi and now Thimpu, India is desperately trying to open a channel of dialogue with Pakistan that remains invisible to the other side. In fact, each attempt has seen the emergence of a more arrogant Pakistan. In theory, India's approach cannot be faulted. It is seeking to adopt a step-by-step approach to get Pakistan to first deliver on the more specific cases relating to the Mumbai terror attack and then move on to the larger question of that country eliminating all terror camps operating from its soil. Fair enough. Had this approach borne even the minutest of results, one had reason to hope and be patient.

However, after officially stating that India has resumed dialogue only under intense American pressure, Pakistan has made it annoyingly clear after each interaction since 26/11 that the talks are a part of the composite dialogue process, that the two sides have decided to discuss Kashmir, Siachen, Sir Creek and water-sharing, issues that "concern both Pakistan and India". After each official interaction, the Pakistanis have made their irritation with India's repeated "harping" on Mumbai quite apparent. This, even as India continues to flood Pakistan with 26/11 dossiers; it now intends to send across a copy of Ajmal Kasab's judgement along with fresh sets of evidence against the 20 others implicated, including masterminds Hafiz Saeed and Zakiur Rehman Lakhvi, and seek their extradition — all a pointless exercise. While New Delhi has everything neatly figured out on paper, it is unable to read the complexities of the minds working in Islamabad. Miles away from worries of extradition, therefore, Saeed and Lakhvi brazenly continue their anti-India operations under the very nose — and active patronage — of Pakistani authorities.

What could possibly explain Pakistan's continuing defiance, including its repeated posturing on the dialogue issue, its insistence that India, more than Pakistan, was desperate to resume talks, a charge New Delhi has sought to ignore rather than forcefully counter? Why is India remaining a mute spectator to the changing goalposts of its engagement with Pakistan that are being unilaterally shifted by the latter, particularly the recent clamour about India's "water terrorism" that could become a "nuclear flashpoint", a subject that has been appended to the Kashmir issue at various international fora by Pakistan in recent months? Is there even an iota of shift in Pakistan's position, on Mumbai specifically and on terror in general, since Yekaterinburg last June which propels the hope that eventually Islamabad will fall in line?

Clearly, Pakistan's nuisance value is what is fetching it international attention: It is a nuclear power that could press the button under the least of provocations from India. In the aftermath of 26/11 world capitals went into a spin, anticipating a military reply from India that could critically shift Pakistan's focus from Afghanistan, apart from increasing the chances of a nuclear war. Given Mr Singh's disposition no one need have worried. However, the spectre itself was enough to get the hotlines between Washington and New Delhi working. Talk to Pakistan, was the suggestion, even if the terms of engagement bring little benefit to India. Not one to displease, Mr Singh obliged, alternately shaking hands with the Pakistani President and Prime Minister in various corners of the world, Kodak moments that have suitably reassured US President Barack Obama.

Engagement is a sound principle in diplomacy and international strategy. However, such an exercise must visibly augment a country's strategic worth and clout, particularly so in India's case as it seeks its rightful place on the global stage. Unfortunately, this ongoing engagement with Pakistan, apart from exposing the Manmohan Singh Government's helplessness against a petty neighbour, has also led to legitimate questions on whether, on its way to becoming a major world power, India has woefully surrendered to the American game in South Asia instead.

***************************************

THE PIONEER

EDITORIAL

RURAL HEALTHCARE NEGLECTED

RANJIT KUMAR PAUL

While there are opinions galore regarding the Government's proposal to introduce a three-and-a-half year medical course christened as Bachelor of Rural Healthcare in order to cater to the healthcare needs of those living in rural areas, the basic question is: Why has such a need arisen after 62 years of independence? Why are 80 per cent of doctors still treating only 20 per cent of our population?

The answer lies in our poor rural medical infrastructure. On the contrary, there is no dearth of quality medical facilities in our cities — particularly in the private sector. Therefore, the question arises: Why is there such a huge gap in our rural and urban medical infrastructure? There are two main reasons for this: First, the Government's apathy towards rural healthcare, and second, the reluctance of our medical professionals to serve in rural areas.

There is no denying that the Union Government has given a great impetus to rural development by making a higher budgetary allocation of Rs 66,137.86 crore for 2010-11 as compared to Rs 62,201.40 crore for 2009-10. But the big question is: Will the amount suffice to meet the huge expenses for development of the most underdeveloped villages throughout the country? This is because rural infrastructure development includes a plethora of subjects such as construction of roads and bridges, electrification, minor and medium irrigation facilities, soil conservation, watershed management, reclamation of waterlogged areas, drainage, forest development, primary education, healthcare, drinking water management, etc. Attention needs to be given to all of these to entice urban doctors to open up practices in rural areas. But most of the time such desirable holistic development is missing.

The primary healthcare system in rural India needs qualified and dedicated doctors, nurses, pharmacists, etc, in the extant Sub-Centres, Primary Health Centres and the Community Health Centres. But this will not happen unless there is holistic rural development. The Government must re-focus its energies to achieve this objective.

***************************************

THE PIONEER

OPED

MADE IN PAKISTAN

AFTER THE ARREST OF FAISAL SHAHZAD AND HIS REPORTED CONFESSION THAT HE PLANNED THE FAILED BOMBING AT TIMES SQUARE, NEW YORK, THE FBI SHOULD TAKE A CLOSE, HARD LOOK AT THE TEHREEK-E-TALIBAN PAKISTAN WHICH IS EMERGING AS THE NEW AND SINISTER FACE OF GLOBAL ISLAMIST JIHAD

B RAMAN

A US citizen of Pakistani origin, who still retains his Pakistani citizenship after having acquired American citizenship, was arrested by the Federal Bureau of Investigation at the John F Kennedy Airport in New York on Monday in connection with their investigation into the attempted incendiary attack at Times Square on the evening of May 1. He had boarded a Dubai-bound flight of the Emirate Airlines after having passed through security and immigration controls. The doors of the aircraft had been closed and it had started moving away from the departure gates when the FBI ordered it to come back to the departure gates and took him into custody. He was to be produced before a local court on May 4.

The FBI has taken over the responsibility for the investigation of the case from the New York Police, thereby indicating that the authorities suspected that the attempted incendiary attack could have links with international terrorism. The name of the arrested suspect has been given by sections of the US media as Shahzad Faisal, but Mr Eric Holder, the US Attorney-General, gave his name as Faisal Shahzad.

He is stated to be 30 years old and has been described by some reports as an information technology expert. It is not known whether he is a Pashtun, but some reports say he is married to a woman from Peshawar, the capital of the North-West Frontier Province of Pakistan, who had studied in the United Kingdom before migrating to the US. It is not known when Faisal Shahzad migrated to the US, but he was naturalised as a US citizen on April 17, 2009. He travelled to Dubai in June 2009, and returned to Connecticut, his city of residence, in April 2010. During this period, he is believed to have spent about five months in Pakistan. It is not known where he spent the remaining period.

The breakthrough in the investigation came after the police established that the Nissan Pathfinder vehicle which was used for the failed incendiary attack had been bought by a Hispanic or Middle-Eastern looking man from a woman of Connecticut three weeks ago for $ 1800 paid in cash. The police had established her as the original owner of the car with the help of the identification number. The suspect had erased the number from the dashboard, but not from the engine. She had advertised for the sale of the car in one of the Internet sites for the sale/purchase of used cars.

She did not recall the name of the purchaser, but identified Faisal as the buyer from his picture shown to her by the FBI. It is not clear how the FBI zeroed in on him. There are two possibilities: Either he was already under watch by the FBI or he was one of the Pakistani-origin residents of Connecticut who had recently returned after a longish visit to Pakistan and hence appeared in the database of the FBI which keeps track of residents of Pakistani origin spending a long period in Pakistan.

It is not clear why the FBI immediately did not flash his name to the airport security in all airports. The fact that he was able to pass through the security and immigration controls at the JFK Airport and board the aircraft shows that at the time he passed through the controls they had no adverse information about him. Luckily, after he had boarded the aircraft, the authorities realised he was on board the aircraft and brought it back to arrest him.

The investigating authorities do not know as yet whether he was a lone wolf terrorist or whether he had accomplices. They seem to be conducting their investigation on the presumption that there could be accomplices. The FBI has till now identified him only as the person who had purchased the Nissan Pathfinder vehicle and not as the person who drove the vehicle to the Times Square and left it there with the timed incendiary device inside. They are enquiring whether it was he who left the vehicle or someone else.

The claim made by Qari Hussain Mehsud of the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan regarding responsibility for the attempt is now being taken a little more seriously by the FBI because the message making the claim had been recorded before the incident. The FBI is also taking seriously a separate message of Hakimullah Mehsud, the Amir of the TTP, warning of reprisal strikes in the US, which had also been recorded before May 1.

Both the TTP and the Islamic Jihad Union have been angry against the US over its Drone strikes in North and South Waziristan. The TTP has been angry because of the death of Baitullah Mehsud, its then Amir, following a Drone strike in August last, and the subsequent injury to Hakimullah in another strike in January, 2010. The IJU is angry because of the alleged death of its leader Najmiddin Jalolov in a Drone strike.

According to some speculation, the Nissan vehicle was parked near the offices of Viacom Inc that owns the theatre Comedy Central. The theatre reportedly recently staged an episode of the animated show South Park, which was strongly criticised by a group called the Muslim Revolution for allegedly insulting Prophet Mohammad. Was this also a possible motive? It is not yet clear.

The writer, a former senior official with R&AW, is a noted security expert.

***************************************

THE PIONEER

OPED

LONDON DREAMS

RESTORING EMPIRE'S SECOND CITY IS A DIFFICULT TASK

SHIKHA MUKERJEE

Serious as the charge is against Union Minister Sisir Adhikari of the Trinamool Congress for financing a paltry Rs 1.2 lakh to buy arms from a Bangladeshi dealer, Parliament cannot waste its very expensive time, Rs 14 lakh an hour, to pursue this. There are other subjects involving high-value scams such as IPL and the auction of 2G spectrum that require greater attention.

While the Adhikari affair is grist for the CPI(M) and the BJP, it is nevertheless a minor matter and will not serve to cause a disintegration of the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance. Neither the Trinamool Congress nor the Congress are in a hurry to end the relationship because separately they are weaker than the CPI(M) while together they stand a good chance of bringing the uninterrupted reign to an end.

Being called offensive names in West Bengal by Trinamool Congress leader Mamata Banerjee does not seem to affect the Congress's self-esteem, perhaps because taking cognisance of insults is injurious to its health in the long term. This does raise questions about what the Congress and the Trinamool Congress intend to do with power once they succeed in ousting the CPI(M).

The forthcoming municipal election in West Bengal concerns issues of civic services and urban infrastructure. Even if the Trinamool Congress is not answerable, the Congress certainly is accountable for how it proposes to tackle the enormously complex and complicated task of planning and managing the breakneck speed with which India is urbanising. Since the two parties have as of now parted company, albeit only for the municipal elections, each must have a vision for what it hopes to do after winning in one or many or most or all of the 81 urban bodies where the contest is on.

Kolkata, unlike Pujali municipality, is a teeming metropolis and the pressure for services makes managing its infrastructure as complex as running a city State or a metropolitan Government. Other cities like Howrah, Durgapur, Haldia, Burdwan and Siliguri require just as much managing because there is a serious mismatch between the infrastructure that exists and the infrastructure that is required in 20 years to meet the needs of a rapidly urbanising India.

Soon after winning the Lok Sabha election, Ms Banerjee had declared that she could transform Kolkata almost overnight making it the equivalent of London, just as she had promised to make Darjeeling, a hill town, into Switzerland, a country. Having raised expectations that Kolkata, the poorest among the three mega cities of India, can be changed into London, the Trinamool Congress now needs to do more than merely nominate 141 candidates to win a majority in the Kolkata Municipal Corporation.

Whereas the Congress has a great deal of information on what is required in terms of urban services and infrastructure as well as the strategies required to finance and implement these needs, the Trinamool Congress is on an entirely different plane. The party operates on manipulating sentiment. With a slogan like "Maa, Mati, Manush" it could compel the closure of the Tata Motors venture in Singur linking the factory to forcible acquisition of land. With the same slogan how can it hope to deliver urban services and build infrastructure?

One answer would be that the Trinamool Congress would follow the lead of Railway Minister Banerjee. In every municipality, town and city, including Kolkata, it would announce a slew of initiatives for improvement of services. In the same way it would set up a flagship facility such as the auto logistic hub at Shalimar in Howrah district and then go slow on following it up with other more complicated and expensive infrastructure development projects.

That however would be a disaster for West Bengal and a nuisance for India. Urbanisation has to be a planned, controlled and strongly monitored process because it requires massive funding and massive construction. The old style haphazard construction of housing, roads and infrastructure can no longer work because now the process of urbanisation is not being driven by policy-makers but is part of the economic transformation under liberalisation.

Providing infrastructure for Kolkata of the same quality and efficiency as London will require from the Trinamool Congress a strong leadership. Oddly enough, Ms Banerjee has fought shy of naming any of the 116 she nominated in the first round as a possible Mayor. Without a leader and without a blueprint that would set the priorities and agenda of a Trinamool Congress-led Kolkata Municipal Corporation, Ms Banerjee is living dangerously.

The CPI(M) inspired furore in Parliament over the possible misdeeds of Mr Adhikari may, therefore, be a welcome diversion for the anti-CPI(M) pro-Trinamool Congress voter who may otherwise recall Ms Banerjee's promises of making Kolkata a clone of London, once the capital of an Empire that continues to strike a chord in the Bengali imagination.

**************************************

THE PIONEER

OPED

IT LOOKS LIKE A PEN BUT IT CAN FOIL A BOMB

A NEW WEAPON IN THE ARSENAL SHARED BY AIRPORT SECURITY PERSONNEL AND POLICE RESEMBLES A PEN BUT CAN DETECT BOMB DETONATORS IN POWDER FORM AT AS LITTLE AS FIVE MICROGRAMMES, WRITES A HOFFMAN

The ACRO-PET resembles a pen and can detect TATP, a peroxide bomb detonator used in many major terror attacks worldwide.

It's a white crystalline powder with a distinctive acrid odour. TATP is a peroxide bomb detonator and an explosive of choice for airport bombers. If it had been detected at Schiphol Airport in Amsterdam, the underwear bomber en route to Detroit several months ago would have been foiled much sooner.

Would-be bombers have managed to smuggle TATP on board before. In 2001, Richard Reid of Al Qaeda targeted American Airlines Flight 63 with a TATP trigger for a bomb concealed in his shoe. But underwear and shoe bombers beware: A technology developed by Israelis and Americans is now your nightmare.

Collaboration between an American researcher and Prof Ehud Keinan of the Technion —Israel Institute of Technology has culminated in a new way to foil terrorists carrying TATP-based explosives. Resembling a pen —although you can't write with it — the device is a new weapon in the arsenal shared by airport security personnel, police and environmentalists. Prof Keinan and Prof Philip Dawson from the Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, California, recently developed and commercialised the ACRO-PET (Peroxide Explosives Tester) — a simple and cost-effective device for detecting TATP.

Operated by touch, the sensitivity of the device is quite high, as it can identify as little as five microgrammes of TATP, an amount that can't be seen by the human eye. An operator touches the tip of the device to the surface of the suspicious material. The tip is then removed and the operator replaces it on the 'pen' and presses three levers, each of which releases 300 micro litres of solution. A colour change indicates the presence of TATP. If it's there, that's the time to make arrests.

"It's a next generation tool," says Mr Keinan, "most airports are not equipped with any devices (like this)."

Pinpointing terrorists before it's too lateAt a cost of about $ 25 per unit, the explosives tester is being sold through Acro Security Technologies. Founded and based in Israel, Acro Security sells the ACRO-PET and other products to pinpoint terrorists before it's too late.

The pen-like device is a disposable item that can be used by non-experts, like US troops in West Asia, customs police, regular police and even environmentalists.

"Sometimes we face environmental hazards that use peroxide-based chemicals," Mr Keinan relates. "But it's especially useful at airports for reducing false positives any time peroxides or suspected peroxide materials are found. The main thing is the war against terror.

"Some major airlines equip every plane with these detectors. If, for example, the December 25 Nigerian guy — if they knew using this device what material they had on board, they could have reported the material before landing. Knowing beforehand is important to know how dangerous a material is and how it should be handled, whether it's real or fake," Mr Keinan explains.

Mr Keinan hopes that the ACRO-PET device will be made available on all flights, giving airline hosts a quick and accurate way to test suspicious materials they may discover. This will help ground authorities to prepare better and respond more rapidly if a suspected terrorist manages to make his or her way on board.

Hard to detect, until now

TATP is extremely lethal and has played a role in major terrorist attacks for the past three decades, relates Mr Keinan: "There are several reasons for the popularity of TATP among terror groups all over the world. It's easy to prepare from inexpensive raw materials, and was difficult to detect (until now)."

Previous research on the science behind the device was reported in the journal Crystal Growth and Design. And lucky for Mr Keinan, he retained royalty rights after the Technion showed no interest in helping him to commercialise the research.

Mr Keinan and Mr Dawson's research was funded by organisations like the Binational Science Foundation, an Israel-US initiative that funds science research between the two countries to meet common goals.

"We invented the chemistry," says Mr Keinan. "It's based on enzyme catalysis, a colorimetric system sensitive to hydrogen peroxide. We developed the methodology, and hold the American patent, which is the basis of the product. It's been commercialised for about one and a half years and it's picking up momentum."

Mr Dawson's lab has developed new protein engineering tools that enable synthetic organic chemistry to be applied directly to proteins. These tools are being used to address fundamental questions in protein folding, stability and enzymatic catalysis.

Ten years of science

Working on the science behind it for about 10 years, it took several years for the researchers to find the right investors to take their idea to the commercial phase. The Israeli contribution escorted the product through development, and through the first, second and third prototypes. The final product is now in use around the world in South Africa, Australia and China, and also in the US where the company is now focussing its marketing efforts.

Aside from his work on ACRO-PET, Mr Keinan is still working on research at the Technion and is an associate professor at Scripps. He would gladly tells about his latest project, but "it's security-related and highly classified," he admits.

**************************************

THE PIONEER

OPED

THE UNEQUAL SIDES OF THE SLAVIC TRIANGLE

RUSSIA'S TIES WITH UKRAINE ARE IMPROVING WHILE BELARUS IS ACTING UNFRIENDLY, WRITES NIKOLAI TROITSKY

On Tuesday April 27, the Parliaments of Russia and Ukraine ratified an agreement extending by 25 years Russia's lease of the base in Sevastopol, where it's Black Sea Fleet is stationed. This agreement is the clearest sign yet of the two countries' rapprochement. Russia's relationship with Belarus, on the other hand, is veering off course.

In fact, this 'Slavic triangle' has never been isosceles. Until recently, Russian-Ukrainian relations were essentially frozen. The tension was only punctuated with periods of downright hostility. Moscow's alliance with Belarus seemed stable in comparison; the two countries even established the Union State with its own joint governing bodies.

Ukraine and Belarus have unexpectedly reversed roles. Russia's relations with Ukraine are improving with each passing day, while its Union State partner — who should be more than a mere ally — is making unfriendly statements about Moscow with ever greater frequency. Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko told Reuters in February that Russia is displaying the same imperial ambitions in its foreign policy as the United States. That is a breathtaking accusation.

Condemning Russia's "imperial ambitions" was a favourite pastime of former Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko. Unsurprisingly, Russian-Ukrainian relations were strained during his tenure. Now that he has been replaced by Mr Viktor Yanukovych, bilateral relations are on the upswing. As for Belarus, the Government has not changed hands there for a long time. Mr Lukashenko has been running the country since 1994. During those 16 years, he seemingly failed to notice Russia's "imperial ambitions". What changed his mind? Why is it that Russia's long-time partner and faithful ally, as Mr Lukashenko once positioned himself, has changed his rhetoric so abruptly?

Mr Lukashenko's rhetoric continues to grow more and more aggressive. On April 25, the Belarusian leader said, "the Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Armed Forces seems to have forgotten that there are two Russian bases in Belarus: One near Baranovichi and the other near Vileika. Let me remind him that unlike for Sevastopol, Russia doesn't pay us a single ruble or kopeck in rent for these bases." Were it not for the long-standing alliance between Russia and Belarus, this "reminder" might have sounded an awful lot like blackmail. But Mr Lukashenko did not stop there. "Russia has no friends in the West except for the Belarusian army," he added.

Mr Lukashenko made this statement right after Russia and Ukraine signed the agreement on the Sevastopol base. Russia will be able to keep its Black Sea Fleet in Ukraine, but at a price of several billion dollars. True, if the lease had not been extended, the cost of relocating the fleet to a new base in Novorossiysk would have been much greater. But this would have been Russia's problem, not Ukraine's.

Could it be that Mr Lukashenko's grudge is rooted in the fact that Belarus makes no profit from Russian military bases? This is not even the first time he raised the issue of money. "Russia will have to pay hard currency for something it is used to get free of charge," Mr Lukashenko said in February. He also claims that Belarus has lost a total of $ 5 billion since January 1, when Moscow introduced export customs duties on refined oil products and petrochemicals supplied to Belarus. This dispute has been taken up by the CIS Economic Court. In any case, it's strange to see two members of a Union State squabbling over money.

Was it a coincidence that the dispute escalated just as Russian-Ukrainian relations finally began to improve? Hardly. Mr Lukashenko is an experienced and shrewd politician. He has always been adept at exploiting Belarus's role as Russia's only friend in a hostile environment and its geographical position as Russia's gateway to Europe. Mr Lukashenko was not troubled by the New Year's gas wars between Moscow and Ukraine. Instead he saw an opening to pressure Moscow for even more generous subsidies.

Now the situation has reversed. Mr Lukashenko has lost his unique role now that Moscow has settled its gas dispute with Ukraine and signed a range of agreements, including the extension of the lease on the Sevastopol base and a gas supply agreement with an enormous 30 per cent discount for Ukraine. Perhaps this is why Mr Lukashenko recently launched a broadside against Russia's policy toward Kyrgyzstan.

The writer is a Moscow-based commentator on current affairs.

******************************************************************************************

THE TIMES OF INDIA

COMMENT

TERROR TRAIL

What is being counted as the 31st attempt after 9/11 to stage a terrorist strike in the US may turn out to be one of the most important ones yet. Faisal Shahzad, the Pakistan-born American citizen who attempted to explode a car bomb in Times Square, the figurative heart of New York, may have been incompetent but the significance of what he tried to do is no less for it. His ineptitude - coupled with highly effective work by US security personnel - has enabled his capture, shedding light on the changing pattern of terrorist strikes. And it further emphasises - after David Coleman Headley, Major Nidal Malik Hasan, the men responsible for the 2005 London metro bombings and those who had planned a similar attack on the New York metro system ^ that extremism is no longer just an external threat in the US and Europe, but an internal one as well.

Given that the Shahzad investigation is just beginning, it is difficult to say anything with certitude, but his confession so far underscores the common denominator in many of these cases - the badlands along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border. With the leadership of the Afghan Taliban as well as the Pakistani Taliban - the latter having claimed credit for the Times Square attempt - now based in north Waziristan, it is perhaps the epicentre of global terrorism.

The links between this new breed of terrorists - men like Headley and Shahzad, not driven to extremism by poverty and a lack of options but members of elites who have spent a great deal of their lives in the western societies they turn on - lead directly from the US to this region. It is where they go to be trained and taught how to carry out terrorist strikes.

So far, the attempts may have been amateurish. In addition, the US's internal security mechanisms, thoroughly revamped after 9/11, have been effective, blips notwithstanding. But all it would take for a major propaganda victory for the extremists would be one strike. Preventive measures within US borders are well and good, but they are the last line of defence at the end of the terror trail. Without severe abrogation of civil rights - and perhaps not even then - they cannot be made foolproof. It is at the source that the problem must be tackled. All roads lead to north Waziristan, and the sooner Washington and Islamabad realise this, the better.

***************************************

THE TIMES OF INDIA

COMMENT

TERROR TRAIL

***************************************

THE TIMES OF INDIA

EDITORIAL

FINE COWS AND ENGLISHMEN

RASHMEE ROSHAN LALL

The point about today's British general election is we missed it. It barely figured on India's collective radar. If anything, it was like the cow's waning "audience-appeal" so entertainingly described by P G Wodehouse in his Blandings series on that fluffy-minded, pig-loving peer, Lord Emsworth. "It was a fine cow, as cows go, but, like so many cows, it lacked sustained dramatic interest." That was Wodehouse's The Custody of the Pumpkin, published 1924.

So too the British general election. It was a fine election, as elections go, but like so many elections, it lacked dramatic interest (for India). It says a great deal about 21st-century Britain that Wodehouse remains a good fit nearly a hundred years after The Custody of the Pumpkin appeared to celebrate a country where passions run high in the vegetable beds.

A century after Wodehouse employed the plummy phraseology of pre-war English upper-class society to convey a certain idea of England, he is still held to capture the faded, cabbage roses and cribbage essence of Englishness. A A Gill, the satirical, strenuously politically incorrect Anglo-Indian food critic so beloved of those who read The Sunday Times, London, is right to describe Britain as a country replete with "the hand-me-down vanity of tradition, the authority of history, the sonorous tic of convention".

Is this what makes India fluffy-minded about British politics 2010? Do we regard Britain as a too-tiny, too-traditional, former imperial power, hemmed in by Europe, the Great Recession and its own inconsequentialism? Admittedly, a British election has little direct effect on the wider world. When roughly 45 million Britons decide whether or not to eject the Labour party and its dour leader Gordon Brown from 13 years in office, whether or not to give the Conservatives led by the very Wodehousian David Cameron a viable chance to govern, or accord the shiny faced Nick Clegg of the Liberal Democrats a stab at playing kingmaker, they are not playing midwife to a cataclysmic birth. Britons don't get to elect "the most powerful man in the world"; that's still for the Americans to do. Britons don't choose the men whose investment, purchase and manufacturing decisions can sicken or strengthen economies around the world; that's for the Chinese to suffer.

The point about India's apparent indifference to the British election 2010 and British politics in general is as comforting as it is dispiriting. It is a compound of profound trust and extreme presumption. Both India and Britain trust their relationship and presume upon it. It is noteworthy that if India virtually ignored the British election, Britain repaid the compliment in full measure a year ago. The Delhi correspondent of a leading British daily recently recounted the lack of interest from his London newsdesk about the Indian general election and contrasted this with the screaming attention given to the Pakistani polls. It was a backhanded compliment to Indian political stability.

For India, a new government in London will not - and cannot - fundamentally alter the dynamics of the bilateral relationship, which is too well entrenched to be casually nudged off-course. A brand new British prime minister will not - and cannot - unilaterally rejig relations to plumb new depths. In 2010, India and Britain are arguably at the best point in a 63-year fox-trot that has required much nimble footwork, careful steering and an attentive ear for the rhythm of the bilateral mood music, be it Kashmir, the Jallianwala Bagh massacre, shoals of illegal Indian immigrants to the UK or unfair treatment of UK-based Indian doctors. Today, the equation is solidly based on the stuff the Sensex is made of, the case for more mergers and acquisitions and stronger foreign direct investment flows in both directions.

Cameron, who may wind up as the next British prime minister if numerous opinion polls are correct, recently argued for a new, formalised "special relationship" between India and Britain. In 2006, he notably chose India for his first overseas trip as Conservative Party leader. He now argues that the case for a special relationship "just gets stronger and stronger. India is the second largest investor in Britain, there are 600 Indian companies based here and trade between the two countries is 13 billion pounds a year".

He was not saying anything startlingly new or pithy. No British politician could disagree. Therein lies the strength ^ and the reason ^ for profound bilateral trust, presumption and, it has to be said, indifference to changes of government.

Even so, most countries are like women and inordinately partial to compliments, moonshine and appropriate attentiveness. It is in India's interest to know more about 21st-century Britain than half-remembered passages from Wodehouse, the opinions and travails of the 1.8 million Indians settled in the UK and rude one-liners on how Continental people have sex lives but the English have hot-water bottles.

After all, Britain remains one of the world's largest economies; London is the world's financial capital and a centre of excellence for the liberal arts from music to cinema; Britain is a permanent member of UN Security Council, has nuclear weapons and a lingering sense of guilt about Empire. It is in our interest to capitalise and build on this. A good start may be getting the name of the next British prime minister right.

***************************************

THE TIMES OF INDIA

TOURISTS ARE NOT THE PROBLEM

Environment minister Jairam Ramesh has got this one right. He has said that his ministry has no intention to ban tourism in tiger reserves, as demanded by some sections of the environment department. Those in favour of the ban have argued that an increased number of tourists and tourism-related construction was proving to be disastrous for tigers and their habitat, resulting in dwindling numbers. This is a flawed argument. Indeed, the only way to save the tiger is to ensure that the economic value of a live tiger is much higher than the profit to be made from killing it for body parts. This can be done primarily by making tigers and tiger reserves a tourist draw.

The worrying fall in the number of tigers in India - which stands at around 1,400 - has little to do with tourists. This has happened because of poaching and encroachment of the tiger habitat. These are the real issues that need to be tackled. Our ill-equipped and poorly paid forest guards are fighting an uphill battle against poachers. Besides, forest conservation laws are regularly flouted.

All over the world tourists flock to see animals in their natural habitat without any adverse impact. Indeed, the money from tourism is funnelled back to protecting the animals. In India, some of the most-visited national parks such as Corbett or Bandhavgarh also have the highest number of tigers. However, no one is arguing that tourism in national parks should be unregulated. Tourists in tiger reserves must always be accompanied by trained guides. More importantly, tourism-related infrastructure should not be allowed inside the core areas of national parks and activities in wildlife resorts must be strictly regulated.

The Indian tiger is in dire straits. The only way to save it is to highlight how precious it is for our country and the world at large. Encouraging more tourists to tiger reserves will only help this cause.

***************************************

THE TIMES OF INDIA

SURVIVAL IS THE PRIORITY

RUPA SENGUPTA

So, the lid's been put on the tiger tourism fracas. Official talk about turning ecologically sensitive tiger reserves into no-go zones irked the tourism lobby. That lobby's won this round. None of this alters the fact unregulated wildlife tourism is a migraine for conservationists the world over. Yes, we love to look at untamed animals; if we can be billed for it, it's a business to boost like any other. Only, right now, there's a bigger priority: staving off tiger extinction. Just about 1,400 remain in natural habitats. Who knows how many will go the Sariska and Panna way?

Tiger tourism, some say, can be micro-managed. But if it's been a near-disaster till now, what's the chance we'll change stripes? We all know the scandal of hotels and lodges being built on tiger corridors, damaging grasslands and causing loss of precious habitat. We all know unsupervised tourists turned picnickers and wedding guests harass the big cats and disperse their prey. As for tourism as a tool against poaching, law enforcers must net poachers anyway. If anything, serious issues like poaching and encroachment risk getting obscured in the wildlife tourism spat.

It's argued that tiger protection needs money, and foreign tourists especially bring top dollars. That's sophistry drawing on economic reductionism to give animals their due. It's like saying non-human species have a 'right' to exist only if bred for food or fur, hunted for sport or shackled in zoos and amusement parks. Without 'value' extraction, who'd care for crocs or dolphins? Here's the counter-argument. Species need conserving for their intrinsic worth. They have a life, a subjectivity and a purpose that are irreducible and inalienable. So, their 'value' doesn't depend on how many of us will pay to exploit them.

***************************************

THE TIMES OF INDIA

END GAME AT ARTHUR ROAD

BACHI KARKARIA

Mumbai's torrid tango with Ajmal Amir Kasab is over. From the moment we saw that first eerie photograph, we had been obsessed by this baby-faced monster. We never stopped being sickened, outraged, infuriated, frustrated -- even daily inconvenienced by the detour-forcing barricades on Arthur Road where he sat secure in his multi-crore, bullet-proof and bomb-proof facility. Even the mountain of the court came to this Mahomet.

Now the verdict has been delivered. The quantum of punishment will be announced today. One way or the other, it's a death foretold. Appeals, the bleeding hearts, the bring-the-big-fish-to book-first brigade --all these can wait. The moment of truth has already come. We can exhale again. For me now the focus of fascination has shifted. From that consummate player in the dock to the man in the hotter seat. From the terrorist to the judge. Since Monday, I have been thinking about what it takes to be Madan Laxmandas Tahaliyani. The cerebral prerequisites, yes, but even more, the psyche. The first must be completely engaged, the second must be completely detached.

The painstaking 1,522-page judgment symbolized the herculean deliberation which has hall-marked this trial, arguably among the topmost in our threatened times. If 'due process' and 'rule of law' became the most hosanna-ed triumphs of this week, then Judge Tahaliyani was the totem of that victory. His unmoved acquittals bore this out as resoundingly as his undiluted verdict of 'guilty'. The transparency, the punctilious fair play put us in the league of extraordinarily civilized nations. The trial was conducted with speed, but the justice wasn't summary. In the eyes of the world, it separated us from kangaroo courts and banana republics. Most of all, it took our own breath away.

But think about it. There's a lot in common between judges and terrorists, most notably, their temperament and their training. Both have to be unflinching in their mission, undistracted by the extraneous consideration, whether it appears as a negotiator's subtle ploy or the media's raucous cries for blood. Both must remain unmoved by the imploring tears, those of the hostage or those of the accused. Both have to be coldly clinical, like a neurosurgeon or Zen master, disciplined to respond, not react.

The subterranean interplay of Kasab and Judge Tahaliyani is even more riveting. Extreme hierarchies create strange relationships. Remember the Stockholm Syndrome and the disturbing 1974 poster of a machine-gun-toting Patty Hearst against the flag of the Symbionese Liberation Army which had earlier kidnapped this American newspaper heiress for ransom? It's admittedly not quite the same, but consider the power equation between the luckless sole-surviving terrorist and the man whom the world looked upon as the earthly emissary of divine justice. Or simply think about the hoopla and hysteria over this trial, and the mental celibacy it must demand not to succumb to its seductions, the more subterranean, the more subversive.

When the judge-prisoner interactions are so close, prolonged and concentrated on just one man, not a diffuse army of rioters or absconding bomb conspirators, and when it all takes place in the surreal confines of a courtroom deep within the bulletproof gut of a jail, then the biggest danger is intimacy; the first casualty, detachment. Through those 271 working days of the court, the 1,611 questions put to him, the 3,192 pages of evidence, virtually eating, drinking, sleeping, breathing the case (with no Diwali break), mere mortals would find it impossible not to get emotionally meshed to Kasab with a Velcro strip's myriad hooks. But he peeled it away as ruthlessly as a terrorist -- that's the awed verdict on Judge Tahaliyani.

***************************************

******************************************************************************************

HINDUSTAN TIMES

EDITORIAL

LITTLE COMFORT IN NUMBERS

As a nation, we certainly have a penchant for the divisive rather than the inclusive. So, the latest brouhaha over the demand for a caste-based census comes as no surprise. Leading the charge are heavyweights like Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee, Law Minister Veerappa Moily, Minister for Overseas Affairs Vayalar Ravi and others while Home Minister P. Chidambaram and Commerce Minister Anand Sharma oppose it. The sultans of caste politics Mulayam Singh Yadav and Lalu Prasad are naturally for it, as also the BJP and the Left. The suggestion that a separate agency handle the caste enumeration makes little sense. After all, the empirical data gathered will be the same, irrespective of who collects it. The question is whether such information, if available to political formations, could be misused. The answer is yes, but then again the lack of credible data is equally open to exploitation as we have seen in the past.

The argument that caste data is necessary to ensure that affirmative schemes are appropriately targeted is specious since the most deprived castes have in the past been overlooked despite a fair amount of information available. The last caste-based census was in 1931. The 79 years without data collection have neither eliminated caste distinctions nor have they ended caste inequality. However, caste is a reality, an often ugly one, in India. It has long been argued that caste cannot be a criterion for according State benefits, rather the basis should be economic. We have seen that there is tremendous resistance to this with the so-called creamy layer oppressing the weaker castes. The collection of caste data as proposed will, if the intention is to bolster affirmative action, face a major hurdle in the fact that caste is very fluid across the country. A lower caste in one state is not necessarily so in another. So, it would be difficult to find a median to determine which is a needy caste and which is not.

The government's argument that the census ball is already rolling and a new criterion cannot be added now is valid. It would be far better to debate the merits and demerits of a caste-based census in a rational manner, if that is possible, before introducing it. The prime minister has been a staunch advocate of meritocracy. It is a different matter that ground realities mitigate against this in many instances. That should be the holy grail that we should move towards. So, for the moment, it might be best to put this idea of a caste-based census on the backburner and examine other options to ensure a level-playing field for all citizens of the country.

***************************************

HINDUSTAN TIMES

A PHOTO-FINNISH

FINLAND THINKS THIRD PARTY MEDIATION CAN SOLVE KASHMIR. LET'S TALK ABOUT THIS OVER REINDEER STEAK IN HELSINKI.

Peaceniks have a genuine problem, they suffer from congenital agitation when they spot a trouble zone. Take for example the Scandinavians, the do-gooders-in-chief of the world. The moment they spot a troubled mass of humanity, they dart across and offer their services (and funds) as mediators. Whether you like them or not, never underestimate Scandinavian mediators: these good, doughty souls are even okay with taking couple of blows from both sides for the sake of an 'accord'. So we were not surprised to hear Finnish Foreign Minister, Alexander Stubb, advocate third party mediation in Kashmir. He did not exactly say that the Finns want the job, but we did detect a certain undertone of 'don't hesitate to drop us a line if the backyard's heating up a bit too much' in his words.

Why are the Scandinavians such indefatigable do-gooders? While we, in less fortunate parts of the world, are busy fighting our own battles, they seem to have no problems at all. Look at their line-up: the Norwegians in West Asia and Sri Lanka, the Danes in the biggest of the world crises, climate change and now, the Finns expressing their interest in India. Um, could it be the sunny beaches of Lanka, the diversity of India or the adrenaline-pumping politics of Pakistan?

But like in all jobs, we will need to do some background checks. And what do we have? The Oslo Accord didn't go down too well with the Norwegians being called "Israel's helpful errand boy". In Lanka, all mediation was put to rest with the president mowing down the LTTE. The climate change summit hardly managed to cool down the world. A Kashmir solution no doubt will look good on Finland's CV, but we've no vacancies. Not a Finn-Finn situation at present.

***************************************

HINDUSTAN TIMES

A COMING-OUT PARTY

KUMKUM DASGUPTA

'Namaskar, I am Raman Kumar from Kanker, Chhattisgarh. Last week, the local administration held a public hearing on land acquisition in our village. The meeting was a farce." I have never met Kumar — I heard the 'news bite' by just dialling 080-66932500 from my workstation in New Delhi, 1,300 kilometres from Kanker.

In urban mediaspeak, Kumar is a 'citizen journalist'. But unlike his urban counterparts, who are encouraged to tweet or blog on issues that are important to them, Kumar, a digital have-not, never had any dedicated space to discuss issues that were crucial to him. Interestingly, it's technology, which created the divide in the first place, has come to his aid by lowering the barrier for sharing information. All he now needs is a mobile phone.

Raipur-based communication professional Shubhranshu Choudhary has been working for sometime on alternative media and how to bridge the gap that exists between mainstream media and people like Kumar. He started a website, www.cgnet.in — a platform for news and information about Chhattisgarh some time ago. But since internet penetration in India is low, Choudhary wanted a more popular and broadbased technology to increase the scope of information exchange.

Around the same time, S. Amarasinghe of Massachusetts Institute of Technology and his team were scouting for an opportunity to deploy their newly-developed AudioWiki platform, a repository of spoken content that could be "accessed and modified via a low-cost telephone". His former student, Bill Thies, who now works with Microsoft Research in Bangalore, identified www.cgnet.in as a candidate for the platform.

And CGnet swara was born in February, 2010.

This is how it works: if a citizen journalist like Kumar wants to share some 'news' or listen to 'news' from other parts of the state, all he has to do is dial 080-66932500. Once he connects, an IVR system (the same technology that guides you when you call bank or airline helplines) takes over and prompts him to choose his options: record or listen to news. Microsoft's Bangalore office hosts the IVR technology in its server. A 'citizen journalist' can then record the news in any language/dialect. The information is then verified/translated by moderators and disseminated via SMSes and www.cgnet.in. Or you could dial 080-66932500 to hear it.

There's a growing feeling in many parts of the country that the urban media, especially the English media, is focusing less and less on the views/issues of marginalised communities. Initiatives like these provide a platform for those voices.

Recently in Goa, Video Volunteers launched IndiaUnheard, a nation-wide community-based news agency 'dedicated' to help the most-marginalised communities tell their own news. It is a network of more than 30 Community Correspondents representing 24 states of India.

It's too early to foresee how all this will pan out, whether we will get a new tribe of rural citizen journalists or urban journalists will pick up the untold stories. But for now, it has given a voice and platform to people who feel that they have been "left out" of the media boom or have access to only the sanitised news coverage of the government-run All India Radio.

But more importantly, as one of the users said, there's happiness in just 'being heard'.

In 2002, the World Bank asked 60,000 people living on less than a dollar a day to identify the single greatest hurdle to their advancement. Above even food, shelter or education, the number one need identified was to have a 'voice' of their own.

Eight years later and with a million mutinies brewing, that need has not diminished one bit. In fact, it is growing.

***************************************

HINDUSTAN TIMES

NO TO MIND GAMES

AJAI SAHNI

The Supreme Court's decision declaring forced narco-analysis and lie-detector (or brain mapping) tests unconstitutional is impeccable, not only in law, but also in terms of investigative probity and the integrity of policing. Some critics have described the judgement as a "blow" to investigative agencies. But this is nothing but a blow against shoddy, unscientific investigations and a pervasive psyche that seeks to substitute shortcuts for proper and modern methods of evidence-gathering and evaluation. It is significant that, in recent years, there had been increasing and often unproductive recourse to coercive narco and brain-mapping tests in a number of high-profile cases.

Constitutionally, an accused cannot be "compelled to be a witness against himself", and the court has now clearly held that forcing a person to submit to these tests constitutes just such a compulsion. This settles the law on a subject that has produced divergent judgements in lower courts, with several cases in which the use of narco-analysis and lie-detector tests was upheld. This does not, of course, mean that there is no scope for such tests. It is only their coercive use that has been disallowed by the court. Where suspects are willing to submit voluntarily in an effort to 'clear their name' of particular allegations, judicious use of these tools remains possible, within the natural reservations that must arise from the imperfection of these methods.

Of course, an argument from expediency may arise: the threats of terrorism, proxy war and mass political violence in India have become so great that the 'public interest' demands the use of such methods. This, however, is a slippery slope that will end up with the justification of torture and other 'shortcuts' we have become habituated to. Crucially, however, such arguments are entirely defeated by an objective evaluation of the efficacy of these methods, and the deleterious impact they have on professional integrity and competence within the police.

'Evidence' yielded through either of these methods is, of course, not admissible in court. Advocates, however, argue that these can offer useful aids to investigation, leading to recoveries and substantive admissible evidence. The reality is, narco-analysis and lie detector tests are essentially in the realm of pseudo-science. They are far from reliable and, on the occasions that they may, in fact, yield acceptable results, are enormously dependent on the skills and sincerity of those who use these tools.

Narco-analysis reduces the subject to a deeply suggestible state and, like torture, in the hands of the wrong interrogators, can yield precisely the 'confessions' that are sought — whether or not these have any basis in fact. Given the broader conditions of the Indian investigative apparatus, it must be recognised that, to the extent that the use of such methods becomes widespread, these may well lead to the planting or concoction of 'corroborative' evidence and testimonies. Moreover, both narco-analysis and lie detector tests produce wildly divergent outcomes from interrogator to interrogator and from subject to subject. Individuals react very differently to these tests. Such testing not only produces unreliable data, but hardened criminals may well be able to, or be trained to, produce deceptive outcomes, effectively misdirecting or terminating productive investigations.

The crucial argument against such tests, however, arises from its general impact on the character and capacity for scientific investigation and professional policing. Increasing reliance on these tools is essentially an unreliable shortcut that obstructs the development of effective capabilities for scientific investigation and the creation of adequate forensic capacities within the law enforcement establishment.

There are a number of cases in the recent past — the Aarushi case prominent among these — where repeated and unproductive narco-tests have been sought to be substituted for utterly botched investigations and what, prima facie, appears to be the deliberate destruction of crucial evidence. There has been a veritable slew of recent cases — including the trial and acquittal of the two co-accused, Fahim Ansari and Sabahuddin, in the 26/11 Ajmal Kasab trial — where extremely shoddy investigative work has been manifest. Increasing reliance on shortcuts such as narco-analysis and brain mapping (and including torture) will only deepen the culture of investigative incompetence that is currently pervasive across the country.

The conditions of Indian policing in general, and the investigative apparatus in particular, are a disgrace to any modern nation, certainly to one that aspires to be a 'great power' in the conceivable future. This has been the result of decades of neglect by successive regimes, both at the Centre and in states. Instead of addressing the colossal cumulative deficit in capacities for policing, investigation and forensics, policymakers and the police leadership have been resorting to a range of slapdash methods that have undermined faith in enforcement agencies, even as they have largely failed to produce the desired results in terms of effective law-and-order management and prosecution of crime.

None of this is going to create the apparatus we need to fight the rising threats to internal security, though they may produce an occasional flash-in-the-pan 'success'. In every sphere — the investigation of crimes, including terrorist crimes, is no exception — it must now be realised, there is no substitute for professionalism and efficiency, and for the creation of capacities for modern and scientific police work, and a competent and modern apparatus for internal security management.

Ajai Sahni is Executive Director, Institute for Conflict Management and South Asia Terrorism Portal

The views expressed by the author are personal

***************************************

******************************************************************************************

THE INDIAN EXPRESS

EDITORIAL

NO OFFENCE

An epidemic of outrage appears to have convulsed Parliament, with chunks of the closing days of the Budget Session lost to adjournments. Just when closure was won on the deadlock over Mani Shankar Aiyar's comment on Arun Jaitley and Sudip Bandopadhyay's words to Basudeb Acharia (Aiyar expressed regrets and Acharia was pacified by the Lok Sabha speaker's reprimand to Bandopadhyay), on Wednesday the BJP's Ananth Kumar invited the indignation of the RJD's Lalu Prasad. Their disagreement came in the course of a discussion in Lok Sabha on the Census questionnaire.

The surprise is not that affront is so often caused, and offence so easily taken — our legislatures rightly remain alert to unparliamentary comments, and the chair is habitually prompt in expunging them. What remains startling, however, about these three incidents is how slow MPs and their party leaderships have been in moving on. Passage of time tends to give figures of the past greater stature, and the danger is that lazy comparisons can be made between today's parliamentarians and their predecessors. But it is certainly the case that Parliament is today less invested in protecting its debates and discussions from disruptiveness. Pressure groups simply do not exist to get offender and offended to participate in the motions of civility that are needed for the smooth functioning of the House.

Numerous tools have been used to get around this. As Lok Sabha speaker, Somnath Chatterjee went to considerable trouble to make a success of the Lok Sabha TV channel, in the hope that not only would proceedings in the House be accessed by the public, but that live telecast would give MPs an incentive to be more and engagingly articulate. Vice President Hamid Ansari, as chairperson of the Rajya Sabha, has weighed in with suggestions for Question Hour and for moderating the anti-defection law. But rules and transparency can only achieve so much. Like democracy itself, parliamentary debate and discussion depend so critically on the imagination of those who participate.

***************************************

INDIAN EXPRESS

CATCHING MAMATA

Some may say Union Minister for Railways Mamata Banerjee has been playing truant. Some may call her plain irresponsible. Given the utter predictability of her conduct, it's perhaps best to leave the distinction to the domain of semantics and ask Banerjee how long she intends to make her ministry, the Union cabinet, even parliamentary proceedings, to say nothing of stranded commuters who every now and then suffer the whims of railway staff, orbit her arithmetic and agenda for the West Bengal assembly elections scheduled next year. As a cabinet minister with a key portfolio, she has no excuse for her absence and negligence. Why then was Banerjee so elusive on Tuesday when the opposition cornered the government over the Mumbai suburban railways motormen's strike that paralysed India's commercial capital? Did Banerjee, as Union railway minister, not have a responsibility towards the 7 million commuters held to ransom for the length of a day by railway employees whose conduct her office is ultimately accountable for?

Well, the minister, busy with her electoral arithmetic for the Kolkata municipal polls, chose not to make any comment, even as the strike saw the Union government moving the Bombay high court for getting the motormen back to work as well as the Maharashtra chief minister intervening. While the cabinet is indeed collectively responsible, Banerjee's style of functioning is the hallmark of the worst form of rent-seeking and hostage-holding that coalition partners often subject the Union government to. In fact, the Trinamool chief seems to be competing with the DMK at the moment on which ally can most embarrass the Congress. (Thus, in Banerjee, there's a lesson for the Congress too.)

Whether it be train accidents, an abysmal attendance at cabinet meetings, or land acquisition, Banerjee has demonstrated that her ministry was not her priority, that she — though not the first or only minister to do so — wanted to use this national leverage for unambiguously regional, narrow political ends. There has been even a gentle rap from the prime minister late last year. It is time Mamata Banerjee was given a clear choice between the two jobs.

***************************************

THE INDIAN EXPRESS

EDITORIAL

TRUTH TO POWER

The Supreme Court has declared that narco-analysis, brain-mapping, and polygraph tests — the whole gamut of "truth technologies" intended to loosen the tongue and get suspects to spill during interrogation — are illegal without the subject's explicit consent. Unless a person voluntarily submits to them, these methods violate the right against self-incrimination provided in Article 20(3) and the right to privacy.

The narco-analysis test is conducted by injecting three grams of sodium pentothal dissolved in water, designed to push the suspect towards a hypnotic twilight state where they are questioned several times over to tease out ambiguities. Brain-mapping and lie-detection also measure physiological responses to stimuli as indication of psychological states. Lie detectors have been around in various versions since the '20s, when they were called "the soul machines" or "machines for the cure of liars". Meanwhile, "truth serums", used on World War II spy suspects in the US, had been struck down as unconstitutional, as far back as 1963.

Either way, confessions sweated out through these methods are not admissible as evidence in court. But they were often used to find and chase up on leads — they have been notably administered on Ajmal Kasab and in the Nithari murder case. Now, those options are less easily available to investigating agencies — which might detract from their efficiency somewhat, but is undoubtedly a reminder that no matter how exigent the circumstances, dodgy science should not be put to the service of an elusive justice. Many studies have shown that persons who have been administered these chemicals can often repeat the interrogators' words and cues or freely fantasise.

Like drunken unburdenings — which also involve a loss of inhibition, but may not necessarily lay out the truth — these revelations are too addled for any straight reading. As Lindsey vs United States, a 1956 federal appeals court decision, found: "The intravenous injection of a drug by a physician in a hospital may appear more scientific than the drinking of large amounts of bourbon in a tavern, but the end result displayed in the subject's speech may be no more reliable." No matter how much more sophisticated the technology used now, it is still a coercive and manipulable investigation tactic, and one that has been rightly regulated by our courts.

***************************************

THE INDIAN EXPRESS

EDITORIAL

LOOKING FOR DIFFERENCE

DHIRAJ NAYYAR

Britain's economy went through six consecutive quarters (one and a half years) of negative growth between March 2008 and September 2009, its deepest recession since the '30s. Its quarter of recovery between October and December registered a measly 0.1 per cent growth. In such dire economic circumstances, it is difficult to imagine that the incumbent government would have even a whiff of a chance to retain power in the general election today.

Remarkably enough, the Labour Party, although trailing in the opinion polls, still has a reasonable shot at retaining power. In fact, if it wasn't for their hopelessly unpopular, uncharismatic and gaffe-prone leader and incumbent prime minister, they may well have been a shoo-in for a fourth consecutive term in office.

The Liberal Democrats, Britain's third political party for a long time, would blame the first-past-the-post electoral system for giving Labour even under Gordon Brown a whiff of a chance. Like in India, the overall percentage of vote matters little unless it converts into seats in Parliament. This is precisely the reason why electoral reform has periodically surfaced as a major issue in the course of this election campaign.

But the nature of the electoral system can only be accorded so much blame. It doesn't explain why all the three major parties are still running relatively close to each other in opinion polls. The electoral system cannot explain why public opinion hasn't overwhelmingly moved one way or the other.

To understand that one needs to dig deeper than just the immediacy of the recent recession.

Britain has always been at the cusp of America and Western Europe in more ways than one, with greater cultural and intellectual affinity to the former and closer physical and therefore economic proximity to the latter. The US and Britain made a decisive break from the post-war Western consensus (and indeed the rest of Western Europe) on economic policy in the '80s courtesy Ronald Regan and Margaret Thatcher. The Anglo-Saxon model of capitalism emphasised a greater role for free markets and a much smaller role for the state.

In Britain, however, the Thatcherite revolution, while promoting efficiency and productivity also created a deep structural flaw that was finally exposed by the financial crisis: marginalisation of manufacturing and over-dependence on the services sector, particularly financial services centred round London. Curiously enough, many forecasts some years ago suggested this was the way to go. Britain, by these forecasts, would overtake France and Germany in terms of GDP by 2020 simply on the back of growth of the financial sector. But now that the future of global finance is uncertain — regulations could put a break on the rate of growth — the UK economy has few alternatives to power growth.

The only remnants of strong British manufacturing today are in aerospace (Rolls Royce is a leader in aircraft engines) and pharmaceuticals (GlaxoSmithKline). But while both are high-tech industries, they have uncertain trajectories — aerospace can be cyclical and heavily dependent on government support; pharma hasn't had a major breakthrough for a number of years. American manufacturing on the other hand survived the Reagan revolution, and the boom in Silicon Valley through the '80s and '90s gave the US a new forum for economic leadership.

Some of Britain's dismal manufacturing performance can also be attributed to the strength of the pound, which has got a good price for the country's North Sea Oil since the '80s, but has dissuaded exports and encouraged imports. Since exports were always going to be uncompetitive with a strong pound, even foreign investors did not find it worth their while to manufacture there. Again this is different from the way things turned out in the US where Japanese and Korean manufacturers, for example, set up base.

This lack of diversification in the UK economy has had other consequences too, particularly on regional inequality. Statistics from the UK's Office of National Statistics show that while the country's per capital gross value added (per capita income) was GBP 21,000 in 2008, 10 out of 12 regions had per capita incomes lower than the national average. Wales and the northeast of England registered per capita incomes of GBP 15,000 only, less than half of London's GBP 34,000. Interestingly, that trend has remained the same in the last 10 years: London and the surrounding areas have prospered from financial services while the rest of the country has been depressed because of lack of diversification.

The focus of the three main political parties in this campaign has been on the immediate after effects of the recession. Far too little attention has been given to these longer term problems. New Labour may yet have come closest to addressing some of these issues. Tony Blair devolved considerable political and policy authority to some regions: Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Most recently, Business Secretary Peter Mandelson floated interesting, even if controversial, ideas of using state intervention to revive British manufacturing.

The other problem which is long-term and on which few convincing solutions have been put forward is in the provision of public services. Here public opinion has leant more towards the European (rather than American) view on the extensive (and free) provision of public services. The National Health Service (NHS) to this day provides free (that is, government funded) healthcare services to all residents of the UK — the kind of universal healthcare that the US is far from achieving. However, unlike in most other Western European countries, the state of health services in particular (but also schools) is far from satisfactory — long waiting periods, often costing people their lives, have been the most potent symbol of NHS failure over the years. The Labour government has pumped a lot of money into NHS over the last 13 years. But outcomes simply haven't matched the input of resources.

Again, New Labour under Tony Blair, more than the Tories or LibDems, had the right ideas about mixing state funding with some market-based discipline. But he failed to convince his own party, particularly Gordon Brown, on the need for radical reform.

Voters may not be inclined to give Labour's ideas, even the good ones, a fourth successive mandate, not while the uninspiring Brown is in charge. On the other hand, the more attractive and comforting personality of David Cameron, rather than the somewhat confused, inconsistent and often illiberal (and behind the times) ideas of the party he leads, may be enough to see the Tories home after 13 long years.

The writer is a senior editor with 'The Financial Express'

dhiraj.nayyar@expressindia.com

***************************************

THE INDIAN EXPRESS

EDITORIAL

COURTING A BALANCE

VINAY SITAPATI

Three grams of sodium pentothal, three litres of distilled water and dextrose. That's all it took to get Abdul Karim Telgi talking. Telgi, accused in the Rs 3,000-crore stamp paper scam, was administered a "truth serum" in 2003. So have others in high-profile cases such as Aarushi Talwar's murder or the 2008 Malegaon bomb blasts. Their drug-induced bare-alls have called into question a powerful new tool in criminal investigations. Yesterday, in Selvi vs State of Karnataka, a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court provided an answer. The court held that lie detectors (polygraph tests), brain-mapping (P300) and truth serums (narco-analysis) are not compulsory. Suspects have a right to say no.

The key word here is "compulsory" because the judgment does not ban tests to which the suspect acquiesces. Besides, narco-analysis is inadmissible in court (though some high courts have held otherwise). Therefore convicting a suspect on the basis of a doped confession was not the SC's primary worry. But can the police drug a suspect to aid their investigations, even without his permission?

The court said no, and in doing so, relied on two constitutional rights we all enjoy against the state. These are the right against self-incrimination and the right to a fair trial guaranteed under Articles 20(3) and 21 of the Constitution. The court held that truth serums are not merely physical tests like medical examinations that are routinely performed on suspects; they are "testimony" that suspects have a right not to give. The court went on to hold that such invasive tests violated the suspect's right to privacy, amounted to "cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment" and might expose suspects to "non-penal consequences" such as beatings and torture. Besides, the dodgy science behind such tests made it too unreliable to ensure a "fair" trial.

It is difficult to argue with such a judgment, especially given how truth serums, taken to be instruments to gain the absolute truth, are insidiously used to taint. In September 2009, tapes of narcotic tests done on the two priests and nun accused of murdering Sister Abhaya in Kottayam were broadcast by a Kerala news channel. The video showed these three confessing, in drug-induced stupor, to their dark deeds. A magistrate soon ordered the channel to stop airing the video, but the damage had been done. What could not be admitted in a court of law was used to convince in the court of public opinion.

The SC verdict is also in line with liberal democracies elsewhere. Canada and the UK outlaw non-voluntary confessions induced through truth serums. In 1963, the US Supreme Court held that confessions induced through "truth serums" were inadmissible in court, and questioned their effectiveness. In the landmark 1966 case of Ernesto Miranda vs Arizona, the US Supreme Court emphasised the voluntary nature of pre-trial investigation. The famous Miranda warning — "You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law" — is etched in the memory of every Hollywood fan. This case was, in turn, referred to by the Indian Supreme Court in 1978. In Nandini Satpathy vs P.L. Dani, the court held that Article 20(3) protected suspects during the investigation stage itself. This week's SC decision relies heavily on the Nandini Satpathy case.

The world might have come to outlaw truth serums, but India has something that these countries don't: a pathetically low conviction rate. That's the single biggest problem in our criminal justice system (if you don't count years and years of delay, that is). This means that investigative agencies need every tool that aids them. As former Karnataka Director General of Police R. Srikumar says, "A criminal knows the crime more than anybody else, and tools that help us make him speak are always useful." He should know. Srikumar was the investigating officer in the Telgi case. Srikumar agrees that these tests are not yet scientifically certain. "But as investigators we are always looking for new tools to get to the bottom of the crime."

In his book Suspect Identities: A History of Fingerprinting and Criminal Identification (Harvard University Press, 2001), criminologist Simon A. Cole chronicles how long it took for fingerprinting classification systems, pioneered by the Argentinean and colonial Bengal police forces in the mid-1890s, to spread; it is now a ubiquitous tool in police investigations. Perhaps that is why we must draw limited inferences from the Supreme Court's judgment. The judgment does not ban truth serums, polygraph tests and brain-mapping altogether. It merely forbids force and coercion, and holds these tests to have limited value. The science of crime detection is a work in progress, and a Luddite fear of technology must not prejudice us against new and improved tools.

vinay.sitapati@expressindia.com

***************************************

THE INDIAN EXPRESS

EDITORIAL

BETTING THE FARM(VILLE)

SARITHA RAI

For the past few months, Sharmila Abdulpurkar, a Bangalore-based mother of two, is hooked on to the online social game Farmville. Abdulpurkar is a level 41 farmer, indicating that she is a serious addict. She watches the trees on her virtual farm bear fruit, exchanges the milk from her cows for currency, and has friends and family as neighbours around her. "I am a complete addict," confesses Abdulpurkar, adding, "It is the next best thing to managing a real farm".

Not far from where Abdulpurkar actually lives, amidst the chaos of the city's upcoming metro rail network in downtown Bangalore, is the Indian unit of Zynga, Farmville's creator. Zynga is the world's biggest social gaming firm. Try this for size — 1.8 million people play Zynga's popular Farmville, Mafia Wars and other games before they eat their breakfast each morning. More tractors sell on Farmville in a day than in the United States and Canada in an entire year.

So what is Zynga doing in Bangalore? Currently, 235 million people worldwide play Zynga's social games at least once every month. The online gaming firm wants to make that 1.4 billion, a number close to India's population. To make that a realistic goal, Zynga chose Bangalore to set up its first development centre outside the United States.

Social gaming companies are growing on a massive scale and require top technical talent. Bangalore and India were natural choices says Zynga Game Network Country Manager Shan Kadavil who launched the office a couple of months ago. "Outside the San Francisco area, where else but here could you hire a 100 computer scientists within a year?" he asks.

The India unit currently has 30 employees, high-end computer professional hired off techie congregations such as Code Jams, BarCamps and Hackathons. The other element of hiring, studio talent to develop the beautifully-crafted animation for the games, is proving much more difficult in India. Zynga is now going after Bollywood talent, and hopes to have a full-fledged formal studio running in the next quarter.

Talent is not the only reason Zynga is in India. India is a potentially huge market for social gaming firms. Though it has only 36 million Internet users, by 2013 between 60 and 80 million Indians are expected to be online. But what makes the market mouth-watering is the fast-paced growth in its mobile subscriber base.

India is predicted to be the third largest online market in the next three years, says Kadavil. Zynga's Farmville game already has Indian elements — auto rickshaws, gulmohar trees, chaat stands and elephants. In its Café World game where users compete to set up restaurants, Lavish Lamb Curry and Grand Chicken Kebabs are key elements.

Social gaming is only a couple of years old, so a relatively new phenomenon on the Internet. Yet Zynga alone accounts for a daily data transfer of a petabyte, that is one followed by 15 zeros. Indian users adapt to social gaming very quickly because the entry barrier is non-existent. Kadavil, a level 34 farmer, says the concept of a group game, of helping each other, of getting together with friends to complete a task, has big appeal in India.

The janitor at Zynga's Bangalore unit, who is neither English nor computer literate, is a level 45 farmer on Farmville. But Kadavil was surprised when the paanwalla around the corner from his office responded to a Farmville T-shirt by declaring that he is a fanatic of the online game. "Unlike traditional gaming companies where freaky teenagers with twitchy fingers formed the bulk of users, social gaming has universal appeal," he says. What's not to like about helping a friend clear the pests from her fields or asking another to give you a hand with your new chicken coop?

saritha.rai@expressindia.com

***************************************

THE INDIAN EXPRESS

EDITORIAL

ANATOLY DOBRYNIN, AMBASSADOR NON-PAREIL

INDER MALHOTRA

When Anatoly Dobrynin, unquestionably one of the most outstanding diplomats of the 20th century, died recently in Moscow at age 90, the Indian media took no notice of it. Nobody need blame the media for the simple reason that his arena of brisk activity was the United States where he was Soviet ambassador for a record period of over 24 years. He dealt with six presidents and nine secretaries of state. As the envoy of one superpower to the only other, his main task was to see to it that their tense relationship did not spin out of control. In this he succeeded eminently. According to Alistair Horne, a British war historian and biographer — among others, of Henry Kissinger with whom Dobrynin had a very friendly working relationship — if the Cold War did not turn into a hot one, much of the credit must go to Dobrynin. Kissinger's take is that in relaxing tensions and avoiding "inadvertent deadlocks" Dobrynin's contribution was "central".

Incidentally, Kissinger and Dobrynin addressed each other by their first names and bantered frequently without either of them giving up their countries' basic position. Some observers claim that conversations between the two were "like gossipy chats between two college roommates". This was not all. Since long before the Nixon-Kissinger duo moved into the White House, the US had conferred on Dobrynin the unique privilege of entering the state department through the garage and gate at Foggy Bottom reserved only for the secretary of state and other top American officials. During the Reagan presidency when Alexander Haig briefly became secretary of state, he withdrew the Soviet ambassador's privilege but was made to restore it almost immediately.

Son of a plumber and having no fewer than 12 siblings, Dobrynin was the first member of his family to go to university where he qualified as an aeronautical engineer. He did not particularly want to be transferred to diplomacy but obeyed the party's directive when he found that his technical training was of advantage to him. For instance, he felt that he understood missilery much better than even Kissinger, leave alone other interlocutors. He had first arrived in Washington in 1962 when he was only 42, and plunged straight into the Cuban Missile Crisis. According to a plethora of detailed accounts of that period he played a constructive role in ending the eyeball-to-eyeball confrontation.

During Dobrynin's extraordinarily long tenure as Soviet ambassador in Washington, India was bound to figure in the exchanges between the two superpowers, and it did, literally with a bang during the Bangladesh crisis that began in March 1971 and led to the war for the liberation of Bangladesh in December that year. Kissinger records that he first discussed the "India-Pakistan crisis" with Dobrynin on July 19, "shortly after my secret trip to Pakistan. Dobrynin, oozing conciliation, asked for my views. I replied that we favoured a peaceful political evolution because a war could not be localised. Dobrynin said this was also the Soviet view; Moscow supported India's political goals but was strongly discouraging military adventures". The second discussion between the two on the same subject took place on August 17 after the Indo-Soviet Friendship Treaty had been signed. "Dobrynin gave me the same interpretation as (L.K.) Jha (Indian ambassador) had previously, insisting that the treaty had been in preparation for a long time. No more than Jha did he explain why premeditation should assuage our concern".

The most crucial meetings on the crisis and the looming war — throughout which America "tilted" towards the side morally in the wrong and militarily doomed to defeat — took place on September 29 (at the level of President Nixon and Soviet Foreign Minister Gromyko at which Kissinger, Dobrynin and some others were present) and on October 9 between the "two friends, Kissinger and Dobrynin". Luckily, at both these meetings, held well after Indira Gandhi's visit to Moscow, Yuli Vorontsov, Dobrynin's devoted and able deputy, was also present. In the late '70s and early '80s he was ambassador to India. He gave me a detailed account of both these discussions. When Nixon personally pressed the Soviet side to join the US in "discouraging India from war", Gromyko responded that avoiding war was "indeed desirable" but it was his considered judgment that the risk of war "resided, above all, in Pakistani provocations".

"During the October 9 meeting", according to Vorontsov, Dobrynin "very smoothly made short work of concerns voiced by Kissinger to the effect that Moscow had decided to use its veto in case India was brought before the UN Security Council; and further if Pakistan or China attacked India, the Soviet Union would respond with an airlift of military hardware". (Incidentally, at this meeting, as an aside, Kissinger taunted Vorontsov that he was a warmonger. His reply: "My name is War Not Sov. You are the warmonger".)

Purely by chance I had occasion to shake hands with Dobrynin when he arrived at the Indian embassy in Washington to call on Ambassador K. R. Narayanan (later the republic's President). After he had gone, Narayanan told me that he offered Smirnoff vodka. Dobrynin drank it dutifully but his disapproval of the drink showed. An hour later, the Soviet ambassador sent to his Indian colleague a case of Stolichnaya.

In 1993, Vorontsov was Russian ambassador to the US. On one occasion I said to him I was sure his American hosts considered him a worthy successor to his famous boss. "No, Inder", he replied, "no one can take his place".

The writer is a Delhi-based political commentator

***************************************

THE INDIAN EXPRESS

EDITORIAL

LOVE AND DISHONOUR

SHAILAJA BAJPAI

The boy is from one caste, the girl from another. They fall in love. They wish to marry. The boy's family, in particular, objects to the match. The young couple is determined to wed. Eventually, the boy's family relents and a grand engagement party is held . In front of both families and guests, the boy's grandmother asks the girl to dance, which she does with great reluctance. She is mistaken for a nautch girl by a guest. Her family is speechless with mortification. Then, the grandmother insists that the girl allow herself to be examined in front of the entire gathering to see if there is a mole on her back which could be inauspicious for the boy's family. The girl's family is stunned, the boy's family enjoys the insult to the girl and her family.

This is the story so far on Yeh Pyar Na Hoga Kam (Colors). But it could be a scene from everyday life. What's frightening is not that serials such as this one, are increasingly imitating reality but that they can become accomplices to crimes perpetrated in the name of caste, class or other biases (like the colour of your skin in the old Zee serial Saat Phere, or your looks as in Laagi Tujhse Lagan, Colors ). Where reality TV shows, talent shows have been democratic, aspirational and inclusive, allowing thousands who think they can sing or dance to audition — watch Indian Idol on Sony to find out more . TV serials reinforce barriers, prejudices and the "narrow domestic walls" they should be breaking down.

In all soaps, the most important entity is the Family, the most critical event, the Wedding, the central theme Marriage. The promos for a new soap, To Baat Hamari Pakki, coming soon to Sony, picture a young girl decked up in jewellery and clothes almost as heavy as her ornaments, before she is thrust before the boy's family with a tea tray for a "show". In Behenein (Star Plus), the family is preparing for a wedding: "Shaadi, shaadi, shaadi" — that's all you ever hear on these serials.

If weddings are the plot, family honour is the underlying driving force, always linked to the idea of a suitable girl or boy for marriage into the family. Together they propel everything towards conflicts in which the girl is usually humiliated and the boy is either helpless before his family or suffers as much as the girl. In Agle Janam Mohe Bitiya Hi Kijo (Zee), Shekhar, the upper caste boy is exiled from his home because he is with the wrong girl, Laali.

Finally, there is that elusive thing called "love". It casts a shadow across the families, the arranged marriages planned by the families, and in almost all cases will lead to untold misery. Anyone who watches these serials regularly will conclude that romantic love is bad, that it disgraces and dishonours the family and therefore cannot triumph. Indulge in it only at your own peril.

TV serials justify the continuance of ignorant, harmful old ways of thinking and discourage, nay, punish anyone who dares to flout them. The khap panchayat diktats on same gotra marriages, the "honour" killings we read about and which has perhaps seen a mother kill her own daughter in the Nirupama Pathak case, are very much a part of the world in our TV serials.

And what can one say about the atrocities being committed on Emotional Atyachar (Bindass) where lovers find their partners cheating on them as soon as temptation — in the form of an irresistible member of the opposite sex — drapes him or herself all over them? Doesn't this promote the belief that "love" is a mockery, that young people should stay away from it as far as possible and let's quickly lock them into arranged marriages?

By the way, last week Rahul Mahajan was on Emotional Atyachar. He was seen enjoying the company of women, while his wife watched with a heart beating just a little too fast. The entire show was predicated on his being unfaithful and so of course he wasn't. At the last moment when the temptation was overwhelming , he drew back.

shailaja.bajpai@expressindia.com

***************************************

THE INDIAN EXPRESS

EDITORIAL

VIEW FROM THE RIGHT

SUMAN K JHA

Cut motion

The editorials in the latest issue of the RSS mouthpiece Organiser titled "Is there any hope if Congress is to win like this always" focuses on the "vulnerability" of the UPA government. "In an unedifying spectre of political chicanery the Congress was able to undercut the Opposition unity on cut motions by cutting deals across the board. This has exposed many things — the foremost being the vulnerability of UPA-II in Parliament after claiming that it got a convincing mandate in the May 2009 elections. This was the first real trial of strength for the Manmohan Singh government. And in every sense the Congress managers repeated the tricks and low political tactics that they displayed in the last phase of UPA-I at the time of voting on the nuclear deal after the Left Front withdrew support," says the RSS organ. It goes on to add: "the manner in which the Congress has now perpetuated the sin of devaluing the CBI, Enforcement Directorate and the tax department for its political ends has permanently damaged the reputation of these important Central institutions, whose image of impartiality and independence is cardinal to the credibility of Indian democracy".

The RSS organ talks about the "U-turn" taken by the Samajwadi Party and Bahujan Samaj Party. "He (Mulayam Singh Yadav) and his family members are also being haunted by the CBI in corruption and disproportionate assets cases. He too gets repeatedly humiliated. But he had to break the opposition ranks along with Lalu for fear of CBI action at Congress' bidding... The most shameful of all is the U-turn of UP Chief Minister Mayawati in a blatant admission of self interest, supporting the Congress within a few hours of the CBI giving some temporary reprieve in the Taj corridor and disproportionate assets probes," says the editorial in the RSS mouthpiece. In its editorial titled "Avsarvaadi rajniti ko dhikkar" (Down with opportunistic politics), the RSS organ in Hindi Panchajanya too charges that the "Congress misuses CBI for its political ends, during its rule".

Price rise rally

In a write-up titled "The precious treasure of BJP", V. Shanmuganathan, a BJP functionary, writes that with its recent anti-price rally in the capital, the new BJP president has brought focus onto the karyakarta. "This huge rally was really a challenge to our hard work. Parking arrangement for thousands of buses and other vehicles was the first important task... We distributed 30 lakh water pouches to the people in their places of stay, Ramlila Maidan and Parliament Street. (Former MP from Arunachal Pradesh) Tapir Gao was happy about the participation of 151 youths from his state. Many people came from Nagaland, Mizoram, Meghalaya, Manipur, Tripura and the North East. The biggest number of delegates, numbering 97,000, participated from the whole of Uttar Pradesh".

The recent issues of BJP mouthpiece Kamal Sandesh, too, has written an editorial on the recent anti-price stir in the capital. The English version of Kamal Sandesh has an editorial titled "Massive rally against prices in Delhi shows Aam Aadmi is with BJP", while the editorial in the Hindi edition of Kamal Sandesh, too, has a similar heading. "The ultimate outcome and result of the struggle on the road for the cause of the people has its own reward. It may come sooner or later, but it does come in the long run," says the BJP mouthpiece in English.

***************************************

******************************************************************************************

THE FINANCIAL EXPRESS

EDITORIAL

DISTRIBUTING POWER

With power utility companies in various states unable to increase tariffs, their staggering losses have now become a cause of worry for the government. As reported in FE on Wednesday, the Planning Commission has raised an alarm that the combined losses of public sector discoms, which were to the tune of Rs 40,000 crore in 2009-10, could swell up to Rs 68,000 crore in the current financial year. In fact, if the state governments do not allow the discoms to raise consumer tariffs, they could go bankrupt and then seek a bailout by the Centre. Such a situation is unwarranted. The cost of electricity has now touched Rs 3 per unit and the discoms, on average, charge around Rs 2.50 per unit from consumers—the difference is putting a strain on their finances. Interestingly, states that have privatised power distribution (Delhi, Orissa and some parts of Maharashtra) have done well in reducing their biggest losses in the form of transmission and distribution losses (T&D). There has been a gradual improvement in metering, billing and collection efficiency. In fact, the utilities in Orissa have improved their book profit from Rs 308 crore in 2006-07 to Rs 755 crore in 2007-08. In Maharashtra, the unbundled utilities together have aggregated a book profit of Rs 675 crore in 2007-08 in comparison to Rs 269 crore in 2006-07. But nationwide, T&D losses still remain substantially high at 33% as compared to the global benchmark of 5%.

Over the years the government has realised the importance of private sector participation in the power sector, both in generation and distribution. But currently, the private sector generates merely 15% of total power, and only 13% of the power distribution in the country is carried out by the private sector. With mounting T&D losses, state governments must now look at handing over the power distribution to private sector. The Mayawati government in Uttar Pradesh, after a year-long delay, has made a small beginning by handing over power distribution and bill collection to Torrent Power in Agra; the name of a private discom for Kanpur is likely to be decided by the end of this month. The move comes at a time when Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Limited's (UPPCL) accumulated losses mounted to over Rs 37,000 crore by the end of March 2009 and the state government has indicated that it will hand over power distribution in nine other cities to...

***************************************

THE FINANCIAL EXPRESS

EDITORIAL

GREECE AND BEYOND

The EU and IMF may have agreed to provide a 110-billion euro bailout to Greece, but the ability of Greece to meet its end of the bargain is in serious question. The Greek government had promised a second set of wage cuts for public sector workers, a three-year freeze on pensions and an increase in sales tax as just some of the many measures to practise austerity. However, public sector unions together with their counterparts in the private sector virtually shut the country down on Wednesday. Those on general strike included air traffic controllers, transport workers, gas station owners and even shopkeepers. Greece's socialist government has a majority in Parliament to press through with the expenditure cuts and tax increases but its ability to manage such widespread protests and strike is still untested. Yet, the government has no choice but to press ahead with austerity after many years of living beyond its means.

Greece may have had other choices if it wasn't a part of the Eurozone. For one, it could have devalued its currency, giving a boost to manufacturing, exports and growth. It would also have had the freedom to print more money and therefore lean on domestic sources to help the debt burden. But that is not an option. However, Greece and indeed other vulnerable countries in Europe, including Spain and Portugal, need to undertake deeper structural reform beyond the immediate austerity measures now required. Much of Europe still has far too many rigidities in both product and labour markets (particularly the latter), which makes adjustment during a downturn very hard. Greece et al could do with a dose of deregulation very soon. There is also a strong case to cut down on the bloated public sector, which is a big burden on the government's fiscal bill. Unlike the US, most parts of Europe also have a problem of an ageing population—too few working people have to support too may pensioners. Again, some parts of Europe need to be more liberal with immigration to overcome this problem. There are already proposals to raise retirement ages to reduce the pension burden. The financial crisis has simply exposed Europe's most vulnerable economies to problems they were living with in any case. Now is the perfect time for these countries to undertake fundamental structural reform that will increase growth and lower the burden of debt over the next decade and longer.

***************************************

THE FINANCIAL EXPRESS

COLUMN

WHO IS THIS BAILOUT REALLY FOR?

K VAIDYA NATHAN

On May 3, Euro-region ministers agreed to a 110-billion euro rescue package for Greece to prevent a default and stop the worst crisis in the currency's 11-year history from spreading through the rest of the Euro bloc. Something had to be done because Greece's next bond payback date is May 19 and a possible failure to pay would have, at the very least, routed other European sovereign bond markets and sent stock markets tumbling in the region. Last week's market sellout of Portuguese and Spanish bonds on speculation that a bailout package may not come through, was enough indication for policy makers to agree to the unprecedented bailout. The 16-nation bloc will pitch in 80 billion euros and the IMF will contribute the rest 30 billion euros. Greece agreed to a series of fiscal measures that would help repay this borrowing. At stake is the future of the euro, 11 years after its creators left control of fiscal policy in national capitals.

On the face of it, it seems like the EU has been generous with Greece in lending money to a country that has overspent itself in the past. The dole-out isn't as much because of a new found love of their neighbour, but because by helping Greece they are, at least in part, bailing their banks out of immediate trouble. Sure, Euro politicians may sell it to their citizens that they are helping out Greece to look like a US of Europe but in actuality, their compulsion comes from preventing any adverse stress to their own banking institutions. Unlike the Japanese government that borrows money from its own citizens, Greek domestic savings aren't anywhere close to those levels. More than 80% of the bonds issued by the Hellenic Republic are held by European banks in other European countries. If the Greek government had chosen to default because of being left with no other choice, then the major losers would not have been its own citizens but the other European banks that are holding those bonds. Sure, it would have blotted Greece's credit history irreparably, but it wouldn't have been politically unpalatable.

So, effectively what you are seeing is its neighbours helping Greece remain solvent and being able to pay back the money it had borrowed in the past.

The financial lifeline lasts three years. The 110-billion euro fund will be disbursed in tranches with quarterly assessments and a permanent IMF team monitoring its progress on a monthly basis. This deal will lend Greece sufficient money so that it doesn't have to borrow for at least three years from the financial markets (other banks who hold the bonds). Policy makers are hoping that three to four years is enough time for Greece to put its fiscal house in order and become financially sound. To get to that position, the Greek government needs to demonstrate that it can find its way back to supportable levels of debt, which the EU specifies as less than 60% of GDP. Greece's debt-to-GDP ratio is currently 140% and exceeds the EU specifications by 80%. The bailout forces Greece to cut its budget deficit—i.e. the shortfall of revenues over spending to less than 3% of GDP by the end of 2014. The shortfall was 13.6% last year. It needs to show that it can not only service the interest on this borrowing but can also retire debt worth 80% of GDP in three to four years. Meanwhile, it has to get its economy into a position where it can realistically be expected to grow healthily.

Will Greece implement these fiscal measures well enough and does it have the political will to do so? Greece no longer makes anything that anyone outside Greece wants to buy at the price Greeks demand. It has one of the lowest labour productivity per person employed. It seems overly optimistic to think that all of a sudden Greek workers are going to chuck their unproductive habits and start to work a lot more efficiently just because the government has agreed to a series of measures. This seems more unlikely because wages are slated to come down in the future from current levels.

The magnitude of the fiscal measures is quite onerous and it may choke Greece's economic growth to the detriment of its citizens and the lenders. These measures may help Greece service the debt short-term; however, this will hurt long-term GDP growth needed to get the country back to economic health. Unlike the current generation in India is reaping the benefits of economic growth, a generation in Greece may have to bear the pain of past profligacy. This bailout is, at best, a short-term fix and doesn't mean the end of woes for either Greece or its lenders.

This is not the last time that Greece is coming hat in hand to the rest of the world.

The author, formerly with JPMorganChase, is CEO, Quantum Phinance

***************************************

THE FINANCIAL EXPRESS

COLUMN

REGULATORY LESSONS FROM GOLDMAN

SAUGATA BHATTACHARYA

There is widespread popular sentiment against the alleged indiscretions of Goldman Sachs in structuring and selling a complex mortgage-based derivative security, Abacus 2007-AC1. It will take a while to determine whether there was a deliberate attempt to deceive on the part of the investment banking giant or whether this was the result of the individual actions of a rogue trader (named in the US SEC civil suit) or of a small group operating around him. We emphasise that the article does not seek to justify, or even explain, specific transactions at Goldman Sachs, but to lay out the operating environment in which banks, particularly investment banks, structure complex securities. It is a coincidence that this comes barely a couple of days after no less an august person than Warren Buffet, the oracle of Omaha, chose to defend the transaction.

The vaunted investment bank's reputation has unquestionably been dented. First came the bad press on account of the structuring in 2002 of an unusual, if perfectly legal, currency swap transaction that allowed Greece to shove back into the future part of its then current borrowing requirements. Close on its heels came the unexpected news of the SEC suit. The antagonism to the Abacus transaction is remarkable, given the academic and professional interest, even envy, that Goldman and a handful of other banks had generated in the early days of the unfolding financial crisis following news accounts of their standout success in recognising the risks of the looming crisis and the subsequent alacrity in hedging their balance sheets.

While it is easy to be critical of the Abacus deal, particularly after the leaked e-mails of the risible commentaries of its chief architect, there are larger issues—regulation, governance, accounting and disclosure—whose regulatory implementation will be influenced by the outcome of these investigations. We highlight two of these issues here. One, who bears the larger responsibility for appropriate due diligence of financial products designed for investors? And two, how should banks manage their enterprise risk, balancing the investment needs of their diverse set of stakeholders?

The short answer to the first issue is: both seller and buyer. The crux of the argument for the seller in the Abacus deal will be this: the counterparties were large sophisticated institutional investors. In the case of the Abacus transaction, the largest investors in the transaction were IKG (a large German specialist bank for corporate lending) and ACA Capital Partners (an independent securities selection agency). We cannot do better than quote from a defence document submitted by Goldman Sachs to the SEC (now available on the Internet), commenting on the principle of the deal: "The bottom line is that no amount of disclosure would change that the very sophisticated investors already knew that some entity or entities by necessity had to take a short position—regardless of who selected them, the offering documents for each of the reference securities disclosed detailed information on their underlying assets, as required by Regulation AB. It is this concrete information on the assets—not the economic interest of the entity that selected them—that investors could analyse and use to inform their decisions." In addition, a significant function of large banks is as 'market makers', giving both buy and sell quotes to match demand and supply of complex securities.

As to the second issue, banks cater to the financial needs of diverse classes of investors and clients, ranging from the retail investor looking for a safe haven to park her savings to high net-worth families who are savvier about their investment options; from sophisticated corporations to even more alert institutional investors, including hedge funds. They have vastly different risk appetites, investment horizons and financial targets.

In structuring products to meet these multiple aspirations, banks are often confronted with potentially conflicting decisions. It is a legal, moral and ethical axiom that the primary responsibility of banks is their fiduciary responsibility to depositors, to ensure that their savings remain safe. This is the task of the risk managers and CFO, and this de-risking is what Goldman and some other banks actually achieved, progressively into the run-up to the crisis. However, banks are also accountable to their shareholders, who expect a reasonable return on their risk equity capital. Higher returns can only come about with higher levels of risk. This is the core trade-off that banks continually have to manage.

However strong the risk control systems in banks, occasional mis-sells will invariably fall through the cracks; these might not be indicative of systemic negligence. The best regulatory antidote to these potential conflicts of interest are stringent, albeit appropriate, disclosures and associated standardised accounting norms.

The author is vice-president, business & economic research, Axis Bank. Views are personal

***************************************

THE FINANCIAL EXPRESS

COLUMN

HOME GROWN

NIKHILA GILL

From the time of the nation's founding, immigration has not only been crucial to the US's growth but also a periodic source of conflict. In the hierarchy of immigration issues, H-1B visas and outsourcing come in second only to illegal immigrants. To allay its citizens' fears, the number of H-1B visas issued to aspiring workers from India, for example, was cut to a third—from 1,95,000 to 65,000 in 2007—and has stayed at that number. With the dust of the ghosts of the financial crisis beginning to settle, the rampant paranoia about immigrants taking away jobs that rightfully belonged to Americans is subsiding—albeit temporarily—giving the US government a chance to rethink its position vis-à-vis foreign workers.

The Senate is in the midst of attempting to amend its 'high skilled immigration system' to draw the brightest minds from across the world to its soil. To ease their entry into the US, Democrat Senators are proposing immediate green cards for foreigners pursuing advanced degrees from American universities in the fields of mathematics, science, engineering and technology with job offers in a related field. This is being done with the aim to permanently retain talent in the country. Newspapers in the US have commented that since India is one of the largest exporters of talent in these fields of study, it is expected to benefit the most from this policy. But who really benefits?

The infinitely easier access to green cards will be a huge impetus for young professionals to pursue higher education in the US, an exercise that already costs India over $10 billion annually in forex reserves. Students, who would earlier have returned to India to build their careers, will now be presented with green cards. Yes, India's forex reserves will increase in the way of remittances. But what India needs most is to move towards innovation. For this shift, we need our talented young minds to return to the country by encouraging original thought and nurturing creativity. Instead of worrying too much about the nature of the US visa regime, we need to focus on being able to nurture and harness talent locally.

feedit@expressindia.com

***************************************

******************************************************************************************

THE HINDU

EDITORIAL

RETROGRESSIVE INTENT

Like Banquo's ghost, the scare of amendments to the Right to Information Act has made a habit of rearing its head every so often. In a recent letter to an RTI activist, the Department of Personnel and Training has confirmed the central government's intention to overhaul the 2005 Act — of course, with the now-familiar caveat that the process would include consultations with the stakeholders. No less than Sonia Gandhi argued against the amendments, to little avail, it seems. So what chance do the other stakeholders stand? In the time-tested manner of governments and bureaucracies, the department is upfront about some of the amendments while deliberately obfuscating the nature of some others. The door is to be shown to applications deemed to be "frivolous or vexatious." Section 8 of the Act, which prescribes exemptions to the Act, could be amended to "take care of the sensitivity of the office of the Chief Justice of India" as well as to "slightly modify the provision about disclosure of cabinet papers." What this means, shorn of officialese, is this: The office of the CJI will enjoy full immunity. Cabinet papers currently being processed are already exempted from scrutiny under Section 8. However, the bar abates once a Cabinet decision has been taken. Undoubtedly, therefore, the "slight" modification hinted at in the letter is aimed at making Cabinet decisions permanently inaccessible and opaque. Another amendment under consideration could disallow single-commissioner Information Commission benches. If that happens, the disposal of cases could slow down, rendering the Act ineffective.

Then there is the matter of "frivolous or vexatious" applications. Who is to decide what is vexatious and what is not? Any government department will naturally be vexed by an application that seeks to expose misconduct or corruption. A recent Union Home Ministry communication advised an RTI applicant not to disclose the names of men and women considered for the Padma awards. The anxiety clearly emanates from the arbitrary manner of deciding the awards. Under a future version of the Act, all queries relating to the awards could be deemed "vexatious." It is true that the RTI is not always approached in the public interest; for example, there may be a disproportionate use of the Act by insiders, those within officialdom, to pursue their narrow career interests or even personal agendas. But this cannot be an excuse to dilute or degrade an Act that is recognised as being among the best in the world. At a workshop held recently to assess the RTI environment in South Asia, India was held up as model. It would be a great pity if the government was allowed to get away with the retrogressive amendments it has in mind.

***************************************

THE HINDU

EDITORIAL

NEW GUIDELINES FOR RATING AGENCIES

Capital market regulator SEBI has issued new guidelines for credit rating agencies that seek to make the rating process more transparent. The guidelines flow from the report of a government-appointed high-level committee. As in the case of practically all aspects of the capital market impinging on investor protection, SEBI has relied heavily on the disclosure mechanism in formulating these guidelines. Henceforth, credit rating agencies have to make mandatory, comprehensive disclosures twice a year. They will have to place in public domain the factors behind their ratings and provide a synopsis of the discussions they had with the merchant bankers, bankers, and auditors concerned. They will have to disclose details of voting at the rating committee meetings and also of any dissent note. Credit rating agencies will have to look for and report defaults on the basis of certain well-established criteria, such as non-payment of interest on the due date, and also publish information about the historical default rates in various rating categories. It should not be difficult for the leading agencies to follow these guidelines. However, two questions are relevant here. One, will the additional information available really help the majority of investors? Second, will compliance with the guidelines help the agencies improve their image that has been tarnished recently?

Credit rating agencies provide valuable inputs to investors to make an informed decision when they want to place their money in debt instruments. More recently in India, new equity share offerings were also rated. In developed markets, they attracted a lot of negative publicity for their conduct during the recent financial crisis. Many complex financial instruments with high investment grade ratings fell by the wayside, dragging down the financial institutions and several other investors. The charge against them is that they misled investors by awarding satisfactory ratings to instruments whose risks they did not comprehend. In the late 1990s, during the Asian currency crisis too, they were seen in poor light. In India, the rating agencies are rapidly expanding their activities, even if the lack of depth in some segments of the debt markets might be restricting their scope. They will do well to adhere to these guidelines, if they are keen to improve their credibility in the eyes of investors. Notably, in every credit rating agency, there must be a Chinese wall between the analysts involved in the rating exercise and those responsible for the marketing and other business-related functions.

***************************************

THE HINDU

LEADER PAGE ARTICLES

UNFINISHED TASKS IN BANGLADESH

THE PROCESS OF BRINGING TO TRIAL THOSE INVOLVED IN WHAT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY DURING THE 1971 WAR OF LIBERATION AGAINST PAKISTAN IS A BOLD MOVE TO REMOVE A NATIONAL STIGMA.

HAROON HABIB

The Sheikh Hasina government has opened what could turn out to be a new chapter in Bangladesh's history, setting in motion a process that was long overdue: the trial of those involved in what should be considered crimes against humanity during the 1971 liberation war against Pakistan. On March 25, 2010, the government announced the formation of a tribunal, an investigation agency and a prosecution team under a law enacted as early as in 1973.

Horrendous crimes were committed during the war: some three million people were killed, nearly half a million women were raped and over 10 million people were forced to flee to India to escape military persecution. Justice has not yet caught up with the perpetrators. This has had a profound effect on Bangladesh over the decades since.

The trial is not just a fulfilment of the current government's political commitment, but a step towards meeting a national obligation to the judicial process. It is an important step to meet the nation's commitment to restoring the rule of law.

In the general elections of December 2009 in which the Awami League-led grand alliance won a resounding mandate, the issue of a war crimes trial played a role. An overwhelming majority of the people, especially those from the new generation of voters, evidently marked their unequivocal support for the demand.

The Sheikh Hasina government has recently seen the judiciary meting out punishment to the assassins of the country's founding father, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. The historic trial was held after 34 years of the bloody changeover that forced the new-born nation to detract from its secular 'pro-liberation' line. And by starting the war crimes trial three and half decades after the war, the government has shown both courage and conviction to accomplish an unfinished national task.

The investigators have identified and are pursuing the perpetrators, and the trial has popular support. But the process is facing resistance from the government's political opponents, particularly from the fundamentalist and right-wing parties. Understandably, such resistance comes mainly from the Jamaat-e-Islami that took a stand against the country breaking free from Pakistan. But the Jamaat got a boost when it mustered tactical support from its political ally, the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) led by Khaleda Zia.

The trial is meant to bring to justice those collaborators of the Pakistan Army who perpetrated genocide, mass rape, arson and looting. It is also a rejuvenation of the 'Spirit of 1971' on the basis of which the former East Pakistan became Bangladesh. The trial makes a moral point: that the rule of law must prevail and justice must be dispensed to those who committed the crimes.

The irony is that while the trial process that was initiated soon after independence got frustrated following the assassination of Sheikh Mujib in 1975. In the light of the Simla Agreement signed between the Prime Ministers of India and Pakistan on July 3, 1972, and the tripartite agreement signed on April 9, 1974 in New Delhi, 195 Pakistani war criminals were allowed to go back to their country along with over 90,000 Prisoners of War who had surrendered to the India-Bangladesh Joint Command in Dhaka on December 16, 1971. However, those agreements have no relevance for the trial of Bangladeshi citizens who committed offences such as killing, looting, arson and repression of women.

There is some criticism with regard to the formation of the tribunal, the investigating agency and the prosecution team. Many people hold the view that some of them are not manned by competent people. Even Dr. Alauddin Ahmed, an adviser to the Prime Minister, questioned the integrity of the chief investigator, who, according to him, was an activist of the Jamaat. (Following this the government on May 3 ordered a probe into the credentials of Abdul Matin.) Such criticism apart, the trial, if it goes smoothly, will expose the sheer magnitude of one of the worst instances of massacre and mass rape in history, of which not many people are aware outside of Bangladesh.

As the unofficially compiled lists show, most of the suspected war criminals belong to the Jamaat-e-Islami which took up arms to defend Pakistan as collaborators of the Pakistan Army. The BNP and some Islamist groups also have leaders against whom charges of war crimes have been levelled. But the tribunal will prosecute only those against whom sufficient evidence is available.

Just after independence, an effort was on to put in place a process of accountability. The post-liberation

government promulgated the Bangladesh Collaborators (Special Tribunals) Order in 1972. In July 1973, Parliament passed the International Crimes (Tribunal) Act to allow the prosecution of individuals for genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Around 37,000 people were jailed. An estimated 26,000 people were released when in November 1973 the government announced clemency for all except those charged with heinous crimes. Around 700 persons were convicted. But, in December 1975, following the assassination of Sheikh Mujib, all convicts and under-trial prisoners were released by the military ruler, Ziaur Rahman, who also annulled the Collaborators Act. Since then the issue had lain dormant. It resurfaced only when the Awami League, which led the Liberation War, first came to power in 1996.

In 1992, a national campaign was launched under the leadership of Jahanara Imam, writer and the mother of a liberation war martyr. This culminated in a mock public trial of war criminals in Dhaka. And as Ms. Khaleda Zia formally inducted Jamaat-e-Islami leaders into her Cabinet in 2001 and key Jamaat leaders dubbed the 1971 liberation war as a 'civil war' just to undermine national independence, the issue got national attention. The Sector Commanders' Forum, led by the front commanders of the war, and the Nirmul Committee, a secular platform to try war criminals, as well as other 'pro-liberation' organisations, spearheaded a campaign.

Although the trial has a strong moral rationale, it is no easy task. Politicians and lawyers supporting the BNP and the Jamaat have challenged the law under which the trial is on. But legal experts have rejected their pleas, saying that the law is broadly compatible with international standards.

This is no ordinary trial, but one that answers the inner-most urges of an aggrieved nation and addresses the travails of countless bereaved families, widows and orphans, those who were wounded and immobilised. The woman victims of atrocities have been conferred the honour of war heroine ('Beerangana'). Therefore, the trial is a solemn unfinished task to remove a national stigma.

The trial will have obvious political implications. The irony is that those who committed the crimes as henchmen of the Pakistan Army in 1971 are now established political leaders, well-entrenched businessmen or highly connected Islamists, all of whom have their own agenda.

The Sheikh Hasina government will have to face up to a hard reality. The war criminals of 1971, many of whom left the country at the dawn of Independence but returned and were rehabilitated thanks to the military rulers, are now organised and powerful. They have strong political backers in the BNP.

The government understands the implications and the risks. The Prime Minister has urged the people to remain 'alert and united' so that the process is not disrupted by 'conspiracies'. She knows that the move will get meaningful support from the majority of the people. A confident Sheikh Hasina said: "We're not afraid of any plot by the defeated forces. Inshallah, we will complete the trial and free the nation from the stigma."

As the trial process advances, the Jamaat has called upon its members to prepare for the ultimate sacrifice. Ali Ahsan Muhammad Mojaheed, its secretary general, claimed that India was instigating the government to go after the Jamaat. "India apprehends that only the military and the Jamaat can prevent Bangladesh from becoming a proxy for India."

But Sheikh Hasina has remained brave, and has said her government would hold the long-overdue trial no matter what the Jamaat does. "It has been our national commitment, and we shall do it," she asserted. Bangladesh, which recently ratified the Rome Statute that calls on countries to bring their own laws in line with international standards for the prosecution of individuals who commit crimes against humanity, has assured the world community that the trial process would go on and that it would conform to the highest standards.

It has been the considered view of the secular school of thought that if the trial process is withdrawn, or kept incomplete halfway through, under any compulsion or pretext, Bangladesh's 'pro-liberation' politics will suffer a blow. Those who had opposed the country's independence and perpetrated the worst crimes against humanity on religious grounds, will be able to further consolidate themselves if the trial remains incomplete.

( The writer, based in Dhaka, is a Bangladesh liberation fighter himself.)

***************************************

THE HINDU

MEN OF LETTERS, UNMOVED READERS

SUICIDE NOTES IN VIDARBHA ARE AT TIMES ADDRESSED TO THE PRIME MINISTER, THE DESPERATE LAST CRIES OF VOICES THAT WENT UNHEEDED WHEN ALIVE.

P. SAINATH

Seeking authenticity for his letter to the Prime Minister and the President, Ramachandra Raut composed it with care on Rs.100 non-judicial stamp paper. Then he added a few more addressees, including his village sarpanch and the police, in the hope that it got home someplace. Then he killed himself. A mere digit in the nearly 250 farm suicides that hit Vidarbha in four months; but a villager desperate to be heard on the reasons for his action: "The two successive years of crop failure is the reason." Yet, "bank employees came twice to my home to recover my loans". (Despite a government order to go slow on recovery in a region hit by crisis, crop failure and more recently, drought).

Raut's suicide being the third in a month in Dhotragoan in Washim district, the village wants to see it spreads no further. "We try and meet every evening for an hour, all of us, anyone who will come," says Nandkishore Shankar Raut from Dhotragaon. "The idea is to keep people's morale up." So Dhotragaon counsels itself. Ramachandra Raut's letter was also an appeal not to be misunderstood. "Don't trouble anyone in my home," it tells the police. "I am fully responsible for my action." The stamp paper suicide note carries the seal of the deputy treasury officer of Mangrulpir tehsil dated March 29, and that of the stamp vendor who issued it to Raut on April 7. Raut filled it in and took his life the same day.

The family owes the banks Rs.1.5 lakh. His village pooled money to observe his 13th day ritual, sparing Raut's indebted family further expense.

Unique

Vidarbha's farm suicides have been unique in one respect. Some of those taking their lives have addressed suicide notes to the Prime Minister, the Chief Minister or the Finance Minister. In August 2006 Rameshwar Lonkar of Wardha complained, in his note, to Dr. Manmohan Singh, just a month after the Prime Minister went to his region. "After the Prime Minister's visit and reports of a fresh crop loan, I thought I could live again," Lonkar wrote. But he found himself rebuffed at every stage while seeking that loan. Sahebrao Adhao's last testament in Amravati the same year painted a picture of usury, debt and land grab.

In November 2006, cotton grower Rameshwar Kuchankar addressed the then Maharashtra Chief Minister Vilasrao Deshmukh in his note. He scribbled it down moments before taking his life in Yavatmal. "We are fed up with the delay in procurement and crashing prices ... Mr. Chief Minister, give us the price." He also warned State Home Minister R.R. Patil that if the price did not improve at once, suicides would soar. They did.

"These notes are the last cry of despair of people trying to tell their government the reasons for agrarian distress," says Kishor Tiwari. Mr. Tiwari heads the Vidarbha Jan Andolan Samiti, a body fighting for farmers' rights. "We set up expert committees to tell us why farmers commit suicide when they are themselves telling us the reasons with such clarity in their suicide notes." The notes often speak of debt, soaring cultivation costs, high cost of living and volatile prices. Some of them trash regressive policies and a credit crunch that have destroyed thousands of farmers here in the past decade. Crop failure and drought coming atop these, ruin fragile lives.

Raut's suicide note, addressed to the President and the Prime Minister, composed on a Rs.100 non-judicial stamp paper.

Two years of crop failure in a single crop district can mean 34 months with no income. Vidarbha gained little from the 2008 Farm Loan Waiver which addressed only bank debt. The waiver excluded those farmers holding more than five acres, and made no distinction between dry and irrigated holdings. In Western Vidarbha, farmers take more loans from moneylenders than from banks. And, the average land holding is around seven acres in this mostly unirrigated region.

Of the five states that account for two-thirds of all of India's farm suicides, Maharashtra is by far the worst. According to the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) the State logged 41,404 farm suicides between 1997 and 2008. That is, more than a fifth of the national total of nearly 200,000 in that same period. Of those 12 years, NCRB data show, the years 2006-08 have been the very worst. Within the State, Vidarbha has been the focal point of the tragedy.

Back to square one

However, the situation here seems like a throwback to that of 2005-06, before Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's visit. Hit by a spate of suicides at the time, the State government spoke in many voices. In mid-2005, it gave out a figure of just 141 distress suicides across the whole State since 2001. Challenged in court, it revised this to 524. When the National Commission of Farmers team led by Dr. M.S. Swaminathan visited later the same year, it conceded there had been over 300 in the single district of Yavatmal. The final figure for the whole State that year, put out by the NCRB, was actually 3,926 suicides.

"For a while," says Mr. Tiwari of the VJAS, "the State revealed real numbers on the website of the Vasantrao Naik Farmers' Self-Reliance Mission. That was because of Dr. Singh's visit and a lashing from the courts." In fact, those figures were far higher than anything even the VJAS had recorded. This year, however, the website's columns for 2010 are so far blank. The Agriculture Ministry's reply to a question in the Rajya Sabha, based on State claims, says just 23 farm suicides occurred between January and April 8. This, even as other arms of government (and the Leader of the Opposition) put out figures ten times as high. The Vasantrao Naik Mission has itself given out signed data confirming there were 62 such deaths in January alone. (Though it has not put this up on its website.)

The numbers are routinely lowered by tagging hundreds of suicides as "non-genuine". That is, "ineligible for compensation". Aimed at curbing the amounts the State has to fork out to bereaved families, this move has caused much damage. "We are deluding ourselves," says a senior official. "No wonder Ramachandra Raut felt the need to address his letter on stamp paper to the Prime Minister and President as well. He knew nothing would be taken seriously here in Maharashtra."

***************************************

THE HINDU

THE FLURRIES OF VOTING DAY IN MAURITIUS

LOW TURNOUT LEADS TO THE PRIME MINISTER GOING FROM DOOR TO DOOR URGING CONSTITUENTS TO CAST THEIR VOTES.

PRANAY GUPTE

When I covered politics for The New York Times a very long ago in the United States and in other countries that allowed for adult franchise, a wise old Editor would often caution against making projections, particularly on election day. Of course, those times were before smart pollsters brought their sophisticated techniques to gauge exit polls and voter sentiments, and well before television stations flashed informal results before candidacies were declared successful.

The TV stations here in Mauritius do no such thing; there are few, if any, reliable polls; votes are hand counted; and as this island-nation's 880,000 registered voters cast their ballots on Wednesday, it was not even clear just how many Mauritians showed up at the booths set up in schools and public institutions. Radio stations broadcast differing percentile figures throughout the day. Although Wednesday had been declared a national holiday to encourage voters to trek to the polls, it was clear that enough of them chose leisure over the obligations of citizenship.

So clear, in fact, that Prime Minister Navin Ramgoolam — who is leading a three-party alliance that he hopes will give him a second successive five-year term — took to the radio waves himself and appealed to his fellow countrymen to overcome their ennui. In the afternoon, he walked from door to door in his constituency urging people to cast their ballot.

It was not something that Prime Ministers are wont to do, but the 63-year-old Mr. Ramgoolam is that rare breed of politician who actually knows many of his constituents by name, and makes it a point to stay in personal contact even when election season is over. So visiting constituents' homes was generally perceived as something less than political opportunism.

He shares that characteristic with his political nemesis, Paul Berenger, the former Prime Minister who leads the left-win Mouvement Militant Mauricien (MMM). In an interview with The Hindu, Mr. Berenger said he was energised by his tour through his constituency and those of 19 others; these constituencies, plus one in the neighbouring island of Rodriguez, send 60 victors to the national parliament.

But Mr. Berenger acknowledged that Mr. Ramgoolam's alliance had "far more money, many more cars, and lots more party workers".

Still, he said, he was confident that the MMM would win. Asked about the general perception that his French ancestry made him tilt in favour of the economic and other interests of European nations such as France and Britain, Mr. Berenger seemed unperturbed. He sensed the subtext of my question.

"Look," Mr. Berenger said, "India need not worry if I became Prime Minister. I have always said that the relationship between our two countries is umbilical. It cannot be broken, it can only be strengthened."

One way of interpreting his remark is that even under a leftist government led by a representative of a minority

Franco community in an island-nation of 1.3 million that is dominated by Hindus — with Creoles, Muslims, Chinese, and Christians added to the mix — Mauritius would find it disadvantageous to strain its relationship with India. After all, Mauritius channels nearly $12 billion in foreign direct investment to India annually, making it the latter's biggest supplier of FDI. Rest assured that much of this money is not indigenous: it comes from somewhere else, and Mauritius surely gets a percentage of the take. Would Mr. Berenger really want to re-shape that reality?

"My reality is good governance," Mr. Berenger said, in his deep French-coated voice. "My concern is electoral and political reforms that would bring more justice in our system."

I was tempted to ask why such reforms were not undertaken when Mr. Berenger served as Prime Minister from 2003 to 2005. But I anticipated his answer: Not sufficient time. Besides, it would have been unkind to pose such a question, even to a veteran politician, on a day that he was so earnestly trying to drum out votes for his party.

I put a different sort of question to Nita Deerpalsing, a parliamentarian and spokeswoman for Mr. Ramgoolam's Mauritius Labour Party. Was she satisfied with voter turnout?

"Very satisfied," Ms Deerpalsing said.

Did she plan to speak to the Prime Minister about her hunches concerning election results?

"I'm concentrating all my energies in my constituencies," she said, somewhat sharply.

Will the three-party alliance win when the election results are formally announced by midday on Thursday?

"Of course."

That seemed as good a thought with which to gracefully exit the conversation.

To put it another way, as my wise old Editor would say, never project, never predict, never prognosticate. Tomorrow is, after all, another day — and a single day can be an entire lifetime in the politics of clangorous multiparty democracies, even if they are tiny island states whose main claim to global fame was the fact that the long extinct dodo bird was spotted nowhere else in the world but here, by Dutch settlers more than three centuries ago.

The dodo bird may have been long gone, but Mauritian politics has taken full flight. Stay tuned.

(Pranay Gupte is a veteran journalist and author. His forthcoming book is on India and the Middle East.)

***************************************

THE HINDU

U.S. DISLIKES THOSE WHO ROCK THE BOAT

THE EXPERIENCE OF JAPAN'S YUKIO HATOYAMA SHOWS JUST HOW MUCH THE U.S. DISLIKES ALLIES QUESTIONING THE TERMS OF THE RELATIONSHIP.

SIMON TISDALL

For a glimpse of the fate that might await Britain's Liberal Democrat Nick Clegg in Washington were he to become U.K. Prime Minister, one need only look at the trials and tribulations of Yukio Hatoyama, Japan's inexperienced leader who took office last year.

Like Mr. Clegg, Mr. Hatoyama proposed a more equal, less subservient bilateral relationship. He wanted to explore alternative alliances, including closer ties with China. He even suggested closing a U.S. military base. Now he is paying the price of his effrontery.

Attending last month's nuclear summit in Washington, Mr. Hatoyama's officials lobbied hard for a one-on-one meeting between their man and President Barack Obama. The request was brusquely rebuffed. Instead, the Japanese Prime Minister had to settle for a rushed 10 minutes sitting next to Mr, Obama at dinner, making his points while his host consulted the menu. In Tokyo, his treatment was described as humiliating.

Rude reception

More extraordinary still, according to U.S. press accounts, Mr. Obama bluntly informed Mr. Hatoyama that he was "running out of time" to settle the dispute over relocation of a U.S. Marine Corps base at Futenma, on Okinawa, and asked him to his face whether he could be trusted. Visiting Okinawa on Tuesday, Mr. Hatoyama seemed to be preparing the ground for a climbdown, suggesting some base facilities would remain.

Japanese officials were reportedly so affronted by Mr. Obama's rudeness that they did not distribute the usual written record of the exchanges. It got worse.

Mr. Hatoyama's presumption in appearing to challenge U.S. security interests, and Mr. Obama's rough handling of him, led Washington Post gossip columnist Al Kamen to label him the summit's "biggest loser". Mr. Kamen said Mr. Obama administration officials had ridiculed the Japanese leader as "increasingly loopy". This in turn provoked media frenzy in Japan, as translators tried to establish exactly how insulting "loopy" really was.

A top aide to Mr. Hatoyama criticised the term as "somewhat impolite". But then, to everyone's amazement, Mr. Hatoyama went to the Diet (parliament) and suggested, self-deprecatingly, that the description might be accurate. "As the Washington Post says, I may certainly be a foolish Prime Minister," he said, before going on to admit that he could have handled the Futenma base issue sooner and better.

Mr. Hatoyama's Democratic party won in a landslide last August, ending 50 years of almost unbroken rule by the conservative Liberal Democrats who by and large submitted unquestioningly to Washington's will. His ideas about giving Japan a more independent voice in the world, of loosening the American harness, were actually quite modest and mostly unlikely to be implemented. But far from respecting the voters' verdict, the U.S. responded with bullying, name-calling, and exaggerated warnings about the consequences for Japan and the Asia-Pacific region, culminating in the banquet snub. Now Mr. Hatoyama's self-criticism suggests he may not last much longer.

Given his relatively more provocative views on nuclear disarmament, closer British ties with a united Europe, and the importance of upholding human rights, even in "war on terror" conflict zones, "prime minister" Clegg could be assured of a yet rougher reception in Washington — though even brasher Americans might hesitate to suggest the elected leader of their closest military ally was off his nut.

Mr. Clegg might also wonder, in such circumstances, how long he might be able to hold on to power. Mr. Hatoyama must certainly be wondering himself. The growing perception among Japanese voters that he is weakly bowing to U.S. demands on Futenma has greatly undermined him. A majority believes he should resign if he loses the Futenma fight or misses his self-imposed deadline of the end of May for settling it.

Thwarted change-maker

In the latest poll his approval rating is down to 21 per cent. As President, Mr. Obama has gained a reputation, fairly or unfairly, for appeasing upstart dictators while dissin' old allies. Mr. Hatoyama's crusade against Japan's "old politics" looks like being one casualty.

If he were to take office Mr. Clegg would also encounter formidable U.S. hostility to some of his ideas. He might do well to consult Tokyo's thwarted change-maker before venturing across the Atlantic.

***************************************

THE HINDU

HIV SUMMIT IN AFRICA FOR GRANDMOTHERS

AFTER LOSING ADULT CHILDREN TO AIDS, THEY OFTEN BECOME THE HEAD OF A HOUSEHOLD.

DAVID SMITH

Their collective wisdom is incalculable — and so is the collective burden they carry when families are torn apart by AIDS.

Africa's newest special interest group is that of grandmothers. They will attend their first special conference this week to share experiences and call for international recognition of their uniquely difficult circumstances.

A summit of grandparents in the West might prompt jokes about bingo and dentures, but the inaugural African Grandmothers' Gathering, starting in Swaziland on Thursday, is a gravely serious affair.

More than 450 grandmothers from 12 African countries will meet to discuss the impact of losing adult children to AIDS, becoming the head of a household and raising grief-stricken grandchildren as their own.

These forgotten victims hope to build a "solidarity movement" across Africa to make the case that grandmothers need targeted support from international donors.

A lost voice

"It's a lost group, a lost voice," said Philile Mlotshwa of Swapol (Swaziland Positive Living), which is organising the event in partnership with the Canadian-based Stephen Lewis Foundation . "They are the heroes yet no one has gone to them to say we recognise your efforts." The organisers say it is time to heed the "indomitable and indefatigable" grandmothers who step forward to care for children, sometimes as many as 10 to 15 in one household. "They are holding together the social fabric of communities across the continent." Ms Mlotshwa continued: "Grandparents have always played an important role in solving disputes and as a source of knowledge. But now the younger generation is not there: people aged 29 to 49 are dying from HIV-AIDS ... Grandmothers are at the frontline of the HIV-AIDS impact. They have to pick up the pieces and move on. They don't have time to grieve because the children need to be looked after. They are doing this without any income.

In spite of challenges

"They are sick with diabetes and high blood pressure. We are seeing women who are carrying on in spite of the challenges and the fear of what will happen to these grandchildren if they die." Ms Mlotshwa said she hoped the gathering would raise awareness of grandmothers' needs. "Various responses to HIV-AIDS have been designed but not yet targeted at them." The grandmothers are likely to seek international support for grief counselling, access to healthcare for themselves and children in their care, safe and adequate housing, economic security, safety from gender-based violence, raising community awareness and breaking stigma, support in raising grief-stricken grandchildren and access to education for children.

Grandmothers from Botswana, Ethiopia, Kenya, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia, Rwanda, South Africa, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia and Zimbabwe will be represented.

Stephen Lewis, chair of the foundation, said: "Grandmothers [are] the unsung heroes of Africa. These magnificently courageous women bury their own children and then look after their orphaned grandchildren, calling on astonishing reserves of love and emotional resilience."

— © Guardian Newspapers Limited, 2010

***************************************

******************************************************************************************

THE ASIAN AGE

EDITORIAL

WILL NY PLOT MAKE US SHED BLINKERS?

Two recent developments tend to confirm India's fears that jihadi outfits in Pakistan, Afghanistan or elsewhere, can be mobilised to launch attacks outside their indigenous area of operation, whether or not they are labelled Al Qaeda adjuncts. At any rate, their ideological moorings prepare them for such a task. In Indian understanding the jihadist groups in the subcontinent are intermeshing entities subserving the same broad aims, and are often created by the same pool of actors, among which Pakistan's intelligence community is the most prominent.
Take the case of Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) chief Hakimullah Mehsood, who was presumed killed by the United States and Pakistan after an American missile strike in Waziristan last January, but has clearly recovered from his injuries and is now alive and well. But that's the least of it. In two recent videos Hakimullah has threatened to take on the Americans — not in Pakistan or Afghanistan, but in the American homeland. It is too early to say if the US will dismiss this as bluster or adopt the more reasonable (and sensible) course of adjusting its perspectives on the meaning of jihadism — and the terrorism flowing from it — in many Muslim lands, including the ones that America has invaded. Since the Al Qaeda phenomenon came to notice after September 11, 2001, the established wisdom in the US and the West more generally — and this appeared to "infect" other Europeans, notably the Russians (who presumably still have a lot of stake in what eventually happens in Afghanistan and the neighbouring tribal areas of Pakistan) — has been that the West need be watchful only against Al Qaeda and not the home-grown terror outfits espousing jihad in various societies which have surfaced in response to so-called local grievances. It is for this reason that the US does not treat the Afghan Taliban or the TTP on the same footing as Al Qaeda, though its forces battle the former when they have to, or when Western troops believe the local guerrilla groups have provided active assistance to Al Qaeda against Western military forces. As for the Pakistan Punjab-based Lashkar-e-Tayyaba, which focuses primarily on terrorist assaults against India, the US forces leave it alone, although Lashkar frequently teams up with the TTP and the Afghan Taliban to mount operations. It can only be hoped that the resurfacing of Hakimullah and the anti-US warnings he has sounded will become a factor leading to course correction in US thinking. Not so long ago, the Pakistan military — under Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani — had counted the TTP as a "patriotic" Pakistani outfit that could be an "asset" to be used against India. This country had protested, but Washington merely heard the exchange and kept its counsel.

The related point of recent interest is the attempted car bombing in New York's Times Square by Faisal Shahzad, an American citizen of Pakistani origin. It appears this terrorist had trained with the TTP for five months and returned to his adopted country to carry out the task assigned to him. Mr Shahzad comes from a Pakistani military family of privilege. There must be countless others like him in the US and in Europe. That enhances the pool of talent that outfits like the TTP (or indeed Lashkar, as the case of David Headley demonstrates) can draw upon. To checkmate security threats from a new source such as this, Washington will need to shed its ideological blinkers. It cannot afford to proceed on a case-by-case basis. If the sources of terrorism have to be wiped out in Pakistan, the Pakistani authorities will need to wield a long broom. It would not do to fight the Afghan Taliban but leave TTP and Lashkar-e-Tayyaba alone. The time for self-serving selectivity is over.

***************************************

THE ASIAN AGE

EDITORIAL

THE NEW JUNGLE WAR

The massacre of 76 CRPF personnel at Dantewada sent shock waves through India, just as the Pakistan-launched terrorist attack on Mumbai on 26/11 had done. The latter led to a change of guard in the home ministry. Home minister P. Chidambaram injected dynamism into a somnolent ministry. One appreciated his earnestness and the various measures he initiated. For several years, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has been saying that Maoist terrorism is the biggest threat to the nation, but little has been done to deal with it. Dantewada has highlighted gaping weaknesses. When the nation faces a grave threat to its survival, it is imperative to put up a united front. During the Kargil War, it was distressing that the then Opposition had put up an inflated rubber bus turned upside down to ridicule the then Prime Minister's attempt at bus diplomacy. It is gratifying that after Dantewada the Opposition closed ranks in support of the home minister. This is as it should be.

For the first few days, the media said 1,000 Maoists had attacked the CRPF at Dantewada. Then this number came down to 300. Initially, there was no report of any Maoist being killed, but it was later said that eight of them were slain, showing that the CRPF company did put up a fight. Only one newspaper reported that Satyavan Singh Yadav, the deputy commandant, was wounded, yet he killed a few Maoists before being hacked to death. Such confusion does not do us any credit.

Several hundred police and paramilitary personnel have been killed on account of poor leadership and poor training. In Chhattisgarh, 30 armed policemen inside a building were killed. At a CRPF post, men watching an India-Pakistan cricket match on TV were killed. At Sildah, West Bengal, 24 armed men of the Eastern Frontier Rifles were killed without offering any opposition and 36 Greyhound commandos of the Andhra police travelling relaxed in a motor launch on a lake, without taking elementary precautions, were gunned down. Such instances, in broad daylight at district HQ, without meeting resistance, shows complete collapse of administration.

Having gone through arduous jungle training like all other Army personnel inducted into Burma from 1943 onwards, I can vouch for the great importance of vigorous jungle training for all personnel operating against the Maoists. The Army has a jungle warfare school at Vairangte, Mizoram. The CRPF company at Dantewada had no jungle training. Fields of fire are limited in jungles and open spaces can be death traps. At Dantewada, the CRPF company walked blindly into such a killing ground. The support of the tribals in the jungles should also be mobilised. The British had raised Lushai, Kachin and Naga levies. These gave invaluable support for operations in the jungles. We can do the same against the Maoists. This will also assist economic development by providing employment in the region.

The glaring deficiencies of the paramilitary in leadership at both field and supervisory levels must be made up. The regular police officer looking after police stations and other police functioning is as unsuited for such operations as a normal Army officer for running the police administration. In 1973, I recall, we had put up a scheme for lateral induction of officers and men from combat arms into the paramilitary after a certain number of years. This would solve the problem of a full career for the soldier while maintaining the Army's youthful profile, and at the same time provide military expertise and experience to the paramilitary. This would have also meant the exchequer saving hundreds of crores in the '70s due to reduced expenditure on pensions and training costs. Today this would run into thousands of crores. After nearly 40 years, the Sixth Pay Commission has made the same recommendation. Would the bureaucrats in Delhi and the paramilitary top brass, zealously guarding their turf, allow this to be implemented?

Law and order is a state subject and it is legitimate for states to guard their autonomy. But Maoist terrorism is a war unleashed against the nation. It does not respect inter-state boundaries. The Centre making paramilitary forces available to the states, and expecting them to fight this war with the buck stopping at the chief minister, is not enough. During the Second World War, the Allies, without asserting their individual sovereignty, allowed overall strategic direction of the war to be given by the Big Three — Franklin Roosevelt, Winston Churchill and Joseph Stalin. At the theatre level unified commands under supreme commanders in command of all services, cutting across nationalities and international boundaries, were set up. Similarly, we need a supreme body with the Union home minister and chief ministers of affected states to formulate overall policy. Under this apex body there should be zones worked out on the basis of geographical and other considerations, ignoring inter-state boundaries. In each zone there should be a unified command under a suitable police officer or an Army officer on deputation. All agencies within the zone — police, paramilitary and intelligence — should report to him/her. At the zonal level, there should be a committee of chief ministers of the zone for giving policy directions to the zonal commanders. In World War II, neither the sovereignty of the Allied nations nor international boundaries came in the way of the conduct of the war. Similarly, neither the autonomy of states nor inter-state boundaries should impinge upon the war against the Maoists.

The CRPF at Dantewada was ambushed while on a three-day jungle dominating patrol. Such patrols serve little purpose. They are like a sword striking the water: fruitless. What we need are impregnable redoubts of minimum company strength with suitable defences. There will then be no question of any Maoist attack succeeding. These can become bases for sending out small patrols to gather intelligence, which can be supplemented by other inputs. On that basis, surgical strikes should be carried out. These redoubts can also be bases from which development works in the region can be organised. In 1968, I was commanding a brigade of nine battalions in the jungles of Manipur. I had 42 such air-maintained posts to dominate the jungle. None of these were ever attacked by the Nagas. My flanking formation in Nagaland also worked on the same strategy. We captured the gang of 300 Nagas led by Mowu Angami, the commander-in-chief of the Naga army returning from Yunan (in China) after training and with modern weapons.

The author, a retired lieutenant-general, was Vice-Chief of Army Staff and has served as governor of Assam and Jammu and Kashmir.

S.K. Sinha

***************************************

THE ASIAN AGE

EDITORIAL

PLAYING HARDBALL

MOVE WILL BRING ACCOUNTABILITY

The sports ministry's guidelines should be accepted by the National Sports Federation (NSF) chiefs without malice. They should welcome such a decision which is in the interest of the sportspersons and a way to make the working of all the NSFs both accountable and professional.

This directive will encourage youngsters with new ideas to come to the fore and take command of the sports scene. These youngsters can be management graduates, sportspersons or even academicians. In any case they will bring new ways to root out financial irregularities, nepotism, regionalism and corruption present in the sports bodies.

I am nearing 80 and participated in three consecutive Olympics from 1956 onwards and have seen the condition of sports since then. Having won a few Olympic medals in some select sports does not give a clear picture about the actual growth of India as a sporting nation.

We are way behind in athletics, swimming, football, basketball, gymnastics etc. and even our national sport, hockey, needs much improvement. We failed to win a single game in the recently-held Hockey World Cup except the one against arch-rivals Pakistan.

The tournament which was a test event for the Commonwealth Games (CWG) shows that we need not just good athletes but also good administrators and better sports infrastructure.

We were bestowed the licence of holding the CWG eight years ago but we are still clueless on how to improve our medal count in various disciplines. I fear if we will get even one medal in athletics in the event that's scheduled in October.

The contentious order about tenures was passed in 1975 but these administrators, under the garb of Olympic Charter, refused to accept it. When an IAS and IPS officer seek home ministry's permission to contest elections, so why don't these political leaders go through the same process. The question of re-election only comes when a member has done something concrete for the growth and benefit of the sport. But these babus like to stick to their seats come what may, as if it's their personal fief. They get huge grants from the government to organise national and international championships, however, when the ministry seeks details of their expenditure they have a problem.

The NSFs need to know that those sums of money come from the pockets of the public, the tax-bearers. They need to divulge details. It's good that the ministry brought them under the RTI Act or they would have continued to misuse public money.

As a former athlete I know that our bodies can sustain the pressures of international competitions and remain agile till a particular age — then why make a hue and cry over the new guidelines restricting the age of office-bearers of NSFs to 70 years.

(As told to Rohit

Bhardwaj)
— Milkha Singh, who has represented India at the Olympics, is a legendary athlete

Why single us out for fixed tenures?

This is not a new ruling that the government has come up with. They have always tried to dictate terms to sports administrators. In fact, the government had passed a law curtailing the tenures of various National Sports Federations (NSFs) chiefs during Emergency, in 1975. Obviously, there was military rule at that time, so everyone had to follow it.

But reissuing that directive now seems ridiculous. I have served the Archery Association of India as president for the last 32 years, after I was first elected in 1978. It is not that I take this position as my property. It's the other members of the federation who want me to keep this post. Our constitution does not prevent anyone from participating in the elections — whoever thinks s/he can manage the sport better can come forward. Our elections are free and fair and this is beyond doubt as we also have a government-nominee overlooking it.
I recall that after being elected for the third successive term in 1986, the government issued a notice that I cannot remain president for so long. I then went to court, which, after investigating our election process, gave the verdict in my favour and asked the government to frame laws regarding sports bodies. But the government was helpless as in the Indian Constitution sports is in the state list and not the concurrent list. So their attempts to amend the rules failed.

Also, when there is no limit on how many times one gets elected to the Lok Sabha or Rajya Sabha, or for that matter to any political position in any country, then how can this rule apply to us? Atal Behari Vajpayee and Babu Jagjivan Ram were elected to Parliament for at least five terms.

The ministry's setting of the retirement age at 70 also baffles me as our Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Delhi chief minister Sheila Dikshit are above that age. For that matter, even sports minister M.S. Gill is above that mark.

The government says that this guideline will benefit the sportsmen, but how? They say they will not issue us grants, that we will get no income tax, customs or excise exemptions — but won't this create problems for the sportspeople who have to import various equipments from abroad. The Sports Authority of India, whose job it is to import equipments on behalf of the NSFs, has not done its job well since the last five years or so. As far as archery is concerned, the grants that we get for organising junior, sub-junior and national championships are respectively two, four and six lakhs — this is pretty less compared to other countries.
There are no provisions in the Registration of Societies Act or in the International Olympic Charter that support the government's directive. So the government should let the NSFs function smoothly, for better organisation of the Commonwealth Games which is just round the corner.

Vijay Kumar Malhotra, BJP leader and Archery Association of India president

The Age Debate

***************************************

******************************************************************************************

DNA

EDITORIAL

SUPREME COURT GETS IT RIGHT

By making the use of narco-analysis, polygraph, and brain-mapping tests illegal, the Supreme Court has not just underlined the importance of personal liberty and privacy, but also put the onus of better investigation on the police.

Though the results of such tests are not admissible as evidence, police forces across the country have been using them as a short-cut to information and to bolster their cases. This is despite the fact that none of these tests has total scientific sanction or agreement on their reliability.

The apex court has, of course, stood up for personal liberty in its role as guardian of the Constitution. A bench headed by chief justice KG Balakrishnan said: "We are of the considered opinion that no individual can be forced and subjected to such techniques involuntarily, and by doing so it amounts to an unwarranted intrusion of personal liberty."

All too often, the police in India, in its hurry to get through with an investigation and file a charge sheet, trample on the rights of the accused. This is not a bleeding-hearts liberal argument: the fact is that guilt and culpability have to be proved in a court of law.

Being a suspect is not enough to make a person a criminal. The number of people who are let off by the courts in India shows how shoddy and ad hoc our policing can be. The presumption of innocence is one of human civilisation's highest principles and the apex court has, obliquely, re-emphasised it.

The other issue is of forensic evidence. Contemporary science has made life simpler for the police in its fight against crime. But we seem to have opted for the most dubious of these scientific offerings — polygraph, brain-mapping, and narco-analysis tests — which don't stand up to scrutiny. They can be manipulated by both intelligent suspects and crooked police officers. The margin of error is too high for them to be legally or socially acceptable.

Along with the various investments being made in equipment and training for the police, we perhaps need more forensic laboratories and scientists to become an integral part of any investigation.

As we saw in high-profile cases like the Jessica Lal murder or the as-yet-unsolved Arushi Talwar case, our bumbling Keystone Kops completely desecrated the crime scene, compromising the evidence. By denying them the fig-leaf of narco-testing, the Supreme Court is forcing the police to do its job better — with better tools.

***************************************

DNA

EDITORIAL

WALTZ OF STATES

Inter-state river disputes are the norm rather than the exception. Examples vary from the Krishna water dispute between Maharashtra, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh, and the Kaveri (Cauvery) one between Karnataka and Tamil Nadu.

This is why it is heartening to note the memorandum of understanding (MoU) signed by Maharashtra chief minister Ashok Chavan, Gujarat chief minister Narendra Modi and Union water resources minister Pawan Bansal on Tuesday in New Delhi.

The MoU is a very preliminary step for preparing detailed project reports for linking up some of the rivers in the two states, including Damanganga-Pinjal, on the one hand, the Par-Tapi-Narmada, on the other.

The first project will feed water to the city of Mumbai, and the second will bring water for irrigation to the scorched areas of Saurashtra. Prime minister Manmohan Singh is keen on the development and he was happy that the two states had opted to cooperate.

It is indeed commendable that neighbouring states should be able to work together in utilising riparian resources. This is one aspect that has not received enough emphasis in our federal structure — what the states can do together instead of pressing for their special interests.

The potential of states forging common economic links across sectors and boundaries could be of immense benefit to people living in these states, especially in the border areas. It would be a great boost if there were to be a convergence of the industrial and entrepreneurial energies of Maharashtra and Gujarat.

It could become a great hub in the western part of the country. A similar convergence could emerge among the southern states or in the north-east. If this were to happen among more states, then the role of the central government either as a patron or arbitrator between clashing states could be reduced.

There is, however, a need for caution with regard to the linking of rivers. Politicians and bureaucrats rarely pause to think of the long-term implications of developmental projects.

There is blinkered faith, bordering on infantilism, with regard to big projects that promise prosperity. Linking of rivers and shifting excess waters from one system to another might be an engineer's dream and delight but it could have disastrous effects on the people and the lands over the years.

So, due diligence is required on the part of decision-makers in Mumbai and Gandhinagar with regard to the adverse effects, along with the positive aspects, of this cooperation.

***************************************

DNA

FRACTURED STATE POLITIES

R JAGANNATHAN

The bossman of the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam, M Karunanidhi, went to Delhi the other day and announced that controversial telecom minister A Raja, widely seen as the man at the centre of the spectrum scandal, would not be sacked.

Karunanidhi had the gall to add that Raja was being targeted because he was a Dalit.

The coded message to Manmohan Singh is simple: You have no jurisdiction over my ministers. My party's minister is accountable to me, not the nation.

Similar tales can be told about the UPA's other major coalition partners — the NCP, and the Trinamool Congress, among them — and it all leads to one depressing conclusion: governance is going to be very, very tough when ministers are going to be accountable to their state party bosses rather than the prime minister.

Collective responsibility is dead.

Anybody who thought that the last general election had strengthened the Congress' position within the UPA must be completely disillusioned by now. Not only has the party managed to tie itself in knots over issues (Women's Bill, et al), with every passing day it is losing steam.

Worse, there is increasing evidence that instability at the Centre is now moving down to the states. In fact, the big change over the last 15 years is not that we have had unstable coalitions at the Centre, but this phenomenon has got entrenched in most states as well. In fact, barring a few exceptions — Rajasthan, Uttarakhand, Himachal, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh and Gujarat — almost every other state in the country has seen coalitions emerging as the norm.
Consider Tamil Nadu, once seen as a straight choice between the two Dravidian parties.

It slid into coalition rule in the last assembly elections and the main party no longer calls the shots. For the first time in decades, the DMK returned to power without its own majority, and now needs the Congress to prop it up from the outside. It is highly unlikely that the AIADMK, if it comes to power the next time, will manage a majority on its own.

In Andhra Pradesh, the next election is likely to see a coalition. In last year's election, YSR scraped through with a majority primarily because Chiranjeevi's Praja Rajyam ate into Telugu Desam's anti-incumbency harvest. The next time, the Congress is unlikely to be so lucky, and may have to settle for a coalition.

Uttar Pradesh seems to be currently under one-party rule, but this is ephemeral. Mayawati's BSP is a coalition of Dalits, Brahmins and peripheral Muslims, but as Rahul Gandhi builds his party in the state, this internal coalition may not hold. After the next election, UP may be ripe for another coalition.

As for the rest of the states, Kashmir already has a coalition, and so does Punjab. Haryana has seen one in the past (INLD + BJP), and may see them again in the future. Bihar has a coalition, and Lalu Prasad cannot hope to win the next election without a partner in tow.

Nor can current incumbent Nitish Kumar manage on his own, though he has the option of switching partners (Congress for BJP). Maharashtra has been ruled by a coalition since 1995, and Karnataka had one before the BJP won two years ago with the help of turncoats and moneybags.

Kerala and West Bengal have always had multi-party governments, and Orissa had a coalition till the 2009 election. Jharkhand has the worst of all worlds — a coalition that keeps changing with every election, and in between too.

In the north-east, Assam and Meghalaya, the biggest states, are now well into coalition politics, with negative consequences for stability and good governance. This leaves only the tiny states and Goa with single party governments — and they are unstable inherently.

The reason why I have elaborated at length on the spread of coalitions across the length and breadth of India is simple: till recently it seemed as if the central coalitions reflected the power of state-level bosses from various parties.

But this reality is about to change as the states themselves become repositories of shaky, multi-party coalitions. One shudders to think what will happen if every coalition partner in every state starts exerting pressure on the Centre for narrow political purposes.

Signs of this are already visible. Sharad Pawar's NCP, a coalition partner in Maharashtra and at the Centre, is not only able to rock the Centre on issues pertaining to Maharashtra, but is able to withstand pressure for any kind of accountability to the prime minister.

When the wheat import scandal hit the headlines, the centre could do nothing to Sharad Pawar. When Pawar was asked about rising prices, he could pass the buck and say it was the collective responsibility of the cabinet. His colleague Praful Patel can run Air India into the ground, but he cannot be removed.

As the Chinese say, we are in for more interesting times. If state-level coalitions fail to evolve an internal governance ethic, we have much to worry about.

***************************************

DNA

MEN, THE HUNTERS; WOMEN, THE GATHERERS

ANTARA DEV SEN

A new study suggests that to get the same work done, men often expend 70% more energy than women. So tell us — the exasperated wives, infuriated women colleagues, impatient female friends, irritated sisters — what we didn't know already.

A study of mushroom gatherers by the National Autonomous University of Mexico, to be published in Evolution and Human Behaviour, shows how men spread out far and wide, tackling difficult terrain, vigorously sweating it out to collect the same amount of mushroom as the women did, pottering about effortlessly on easy ground.

Apparently men went looking for mushroom-dense patches, never mind how far or how difficult to reach, whereas women quietly collected mushrooms from patches which could be sparser but easier to access and more frequently found. At the end of the day, the men and women had the same amount of mushrooms.

It's all because of our hunter-gatherer past. Men, the primary hunters, are good at chasing a distant target, while women, primarily nurturers and gatherers, make the best of what they have closer at hand. This fits in very well with the study published in the British Journal of Psychology last year showing how men were better at focusing on objects at a distance while women were better at focusing on areas closer at hand.

With or without mushrooms, most women could vouch for the authenticity of this conclusion. We encounter the end-product of thousands of years of energetic hunting every day. You know how every little task that you would fit into your odd-jobs schedule without even thinking twice becomes a big, stand-alone project for him? It would have to be just perfect, he would research and investigate and finally get from several miles away what you would normally pick up on your way back home, with the fruit and vegetables and the milk.

Or when he decides to cook. How every few minutes he (or for more privileged hunter-gatherers, someone else) would have to rush off to the neighbourhood grocer or vegetable seller to get that one particular ingredient that is so essential to the dish, how every possible utensil would be used and tossed into the kitchen sink overflowing with discarded bowls and plates and sundry cooking implements, how every kitchen gadget would be used with scientific precision and enormous concentration for jobs that a lowly knife does rather well, how everything has to be just so.

Besides, the hunters are not particularly good with found objects. They like the thrill of the chase. Unlike us gatherers, who happily gather from the refrigerator bits and pieces of leftovers and make a quick new dish out of them. Not for us the rather unnecessary spirited adventures of the hunter that would deplete our energies further. Our adventures are for fun, not survival.

But not all women would admit to this. Because it hints at a certain — dare I say it — efficiency. Expending almost three times your energy to get the same result isn't astoundingly efficient. But the gatherers wouldn't want their hunters to know that. We are so much more comfortable allowing the hunters to believe that they are far more competent in every way.

Oh no, of course not, the smarter gatherers would say within the hunter's earshot, he's so much more efficient than I could ever be! They would say this in an honest and grateful way, with a straight face and an inner wink that only women can detect.

I look forward to more studies on hunter gatherers. They would unravel the curious mysteries of needlessly adventurous office colleagues. More importantly, they would promote greater understanding in our domestic lives.

***************************************

******************************************************************************************

THE TRIBUNE

EDITORIAL

SC BAN ON NARCO TESTS

A BIG BLOW TO INVESTIGATING AGENCIES

THE Supreme Court judgement on Wednesday banning Narco analysis, brain-mapping and polygraph tests on the accused is a big blow to agencies like the CBI which have been using such techniques as important tools in investigation. In a landmark ruling, a three-member Bench consisting of Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan, Justice R.V. Raveendran and Justice Dalveer Bhandari has said that if an individual is forced to undergo these tests, it would amount to "unwarranted intrusion of his personal liberty" and a flagrant violation of his fundamental right under Article 20 (3) of the Constitution which prohibits self-incrimination. The Bench made it clear that these tests will not be admissible as evidence in the courts as the law prohibits an accused from giving evidence against himself. As for polygraphy tests, it observed that the investigating agencies will have to follow strictly the guidelines of the National Human Rights Commission.

Significantly, the investigating agencies have conducted these tests in a number of high profile cases such as the fake stamp paper kingpin Abdul Karim Telgi case, Nithari killings accused Surinder Koli's case and on Abu Salem in the Gulshan Kumar murder case. In the Arushi murder case, her parents underwent the lie detector test but no Narco test was conducted on them. Narco test involves psychotherapy and the patient is deeply sedated with medication. Though it is believed that inhibitions are reduced and the subject cannot manipulate answers during this test, opinion is sharply divided over its efficacy. While the issue as such has been a subject of national debate, many senior advocates believe that Narco analysis is "imperfect, uncertain and hazardous" often leading to "wrong results". Not surprisingly, it was not conducted on Mohammed Ajmal Amir Kasab, found guilty in the Mumbai terror attack.

Now that the Supreme Court has banned these tests, the authorities will have to evolve new methods of investigation. The police ought to change its colonial mindset and to show greater respect for human rights. It is common knowledge how the accused are tortured these days, sometimes resulting in custodial deaths. The apex court ruling may help ensure a fair trial for any individual, but agencies like the CBI ought to deploy more humane methods of investigation to ferret out the truth and bring the guilty to book.

***************************************

THE TRIBUNE

EDITORIAL

POPULISM IN RETREAT

WATER CHARGES FOR ALL IN PUNJAB

Populism is being rolled back in bits and pieces in Punjab. The latest facing the axe is the free water supply to the urban poor, who may also have to pay nominal sewerage charges if Local Bodies Minister Manoranjan Kalia's proposal goes through. Incidentally, the minister belongs to the BJP, which considers the urbanites its vote bank. He had also co-scripted the government's fund-raising plan with Deputy Chief Minister Sukhbir Singh Badal under which farmers were asked to pay for electricity and water and claim reimbursement of power bills. The Kalia-Sukhbir report has put some cash in the almost depleted coffers of the state.

Though a gradual shift in political thinking about reforms is welcome, the leadership actually has no alternative. Saddled with an ever-growing debt, which is to reach Rs 71,000 crore by the end of this fiscal, the government has to raise resources from every available source to save the state from a financial catastrophe. After the withdrawal of octroi, the municipal corporations in the state are starved of cash. The visible deterioration in the civic amenities is a pointer to that. The urban chaos is becoming unmanageable with the city dwellers being deprived of regular supply of power and clean drinking water.

Central funds are available for urban uplift under the Jawaharlal Nehru Urban Renewal Mission and the Urban Infrastructure Development Scheme. The state can also have an access to easy funds from the 13th Finance Commission if it meets the prescribed conditions like the levy of user-charges for services and the imposition of house tax in the cities. People must pay if the essential services are to be provided and maintained. If the poor are being asked to make sacrifices in these days of high food inflation, the state leadership too must avoid extravagant expenditure, axe political deadwood and shed administrative flab.

***************************************

THE TRIBUNE

EDITORIAL

BATTLELINES ARE DRAWN

BRITISH POLLS MAY THROW UP HUNG PARLIAMENT

THIS time British parliamentary elections have evoked more than usual interest worldwide. Besides Prime Minister Gordon Brown's Labour Party and the Conservatives led by David Cameron, the Liberal Democrats headed by Nick Clegg are no pushover either. Most pollsters have predicted a hung parliament unless some voters change their mind at the eleventh hour and swing the pendulum towards the Conservatives, who believe in "old politics" and carrying on "business as usual".

The Nick Clegg factor, it seems, is working strongly in favour of a drastic change in British politics. The Liberal Democrats' tremendous appeal particularly among the youngsters is likely to upset the calculations of those who stand for the status quo. The emergence of the third major political force has led to a serious demand for switching over to proportional representation as the prevalent first-past-the-post system does not allow the formation of a government representing the majority of the electorate. A party which manages to have more than 50 per cent of the MPs on its side forms the government, though they may not represent the majority of the electorate. In the system of proportional representation, the number of seats that a party gets is more or less in proportion to the votes cast.

In the event of a hung parliament, there is the strong possibility of the ruling Labour and the Liberal Democrats coming together to keep the Conservatives at bay. Even if the Conservatives win more seats than the other two parties, the convention in Britain says that first the incumbent Prime Minister will be asked to try to form a government. Thus, there are greater chances of Britain getting a non-Conservative government again. This means the likelihood of proportional representation replacing the first-past-the-post system, as the Liberal Democrats have been openly demanding such a change and the Labour leadership stands for holding a referendum for the purpose. Politics in Britain is truly at crossroads today.

***************************************

THE TRIBUNE

COLUMN

REVIEWING THE NPT

NEED FOR NEW SECURITY ARCHITECTURE

BY HARSH V. PANT

AS representatives from the nearly 190 countries, party to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), gather this month for four weeks to take stock of the accord that lies at the heart of the global nuclear non-proliferation regime, the entire regime is under tremendous strain and it is no longer evident if it can be salvaged unblemished. The strains had come into sharp focus ever since India and Pakistan tested their nuclear devices in 1998, thereby challenging the extant global nuclear order. But the US-led international community found that challenge manageable.

Despite its mixed results, the nuclear non-proliferation regime is widely recognised as one of the most successful arms-control arrangements made ever. And the NPT has been the mainstay of the nuclear non-proliferation regime and the key international standard-setting document for conduct in the nuclear era.

It has been argued that the non-proliferation treaty has had considerable success in persuading nations to forgo nuclear weapons as evidenced by the termination of nuclear weapon-related programmes in Argentina and Brazil, the elimination of South Africa's nuclear arsenal, the transfer of former Soviet nuclear weapons to Russia, and the detection and freeze of North Korea's nuclear facilities.

When the NPT came up for extension in 1995, widespread opinion among policymakers and experts was that the NPT needed to be extended as it had worked very well. This was premised on the belief that an extension of the NPT for unlimited duration would not only preserve all the gains made by the nuclear proliferation regime as a whole but would also make sure that future progress gathered momentum. The significance of the NPT for the nuclear non-proliferation regime remained in it being the sole global instrument through which non-nuclear-weapon states could make a legal commitment not to acquire the ultimate weapon.

The NPT got an indefinite extension in 1995, leading some to make a claim that it had been the most successful arms control treaty ever negotiated despite some problems primarily associated with a lack of movement towards nuclear disarmament by the nuclear powers. Even after the nuclear tests by India and Pakistan in 1998, scholars remained upbeat about the non-proliferation regime. It was argued that India and Pakistan were exceptions to the rule and the non-proliferation regime had succeeded beyond the expectations of its founders. No one has, however, thought it fit to examine the "failures" of the non-proliferation regime closely so as to discern as to why, after all, this regime has not worked in the regions where it was most urgently required.

Today, new challenges have arisen from all sides and the same US-led international community seems to have no idea about how to respond. North Korea is a nuclear-weapon state while Iran seems to be moving steadfastly in the same direction. Moreover, the increasing complicity between the so-called "rogue" states is creating a second-tier of nuclear states who refuse to play the nuclear norms set by the West during the hey days of the Cold War. There is evidence that Iran has provided North Korea with data from its missile tests to enable Pyongyang to make improvements in its own missile systems. On the other hand, North Korea may be supplying Iran with engineering suggestions for further testing. North Korea may also be trying to raise hard currency by peddling its nuclear missile technology in the global black market. While it is accepted now that the A.Q. Khan network sold uranium enrichment technology to Iran, North Korea and Libya, international inspectors are fretting over the fact that the Khan network may have even sold blueprints for a sophisticated and compact nuclear weapon. It's not clear who received these blueprints. Most damaging has been the role of China — a nuclear-weapon state that has single-handedly wrecked the NPT by not abiding by its commitments of not spreading nuclear weapons technology.

There is a real danger that if nothing is done with regard to Iran and North Korea, other states like Syria, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Taiwan, Japan and Brazil may be tempted to go nuclear. Moreover, with nations willing to trade their nuclear and missile technologies in the global black market, there is a real danger of these technologies falling into the hands of terrorists.

It should be clear to even the lay observer that the NPT has been a mute spectator of these recent developments. In fact, Iran has used its right as a member of the NPT to use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes to move towards nuclear weapons. And North Korea casually walked out of the NPT when it realised that the treaty was becoming an impediment to its acquisition of nuclear weapons. The world has also taken note of the fact that India and Pakistan have become members of the global nuclear order without ever bowing to the pressures of the NPT.

The NPT was always a flawed document in many ways and various countries, including India, had pointed to its flaws over the years. Recent global developments make it amply clear that unless a thorough review is undertaken of the NPT, it would soon become a paper tiger, if it is not so already. Given the horrors of September 11, 2001, the danger of nuclear terrorism and the prospect of numerous Irans and North Koreas just a screwdriver-turn away from nuclear weapons, it is time for the international community to promote a bolder nuclear arrangement than the NPT.

India has always been dissatisfied with the global non-proliferation and arms control regime because it constrained its autonomy to make foreign policy decisions as dictated by national interests. India had argued that an inequitable regime that gave only a few countries the permanent right to have nuclear weapons and denied others this right was inherently unstable. There are reasons for India to feel vindicated by its long-held stance on these issues. Today, as the global nuclear non-proliferation regime crumbles under the weight of its own contradictions and India gains acceptance as a de facto nuclear-weapon state, India can rightfully claim that it was one of the first states to draw the attention of the world community to these challenges.

A radically new global security architecture is needed to tackle the problem of proliferation and terrorism. The old security architecture has failed and it is time this got recognised if the world hoped to tackle the emerging challenges. India along with the older nuclear powers should rise to the occasion and offer ideas on a new framework for international security suitable for the 21st century. Typically, world powers not only challenge the status quo that is inimical to their interests but also provide responsible alternatives to manage the challenges facing the globe. It is time for India to respond to its rising global profile.

***************************************

THE TRIBUNE

COLUMN

PICASSO AND HIS PAINTINGS

BY ROOPINDER SINGH

A painting should reflect how the artist perceives the subject, and you appreciate it for the effect it has on you, the viewer. During my younger days, I did not have many definite ideas about art and artists, for the simple reason that I did not know enough, though I did appreciate art. Looking at Rodin's Thinker was an experience that touched the soul; the impressionists left an impact of a painting that far transcended realism. The fundamentals of art are universal, and people are ready to pay maximum dollars to possess paintings by masters.

A painting by Pablo Picasso has just been sold in New York for $106.5 million - a new world record. The 1932 painting, Nu au Plateau de Sculpteur (Nude, Green Leaves and Bust), has Marie-Therese Walter, the artist's mistress, in a reclining position and also in a bust. Picasso included his own profile in the blue background.

Picasso was a painter about whom I had strong views. When I was young, Picasso's work left me totally unmoved and impressed, though, to be fair, I had graduated from an earlier stage when I felt that Picasso was a bit like me, someone who couldn't paint and thus odd shapes like triangles for the nose!

I lived in ignorance for decades. I remained somewhat suspicious of the person whose full name was Pablo Diego José Francisco de Paula Juan Nepomuceno María de los Remedios Cipriano de la Santísima Trinidad Ruiz y Picasso.

Although he dominated the 20th-century art scene, he left me unmoved. By the end of the century, I had seen the world, but not Picasso's place in the world of art. It was the dawn of the 21st century that enabled me to finally shed this bit of ignorance, and my prejudice towards Picasso. The trigger was a colleague who had just visited an exhibition of the works of the great artist mounted at the National Museum, New Delhi. The Government of France had sponsored the "Picasso: Metamorphoses, 1900-1972, From the French Collections, from December 2001 to February 2002".

Gaurav had seen the exhibition and was bubbling with enthusiasm, talking constantly about it to my colleagues and me. His account of how great the exhibition was, and how it aided his understanding of the artist enthused me enough to drive down to Delhi one Sunday morning, straight to the museum.

Having started early, I found myself there by the opening time and went in. Here were 122 works — graphics, drawings, collages, assemblages and sculpture. What an array divided into various sections that profiled the panoramic sweep of Picasso's prolific career. Blue Period paintings, early turn-of-century, brooding contemplative works, the brilliant sculptures, his portraits, which were thoughtfully placed along with photographs of the subjects... Picasso's greatness finally sunk into.

I realised, not for the first or the last time, what a fool I had been, in not getting rid of the negativity of ill-formed opinions based on prejudice. Thank God, providence and prodding had enabled me to discover the greatness of an artist.

I went out for lunch and came back to the museum. I bought some prints and generally spent as much as I could afford before driving back to Chandigarh that evening. I had thought of meeting friends, as I always do when I am in Delhi, but that didn't happen. I needed to be alone to absorb what I had experienced during the day.

***************************************

THE TRIBUNE

OPED

UNCERTAIN BRITONS VOTE TODAY

BRITISH political leaders campaigned around the clock in a final push for votes before a parliamentary election that opinion polls suggest could redraw the political map. Prime Minister Gordon Brown hinted that he could step aside if his Labour Party fails to win a fourth consecutive election on Thursday, as most polls suggest.

Recent surveys have indicated that David Cameron, hoping to end his Conservative Party's 13 years in opposition, would either win a slim majority in parliament or fall just short of it.

But a new poll showed the race tightening again. The YouGov survey for the Sun newspaper showed Labour cutting the Conservatives' lead to five points while the Liberal Democrats slipped back. That outcome would make Labour the largest party in parliament, though without a majority.

"I have never known so many undecided voters as we have seen in this election," Brown told a rally in Manchester.

Cameron planned to campaign overnight, with events scheduled in northern England early Wednesday as he seeks support from the third of voters said to still be wavering.

The rise of the LibDems has added to the unpredictability and turned the contest into a three-way fight. The LibDems could hold the balance of power in an inconclusive election and will use that to push for a proportional voting system.

Brown, finance minister for a decade until 2007, indicated earlier he could step aside if Labour flops at the polls. "I will take full responsibility if anything happens," Brown told GMTV. "But I still think there are thousands of people who have still to make up their minds."

Cameron accused Brown of lying about alleged Conservative plans to cut benefits, saying he had conducted the most negative campaign in modern British political history. "It's been the most disgraceful campaign," he told a rally in Scotland.

Brown's campaign was undermined by one of his candidates who described him in a local newspaper interview as "the worst prime minister ever." Manish Sood, standing for election in Norfolk, eastern England, told Reuters he stood by his comments. — Reuters

Gordon: Torment will be over soon

Gordon Brown is finished. He is gone even in the scenario whereby the Tories fall so far short of a majority that there appears a stronger mandate for a Lib-Lab coalition than a minority Cameron administration. It's hard to imagine anyone other than Mr Clegg leading such a coalition, since even Labour isn't daft enough to try to impose another leader yet to put himself before the electorate. But whoever such a PM might be, it cannot now be Gordon. He is that dead man walking.

The prospect of his going fills me with neither glee nor a sense of imminent regret. After all, though he will effectively be driven out of Downing Street in Mr Clegg's big yellow taxi, this is hardly a case of not knowing what you got till it's gone. With Gordon, in fact, we knew what we were getting before he arrived in No 10, even if dunces like me hoped that achieving his great ambition might affect him like waking up on Christmas Day did Ebenezer Scrooge. Alas, alas, and thrice alas, in the real world even ghosts lack transformative power.

Yet being an appalling PM doesn't make Gordon a small one. Far from it, this is the largest politician we've known since Mrs Thatcher – a man who'd have stood tall in any age but stands out as a Titan in this one. The fact that his role model is Prometheus, with his liver devoured daily, highlights his extraordinary talents both for provoking sadistic attack and for futile regeneration after it.

His resilience has been wondrous to behold these recent weeks, and if it doesn't make you warm to him, it must instill ungrudging respect. For him to be coming down this final furlong like an express train now, albeit from 40 lengths off the pace, bankrupts belief. Even at his debating worst, when the rictus drowned out an effective closing speech, he was visibly a Gulliver among Lilliputians.

Matthew Norman/The Independent

***************************************

THE TRIBUNE

OPED

TWO-PARTY ERA IN TWILIGHT

THIS election campaign has felt almost like a liberation. The prison walls – the stultifying, spirit-crushing assumptions of the long era of two-party politics – have crumbled. The surge in support for the Liberal Democrats has unlocked something precious: a feeling among the public that, for the first time in a generation, a radical overhaul of our political settlement could be possible.

That feeling – combined with the enduring uncertainty over the result of the election – is a tonic for democracy. The public sense that their vote matters. When one considers that this campaign began against a backdrop of rampant cynicism and apathy, stirred up by MPs' abuse of their expenses, this transformation looks all the more remarkable. And welcome.

But while this is a moment of hope and freedom, it is also a moment of danger for the popular movement for change that has been set free in recent weeks. Nick Clegg's party has made an astonishing breakthrough. But though the mould of British politics is fractured, it is not yet broken. And the vested interest of the "old politics" could still preserve it. Despite the drama of recent weeks, there remains a considerable risk that Britain could wake up on Friday morning to discover we are in for four or five more years of "business as usual" politics under a Conservative government.

Labour Party

Labour seeks public support on the basis of its record in power. Gordon Brown is due immense credit for the manner in which he handled the 2008 financial crisis. And Labour can point to some worthy and lasting achievements, from political accord in Northern Ireland, to the introductions of civil partnerships and the minimum wage.

But the blind support for the disastrous US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the dishonest way in which the case for that intervention was made drained the party of moral authority. And while Labour's efforts to reform our public services and cut national carbon emissions have been a disappointment, its record on civil liberties has been a disgrace. This feels like an exhausted administration.

Labour's decision to pick up the banner of electoral reform has all the moral conviction of a sinner recanting on his deathbed. And the electoral reform it has floated – the alternative vote – is a non-proportional sham. And yet Labour's position on this key matter, its commitment to hold a referendum on moving to a new voting system, is a thousand times better than the Conservatives' flat rejection of the case for any change. For this reason alone, Labour, not the Conservative Party, would make a better coalition partner for the Liberal Democrats in the event of a hung parliament.

Conservative Party

The conservative Party talks of the need for change in Britain and its leader, David Cameron, likes to emphasise the manner in which the party has renewed itself. The Conservatives are no longer the reactionary rabble that fought the 2005 election. Their focus on improving the state education system and the National Health Service does them credit. So does their plan to encourage the voluntary sector to play a greater role in delivering public services. But in a host of other areas – from criminal justice, to their hostility to the European Union, to their attitude to immigration – the shift has been superficial at best.

Worse, the Conservatives have set their face resolutely against the fundamental change that would breathe new life into our body politic: electoral reform. If the Conservatives win the highest number of seats this week – an outcome that the opinion polls suggest is increasingly possible – they would be a formidable roadblock to the overhaul of the voting system that the public want and deserve. The lid could yet be slammed firmly down on all those hopes for a new way of doing politics. — The Independent

***************************************

THE TRIBUNE

OPED

NICK CLEGG: RISE OF THIRD FORCE

Whatever the eventual outcome of this election, the voters have spoken already. The political landscape changed suddenly after the first televised leaders' debate, when support for the Liberal Democrats soared in a way that was without precedent in the middle of a campaign. "Cleggmania" was the equivalent of a loud cathartic scream from a bemused, frightened and angry electorate.

The noisy eruption was more shapeless than it might have seemed at first. I doubt if many of those turning towards Nick Clegg knew too much about what was in the Liberal Democrats' manifesto. Probably their disillusionment with the traditionally bigger two parties had little to do with what either Labour or the Conservatives were proposing at the election. But voters saw in Clegg a figure who could perhaps guide them away from stifling political orthodoxy as represented by the old duopoly. This recognition, however vaguely formed, had in its origins a refreshing clarity. A majority of voters yearn for a new way of conducting politics.

Cleggmania was not really a new phenomenon. But the context made it fundamentally different. The backdrop to the election campaign is both an economic crisis of apocalyptic proportions and a parliamentary scandal. The near collapse of the banks and the reckless greed that brought it about should be enough to shake up politics on its own. When the MPs' expenses scandal is added to the brew we have a combustible combination.

The sudden increase in support for a third party once the election was underway has been one consequence of changes that are taking place in front of our eyes. Who would have though that the government would own several banks? Who would have thought we would be accumulating an intimidating debt to stay afloat? Political change is partly a response to wild events elsewhere. There is another factor in the hunger for political reform. In trying too hard to please as many voters as possible, Labour and the Conservative parties have blurred their identities to a point where few have any sense of what they represent.

If Cameron had truly modernised his party Clegg would not have had any space by the time of the debates. Instead, Clegg espouses a politics that might have been Cameron's if he had seriously changed his party. Clegg is pragmatically pro-European, a constitutional reformer, an advocate of sweeping redistribution through the tax system.

Steve Richards/The Independent

THE TRIBUNE

OPED

BANGALORE DIARY

SHUBHADEEP CHOUDHURY

GURU THROWS LIGHTS ON SEX SCANDAL

The media cell of the Art of Living guru, Ravi Shankar's headquarters here, keeps up a steady stream of press statements containing Sri Sri's comments on various topical events. The globe-trotting guru, who has never been in a sex scandal himself, has issued a press statement against Nityananda, who is at the centre of a sleaze drama.

Ravi Shankar criticised Nityananda, first citing UNAIDS guidelines and then the tantric tradition. According to him, sexual experiments belonging to the tantric tradition can be attempted by householders only.

The guru with a benign smile had also issued statements on the IPL controversy and on artist Husain's citizenship issue. Ravi Shankar seems to have fallen out with Vijay Mallya, owner of the Bangalore team in the IPL, who used to proclaim himself a follower of Ravi Shankar. Ravi Shankar's statement on IPL criticises businessmen getting involved in sports.

Phone directory these days!

BSNL, Bangalore, has surprised everyone by deciding to bring out a tele- phone directory in print. A phone directory in book form has become obsolete with people doing their search for phone numbers on the internet. Besides, agencies such as Justdial are available to give you phone numbers of services available in the neighbourhood.

BSNL had last published a directory three years back. Without having any demand for it as such, BSNL will again bring out a new directory and three lakh CDs of the print edition. BSNL officials here say that old habits die hard and the sale of the print edition will not be a problem.

IISc graduate course

Gadadhar Mishra, G. Rangarajan and Tirthankar Bhattacharya, faculty members at the Indian Institute of Science (IISc) here, are all quite excited about the proposed starting of undergraduate courses in IISc, ranked number one in the country among scientific and engineering research institutions.

Work on building up infrastructure for the new programme (building hostels, etc) is in progress, they said, and added that next year would see the IISc opening its doors to the undergraduate students. The four years integrated course will primarily provide science and engineering education with a dash of humanities. After passing out, the students are expected to take up R&D jobs, fill teachers vacancies in NITs and so on.

******************************************************************************************

MUMBAI MIRROR

EDITORIAL

THE LONG-DISTANCE RUNNER

BRITISH LITERATURE'S ANGRY YOUNG MAN, THE WELL-PUBLISHED ALAN SILLITOE ACTUALLY CAME FROM A BACKGROUND OF THE MOST HORRENDOUS POVERTY

The British novelist, Alan Sillitoe (b 1928) who died on April 25, was invited to India with his wife, the poet Ruth Fainlight, more than 20 years ago by the British Council. Some years before that, again courtesy the British Council there was a festival of films based on the "Angry" novels of the '50s. Both Sillitoe and Fainlight read from their work to students in St Xavier's, and elsewhere. Postreading questions tend to focus on work rather than on personal lives which is the way it should be. So students came away charmed, but unaware that Sillitoe came from a background of the most horrendous poverty.

Sillitoe's authorised biographer, Richard Bradford describes the kind of working-class background in Nottingham from which Sillitoe came. His father was illiterate, almost always out of work, could not hold a job for more than a month, beat his wife and children. Sometimes the mother had to prostitute herself to feed the children. They moved constantly from one unspeakable dwelling to another, dragging their stuff behind them in a handcart. The entire family, like other families in the same condition occupied one room, which invariably smelt of "leaking gas, stale fat and layers of mouldering wallpaper." One of his most vivid memories is of his mother begging his father not to beat him on the head.

Amazingly, a publisher's reader denounced one of Sillitoe's early working-class novels as "fraudulent, clearly an attempt by a writer with no experience of proletarian existence to make money by inciting contempt for decent working men." Sillitoe himself said that he wanted to "create works which leave the reader, and therefore the author, in favour of life by the end of the book rather than in a state of despair about all the vile things that go on in the world."

It is said that his mother tore up one of his early manuscripts because she felt it made the family look disreputable. This fact, and some of the novels which use this material, show that Sillitoe had no interest in being sentimental about the poor, of asserting they were automatically more "authentic" as human beings, merely by virtue of their poverty. He himself moved economically into the middle class, but was never interested in labels or boxes. His interest was writing.

It was unusual in the novels and plays pre-1950 to hear working-class voices. Sillitoe was living in Majorca at the time, on a military pension. (He had to leave the RAF because of TB). Robert Graves, who also lived on the island told him he should write about the things he knew best. So he began to write about Nottingham, not as part of any conscious attempt to be one of the "Angry Young Men," (he says he didn't really know any of them), but simply because he agreed that he should write about what he knew. Saturday Night and Sunday Morning (1958) about promiscuous, heavy-drinking Arthur Seaton whose girlfriend has to have a back-street abortion provoked protests about immorality. But Sillitoe said he was merely writing about things as they were.

The Loneliness of the Long-Distance Runner (1959) is a long short story, the title of a collection. A boy in a juvenile prison, on whom the prison authorities pin their hopes in a competition, decides to lose the race to spite the governors of the school and all the other establishment figures he despises. Both this story and the earlier novel were made into very successful films.

Sillitoe wrote more than 25 novels. He also wrote poetry and published at least one book with his wife Ruth Fainlight, and his friend Ted Hughes. He wrote an autobiography, Life Without Armour in 1995, and he wrote for children.

***************************************

******************************************************************************************BUSINESS STANDARD

EDITORIAL

GIVING SPORTS A CHANCE

GILL'S MOVE ON SPORTS FEDERATIONS WAS LONG OVERDUE

Now that the heads of the country's topmost sports federations, including the Indian Olympic Association (IOA) which has the power to recognise/derecognise these associations, have come out against Sports Minister M S Gill's decision to restrict their tenure, the issue is truly joined, and it remains to be seen who comes up trumps. As widely reported, several politicians have been in charge of sports bodies for decades — Congress' Suresh Kalmadi has headed the IOA for 15 years, BJP's Vijay Kumar Malhotra has headed the archery association for 31 years, Akali Dal's S S Dhindsa has headed the cycling federation for 14 years, and so on. Apart from the fact that this violates the law which specifies a maximum tenure of eight years and that no one can head two federations at the same time (if N Srinivasan owning the Chennai Super Kings while being BCCI secretary is not bad enough, he is also the president of the chess federation), there are a host of other problems. Most of these associations are captured by cliques and there is a cosy relationship with the IOA — while the IOA recognises these associations, they get to vote for the IOA's top leadership. If the IOA is unhappy with any association, it can derecognise it, as it did with the Indian Hockey Federation (IHF) headed by K P S Gill, and replace it with an ad hoc committee comprising its own officials. India's track record in international events like the Olympics makes it clear that these federations aren't doing too much for the game. At least in the case of BCCI, which is currently in the eye of the storm, it has to be said that Indian cricket has done very well at most global contests.

As a former chief election commissioner, the sports minister knows that he must insist on a fair election process, with voters lists updated and made public, with a secret ballot and an independent returning officer. In the case of Hockey India, that the IOA set up as an ad hoc body once K P S Gill's IHF was derecognised, M S Gill pointed out that the returning officer was a vice president of the IOA! While M S Gill will fight his battle to have his way — it helps that his action last week was in response to a court order asking the ministry to file an affidavit on the extraordinary tenures of sports federation chiefs — there are some other options that need to be considered as well. Declaring such federations as "offices of profit", which they indeed seem to be, will ensure that sitting MPs cannot aspire to head them. Putting them under the ambit of the Right to Information (RTI) Act is another. If the idea of a sports regulator is not acceptable, each federation must have an acceptable dispute-settlement mechanism. In the case of IPL, to cite a current example, the move to allow the existing eight teams to retain seven of their top players is clearly against the interest of the new franchises like Kochi and Pune — an appellate process within the BCCI set-up, or outside it, would allow Kochi/Pune to challenge this. If politicians and/or sports administrators are not to play games with the sport, the rules have to be clearly defined and the referees, including third umpires, need to be put in place.

***************************************

BUSINESS STANDARD

EDITORIAL

SUGAR FREE

THE TIME FOR DECONTROL IS HERE AND NOW

There was a time when the price of almost every commodity was controlled. It was during the Second World War. When India's post-Independence growth outpaced domestic supply of goods in the 1950s, free India's policymakers drew on the experience of the war years to introduce rationing and price-controls. For half a century after that, price and distribution controls became, on the one hand, the symbol of Indian socialism and, on the other, the weaponry of a corrupt "licence-permit Raj". Then came the plea for a "bonfire of controls" and in that early dawn of liberalisation, price controls on commodities like steel and cement disappeared. Few in today's India can even imagine the control and permit Raj that defined cement sales and pricing barely a generation ago. The only really "non-essential" commodity to survive the era of liberalisation is sugar. Powerful political interests entrenched in state-level politics in states like Maharashtra and Uttar Pradesh have managed to prevent full decontrol of sugar prices. For a long time even government economists believed the system of partial decontrol served the needs of both farmers and poorer consumers.

Almost everyone ignored the wisdom of a distinguished economic policy-maker, Dr S R Sen, who chaired the famous Sugar Enquiry Commission, 1965, and recommended decontrol with a government-funded buffer stock. Sen took the view that "to enable the industry to pay the minimum price of cane to farmers, it is necessary to prevent sugar prices from falling below a certain level, just as to protect the interests of the consumers, they must be prevented from piercing a ceiling". He saw a buffer stock as the appropriate mechanism through which the government would influence price trends in the market, rather than fix the final selling price. Such a buffer can easily be funded by the industry itself. This year, when output is expected to sharply increase, is a good time to fund and stock such a buffer. Politicians are also wrong to assume that millers do not have the interests of the growers at heart. Most successful sugar mills have long-term supply contracts that have helped both growers and millers. Normal market solutions must be found for a simple item of daily consumption like sugar. Apart from decontrolling sugar price, the government must also ensure cane farmers pay for the water they use. Uneconomic water pricing has encouraged cane cultivation, leading to the diversion of water away from food crops and to excessive tapping of groundwater. In a country confronted with a diabetes epidemic, there is no economic, ecological or epidemiological justification for sale of subsidised sugar to any section of the population.

***************************************

BUSINESS STANDARD

EDITORIAL

CHINA CLUB INSTEAD OF BOMBAY CLUB?

EMULATE CHINA'S COORDINATED POLICIES FOR STRATEGIC SECTORS, AND WE'LL RELY LESS ON COMMODITY EXPORTS

SHYAM PONAPPA

With the momentum of the past few years, India's potential for growth is enormous, despite the chaotic loose linkages. In sectors like power and telecommunications, this translates to demand far outstripping capacity. Some contend that domestic inability to build capacity — i.e., being able to actually pull it off, as against the perpetual potential — will conscribe not only these sectors, but also limit overall growth. So the argument goes, e.g., let China build India's power plants, because we need the power and don't have capacity/they do it cheaper.

Comparative advantage notwithstanding, this reasoning is fallacious given the realities of national interests and self-interest. To understand why, consider the naïveté of the underlying assumptions — about "rational man", that capitalism is fair, capital is immobile, surplus value accrues to countries and not to companies, or that the pursuit of self-interest maximises societal benefits.*

Our quandary is aggravated by our inability so far to orchestrate supportive policies for even a level playing field. Ironically, one need only consider India's approach to IT and IT-enabled services (ITeS) in the initial growth years to realise this. India's policies in IT and ITeS, while far from perfect — in fact, sneaked through by stealth, as in the preferential 64 kbps communications lifeline, and the tax breaks for software service exporters — provided the foundations for transforming IT and then ITeS/BPO/KPO (Business Process and Knowledge Process Outsourcing).

These sectors also benefited from a controlled exchange rate, as the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) managed a steady depreciation during those years. But they did not have another vital ingredient of coordinated policies as did the Asian tigers: low borrowing rates (see diagram).

This is one reason why, for instance, India's machine tool manufacturers or shipbuilders have not matched the growth of knowledge-based services. The former need inexpensive, long-term capital for production and marketing, as well as for continuous innovation, upgrade and scale.**

Why labour arbitrage and not productsThis is also one reason why we lack product orientation, because product design, development and marketing require the support of easy access to cheap capital for a long period. Labour arbitrage needs little capital. Therefore, we have been better mercenaries than producers of products, compared with the chaebols (Samsung, Hyundai) or keiretsu (Mitsubishi, Dai-Ichi/Mizuho). There are, of course, many additional reasons: their education, training, work practices, our policies against large corporations, etc.

With growth in domestic markets across a broad range — telecom equipment, engineering goods, power — there are domestic manufacturing initiatives, such as L&T and Bharat Forge in power generation joining Bhel, or Tejas Networks in optical switching. But for the transformational changes we have witnessed in IT, we need coordinated industrial policies that support domestic manufacturing, because that's the competition. Unthinking acceptance of "open markets" without heed to how others — including developed economies — cosseted and built their manufacturing capacity will ensure that India stays a raw materials and commodities exporter, while importing trains, aircraft, machine tools, and equipment for power generation, telecommunications and defence.

Integrated policies work

Ideally, supportive policies comprise a coordinated range, such as state and central taxes, favoured locations with good infrastructure — energy, transport and communications, subsidised land, favourable exchange and interest rates, preferred access to domestic markets, and barriers to unfair competition, like import tariffs not below the WTO floor, and safeguard duties. Without this orchestration, the victors are companies and countries that have understood these principles, and have these systems in place. (This applies equally to farm products.)

Many are apprehensive that what works elsewhere will not work in India because of malpractices, as seen in recurring scams. There is every need for systems with integrity, and for enforcement with penalties. But just as corruption in government or civil society does not do away with the need for either, misuse does not negate the need for incentives. It would be self-damaging to lose the opportunity to try and get our act together simply because of apprehensions of corruption and/or incompetence. That would be like not subsidising food for the poor; it's a different matter that we need better methods to prevent gross misappropriation.

The consequence of heedless, ad hoc muddling through instead of orchestrated strategies is that manufactured imports will dominate our markets, while domestic manufacturing is fragmented, hamstrung or absent. Having said that, consider India's needs in electricity or communications — telecom, Internet and broadcasting — and it is apparent that crafting policies is not simple. So many conflicting images, some based on facts, others, mere impressions, which are often more important than facts. What should policy-makers do for our needs on such a massive scale with growing shortfalls?

Emulate China

The short answer: learn from China. In the power sector, Chinese suppliers have the following advantages:

Low-cost access to capital.

An exchange rate advantage (10-30 per cent).

No sales tax and octroi, aggregating to about 11 per cent.

Zero customs duty on equipment for large plants (China imposes a 30 per cent import duty).

Corrective action discussed for years has not resulted in concrete steps. The power ministry, citing supposed user benefits, opposes the planning commission's recommendation of a safeguard duty. This is as shortsighted as "free electricity" that undercuts investments in power.

In telecommunications, consider Huawei, with revenues of over $20 billion, nurtured for 20 years with the People's Liberation Army (PLA) as an R&D partner and guaranteed customer, vis-à-vis, say, Tejas Networks from Bangalore, with no government support.

Our policies need to focus on our long-term interests with strategic intent and execution, as in other countries, balancing costs with the benefits of domestic capabilities. These sectors need government procurement support, not criteria that disqualify Indian companies in strategic sectors like power and communications. They also need interim methods for Chinese companies to contribute while upgrading our skills and processes. Our aim needs to be a level playing field.

shyamponappa@gmail.com

***************************************

BUSINESS STANDARD

EDITORIAL

A GLUT OF MBAS?

WE NOT ONLY HAVE AN OVERSUPPLY OF MBAS ALREADY, BUT HAVE MBAS WHOSE ACADEMIC AND EXPERIENCE PROFILE ACTUALLY MAKES THEM ANOTHER "BRICK IN THE WALL"

ARVIND SINGHAL

For the last few years, every MBA placement season sees a flurry of releases from various business schools on the highest and average salaries offered to their newly minted MBA graduates. Each year, the numbers show a rising trend, and if these numbers are to be taken at face value, India must be facing an incredible crunch of entry-level managerial talent since such compensation levels are aspirational even for mid-career professionals in other functions, such as manufacturing, or professional service providers, such as doctors and chartered accountants. Sometime later in the year, it would be the "ranking" season when leading business magazines come out with cover stories carrying their rankings of leading business schools in India, adding further glamour to the MBA degree.

Largely unstated are the less-than-stellar overall placement records for most MBA institutes in India, including some that have made it to even the top-10 rankings. While it may be true that finally most MBAs from the top-10 or even the top-25 ranked institutes find some job and hence they are technically "placed", it is also true that increasingly, many of them are forced to take up jobs that could be easily managed by someone with a basic graduation degree itself. The plight of those who do not come from the top-25 institutions is probably worse. Indeed, if the glamour and the clamour for an MBA degree continue to grow as it has in the last few years, and with both public and private institutions creating capacity at the same pace as they have been doing recently, it may be an exaggeration, but just barely, that we will see legions of MBAs in the field sales force of pharmaceutical or FMCG companies, on the shop floor of retail outlets, and in different types of BPOs and KPOs.

Hard data supports the onset of this glut of MBAs. In 2000, there were about 600 colleges in India offering about 70,000 MBA seats. By the end of 2009, the number had increased to 1,400 colleges offering about 120,000 MBA seats! The intake of the top-20 institutes alone has increased from 1,500 in 2000 to over 5,000 in 2009, and is poised to increase further in the next five years as more IIMs come into operation while the current top-ranked ones (IIMs and others) further expand capacity or add new campuses and programmes. By comparison, the US (whose economy is over 10 times bigger than that of India) has about 1,000 colleges offering about 150,000 MBA seats to both US citizens and to a growing pool of international applicants. In the entire European Union (EU), whose economy is also over 10 times that of India and which has much more diversity in terms of number of countries and businesses, there are just about 550 colleges offering about 100,000 MBA seats. Major EU economies such as Germany, France and the UK individually offer between 8,600 and 27,000 MBA seats despite each being significantly larger and more global than India is at this time.

Making it worse is the highly flawed selection criterion of almost all Indian MBA colleges, including the IIMs. The 2010 incoming batch, for instance, has just 6 per cent women, about 94 per cent are engineers with just an isolated representative from arts stream, 33 per cent have no work experience at all and 41 per cent have less than two years of experience. There is very high probability that even this experience profile will largely have applicants who have worked in the IT sector post-engineering and wish to make a transition out of the IT sector itself. Harvard's class of 2010 has 38 per cent women, just 32 per cent are engineers, and over 84 per cent have experience of more than two years. ESADE (Barcelona, Spain) has 48 nationalities represented in its class of 180 students with an average work experience of seven years.

Hence, we not only have an oversupply of MBAs already, but have MBAs whose academic and experience profile actually makes them another "brick in the wall". There are no easy solutions except that MBA colleges have to reinvent themselves and their programmes immediately before they add more capacity, and all new aspirants for an MBA programme should keep in mind that an MBA degree from even a high-ranking institute may not translate into a dream job in the near future!

arvind.singhal@technopak.com

***************************************

BUSINESS STANDARD

EDITORIAL

IRRAWADDY'S GHOSTS

THE MYANMAR GOVERNMENT HAS DONE LITTLE TO PUT VILLAGERS BATTERED BY CYCLONE NARGIS BACK ON THEIR FEET

BARUN ROY

Two years after a devastating cyclone battered Myanmar's Irrawaddy delta in May 2008, leaving 138,000 dead and over 2.4 million homeless, people in the affected areas say they're still troubled by ghosts at night — ghosts of fathers, mothers, husbands, wives, or children killed by the cyclone — and every night after dusk, village guards clang iron bars as they go on their rounds to assuage people's fears.

Time has yet to heal the many scars left by Cyclone Nargis on the delta's poor farming and fishing population. Whipped by 200-km-per-hour winds and 12-ft-high tidal surges, people had no way of saving their homes or fields or stores. At least 200,000 head of cattle were killed, more than 780,000 hectares of paddy fields were ravaged, and some 707,500 metric tonnes of stored paddy and milled rice were destroyed. The government has done little to put the hapless villagers back on their feet while international aid agencies, trying to help, have faced all kinds of impediments.

Some 500,000 people still lack shelter or work. Food is scarce, drinking water is insufficient, and a fierce summer has dried off water bodies that could have served as alternative water sources. Embankments damaged by Nargis remain mostly unrepaired or ill-repaired. Dispossessed of land and with little credit available, survivors live by scrounging whatever they can lay their hands on. On days that officials are on visit, they can't even beg openly on the streets and are arrested if they do.

Yet, the Irrawaddy delta is Myanmar's rice bowl. This is where the main expansion of the country's rice area has taken place. Anything that happens to it, therefore, is bound to affect the country's agriculture and, consequently, its exports. If, as the Asian Development Bank (ADB) suggests, Myanmar's net annual agricultural growth has been sliding for years, periodic droughts and floods aren't the only ones to blame. The government has utterly failed to take adequate protective measures in the very region where they matter most.

Coastal embankments, built mostly in the 1970s, encompass only some 162,500 hectares of delta cropland (against the country's total rice area of 6 million hectares), but even these are in a very poor state and need urgent rehabilitation. Large tracts of cropland still remain prone to flooding during the monsoon. What's more alarming, most of the mangrove forests along the coast have been allowed to be lost to shrimp farming. Researchers say that almost 85 per cent of mangroves in the Irrawaddy delta were destroyed between 1924 and 1999, and the damage continues.

Lessons could have been learnt from neighbouring Bangladesh, where losses of lives and crops have been significantly reduced through effective protective measures. Between the Bhola super-cyclone of 1970 that killed 500,000 people and destroyed 400,000 homes and the Sidr in 2007 that left 3,000 dead (notice the difference), Bangladesh has developed a dependable system of warning sirens, evacuation routes, and elevated shelters that has helped keep casualties down. There are polders stretching up to 100 km inland and nearly 10,000 km of embankments along the coastal belt. Many embankment slopes have been reforested, and, under a Comprehensive Disaster Management Programme, whose first phase has just been completed, policies aimed at risk reduction are now better focused, agencies are better coordinated, and workers at the union level are better trained to handle emergencies.

A basic protection system is thus in place, which might have been a reason why the toll from May 2009's Cyclone Aila was a meagre 200, a seemingly unbelievable figure in Bangladesh's context. Of course, things could still go wrong and future disasters might inflict severer damages in terms of life and property. But if they do, it would be easier now to pinpoint causes and order remedies. It's true, a year after Aila, 200,000 of the victims are still waiting for shelter and safe drinking water. But that's more a case of administrative tardiness than of systemic failure.

That's not the case with Myanmar, where dictatorship is an obstacle and relief can't be demanded. Nevertheless, certain things can be achieved even in a dictatorship, if only a credible, authoritative third party, like ADB, takes up the task. To my mind, especially as the dangers of a global climate change become increasingly imminent, there's a strong case for launching a regional cooperation initiative for deltaic Asia, where problems are similar and solutions could be, too.

A regional initiative would allow experiences to be exchanged at various levels, basic protective measures and procedures to be standardised, and technologies innovated by institutions like the International Rice Research Institute to be put to best possible use to minimise immediate losses of lives and property and strengthen post-disaster recovery. NGOs are simply not fit for such a task as the issues involved are broad, multi-dimensional, and complex, and have implications for policy making.

rbarun@gmail.com

***************************************

BUSINESS STANDARD

EDITORIAL

UNDER THE WEATHER

GIVEN IMD?S PAST RECORD ON FORECASTS, THE LATEST ONE COULD ALSO GO WRONG

SURINDER SUD

Can you trust India Meteorological Department's (IMD's) forecast that the country will get a rainfall of 98 per cent of the long-period average (LPA) during the monsoon season this year? Considering the poor accuracy record of IMD's long-term forecasts in the past, the answer to this question cannot be wholly in the affirmative. IMD has erred in its projections far more often than it has managed to get them right.

Besides, the credibility of IMD's monsoon predictions has been eroded because these forecasts have repeatedly failed to warn against droughts. This happened in the case of all the three droughts in recent years — in 2002, 2004 and 2009.

This year again, IMD has used the same model for predicting monsoon rainfall (five-parameter statistical ensemble forecasting system), which had failed miserably to foresee the severe drought last year.

Indeed, last year's fiasco stands out as a classic case of IMD's inability to precisely assess the rainfall expected during the monsoon season. IMD went wrong not only in the first stage of the forecast that was issued in April 2009, but also in the "forecast update" issued in June, well after the onset of the monsoon — nor could it foresee the situation accurately even in an unprecedented third attempt to fine-tune its forecast in August when the monsoon had already run through more than half its course. Its first forecast put the rainfall at 96 per cent, the second one at 93 per cent and the third one at 87 per cent, whereas the actual rainfall turned out to be a mere 77 per cent of the normal, resulting in drought in a large part of the country.

Moreover, the record of IMD's long-range monsoon predictions has not been satisfactory enough to inspire any confidence in the reliability of this year's prediction. Its projections have been way off the mark ever since the monsoon prediction model developed by a team of scientists led by the then secretary of the Department of Science and Technology, V R Gowariker, lost its relevance after 1993.

This is evident in the numbers presented in the graph:

IMD's forecast proved correct only for four of the past 16 years (taking the stipulated model error of ±5 per cent as the yardstick for determining accuracy). In other words, on 12 of the 16 occasions, IMD predictions went awry.

The accuracy rate of long-range rainfall predictions works out to a mere 25 per cent. Thus, the failure rate is as high as 75 per cent, which makes the projections unreliable.

In seven of the 12 anomalous forecasts, the difference between the predicted rainfall and the actual one was over 10 per cent, which is way off the mark. In the drought years of 2002 and 2009, this difference was as high as 20 per cent and 19 per cent, respectively.

IMD has erred not only in forecasting droughts or rainfall deficiency, it has been unable to foresee even excess or above-normal rainfall accurately. IMD has forecast rains of over 100 per cent of the normal on only two occasions. Both times, the difference between its predicted and actual rainfall was over 10 per cent. One of these occasions was in 2004, when the IMD forecast put the likely rainfall at 101 per cent of the normal, but the actual was only 81 per cent, causing a severe drought.

Indeed, a reliable prediction of rainfall is vital not only for agriculture but also for various other purposes, including irrigation, reservoir management, flood control, navigation, power generation and the like. What is actually needed is not an idea of the total quantum of rainfall in the whole country during the four-month monsoon season (June-September) but also its distribution in terms of space and time. The advance knowledge about excessive rainfall and heavy downpours is as necessary as it is to know about long breaks in the monsoon activity. IMD, unfortunately, has not been able to meet such demands which are important to different stakeholders. Though it has been issuing forecasts for the country's four broad regions (north-west, north-east, central India and peninsula) as well as for the agriculturally crucial month of July since 2003, these predictions, too, have yet to establish their credibility.

In 2009, for instance, IMD's forecasts for three of the four regions proved erroneous. For the country's key agricultural belt in the north-west, the projected rainfall was 81 per cent (with a stipulated model error as large as ±8 per cent) but the actual rainfall turned out to be only 64 per cent, far beyond the error range. Similarly, in the north-east, the actual rainfall was 73 per cent, against the projection of 92 per cent; and in central India, the rainfall was 80 per cent, against the prediction of 99 per cent. Only the forecast for the peninsula held true with the actual rainfall being 96 per cent, against the projection of 93 per cent.

Indeed, the truth is that IMD's monsoon prediction capability has not improved in several decades despite gradual introduction of new technologies, such as Doppler Weather Radars, meteorological satellites and high-speed data communication and computing systems. Substantial additional investments went into augmenting the data collection, communication and processing of infrastructure, especially after the 2002 drought.

The 2004 drought prompted the government to further revamp and strengthen the forecasting capabilities of IMD through measures like creation of a fairly dense network of satellite-based automatic rain gauge stations for online monitoring; augmentation of the network of upper air observations; boosting infrastructure of S-band Doppler radars for complete coverage of coastal areas; and installation of more C-band storm detection radars, besides, of course, introduction of better super-computing facilities for faster data processing.

The only brief period when IMD generated reliable monsoon forecasts in successive years was between 1988 and 1993. This was the time when the 16-parameter power regression model (commonly called Gowariker model) performed well. Subsequently, even this model began yielding wavering forecasts and ultimately had to be given up after its total failure to visualise the drought in 2002.

It was believed that some of the 16 regional and global parameters related to land, ocean and atmosphere had lost their relevance for the Indian monsoon and needed to be changed. Consequently, IMD changed the models in 2003 and once again in 2007, using a mix of old and some new parameters, but without much success in moving closer to achieving a reasonable degree of perfection in long-range monsoon rainfall prediction.

***************************************

******************************************************************************************

THE ECONOMIC TIMES

EDITORIAL

SOUND MOVE MR SIBAL

The government's move to make education loans cheap and extend their repayment period is welcome . This is a key component of education reform to greatly expand the base of higher education. A National Education Finance Corporation to refinance banks for giving education loans below prime lending rates is also a workable idea. The feasibility of the government lending directly to students through educational institutions , as in the US, needs to be examined.

Human capital is the primary driver of economic growth in this country of young people all of whom need to study, and study longer than they used to. Sure, banks cannot carry the burden of a social objective. The onus is on the government to bear the extra burden of providing cheap loans. Securitisation of student loans and extending sovereign guarantee to the resulting securities would lower the cost of financing. The government can consider subsidising the loans as well.

There is a strong case for extending government funding of education both to students, as interest subsidy and liberal scholarships, and to educational institutions. Students would vie to get enrolled in the best institutions and institutions would vie to enrol students and thus get funds. Such competition is likely to help raise standards.

The cost of education would go up when private, including foreign universities increasingly fill the gap between demand for education and the state-funded supply . So, student loans should be cheap, plentiful and easily available. The requirement of physical collateral for loans above Rs 4 lakh should go. The real collateral is the earning potential of the student being funded. With information technology, especially the unique identity programme, banks can track any borrower and realise loan repayments.

The government can enter into agreements with foreign governments to take cognisance of the student loan repayment obligation of guest workers. Private companies should also expand their endowments and scholarships to build a rich talent pool. Lack of finance should not stop a young Indian from realising her desire to study and enhance her creative potential.

***************************************

THE ECONOMIC TIMES

EDITORIAL

NEW CJI MUST PUSH REFORMS

The change of guard at the Supreme Court that takes place a week from now comes at a time when the judiciary is in the news more than ever before; and not always in the best light either! Starting from the battle over disclosure of judges' assets under the Right to Information Act that saw the apex court try to put itself above the very law of which it is a custodian to the ongoing fracas over Justice P D Dinakaran (the former chief justice of the Karnataka High Court who is under a cloud on allegations of corruption) to the steady increase in the number of cases pending before courts, there is much that needs to be set right with our judicial system.

We have some of the best laws in the world but unfortunately , most exist only on paper as far as the ordinary citizen is concerned.

This must change. A democracy that is not able to deliver speedy justice to its citizens is a democracy only in name. Despite efforts to reduce the backlog through alternate dispute resolution systems, cases still drag on for decades and the apex court is often dragged into what can best be called frivolous litigation. Hopefully the Constitution bench to be set up by the new chief justice to examine whether the apex court should limit itself to constitutional cases and matters of public importance will come up with an answer. And fast!

The problem is that as with labour, the legal sector remains one of the last bastions to be tackled in the ongoing reform process. Yet there are few areas more critical to a country that aspires to be a global economic power than a well-functioning legal system. The good thing is that the judiciary is now under media scrutiny as never before. Tuesday, the Supreme Court directed trebling of the salaries of trial court judges. One major reason for the pile up of cases — more than 30 million at last count — is the large number of vacancies, thanks in part to paltry salaries, in the lower judiciary.

Further, the Thirteenth Finance Commission's grants for court infrastructure should address that deficit. For more than five decades, talk of an All India Judicial Services has remained just talk. The new CJI has his hands full.

***************************************

THE ECONOMIC TIMES

EDITORIAL

DIVIDE & RULE DOESN'T WORK

To think that if a rule installed in 1799 by a curmudgeonly police chief of Paris had really been enforced, the late Yves St Laurent would not have become the saviour and inventor of the new woman. His essentials for timeless chic, after all, comprised the trouser suit and safari and le smoking jacket. Juxtaposed to the current controversy in France over the burqa and headscarf, and even as Paris is in the midst of a major YSL retrospective, it emerges that an arcane rule decrees that any Parisienne who wants to "dress like a man" must seek permission from the authorities.

Whether there is any law that also enjoins men to get clearance before dressing like women is not clear; it would certainly have helped Paris keep tabs on any lurking Scottish supporters of Jacobite claimants to the British throne in the early 1800s!

Though the French constitution now ensures that women and men are regarded as equal — which presumably extends to their sartorial preferences — every single woman in Paris togged out in 'le pantsuit' is still on the wrong side of the law, as indeed are the city's policewomen who are mandated to wear trousers as part of their niforms. For, in 211 years, the rule has been amended just twice.

Once in 1892 it exempted women trouser-wearers as long as they were "holding the reins of a horse" ; in 1909 that courtesy was extended to those on bicycles "or holding it by the handlebars" . That makes the French capital just a shade less oppressive than Khartoum today — where women are routinely rounded up and punished for 'unseemly' behaviour that also includes wearing trousers.

No wonder some French MPs have finally submitted a draft bill to repeal the law, perhaps spurred by the YSL retrospective's mission to canonise the designer as the messiah of the legion of women who now take wearing trousers for granted.

***************************************

THE ECONOMIC TIMES

EDITORIAL

NIFTY MAY FIND STRONG SUPPORT AT 5000 LEVELS

Trading began on an extremely nervous note on Wednesday. A meltdown in global markets due to rising concerns in PIIGS (Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece, and Spain) had the rub-off effect on Indian markets too. Nifty May futures moved into a premium of around six points towards close.

Volumes in futures and options (F&O) surged to Rs 96,186 crore from Rs 76,512 crore on the day. Andhra Bank, Uco Bank, Indian Bank, Patni Computer and Sesa Goa were the top gainers while JP Associates, Jindal Steel, Videocon Industries, Pantaloon and Sterlite were the top losers.

Long build-up of positions was observed in stocks like Patni, Uco Bank, Indian Bank and Sesa Goa. Short build-up was seen in JP Associates, Jindal Steel, Sterlite and GAIL. Major action was seen in Nifty 5000, 4900 and 4800 strike puts, which were seen adding 10.37 lakh, 31.8 lakh and 11.27 lakh shares to open interest.

Nifty 5100 calls were seen adding 16.89 lakh shares to open interest. This suggests that players are looking at 5000 level as a strong support for Nifty in the immediate near term. Increased activity of put-writing in lower strikes (an addition of around 43 lakh shares in 4900 and 4800 strikes) is in line with the same trend.

Nifty futures also saw a build-up of some long positions, adding about 23 lakh shares to OI. If this continues on Thursday, the market may stage a comeback after three days of profit-booking. Nifty's annual volatility is around 24% and is on the lower side, suggesting recovery in near term.

Mayank Shah, CEO, Anagram Capital

***************************************

THE ECONOMIC TIMES

ESSAR STEEL DEFERS BOND SALE ON EURO DEBT CRISIS

SHELLEY SMITH & KATRINA NICHOLAS

HONK KONG: Essar Steel Holdings postponed a sale of dollar-denominated bonds amid rising investor concern over contagion from Europe's debt crisis. Essar "decided to postpone their planned financing," company spokesman Manish Kedia said in a statement. "Investors are nervous and don't want to be taking many risks," Tim Condon, chief Asia economist at ING Groep in Singapore, said by phone. "This doesn't look as serious as it was during the Lehman panic in the fourth quarter of 2008 but it will become more costly for weaker credits to come to market."

Bond risk jumped in Asia after $1.1 trillion was wiped from the value of global stocks on Tuesday on concern a rescue package for Greece will be extended to Spain and Portugal.

The extra yield investors demand to own company debt instead of Treasuries rose 4 basis points to 153, the biggest one-day increase since March 30, 2009, according to Bank of America Merrill Lynch's Global Broad Market Corporate Index. Essar Steel said April 12 it planned to sell senior notes due 2017 to refinance debt and for potential acquisitions. It hired Bank of America, Deutsche Bank, Standard Chartered and UBS to help it raise at least $750 million, a person familiar with the matter said at the time.

"The company believes that it will be much better placed to achieve their desired result in the debt capital markets following the near to medium term ramp up of its production facilities," Mr Kedia said.

Moody's Investors Service gave a provisional B2 rating to the proposed dollar bonds, the fifth-highest speculative-grade ranking. It graded the company one notch higher at B1. "The ratings will be under pressure if the bond issuance fails to proceed in view of Essar Steel's weak liquidity and high refinancing risk," Moody's said.

Essar Group, the parent company of Essar Steel, has the equivalent of $1.9 billion in bonds outstanding, with $1 billion maturing next year, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. Essar Energy, a unit of Essar Group, tumbled 7.3% to 389.5 pence in its first day of trading in London on Tuesday after an initial public offering last week.

Essar Steel is at least the fourth Indian company to stall a bond sale since February. Union Bank of India pulled a dollar-denominated sale April 14 after Bank of India and Bank of Baroda canceled issues in February citing credit-market swings. Bank of Baroda and Bank of India returned a month later, selling $350 million of 5 1/2-year bonds and $500 million of similar-maturity notes respectively.

***************************************

THE ECONOMIC TIMES

EDITORIAL

TRUTH, NOT SPIN, WINS

SHANTANU UDHAV NAGARKATTI

Zen Flesh, Zen Bonestells the story of a blind man living by a temple. Being unable to see their faces, the beggar learns a person's character from the tone of his voice: "When I hear someone congratulate another , I hear an underlying envy and jealousy in their voice. When one commiserates with another's miseries, beneath the words of condolence I hear a secret joy and exultation. "In all my experience, only Zen Master Bankei's voice rings of sincerity," he adds. "When Bankei speaks to express joy, I hear joy and when he expresses sorrow, I hear sorrow."

The Zen Master's sincerity springs from truth, and emotional authenticity, the two vital ingredients of good communication . That explains why so many seem to live on an island pulsing with existential loneliness , despite being surrounded by an ocean of family and friends. Daniel Goleman shows in Vital Lies, Simple Truths that the entire fabric of human life rests on denial, deception, and lies which we believe are essential to our psychological well-being .

The mind's perceptual filter, well fortified by ego defense mechanisms, allows us to see, not reality, but an artificial version — essentially a personal weltanschauung or world-view . Thus, we live in discrete emotional universes, briefly and superficially connecting, whenever we hear a version of our truth.

To understand another person's truth, we need to first step out of our own. Before we speak, we need to not just ascertain the question, but also the nature of the questioner. Hence, all good efforts at connection require precise direction to focused target groups and their edition of the truth.

Without empathy there is absence of a connection , and a complete failure of communication . The saint is able to communicate perfectly with all. He prattles with children, jokes with the young and is sober with the elderly. The wise and the foolish, the devotee and the criminal, man and beast, all bond with the saint. Those who encounter a saint, experience not just consummate rapport, but also receive the divine grace that flows through those who are empty of petty ego and self.

"All beings rest on Me; as pearls strung upon a thread," says Sri Krishna in the Gita. To discover the divine thread which connects us is to realise love. Want of love is at the root of all human unhappiness, and it is the inability to communicate that underlies it.

***************************************

THE ECONOMIC TIMES

EDITORIAL

WHO SHOULD PAY FOR CREDIT RATINGS?

ISSUER-PAYS MODEL ENSURES RATINGS ARE AVAILABLE TO THE ENTIRE MARKET

There has recently been much debate around the business model of rating agencies, specifically the conflicts of interest in the issuer-pays model. It has been suggested that this model — in which the entity issuing the debt pays for the rating — compromises the quality of analysis of rating agencies. A variety of alternative models are possible. Common proposals feature payment by investors, or by some external agency, which could be the government, regulators or stock exchanges. The efficacy of a model can be measured by how well it addresses two goals: ensuring high-quality and accurate ratings, and the widespread availability of ratings to all market participants.

The biggest advantage of the issuer-pays model is that it makes all ratings and rating changes available to the entire market — including retail investors — free of charge. An investor can compare the ratings of a wide array of instruments before making an investment decision, and can continuously evaluate the relative creditworthiness of a wide range of issuers and borrowers. Other benefits of the model include giving rating agencies access to high-quality information that enhances the quality of analysis, and keeping the cost to the system low — currently, the cost of ratings is the smallest component of fund-raising costs.

There are, of course, conflicts in this model, as in any other, and they need to be managed: it is critical to ensure that rating fees are not linked to the rating level, that analytics are firewalled from marketing and fee negotiation activities, and that the rating process is designed to be free of bias by incorporating multiple perspectives and views.

Would a model of investors paying for ratings work better? Ratings would then be available only to investors who could pay for them — the biggest disadvantage of this system would be to take ratings out of the public domain. Smaller investors stand to lose the most, since they cannot afford to commission a ratings exercise. The investor-pays model creates an inherent bias towards credit rating agencies giving lower-than-warranted ratings, so that investors would get a higher yield. And pressures from investors to avoid rating downgrades would increase considerably, since downgrades result in mark-to-market losses on rated securities.

What about a government- or regulator-pays model? This model would avoid bias, but at the cost of moral hazard: rating opinions paid for with public money may be seen as endorsed by government or regulators. Moreover, since empanelled credit rating agencies would be guaranteed business, the model could lead to complacency and compromise analytical rigour and excellence. Similar questions arise with another suggested solution, that of exchanges sponsoring ratings.

Clearly, each model has its pros and cons; the key lies in how well conflicts are managed. In India the issuer-pays model has worked well, aided by a strong regulatory framework in place since 1999. This framework has helped manage the conflicts of interest in the model, leading to ratings that have hugely benefited the market as a whole.

EXPLORE HYBRID OPTIONS; USER-PAYS MODEL IS DIFFICULT TO IMPLEMENT

The debate over who should pay for the credit rating of financial instruments intensified after the US subprime mortgage crisis where rating agencies seemingly underestimated credit risk and failed to proactively adjust the ratings.

The issuer-pays model clearly has shortcomings. When the credit rating agency is paid by the issuers, the issuers can 'shop around' for better rating with different rating agencies and, so, may have some leverage over the final rating. The rating agencies, on their part, could have a conflict of interest and may alter their ratings in favour of the issuers in order to keep the relationship. Given this, a section of financial market observes that this model fundamentally compromises the objectivity of the rating process that will be solved by making a transition to the user-pays model. This change, although dramatic, would not be unprecedented. However, even the user-pays model has similar 'conflict of interest' limitations, since investors who are paying for the rating could prefer lower ratings (and thus higher yields) for newly-issued bonds.

Further, the user-pays model is difficult to implement. Investors in markets like India are unlikely to be willing to pay the rating subscription fees necessary to generate a comparable revenue stream. As a result, this could probably culminate into substantially fewer offerings getting rated. This would be detrimental to smaller issuers. It would also marginalise small investors who may not be able to afford to pay the rating fees upfront, which will not be the case in the issuer-pays model.

An advantage of the issuer-pays model is the rapid dissemination of ratings to the market, which is useful in reducing information asymmetry and facilitating better price discovery of corporate bonds. In case of user-pays model, there may be a substantial lag in such dissemination.

Having said that, there may be a need to explore a hybrid solution whereby an issuer would pay the rating agency for the first rating and, subsequently, if an investor wants to have a second opinion from another rating agency, she will pay for it. Another arrangement that may be explored is the feasibility of having a hybrid rating agency that would be owned and supervised by a consortium of institutional investors. The exchange-pays model can also be considered whereby the exchanges will pay for the ratings and recover the cost through an additional trading fee.

It is indeed difficult and complex to arrive at a consensus on which model to use. However, one thing is clear: there is a need for greater transparency and accountability and improving disclosure standards uniformly across rating agencies. There is also a need to increase the degree of competition in the industry and develop adequate safeguards to avoid conflicts of interest.

On balance, we can probably continue with the current issuer-pays model, particularly in light of the new Sebi regulation that comprehensively addresses the above-mentioned issues of transparency, disclosures and conflict management, and fosters best practices.

***************************************

THE ECONOMIC TIMES

EDITORIAL

EXPLORE HYBRID OPTIONS; USER-PAYS MODEL IS DIFFICULT TO IMPLEMENT

Given this, a section of financial market observes that this model fundamentally compromises the objectivity of the rating process that will be solved by making a transition to the user-pays model. This change, although dramatic, would not be unprecedented. However, even the user-pays model has similar 'conflict of interest' limitations, since investors who are paying for the rating could prefer lower ratings (and thus higher yields) for newly-issued bonds.

Further, the user-pays model is difficult to implement. Investors in markets like India are unlikely to be willing to pay the rating subscription fees necessary to generate a comparable revenue stream. As a result, this could probably culminate into substantially fewer offerings getting rated. This would be detrimental to smaller issuers. It would also marginalise small investors who may not be able to afford to pay the rating fees upfront, which will not be the case in the issuer-pays model.

there is a need for greater transparency and accountability and improving disclosure standards uniformly across rating agencies. There is also a need to increase the degree of competition in the industry and develop adequate safeguards to avoid conflicts of interest.

***************************************

THE ECONOMIC TIMES

EDITORIAL

ISSUER-PAYS MODEL ENSURES RATINGS ARE AVAILABLE TO THE ENTIRE MARKET

***************************************

THE ECONOMIC TIMES

EDITORIAL

NO, HOW CAN IPL VALUATIONS DROP?

NO : Will Brand IPL suffer serious devaluation? I ask myself what a silly question is this considering that we are a cricket-crazy nation; we not only enjoy watching our team perform but also participate and hotly debate every activity around cricket from team selection to shot selection, from asking about pitch conditions to mastering asking rates and so on. The only thing we are unforgiving about is when the Indian team loses, which leads us to collective depression.

It may be inopportune to mention this but one should recall the early exit of the Indian team at the 2007 World Cup in West Indies. While there was general hysteria when we lost to Bangladesh, advertisers and agencies such as ours suffered a double whammy as viewership ratings dropped dramatically and we did not get returns for the advertising investments made. Ever since, whenever we buy advertising on cricket there is always a lurking doubt on the performance of the Indian team as we have to commit high ad rates and outlays considering the high acquisition costs for cricket today.

Herein lies the beauty of IPL, which ring fences advertisers and agencies. IPL takes away the pressure from viewers to ask for an Indian victory. We have our own team favourites (it is a different matter that we may protect our psyche from damage by making a list of 3 or 4 favourites) but in the end we are willing to celebrate the winner. This was evident in the recently concluded IPL when at picturesque Dharamsala, the home crowd was supporting Kings 11 but as it dawned that Dhoni was taking the game away, there was much jubilation every time he hit a six.

How can the current controversy take away from what happened on the field, the wonderful sixes Yusuf Pathan hit, the brilliant fielding of David Warner, the economical spin bowling of Pragyan Ojha and so on. The results speak for themselves – IPL 1,2 and 3 have delivered viewership ratings of 4plus irrespective of who the winner is. Reach of audiences have surpassed any soap opera in recent times. Stadiums have been full all thru, marketing and finance people love such consistent performance – How can valuations drop?

Shashi Sinha, CEO, Lodestar UM

***************************************

THE ECONOMIC TIMES

EDITORIAL

IPL IS LIKELY TO BE TONED DOWN

YES : Optimism needs no logic. A few weeks before markets crashed in 2008, experts were talking about the index touching 25,000-mark. Satyam won a slew of awards for corporate governance months before the scandal broke.

Valuations reached ridiculous figures before the dotcom euphoria evaporated. Confidence in a brand or enterprise follows the curve of past experience and makes it difficult for us to anticipate an imminent and drastic fall.

In a sane world, we would be very worried about the future of the IPL. While consumer interest continues to hold firm, the business end is shrouded by uncertainties of many kinds. The entire system is under investigation, not just for tax irregularities but for match-fixing as well. The bidding process is under a cloud as is the ownership structure. Nobody is making any money of a significant kind and the entire model is extremely expensive. Television ratings are good, but not growing dramatically while advertising costs are. The addition of two new teams will stretch the tournament to a point where sustaining interest will begin to become a challenge. Add to this the perpetual fear of a black swan event, a terrorist attack or a pullout by foreign players over security fears and you have a picture that is far from re-assuring.

While the IPL consumer brand is unlikely to get dented in a hurry, valuations which are based on expectations about the future are driven much more by sentiment. Valuations exaggerate both optimism and anxiety and there is more than enough reason to be very very nervous. The immunity enjoyed by the IPL so far comes from the fact the reasons to want to be a part of the show had as much to do with making money as with being on TV all the time and hobnobbing with celebrities. Under the new dispensation, that side of the IPL is likely to be toned down. Not good news for valuations.

Santosh Desai, Managing director, Future Brands

***************************************

THE ECONOMIC TIMES

EDITORIAL

FOOD SECURITY NOT BY FOOD ALONE

T K ARUN

Politics runs the risk of being reduced to the art of the passable — it has to be approved by the legislature, by the omniscient television anchors, by sulking editorial writers forced to cede ground to the TV anchors, and, most crucially , by Sonia Gandhi. The food security Bill was drafted for Ms Gandhi's favour and has been shafted by her displeasure.

Food security, hostage, in any case, to the attention deficit of our minister for food and sugar and cricket and Maharashtra politicking, is now all gummed up in a wrangle over how many people should be covered, how many should be left out and how many times the empowered group of ministers should defer their meeting on the subject.

What all this bustle over the bill misses out is the simple fact that food security is not achieved primarily by distribution of food. The rural employment guarantee scheme is about food security — it offers 100 days of employment so that people do not go hungry in those spells when regular work, primarily related to raising crops, is not available. The entire Bharat Nirman programme, the rural roads programme, the urban renewal mission, the skills mission , the grand national highway building schemes, all generate jobs and incomes and thus enhance food security.

Does this mean that there is no need to focus specifically on access to food, that official energy should be expended on growth? Not quite. In a country like India where millions of people live on the margins of subsistence , guaranteed access to food is vital. However, any programme to do this must not assume it to be its solitary burden to feed the poor of the land, it must take into account the many government programmes that concurrently work for the same goal.

Let's take, say, Kumti Majhi, a Kondh tribal, who leads a precarious existence collecting forest produce. He can afford food if his income is supplemented, say, through an employment guarantee scheme. Equally , he can afford food if the food itself is made available at a subsidised price. Should he be given both an income supplement and subsidised food?

Or should that extra money going to him be used to build an all-weather road from his hamlet to the nearest road? Suppose a bauxite mining project comes along and takes away the land off which Kumti lives, and the colour of his water source turns an angry red, the shade of the sores that now erupt on his body. Where will he turn for food security?

The point is that food security does not, cannot exist in isolation. It is a function of a person's location in the
overall economic and political structure of society. Unless that environment turns benign, piecemeal efforts at easing the pressure on some part of the life of the poor will fail to particularly benefit the poor. Turning that environment benign is a function of politics, not of any particular law.

Enhancing incomes of the rural poor and cheapening the supply of food come together in raising farm output, essential to meet the rising demand for food across the world, not just for conversion into fuel but also to feed the changed food preference of people with improving living standards.

Increasing farm output is a huge challenge that will call for enormous resources, both financial and policy. Paucity of political will to forge and implement reasonable compensation/rehabilitation policies for people displaced by projects has, in combination with steady scaling back of outlays on major irrigation, created a looming water crisis, with groundwater near exhaustion in most places. For farm output to go up, there has to be sizeable investment in surface water management, meaning dams, reservoirs, canals and displacement.

The YSR government of Andhra Pradesh was effective because it stepped up irrigation investment significantly. Raising food output will call for not only augmented water supply but also better know-how , embodied in hybrid or genetically modified plant varieties and high-tech inputs, and in improved crop husbandry practices.

These cannot be absorbed by the current scattered structure of farming in India : farmers would need to pool their resources to form farmer companies or cooperatives to secure the organisational form required to carry out modern agriculture . Modern farming is capital intensive . And would not be able to accommodate large-scale underemployment as traditional farming does. A lot of the surplus labour would be absorbed by fastgrowing urbanisation.

If the rest are not to become polarised into a handful of rich peasants whose landholdings steadily grow and a disgruntled landless, jobless mass, a great deal of organisational innovation is called for. That too is part of food security. In fact, of internal security. The only way to overcome the bureaucrat's tendency to compartmentalise, and hold on to the holistic picture, is for politics to always be in command. Will someone please approve?

***************************************

THE ECONOMIC TIMES

EDITORIAL

SIMPLIFIED OPTIONS LED TO FINANCIAL CRISIS

JAIDEEP MISHRA

Now that there is relative stability following the global financial crisis of 2008, the mavens have been thinking loud and analysing what exactly went wrong. The Institute for New Economic Thinking held its inaugural conference last month at the University of Cambridge, where during the Great Depression of the 1930s, Keynes had advised loose fiscal policy (read stepped up government spending) to prevent a general collapse of nominal demand.

Of late, Keynesian policy has, once again, helped stabilise the global economy. But as a paper by Adair Turner, Chair of the Financial Services Authority in the UK, mentions, the key lesson of the financial crisis is that public policy ought not to be constrained by 'an over-simplified version of one strain in economic thinking'. Namely, the hypothesis that capital markets are inherently efficient and self-correcting, and the idea or doctrine rather that market completion via financial innovation — including dodgy mortgage-backed securities in the US — was delivering both economic efficiency and stability.

The paper begins by reiterating that in the pre-crisis years, experts did express misgivings about structured finance products — Prof Raghuram Rajan used the phrase 'cataclysmic meltdown' in a 2005 paper — but the dominant conventional wisdom was used to dismiss the concerns. It emphasises that economics, as a discipline, has not been monolithic.

It has, for instance, explored real world complexities like information asymmetry, transaction costs and the fact that markets can settle far from an efficient equilibrium. And further that there can be multiple, fragile equilibria, with market players much prone to behavioural proclivities and other irrational tendencies. But despite such realistic modelling and other developments, the paper opines that policymakers, regulators and whole governments can and do tend to 'gravitate to simplified versions of the dominant beliefs of economists'.

As an illustration, the paper quotes from the IMF's Global Financial Stability Review of April 2006 — only 18 months before the crisis broke — 'There is a growing recognition that the dispersion of credit risks to a broader and more diverse group of investors... has helped make the banking and wider financial system more resilient'! It adds that risk managers in banks applied the techniques of probability theory to notions of 'value at risk', never mind that samples of recent past events may not carry strong inferences for the probability distribution of future events. Note that the large-scale issue of securities — linked to mortgage payments — was a rather recent phenomenon in the US, that really took off in the 2000s. Also, as house prices generally fell there, for the first time in decades, it led to huge mortgage defaults given the practice of 'non-recourse' funding or liability limited to the property per se.

The paper elucidates that regulation and intervention, including information disclosure requirements to overcome asymmetries of information between businesses and consumers, would increase market transparency. But the fact remains that the belief system of market regulators and financial policymakers in most 'financially-advanced centres' tended to preclude the possibility that market participants might indulge in 'rent extraction and financial instability', bereft of social and economic benefit. In the apparent triumph of the notions of financial deregulation and market completion, both vested interests and ideology did play a game-changing role. What then is the way ahead?

What's averred is that while 'good economics can help address specific problems and avoid specific risks', the 'apparently certain, simple and complete answers' proffered in the pre-crisis years will no longer do. What's called for is 'discretionary through-the-cycle' tools and policies to offset the risks of self-reinforcing credit and asset price cycles. Also, note that credit default swap spreads — which indicate likelihood of payment default — of major banks actually fell and touched historic lows in the run up to the crisis. So, market price information may not be reliable, nor speculation always beneficial. It suggests scope for financial transaction taxes and short-term controls on capital flows, concludes the paper.

(Economics, conventional wisdom and public policy, INET paper, King's College, Cambridge)

***************************************

THE ECONOMIC TIMES

EDITORIAL

'INDIA IS A PERFECT MATCH FOR EUROPE'S CAPITAL POOLS'

SUDESHNA SEN

LONDON: Xavier Rolet, CEO of the London Stock Exchange, isn't your usual kind of banker. He's journeyed to the South Pole, driven in gruelling rallies, is a defence and geopolitical expert, keeps bees, and speaks with as much authority about Africa as he does about financial regulation.

But then, these are not ordinary times for the London Stock Exchange (LSE). Mr Rolet took over from Dame Clara Furse in 2009. While Dame Clara's tenure was marked by repeated takeover bids for the premier exchange, Frenchman Xavier has a much more basic job —bringing nervous issuers and investors back to the exchange. "Running an exchange, unfortunately, leaves little time for other activities," he says, a bit regretfully.

Considering that his previous jobs included heading Lehman Brothers Europe, and he's worked his way up from a poor inner city childhood to go through half a dozen global investment banks, that says a lot about his current job. Just after Essar Energy managed the largest flotation on the LSE since 2007, Mr Rolet is on his first trip to India — "not personally, but as LSE CEO" — to meet not only regulators and policy-makers, but also Indian corporates he wants to lure to the London Stock Exchange.

The London Stock Exchange had in total £82.5 billion in capital raised, mostly rights and restructuring, and has some 25 Indian companies in its main market and its junior market, AIMS. "Europe has significant pools of capital with ageing populations. It has low growth, and plenty of capital. India has lots of growth and needs capital. It's a perfect match," he says.

At the same time, he's more than aware of the rising power of Asian exchanges like in Hong Kong. "If you want capital on any terms, there are capital bubbles available. If you're looking for expertise, sophisticated investors plus a possible supply for future rounds of raising capital, then the LSE is the best place. Especially when you've got a successful business model, a large internal presence and you want to take your business model overseas," he says. He's also quick to point out that for strategic businesses like utilities, LSE investors aren't bringing in a foreign government's money — given that a bulk of Hong Kong's investors are from China. "London is totally commercial," he says.

What about LSE's own business model? Mr Rolet believes that in future, when regulatory frameworks permit, a "small number of exchanges can go international, with distribution across the US, Europe, Asia and Africa connecting international financial centres and providing a global trading platform".

Before all that though, the major global job is that of overhauling the regulatory framework of the global financial system. "Regulators all over the world are discussing the shape of things to come, they're comparing notes," he adds. Mr Rolet's verdict is that it may be a long, slow process, but he believes that Indian regulators are closely monitoring the process. And it will lead to an opening up of the financial sector in India. "If that's too optimistic, it's okay, I've been accused of optimism before," he says.

***************************************

THE ECONOMIC TIMES

EDITORIAL

'MORE TURMOIL IN GLOBAL FINANCIAL MARKETS'

JIM ROGERS ANDY MUKHERJEE

Commodities guru Jim Rogers turns Oracle of Doom as he predicts more turmoil in global financial markets. In an exclusive interview with ET NOW's Andy Mukherjee, Mr Rogers predicts currency crises, more national bankruptcies — and he's shorting emerging markets.

You have been warning us for quite sometime about the currency crisis. Is that what is finally upon us?
The currency crisis has been going on for a while. It did not start this week. It started maybe with Iceland or many other countries that have been having problems. The currency crisis is going to get worse. Over the next year or two, we are going to see more, so prepare yourself.

Do you think the Eurozone is going to shrink because of what we are witnessing in Portugal, Greece and Spain?
Eventually the euro, unfortunately, is going to break up because it keeps weakening itself from within. If they would let Greece go bankrupt, for instance, it would strengthen the euro, it would strengthen the Eurozone because then people would know you have to maintain a sound economy. You have to maintain a sound currency and everybody would jump in and buy the euro, I would also buy more if that would be the case. Weakening from within and continuing to lend money and paper over problems is not a solution for a sound currency. I do own the euro, but I do not think this is the proper approach.

We are also seeing the impact of the crisis on most commodity markets. Do you think that this is just temporary and commodity is still the place for investors to be?

Yes, gold is making all-time highs in some currencies. So some currencies are doing well. But if the world economy gets better, then obviously commodities are going to do better because the world will use more and there are shortages developing. But let's assume the worst. Let's assume world economies do not get better, then I would rather be in commodities in most things because governments are going to print even more money, and whenever you have printed money throughout history, it has led to higher prices for real goods whether it is silver or natural gas. So, I would rather own commodities than most things in the world in the next two or three years.

Looking at the Rogers International Commodities Index, I find that rubber has done exceptionally well this year and so has lumber. What kind of commodities do you like at the moment for the long term?
I prefer agriculture just because it has not moved up as much. Metals have boomed in the past 15-18 months, energy is up a lot in the last 15 or 18 months. Agriculture for the most part is still very depressed. Yes, you are right, rubber has done well, some things have done well but for the most part, agricultural products are still very depressed including sugar. Sugar went up a lot in the past couple of years but it is still very depressed compared to its all-time high.

It is a known fact that global markets are really swayed by movements across the globe. Do you expect to see any cataclysmic events in 2010 or do you think it is going to be a largely benign kind of year ?
I have no idea. There will be more currency crises, more currency turmoil over the next year or two or three. We have huge imbalances. All the credit to nations in the world or in Asia and all the debt — you know who the debtors are and you know where they are. Those imbalances have not been sorted out yet. Throughout history, most imbalances like this have been sorted out in the currency markets or once upon a time when we were on the gold exchange through the gold markets and so we have more problems coming.

You may well see some more countries going bankrupt in this period of time because these imbalances still exist. I would be careful if I were you. I have started selling short in the last month or so. I have had virtually no shorts. In fact, I have had no shorts since the fall of 2008 but in the last month or so, I started adding to my short positions for the first time in 18 months.

What are you shorting?

I am shorting a stock market index in the US, I am shorting an emerging market index and I am shorting one of the large western international financial institutions. It is an emerging market index; it is not a specific country. It is an index of many emerging markets and that is mainly because the emerging markets have grown the most during the past few months of this big recovery. So that is where some of the excesses are developing. As for the large western bank, it is a bank which people think is extremely sound. If I am right, there are going to be more currency problems and more turmoil in the markets, it will have to come down.

Are you bearish on all Asian equity markets or are there any pockets of value that you like?
I am not buying any stock markets anywhere in the world. I have not bought any stock markets for the past 18 months. I have been playing the world economy through the commodity markets for those 18 months and the currency markets. And as I said, now I am starting to sell short but I have nothing to do with any Asian market. I have not bought any market anywhere because I have been leery of this big rally in the stock market. It has been caused by a lot of money being pumped into the world economy. If the world economy gets better, commodities will do well and they have. If the world economy does not get better, commodity is going to be a better place to be than stocks, all over the world, not just Asia.

You said you are shorting western financial institutions. Now if I am not wrong, you were doing the same thing in the second half of 2008 and we saw what happened back then. Are you concerned or worried that something like that is going to happen again? Do you think another financial crisis is going to be upon us when investors are just going to get scared about banks?

Well, I was short on major western financial institutions in 2008, I am delighted and surprised you remember but I was. Then there were great excesses in the western financial community. We do not have that kind of excess now. We have excesses but nothing like we did then. I am just shorting this major western financial institution because it's very highly priced and if the markets are going to consolidate, it will be one of the first to get hit because as there will be consolidation because of currency turmoil and financial market turmoil. I do not see a bubble in finance like we had two or three years ago. I only see two bubbles in the world, one is the Chinese urban to real estate and the other is the United States' government bond market.

The latest data indicates that EPFR funds have been pulling out of the emerging markets. But if China does slow down over the next six months and Europe comes out relatively unharmed, what do you think will happen to fund flows to emerging markets over the next six months?

Well, I am not quite sure that you would see emerging markets slowing down if Europe did. If Europe and America slow down, that will affect markets everywhere. Europe and America, for instance, are over 10 times as big as the Chinese market. People talk about China, people talk about India, but these are very small markets or economies compared to the major economies in the West and in Japan, so if the West slows down, of course, it is going to affect everybody.

I do not see the emerging markets slowing down and the West reviving because the West is so very big and it needs most emerging markets. Most emerging markets are commodity-based economies and if the world economy does well, the commodities are going to do okay, so I do not see the emerging markets slowing down if the West continues to revive. I started selling short in emerging market index but that's just because the emerging markets were the ones which went up the most in the past few months.

***************************************

THE ECONOMIC TIMES

EDITORIAL

CONNECT WITH USERS NOT EASY TO REPLICATE: SHIVANI HEGDE, NESTLE

Distribution-led growth, new variants and aggressive advertising have kept Nestle India's iconic brand, Maggi, dominate the instant noodle market with more than 90% share. But now Maggi is bracing for its toughest challenge in 25 years with rivals GlaxoSmithKline, Hindustan Unilever and ITC entering the field by extending Horlicks, Knorr and Sunfeast brands to instant noodles category. While Horlicks Smoodles and Knorr Soupy Noodles are already in market, ITC is widely speculated to be entering the field with Sunfeast. Nestle India's general manager (foods), Shivani Hegde, however, feels competition will only benefit Maggi as they will help the market grow. In an interview with Ratna Bhushan, she talks about the potential at the bottom-of-the-pyramid market and building further on the brand's DNA. Excerpts:

Nestle's culinary division has only one brand–Maggi–though the umbrella has separate categories under it. Isn't that overdependence on one brand?

Generations have grown up with Maggi and it has established a connect with consumers. The brand not only uses Nestle's global R&D and expertise, it keeps innovating and renovating to provide taste and health. This is the basic DNA of Maggi. The brand is the natural umbrella for all products that carry its DNA. We are happy to build further on that.

Maggi noodles is facing its first big threat in India with a slew of competitors—Hindustan Unilever, GlaxoSmithKline and ITC. How are you dealing with the competition?

We are going to watch this with interest. Maggi has worked hard to create and grow the market in the past 25 years, and what it has achieved is not easy. It's a tough job. The connect with the consumer is a very strong asset that is not easy to replicate. It is natural that newer brands will want to enter the market now. Our objective is to bake a bigger cake and we are fine if this market activity helps in doing that. We have our own strategies to build consumer trust further.

There is a speculation that Maggi has doubled ad spends to protect its market shares. Is it true?

This is very interesting speculation! If we have managed to give the impression of doubling of ad spends, it should indicate that our ad campaigns have been impactful. For example, the 'me and meri Maggi' campaign made the consumer the hero of our advertising. Good advertising translates the relationship between the product and consumer into something the consumer connects with. We did this with the noodles campaign. Now we are doing it with sauces as we complete 25 years of the product.

What has the response been to the bottom-of-pyramid brands you introduced some months back? And what are you doing to tap potential in the rural markets?

Growth will come from both urban and rural markets. It's a question of developing the right products and be willing to take them where they are needed. In December/January, we launched two fortified concepts – rasile chow and masala-ae-magic. These will be useful across kitchens, especially so for the lower income families who are unable to afford meals that can give them balanced nutrition. The initial feedback is good.

Any variants of Maggi that didn't work? What about seasonings and the rice-based variants?

The size of the segments differ and, therefore, it would be wrong to compare them. However, virtually every product in the portfolio is a dominant player in its segment. Even when you talk of products that did not work, it is a relative comparison. If we have withdrawn a product, it is because the volumes were not up to our expectation, even though that volume may have been a good achievement. We prefer to channelise our resources where they are most effective.

What changes is Nestle making to comply with the new food law?

We comply with all food laws and believe in responsible advertising. We will naturally continue to do so in the future as well.

***************************************

******************************************************************************************

DECCAN CHRONICAL

EDITORIAL

WILL NY PLOT MAKE US SHED BLINKERS?

Two recent developments tend to confirm India's fears that jihadi outfits in Pakistan, Afghanistan or elsewhere, can be mobilised to launch attacks outside their indigenous area of operation, whether or not they are labelled al Qaeda adjuncts. At any rate, their ideological moorings prepare them for such a task. In Indian understanding the jihadist groups in the subcontinent are intermeshing entities subserving the same broad aims, and are often created by the same pool of actors, among which Pakistan's intelligence community is the most prominent. Take the case of Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) chief Hakimullah Mehsood, who was presumed killed by the United States and Pakistan after an American missile strike in Waziristan last January, but has clearly recovered from his injuries and is now alive and well. But that's the least of it. In two recent videos Hakimullah has threatened to take on the Americans — not in Pakistan or Afghanistan, but in the American homeland. It is too early to say if the US will dismiss this as bluster or adopt the more reasonable (and sensible) course of adjusting its perspectives on the meaning of jihadism — and the terrorism flowing from it — in many Muslim lands, including the ones that America has invaded. Since the al Qaeda phenomenon came to notice after September 11, 2001, the established wisdom in the US and the West more generally — and this appeared to "infect" other Europeans, notably the Russians (who presumably still have a lot of stake in what eventually happens in Afghanistan and the neighbouring tribal areas of Pakistan) — has been that the West need be watchful only against al Qaeda and not the home-grown terror outfits espousing jihad in various societies which have surfaced in response to so-called local grievances. It is for this reason that the US does not treat the Afghan Taliban or the TTP on the same footing as al Qaeda, though its forces battle the former when they have to, or when Western troops believe the local guerrilla groups have provided active assistance to al Qaeda against Western military forces. As for the Lashkar-e-Tayyaba, which focuses primarily on terrorist assaults against India, the US forces leave it alone, although Lashkar frequently teams up with the TTP and the Afghan Taliban to mount operations. It can only be hoped that the resurfacing of Hakimullah and the anti-US warnings he has sounded will become a factor leading to course correction in US thinking. Not so long ago, the Pakistan military — under Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani — had counted the TTP as a "patriotic" Pakistani outfit that could be an "asset" to be used against India. This country had protested, but Washington merely heard the exchange and kept its counsel. The related point of recent interest is the attempted car bombing in New York's Times Square by Faisal Shahzad, an American citizen of Pakistani origin. It appears this terrorist had trained with the TTP for five months and returned to his adopted country to carry out the task assigned to him. Mr Shahzad comes from a Pakistani military family of privilege. There must be countless others like him in the US and in Europe. That enhances the pool of talent that outfits like the TTP (or indeed Lashkar, as the case of David Headley demonstrates) can draw upon.

***************************************

DECCAN CHRONICAL

EDITORIAL

THE NEW JUNGLE WAR

BY S.K. SINHA

The massacre of 76 CRPF personnel at Dantewada sent shock waves through India, just as the Pakistan-launched terrorist attack on Mumbai on 26/11 had done. The latter led to a change of guard in the home ministry. The home minister, Mr P. Chidambaram, injected dynamism into a somnolent ministry. One appreciated his earnestness and the various measures he initiated. For several years, the Prime Minister, Dr Manmohan Singh, has been saying that Maoist terrorism is the biggest threat to the nation, but little has been done to deal with it. Dantewada has highlighted gaping weaknesses. When the nation faces a grave threat to its survival, it is imperative to put up a united front. During the Kargil War, it was distressing that the then Opposition had put up an inflated rubber bus turned upside down to ridicule the then Prime Minister's attempt at bus diplomacy. It is gratifying that after Dantewada the Opposition closed ranks in support of the home minister. This is as it should be.

- The author, a retired lieutenant-general, was Vice-Chief of Army Staff and has served as governor of Assam

***************************************

DECCAN CHRONICAL

EDITORIAL

MR OBAMA, DON'T LET US GET LEFT BEHIND

BY THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN

There is only one meaningful response to the horrific oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico and that is for America to stop messing around when it comes to designing its energy and environmental future. The only meaningful response to this man-made disaster is a man-made energy bill that would finally put in place an American clean-energy infrastructure that would set our country on a real, long-term path to ending our addiction to oil.

That is so obviously the right thing for our environment, the right thing for our national security, the right thing for our economic security and the right thing to promote innovation. But it means that we have to stop messing around with idiotic "drill, baby, drill" nostrums, feel-good Earth Day concerts and the paralysing notion that the American people are not prepared to do anything serious to change our energy mix.

This oil spill is to the environment what the subprime mortgage mess was to the markets — both a wake-up call and an opportunity to galvanise a constituency for radical change that overcomes the powerful lobbies and vested interests that want to keep us addicted to oil.

If the US President, Mr Barack Obama, wants to seize this moment, it is there for the taking. We have one of the worst environmental disasters in American history on our hands. We have a public deeply troubled by what they've seen already — and they've probably seen only the first reel of this gulf horror show. And we have a bipartisan climate/energy/jobs bill ready to be introduced in the Senate — produced by Senators John Kerry, Joe Lieberman and Lindsey Graham — that would set a price on carbon and begin to shift us to a system of cleaner fuels, greater energy efficiency and unlock an avalanche of private capital to the clean energy market.

American industry is ready to act and is basically saying to Washington: "Every major country in the world, starting with China, is putting in clear, long-term market rules to stimulate clean energy — except America. Just give us some clear rules, and we'll do the rest".

The Kerry-Lieberman-Graham Bill is an important step in that direction. It is far from perfect. It includes support for more off-shore drilling, nuclear power and concessions to coal companies. In light of the spill, we need to make this bill better. At a minimum, we need much tighter safeguards on offshore drilling. There is going to be a lot of pressure to go even further, but we need to remember that even if we halted all offshore drilling, all we would be doing is moving the production to other areas outside the US, probably with even weaker environmental laws.

Somehow a compromise has to be found to move forward on this bill — or one like it. But even before the gulf oil spill, this bill was in limbo because the White House and Senate Democrats broke a promise to Senator Graham, the lone Republican supporting this effort, not to introduce a controversial immigration bill before energy. At the same time, President Obama has kept his support low-key, fearing that if he loudly endorses a price on carbon, Republicans will be screaming "carbon tax" and "gasoline tax" in the 2010 midterm elections.

Bottom line: This bill has no chance to pass unless President Obama gets behind it with all his power, mobilises the public and rounds up the votes. He has to lead from the front, not the rear. Responding to this oil spill could well become the most important leadership test of the Obama presidency. The President has always had the right instincts on energy, but he is going to have to decide just how much he wants to rise to this occasion — whether to generate just an emergency response that over months ends the spill or a systemic response that over time ends our addiction. Needless to say, it would be a lot easier for the President to lead if more than one Republican in the Senate was ready to lift a finger to help him.

Our dependence on crude oil is not just a national-security or climate problem. Some 40 per cent of America's fish catch comes out of the gulf, whose states also depend heavily on coastal tourism. In addition, the Chandeleur Islands off the Louisiana coast are part of the Breton National Wildlife Refuge. It was created by Teddy Roosevelt and is one of our richest cornucopias of biodiversity.

As the energy consultant David Rothkopf likes to say, sometimes a problem reaches a point of acuity where there are just two choices left: bold action or permanent crisis. This is such a moment for our energy system and environment. If we settle for just an incremental response to this crisis — a "Hey, that's our democracy. What more can you expect?" — we'll be sorry. You can't fool Mother Nature. She knows when we're just messing around. Mother Nature operates by her own iron laws. And if we violate them, there is no lobby or big donor to get us off the hook. No, what's gone will be gone.

***************************************

DECCAN CHRONICAL

EDITORIAL

PLAYING HARDBALL

MOVE WILL BRING ACCOUNTABILITY

MILKHA SINGH

The tournament which was a test event for the Commonwealth Games (CWG) shows that we need not just good athletes but also good administrators and better sports infrastructure.

(As told to Rohit Bhardwaj)

— Milkha Singh, who has represented India at the Olympics, is a legendary athlete

Why single us out for fixed tenures?

Vijay Kumar Malhotra

I recall that after being elected for the third successive term in 1986, the government issued a notice that I cannot remain president for so long. I then went to court, which, after investigating our election process, gave the verdict in my favour and asked the government to frame laws regarding sports bodies. But the government was helpless as in the Indian Constitution sports is in the state list and not the concurrent list. So their attempts to amend the rules failed.

Also, when there is no limit on how many times one gets elected to the Lok Sabha or Rajya Sabha, or for that matter to any political position in any country, how can this rule apply to us? Atal Behari Vajpayee and Babu Jagjivan Ram were elected to Parliament for at least five terms.

As far as archery is concerned, the grants that we get for organising junior, sub-junior and national championships are respectively two, four and six lakhs — this is pretty less compared to other countries.

There are no provisions in the Registration of Societies Act or in the International Olympic Charter that support the government's directive. So the government should let the NSFs function smoothly, for better organisation of the Commonwealth Games which is just round the corner.

— Vijay Kumar Malhotra, BJP leader and Archery Association of India president

***************************************

DECCAN CHRONICAL

EDITORIAL

THE LIMITS OF POLICY

BY DAVID BROOKS

Roughly a century ago, many Swedes immigrated to America. They've done very well here. Only about 6.7 per cent of Swedish-Americans live in poverty. Also a century ago, many Swedes decided to remain in Sweden. They've done well there, too. When two economists calculated Swedish poverty rates according to the American standard, they found that 6.7 per cent of the Swedes in Sweden were living in poverty.

In other words, you had two groups with similar historical backgrounds living in entirely different political systems, and the poverty outcomes were the same.

A similar pattern applies to healthcare. In 1950, Swedes lived an average of 2.6 years longer than Americans. Over the next half-century, Sweden and the US diverged politically. Sweden built a large welfare state with a national health service, while the US did not. The result? There was basically no change in the life expectancy gap. Swedes now live 2.7 years longer.

Again, huge policy differences. Not huge outcome differences.

This is not to say that policy choices are meaningless. But we should be realistic about them. The influence of politics and policy is usually swamped by the influence of culture, ethnicity, psychology and a dozen other factors.

Last week, the American Human Development Project came out with its "A Century Apart" survey of life in the United States. As you'd expect, ethnicity correlates to huge differences in how people live. Nationally, 50 per cent of Asian-American adults have a college degree, compared with 31 per cent of whites, 17 per cent of African-Americans and 13 per cent of Hispanics.

Asian-Americans have a life expectancy of 87 years compared with 79 years for whites and 73 years for African-Americans.

If you combine the influence of ethnicity and region, you get astounding lifestyle gaps. The average Asian-American in New Jersey lives an amazing 26 years longer and is 11 times more likely to have a graduate degree than the average American Indian in South Dakota.

When you try to account for life outcome differences this gigantic, you find yourself beyond narrow economic incentives and in the murky world of social capital. What matters are historical experiences, cultural attitudes, child-rearing practices, family formation patterns, expectations about the future, work ethics and the quality of social bonds.

Researchers have tried to disaggregate the influence of these soft factors and have found it nearly impossible. All we can say for sure is that different psychological, cultural and social factors combine in myriad ways to produce different viewpoints. As a result of these different viewpoints, the average behaviour is different between different ethnic and geographic groups, leading to different life outcomes.

It is very hard for policymakers to use money to directly alter these viewpoints. In her book, What Money Can't

Buy, Susan E. Mayer of the University of Chicago calculated what would happen if you could double the income of the poorest Americans. The results would be disappointingly small. Doubling parental income would barely reduce dropout rates of the children.

It would have a small effect on reducing teen pregnancy. It would barely improve child outcomes overall.

So when we're arguing about politics, we should be aware of how policy fits into the larger scheme of cultural and social influences. Bad policy can decimate the social fabric, but good policy can only modestly improve it.

Therefore, the first rule of policy-making should be, don't promulgate a policy that will destroy social bonds. If you take tribes of people, exile them from their homelands and ship them to strange, arid lands, you're going to produce bad outcomes for generations. Second, try to establish basic security.

If the government can establish a basic level of economic and physical security, people may create a culture of achievement — if you're lucky. Third, try to use policy to strengthen relationships. The best policies, like good pre-school and military service, fortify emotional bonds.

Finally, we should all probably calm down about politics. Most of the proposals we argue about so ferociously will have only marginal effects on how we live, especially compared with the ethnic, regional and social differences that we so studiously ignore.

***************************************

DECCAN CHRONICAL

EDITORIAL

DETACHMENT IN KALYUG

BY YOGI ASHWINI

Spirituality today has become a buzzword. There has been a mass exodus towards the spiritual sciences. No, this is not indicative of evolution. This is a direct result of commercialising spirituality and selling these sciences as a panacea to all of world's problems. Ironically, the very science of detachment has been tied with attachments of money and fame, feeding on the misery of helpless people who have no other alternative to look up to. Shamelessly, these business propositions have been disguised and packaged as yoga.

The effect of maya is powerful. The present age, kalyug, was predicted to witness the downfall of dharma. Today, with the adulteration of the pious sciences and the propagators, looking for Brahma, the Supreme Consciousness, is the same as looking for a needle in the haystack. However, the only path to evolution in this kalyug is to keep on moving, undeterred by attractions, holding the hand of Guru. With constant tapa and sadhana, a seeker develops so much magnetism that the needle gets attracted to him on its own, no matter how much the hay.

For a yogi, the entire Creation unfolds as drama. The ultimate purpose is to realise the drama and not get affected by its scenes and acts. The need is to rise above karma. Lord Krishna emphasised on the same through his leela, not getting affected or attached with the play. This is called nishkama karma or karma free of attachment, that is, free of pain and pleasure. This is the underlying message of Gita.

Only when a being has attained a certain level of detachment can he/she access the subtler forces of Creation through specific practices prescribed in Yog and Tantra. One such technique is the Agnihotra.

Agnihotra is performed at the time of sunrise and sunset, the prime chant being "idam na mam" (all this is not mine, indicating detachment). To perform this havan one requires a level of detachment from the aspects of maya that intoxicates the five senses. A person who performs this havan has to be in vairagya, the samidha and samagri should be of the highest levels of purity and all those sitting should have a high level of purity in their achar and vichar. Exactly at the time of sunset and sunrise, a specific shade of the sun's prana is awaited and as it appears the havan starts. The entire havan is normally completed in a minute or two.

This gyan has been passed on to us by the Vedic rishis. They lived in hermitages and taught as per the guru-shishya parampara. They were the masters of all aspects of creation, arts, commerce, politics, sciences and warfare, yet they were not businessmen or politicians or performers. They were not allowed collection — aparigraha being one of the principal yamas. Charity and service was their mainstay and that is why they could attract the needle and in turn bless us with their wisdom.

— Yogi Ashwini is an authority on yoga, tantra and the Vedic sciences. He is the guiding light of Dhyan Foundation. He has recently written a book, Sanatan Kriya: 51 Miracles... And a Haunting.

Contact him at dhyan@dhyanfoundation.com [1]

***************************************

******************************************************************************************

THE STATESMAN

EDITORIAL

OFF TRACK

MISS BANERJEE'S MASTERLY INACTIVITY

THE railway motormen's strike in Mumbai, which happily has been called off, illustrated minister Mamata Banerjee's retreat to masterly inactivity. There are at least three aspects of the extensive dislocation ~ mercifully only over two days ~ that has made the agitation unusual. One, this is the first time perhaps that an issue under the ambit of the Centre was settled by Maharashtra's Home minister. The railway administration appeared to be in suspended animation. Second, a statement on the overwhelming inconvenience that virtually crippled Mumbai had to be made by the Prime Minister in both Houses of Parliament as the Railway minister's overriding interest was the increasingly chaotic civic election in Bengal. The motormen had served sufficient notice of their intention; Miss Banerjee's absence must therefore be seen as calculated. Certainly, her apparent indifference only made things worse and without a nod from on high, even the zonal railway authorities appeared to be inert and inactive. The third aspect is the demand itself, indeed salaries far higher than the generally undeserving bounty advanced by the Sixth Pay Commission. The clamour, that was thoroughly unjustified, ought to have been turned down at the threshold by the Railway Board. In the manner of her party, has Miss Banerjee also reduced the board to a one-person show ~ to be assisted not by professionals but by cronies in Kolkata's cultural circuit? The minister must consider herself lucky that the crisis resolved itself by Tuesday evening.

So galling indeed appeared the indifference to Parliament that the saffronites, Shiv Sena and the BJP, went hand in hand with the Left in condemning the attitude. As galling as Sudip Bandopadhyay's chutzpah to use foul language against the protesting MPs. In the event, the Trinamul Congress and its leader have given a short shrift to Parliament. This is the larger issue, no less crucial than the motormen's strike, that the party must now reflect upon. Being the second largest contingent within the UPA must translate beyond merely a proud boast. It is time the Trinamul and its leader realised that a party staking claim to governance cannot behave as if it were in Opposition.

***************************************

THE STATESMAN

EDITORIAL

TENURE LIMITS

CLEAN-UP OR FOUL PUNCH?

WERE it not for suspicions that a personal agenda was being pursued there would be reason to endorse the sports minister's attempt to clean up the federations, though not the arbitrary, hamhanded way he (characteristically?) went about it. Inevitably MS Gill has incurred the wrath of most federations, many headed by strongmen, and the International Olympic Committee and its Asian wing will not accept interference in their affiliated units. So precisely how this will play out is difficult to immediately predict. A key problem is that several federations are headed by political figures with little grassroots support. The origin of the malaise (like so much else) can be traced to the Congress party and its using the 1982 Asian Games to "launch" Rajiv Gandhi: the politician-sport nexus was established. Mistakenly believing that netas could get things done the federations invited them in, only to discover that they ~ to use Rajiv's term ~ would prove "limpets". The experts at manipulating parliamentary polls found federation-elections child's play. Unfortunately the Gill-remedy will also exorcise non-political personalities who have retained office only because of their commitment to an often cash-strapped discipline. In fact funds alone are what give the minister/ministry clout, and that diminishes in direct correspondence to the federation's bank balance. Ideally the government's role should be limited to sports promotion at the lower level and infrastructure development, the federations must finance themselves. Note how the BCCI declines to twirl mantriji's whiskers.

Gill did himself no honour in falling back on a directive that originated in the Emergency when legal sanction was irrelevant, and he clearly cashed-in on the post-IPL scandal public mood. Sinister. His "explanation" that the directive will take effect only when present tenures expire is no alibi: only those with obsolete mindsets would welcome sarkari meddling. And the Sports Authority of India (directly under his control) ought to have been the first stop on the clean-up trail. Had the intentions been noble there would have been consultations, efforts at a consensus-formulated "model" constitution for the federations. The authoritarian manner in which Gill has functioned invites ridicule ~ if MPs can have several terms why not a federation chief? The minister has cloaked his move in the garb of injecting fresh young blood into sports administration. Since his age is in excess of what his directive dictates, he should set an example and step aside. Well begun is half-done!

***************************************

THE STATESMAN

EDITORIAL

DAIMARY IN NET

BUT ANTI-TALK FACTION STILL A THREAT

BY arresting and handing Ranjan Daimary, chairman of the anti-talk National Democratic Front of Boroland, over to India, Dhaka has given proof of its sincerity to improve ties with this country. Daimary disappeared from the scene after signing a truce in 2005. Prompted by his long absence, NDFB general secretary Govinda Basumatary ousted him and, by dropping the demand for sovereignty, started talks with the Centre to settle demands within the constitutional framework. Daimary allegedly masterminded the 30 October 2008 serial blasts in Guwahati, Kokrajhar, Barpeta and Bongaigaon that left 87 dead. Earlier that month in the Bodo-Muslim migrant clashes in Udalgiri and Darang district, 51 people were killed in what amounted to a major ethnic riot after the Bodos achieved their territorial council under the Sixth Schedule in 2003.

The NDFB (formerly the Bodo Security Force, it was renamed in 1994) is the oldest militant outfit in the region. The Centre allegedly used it as a foil against the All Bodo Students' Union and Bodo People's Action Committee that spearheaded the movement for a separate state. The Centre's delay in meeting Dispur's request for a ban on it confirmed this. On the face of it, by virtue of the NDFB being the oldest and most potent, the Centre should have initiated talks with it but its leaders were camping in Bhutan along with the Ulfa when the NDA government initiated talks with the little known Bodo Liberation Tigers Force led by Hagrama Mohilary, who is now the chief executive of the Bodo Territorial Council.

Now with Daimary's arrest only two top leaders ~ Ulfa self-styled commander-in-chief Paresh Barua and National Liberation Front of Tripura chief Jamatia Nayabashi, who also disappeared after signing the ceasefire in 2004 ~ remain outside the security dragnet. Given that other militant leaders' coming overground in Assam and North Cachar Hills have not helped restore any sense of security yet, it is too early to speculate that Daimary's arrest will restore peace in the region. Clinging to its dream of liberating the Indo-Myanmarese region from "colonial rule" in collaboration with other militant outfits, it is still a threat.

***************************************

THE STATESMAN

EDITORIAL

SAARC AT 25

A COMING OUT PARTY FOR THE NEW BHUTAN

SALMAN HAIDAR

IN Thimphu a few days ago, Saarc completed 25 years of existence. That it continues to function has brought satisfaction to those who favour the organisation but has not put a stop to questions by its detractors. From the start, Saarc has faced skepticism about its purpose, and there are those who continue to ask what it has achieved and whether it has made any real difference. Fortunately, such disbelief is not shared by the South Asian leaders, who continue to congregate every year and find value in their annual meetings.

It was Rajiv Gandhi at the first Saarc meeting in Dhaka who insisted on the summit being an annual affair, to be attended by Heads alone, not by alternates. If all the Heads cannot attend, the summit does not take place, which is why there have been only 16 meetings over the quarter century of Saarc's existence. Rajiv was far-sighted in pushing for this idea, for the summit is the most important aspect of Saarc activity. Binding agreements between members may be few and limited in scope, but yet the talks between the Heads are now an important part of the South Asian calendar. The personal links they foster are essential for identifying common ground and promoting joint action. Saarc is not and was never intended to be a forum for solving bilateral problems. Its task is to try to advance common interests within South Asia and also to strengthen the region's collective voice in international fora.

Sideline meetings

While much has been done on the ground and many useful concepts for cooperation have been adopted, lack of political consensus on some major issues has held back progress. The main, though not the only, problems are those between India and Pakistan, which have resulted in slow advance towards key objectives like expanding regional trade and connectivity, and acting collectively against terrorism. These are long standing matters and the Thimphu summit did not signal any breakthrough in dealing with them. Yet despite the obstacles, one should not ignore the progress that has been achieved, or the advances in intra-regional economic activity.
Not all of this has been directly under the aegis of Saarc, but yet it is part of the common regional cause. Nor should one ignore the role of non-official bodies with the Saarc label, which are many and are less inhibited than the official ones, and have done much to promote contact among the people of South Asia.
It is often the case that the summit's thunder is stolen by meetings on the sidelines. India-Pakistan meetings are the usual attention-grabbing events, but not the only ones ~ for instance, it was in Bangalore in 1986 that the leaders of India and Sri Lanka began to shape what became the Rajiv Gandhi-JR Jayawardene accord on joint action on Sri Lanka's minority issue. Ten years later in Male, Mr IK Gujral and Mr Nawaz Sharif re-started the stalled talks between India and Pakistan, culminating in what came to be called the composite dialogue, which is till today the accepted framework for Indo-Pak bilateral discussions. Such outcomes are not just incidental to the annual meetings, for they show how useful Saarc has become for diplomatic activity in South Asia.
At Thimphu, it was India and Pakistan, once again, whose separate talks overshadowed the summit. Though the scope of the group discussions was expanded to bring in important new areas of concern like climate change, the spotlight remained firmly on Dr Manmohan Singh and Mr Gilani. Their last significant meeting had taken place in Sharm el Sheikh on the sidelines of the NAM summit, where they agreed to re-start the bilateral dialogue suspended after the attacks on Mumbai. Public dismay at this decision forced a pause and there could be no early resumption, but at Thimphu the leaders were able to pick up the threads once more. They agreed that the two foreign secretaries should meet, with the task of assessing where matters stood today and perhaps also to see what could come next. The two foreign ministers are to meet subsequently. With this decision, the uncertain course of Indo-Pak dialogue is set to be resumed.

Some commentators on both sides have questioned the value of dialogue and would prefer to remain disengaged, for fear that resumed contact could be seen as some sort of concession to the other side. But the Prime Ministers took a broader view and indicated that apart from dialogue there was no other means of addressing the many difficult problems to be faced.

Timely initiative

TO return to the summit, a fresh initiative on climate change was taken up, with Bhutan urging it on. Appropriately so, for that country is certainly the most environmentally conscious in the region and has done more to preserve its natural heritage than any other. The Saarc region is among the most threatened parts of the world by the impact of climate change. As is well known, rising sea levels threaten the very existence of one of the member-states, Maldives, and could make life impossible in large parts of one of the others, Bangladesh. Melting Himalayan glaciers threaten the means of sustenance of vast populations in the plains of India. Already public opinion in Pakistan is greatly exercised over the shortages of water in its rivers, and blames India for its difficulties, without any just cause. The impact of climate change is thus no distant phenomenon for South Asia to contemplate but something that is already a disturbing element in the region. Saarc's initiative was thus timely, should encourage expanded regional cooperation, and will be part of the currently strengthened international activity on this crucial matter.

The Thimphu meeting was the first held there at this level. There have been earlier occasions when it was Bhutan's turn to play host to the Saarc summit but it felt unprepared and preferred to leave it to another member. In the meanwhile, it built up the facilities needed for such a major occasion, conference chambers, hotels, and the like, as well as the skilled and trained personnel required. A few smaller conferences over the past few years served as training exercises. When the occasion finally came, Bhutan was ready. From all accounts the Thimphu meeting was meticulously organised in every detail. The local population was enthused and all the arrangements went according to plan. It is only a short while ago that Bhutan adopted its new constitution and converted itself into a constitutional monarchy. Earlier it was Bhutan's King who met with his peers at Saarc gatherings. But in Thimphu it was the democratically elected Prime Minister who was in visible command. The summit was thus a coming out party for the new Bhutan.

The writer is India's former Foreign Secretary

***************************************

THE STATESMAN

EDITORIAL

BREAKING THE 'CYCLE'OF EXCLUSION

CLEARLY THE CONCEPT OF SANITATION, ITS VERY DEFINITION, FALLS WAY SHORT OF ITS REQUIREMENT ~ WHICH IS HARDLY SURPRISING BECAUSE THE SCIENCE OF SANITATION HAS BEEN DOMINATED BY A 'MALE' PERSPECTIVE, DR DHRUBAJYOTI GHOSH TELLS ADITI ROY GHATAK

IT is a problem that encompasses at least 40 per cent of Indian women; those in the realms of the dispossessed. Extend it to their similarly placed sisters in all of Southeast Asia and it may involve some 100 million women. Their state of abject "inconvenience" – for want of a more socially acceptable term – would mean that they have been bypassed by managed sanitation programmes in the region, forced to address their cyclical bleeding in the darkness of night with devices that are, at best, unhygienic and, at worst, fatal.

Clearly the concept of sanitation, its very definition, falls way short of its requirements, which is hardly surprising, according to Dr Dhrubajyoti Ghosh, because the science of sanitation has been dominated by a "male" perspective. Dr Ghosh, a UN Global 500 Laureate renowned for his phenomenal work around the east Kolkata wetlands, was bewildered when he first encountered this curse afflicting women in Bengal villages. "This was a problem that everyone knew about, a critical health-related issue that existed in every home, yet it was ignored by administrators, sanitation engineers and even development workers."

For the women themselves, it had to be treated as a matter of shame, a disease to be washed away when no one was looking; the reused fabric often dried in some dingy corner — an open invitation to cervical cancer so rampant in Indian women placed in such conditions. Dr Ghosh — who had to quit as chief environment officer under the West Bengal government's environment department — came across this problem when asked to identify the lacuna in the state's health service by health minister Surya Kanta Misra. An intensive tour of the Bengal countryside and close conversations with the womenfolk opened a can of worms.

It was in a village that an elderly woman told him about the agony of a girl, caught in the vortex of poverty, ignorance and societal indifference, forced to give gender hygiene the go by and conceal her shame. This was the essence of the horrifying revelations made to this former engineer of the state government who was working as a senior fellow at the Centre for Studies in Social Sciences, who shared some of his findings around making a breakthrough in this interview with The Statesman. Excerpts:

Can you talk about some aspects of this shameful failure around gender hygiene

The exploration of health issues in the Bengal countryside provided a major indictment of our word as managers of a civilised society but nothing could be more humiliating than the village women who are forced to manage their menstrual cycle using a piece of discarded fabric that is repeatedly washed in unclean water and sometimes used even without drying. The appalling hygiene does not have to be spelt out; village women suffer from protozoan infection, bacterial infection, urinary tract infection and a host of other diseases – that infect the men as well. Without doubt this is the worst oversight in health care designs for people in general and disadvantaged women in particular.

Has this problem never been addressed by India's many family welfare programmes?

To my mind, family welfare is too focused on attaining demographic targets and has been conspicuously ignoring the recurring distress and the chain of diseases resulting from an improper management of the menstrual cycle. In fact, there was an evident taboo around discussing this affliction, which is why it took months of exploration before someone opened up. Even the thought of using disposable napkins never seemed to have occurred to them, and not only because of cost factors. This was a never-to-be-discussed issue. Period. Clearly, there is the deep-seated apathy of "rural women beyond 30" towards anything around their healthcare.

What was this gender hygiene programme that you initiated?

Having understood the sheer size of the problem, we had to find a solution. I knew that the solution would have to come from the village and guided by us. I also knew that it had to be an affordable solution and the only thing that pointed itself out was to get women to organise themselves in Self-Help Groups and manufacture the napkins themselves.

What were the main problem areas?

First, we had to learn how to make the napkins because no one would share the knowledge with us. It was left for us to figure out what the components should be, where they could be accessed from and then establish a process to manufacture it hygienically. It took us several months to sort this out, using very simple technology. We also had to form Self-Help Groups that would understand the need for this drastic change in their personal hygiene management.

How about energising the Self-Help Groups?

Where we erred was in the formation of the initial Self-Help Groups that seem to have come forward in expectation of financial gains and, after an abortive phase, we have now achieved a more reliable set of groups of women, making and selling packs of nine napkins at Rs 15 each that is definitely superior to the closest branded product and costs less. In fact, the current crop of Self-Help Groups makes it for around Rs 11 a packet and keeps a margin of four rupees. We named the product Paushi (after the village where it was first made) and today we have a modest outreach over five Bengal districts.

Where do you see the programme going from here?

The road map will include promotion and popularisation of the Gender Hygiene Programme by way of initiating behavioural reform in the menstrual hygiene practice of disadvantaged women and developing an institutional framework and mechanism for mainstreaming the programme. This will need extensive campaigning, strengthening the SHGs through appropriate training, including the basics of organisational management, continuous and systematic monitoring of the programme in general and the performance of the incumbent SHGs in particular and enlarging the multisectoral support base for the programme.

What is your take home from this experience?

We need to treat the Gender Hygiene Programme not just as a health intervention agenda but a women's empowerment programme through SHGs that earn by producing and selling napkins. It involves no costly machinery nor big capital. Its is a low-cost, labour-intensive process protocol that needs only an hour of training. Evidently, village women are endowed with a natural aptitude to quickly adapt to these kinds of skills. Essentially, GHP is founded upon a completely different rationale that links the producer and a user. For those women who are served by the retail market dispensations, the producer-user relationship is like "You (manufacturers) make it and we use it", whereas for all those women covered by the GHP, the relationship is, "We make it and we use it". This brand campaign theme emerges from within the programme itself.

Do you expect a big bang impact?

No sweeping change will take place automatically; the role of the government, healthcare agencies at the local, regional and global levels, philanthropic centres, donors, socially initiated groups/individuals come to the fore. The task is twofold: to dismiss the age-old taboo that grips the "lesser" gender and show them the road to emancipation that they can create for themselves.

Alongside the "soft" agenda is the "hard" agenda around creating a reliable and accessible database on the present state of Menstrual Cycle Distress and the long run impact of GHP in lowering the extent of gynaecological morbidity. Parallel examples can be drawn from the worldwide programme on HIV/Aids, where constant monitoring of sensitive population is one of the major components of the total agenda. For GHP, such a monitoring programme will be relatively simpler; indeed, GHP has a clear chance of becoming one of the most widely spread, least expensive health initiatives in South Asia.

The interviewer is a former Assistant Editor, The Statesman

***************************************

THE STATESMAN

EDITORIAL

THE LAMP OF LEARNING

KK KHULLAR

The cafe was almost empty. Some faded flowers were decked in the corner. Now and then a tired looking old man came in for a glass of beer or someone only half awake for a cup of coffee. This seemed to be a special cafe in downtown Masan, a favourite with the aged as against the many I had been to Seoul which catered for the young.

Situated on the road-end, the cafe symbolised the vintage point of the market littered with small shops and eating places. Perhaps there was a factory in the vicinity where workmen were seen coming and going. With a map of the town in one hand and a brief case in the other, I entered the cafe hesitatingly with my rudimentary knowledge of the area. I was told that in the last 40 years the town had faced many challenges to sustain its style as well as its sensibility I occupied a seat in the corner from where I could also have an outside view.
Hardly had I adjusted my recently acquired spectacles from Seoul when a wrinkled but warm voice asked me: "You from India, Sir".

I nodded. It appeared he did not see my nod. So he repeated the question: "You from India, Sir". This time he was more warm.

"Absolutely". Saying this, I nodded again. This time a firmer nod and a smile.

"Ah, what is absolute? Only an Indian can tell me". The gentleman came nearer and occupied the empty chair sharing the table. Without asking me he ordered two hot coffees.

"Yes, what is absolute?" he repeated his question, now at greater ease. Summoning all the humility of India's history, I took courage in both hands and said: "It is inexpressible. You can't say what it is. You can only say what it is not".

The man gave me a quizzical look and mumbled: "What does that mean?"

"It is not a person, not a thing, not a cause", I said emboldened by the man's informality, and added: "It transcends permanence and change. It is nowhere and yet it is everywhere. It lacks nothing, it needs nothing. It is nowhere and yet it is everywhere. It lacks nothing, it needs nothing. It possesses nothing and nothing possesses it ...".

"Sum it up ...", he stopped me.

I looked at his bony frame, his deep blue eyes, his artistic hands, his face absorbed in some faraway object. I put my hands on his shoulders and said as if concluding a question of complicated arithmatics: "It is freedom".
"Ah...", he said immensely pleased, so much pleased that it seemed pain. But he reacted slowly: and said: "More than 60 years ago I read a poem by your poet, Rabindranath Tagore that the lamp of learning would be next lit in Korea. This poem was prescribed in my village school. As I see my country today I recall that poem ... a great poem. You come from a country with a lamp of learning...".

Saying this, he got up, gave me a lingering look, finished his coffee and left.

At Seoul airport I learnt that the plane for Hong Kong was delayed. I picked up a magazine. My eye fell on an article on the world literacy scene. It gave figures of India's illiterate population and the projections at the dawn of 21st century. It is the 10th year of the new century and one-fourth of India's children are still out of school while South Korea's rate of literacy is 100 per cent.

***************************************

******************************************************************************************

THE TELEGRAPH

BE A SPORT

The way to an all-powerful State is often paved with good intentions. A recent example of this is the sports ministry's decision to limit the tenure of those who head the various bodies under the National Sports Federation. On the face of it, this seems to be a good idea since many politicians, bureaucrats and other individuals continue to remain at the helm of various sports bodies for an indefinite period of time and some of them even behave as if the posts were their sinecure. One example of how long a person has actually been holding a post is that of Suresh Kalmadi, who has been the chief of the Indian Olympic Association since 1996. Limiting the tenure of the head, the argument runs, will help in better governance and greater transparency. A mere alteration in regulations may not, of course, result in a change of attitudes and the prevailing modes of running the various sports bodies. What the sports bodies need is professional management committed to introducing and conducting best practices. What India has today is sports bodies run by people more interested in the loaves and fishes of office than in the improvement of the sport concerned.

There is, in fact, a deeper problem. This is suggested by the very decision of the sports ministry to limit the tenure of the chiefs of sports bodies. Why should the State get itself involved in this matter? The sports bodies should be left within their own autonomous domains to determine the norms and regulations that will govern the terms of office of the chief. It should cause no surprise that the original regulation that capped the tenure of office-holders in sports bodies goes back to 1975, the high noon of Indira Gandhi's maximalist State. India is now under a different kind of dispensation. In the age of liberalization, the State should gradually withdraw its frontiers and stop interfering in matters that are of no consequence to it. The interference in the internal affairs of sports bodies is an example of how the State continues to flex its muscles in various domains. That heads of sports bodies should have timebound tenures is a valid position, but the State should not ram it down on the bodies. The latter should be left to take their own decisions. It is not sporting of the State to be involved in sports. Indeed, the more fundamental question to be posed in this context is: is there any need for a sports ministry?

***************************************

THE TELEGRAPH

EDITORIAL

BASIC RIGHTS

The low value accorded to domestic work in India is best illustrated by polite society's peculiar callousness towards the rights of women who work in households for payment. But, however late, something is being done about it. Campaigns for the rights of domestic workers, led chiefly by non-governmental organizations and activists in different parts of the country, contributed much to the inclusion of the domestic workers' category in the Unorganized Workers' Social Security Act. Following upon its general recommendations, the Centre is evolving a policy with the help of a task force that focuses on the specific needs of domestic workers. The list of recommendations of the draft policy, welcome as it is, also reveals the total lack of rights under which domestic workers suffer. Beginning from something as basic as a weekly day off, minimum wages and fixed working hours, the policy would include employment contracts, conditions for termination of employment, health and insurance benefits, conditions of retirement and so on. Some other issues to be considered are conditions in case of pregnancy and illness. If implemented, the government will need to ensure that domestic workers are first registered at the state, district and panchayat levels, and the machinery for monitoring their work conditions is put in motion. Equally important, the policy has asked for the registration and monitoring of all placement agencies. That would greatly aid the efforts to check trafficking and stop child labour.

What the policy is really asking for is a change of mindset. It is only too easy to exploit poor women, who labour both at home and in other people's houses, and are deprived of rights as women, as workers, and as human beings. Middle- and upper-middle-class society has not only lived on this labour for years, but also has thought nothing of ignoring the workers' needs — let alone rights — as human beings. It is heartening that the government is taking notice at last, but there is yet no suggestion of penalties for employers who refuse to comply. Given the breadth and depth of India's poverty, supply is always greater than demand. But once the machinery for registration and monitoring is put in place, violations may perhaps be dealt with. The awareness of the domestic workers itself could become a deterrent. Now there is at least reason for hope.

***************************************

THE TELEGRAPH

EDITORIAL

CUT TO THE CHASE

AN ELECTION, A VOLCANO, AND A SENTIMENTAL JOURNEY

NOTEBOOK - IAN JACK

As you read this, voters in Britain will be going to the polls to decide the next government. For the past weeks, I've been following the campaign in places as different as post-industrial Scotland and the blossomy lanes of Somerset. In all these places, a strange silence has persisted among the candidates. None of them has been prepared to specify or even make a guess at where the cuts will fall when Britain eventually but inevitably tackles its massive public deficit.

Even with tax increases (another great unmentionable) the cuts in public spending will be big — bigger, even the government has admitted, than what the great axe-woman, Mrs Thatcher, inflicted. But what will be cut? The budget for the military, for education and transport, for the arts, for social welfare? All of them? Nobody wants to say. "Why not put your cock on the block and tell us," one man shouted at one public meeting, but all he got in return were the usual opacities about "bureaucratic waste" and "efficiency savings". It wouldn't be completely accurate to say that no differences among the three main parties exist, but those differences are minute compared to the size of the British problem. To keep its creditworthiness among lenders in the international money markets, the next government will need to cut £100 billion a year from its budget. As the Bank of England's governor has said, the next prime minister will have won a contest to be the most hated man in Britain.

My own bet is that David Cameron's Tory party will win with a small majority — maybe a dozen seats — but Labour and Liberal Democrat supporters are hoping for a hung parliament, in which no party has an overall majority. A minority government, probably Tory, could then be formed and last until it was voted down by the Opposition. Or two parties, probably Labour and the Lib Dems, could make an alliance and rule until one fell out with the other. The Lib Dem price for joining such an alliance would be a commitment to replace the first-past-the-post voting system, horribly unfair to the smaller parties, by one form or other of proportional representation. The Lib Dems have had a good election — their personable leader, Nick Clegg, proved a star turn in the TV debates — but it would be astonishing if they won more than a sixth of the seats and a miracle if they agreed to serve in a coalition headed by Gordon Brown. If (more probably, when) Labour loses, Brown won't last as Labour leader beyond summer. He may come to see that as a blessing.

***************

For six days last month, very few aircraft flew across the skies of northern Europe. More than 100,000 flights were cancelled; airlines are thought to have lost around £1.1 billion. An Icelandic volcano with the hard-to-pronounce name of Eyjafjallajökull had erupted, sending tons of volcanic ash into the atmosphere, where northerly winds blew it south into European airspace. Airports closed, thousands of holidaymakers were stranded. The government sent the Royal Navy to evacuate British citizens who'd made their way overland from further south in Europe to ports in Spain and France. This was a crisis, and in crises Britain likes to evoke what's known as 'the Dunkirk spirit', referring to the weeks in 1940 when flotillas of pleasure boats and merchant ships managed to rescue most of the British army from the Dunkirk beaches at the end of the army's humiliating retreat through France. Thanks to skilful propaganda and speeches by Winston Churchill, Dunkirk came to be seen as a kind of spiritual victory rather than a military defeat. It showed us as brave and resilient under the bombs and shells of the superior German forces, even though (as we now know) it was mistaken German strategy that let Britain off the hook.

So how brave and resilient were we this time, faced with the inconvenience of a few extra nights in a hotel rather than dive-bombers and machine guns? It's hard to tell. To judge from the television reports, not very. Families spoke bitterly about having to rent cars and drive across Europe; the Liverpool football side, forced to take the train to a game in Madrid, complained that travelling for a whole day had left them rather tired; crowds at a Spanish airport felt that Gordon Brown's government had somehow let them down. Evidence of English stoicism was hard to come by, but that's not to say it didn't exist. Television and newspapers love a good moaner. "It's been absolute hell, I blame the government" is for some reason a more interesting — though also a far more unreasonable — sentiment than "A volcano blew up, so we'll just need to be patient."

Those of us at home felt rather smug. When the wind's in the right direction, which from our point of view is the wrong direction, planes heading into two of London's airports whine far above our house. On an especially still day you can hear the wing-flaps being adjusted and the undercarriage going down — a high-up scrape and rumble, as though god was shifting a wardrobe across the floor of his celestial house. For almost a week, there were no noises from the sky. People elsewhere in the country remarked that traditional sounds were being heard properly for the first time in a generation: lawnmowers buzzing across lawns, blackbirds singing, the electric hum of distant trains. The poet laureate, Carol Ann Duffy, wrote a quick poem about it. In London all that happened was that cars, buses and pneumatic drills had no interruption from above. Everywhere, however, we were reminded that Britain is an island; cheap air travel and a railway under the Channel have made this easy to forget.

Because there were no flights, I went last month to Ireland by train and ship. My destination was Galway on the Atlantic coast, where I was to speak at a literary festival. It took 16 hours rather than a flight's 90 minutes, but the compensations included a magical view of Liverpool shining across the dark Mersey as we moved downriver, and I was warmed by the sentimental feeling that this was how so many great Irishmen had travelled (though it was Polish lorry drivers rather than George Bernard Shaw who leant over the rail).

The Galway festival was a great success. The Irish are famously and quite rightly known for their informality and hospitality, and inside the cocoon of a literary festival (sympathetic audiences, friendly questions, wine) it's easy to ignore the condition of the country just outside the door. That condition isn't good. Three or four years ago, Ireland thought of itself as the 'Celtic Tiger', its old reputation as one of the poorest and most religious countries in Europe obliterated under a tsunami of cash. House prices in Dublin soared even beyond London levels. Irish entrepreneurs bought up English agricultural land and Mediterranean holiday villas. In rural Ireland, speculative housing estates covered the most unpromising stretches of country and BMWs and Range Rovers became the mark of quite ordinary levels of prosperity. Undermined by materialism and tarred with all kinds scandal — from non-celibate bishops to child abuse — the Catholic church shrank in reputation and influence.

And then Ireland went bust. Today it has the highest levels of public debt in Europe. Housing estates lie empty, unemployment is rising, workers in the public sector face harsh pay cuts. Everyone I meet confesses, "We were living in a dream". Among other Euro countries, Greece is of course even worse off and Portugal and Spain no better, but in Ireland the economic crisis accompanies a real sense of social and cultural loss. When Ireland fell head over heels for money — or debt, as it turned out to be — it also dumped practical ways of thinking and living that had grown from centuries of hardship.The financial crisis facing Britain isn't exactly the same. It has had centuries of prosperity compared with Ireland's 10 years and its political institutions are probably stronger. But the solutions to its own debt mountain will be much the same as Ireland's: higher taxes, unemployment, cuts, cuts, cuts. Everyone knows this. Tonight the votes will be counted. Soon after tomorrow the pain will begin. A quick glass of Dunkirk spirit, anyone?

***************************************

THE TELEGRAPH

EDITORIAL

SCRAP IT OUT

BIKASH SINHA

Cobalt-60 is one of the most dangerous radioactive menaces that the world has known. Its radioactivity is natural and man, as such, has no control over it. It just goes on radiating gamma rays, some kind of special X-rays, let's say. The highly intense gamma rays cause minor to major damage to human cells. If unprotected, this may lead, in extreme cases, to death, as it indeed happened in Delhi.

It being naturally radioactive, man finds easy access to Cobalt-60 and goes on to use it for a whole range of activities, from radiation therapy for cancerous cells to biology to defect studies in material to even radiation damage to materials.

Cobalt-60 looses half its strength (half life in technical terms) in 5.6 years. Assuming all the cobalt in Delhi University was installed more than 20 years ago, the original strength must have been quite huge to last at this level of radiation after such a long time.

The Delhi incident is not unique. Radiation hazard from Cobalt-60 has been surfacing off and on over the years. In the late 1980s, in the scrap market (again) of Calcutta, an even more intense cobalt source was found. Fortunately, awareness has been heightened over the years — the public is at last sensitive to some extent.

The irony is that most people are not aware of the hazards of radioactivity in practical terms. Usually, the source is housed in a box, made of thick lead to shield the radiation. From outside, all one sees is a nice little lead box. Those who sell the box in the scrap market usually sell it for the price of lead, not for the source. They are least bothered about the source once the material reaches 'scrap level'.

They ignore regulations for two reasons. Our own Atomic Energy Regulatory Board cannot regulate the whole of India unless the source persons alert them. Second, the AERB does not have the jurisdiction on all and every body.

Dumping ground

The scrap dealers are interested in the lead and not concerned about radioactivity. So when they tear apart the lead box for sale, radiation from the source has a field day. The gamma rays, now let loose, do their job nicely, causing avoidable radiation-induced hazards.

To my mind, the great tragedy of the cobalt menace lies in the area of cancer therapy. The radiation from cobalt is not especially focused. When it is used to radiate out the cancerous cells, the radiation, at the same time, burns the good cells of the body, obviously not a very good scenario. I have been advocating the scraping of cobalt units for the electron linear accelerator or Linac. I have had a difficult time installing Linac in one of the cancer centres I have been associated with. I am sorry to say that even the much-flaunted Bhabhatron of the department of atomic energy still uses the cobalt unit.

Electron Linac, for this purpose, is relatively easy to build and can be switched off whenever one likes. An Electron Linac produces radiation from the accelerating electrons and the electrons are accelerated in the Linac in a linear direction.

Indian industry can easily take up the challenge of manufacturing both the low-powered Linac, doing all the jobs that a Delhi-type cobalt unit does and even more, as well as a slightly high-powered Linac for cancer therapy. No amount of legislation can do away with the cobalt menace. It has to be scrapped altogether and replaced with Linac . It may be difficult in the beginning, as it was with lead-free fuel for transport. But then the idea will take root, as with lead-free fuel, now recognized as environment friendly despite the initial hue and cry.

Over the years, India has become the dumping ground of cobalt from the rest of the world. That is precisely the reason for easy access and low cost. The West has gone the linear way a long time ago. India should not receive scrap from the West in the form of cobalt units, but follow the linear path.

***************************************

THE TELEGRAPH

EDITORIAL

NOT A SINGLE DROP TO DRINK

THE 'WAR' OVER WATER BETWEEN INDIA AND PAKISTAN CAN JEOPARDIZE JOINT EFFORTS TO CONSERVE THE PRECIOUS RESOURCE, WRITES MANIPADMA JENA

In recent months, Pakistan's politicians have been ratcheting up the rhetoric on water scarcity under the Indus Water Treaty. Is war for water a possibility between India and Pakistan? Unlikely. For one, Pakistan's buffer stock of water will last for just 30 days. Water disputes, the world over, have more often been settled through negotiations. Pakistan's federal minister for environment, Hameed Ullah Jan Afridi, has said that cooperation is the most logical response to trans-boundary water management issues. The Indus Water Treaty is, in fact, one of the best examples of this. India has not disturbed the flow of water to Pakistan even during wars, acts of terrorism and other such conflicts that have bedevilled relations between the two neighbours.

Although the Indus treaty has stood the test of time, water conflict could, in all probability, move into centre stage along with the Jammu and Kashmir issue and further complicate bilateral relations. This is because Pakistan is likely to face serious water shortage in the coming years. The Indus water issue is very much a part of the Kashmir question. Headwaters of the Indus and its tributaries, the Jhelum and the Chenab — the western rivers over which Pakistan has full rights under the treaty — are in Kashmir.

Pakistan's persistent contention is that India is taking advantage of its position as the upper riparian and storing and diverting water that belongs to it. Since its public opposition to India's 450-megawatt capacity in the first stage Baglihar dam in 2005, Pakistan has been using various pressure tactic to get the Indus Water Treaty renegotiated. "Renegotiating the Treaty would in ways mean rewarding Pakistan for its failure to conserve it scarce water resources over the past many decades," say Indian observers.

Analysts further add that Pakistan's complaints are aimed at diverting attention from the long-drawn, but now critical, internal water row among Sindh and Baluchistan on the hand and Punjab on the other. Punjab is the main beneficiary of the Indus's waters.

The Indus Water Treaty, which was accepted as equitable by the two countries, gave unrestricted use of the three eastern rivers — Ravi, Beas and Sutlej — to India, with a mean flow of 33 million acre-feet (one acre-foot equals 43,560 cubic feet of water), one-fourth of the 136 mac that Pakistan got from the Indus river system. However, from the western river, India is also allowed 3.6 mac of water for storage, flood control and hydro-power generation. India is also permitted irrigation for 1.34 million acres, but is currently irrigating only 0.792 million acres.

Similarly, projects on the ground amount to one-sixth of the total potential to generate 18,653 mw from western rivers. If India used its full entitlement for hydropower, it would amount to only 3 per cent of their mean flow. While rumours of India building "hundreds of dams" on Pakistan's rivers is doing the rounds in that country, in reality, India has 33 projects, informed India's high commissioner to Pakistan, Sharat Sabharwal, at the Karachi Council on Foreign Relations. Out of these, 14 are in operation, 13 are under construction while the rest are in various stages of completion or have been scrapped. Twenty of these projects have capacities of 10 mw or less. Twenty-two more projects are in the offing, he said.

Pakistan has raised multiple objections that have delayed various projects, but it is chiefly opposed to the Baglihar project on Chenab, the Kishenganga project and the Tulbul navigation project, both of which are on the Jhelum. In all these projects, Pakistan has brought in, additionally, a new security dimension to the dispute. It fears India may exercise a strategic advantage by regulating the dammed waters of the Chenab and the Jhelum during war.

Pakistan, which got 80 per cent of the Indus river system and 65 per cent of the river basin area, invested in just three dams and eight barrages. Today, the nationwide power deficit has impacted industrial growth and resulted in violent public protests. By 2014, Pakistan is expected to build 32 small and medium dams for irrigation that will be spread over Sindh, Punjab, the North West Frontier Province and arid Baluchistan.

Irrational water resource management, burgeoning populations, unplanned urban and industrial growth, a chemical-fuelled Green Revolution that has run its course and left soil moisture depleted as well as unclear climate change patterns have brought Pakistan and India face to face with a looming water crisis.

Pakistan is moving from a water- scarce nation to a water-starved one. In 50 years, per capita water availability has dropped from 5,600 to 1,038 cubic metres. The figure is expected to fall to 809 cubic metres by 2025, says Pakistan's Water and Power Development Authority.

The country's population is growing at a high 2.3 per cent compared to India's 1.3 per cent. Its sole dependence on the Indus — 70 per cent of its people live in the Indus basin — exacerbates its critical water position.

Inadequate investment in water conservation and the injudicious management of available water resources have resulted in Pakistan's water crisis, says a World Bank report. Up to 40 per cent of the water is being lost because of canals that remain unlined and porous. Pakistan has 61,000 kilometres of main and 1.6 million km of secondary water courses, the world's largest contiguous irrigation system. Already 20 million tonnes of salt sit in the water system, says the World Bank. Pakistan uses 93 per cent of its water resources for agriculture against the global average of 65 per cent. Indiscriminate withdrawal of groundwater has resulted in seawater seeping into and ruining natural aquifers. Over the last 20 years, sea intrusion has wasted two million acres of arable land in Sindh.

Blessed with rivers, India's water management is a little better.However, major water conservation issues such as river-linking and big dams versus small dams remain unresolved. Watersheds and rainwater harvesting are nominal. Both countries are also ages away from scientific agricultural practices. Forward-looking policies are not in place even though the need for them is staring in the face. The two nations refuse to acknowledge that the age of easy water availability is over, and that from now on there can be no food security and even sub-national security without water security.

What the Green Revolution gave India and Pakistan — an abundance to export water hungry crops — has now become unfeasible. Even in the most arid areas, farmers have no alternative but to irrigate their fields by flooding them. Few have adopted the much more efficient drip irrigation system, which governments urgently need to subsidize. Climate change compounds the water problem. Experts say that climate change could alter the timing and rate of snow melt, with an initial increase in annual run-off, followed by a steep decrease as glaciers recede, severely impacting river flows.

Over the next 40 years, the global demand for food is expected to double, and that implies that the amount of water used to achieve global food security would also have to double.

The author was invited to interact with the media and experts in Pakistan on the cross-border water issue. The meeting was organized by LEAD Pakistan in Islamabad, March 2010

***************************************

THE TELEGRAPH

EDITORIAL

THE HILLS HAVE HEARD THAT BEFORE

STALEMATE

Peace will elude Darjeeling unless the GJM leaders stick to their promises

The Darjeeling hills have been quiet for some time now. The next round of tripartite talks is slated for May 14. Perhaps the Gorkha Janmukti Morcha is right now busy preparing itself for that meeting and sees no reason why it should disturb the peace, particularly as the tourist season is about to begin. Tourist trade cannot be the only reason why the GJM is treading cautiously, especially since in the past it had not allowed such considerations to interfere with its agitation. But today, it has a serious cause for concern. And that is — will an acceptance of the autonomy formula go down well with the people? Is it not possible that in the course of time, some others will emerge to brand Bimal Gurung and Roshan Giri as the betrayers, very much in the same way as they have branded Subash Ghisingh?

This thought and the realization that there is not much the GJM can do right now are enough to send shivers down the spine. The GJM, of course, is asserting that it will accept autonomy only as a stepping stone to statehood, but the hills have heard that before. They heard it when Ghisingh accepted the Darjeeling Gorkha Hill Council and then saw how the once-fire-eating leader forgot his past promises to fend for himself. To a people with a long history of deprivation and forgotten promises, the Gurungs and Giris may well appear to be following the same course.

And there would not be any shortage of politicians to provoke such thought. The Akhil Bharatiya Gorkha League and the Communist Party of Revolutionary Marxists are very much present on the scene. Madan Tamang, president of the ABGL, for instance, has already stated that nothing short of statehood will satisfy the hill people. Any insistence by the GJM that if there is a lull in the agitation, it is only to strengthen the ground for a separate state, may well be interpreted as a post-dated cheque which cannot be trusted.

There is little that the Morcha can do about this. Nothing really has gone its way. It had hoped that the Bharatiya Janata Party would return to power and act on its promise to sympathetically consider the GJM's demand. That did not happen. What was worse was that Jaswant Singh, whom the Morcha helped to win from Darjeeling, got thrown out of the party. It had hoped that the Greater Coochbehar and Kamtapur movements will gain momentum and create a wide area of unrest, but that also has not happened. It had hoped that the adivasis of the Dooars will make common cause with it, but the Akhil Bharatiya Adivasi Vikas Parishad has made it clear that it has an agenda of its own. To cap it all, after the initial promise, New Delhi has gone silent on the Telangana issue. So with no external factor coming to its aid, the GJM is today faced with the alternatives of either accepting autonomy on a larger scale than that enjoyed by the the DGHC or to allow the stalemate to continue. It has realized that a separate state will remain as elusive as a clear view of the Kanchenjungha during summer and autumn. But the problem is, how to admit that?Talks to find a solution to a stalemate imply a compromise. The GJM would like the world to believe that this compromise will only be for tactical reasons. But as its leaders get enmeshed in running the local administration, they are more likely than not to move away from the goal they had promised. But the dream they had, like others had before them, cannot be expected to fade away. And as long as that does not happen, the hills will not really be quiet. Hopes of any permanent peace should not be cherished even if the talks in May or later end in handshakes all around.

SUMANTA SEN

***************************************

******************************************************************************************DECCAN HERALD

EDITORIAL

CZARS ON WARPATH

'THE MOVE HAS STIRRED A HORNET'S NEST.'

The sports ministry's decision imposing a limit on the terms of office-bearers of National Sports Federations (NSF) and the Indian Olympic Association (IOA) has stirred a hornet's nest with the sports bodies forging a united front to fight it out. The IOA and its constituents have received a boost in their battle with the International Olympic Committee stating that the ministry's order violated the Olympic Charter and would invite punishment from the apex body.

The communication, no doubt, must be seen as concerted action of a powerful international caucus of sporting czars who have protected each other's interests for long. The sports associations in the country have been the playground of politicians and bureaucrats who have carried on for years as if the final whistle did not apply to them. Many of them have been holding on to the chairs for decades only because of the power and perks that come with it. Accountability has been largely unheard of in their ranks, with many treating the associations as their personal fiefdoms. The ministry's decision was intended to curtail their stay and infuse much-needed fresh blood into sports bodies, but it may not happen without a prolonged fight.

The NSFs and the IOA, their parent body, have staunchly resisted every move in the past to rein them in, using the autonomy clause provided to them under the Olympic Charter as a protective shield. Sports Minister M S Gill, ever since he took over two years ego, has been a thorn in their flesh, his attempts to make them accountable causing severe heartburns. Bringing the NSFs under the Right To Information Act and introducing an annual recognition procedure were the first steps, forcing the IOA to say no to any financial assistance from the government. The latest move, intended to bring in "transparent and professional management of Indian sports," has hurt them even more, sending them scurrying towards the Olympic Charter once again.

The IOC communication may have cast a safety net over the sports bosses for the time being, but Gill has decided to take up the issue with the IOC, citing ground realities in India. If the Olympic Charter is meant to promote sport rather than the self-interests of some bigoted individuals, the IOC will definitely see reason in India's action. As things stand now, NSFs and IOA may have the upper hand but the game, certainly, is far from over.

***************************************

DECCAN HERALD

EDITORIAL

ABORTED ATTACK

'THE US MUST CHANGE ITS APPROACH TO PAKISTAN.'

Two alert vendors in New York's Times Square who noticed smoke and firecracker sounds coming out of a parked car have saved the city from another major terrorist attack. They alerted police who quickly swung into action. Faizal Shahzad, an American citizen of Pakistani origin, who is believed to have packed the car with explosives, has been taken into custody. Meanwhile, Hakimullah Mehsud, the leader of the Teherik-e-Taliban Pakistan, who was believed to have been killed earlier, has claimed responsibility in a video for the aborted attack in New York. The failed attack in Times Square is the latest in a series of attempted assaults on US soil that involve American citizens. It does seem that the US is having to contend with a problem similar to the one Britain has confronted since the July 2005 attacks on the London underground, which is of radicalisation of a section of its citizens. As in Britain, those who have been arrested in the US in recent months in connection with alleged terror plots are homegrown terrorists, and not from some isolated madrassas in distant countries.

In at least two other alleged terror plots involving naturalised American citizens, a Pakistani link has been found. The Times Square plot, which has drawn attention yet again to a Pakistani link, has prompted calls for racial profiling. Not only is such an approach morally reprehensible but also, it is based on the flawed logic that terrorists fit a stereotype. Racial profiling will only end up victimising thousands of innocent people, who have no links to terror.

Rather than engaging in racial profiling, the US government must correct its current flawed approach of putting pressure on Pakistan to act against only those terrorists it believes undermine its own security interests, even as it turns a blind eye towards those who target countries like India. India has been saying for a long time now that the entire terror network in Pakistan needs to be dismantled. It has been underscoring the need to break the ties that Pakistan's military has with various terror outfits. Unfortunately, the US has not taken India's counsel seriously. People like Shahzad are able to attempt attacks because of training they receive from Pakistan. This support base must be shattered to make the world safe from terrorism.

***************************************

DECCAN HERALD

EDITORIAL

IT'S A THREE-HORSE RACE

COLIN TODHUNTER

Much will hinge on who the Liberal Democrats decide to get into bed with, but, to date, they haven't been saying anything.

The UK general election takes place today. The campaign has been a three-horse race between the Conservatives, Labour and the Liberal Democrats. For the first time ever, the party leaders have appeared head-to-head in a series of TV debates, which set the campaign alight.

After the scandals surrounding MPs' abuses of the expenses system, many pundits felt that interest in the election would be low. Not so. These presidential style leaders' debates caught the public's imagination and propelled Nick Clegg, the Lib Dem leader, into the limelight.

If David Cameron, the Conservative leader, represented youthfulness and a new start from the worn out looking and unpopular Gordon Brown, Nick Clegg stole Cameron's clothes by looking even more youthful and exciting. It was a case of 'Nick who?' prior to the televised debates, but since the debates Clegg and his party have secured second place, ahead of Labour, in the opinion polls.

Until recently, David Cameron may have thought he was about to waltz into Downing Street as the next PM, but Clegg and his party's emergence have upset the applecart, and all indicators have been suggesting that perhaps no single party will have an overall majority to govern. This 'hung' parliament scenario has dominated the media recently.

Many perceive Labour to be rather washed up after 13 years in power but also feel there may be little substance behind Cameron or his policies. For Clegg and the Lib Dems, it's a different matter. While it is also debatable if the public really positively endorse the policies of the Lib Dems, apart from propping up the Labour government in 1974, the Liberals have not been in power since the early part of the last century and have traditionally been the third party in British politics.

Given the boost received by the TV debates, the party now appears to represent real change in the eyes of some voters and a chance to break the traditional two party system.

Britain's electoral system could mean the Lib Dems coming second, ahead of Labour, but with substantially less seats in parliament. Any deal done with Labour or the Conservatives after the election to support a minority government may be conditional on reforming the system and bringing in proportional representation, whereby in future elections the Lib Dems will secure an amount of seats proportionate to votes received. This could indeed change the face of British politics by loosening the stranglehold of the two main parties.

If the Conservatives fail to secure enough seats to govern on their own, we could be in for a degree of horse trading in the coming days. Much of it will hinge on who the Lib Dems decide to get into bed with, and, to date, they haven't been saying.

Credibility

New Labour's unpopularity stems from various factors. To many, it has abandoned its traditional core working class voters. The financial crisis and the abuse of the expenses system occurred on its watch. Add to this a number of policy blunders and the fact that the regime took the country into two unpopular wars, and you have a party that is in trouble.

Cameron's Conservative party are still mistrusted because sections of the electorate feel that, despite the happy smiling facade, beneath the surface lurks the ugly face of Thatcherism. This brings back memories of the strife of the 1980s and the party's ideological obsession with privatisation and deregulation, which lies at the core of today's economic crisis.

The fact that the Tories have been out of power for so long and are inexperienced and that their policies seem rather vague doesn't help either.

When Tony Blair came to power in 1997, people wanted change and positively embraced him. This is not the case now. People want change, but Cameron and Clegg are somewhat unknown quantities and lack the 'Blair factor' required to attract voters in their droves.

Finally, it is worth noting that non-voters may outnumber those who vote for the winning party. Some people have no faith in the political system and opt not to vote, believing the whole process to be a sham. Indeed, a telling feature of last few weeks was a campaign dominated by three bureaucratic media savvy party machines with no great ideological differences.

For many, it was disappointing that the campaign deliberately sidelined key issues. Getting out of Afghanistan, for instance, or breaking with the free market policies that caused the financial crisis in the first place was hardly, if at all, mentioned. But with all three parties now acting as de facto arms of the business community, and the mainstream media a compliant partner, none of this came as a surprise.

I happen to believe that any Labour government, no matter how terrible, is better than a Conservative one. But whoever gets into power could find themselves being the most unpopular government in British electoral history, given that the economy is in dire straits and the scale of cuts being proposed.

Perhaps a coalition would be the best option, particularly as many people have had enough of confrontational party politics. What the British public don't want after the election is squabbling politicians and parties, followed by another election in six months time in order to secure a majority government.

***************************************

DECCAN HERALD

EDITORIAL

SYSTEMIC NEGLIGENCE OF CONSUMERS' RIGHTS

PRABHAKAR KULKARNI

Accountability means holding individuals and organisations responsible for their promised actions.

Government departments and organisations registered under the Company Law are expected to be quite alert and responsive to consumers' grievances. It is their statutory responsibility to offer best services as committed implicitly or explicitly so that no consumer is compelled to approach the court of law against such organisations.

But the system with which the departments and companies work is itself defective, careless and callous as is periodically disclosed when the matters are heard by consumer courts and their decisions stressing the propriety of consumers' grievances as also relief offered to them.

Insurance companies are service organisations. People pay them premiums with expectation that they will be useful in unforeseen calamities, like severe illness or accidents and that too without any hassles and technical excuses. In a case heard by the Kolhapur consumer forum, The New India Assurance Company denied claim of compensation for two persons relying on some technical grounds.

Shruti Kulkarni is the only heir of her father Gajanan Kulkarni who died in an accident along with three others — Chintaman and Abhiji Kulkarni and Shreya Abhijit Kulkarni — while Rekha Rajopadhye was seriously wounded. They were travelling in the Maruti car owned by Gajanan Kulkarni, who had taken comprehensive insurance policy from the NIAC.

Technical grounds

But the company accepted claims of Chintaman Kulkarni and Shreya Kulkarni but rejected claims of car owner Gajajan Kulkarni and Abhijit Kulkarni who was driving the car. The technical grounds for rejection cited by the NIAC are car owner Gajajan Kulkarni had no driving license and Abhihit Kulkarni was a driver and hence not eligible for compensation.

While arguing on behalf of Shruti Kulkarni before the forum, advocate Vivek Shukla pointed out that Gajanana Kulkarni was taking the all comprehensive policy from the NIAC since 1996 and if driving licence was needed for car owner that should have been verified by the company while issuing the policy. Abhijit Kulkarni, who was driving the car, was a member of the family — having driving licence — and not paid driver and hence his claim need not be denied.

While deciding the case, the forum president M D Deshmukh and members Pratibha Karmarkar and Varsha Shinde accepted the plea submitted on behalf of the complainant Shruti Kulkarni. It was pointed out by the forum that the NIAC has not produced any rule whether driving licence is mandatory for a car owner. Abhijit Kulkarni who was driving the car had a licence and he was a family member and not an employed driver. Hence denying claim for the two is a serious deficiency in service.

In this case a reference to a supreme court judgement is cited as a basic principle of accountability. It stresses the point that the need of accountability is the soul of good governance and absence of it is the sign of bad governance.

Accountability means holding individuals and organisations responsible for performance measured as objectively as possible. It is obligation of persons in power to be citizen friendly, just, fair and responsive.

In view of this principle and facts of the case, the forum has ordered that the NIAC should pay claim of Rs 2 lakh for Gajanan Kullkarni and Rs 50,000 for Abhijit Kulkarni and Rs 5,000 for mental torture and cost of Rs 1,000 to the complainant Shruti Kulkarni.

In another case, the deficiency of service in the regional transport office (RTO) is disclosed. The complainant Appasaheb Tambe had demanded a specific number for his Indigo car. He paid Rs 10,000 as per the rate for a specific number. This was duly recorded in the concerned record which is known as RC book. When the car owner sold his car to another person it was disclosed that the same number is given to another two wheeler owner and it was not therefore transferred along with the transfer of records to the purchaser of the car.

Accepting amount and giving a specific number to a car owner and then giving the same number to another person is gross negligence and deficiency of service as pointed out by advocate P J Atigre who argued before the Kolhapur consumer forum which accepted the plea and ordered that the RTO should pay Rs 25,000 for mental torture to complainant Tambe.

The fund available with the RTO is public money and hence for the deficiency in service by the concerned official Rs 25,000 should be paid from his salary and not from public fund asserts the forum. While deciding the case, the forum has pointed out that the government's officials and employees are public servants. They are expected to work as per rules and regulations and power entrusted to them should be used properly. They are also duty bound to provide the best possible service to citizens who have every right to complain if such services are not provided.

***************************************

*****************************************************************************************

THE JERUSALEM POST

EDITORIAL

DON'T BELIEVE ALL YOU READ - EXCEPT THIS

BY DOUGLAS BLOOMFIELD

As Mitchell heads back to the Mideast, beware of the verbal flak.

With George Mitchell back in the Middle East this week to launch indirect talks between Israel and the Palestinians, he can expect to run into considerable turbulence created by malicious rumors, trial balloons, taunts and a lot of hot air.

The verbal flak is coming from all directions as self-anointed insiders and experts try to shape public perceptions of the new talks before they even begin – in reality revealing little more than their own agendas. It's not just the usual talking heads and printed pundits – everyone knows who they are – but the anonymous experts, officials, observers, insiders and assorted "reliable sources" whose identity we don't know and whose authenticity we are unable to judge.

So here's an easy guide: If you don't know who said it, take it with a block of salt.

ONE ISRAELI paper this week headlined a story declaring: "Obama promised Abbas a Palestinian state within two years." And the source: "An Egyptian official told the Arabic language daily Al-Hayat." How convincing is that? The White House hotly denied it.

You may have seen stories with headlines like: "Obama to call world summit if Mideast peace talks fail" or "Abbas: Obama won't allow provocations from either Palestinians or Israel."

Here's another reading hint: Who benefits from this story? Whose interest is served? Do those blind sources who purport to know Barack Obama's true intentions have an agenda they – or the reporters – are not telling you? Are they portraying the American president as a crusader for peace, a Palestinian agent aiming to destroy the Jewish state or a tool of the Zionist lobby out to block Palestinian statehood? If you don't know the author's sources or agenda, you can't really answer those questions.

Keep in mind that right now the two sides and their American interlocutors are all jockeying for position. A few stories in the past week confidently told us Obama has promised to recognize a Palestinian state if Israel doesn't agree by a certain date, that the US will support a UN Security Council resolution condemning Israeli settlement construction, that Palestinians have no real interest in negotiations but intend to unilaterally declare statehood, that Obama intends to call an international conference this fall to ram a peace agreement down Israel's throat. There's something for every paranoid prognosticator. And maybe a grain of truth here and there.

Take the story about a supposed letter from Obama to Abbas promising to support a UN vote to condemn settlements. Washington historically vetoes anti-Israel resolutions (not always: the Reagan administration even sponsored the one condemning Israel's attack on Saddam Hussein's Osirak nuclear reactor in 1981). What's behind the Obama letter story? Here's three versions:

• The Palestinians were spreading it to justify returning to negotiations in the absence of the settlement freeze they'd demanded.

• The story was intended to rattle the Israelis.

• It's an attempt by the Israeli Right to show Obama sides with the Palestinians.

The New York Times's Roger Cohen wrote that Obama told Abbas he wouldn't block a UN resolution condemning Israel if it "seriously undermines trust between the two parties." Not so. The White House firmly denied that version, but not a report that a Mitchell aide, David Hale, told Abbas that if Israel goes ahead with construction of the controversial 1,600 homes for haredim in the Ramat Shlomo neighborhood of east Jerusalem, it would abstain (not vote yes or no). That's the project whose announcement scuttled Vice President Joe Biden's initial effort to launch the proximity talks in March.

The moral of this story: Hold your fire. The news stories will be flying at you from all directions, each declaring it has the inside scoop. Everyone is going to have his or her sources and leaks. Saeb Erekat, the chief PA negotiator, gives his briefings on and off the record, unabashedly contradicting himself and issuing all kinds of dire warnings, from Palestinian plans to unilaterally declare statehood to flat denials.

When Erekat threatens, "If Israel builds one house in the West Bank, Palestinians will immediately stop the negotiations," he doesn't scare Binyamin Netanyahu, but he does encourage Israeli rejectionists to send out a construction crew. One has to ask whether Erekat is really looking for an excuse to walk out and blame the Israelis.

On the Israeli side, beware the "senior official."

That can mean any cabinet minister, deputy, assistant or his driver – each considering himself or herself a senior official and the one who really should be running the country. It can also mean insiders in the Prime Minister's Office acting – probably under instructions – to plant misinformation meant to affect policymakers in Washington.

Everyone has an agenda. Every reader, like every good reporter, should consult multiple sources, analyze what the source meant as well as what he or she said, and then make an independent and skeptical judgment. Do that, and chances are you could be half right.

A final hint. Listen most to what the delegations themselves are saying. The more kvetching, the more problems; the less they have to say, the more work they are getting done.

bloomfieldcolumn@gmail.com

***************************************

THE JERUSALEM POST

EDITORIAL

FUNDAMENTALLY FREUND: THE ROAD TO NOWHERE

BY MICHAEL FREUND

On the eve of the anticipated start of so-called proximity talks between Israel and the Palestinians, there is a discernible lack of enthusiasm.

The fanfare that usually accompanies the relaunch of Middle East negotiations has been replaced by an atmosphere of apathy, as it seems clear to just about everyone – outside the White House, that is – that little will come of the impending round.

Speaking to the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee on Tuesday, Brig.-Gen. Yossi Baidatz, head of IDF Intelligence's Research Division, said that even before the talks commence, the Palestinians are "already preparing the ground for the failure" of the process.

And dovish Deputy Prime Minister Dan Meridor was no less gloomy, telling The Jerusalem Post yesterday that the talks "won't yield results" because the Palestinians are not willing to take "tough decisions."

Indeed, it says a lot about the state of the peace process that the only tangible outcome certain to emerge is an inevitable boost in US envoy George Mitchell's frequent-flyer account. This, of course, is entirely the fault of the Palestinians, who have repeatedly rejected the various gestures made by Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu over the past 12 months.

Basking in the glow of unprecedented American pressure on the Jewish state, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas is in no rush to make progress in difficult bargaining with Israel. He has every reason to wait, knowing full well that when the negotiations stall, the weight of international pressure will come down hard on the decision-makers in Jerusalem and not Ramallah.

But Washington too shares a great deal of the blame. By choreographing this farce of indirect talks doomed from the start, the Obama administration is playing directly into Palestinian hands, thereby further diminishing the already dismal chances of making peace. Through its naiveté, Washington is unwittingly setting the stage for an explosion of frustration and violence when the talks come screeching to a halt, which is hardly in anyone's interest.

The conceptual error underlying the policy of the Obama administration is stark and simple: It still seems to think that the Oslo process has a chance in hell of succeeding.

In this respect, it is well worth recalling an important if largely dubious anniversary in Middle East diplomacy that slipped by this week.

IT WAS 16 years ago on Tuesday, on May 4, 1994, that prime minister Yitzhak Rabin and PLO chairman Yasser Arafat ascended a stage in Cairo and signed the Gaza-Jericho Agreement, paving the way for the first transfer of Israeli territory to Palestinian control.

At the ceremony, then-foreign minister Shimon Peres assured those present that a new day was at hand. "Today," he said, beaming, "we declare that the conflict is over. Today we have agreed to promise mothers and children, Arab and Jewish, that no finger will pull a trigger to endanger the lives or to affect the dignity or happiness of their children."

Within a few weeks of the signing, Arafat returned triumphantly to Gaza, as the IDF retreated and the xperiment begun in the September 1993 Oslo Accords was put into place on the ground.

We all know how well that turned out. Despite Peres' optimism, the conflict remains far from over. Instead, the Oslo process bequeathed us years of suicide bombings, hundreds of civilian deaths, diminished deterrence and the loss of territory, as well as the rise of Hamas.

Logic, then, would dictate that rather than trying to keep this failed process going, Washington would do better to reexamine its approach and acknowledge its mistakes. A good place to start would be to recognize once and for all that there is no serious partner on the Palestinian side with the courage, authority or conviction to negotiate terms with Israel. Like it or not, the chances of forging an agreement with the current cast of characters in Gaza City and Ramallah are close to nil.

Moreover, President Barack Obama's enthusiasm for the land-for-peace paradigm and the two-state solution has proven to be entirely misplaced. Israel's past abandonment of territory, whether unilaterally or through agreements, has only brought disaster in its wake. The fact is that "peace for peace" was and remains the only viable and acceptable basis for a just end to the conflict.

Nonetheless, Washington stubbornly refuses to accept what is obvious to all, and insists on plunging ahead down a well-worn path clearly marked "Dead End."

The result will likely be catastrophic.

In diplomacy, Henry Kissinger once noted: "If you don't know where you are going, every road will get you nowhere."

And that, it seems, is precisely where Obama is about to take us.

***************************************

THE JERUSALEM POST

EDITORIAL

THE HOUSING SOLUTION

In Tel Aviv, prices are up by 30% since a year ago, and 5% since three months ago.

Last fall, Construction and Housing Minister Ariel Attias (Shas) ceremoniously informed the nation of a new reform he was launching that would, in no time at all, significantly lower spiraling real estate prices by inundating the marketplace with cheap land.

This was to be a facet of Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's crusade against obstructive red tape, which, he has consistently argued, strangles development projects and inordinately inflates housing costs.

In theory, this all sounded compelling. And the theory's ramifications extend beyond putting the lid on prices. Presumably the more convoluted and drawn-out the route to winning planning approvals and construction permits, and the more expensive the land, the greater the temptation to find shortcuts. It becomes inviting to simplify things via graft and favoritism. And thus, were efficient red-tape-cuts instituted into the system, the thinking goes, this in itself would constitute a potent disincentive for corruption.

The problem, of course, is that the reverse logic is as cogent. Where less control is imposed, the opportunity for mischief is all the greater.

In his reformist offensive, Attias announced large-scale sales of Israel Lands Authority plots sufficient for the construction of thousands of housing units. This, he promised, would radically cool the feverish market. Land, after all, is the costliest component of real estate prices. If the market were swamped with inexpensive lots, prices were bound to tumble. Attias predicted that by the beginning of 2010, housing price-rises would be halted, and that they would dramatically drop by year's end.

UNFORTUNATELY, THIS rosy forecast has not panned out. In fact, the very opposite has occurred. Housing prices are going through the roof.

Official government statistics released Tuesday indicate that the prices of four-room apartments (Israel's most popular size) rose by a national average of nearly 17 percent in the first quarter of 2010, compared to the first quarter of 2009, and by over 4% from the final quarter of 2009. The figures are based on data from 14 cities countrywide. In Tel Aviv, prices are up by 30% since a year ago, and 5% since three months ago.

Exuding never-say-die determination, Attias, also on Tuesday, published tenders for the sale of land sufficient for 3,000 housing units, in a bid to push prices down nevertheless. He insists he is on the right course, but that the reform process is slow and needs to be given a chance. In the past eight months, Attias has put on the market plots for 21,600 units.

Bank of Israel Governor Stanley Fischer acknowledged to the Knesset Finance Committee on Wednesday that "a problem does exist," though he isn't yet calling it a bubble. "We must avoid complacency," Fischer stressed. "There is a relatively rapid price rise, which means that we might have to take steps… I can't precisely define when a bubble forms, but we are examining the issue of interest rates in dealing with this problem."

As Fischer was intimating, low interest rates entice buyers to take out sizable mortgages and increase demand, consequently hiking prices. Interest rates, however, are not lightly tampered with, especially as raising them would artificially strengthen the anyway-overvalued shekel at a time of dangerous global volatility (i.e., the Greek/Euro-zone crisis), thereby hurting exports and possibly increasing unemployment.

ANOTHER REASON the Attias land sales failed to achieve their objective was that most of the land the minister found to advance his reforms lay outside high-demand areas. In real life, families in search of flats in metropolitan Tel Aviv are quite unlikely to opt for Yeruham instead.

Attias has now begun to partially correct this inherent flaw, but the fact is there isn't a great deal of public land available in lucrative areas.

The question, therefore, should be how to bring Yeruham closer to Tel Aviv's opportunities, and thus make more remote (but affordable) residence more viable and less forbidding.

And the answer lies in other, seemingly mundane solutions like belatedly pulling Israel's rail links out of the late 19th century and bringing them into the 21st. Improvement in public conveyances of all sorts would shrink the distances and demolish the psychological barriers to dwelling that little bit further away from the country's economic and cultural hubs.

***************************************

THE JERUSALEM POST

EDITORIAL

IF ONLY ISRAEL HAD COOPERATED

BY RICHARD GOLDSTONE

I wish that the energy the government and its supporters had put into discrediting the report had been invested in working with our mission. Excerpts from a statement by Judge Richard Goldstone for the meeting with South African Jewish community leaders on Monday.

Let me say that I have taken no pleasure in seeing people around the world criticize the South African Jewish community, and I commend the South African Jewish Board of Deputies and all responsible for bringing an end to the unfortunate public issues that had arisen relating to my grandson's bar mitzva. My family and I are delighted that I was able to attend the bar mitzva on Saturday, and that it was such a joyous and meaningful occasion. I am deeply grateful to Rabbi Suchard, the members of the committee and the congregation at Sandton Synagogue for having made this possible.

Without more, allow me to turn to the Gaza report that has caused so much anger in this and other Jewish communities. It is well-known that initially I refused to become involved with what I considered to be a mandate that was unfair to Israel by concentrating only on war crimes alleged to have been committed by the IDF. When I was offered an even-handed mandate that included war crimes alleged to have been committed against Israel by Hamas and other militant groups in Gaza, my position changed.

I have spent much of my professional life in the cause of international criminal justice. It would have been hypocritical for me to continue to speak out against violations of international law and impunity for war crimes around the world but remain silent when it came to Israel simply because I am Jewish.

The State of Israel was established in 1948 by the United Nations acting on the principles of international law. It should not be surprising that Israel has always committed itself to being bound by the norms and practices of international law. I have always assumed that Israel would wish to be judged by the highest standards of international law. One of the cardinal norms, accepted by Israel, is that of "distinction" – the requirement that there be proportionality between a military goal and civilian casualties caused in achieving that goal.

THIS WAS the first occasion in which the UN Human Rights Council was prepared to consider military operations between Israel and the militant organizations from all perspectives and offer Israel the opportunity of telling its story to a United Nations inquiry. I also anticipated that this might herald the start of a new approach by the Human Rights Council in which all similar human rights valuations around the world receive equal attention.

But sadly for everyone, the Israeli government squandered that opportunity. That did not prevent the mission from finding that serious war crimes appeared to have been committed by Hamas and other militant groups operating from Gaza. That finding was also accepted by the UN General Assembly, the Human Rights Council and the European Parliament. The right of Israel to act in self-defense was also not questioned by the report.

The letters that passed between me and both Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and the Israeli ambassador to Geneva are attached to the Gaza report and tell the story, most openly, of my desire for Israeli cooperation and the concerns of Israel with regard to cooperating with our mission. That Israel refused to cooperate meant we had to do the best we could with the information we were able to gather. I only wish that the energy the government of Israel and its supporters had put into discrediting the report had been invested in cooperating with our mission.

It is obvious but must be stated: Had Israel provided us with credible information to respond to the allegations we received, it would have been given appropriate consideration and could potentially have influenced our findings. That was unfortunately not forthcoming. We cannot undo the past.

In conclusion, I would state that it is regrettable that the majority of the Israeli government decided against accepting the first and primary recommendation of the Gaza mission, namely to launch its own open and credible investigation into the findings contained in the report. That is still a course open to it and, if adopted and implemented in good faith, would effectively put an end to calls for international criminal investigations.

***************************************

THE JERUSALEM POST

EDITORIAL

IN PAIN AND ANGER

BY AVROM KRENGEL

As a member of the community, we ask Judge Goldstone to understand our reactions to what he has done.

Excerpts from the opening statement of Avrom Krengel, chairman of the SAZF, delivered in a meeting Monday between the federation and Judge Richard Goldstone.

Sixty-five years after the liberation of Auschwitz and 62 years since Israel's independence, Jews throughout the world live lives of unprecedented freedom, dignity and security, attributable to the existence of the State of Israel; but it is only its citizens that make the ultimate sacrifice to ensure its continued existence.

In my capacity as chairman of the SAZF, I address you today to express our deep disappointment and dissatisfaction with your involvement, as a South African Jew, in leading the UN fact-finding mission on the Gaza conflict.

The UN Human Rights Council is notorious for its bias against Israel. Since its creation in 2006, the UNHRC has devoted 27 of its 33 censures to resolutions criticizing Israel but not one against Sri Lanka after it killed an estimated 20,000 civilians, or against Sudan for the Darfur atrocities.

The enabling resolution of the UNHRC, upon which your mission was established, stated that the designated purpose of your mission was "to investigate all violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law by the occupying power, Israel, against the Palestinian people throughout the occupied Palestinian territory, particularly in the occupied Gaza Strip, due to the current aggression."

Your mission of enquiry into the Gaza conflict, where approximately 1,000 civilians were killed, is unprecedented. Never before has the UNHRC, nor any other organ of the United Nations, conducted an investigation of human rights violations into conflicts which do not involve massacres, genocide or crimes against humanity.

Certain aspects of the contents of the report are highly prejudicial to Israel, while being extremely favorable toward Hamas. The report never misses an opportunity to mention that Israel refused to cooperate with the mission. The underlying message is clear: Israel is to blame for any harsh findings.

THE APPROACH to Hamas, however, is entirely different. You state that during your visits to the Gaza Strip, the mission met with senior members of the Gaza authorities who cooperated fully . Clearly you wish the reader to believe that Hamas cooperated fully, and therefore no adverse findings against it can be made.

Later on in your report, however, a different picture emerges. You state that the Gaza authorities said they had nothing to do with the Al-Kassam brigades or other armed groups, and also had "no information on the activities of the Palestinian armed groups, or about the storage of weapons in mosques and buildings."

The report also noted that those interviewed in Gaza appeared reluctant to speak about the presence or conduct of hostilities by the Palestinian armed groups.

In other words, based on the mission's own version, absolutely no one in Gaza cooperated in describing the way Hamas and others conducted their armed operations. You state that if the Gaza authorities failed to prevent Palestinian armed groups from endangering the civilian population, they would bear responsibility for the damage done.

What you omitted, as you have done whenever describing Israeli atrocities, was that the refusal of the Gaza authorities to cooperate with the mission forces it to conclude that Hamas did bear responsibility for the damage done to Gazan civilians.

Your report provided a complete context for the reasons for the conflict in Gaza. Over 100 pages detail every actual and alleged human-rights violation Israel has committed in what you term "the occupied Palestinian territories" since 1967, designed no doubt to allow readers to understand why Hamas and the "other Palestinian armed groups" resorted to rocket fire into southern Israel and the capture of Gilad Schalit.

In respect of Israel, however, no such contextualization of its actions is provided. Nowhere do you feel it is of value "for contextual purposes" to mention that Hamas's founding charter calls for the destruction of the State of Israel, or that the reason for Israel's and Egypt's blockade of Gaza, and the US and EU sanctions imposed on Hamas is a direct result of Hamas's refusal to abandon its primary aim of destroying Israel. You fail to mention that Hamas is an implacable enemy of any two-state solution, that at the height of the Oslo Peace Accords, Hamas waged a merciless terror campaign against Israel, resulting in 150 Israeli civilian deaths, and killed over 500 Israeli civilians in suicide bombings between 2000 and 2009.

You also fail to disclose that Hamas is armed, supported and supplied by Iran, a country whose president has frequently stated a desire to destroy the State of Israel, and which is suspected of developing nuclear weapons perhaps for this very purpose.

IT NOW appears that the world has two sets of international law; one to be applied to Israel, the other to everyone else. Only Israeli soldiers, generals and politicians will face the prospect of war-crimes trials at The Hague, while those of Russia, United States, NATO and Sri Lanka – collectively responsible for the death of over 320,000 civilians during the past 15 years of armed conflicts – will continue to act with impunity and immunity.

This situation is not international justice but simply a travesty of justice, a reintroduction of discriminatory laws and practices against the Jewish people.

As a fellow Jew, we admonish you for spending 14 days in the Gaza Strip, listening to the testimony of hundreds of Gazan residents while failing to reach out to Gilad Schalit who has languished for four years in a hellhole.

We think it would have been only appropriate to demand the unconditional release of Schalit or failing that, at least to visit him and hear his story of suffering and isolation.

As a member of the Jewish community, we ask you to understand our pain and anger at what you have done, and to work with us in ensuring that Israel is not treated differently than any other nation.

The writer is chairman of the South African Zionist Federation.

***************************************

THE JERUSALEM POST

EDITORIAL

CAMPUS FEARS HERE AND THERE

BY BRENDA KATTEN

To what extent are governors conscious of the hatred resulting from those Israeli academics that promote boycott, divestment and sanctions against Israel? This coming week will see the start of the annual meetings of the boards of governors of a number of Israeli universities, with members arriving from all over the world.

As contributors to their respective universities, one wonders if the governors are aware that many students feel threatened by the language of some professors? Language that condemns the Jewish state, calling it a "colonial power whose indigenous population, the Palestinians, has been kicked out by the Israelis."
These students are being educated to see Israel as a pariah state.

Those students who are shocked by these pronouncements are frequently too afraid to speak out against the views being projected. They worry that to openly disagree is to pave the way for a poor mark. (Prof, Amnon Rubinstein referred to this in a November op-ed in The Jerusalem Post in which he spoke of the rights of the students.)

To what extent are governors conscious of the hatred resulting from those Israeli academics that promote BDS (boycott, divestment and sanctions) against Israel? Is it not strange that they are able to travel abroad calling for the boycott of the very universities from which they receive their livelihood?

Do governors recognize the devastating effect of this Israel-bashing on students in their respective countries? For example, a number of Israeli academics spearheaded the recent "Israel Apartheid Week" (now in its sixth year) aimed to show the country as an apartheid state like South Africa was. London was the scene of major anti-Israel activity during this "Apartheid Week," led by an associate professor from Tel Aviv University. The prime objective was to isolate, delegitimize and dehumanize the one Jewish state. This is particularly disturbing when seen in conjunction with Jewish students who feel unable to stand up to the increasingly virulent anti-Israel bombardment on campus.

WHILE WE pride ourselves on being a democratic country where free speech is a given right, every society places a limit on free speech. Surely it is unacceptable that there are those employed by Israeli universities who educate their students to see the country as a colonial and pariah state as well as travelling abroad to call for BDS.

Today, it is quite clear that there is a turning away from Israel – sadly also among Jews – the result of both an effective anti-Israel media campaign together with an Israel whose leadership has long dismissed the relevance of hasbara. The student on campus is at the forefront of the battle for Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state. The question is, are Jewish students receiving the necessary support to confront the ever-growing hostility?

As a former chair of the Hillel Foundation in the UK, I can say that some 12 years ago Jewish students spoke up for Israel with pride and eloquence. Today, it is becoming increasingly difficult to find student activists willing and capable of standing up and being counted. While it is incumbent on communities worldwide to support the Jewish students by ensuring they are armed with the facts, it would seem that we now have to address a second challenge, that of those who educate toward the demise of Israel.

It is from universities that tomorrow's leaders will emerge. This applies to the political leadership in each country as well as leadership for the respective Jewish communities. Surely it is incumbent on all of us, but especially on those who have connections with universities here, to do all we can to ensure that our students are not educated to turn away from Israel. It is of vital importance to our Jewish future that our students are made aware of our people's right to its historic homeland, and to feel pride in all that this little state has achieved since its rebirth in 1948.

The writer is co-chair of Europeans for Israel and public-relations chair of World WIZO

***************************************

******************************************************************************************

HAARETZ

EDITORIAL

NETANYAHU'S HUMP

THOSE WHO TRULY BELIEVE THAT WITHDRAWALS, INCLUDING IN JERUSALEM, WILL GIVE ISRAEL A BRIGHTER FUTURE, BEAR A SPECIAL OBLIGATION TO SUPPORT THEIR PRIME MINISTER NOW.

Benjamin Netanyahu is entering the proximity talks with a hump of many years' standing on his back, a hump inherited from his predecessors, especially Ehud Barak. This hump will almost certainly prove to be a primary cause of the expected failure of a process that has been forced on both sides.

This week marks the 10th anniversary of Barak's panicked and humiliating flight from south Lebanon. Ever since then, Hezbollah, the Palestinians and, in fact, the entire Arab world have viewed Israel as a country that, because of the deaths of about 20 soldiers a year, lost its will to fight - the will that enables the country to exist as a Jewish state amid the hundreds of millions of hostile Muslims in the region.

Barak's inability to distinguish the important from the trivial was again on display during the war of terror that Yasser Arafat launched in response to Barak's strategic mistake of fleeing Lebanon unilaterally. For many long months, this terror exacted its deadly toll on us, yet Barak lacked the guts to respond. This failure to respond caused Israelis to lose faith in their country, their army and their future in this region.

This weakness also encouraged terrorist organizations to intensify the slaughter, while nations that used to admire Israel for its courage began to adopt pro-Palestinian policies, despite the vicious Palestinian terror attacks. And now Barak, the man responsible for these egregious strategic mistakes, is the cabinet's chief supporter of the proximity talks.

Netanyahu is also saddled with the hump he inherited from the disengagement. This move, which was theoretically supposed to give Israel more room to maneuver, was viewed by the Palestinians and their supporters as further proof of Israel's waning strength and stamina. For the disengagement entailed not only flight, but also a despair that lasted for three years, until Operation Cast Lead in Gaza. (Similarly, Operation Defensive Shield in the West Bank was launched only after a year and a half of terror, and after Barak had been replaced by Ariel Sharon. )

Our inferior diplomatic position is thus the rotten fruit of strategic mistakes and military weakness: The Palestinians are convinced that a combination of diplomatic maneuvering (like the evasive maneuvers they have engaged in ever since Barack Obama became president of the United States ), cries of distress from Jordan and Egypt, threats of war from both the east and the north, and the international pressure spearheaded by Obama will finally defeat Israel.

In this psychological and diplomatic situation - in which the prime minister bears an intolerable burden, and it is doubtful that he will have the strength to withstand the combined Palestinian, American and European pressure - it is vital to forge a nonpartisan domestic front to strengthen Netanyahu and enable him to withstand this enormous pressure. Only thus will it be possible to prevent a diplomatic defeat for Israel in the proximity talks (which involve neither truth nor reconciliation, but are solely a trap for Israel ).

This supportive front must be joined by every Zionist actor in both Israel and the Diaspora. And it must certainly be joined by all of Netanyahu's coalition partners, some of whom miss no opportunity to publicly assail him, in the process weakening the state in which they serve as ministers and Knesset members.

But it is those who truly believe that withdrawals, including in Jerusalem, will give Israel a brighter future, those who truly are convinced that the Palestinians want peace and accept the formula of two states for two peoples, who bear a special obligation to support their prime minister now.

For we have long since learned that a weak prime minister and a weak Israeli government bolster Palestinian hopes of defeating Israel, causing them to withdraw from agreements already reached and make demands that even a government under brutal American pressure could never accept. And in consequence, the peace for which they yearn will only recede still further.

**************************************

HAARETZ

EDITORIAL

THE FRIEND

AS THIS WEEK'S MEETING BETWEEN ELIE WIESEL AND OBAMA SHOWS, WITH FRIENDS LIKE THAT, ISRAEL DOESN'T NEED ENEMIES.

BY GIDEON LEVY

The settlers of Pisgat Ze'ev, the intruders of Sheikh Jarrah, the people who covet Silwan, the infiltrators into the Muslim Quarter and you, the mayor of the nationalist city, Nir Barkat, can stop worrying: (All of ) Jerusalem is yours, forever. Nobel laureate Elie Wiesel met at the White House with his friend, Barack Obama, on a mission from his other friend, Benjamin Netanyahu, and when he came out he said he had the impression that Obama respected his advice to postpone discussions on Jerusalem.

With friends like that, Israel doesn't need enemies. Sixty-two years after declaring its sovereignty, Israel still needs Jewish influence peddlers - one time it's Wiesel and one time it's Ron Lauder - to appeal to the nobleman. Forty-three years since the occupation started and these people are only working to perpetuate it.

There are not many Jews like Wiesel, to whom the White House door is open and the president lends an ear. And what does Wiesel do with this golden opportunity? He talks to Obama about postponing discussions on Jerusalem. Not about the need for an end to the occupation, not about the opportunity to establish a just peace (and a just Israel ), not about the outrageous injustice to the Palestinians. Only perpetuating the occupation.

Instead of a figure considered so moral taking advantage of a presidential meal to urge his host to end Israel's endless foot-dragging, Wiesel haggled for wholesale postponement. He did this ostensibly for the good of a country whose prime minister, just one year ago, gave his two-state speech, but has not lifted a finger to implement it. A country with which Syria is almost begging to make peace and against which the Palestinians have long stopped using terror. But it continues in its refusal to make peace. In light of all this, what does the friend recommend? To postpone. Postpone and postpone, like Netanyahu, who sent him, asked him to do.

The man the Nobel Prize committee said is "a messenger to mankind; his message is one of peace, atonement and human dignity," is doing just the opposite. Not peace, not atonement and not human dignity, certainly not for the Palestinians. After the ridiculous ad campaign in the American press, based on the fact that Jerusalem is mentioned in the Bible ("more than 600 times" ) and not once in the Koran, perhaps, heaven forbid, the American president of change will listen to the bad advice of his friend, the Holocaust survivor, and decimate any chance for peace.

Wiesel will make arrangements and Obama will postpone. Around a quarter of a million Palestinians will continue to live another generation under Israeli occupation. A quarter of a million? Three and a half million, because to Obama, Wiesel and in fact everyone, it's clear that without dividing Jerusalem there will be no peace.

And what if Obama postpones discussions on Jerusalem as his friend requested? Postpone until when? For another 43 years? Maybe another 430 years? And what will happen in the meantime? Another 100,000 settlers? A Hamas government in the West Bank, too? And why? Because Jerusalem isn't mentioned in the Koran, its Palestinian residents don't have a right to self-determination?

And what about the sanctity of Jerusalem as the third holiest city in Islam after Mecca and Medina? What does sanctity have to do with sovereignty, anyhow? What will happen if once again the discussion is postponed and they talk about water, as Netanyahu wants? These are all questions the friend was not asked.

How depressing to think that these are currently the Jewish people's greatest role models. It's as if they think that automatic and blind support of Israel and its caprices means true friendship - that perpetuating the occupation serves Israel's goals rather than endangers its future. It's as if they let their conscience speak out about the world's injustices, but when it comes to Israel's injustices they have a veil over their eyes and their voice falls silent.

If I were Elie Wiesel, such a famous Holocaust survivor, a Nobel Prize laureate whose voice is heard in high places, I would ask my friend in the White House, for the sake of peace, Israel's future and world peace: Please, Mr. President, be forceful. Israel depends on you as never before. Isolated as never before, it's as good as dead without American support. Therefore, Mr. President, I would say to Obama over the kosher meal that was served, be a true friend of Israel and extricate it from its misfortune.

***************************************

HAARETZ

EDITORIAL

WHO'LL BE OUR NICK CLEGG?

AN ISRAELI NICK CLEGG WOULD FIRST HAVE TO PUT TOGETHER A TEAM OF PEOPLE WHO PROVE THEIR WORTH NOT BY PROMOTING THEMSELVES BUT BY PROMOTING A NEW SERVING ELITE.

BY ARI SHAVIT

You don't have to be a political genius to know who's going to win the next election in Israel. The winner will be the person who comes up with a practical proposal for Zionist renewal - someone who takes a courageous stand against the post-Zionism of the ultra-Orthodox, the chauvinists and the left. The winner will be someone who attracts the sane but beleaguered Zionist center, someone who inspires the silent Israeli majority that loves its country and is seeing it disintegrate before its eyes. The winner will be the one whose personality, past and talents embody another Israel: vigorous, enlightened and prosperous.

Benjamin Netanyahu? He was supposed to be the perfect renewer of Zionism: secular, educated and a man of quality who lives Theodor Herzl's vision and is capable of achieving it. Netanyahu, however, insists on being Netanyahu. He behaves like a disciple not of Ze'ev Jabotinsky but of some small-time synagogue official. He believes in the free market but doesn't defend the free society. He believes in economic progress but doesn't foster cultural progress. In the way Ehud Olmert handed Jerusalem to the ultra-Orthodox, Netanyahu is handing them the country. He stands and watches while the Jewish state is becoming the opposite of the state that Herzl dreamed of.

Ehud Barak? Barak, too, could have been a worthy renewer of Zionism. With all his faults, Barak is an outstanding person of remarkable talents. If he took the trouble to behave like a civilian leader, he would be able to set up a promising coalition of high-quality Israelis. But Barak has vanished into his handsome office in the Defense Ministry in Tel Aviv. He functions today as both defense minister and foreign minister, and as a supreme military chief of staff and the prime minister's Siamese twin. He doesn't seem to have enough energy left to kick-start a Zionist renewal.

Tzipi Livni? Netanyahu and Barak are working overtime on Livni's behalf. They are giving her great slam-dunk passes, but she fumbles them all. She made a great mistake when she didn't take Kadima into the government. But Livni's chances are still not too bad. If she finds a good message and puts together a good team, she could be the next prime minister. But so far, she has not responded to the deep yearning of most Israelis for profound change.

A Nick Clegg? With the national leadership fossilizing, the chances are good that some Nick Clegg will appear and reshuffle the deck. The chances are good that someone who has not been standing at the front of the stage will steal the show. Someone who offers the public what it has not yet been offered could collect all the winnings and fundamentally alter the political landscape. In the current situation, Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi is the leading candidate. Likud MK Gideon Sa'ar is the alternative candidate. But media personality Yair Lapid also wants it, as does Ariel Sharon's son Gilad. This week, Tel Aviv Mayor Ron Huldai also tossed his hat into the ring.

Beware: Israel can ill-afford another disastrous political adventure. We've had Dash, Shinui and Kadima. Three times the Israeli center has tried to offer something new and has failed - good Israelis trying to save the country but disappointing their supporters. A fourth failure would be one too many, a fatal disappointment. It is therefore necessary for all the candidates of the next generation to show great responsibility, do their homework, test their abilities, display maturity and show that they are really out to serve the nation, not themselves.

To get itself out of trouble, Israel urgently needs people like Shlomo Yanai, Shlomo Dovrat, Shlomo Nehama, Shlomo Ben-Ami, Ruth Gavison and Uriel Reichman. These people will not go into politics unless it is brought to them. So the first test facing each Israeli Nick Clegg is to put together an exemplary team. They have to prove themselves not by promoting themselves but by promoting a new serving elite. Only if a potential Clegg puts together a leadership for the coming generation will the star of that generation become a worthy Zionist leader.

***************************************

HAARETZ

EDITORIA

NOT TAKING LISTENER REQUESTS

The proximity talks are not a call-in program taking listener requests. The time has passed for the Palestinian Authority, and even the U.S. government, to dance to the tune of the Israeli piper.

After an exhausting odyssey, it seems that the Obama administration has finally managed to get the peace process going again. Although the dispute over the construction freeze in East Jerusalem has precluded direct bilateral talks, the proximity talks will break the ice that has been clogging up the Israeli-Palestinian track for over a year. Regrettably, the good news was received in Jerusalem with a demonstrative chill and a lowering of the already modest expectations that the talks will bring peace any closer.

On Monday, Barak Ravid reported in this paper that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would initially seek to focus the talks on security arrangements in the West Bank and water issues. Nobel laureate author Elie Wiesel said he got the feeling that U.S. President Barack Obama understands and respects his advice to hold off on discussions about the future of Jerusalem until a later stage.

It's no wonder that - as the head of the Military Intelligence research division, Brig. Gen. Yossi Baidatz, has said - the Palestinians interested in negotiations do not believe that Netanyahu and his government intend to make progress toward a final-status agreement.

The sourness with which the government is anticipating the talks was expressed in the decision to present to the cabinet (and the public ) a Palestinian "incitement index," of all things. A senior official reported that with the opening of the indirect negotiations Israel would demand that the Palestinians act to stop anti-Israel incitement and promote education toward peace. Now that acts of violence have almost entirely disappeared, the (justified ) criticism of incitement has taken the lead in the diversionary war that some senior ministers are waging against the peace process.

If the government genuinely wants to put an end to the conflict it will have to find a way to speed up negotiations and restore the Palestinian neighbors' confidence in it. If Netanyahu really believes in what he said in his Bar-Ilan speech, he must honor the commitment made by his predecessor, Ehud Olmert, at the Annapolis conference, and continue with a practical discussion of all core issues, mainly permanent borders, Jerusalem and the refugees.

The proximity talks are not a call-in program taking listener requests. The time has passed for the Palestinian Authority, and even the U.S. government, to dance to the tune of the Israeli piper. The hour has come for the decision makers to realize that time is working against the world's only Jewish democratic state. Netanyahu and his advisers would do well to drop their stalling tactics and direct their energy toward advancing the solution of two states for two peoples.

***************************************

HAARETZ

EDITORIAL

PROTECTING OUR CHILDREN FROM OURSELVES

PERHAPS THE MANTRA 'DON'T TALK TO STRANGERS' DISTRACTS US FROM THE FACT THAT WE'RE NOT PROTECTING OUR CHILDREN FROM THE REAL DANGER.

BY AMALIA ROSENBLUM

High among Israeli children's 10 commandments is the edict "Don't talk to strangers." This is understandable - we live in a threatening world and want to protect our children from perverts hiding behind Internet bushes and from strangers in playgrounds.

It seems that this fear goes back to the legendary Pied Piper of Hamelin, who captivated children with his magical playing. But beyond the basic rules of behavior, is the dread of strangers that we plant in our children really justified?

On the face of it, the National Council for the Child's figures show children face the greatest danger outside the home. In 2008, 6,337 files were opened for offenses committed against children outside the family, compared to 2,405 cases for domestic offenses.

But you have to know how to read these figures. International research shows the number of reported cases of domestic child abuse constitutes an extremely low percentage of actual cases. In other words, most childhood sexual abuse occurrences are perpetrated by a family member at home or by someone close to the family. In cases of chronic (non-sexual ) abuse the perpetrator is almost always someone close to the child rather than a stranger.

Professional literature also shows that ongoing sexual abuse in the family or close circle is incredibly damaging. Its results include severe psychological disorders leading to a disposition to drug addiction, crime and prostitution.

These harsh consequences are directly associated with the low reporting rate of the dark family secret. A child exposed to chronic abuse by a close person - an authority figure - experiences total helplessness. This stems in part from the inability to stop the abuse due to the extreme imbalance of physical as well as mental strength.

It is also evident that when a girl is abused by a person who is supposed to take care of her, her ability to develop basic trust in others is severely impaired.

So if the real danger to children is at home, why are we putting such an emphasis on the fear of strangers? Perhaps because the mantra "don't talk to strangers" distracts us from the fact that we're not protecting our children from the real danger.

The Social Affairs Ministry unit in charge of investigating children's cases is acutely understaffed. The ministry has 57 positions for children's investigators and special investigators. The shortage of people trained to deal with child abuse forces those brave or desperate children who dare to complain and yearn for help to wait for months before they receive any assistance.

Training investigators and adding positions costs money, but additional funds alone will not solve the problem. It is also necessary to change the individual approach to child abuse cases. It is important to teach children how to be extra careful with complete strangers.

But as adults in the community - parents, teachers and citizens - we must not be led astray by the pied piper fantasy. We must know that it is our responsibility to open our eyes, listen and report the condition of children in our community so that we can better protect them from ourselves.

***************************************

******************************************************************************************THE NEW YORK TIMES

EDITORIAL

SAVING THE TEACHERS

Last year's $100 billion education stimulus plan insulated the public schools from the worst of the recession and saved an estimated 300,000 jobs. With the economy still lagging and states forced to slash their budgets, Congress must act again to prevent a wave of teacher layoffs that could damage the fragile recovery and hobble the school reform effort for years to come.

In March, Representative George Miller, a Democrat of California, introduced a jobs bill that included a $23 billion school rescue plan. Senator Tom Harkin, a Democrat of Iowa, has since introduced a similar plan fashioned as an emergency spending bill. The House version is the better of the two.

The need for a second school stimulus plan was underscored on Monday by a new analysis from the American Association of School Administrators, which reported that cash-strapped districts were prepared to cut as many 275,000 jobs in the 2010-2011 school year.

The loss of that many paychecks — and the resulting decline in consumer spending — could kill off still more jobs in the communities where teachers and other school employees live.

Assuming that both houses pass their respective bills, House leaders should insist on two important changes.

First, they should discard ambiguous language in both bills that could allow that states to use the money for expenditures other than education. Second, they should remove a provision of the Senate version that exempts the states from adhering to important reform requirements laid out the original stimulus bill.

Under those conditions, states are barred from cutting school funds and using the new federal dollars to fill the gap. They are also required to create data driven systems for monitoring student progress and evaluating teachers — and to ensure that low-income and minority children are no longer disproportionately taught by unqualified teachers.

Despite arguments to the contrary, the school rescue plan can, in fact, do double duty.

It could both prevent layoffs and advance the cause of reform.

***************************************

THE NEW YORK TIMES

FEAR ITSELF

There are many important and urgent questions about the man accused of trying to set off a car bomb in Times Square.

Officials say Faisal Shahzad admitted to the attempt and said he learned bomb-making at a camp in Pakistan. Is Mr. Shahzad indeed connected to the Pakistani Taliban, which American officials now say seems likely? Was he working with others in this country who may be at large? How did Mr. Shahzad, a naturalized citizen whose family includes a senior Pakistani military officer, end up trying to murder countless people?

There are questions, too, about how the F.B.I. lost track of Mr. Shahzad for a time and why he was allowed to board an international flight despite a special alert issued by United States authorities.

The answers to such questions directly affect the security of Americans, and law enforcement officials are beginning to get them. That hasn't stopped a familiar group of politicians from cynically trying to use this incident as yet another excuse to weaken the rule of law and this country's barely recovering reputation.

Lawmakers like Senators John McCain of Arizona and Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut and Representative Peter King of New York were immediately outraged that Mr. Shahzad — a United States citizen accused of an attempted attack on civilians in an American city — was arrested by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and eventually read his Miranda rights.

They are demanding that Mr. Shahzad be declared an illegal enemy combatant, stripped of any rights and brought before a military tribunal. They have opened another round of sneering at "the law enforcement approach" to terrorism. That is contemptuous, first of all, of the police officers whose quick actions may have saved untold numbers and the other people who identified and tracked Mr. Shahzad with amazing speed.

It also ignores reality. According to all reports, Mr. Shahzad started talking even before he was read his rights ("the law enforcement approach" allows investigators to question suspects immediately if there is an imminent threat to the public). When he was read his rights, Mr. Shahzad seems to have kept talking. The Times reported on Wednesday that he waived his right to a speedy arraignment — to go on talking.

To get around the inconvenient fact that Mr. Shahzad is a citizen, Mr. Lieberman is even calling for a law allowing Americans accused (not convicted) of unspecified crimes to be stripped of their citizenship and retroactively deprived of due process under the law.

This is not Mr. Lieberman's first foray into this dark territory. He is co-author with Mr. McCain of a bill that would require that anyone arrested on any terrorism-related charge, including American citizens, be declared an enemy combatant and tried in a military court.

Let's be clear about what works and what doesn't.

There is no evidence that vital intelligence has been lost, or a terrorist attack allowed to happen, because a suspect was questioned lawfully. The men who interrogated top-ranking terrorist suspects following the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks said the prisoners gave up their valuable knowledge before being subjected to waterboarding and other illegal acts.

Federal courts have convicted hundreds of people on terrorism-related charges since 2001. The tribunals have obtained one guilty plea from a prisoner who may not have done anything and was subsequently released.

Senators McCain and Lieberman say military trials will show strength. Abandoning democratic institutions in the face of terrorism is an act of surrender. It will not make this country safer. It will make it more vulnerable.

***************************************

THE NEW YORK TIMES

VIDEO GAMES AND FREE SPEECH

There are countless parents who will not allow their children to play violent video games, in which players are able to kill, maim, dismember or sexually assault human images in depraved ways. The video game industry rates them, and some stores use that rating to decide whether to sell a particular game to a minor.

But California went too far in 2005 when it made it illegal to sell violent video games to minors. Retailers challenged the law, and a federal appeals court rightly ruled that it violates the First Amendment. Last week, the Supreme Court said that it would review that decision. We hope it agrees that the law is unconstitutional.

California's law imposes fines of up to $1,000 on retailers that sell violent video games to anyone under 18. To qualify, a game must, as a whole, lack serious literary artistic, political or scientific value for minors.

But video games are a form of free expression. Many have elaborate plots and characters, often drawn from fiction or history. The California law is a content-based restriction, something that is presumed invalid under the First Amendment. The Supreme Court has made it clear that minors have First Amendment rights.

California has tried to lower the constitutional standard for upholding the law by comparing it to "variable obscenity," a First Amendment principle that allows banning the sale of some sexually explicit materials to minors that cannot be banned for adults. The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in San Francisco, like other federal courts, rightly refused to extend that doctrine to violent games.

Under traditional First Amendment analysis, content-based speech restrictions can survive only if they are narrowly tailored to promote a compelling government interest. California says its interest is in preventing psychological or neurological damage to young people. The appeals court concluded that the evidence connecting violent video games to this sort of damage is too weak to make restricting the games a compelling government interest.

Even if the interest were legitimate, the state could have used less restrictive methods. The video game industry, like the movie business, has a voluntary rating system that provides buyers and sellers with information on the content of specific games, including age-specific ratings, ranging from "early childhood" to "adults only." The government could do more to promote the use of voluntary ratings by retailers and parents.

California lawmakers may have been right when they decided that video games in which players kill and maim are not the most socially beneficial form of expression. The Constitution, however, does not require speech to be ideal for it to be protected.

***************************************

THE NEW YORK TIMES

HE PROBABLY DIDN'T MEAN TO

Sometimes politicians accidentally tell a very big truth. That's what happened at a New York State Democratic conference in Niagara Falls last week. Malcolm Smith, the State Senate president, was talking to party members about the redistricting that has to take place before the 2012 elections. If Democrats keep control of the State Senate next year, he vowed, "we are going to draw the lines so that Republicans will be in oblivion in the state of New York for the next 20 years."

We have long known that Albany's venal crowd — both parties — see political mapmaking as the best way to guarantee themselves lifetime employment. You just don't expect to hear them admit it in public.

The current system is gerrymandering, pure and cynical. It is hugely unfair to voters who deserve real elections with real choices rather than these old mapmaking scams that are the foundation of Albany's dysfunction and inertia.

If you don't believe us, just listen to Mr. Smith. He has made the case for why New York desperately needs a

new, fair, nonpartisan system for drawing Congressional and legislative districts. The answer is an independent, redistricting commission now being championed by Assemblyman Michael Gianaris and Senator David Valesky, both Democrats. Leaders of both houses should assure that this bill makes it to the floor for a vote in the next few weeks.

Voters should also put their representatives on notice right now: Support the creation of an honest redistricting commission or we'll vote you out in November. They must also insist that all candidates for governor take an airtight pledge that they will support the Gianaris-Valesky proposal — and, if elected, will veto any gerrymandered maps brought to the governor's desk.

Mr. Smith scoffs at such reforms. He says that Democrats can draw maps fairly. Republicans also promise that they could do it right if they were just back in control. Voters, don't you believe it.

***************************************

THE NEW YORK TIMES

AL QAEDA'S NUCLEAR PLANT

BY CHARLES FADDIS

Davidsonville, Md.

ALL eyes are on Faisal Shahzad, the man charged with the attempted bombing in Times Square on Saturday.

But perhaps we ought to be concerned a bit less with Mr. Shahzad, a failed terrorist now in custody, and significantly more with Sharif Mobley — a New Jersey native, a former high school wrestler and, until shortly before he moved to Yemen to allegedly join Al Qaeda, a maintenance worker at five nuclear power plants along the East Coast.

Since his arrest by Yemeni security forces in March, American law enforcement officials have taken pains to emphasize that Mr. Mobley's low security clearance makes it unlikely that he passed crucial details about American nuclear-plant security to Al Qaeda.

But it doesn't take top-level clearance to know how to set off a nuclear meltdown. All it takes is information on perimeter security — information Mr. Mobley possesses about every plant where he worked.

A nuclear power plant is very different from a coal- or gas-burning plant. If something goes wrong at such a plant, boilers can be quickly shut down, averting disaster.

But there's no way to quickly shut off a reactor: the heat that builds up inside it is so intense that even if something goes wrong, cooling water must continue to circulate through its systems for days before it is safe.

If the cooling system malfunctions, even if the rest of the plant is operating safely, the heat will literally melt the reactor and its concrete containment shell, releasing radioactive gas into the atmosphere — in other words, a partial nuclear meltdown like that at Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania in 1979.

And it turns out that damaging a reactor's cooling system is a lot easier than getting to the core. You don't have to obtain access to the nuclear fuel, get into the control room or penetrate the containment shell. Most of the critical components of the cooling system, including pumps and water intake pipes, sit unprotected outside. If you can get a car bomb or a team with demolition charges near these components, you can shut off the cooling water to the reactor, and physics will take care of the rest.

Even low-level employees at a nuclear plant would have the information necessary to pull off such an attack, like the number of guards, their weapons and procedures at entry gates — even someone as low-level as Sharif Mobley.

We don't yet know what kind of plant-security information, if any, Mr. Mobley passed on to Al Qaeda. But we do know that the organization has been interested in attacking American nuclear plants for years; it even considered including a plant on its Sept. 11 target list.

For now, we have no choice but to assume that Mr. Mobley did in fact pass on details about plant security, and we need to take immediate steps to head off any possible terrorist attack. Defensive schemes at the plants where Mr. Mobley worked need to be significantly changed so that his information is no longer of value to any potential attacker. Guard procedures, for example, must be altered. Where such changes cannot adequately compensate for the potential risk Mr. Mobley presents, then defenses need to be strengthened. Security perimeters need to be widened. And more barriers must be put in place against car bombs.

Once we have dealt with the plants where Mr. Mobley worked, we need to institute similar procedures at the remainder of the nuclear plants in the United States, because the unfortunate truth is that the defensive schemes at these sites are essentially all alike.

For too long we've assumed that a nuclear plant is safe as long as its reactor is protected. Sharif Mobley knew better. Now, chances are, so does Al Qaeda.

Charles Faddis, a former officer at the Central Intelligence Agency, is the author of "Willful Neglect: The Dangerous Illusion of Homeland Security."

***************************************

THE NEW YORK TIMES

WAITING AT THE TOP OF THE WORLD

BY MANJUSHREE THAPA

Katmandu, Nepal

IN her 1967 travelogue, the Irish writer Dervla Murphy described my homeland, Nepal, as a country that had just emerged from centuries of isolation, and was baffled about how to be part of the modern world. Most of what the Nepalese — and she — did was to wait for something to happen.

"We waited endlessly for everything," Ms. Murphy wrote. "For glasses of tea to be carried on trays from the bazaar, for a policeman's bunch of keys to be fetched from his home down the road, for an adjustable rubber stamp which would not adjust to be dissected (and finally abandoned in favor of a pen), for a passport officer to track down Ireland (whose existence he seriously questioned) in a dog-eared atlas from which the relevant pages had long since been torn, and for the chief customs officer, who was afflicted by a virulent form of dysentery, to withdraw to a nearby field between inspecting each piece of luggage."

The main wait in Nepal, at present, is for an end to the nationwide general strike that began on Sunday. The Maoists, who led our Constituent Assembly until losing their coalition partners last year, have trucked tens of thousands of party cadres into Katmandu to enforce the strike. They are trying to stage what they call a "people's movement" to form an all-party government — with the Maoists in control.

Katmandu has come to a halt as bands of Maoists brandishing sticks march through the streets ensuring that government offices and businesses stay shuttered. Schools are closed, households are running out of food, and even money is in short supply, since all the banks are closed. Tempers are flaring. It would not take much for people's discontent with the strike to tip into civil unrest.

Even before the strike, the country had entered an advanced state of entropy. Unable to meet demand, the Nepal Electricity Authority rations power. Most neighborhoods get only about 12 hours of electricity, mostly after 10 p.m. People must seek out alternative sources of energy, or conduct much of their work outside of normal hours. Electric kettles, ovens, freezers — even lights — are a luxury that most forgo. People carry flashlights at night and read by candlelight.

The other utilities are similarly overstretched. Katmandu's mains fill with water only once every six days, for about three hours — often at two in the morning. Homeowners must scramble to fill their tanks then, or else truck in water from expensive private companies. The telephone networks are always busy. Calls do not go through or are reduced to gibberish: "I can't hear you. Can you hear me?" The city's air is rank with dust and exhaust; its rivers are open sewers that pedestrians scurry by, noses covered.

There are too many vehicles for the few tortuous roads. In the place of public transport, fleets of private vans career from stop to stop with their hapless, nauseated passengers. The existing health care facilities do not meet the needs of the three million residents. There are few jobs. To add to the insecurity, an earthquake — a big one — is long overdue. "Unsustainable" is the word that springs to mind when one thinks of the future of Katmandu.

Bad as this is, it is not the worst of Nepal's woes. Since long before the strike, we have been waiting to discover what kind of country this is to become. Nepal was promised a new constitution in 2006, when the decade-long Maoist insurgency ended with an agreement between the insurgents and the democratic political parties to make a new Nepal, a federal democratic republic that would replace the autocracies, monarchies and struggling democracies of the past.

This Assembly has, since then, set 11 thematic committees to work drafting legislation. Unfortunately, some of these committees have drafted parallel (and irreconcilable) laws, leaving key issues unresolved. Should the new Nepal be an Indian-style parliamentary democracy or a Chinese-style party dictatorship? Should the Supreme Court be independent, or subject to parliamentary review? What should be the boundaries of the federal states, and how should these states share power with each other and the center? Should executive power reside with the president or the prime minister?

All this — and more — is undecided. A final draft of the constitution is supposed to be submitted by May 28. The deadline will obviously be missed.

And so, instead of waiting for something as constructive and exalted as a constitution, the Nepalese are waiting for more mundane things like for the strike to end, for electricity and water to return.

This is surely not the future Nepal was hoping for when Dervla Murphy came here 40 years ago. We Nepalese are still baffled about how to be part of the modern world. For this we are still, and seemingly forever, waiting.

Manjushree Thapa is the author, most recently, of the novel "Seasons of Flight."

***************************************

THE NEW YORK TIMES

CONGRESS, UP IN ARMS

BY GAIL COLLINS

There seems to be a strong sentiment in Congress that the only constitutional right suspected terrorists have is the right to bear arms.

"I think you're going too far here," said Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina at a hearing of the Senate Homeland Security Committee on Wednesday. He was speaking in opposition to a bill that would keep people on the F.B.I. terrorist watch list from buying guns and explosives.

Say what?

Yes, if you are on the terrorist watch list, the authorities can keep you from getting on a plane but not from purchasing an AK-47. This makes sense to Congress because, as Graham accurately pointed out, "when the founders sat down and wrote the Constitution, they didn't consider flying."

The subject of guns turns Congress into a twilight zone. People who are perfectly happy to let the government wiretap phones go nuts when the government wants to keep track of weapons permits. A guy who stands up in the House and defends the torture of terror suspects will nearly faint with horror at the prospect of depriving someone on the watch list of the right to purchase a pistol.

"We make it so easy for dangerous people to get guns. If it's the Second Amendment, it doesn't matter if they're Osama bin Laden," said Paul Helmke, the president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.

Graham wanted to make it clear that just because he doesn't want to stop gun purchases by possible terrorists, that doesn't mean he's not tough on terror.

"I am all into national security. ... I want to stop reading these guys their Miranda rights," he said.

The Obama administration has been criticized by many Republicans for having followed the rules about how long you can question a terror suspect before you read him his rights. These objections have been particularly loud since the arrest of Faisal Shahzad in the attempted Times Square bombing. No one seems moved by the fact that Shahzad, after being told that he had the right to remain silent, continued talking incessantly.

"Nobody in their right mind would expect a Marine to read someone caught on the battlefield their rights," Graham said.

Terror threats make politicians behave somewhat irrationally. But the subject of guns makes them act like a paranoid mother ferret protecting her litter. The National Rifle Association, the fiercest lobby in Washington, grades every member of Congress on how well they toe the N.R.A. line. Lawmakers with heavily rural districts would rather vote to legalize carrying concealed weapons in kindergarten than risk getting less than 100 percent.

The Senate Homeland Security Committee hearing on "Terrorists and Guns: The Nature of the Threat and Proposed Reforms," concerned a modest bill sponsored by Senator Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey. It would allow the government to stop gun sales to people on the F.B.I. terror watch list the same way it does people who have felony convictions. Because Congress has repeatedly rejected this idea, 1,119 people on the watch list have been able to purchase weapons over the last six years. One of them bought 50 pounds of military grade explosives.

Mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York City and his police commissioner, Ray Kelly, dutifully trekked down to Washington to plead for the bill on behalf of the nation's cities. The only thing they got for their trouble was praise for getting the city through the Times Square incident in one piece. And almost everyone had a good word for the T-shirt vendor who first noticed the suspicious car and raised an alert. Really, if someone had introduced a bill calling for additional T-shirt vendors, it would have sailed through in a heartbeat.

Gun legislation, not so popular.

Lautenberg's bill has been moldering in committee, and that is not going to change.

"Let me emphasize that none of us wants a terrorist to be able to purchase a gun," said Senator Susan Collins of Maine, who nevertheless went on to argue against allowing the government to use the terrorist watch list to keep anyone from being able to purchase, um, a gun.

"Some of the people pushing this idea are also pushing the idea of banning handguns," said Graham, darkly. "I don't think banning handguns makes me safer."

The terrorist watch list is huge, and some of the names on it are undoubtedly there in error. The bill would allow anyone denied the right to purchase a firearm an appeal process, but that would deprive the would-be purchaser some precious gun-owning time. Before we subject innocent Americans "to having to go into court and pay the cost of going to court to get their gun rights back, I want to slow down and think about this," said Graham.

Slow is going to be very slow, and the thinking could go on for decades.

***************************************

THE NEW YORK TIMES

NEW ALARM BELLS ABOUT CHEMICALS AND CANCER

BY NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF

The President's Cancer Panel is the Mount Everest of the medical mainstream, so it is astonishing to learn that it is poised to join ranks with the organic food movement and declare: chemicals threaten our bodies.

The cancer panel is releasing a landmark 200-page report on Thursday, warning that our lackadaisical approach to regulation may have far-reaching consequences for our health.

I've read an advance copy of the report, and it's an extraordinary document. It calls on America to rethink the way we confront cancer, including much more rigorous regulation of chemicals.

Traditionally, we reduce cancer risks through regular doctor visits, self-examinations and screenings such as mammograms. The President's Cancer Panel suggests other eye-opening steps as well, such as giving preference to organic food, checking radon levels in the home and microwaving food in glass containers rather than plastic.

In particular, the report warns about exposures to chemicals during pregnancy, when risk of damage seems to be greatest. Noting that 300 contaminants have been detected in umbilical cord blood of newborn babies, the study warns that: "to a disturbing extent, babies are born 'pre-polluted.' "

It's striking that this report emerges not from the fringe but from the mission control of mainstream scientific and medical thinking, the President's Cancer Panel. Established in 1971, this is a group of three distinguished experts who review America's cancer program and report directly to the president.

One of the seats is now vacant, but the panel members who joined in this report are Dr. LaSalle Leffall Jr., an oncologist and professor of surgery at Howard University, and Dr. Margaret Kripke, an immunologist at the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center in Houston. Both were originally appointed to the panel by former President George W. Bush.

"We wanted to let people know that we're concerned, and that they should be concerned," Professor Leffall told me.

The report blames weak laws, lax enforcement and fragmented authority, as well as the existing regulatory presumption that chemicals are safe unless strong evidence emerges to the contrary.

"Only a few hundred of the more than 80,000 chemicals in use in the United States have been tested for safety," the report says. It adds: "Many known or suspected carcinogens are completely unregulated."

Industry may howl. The food industry has already been fighting legislation in the Senate backed by Dianne Feinstein of California that would ban bisphenol-A, commonly found in plastics and better known as BPA, from food and beverage containers.

Studies of BPA have raised alarm bells for decades, and the evidence is still complex and open to debate. That's life: In the real world, regulatory decisions usually must be made with ambiguous and conflicting data. The panel's point is that we should be prudent in such situations, rather than recklessly approving chemicals of uncertain effect.

The President's Cancer Panel report will give a boost to Senator Feinstein's efforts. It may also help the prospects of the Safe Chemicals Act, backed by Senator Frank Lautenberg and several colleagues, to improve the safety of chemicals on the market.

Some 41 percent of Americans will be diagnosed with cancer at some point in their lives, and they include Democrats and Republicans alike. Protecting ourselves and our children from toxins should be an effort that both parties can get behind — if enough members of Congress are willing to put the public interest ahead of corporate interests.

One reason for concern is that some cancers are becoming more common, particularly in children. We don't know why that is, but the proliferation of chemicals in water, foods, air and household products is widely suspected as a factor. I'm hoping the President's Cancer Panel report will shine a stronger spotlight on environmental causes of health problems — not only cancer, but perhaps also diabetes, obesity and autism.

This is not to say that chemicals are evil, and in many cases the evidence against a particular substance is balanced by other studies that are exonerating. To help people manage the uncertainty prudently, the report has a section of recommendations for individuals:

¶Particularly when pregnant and when children are small, choose foods, toys and garden products with fewer endocrine disruptors or other toxins. (Information about products is at www.cosmeticsdatabase.com or www.healthystuff.org.)

¶For those whose jobs may expose them to chemicals, remove shoes when entering the house and wash work clothes separately from the rest of the laundry.

¶Filter drinking water.

]

¶Store water in glass or stainless steel containers, or in plastics that don't contain BPA or phthalates (chemicals used to soften plastics). Microwave food in ceramic or glass containers.

¶Give preference to food grown without pesticides, chemical fertilizers and growth hormones. Avoid meats that are cooked well-done.

¶Check radon levels in your home. Radon is a natural source of radiation linked to cancer.

***************************************

******************************************************************************************

USA TODAY

EDITORIAL

OUR VIEW ON THE WORLD ECONOMY: GREEK DEBT CRISIS OFFERS PREVIEW OF WHAT AWAITS U.S.

For many years, U.S. lawmakers have been able to see the coming train wreck of excessive federal borrowing and have chosen to do nothing. Now the sovereign debt crises sweeping through Europe are sounding alarms loud enough that even Congress should be able to hear them. If not, the ugly scenes in Europe could, as the saying goes, be coming to a theater near you.

The situation is particularly acute in Greece, where massive debts have forced the government to propose

widely unpopular cuts in salaries, bonuses and pensions coupled with significant tax hikes. Interest rates have soared, and deadly riots have broken out in Athens.

To be sure, there are huge differences between Greece and the United States. Here, the federal government represents about 20% of the U.S. economy, whereas the Greek government is about 40% of its economy. Washington's big spending is on benefit programs such as Medicare and Social Security, rather than on compensation for a massive and militant cadre of public employees. And, perhaps most important, the USA doesn't share a currency with other countries, giving the nation more flexibility to print money if needed.

Before Americans get too smug, however, they should note the obvious: Debt is debt. If too much Greek borrowing can send world financial markets into turmoil like that of the past couple of days, imagine the damage a U.S. debt crisis would inflict.

Washington's public debt is nearly $8.5 trillion, which comes to about 58% of the U.S. economy, compared with ratios exceeding 100% in places like Greece. But the U.S. debt is rising fast, and its true size is masked by the surplus run by the Social Security trust fund. Factoring that in, the total national debt is about $13 trillion, or 90% of the economy. Including unfunded liabilities for such programs as Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, the federal government is looking at a long-term shortfall of about $62 trillion, or about $200,000 for every American, according to the Peter G. Peterson Foundation, a group devoted to promoting awareness about public borrowing.

These numbers should come as a shock. But in Washington, there appear to be two acceptable responses — denial and finger-pointing.

Nothing illustrates this more than Congress' failure in January to create a bipartisan commission just to propose ways of reducing the debt, forcing President Obama to create such a commission with an executive order.

Many Democrats cling to the fatuous and deceitful argument that commission members should keep their hands off Medicare and Social Security, which is tantamount to saying they should do nothing. Those two programs alone consume one-third of federal spending and constitute the vast bulk of the long-term debt problem.

At the same time, many Republicans— including Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, who had previously championed the commission approach— voted against the panel because they fear it will propose tax increases as a necessary piece of any solution.

Unless this type of petty behavior ends soon, and there are few indications that it will, the economic tragedy in Athens will simply be an out-of-town tryout for the show headed for Washington.

***************************************

USA TODAY

EDITORIAL

OTHER VIEWS ON THE WORLD ECONOMY: 'TIP OF THE ICEBERG'

Ryan Avent,The Economist: In the scheme of things, a Greek default is not a big deal. Greece is a small country, and exposure to Greek debt is relatively limited. A Portuguese default would be a little worse than a Greek default, and real trouble in Spain and Italy would be very bad indeed. It makes little sense to fret over the sacrifices Greek citizens can or cannot make to achieve the necessary fiscal adjustment. The first, second and third priority have to be containing the crisis. European leaders seem depressingly slow to grasp this.

Nouriel Roubini,The Christian Science Monitor: While the markets these days are worrying about Greece, it is only the tip of the iceberg, or the canary in the coal mine of a much broader range of fiscal crises. Today it is Greece. Tomorrow it will be Spain, Portugal, Ireland and Iceland. Sooner or later Japan and the U.S. will be at the core of the problem, shaking the global economy. ...

In Europe, where tax rates are already very high, the right adjustment is cutting spending instead of raising taxes further. In the U.S., the average tax burden as a share of GDP is much lower than in other advanced economies. The right adjustment for the U.S. would be to phase in revenue increases gradually over time so that you don't kill the recovery while controlling the growth of government spending. ...

In Greece (with yields higher than 12% on two-year bonds) or Spain or Portugal, the bond markets are forcing an adjustment. In spite of the recession, the markets are telling them to either straighten out their problems or go bankrupt. Unfortunately, there is no such adjustment being forced upon Washington. ... As a result, the political system is going to resist fiscal consolidation. This means the risk of something serious happening in the U.S. in the next two or three years is significant.

Hamish McRae, The Independent: Governments will be strapped for cash, year in, year out, for a generation. Demography will see to that. A shrinking workforce paying, through taxation, for a rising number of retirees, will redefine concepts of fairness and equality. Is it "fair" to tax hardworking young people to pay the pensions of people who have not been self-disciplined enough to save for their own retirement? Or pay for the health care of people who have undermined their health by smoking and not taking any exercise? You can see the anger of the young in Greece, an anger that will be replicated elsewhere as young workers realize what the Baby Boomers have done.

***************************************

USA TODAY

EDITORIAL

6 PLAC ES TO START CUTTING GOVERNMENT

Cal Thomas is a conservative columnist. Bob Beckel is a liberal Democratic strategist. But as longtime friends, they can often find common ground on issues that lawmakers in Washington cannot. View the video version of this column atwww.usatoday.com/news/opinion/default.htmor at USA TODAY's YouTube channel at youtube.com/usatoday.

Today: Cutting government.

Cal: With all the hand-wringing about the swelling U.S. deficit, you'd think Washington would get the message. If you're spending more than you're "earning," — or rather, taxing — you need to start cutting. Americans who have to balance their checkbooks get this.

Bob: You just said it, though: have to balance. If you have unlimited funds, as Congress seems to think it does, then it's a financial free-for-all.

Cal: Well, now that the president's deficit commission has been seated, let's send them down the right path: Cut first. And since we're talking about trillions in red ink as far as the eye can see, that means these cuts will almost certainly have to hurt someone.

Bob: Indeed, but it's better that we do it now rather than when — like Greece— a gun's being held to our head.

Cal: OK, so let's get going. Where to cut? I'd begin with a question: Can state and local governments and private industry more efficiently and at less expense accomplish the goals of a Cabinet department or a federal agency? If they can, let them.

Bob: No disagreement there.

1 Department of Education

Cal: New Jersey's new governor, Chris Christie, is trying to reduce the size and cost of state government. If he succeeds — and I believe the mood in that state is for revolutionary reform — New Jersey could be a model for the rest of the country, including Washington. These include, but are not limited to, removing tenure for incompetent teachers and cutting their bloated pensions, which were a gift to the unions in exchange for votes for Democrats. So No. 1, let's start with cuts at the Department of Education.

Bob: I am one liberal who believes this department spends too much money on national programs like No Child Left Behind that are best addressed at the state level. I could easily support cutting that department in half, with the savings going to the states — ideally starting with higher salaries for teachers.

Cal: So perhaps the great Ronald Reagan was right, after all, when he talked of eliminating the department.

Bob: Let's not get carried away!

2 Department of Agriculture

Cal: Ideally, I wish it were possible for the federal government to perform only those tasks specified in the Constitution and leave all the rest to the states, as specified in the 10th Amendment. But I realize that won't happen, so next up: the Department of Agriculture, which has roughly one employee for every 15 farmers. You think we could find some fat there?

Bob: Absolutely. Between 1996 and 2002, federal subsides to farmers have grown to $121 billion. In recent years, 72% of those subsidies went to huge corporate agribusinesses and the largest privately owned farms. So you have a symbiotic relationship between government and big farmers, but the American people are left holding the bill.

3 Faith-based initiatives

Cal: The government should not be collecting money to fund religious groups. Let's leave that to the churches. As such, I'd do away with any federal money going to religious organizations. This brainchild of President Bush, while noble in its intention, is an unnecessary intrusion by the government into something that ought to be the exclusive preserve of "religious" people whose allegiance is less to Washington than to a higher authority.

Bob: Right on. In 2004, the White House "faith czar" under Bush announced that $40 billion in federal funds were then available to religious groups. President Obama has embraced this concept, even as he has tried to put his own mark on it. For many reasons — fiscal, religious and otherwise — this program needs to end.

4 Future bailouts

Cal: I was opposed to all the bailouts — from banks to GM and Chrysler— which were begun in the Bush administration and continued in the Obama administration. The threat of failure with no bailout is the best insurance that people will make better decisions and take fewer risks. As long as the prospects for a federal bailout exist (under the "too big to fail" scenario) corporations will take risks they otherwise might not take.

Bob: I didn't like bailouts either, but the reality was that the domestic auto industry, long a mainstay of American manufacturing, would have been left with only one company (Ford), not to mention the loss of hundreds of thousands of auto manufacturing jobs. AIG particularly irked me, but had it gone under as the largest insurance company, the world may well have been thrown into a depression. I agree on bailouts of the big banks. Goldman Sachs received billions in 2008 from taxpayers and announced record profits last year. Outrageous.

Cal: Well, let's agree on this — no more bailouts. Let's make sure businesses large and small realize once again that if you risk it all, you can lose it all. The government should be there to protect the people, not to redirect the people's money.

Bob: Close enough, though I'd say no more bailouts unless it's an absolute national emergency. And even then, only as a last resort.

5 Defense Department

Bob: I know that Republicans always harp on Democrats for cutting defense spending, but when you're talking about a piece of the budget pie this large, it has to be on the table when you're talking about cuts.

Cal: I'll buy that.

Bob: The Defense Department will receive $534 billion in this fiscal year. And billions are wasted each year on unnecessary defense programs — see the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter jet — which are not reasonable in a post-Cold War era.

Cal: I completely agree. A balance must be found between necessary weapons systems for our strong defense and pork for members of Congress interested in defending their seats.

Bob: The key in selling defense cuts is letting the American people know that less is sometimes more. Losing the next whiz-bang fighter jet won't make us less safe.

6 Entitlement programs

Cal: I've saved the best for last: If we have any real hopes of getting our spending under control, we have to — have to! — cut entitlement spending.

Bob: As the Obama administration has suggested, billions of dollars are lost each year simply to waste and fraud in the Medicare and Medicaid programs. These can and should be cut. As for the granddaddy of entitlements, Social Security, the time has come to increase the age for payments to 70. When the program was launched, the intention was not to dole out 30 years of benefits. But as we live longer, that's often the case. We should also means-test so that wealthier retirees get less.

Cal: Reagan, with the help of Democrats, had the courage to tackle Social Security reform in the 1980s. But where are the courageous politicians today when it comes to such meaningful reforms and substantial cuts in government?

***************************************

USA TODAY

EDITORIAL

AN ELECTION LIKE NO OTHER

BY CHUCK RAASCH

WASHINGTON — As the retirement of veteran Democrat Rep. David Obey of Wisconsin points out, the 2010 elections are debunking any notion that this is politics as usual.

Three overarching factors are creating the atmosphere:

First, former House speaker Tip O'Neill's axiom that all politics is local is inoperable. Both sides are nationalizing the congressional elections of 2010. The national winds are a gale against incumbents, and more of them are Democrats.

Second, the choices are so stark that you can also set aside the old saw that there is no difference between Democrats and Republicans. Campaigns will be ideological and nasty, and some veterans, like Obey, are going out on their own terms.

And third, this election is as much about 2012 as it is about right now. More on that point will come later.

Before George W. Bush in 2002, the sitting president's party dating back to Dwight Eisenhower lost an average of 19 House seats and one Senate seat in his first midterm election. In an angry anti-incumbent environment, Democrats would consider losses of that scale a victory.

Every election in the second year of a president's first term in office is a de facto referendum on his performance. If a president's party controls Congress, as Obama's does, it is also a measure of that party's popularity versus the public's natural urge to have checks and balances.

More than any year since 1994, both factors are in play for President Obama and for the biggest Democratic majority in Congress since then. This is a dramatically different midterm than 2002, when the country had yet to come unraveled from its post-9/11 unity. Bush's Republicans gained eight House and four Senate seats in that environment.

By contrast, Obama and the Democratic Congress have done or aspire to big things that have divided the country, including health care reform and massive government stimulus spending.

Republicans and Democrats can't even agree on the message of the shocking Massachusetts Senate race in January, when Republican Scott Brown took the seat held for nearly four decades by Democrat Edward Kennedy, who died of brain cancer.

Democratic national Chairman Tim Kaine called Massachusetts "the ghost of Christmas future," an early warning for Democrats that he says will not be repeated.

Republican Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, who is in charge of recruiting and helping GOP Senate candidates, said Massachusetts was "the tip of the iceberg." As in, more unforeseen damage is ahead for Democrats.

In recent breakfasts with reporters sponsored by the Christian Science Monitor, Kaine and Cornyn laid out their respective parties' 2010 bottom lines.

Even though Obama is not on the ballot, Democrats would like the elections to be about him. The Democratic National Committee will spend $50 million trying to get 15 million "first-time" Obama voters from 2008 — primarily single women, blacks and Hispanics — to vote in elections that they usually ignore.

They will do it by arguing that "now is not the time to stop, now that we are climbing up the ladder," Kaine said.

"You see economic recovery, you see health care reform," he said. "I think the president's key approach to these voters is, 'You voted for me for a reason. You wanted to see change, and I delivered it.' "

Republicans also want this to be an Obama Change election.

"There is a raging debate about the size and scope of the federal government and the direction the American people think (the country) should be going," Cornyn said.

"I am actually fine with that ... because, when I look at the results delivered by the Democrat majority and this administration, I see out-of-control spending, high unemployment, tax increases, half trillion-dollar cuts in Medicare, cuts in missile defense, Mirandizing terrorists, failure to secure our border, $2 trillion in new debt, and more government control and more intrusion in our daily lives," Cornyn said. "And so I think there will be a referendum on those results, and a clear choice between a government in which one party has complete control ... and the kinds of checks and balances that Americans, I think, instinctually prefer."

Kaine defines success as Democrats holding onto majorities for Obama.

If Democrats do not do that, or even if they come out of November with narrower majorities in the House and Senate, the second two years of Obama's term could be contentious and unproductive. Unless, that is, Obama decides that to get re-elected, it will be necessary to replicate Bill Clinton in 1995 and cut deals with Republicans and centrist Democrats on deficit reduction, taxes, energy, the environment and immigration reform.

If the Democrats expect to hold Congress long term, they must hold the line this year, especially in the Senate. As analyst Charlie Cook points out, the terms of 65 U.S. senators end in either 2012 or 2014. Democrats hold 43 of those seats.

Chuck Raasch writes from Washington for Gannett, publisher of USA TODAY. Contact him at craasch@gannett.com, follow him at http://twitter.com/craasch or join in the conversation at http://www.facebook.com/raaschcolumn

***************************************

******************************************************************************************

TIMES FREE PRESS

EDITORIAL

LOW TURNOUT, BIG PROSPECTS

The dreadfully low turnout on Tuesday for Hamilton County's Democratic and Republican primary elections was foreseeable, but dispiriting nonetheless. Fewer than 18,000 voters, or a bit more than 8 percent of the county's 207,858 registered voters, cast an early ballot or went to the polls on Election Day. Even so, the vote -- by a disheartening minority of voters -- heralded significant changes in the composition of the County Commission and a change in leadership in one of the county's major elective offices.

Bill Hullander easily outpolled incumbent Carl Levi in the Republican primary in the Hamilton County trustee's race. Mr. Hullander is effectively guaranteed office. He will not face opposition in the August general election . Mr. Hullander, who gave up his District 9 commission seat to challenge Mr. Levi, campaigned vigorously, telling voters that he could run the trustee's office more efficiently, more economically and in a more citizen-friendly manner than Mr. Levi. Voters obviously took that message to heart.

Keep promises, broaden view

Mr. Hullander's task when he assumes office will be to keep promises made in the election campaign become fact. He'll also have to broaden his outlook. As commissioner, he represented both district residents and the county as a whole, though the bulk of his attention was directed to the sometimes parochial interests of the district. The trustee's office requires a more open-minded outlook.

In the other countywide race, incumbent Mayor Claude Ramsey coasted to victory over Republican opponents Basil Marceaux Sr. and Richard Rankin. The primary triumph does not guarantee Mr. Ramsey another term. He still must defeat Richard D. Ford, an independent, in the Aug. 5 general election.

Mr. Hullander's departure from the commission created a wide open Republican primary among equally conservative candidates to succeed him. Chester Bankston, currently a member of the Hamilton County School Board, won a clear majority of votes, defeating Gary W. Neil, Richard Tornquist and John C. Turner for the nomination. The nomination is tantamount to election. Mr. Bankston faces no opposition in August.

Successor to Adams

In District 9, the other commission race without an incumbent, Tim Boyd defeated Jack M. Martin in the Republican primary. Mr. Boyd, a staunch conservative, will face Kenny Smith, a current member of the Hamilton County Board of Education, who had no opposition in the Democratic primary as well as James E. (Jim) Winters and William T. (Terry) Turner, both independents, in August. The winner of what promises to be a heated contest will succeed Curtis Adams on the commission.

One other incumbent -- Richard Casavant of District 2 -- will not return to the County Commission, though that decision was made by voters rather than the officeholder. Mr. Casavant, whose experience and broad view of county issues will be missed, was defeated in the Republican primary by Jim Fields, an energetic political newcomer and strict conservative whose triumph has to be regarded as a surprise. Mr. Fields still has one hurdle to overcome before taking office. He will face independent David W. Cantrell in August.

Incumbents rule

There was less drama in other races for County Commission seats. Incumbents generally ruled on Election Day.

In District 1, Fred Skillern easily turned back challenger Laura M. Oakley in the Republican primary. He'll keep his seat. He has no opposition in the August election. Jim Coppinger of District 3 will return to office, too. He had no opposition in Tuesday's Republican primary and has no opponent in the general election.

In both District 4 and District 5, incumbent Democrats easily won primary races and are assured of retaining their posts. Neither Warren Mackey in District 4 nor Greg Beck in District 5 face general election opposition. Mr. Mackey easily defeated Debbie Gaines, whose name appeared on the ballot though she had withdrawn her candidacy. Mr. Beck outpolled the the Rev. Bernie Miller, a repeat challenger who once sought the same post as a Republican.

In District 6, neither John Allen Brooks, the incumbent and a Democrat, nor Joe Graham, a Republican, had primary opposition. They'll face off in the August election. In District 7, incumbent Larry Henry beat Gordon L. Anderson in the Republican primary. He has no opposition in the August election.

Experienced panel

The August election will determine the final makeup and political outlook of the incoming County Commission, but with Mr. Skillern, Mr. Coppinger, Mr. Mackey, Mr. Beck and Mr. Henry certain to return and the addition of Mr. Bankston, the prospects for an experienced, albeit conservative, commission are good. Given the positive momentum in county affairs and the prospects for a bright future, it is imperative that voters take far greater interest in the August elections than they did in the just concluded primary. Perhaps they will.

An expanded ballot that includes county races not contested Tuesday, a high-profile congressional race and campaigns for governor should attract attention. If it does not, those important elections, like those Tuesday, likely will be determined by a minority of voters.

***************************************

TIMES FREE PRESS

EDITORIAL

NATIONAL DAY OF PRAYER

For the 59th time in as many years, the United States will observe the National Day of Prayer today.

This tradition began in 1952, when President Harry S Truman signed the annual observance into law.

Many Americans today will offer up prayers of thanksgiving for the blessings of life and liberty that we enjoy as a people. Many will also ask God to protect our country and to turn our hearts back to Him in this time of terrorist threats as well as economic turmoil, when many do not have jobs.

The theme of this year's observance is "Prayer -- for such a time as this." Organizers are reminding participants of God's promises toward those who place their faith in Him. The verse associated with today's event is Nahum 1:7: "The Lord is good, a refuge in times of trouble. He cares for those who trust in Him."

The only negative surrounding this year's observance is that a federal judge in Wisconsin recently declared the federal declaration of the National Day of Prayer unconstitutional. That is an absurd ruling because the Constitution forbids the official establishment of a state religion, not the free exercise of religious liberties, which is exactly what the National Day of Prayer encourages.

Prayer is worthwhile and good every day of the year, but there is nothing wrong with setting aside a day when Americans unite to praise God and to seek His blessings, pardon and protection.

***************************************

TIMES FREE PRESS

EDITORIAL

HULLANDER UPSETS TRUSTEE LEVI

The big "upset" result in Tuesday's Hamilton County Republican primary election was the victory of Bill Hullander over incumbent Hamilton County Trustee Carl Levi.

Mr. Hullander was well known as a county commissioner. Mr. Levi was well known as county trustee and before that as Chattanooga city treasurer. Both are good men.

Since there was no candidate for trustee in the Democratic primary, Mr. Hullander apparently will have an easy run in the August general election, assuring changes in the trustee's office

Subscribe Here!

***************************************

TIMES FREE PRESS

EDITORIAL

PRIMARY WINNERS FOR COMMISSION

Democrat and Republican voters chose their party nominees Tuesday for the nine important Hamilton County Commission seats that will be finally decided by voters in the August general election.

Here are the primary results:

District 1 -- Commissioner Fred Skillern was the winner over Laura Oakley in the Republican primary. There was no Democrat primary candidate.

District 2 -- James Fields defeated incumbent Commissioner Richard Casavant in the Republican primary. There was no Democrat candidate. Mr. Fields faces independent David Cantrell in August.

District 3 -- Commissioner Jim Coppinger was the unopposed Republican primary winner. There was no Democrat candidate.

District 4 -- Commissioner Warren Mackey won Democrat re-nomination over Debbie Gaines. There was no Republican candidate.

District 5 -- Commissioner Greg Beck won Democrat re-nomination over Bernie Miller. There was no Republican candidate.

District 6 -- Joe Graham won the Republican nomination with no opposition, while Democrat Commissioner John Allen Brooks won re-nomination with no opposition.

District 7 -- Commissioner Larry Henry won Republican re-nomination over Gordon Anderson. There was no Democrat candidate.

District 8 -- Tim Boyd won the Republican nomination over Jack Martin, while Kenny Smith won the Democrat nomination with no opposition. Independents Terry Turner and Jim Winters will also be in the August election.

District 9 -- Chester Bankston won the Republican nomination over Gary Neil and Richard Tornquist. There was no Democrat candidate.

With six commission seats settled, there will be interesting contests in August for the three others.

***************************************

TIMES FREE PRESS

EDITORIAL

'SAFE' WINNERS AND OTHERS

There were several winners in Tuesday's Republican and Democrat primary elections who comfortably will have no opponents in the August general election. But some will have opponents in August.

Able County Mayor Claude Ramsey deservedly had large re-election victory margins over his two opponents in Tuesday's Republican Party primary. There is no Democrat running to oppose Mayor Ramsey in August, but he will face independent Richard Ford in August.

Republican Sheriff Jim Hammond was unopposed in the Republican primary. He will be opposed in the August general election by Democrat Lloyd Clendenen, who had no opponent in his primary.

Democrat County Clerk Bill Knowles, unopposed in his primary, will be challenged in August by R. Chester Heathington Jr., who was unopposed for nomination in the Republican primary.

Republican County Register of Deeds Pam Hurst, unopposed in her primary, will face Democrat Jeff Brown in August. He was unopposed in his primary.

Democrat Juvenile Court Clerk Ron Swafford, unopposed in his primary, will be opposed in the August election by Republican Gary Behler, who had no primary opponent.

Two fine officials who comfortably were unopposed in winning their Democrat primary election re-nominations and have no Republican opponents in August are Circuit Court Clerk Paula Thompson and Criminal Court Clerk Gwen Tidwell.

***************************************

TIMES FREE PRESS

EDITORIAL

'51ST STATE' BAD IDEA

It is no coincidence that Democrats in Congress want to give both Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rico voting membership in Congress. They know that a proposed House member for Washington and a proposal that could lead to statehood for Puerto Rico would guarantee more Democrats in Congress.

Fortunately, the plan to give the District of Columbia a voting member in the House has been blocked -- for now.

But some are pushing to make Puerto Rico the 51st state. Though the U.S. Senate has yet to act, the House has approved a bill to have Puerto Ricans vote on whether they like their current "commonwealth" status with the United States. If most say they are not satisfied, they would then vote on outright independence, U.S. statehood or something in between.

But since 1967, they have voted in three referendums against U.S. statehood -- for good reason: They now don't have to pay U.S. income taxes.

Unfortunately, the process is rigged by Congress in favor of a pro-statehood vote by Puerto Rico sooner or later. While most Puerto Ricans oppose statehood, a big minority favors it. So by insisting on one referendum after another, Democrats in Congress hope that eventually they will get a narrow pro-statehood vote.

While Congress would still have to approve statehood for Puerto Rico, Democrats would push for it furiously so they could hand the island two U.S. senators and up to six seats in the House of Representatives -- most or all of them Democrats.

The United States has a mutually beneficial relationship with Puerto Rico. There is no economic, military or other reason why Puerto Rico should become the 51st state.

This blatant power grab should be defeated in the Senate.

***************************************

******************************************************************************************

TEHRAN TIMES

EDITORIAL

CLEGGMANIA LIFTS LIB DEMS AS LABOUR CHICKENS COME HOME TO ROOST

BY GUL JAMMAS HUSSAIN

Britain goes to the polls today in one of the most unpredictable and hotly contested general elections in its long history.

Hours before the polling stations open, there is still no clear winner in sight, and new opinion polls every few hours are adding to the confusion and tension. The very latest polls by The Independent and ITV News suggest that on Wednesday almost four in 10 people were still undecided about how they would vote in the general election.

However, one thing is becoming clear. The Labour Party is looking down the barrel and only a political miracle can save it from finishing third or even a distant third in the final election results. The Conservative Party led by David Cameron could end up in first place, closely followed by the Liberal Democrats, whose charismatic leader Nick Clegg turned British politics upside down in the final weeks of campaigning, especially through his spellbinding performance in the electrifying TV debates with the candidates of the two other major parties. It shook the British out of their stupor and ended the dominance of the two largest political parties, which have taken turns ruling the British Isles for many years.

Mr. Clegg's party fiercely opposed the Iraq war, calling it an illegal and senseless war and a huge mistake by the Labour leadership. And at a time when an anti-immigration hysteria is sweeping across Europe, the Liberal Democrats argue that economic migrants have helped make Britain one of the richest countries in the world, celebrate their contribution, and promise to restore Britain's historically liberal approach to immigration. Mr. Clegg's refreshing political ideas and his call for genuine change have given rise to Cleggmania in Britain.

In the political drama unfolding in Britain, poor Gordon Brown looks like the unluckiest politician who is about to fade away and become a footnote in history.

Yet, he is the man who guided Britain through the economic crisis superbly and in 2008 was even credited by economic and political experts for saving the world from economic doom by encouraging fiscal stimulus plans, low interest rates, and bank bailouts. Mr. Brown offered UK banks temporary unlimited funding to prevent a run on deposits and other countries followed suit. Britain still has many problems, like the surging debt, but up to now Mr. Brown has managed to keep the economy afloat and has pulled the UK out of recession.

But alas, it seems that Mr. Brown, who is a clean, honest, non-materialistic, principled family man, has not been able to compete with David Cameron and Nick Clegg and their manufactured charm, so necessary in the glitzy world of around-the-clock TV news networks.

Unfortunately, Mr. Brown inherited an extremely unpopular government marred by the Iraq war blunder and plagued by multiple other misfortunes, caused by his notorious predecessor Tony Blair, and the voters will take the Labour Party to task for all this.

It looks like the final result will be a hung parliament, with the Liberal Democrats becoming the kingmakers. The Tories and Labour will come courting, seeking a coalition, but the Liberal Democrats will most certainly drive a hard bargain, demanding important cabinet seats.

And if they get enough votes, the Liberal Democrats could even ask for the post of prime minister.

And this would end a century of two-party rule in Britain, making this one of the most significant elections in British history.

***************************************

******************************************************************************************

HURRIYET DAILY NEWS

EDITORIAL

FROM THE BOSPHORUS: STRAIGHT - TIME FOR A BOUNDARY DEAL IN THE AEGEAN

The world is a complex and dangerous place and we in Turkey certainly have a front row seat to survey the evidence that this is the case. The list of daunting problems is long. But against the sobering backdrop of much strife and turmoil, on the eve of a prime ministerial summit in Athens, it is also important not to lose sight of many profound changes that portend a better future.

In recent weeks, we have reported on the increasingly high profile of Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad. In contrast with the all-or-nothing approach typical of regional politics, Fayyad's style focuses on the practical: paving roads, reforming the judiciary and building the social infrastructure for full statehood without waiting for Israel.

We reported a few days ago on the Russian president and Norway's prime minister sitting down to sign a practical deal to resolve a half-century's dispute over fishing and drilling rights in an Artic border region.

Closer to home, we reported last week on Turkey's formal invitation to Massoud Barzani to visit officially as president of the "Kurdistan Regional Government" in northern Iraq. It's a small step but in effect acknowledges a constitutional title that Turkey has long resisted.

These may be small things. But they suggest the promise an increasingly mature politics in our region and the prospect of enduring peace and stability.

We mention this because we think it's long past time for Turkey and Greece to come to terms on maritime boundaries in the Aegean Sea. We have used this space to make this argument before. We do so again as an accord has eluded the two countries for decades and it begets a level of military spending that is wasteful in the best of times, disgraceful in these days of Greek economic misery.

As Greece accepts a 110 billion-euro bailout of its sinking economy, an annual tab of 6 billion euros for weaponry is a luxury Greece cannot afford. A single fighter in the cat-and-mouse game of asserting sovereignty in the Aegean region costs the Greek treasury 35,000 euros. And the justification for this and spending on such ludicrous items as new frigates and a German submarine is always Turkey and the unresolved matter of boundaries in a sea dotted with Greek islands.

When Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan goes to Athens on May 15, we have every expectation that the arms race will top the agenda. We won't presuppose what the outcome should be, but we hope that he and his counterpart George Papandreou can finally come to terms that make sense for both sides.A practical agreement on boundaries of continental shelves should not be a daunting diplomatic task. As we note, pragmatism and common sense is defining many small steps leaders are taking to resolve disputes that once seemed intractable. We think the Aegean is also an issue where pragmatism and common sense can and should prevail.

***************************************

HURRIYET DAILY NEWS

EDITORIAL

CAN HISTORIC FIGURES BE SUBJECTS OF RIDICULE?

SEDAT ERGİN

The Republican People's Party, or CHP, leader Deniz Baykal likened Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan to Adolf Hitler. I think it was way overboard. It was a sign how politics desperately needs fine-tuning.

Naturally, Erdoğan had the right to retaliate. However, he tried to liken Hitler to the second president of Turkey, İsmet İnönü, by referring to his mustache. That has happened to be the most unfortunate statement of Erdoğan's political career. I want to categorize my assessments under "Citizen Erdoğan" and "Prime Minister Erdoğan."

Arguments through dead men

Let me start with "Citizen Erdoğan." In his response to Baykal, Mr. Prime Minister says "If they are looking for a political figure that looks like Hitler, they better turn around and look at the photographs of their former leader hanging on the walls of party headquarters. He took after Führer and asked people to call him the 'national chief.' They'll see in the photos that İnönü laughs up his sleeve like Hitler."

Before comparing İnönü with Hitler, let me bring another point to your attention though. Erdoğan in his remarks clearly ridicules İnönü.

At this point, I better say that the person being ridiculed died 37 years ago. First of all, it doesn't fit our culture to ridicule dead men. This is unacceptable in our tradition. Besides, if you start discussions over dead men, they cannot defend themselves at all.

Being fair to history

Now, let's focus on the prime minister's responsibility.

Erdoğan is entitled to dislike İnönü. Just because he is the prime minister, Erdoğan doesn't have to like former presidents and prime ministers. He may disagree with İnönü's way of thinking and even has the right to be angry at him. But when you are the prime minister of a country, you must be sensitive and fair to symbolic names of your country and you automatically take responsibility for that.

Without doubt, many controversial decisions were made in İnönü's "national chief" period. For instance, the Wealth Tax applied to minorities in 1942 and the sending of those that didn't pay the tax to exile in Aşkale is not a page in the history of the Republic of which we can be proud.

Which İnönü will children believe in?

There are plenty of history pages in this category. The Sept. 6-7 incidents in 1955 are another one in which we should be ashamed of ourselves. They took place under former Prime Minister Adnan Menderes after we adopted democracy. And Erdoğan today sees himself as the continuation of the Menderes cause.

I think the bottom line is the way we should look at our history. This is a test not just Turkey but almost all countries go through while confronting history. We see great historic figures not just with their remarkable moves but also with their deadly mistakes too; unacceptable mistakes or mistakes we react against…

We should be objective and assess incidents of the past, good or bad, as a whole.

Only then, we see that the person you likened Hitler was also one of the key figures of the War of Independence; a key figure that signed the Lausanne Treaty, saved the country from World War II and resisted Hitler so as to prevent Turkey from becoming a stepping-stone during the war. We should also not forget that he was the one who decided to adapt multi-party democracy.

In this sense, it seems that Erdoğan doesn't care to be fair to İnönü's historic role. However, a prime minister ought to be respectful to historic figures while he is entitled to criticize them.

Children who learn in school that two battles during the War of Independence were named after İnönü now see on television that Erdoğan likens İnönü to Hitler. What will they think? Will they not be confused?

***************************************

HURRIYET DAILY NEWS

EDITORIAL

STRATEGIC DEPTH AT HOME

JOOST LAGENDİJK

A couple of days ago, on May 1, Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu had something to celebrate. One year ago, he became a minister, after having been the adviser to the prime minister on foreign policy since 2003. He decided to have his ministerial birthday party in Oxford. Together with the editors-in-chief of some leading newspapers and influential columnists, he flew to the United Kingdom and delivered the keynote speech at a conference on Turkish foreign policy at prestigious St. Antony's College, organized by South East European Studies at Oxford University, or SEESOX, and Sabancı University.

I must say, I was impressed by his one-hour speech in which he combined his academic expertise with his experiences in the last seven years in the day-to-day handling of Turkish foreign policy. In a way, his birthday talk was an update of the book that he published in 2002, "Strategic Depth," a voluminous work in which the then-academic sketched the challenges to Turkey in a radically changing world. The complicated study would have remained an interesting theoretical exercise if the professor had not become the architect of a new and fascinating Turkish foreign policy, first in the background, and then as its face and voice on the world stage for the past year. The aim of the Oxford conference was not only to see how the ideas on strategic depth work out in practice in different regions in which Turkey has been very active over the last couple of years, but also to reflect on the restrictions and limitations of a policy that, inevitably, is confronted by the tough realities on the ground.

The good thing about the presence of the minister in Oxford was that he also attended the after-party. People who have seen Davutoğlu speak realize how much the minister still likes to teach. He loves to talk as if he was an academic and that includes the absence of time limits. So, after his one-hour speech on Saturday and his 30 minute-address at the end of the birthday party dinner, most of us expected him to take it easy on Sunday morning. Not this minister. He showed up at the closing session in which several academics, including your columnist, were supposed to round up the conference. Relaxed, without wearing a tie, the former professor sat among his critics and tried to counter the critical remarks on his theories and, more harshly, on his policies.

One of the points raised by many speakers at the conference was the problem of the domestic constraints on the full and successful implementation of the minister's foreign policy ideas. To put it more strongly – the efforts to raise Turkey's image abroad and to portray the country as an example to the rest of the region are being seriously hampered by the fact that Turkey has been unable to solve some if its own long-standing problems at home.

It is one thing to mediate between Serbs and Bosnians or to bring together the different ethnicities in Iraq. For good reasons, Turkey has received a lot of praise for those initiatives. But at the end of the day, the impact of all these diplomatic exercises will be limited if domestic problems that are almost identical are not dealt with properly. In other words: how convincing can this minister be in the rest of the world if the government he is representing is seen, at home and abroad, to fail in its dealing with the Kurds and Alevis in Turkey?

On top of that, how big is the influence of the minister on domestic policies that determine whether or not his foreign policy is successful or not? One example: signing the protocols with Armenia was definitively a good example of the "no problems with the neighbors" policy advocated by Davutoğlu. But the prime minister's re-establishing of the link with the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict was clearly a result of electoral calculations and domestic pressures. Is Davutoğlu able to convince Recep Tayyip Erdoğan that sticking to the deal with Armenia without additional conditions makes sense? Or will the Justice and Development Party, or AKP, leader tell his foreign minister that his policies aimed at long-term solutions are well and fine as long as they do not interfere with overriding short term party interests?

In his reply, the minister was honest enough to recognize the potential tension. But being both a determined politician and an optimist, Davutoğlu played down the problems and remained assured that he could overcome this dilemma. If only for the reason that he is convinced that his foreign policy, based on the absence of outside threats, would contribute considerably to a political climate in Turkey that is conducive to ongoing and sometimes daring reforms. Let's give him the benefit of the doubt and question him again on May 1, 2011.

***************************************

HURRIYET DAILY NEWS

EDITORIAL

SALVAGING AKP'S HONOR

YUSUF KANLI

Late in the evening, to be honest towards midnight, while on the one hand trying to follow the voting in Parliament on the articles of the constitutional amendment package televised live on channel three, or the Parliament channel, of the Turkish radio and Television Corporation, or TRT, on the other hand I was reading a just published book written by dear friend C. Cem Oğuz on relations between Turkey, Azerbaijan and Armenia, the continued occupation of Azerbaijani territory by Armenia, genocidal Armenian actions on Azerbaijani people and the protocols between Turkey and Armenia for improved relations when with the "truckler" scream of my five Aydan I almost fell off my chair….

A deputy of the ruling Justice and Ruling Party, or AKP, was running in joy towards Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan to scream out the good news… "My prime minister… My prime minister… We have done it… The article has passed!" Because of the ethical codes of the Daily News, I cannot unfortunately write here my immediate rather slang reaction to what I saw on the TV screen.

"They have done it… Erdoğan succeeded to scare and force them [those 8 to 12 AKP deputies who voted against and killed the article regulating party closures] to be in tune with the obedient crowd…" I mumbled.

Moments later, with the speaker of Parliament announcing that the article has passed, AKP parliamentarians burst into applause, some dancing in joy, some enjoying the "great success" by making high fives with their colleagues… It was as if a major victory was scored against the enemy forces and a castle was captured….

This week when some AKP deputies realized what grave outcome the push of their leader Erdoğan to collect all powers with himself and his government at the expense of the "separation of powers" fundamental principle of democratic governance and thus voted to kill the article on party closures, they were condemned by the pen-slingers in the allegiant media of being members of the "Ergenekon gang" within the ruling party. After that vote there was panic on the faces of Erdoğan and his Merry Men as they feared those who voted against that article might vote to kill the other contentious two articles aimed at creating a subservient judicial system.

Through lists of "traitors" published on the front pages, and a stern not so covert "We respect the outcome of the vote… but, those who have contributed to this result will give an account of their action when the time comes" warning of Erdoğan at an AKP parliamentary group meeting, that convened extraordinarily, loyalty of all AKP deputies was apparently secured.

So, the members of the "Ergenekon gang" sitting on the benches allocated in parliament for the ruling AKP or those "traitors" within the ruling party decided to give up their "revolt," to domesticate themselves and help their absolute leader Recep Tayyip Erdoğan to save the honor of both himself and the AKP…

Honor of the AKP is of course very important. So is the honor of the family, the village, neighborhood, town or province.

A girl loves someone. The family disapproves. The girl refuses marrinyg the man the family fixed and insists to marry the man she loved. Father or brothers of the girl butcher her mercilessly to save the honor of the family. A group of kids ageing 11 to 14 rape two toddlers, kill one of them. To save the honor of the town and to avoid a blood feud, local authorities sort out the "game between kids" and cover up the crime. A group of men rape scores of students at a boarding school. For more than one year local authorities keep the issue away from justice. When the mass-rape case finally reported by the national media became a national issue, the government comes up with a stern complaint against the media that the honor of a city should be protected.

Unfortunately, the honor of the clan precedes the honor of the family; the honor of the family precedes that of the individual; not only the honor, but also the wishes, of the male members of the family precede everything related to the female population, irrespective of age; and worst, the wishes and ambitions of the political leader who has all the power to determine the political future of the deputies, precedes everything else, even if because of such ambitions the judicial system of the country will be raped….

Whatever… The honor of AKP is salvaged!

***************************************

HURRIYET DAILY NEWS

EDITORIAL

TURKISH FOREIGN POLICY AND IRAN

MURAT MERCAN

Around a dozen years remain until 2023, which will mark the centennial of the Republic of Turkey. As chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the Turkish Grand National Assembly, I am particularly proud to witness that Turkey's presence and influence is increasingly felt worldwide.

Against this background, it is worth mentioning the main dominant factors which characterize Turkey's standing in the world today. Bearing all these elements in mind, Turkey is pursuing a multi-faceted, far-reaching and pro-active foreign policy. Nowadays, six principles are shaping our foreign policy.

The first principle consists of striking a balance between freedom and security. In our opinion, security should not be pursued to the detriment of freedoms or vice-versa. Therefore, we believe that an appropriate balance has to be found between them.

The second principle envisages the integration of Turkey with countries in its vicinity in order to implement regional policies more efficiently. To facilitate and expedite this process, we are following a policy of "zero problems" in our neighborhood. Since Turkey does not have the luxury of waiting for crises to resolve themselves, we have embarked on proactive peace diplomacy in the Balkans, the Middle East and the Caucasus.

The third principle foresees effective diplomacy toward neighboring regions. In this framework, we aim to maximize cooperation and mutual benefits with all of our neighbors. For that purpose, we base our relations with our neighbors on the principles of "security for all," "high-level political dialogue," "economic interdependence" as well as "cultural harmony and mutual respect."

As a member of the United Nations Security Council for the period 2009-2010 and as a responsible member of the international community which has to deal with a wide range of issues, the fourth principle of our foreign policy is to seek "complementarity" with global actors.

The fifth principle of our foreign policy is the effective use of international forums and new initiatives to

galvanize action on matters of common concern.

Based on these principles, the sixth and final principle of our foreign policy is to create a "new perception of Turkey" through an increased focus on public diplomacy.

As I believe all this makes clear, our foreign policy strategy envisages maximizing Turkey's contributions to peace, stability and security on both regional and global levels. Accordingly, Turkish policymakers are trying to overcome differences between countries in conflict through confidence-building measures and by acting as a mediator and facilitator to find solutions to chronic regional problems. We attach a particular importance to the Middle East and to Iran in this framework.

Despite its occasional ups and downs, Turkey has had good neighborly relations with Iran based on the principle of non-interference in domestic affairs. In many ways, the Turkish and Iranian economies are complementary. Turkey is a transit country for Iranian goods to the West, while Iran is a gateway for Turkish exports to the East.

As founding members, Turkey and Iran attach special importance to the Economic Cooperation Organization, or ECO. We consider ECO a multinational economic platform which can contribute to the establishment of economic stability and increasing welfare in our region and beyond.

Turkey is an energy importing country while Iran is an exporting one. Around 11 percent of Turkish natural gas and almost 36 percent of oil imports are acquired from Iran. In 2008, the total volume of Turkish-Iranian trade reached 10 billion U.S. dollars. In 2009, this figure was 5.5 billion U.S. dollars. The decrease registered last year in trade was mainly due to the global financial crisis, but we are confident that the negative effect of the global financial crisis on our bilateral trade will be gradually overcome.

We have intensive contacts with Iran. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan paid a visit to Tehran in October 2009 and held extensive talks with the Iranian leadership, including Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad and Vice President Mohammed-Reza Rahimi. The Standing Committee for Economic and Commercial Cooperation of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, or COMCEC, Economic Summit in November in Istanbul was another occasion where meetings with President Ahmedinejad and Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki took place. Our minister of Foreign Affairs, Ahmet Davutoğlu, has also met his Iranian counterpart on many occasions during the past several months.

We have taken the opportunity provided by these recent high level meetings, coupled with intensive exchanges of delegations at lower levels with Iran, not only to explore possibilities for further developing our relationship but also to discuss a number of regional and international issues of common interest.

Iran is directly affected by the pace of events in the region. It has a stake in regional stability and is in need of stable markets in the surrounding region. Iran has a vibrant society and looks for development and greater engagement. Iran is able to do more to regain the confidence of the international community, as well as the regional players, in the sincerity of its efforts for stability and increased regional security. We advocate diplomatic and economic engagement of Iran rather than isolationist policies as a more effective way to address the challenges that we are facing in the region. We will continue to encourage all our counterparts to take a conciliatory approach in order to better tackle the problems in the Middle East.

Turkey has been encouraging dialogue in order to overcome the disagreements on the nuclear dossier. I continue to believe that a diplomatic solution can and should be found to this issue. In fact, a diplomatic solution is the only viable and lasting solution. On various key regional issues, we need Iran's cooperation to address existing problems. On the other hand, I should emphasize that we are in favor of a nuclear free Middle East and against Iran developing nuclear weapons. Iran should comply with its international obligations. Any solution to the nuclear issue, while observing the right to make peaceful use of nuclear energy, should also be strictly in line with Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, or NPT, obligations, transparency and verification work conducted by the International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA. The concerns of the international community regarding the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction should also be addressed. The region cannot handle further conflagrations.

In order to push the diplomatic process forward, we also need to be mindful of the domestic political context. There is strong suspicion on all sides that has to be taken into account and overcome. Domestic political balances and pressures weigh heavily on all parties. Despite all efforts, disagreements prevail. Again, the remedy is to be found in greater engagement and dialogue.

Within this framework, I would like to underline two major points:

First, as it has been observed in many countries, international sanctions and measures always affect ordinary

people more than the ruling elite. This is valid for Iran as well.

Turkey has deep-rooted historical, cultural and religious ties with Iran. In other words, Iranians are not only our neighbors but also our friends and brothers. Not a single Turkish citizen can accept that his/her friends or brothers/sisters suffer from unfair treatment at the hands of the international community. Indeed, compared to other countries in the region, Iranians live under poor economic conditions. They do not have access to the latest technology in general and are deprived of basic infrastructure facilitating daily life. There is no reason to degrade the existing life standard but enough reason to increase it.

Secondly, I do believe that the future of Iran should be in the hands of Iranian citizens. For more than 2,000 years, Iran has had a notion of statehood and a well-established cultural heritage. Iranian people have enough experience to govern themselves. Any interference from the outside world will have a boomerang effect and will be counter-productive. Therefore, the international community should refrain from any attempt to interfere in Iran to the detriment of the social and political fiber of Iran.

* Mr. Murat Mercan is a deputy and the chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the Turkish Parliament. The original version of this article was published in the Winter 2009/10 issue of Turkish Policy Quarterly (Vol. 8 No. 4) For more information, please visit www.turkishpolicy.com

***************************************

HURRIYET DAILY NEWS

EDITORIAL

IS YOUR LINE OF WORK INTERESTING ENOUGH?

I may be putting all of your lives at danger but I must be true to our readers. I confess that I am a Level six Elite Specialist for a global network of secret agents called "The Agency." My operation is based in Amsterdam and I have three allies working for me. Currently my mission is to discover a plot of an evil pharmaceutical firm which created a virus that already infected 500 people. The firm wants to sell the cure when it will be a global epidemic. I must stop them before it happens. I have been following Dr. Jensen who created the virus and after finishing this column I will look into his office for more clues. I hope that by that time I will have enough "cover" points to keep my operation a secret. Because each minute or so equals one cover point in the online game that I am sucked into.

The Agency Covert Ops is the Beta version released by SONY Online Entertainment. This is their first online media trial and I believe that they have nailed it. The game has a plot a lot like a Tom Clancy book and it has little games and puzzles in it for the gamers to solve and gain points and cash. Later on you can spend your cash to gain better technologies and to pimp up your Headquarters in Sim City style.

The online gaming with the social media touch is one of the fastest growing markets throughout the world. The past few years have witnessed many interesting phenomena like Farmville, Mafia Wars, World of Warcraft, or WOW, and Final Fantasy XI. Some started as Facebook applications and spawned into full fledged businesses in their own right and some were already blockbusters with millions of followers before they adopted online platforms. WOW has 11.5 million online subscribers despite the fact that 70 percent of the trial subscriptions fell through. This means that around 35 million people played the game at least for a few days so far. The subscribers pay in between 11 and 13 euros per month, which generates around 120 million euros cash flow each month for Blizzard, the company that created WOW.

This enormous success of online gaming has created spin off business as well. As a player proceeds in the game, he or she acquires tools, weapons, artifacts and experience points, which are usually tradable or bought from the creator firms. According to Euro Gamer, Blizzard has had unprecedented success with virtual item sales on the release of the Celestial Steed - a special in-game mount for World of Warcraft that costs a princely sum of $25, 20 euros or 17 pounds. Blizzard claimed a seven-hour queue of 140,000 people had formed within three hours of the mount's release last week.

That already represented revenue of $3.5 million - or more than $1 million an hour - on sales of what is,

essentially, just an art asset for the subscription game. The translucent flying horse leaves trails of stardust behind it as it gallops across the sky.

When you compare this success with brick and mortar business, it is just mind blowing. Billions of people work in hard conditions for years and can not even make one tenth of what Blizzard earned in just a few hours for a horse that leaves stardust in people's screens. That is if you still think that there is really a difference in experience for gamers in the "real" world and the "virtual" world. In both worlds people have characters and attributes that they stick to and many of the gamers consider the virtual world as kind of a parallel universe which is no less real than the physical world.

The free games are even more mesmerizing about the numbers. Farmville has 81 million subscribers and still counting. Zynga, the firm that created Farmville, will generate more than $300 million in 2010 by using the sheer number of players even without selling subscriptions. This is another main difference from the brick and mortar business; you can generate cash from people just hanging around in your digital world even if they don't buy anything. Can a store in Taksim Square generate money over free riders?

Java and Flash technologies together with rising band widths made the explosion of online gaming possible and the phenomenon is here to stay the long haul. There is even a game in which you can be a prime minister. According to its description, "the economy, stupid!" (in short TES), is a name of a new online game that puts you in the role of a prime minister of a moderate size European country. Your task is to survive in office for the whole four-year term and win the next elections. You lose if your party loses the elections, or if you are removed from office before elections. The game is turn-based, with each turn representing two months of game time.

There are findings that online gaming hurts economy because of the loss of working hours spent to play in online platforms. There is only one thing to say to those who complain: make your tasks more exciting to your employees. Otherwise they will always cheat your firm with the online platforms.

ersu.ablak@konakmedya.com

***************************************

HURRIYET DAILY NEWS

EDITORIAL

WE FAILED THE CLASS IN THE KURDISH ISSUE

MEHMET ALİ BİRAND

But Fikret Bila did a good job.

There couldn't have been a better feedstock for historians regarding the PKK terror.

The expanded version of the commander front is available on the market published by Doğan Kitap.

I'd recommend it if you are curious about how the Turkish Republic fights the PKK terror. Especially if you want to read about the period between 1980 and today from the viewpoint of 10 chiefs of General Staff and leading commanders in the region, don't miss out on this one.

Due to my curiosity and affection in respect to this subject I read it carefully and felt pretty bad about it. I wanted to share with you my own impressions.

A short account of the struggle with PKK

Firstly a quick reminder:

The PKK was formed in 1978.

It settled in Beka in 1984 and started armed deeds in Eruh in 1987.

Supported by the climate created by the first Gulf War in 1992, it obtained control in the Southeast especially at night and formed recovered regions entering in huge deeds with a large group.

Turkey first woke up after five years passed since the first terror deed and the PKK took the initiative in its own hands in 1992. Gen. Güreş noticed the seriousness of the situation and changed the way of struggle as well as his equipment.

Between 1995 and 1998 more than a thousand soldiers were sent to the region. Four big trans-boundary operations took place. More than $100 billion were spent and 35,000 people were killed, including 5,000 martyrs. We entered a new period when Öcalan was caught in Kenya. But the PKK was still not eliminated.

There has not been any improvement between 1998 and 2006 and no important politics were realized, be it culturally, socially or politically. The opportunity created with the capture of Öcalan was missed out on and the PKK slowly started to revive to carry on with its deeds.

In 2009-2010 we experienced a Kurdish Initiative. But on one side the Kurd's impulsive behavior and on the other side brisk reactions from the opposition coupled with the administration not being brave enough because of fear of losing votes, this initiative has been put on hold.

Civilians leave everything up to the military

If we consider what commanders say the first big mistake from the beginning onward was that civil administrations could not at all understand what the PKK issue was and where it stirred from passing the issue on to the military from the very beginning.

A period in which no one investigated the connection between the PKK and the Kurdish issue, and an attitude of "What the commander says is right." For many years general approach was "Let's supply the military with necessary weapons and ammunition, and leave the rest up to them."

I don't know if beneath this approach lies malicious intent like the military getting its hands on the subject and keeping the civilians out of it or call the military to account for this failure. But there is some good in looking at the other side of the medal.

You always read in statements by commanders that the military despises civil administrations and leaders, looks down on them and believes that no one other then the military loves this country. They exhibit an extreme insecurity.

The military applies what it learned during its training

Commanders may blame civil administrations but it takes them five years to wake up. All of their analyses are superficial and scenery described by some commanders is weak.

The military strictly conforms to how it has been trained. They are technically successful but they too were unable to read the connection between the PKK and the Kurdish issue.

And since they perceived the issue completely as a security issue they could not comprehend the social and cultural dimensions. Since there has not been a civilian involved in the struggle with the PKK, it only remains in the weapon and ammunition dimension.

The commanders identify all internal and big trans-boundary operations as a great success. They make statements like "The PKK has encountered great loss… is wiped out… the region cleared," but shortly thereafter the PKK again revives.

How sad that we now see our commanders feel sorry for not being able to create a connection between the PKK and the Kurdish issue despite being in control. Commanders say, "We were wrong and unable to realize the Kurdish reality in time." And here we see that they continue just like the civilians with their wrong approach.

So where are we now?

I wonder if politics has won or the Kurds?

If we were to look at today's situation we'd see that the Kurdish issue has arrived at some point leaving only the PKK issue behind.

I'll share this with you tomorrow.

PKK is even worse off

Looking at the scenery you may conclude that the PKK is very successful and it's only us who messed up.

This is totally wrong.

In this article we see self-criticism.

If we were to analyze the PKK from a military point of view then we see that the scenery on their side is even worse.

You'll notice the severity of the situation when you look at the brief summary of the armed struggle. You'll see with what intent they started out and how their military strategy developed.

It is obvious that in a military sense they have been disappointed very much.

How it turned out in a political sense I'll share with you tomorrow.

***************************************

******************************************************************************************

I. THE NEWS

EDITORIAL

TOTAL CONFUSION

Woe betide anybody under the delusion that the three-man fact finding committee headed by Cabinet Secretary Rauf Chaudhry were going to deliver anything as tangible as a report. Attempting to unscramble the series of statements issued over the past two days by people who are paid considerable sums to know what it is they are talking about, borders on the impossible. We might be forgiven for believing the Chairman of the committee when he said it had completed its work and handed the report to the Prime minister. What could be more straightforward than that? But wait - now consider the statement by Farhatullah Babar to the effect that the committee has no time frame and that it was to question up to nine other people. The report has been completed and submitted or it has not, surely that is something about which there may be a definitive statement? And if the report is submitted has the committee finished its work and does it now stand disbanded or does it hang in limbo awaiting a decision on future investigations? All this before we have any inkling of what the report might contain.

The pot of confusion was stirred by the Presidency in a press release on Monday evening which tells us that the PPP Core Committee, a new entity which beats in sync with the Presidential heart, was briefed by none other than Interior Minister Rehman Malik who seems to be in so many places these days that there are strong indications that there are more than one of him. So how had he got his hands on the report and why was it not the Prime Minister, to whom the report should have been handed first and who presumably has senior briefing rights over Rehman Malik; doing the briefing? Dazed? Confused? There is more. The press release from the Presidency on Monday said that the Rauf committee will be speaking to more people before submitting its report – indicating that the report was not yet submitted and clearly at variance with what its chairman was on record as saying. Speaking to this newspaper on Tuesday evening Rauf Chaudhry said that his committee had not received any additional mandate, and as chairman of the committee we might reasonably assume he was speaking authoritatively. Thankfully, clarification arrived late on Wednesday night in the form of a statement from Farhatullah Babar. It transpires that the briefing given by Rehman Malik referred to progress made by the Joint Investigation team (JIT) and not the Rauf committee, which will separately report to the Prime Minister. Babar owned up to his mistake, we were all confused, media and public alike, and the incident stands as an object lesson in how not to manage the information flow between government and populace. Lesson learned, we trust.

***************************************

I. THE NEWS

EDITORIAL

TERROR EXPORT

Even as exports from Pakistan fall in so many other spheres, there is one item that goes out to the world in larger and larger quantities from our country. Sadly, this brings in no monetary benefits and no goodwill. Today, it often seems that what we export most often is terrorism. The arrest in New York of a Pakistan-American, even as he boarded a plane that would have taken him to Dubai, acts to confirm this in the eyes of the world. Even if we, as Pakistanis, know that most people in the country oppose terrorism and have no sympathies with those who make killing a mission, the fact is that many in other places see Pakistanis as terrorists. The impact of this has come in the form of the unleashing of racist violence and all kinds of more subtle discrimination. In one way or another, tens of thousands of Pakistanis have suffered. The question is whether enough is being done to stop the export of violence and ensure that a softer, more flattering spotlight is directed towards Pakistan. The arrest of Faisal Shahzad indicates that the mindset which spurs on terrorism has poisoned even those who enjoy wealth and privilege.

Perhaps our thesis that it is essentially the poor who are exploited by the militants is somewhat flawed. Perhaps we need to do more to stop the slow poisoning of minds. A process of brainwashing has continued for years. It needs to be reversed. The strategy for this must be worked out. Psychologists, educators, media people, clerics and others with social influence need to be involved. We must convince people, particularly the young, that militancy and extremism threaten to destroy all that is good about their country. They must play a part in building for it a different future. The story of an educated young man of Pakistani origin in New York, with a family and from a wealthy background, who was apparently willing to risk so much by planting a bomb which was intended to kill ordinary men, women and children should act as an eye-opener to the kind of problems we have allowed to fester in our midst. It is only by changing this that we can hope to move towards a brighter future and a different image for Pakistan.

***************************************

I. THE NEWS

EDITORIAL

POLITICISING POWER

In his latest comments on the faltering power situation in the country, Mian Nawaz Sharif has threatened public protests against loadshedding. His words of course hit a popular note in Punjab where power-cuts continue to paralyse life. There is no immediate evidence the new energy strategy, agreed on a few weeks ago, has brought relief. But we must ask whether it is wise for the opposition to take so much advantage of the electricity crisis the country is currently facing. After all at some time, and maybe in the not-very-distant future, they may find themselves in charge of government and responsible for handling an energy situation that some experts say is unlikely to be resolved for years.

For this reason it may be wise for the political opposition to play a more positive role. While it must indeed continue to expose the inadequacies of the government and the mishandling of the current situation, we might all benefit if some suggestions were made on how things could be dealt with in a more effective manner. Experts familiar with the power situation should be brought together by parties such as the PML-N and asked to propose a strategy that would keep machines running in factories and workshops a little longer. Domestic consumers would also derive the benefits. If a workable plan could be put forward it would embarrass and expose the government far more than the mere hurling of threats. It may also help shed light on the true nature of the energy crisis and thereby help us move towards a solution.

***************************************

I. THE NEWS

AFTER THE UNITED NATIONS INQUIRY

AMEER BHUTTO

The government is playing a cat and mouse game with the people with respect to the Benazir Bhutto murder inquiry. The process of bringing her murderers to trial has been subjected to inordinate delay and procrastination. The soil on her grave was still wet when the nation was told by the new leaders of the People's Party that democracy was the best revenge for her murder, the inescapable implication being that if they got themselves elected through the impending polls, no further action would be necessary in the matter.

Simultaneously, there was a demand for a UN probe into Benazir's murder, which defied logic since the frame of reference for this probe was to be limited to fact-finding rather than a proper criminal investigation, which the UN cannot carry out. What was the point of involving the UN in a long-drawn and expensive exercise in futility when Zardari already claimed to know who the killers were?

The real purpose of the United Nations Inquiry Commission (UNIC) can now be inferred - to buy time and clear Zardari from all suspicions. The first objective was achieved with dazzling success, as 28 months were needlessly wasted. But the latter objective remains unfulfilled in the UNIC report, reinforced by the subsequent UNIC declaration that no one has been absolved from guilt. The mystery behind the Zardari government's request to the UN to delay issuing the report for fifteen days is also easier to understand now in light of the report; to make a last-ditch effort to get the UNIC to clear the names of the present cabinet members, who were riding in the backup car, from all suspicions, which also could not be achieved. I suppose arm twisting the UN is not as easy as manipulating NAB.

The thorough criminal investigation that should have taken place over two years ago, which the UNIC report too deems crucial, is nowhere in sight. Instead, the People's Party leaders claim that they do not believe in revenge. Under which canon of law or logic does punishing killers fall under the classification of revenge? If that is revenge then what is justice? Are all the legal systems of the world which advocate punishment of the guilty based on vengeance? We are also told that the killers will be brought before the "people's court". What exactly does that mean? The people issue their verdict through the ballot box. Is the government suggesting that the killers will have to face a public vote? The very idea is ridiculous beyond imagination. All that is required is a comprehensive criminal inquiry, and then the law should be allowed to take its majestic course. The more the government procrastinates under what it thinks are clever pretexts, the more doubts and suspicions arise in the inds of the people.

Despite the UNIC's recommendation for a criminal investigation, another fact-finding committee has been constituted to probe into the issue of the hosing down of the scene of the attack within ninety minutes of the attack before evidence could be collected. This is certainly a critical issue because it reeks of a cover up, but why is this the only question receiving any attention? There are other questions of equal, if not greater, importance. For instance, why was a post-mortem not allowed to be carried out, not just on Benazir but even on the twenty or so other men who were killed in the attack? Even if the security provided by the state was inadequate, why was there a lapse in the security arrangements made by the party, which boasted that thousands of janisars were ready to guard Benazir with their lives? Who was in charge of these security arrangements?

Everyone is clamoring for a case to be filed against Pervaiz Musharraf after he is safely ensconced in London. Why was he allowed to get away with full presidential protocol? Above all, who benefited the most from Benazir's assassination? Is the government's modus operandi going to be to waste even more time by forming separate committees to probe into each of these questions individually, like the present committee looking into the hosing down issue? Would it not be more efficient to set up a judicial inquiry committee to probe into all the questions and present sound answers, which the UNIC could not do?

The highly suspicious disappearance of Benazir's backup car from the scene of attack should have come under strict investigative scrutiny by now. The whole idea behind a backup car is that it may be used if the vehicle carrying the VIP is disabled. But how can it be used if it is already full? That is why it is always kept empty or carries additional body guards. Who authorised the occupants to ride in this car? Why did this car bolt from the scene and why did it go to Zardari House instead of the hospital, where Benazir was being taken? The Aiwan-e-Sadar's spokesman Farhatullah Babar, in a TV interview, explained that a policeman told them to make way for Benazir's vehicle and to go to Zardari House, where Benazir was being taken, which is why they made a run for it.

This sounds pretty lame, since all they had to do was turn their heads and see that Benazir's vehicle had been disabled by the bomb blast and was going nowhere fast. Even if it had been moving and the backup car was in its way, they could have pulled over to one side instead of fleeing the scene. Because they did not pull over and transfer Benazir into the backup car to transport her to hospital, she remained in the disabled vehicle, slowly bleeding to death, while it limped along on its rims. At the very least, the occupants of the backup car cannot escape responsibility for gross neglect and dereliction of duty to their slain party leader. Why are they not being investigated? Are these holy cows above the law? Besides, why did they not tell the UNIC this story about being directed to leave the scene by a policeman? Why bring it up now? If they did tell this story to the commission, then it is obvious that it was rejected because the commission's report calls for an investigation into the disappearance of the backup car.

It is now being claimed that ninety per cent of the culprits involved in Benazir's murder have been arrested. This is news to just about everyone. Who are these people? How were they involved? What was their role? Were they simply the errand boys or the masterminds? One day the government says it is waiting for the UNIC report and the next day it claims to have arrested ninety per cent of the culprits. How did this come about, particularly since the UNIC report named no names? If their names were already known, then what was the expensive, time-consuming UNIC façade all about? If, as the government is claiming, Musharraf was the key figure to the plot, then what difference does it make if ninety or even ninety-nine percent of the errand boys are arrested as long as the mastermind walks free?

Was Musharraf really the mastermind? Even if he was, was he the sole mastermind or did he have partners in the crime? And what is the meaning of the "I still have a last bullet in my gun" statement that Musharraf made recently? Was it a veiled threat to unmask fellow conspirators should push come to shove?

All we have before us so far are ever-increasing unanswered disturbing questions. In the absence of any credible answers, people have started working out the truth for themselves.

The writer is vice-chairman of Sindh National Front and a former MPA from Ratodero. He has degrees from the University of Buckingham and Cambridge University.

***************************************

I. THE NEWS

EDITORIAL

THE SCYLLA OF VIOLENCE

DR MOHAMMAD TAQI

"This is a political war and it calls for discrimination in killing." -- John Paul Vann, US adviser in Vietnam

The recent killing of Professor Nazima Talib in Quetta has once again called into question the logic of indiscriminate violence against the non-combatant, non-Baloch settlers in the province. It has turned the focus of attention not only to the Baloch guerrilla fighters but has simultaneously put those, who support a non-violent Baloch struggle, on the spot.

Writing about the potential US policy towards Balochistan, Selig S. Harrison noted in his 1981 book 'In Afghanistan's Shadow' that, "with respect to the Baloch issue, the American goal should be to forestall the necessity for a choice between the Scylla of supporting repressive counterinsurgency programs and the Charybdis of supporting Baloch independence."

Indeed both the friends and foes of the Baloch have had to follow this impossible-to-negotiate path. The state players like the USA, former Soviet Union and India have erred - by design or default - in favour of the Pakistani state, while treading this regional policy tightrope.

For the individual and politically or apolitically organised supporters, sympathisers and fellow-travellers of the Baloch struggle, it has been a rather straightforward matter where they have consistently condemned the repressive tactics of the Pakistani state machinery while openly endorsing the Baloch cause. Be it the joining of the 'London Group' boys with the Parari (fighters) in Marri hills in the1970s or lending open - albeit tepid - political support from Wali Khan to Asif Zardari, the Baloch struggle has had almost unanimous backing from the leftist and the centre-left circles of Pakistan.

With the rising spate of killings of the non-combatants, especially Punjabis, in Balochistan, the non-Baloch sympathisers of the Baloch nationalists are finding themselves in an increasingly difficult situation in defending what they have held to be a legitimate resistance and indeed a just war.

The nature of the Baloch guerrilla struggle has been complex throughout its many phases. For the most part though, it has followed - as accurately noted by Selig Harrison - the line given by Che Guevara's associate Régis Debray: in the revolutionary struggle the fighters themselves should be the focus of political power and not subservient to the political leadership not involved in fighting.

Sardar Ataullah Mengal and to some extent Nawab Khair Bukhsh Marri had correctly observed during the 1970s that the students and non-students joining the ranks of the armed struggle would not be under their political guidance or control. These leaders, due to both personal and ideological discipline, did not encourage ideological waywardness in the Baloch guerrillas.

On the other hand, the late Nawab Akbar Khan Bugti, for various reasons, contributed to strengthening of this behaviour in the movement. Nawab Bugti was a rather late convert to the Baloch nationalist cause. Besides having a death wish characteristic of a convert, he injected traits in the struggle that have over the last several years contributed to its negative image.

Irregular and asymmetric wars - like any other armed conflict - exhibit tremendous variation in the magnitude and type of violence, even within different phases and time-periods of that particular conflict. The motives of such violence, especially against civilians are complex and multiple. They could range from drawing attention through a spectacular act like the WTC bombings to instilling fear and triggering displacement, as in the case of the Jewish Irgun's attack on Deir Yassin in Palestine.

Regardless of the targets and tactics of violence, it is neither indiscriminate as such nor without consequence. Usually, a method exists to such madness, whether it is a so-called reprisal based on a presumed guilt by association of the target or simply an attempt to plunder and eliminate a group.

More importantly, there are limits to any strategic gains through such violence. Beyond a certain point, violence - indiscriminate or not - is counterproductive. The general population, angered and frightened by the violence, is not only likely to support the state's repressive response but might also resort to tit-for-tat hostilities as have been witnessed in the case of the Baloch students in Punjab.

The Baloch nationalist movement now has reached a juncture where it may lose the support of its various sympathisers in the rest of the country. Similarly, the state apparatus is also at the threshold where it would likely respond by high-profile deterrent activity against the resistance.

The state forces already outnumber and out-gun the Baloch nationalists and have no intention to scale back their repressive activity. Given the geopolitical realities surrounding Balochistan, it is highly unlikely that the Baloch guerrillas will parade down the city streets, mobilise a mass following or engage the state forces in open combat.

With the US, Pakistan and India arriving at a tacit understanding on the future direction of events in Afghanistan, the Baloch question is nowhere near the top of any regional or global power's to-do list.

It is high time that the Baloch fighters and non-combatant elders and leaders revisited the tactics, direction and objectives of their campaign. The traditional Baloch leadership should be brought back into the picture. The Baloch resistance is at a point where, without political leadership, the Scylla of its own violence is about to push it into the arms of the Charybdis of failure.

The writer teaches and practices medicine at the University of Florida. Email: mazdaki @me.com

***************************************

I. THE NEWS

EDITORIAL

THE THREAT TO CYBERSECURITY

IKRAM SEHGAL

Confidential information has been increasingly compromised by electronic attacks around the world. Many websites, both official and private, have been virtually crippled, exposing the vulnerability of financial data.

A few years ago criminals hacked into the private data of members of the World Economic Forum (WEF). Not only did vital personal information thus become public property, attempts were made to siphon off money from their bank accounts through credit card. In addition to economic and military espionage, there is now cyber warfare as well. Criminals or terrorists could use cyberspace to paralyse communications infrastructure, international financial systems or critical government services.

While nations have established rules of the game on land, sea, air and outer space, there are no such rules in the fifth common domain: cyberspace. There are four options in terms of response: prevention, detection, rapid response and mitigation.

EastWest Institute (EWI), one of the leading US think tanks, launched a major initiative to map the dangers and define/coalesce the areas of cooperation. EWI co-chairman-designate Ross Perot Jr, together with a host of sponsors like AT&T, Dell Services and Huawei Corporation, is hosting the World's First Cyberspace Summit from May 3 to 5 in Dallas, which headquarters some of the world's leading IT companies.

There will be 450-or-so dignitaries and experts at the summit, which could eventually come to be known as "the Dallas Process."

Its stated goals are to: (1) launch an international awareness campaign by governments, businesses and individuals about the growing threats to economic stability and security; (2) identify the problems, with particular emphasis on those that pose a common threat; and (3) facilitate joint action and new agreements through intensive working-group interaction in the critical sectors of finance, energy, telecoms and essential government services.

The many malicious actors, with various motives, have similar techniques and have shared integrated domains. The consequences are hard to predict, but the worst-case scenarios are alarming.

During a consultation organised by EWI on cybersecurity in Brussels in February, the institute's vice chairman, Armen Sarkissian, a former prime minister of Armenia who is chairman of the Eurasia House International, laid down the following aims: (1) articulation of new goals for worldwide cybersecurity and the steps needed to achieve them; (2) stimulation of progressive improvement in the way global cybersecurity is reviewed, managed, and implemented; and (3) bringing together leading policymakers, specialists, business executives, community leaders and journalists from around the world for a debate on defining and understanding international cybersecurity approaches, concerns and solutions.

Security, and Teri Takai, technology advisor to the governor of California, concluded that while not working well on the tactical level, worldwide cybersecurity cooperation was practically non-existent at the strategic level.

As one delegate put it: "We are quickly running out of time." Breakthrough groups headed by senior executives from AT&T, Cisco, PayPal, Deloitte and American Airlines targeted workable solutions, prioritising ICT, Finance, Essential government Services, National Security, Media, Transportation and Energy.

Melissa Hathaway, formerly of the US National Security Council, said, "The groundwork for international cooperation will have to be laid and more top-down methods may be urgently needed by unhindered public-public, private-private and public-private cooperation." EWI president John Mroz added that "cyberspace today is like the Wild West. It does not enjoy the international community's setting of basic agreements, rules and procedures.

"The best weapon against the online thieves, spies and vandals who threaten global business and national security will be international regulation of cyberspace. People have to realise the Internet is an integral part of every country, politically, socially and business-wise. Not to focus on cybersecurity is playing with fire."

Some of the key problems policymakers are facing today in cyberspace, including putting national security against the privacy of individuals, are: (1) a clear lack of a commonly agreed definition of what cybersecurity means; (2) lack of effective integration of technical, business, legal, defence and international policy competencies on a level that has not happened so far; (3) inadequacy of current diplomatic assets assigned to the problem, which reflects a lack of political commitment at high levels; (4) inadequacy of the commercial drivers for building security into network equipment, networks and services, the inadequacy being the result of a lack of consumer awareness of the risk exposure they face and a lack of leadership and commitment from those in control; (5) the fact that while states have the right to organise offensive and defensive assets for information operations of a strategic character to affect the strategic intentions of other states, international law does not adequately regulate these assets; (6) lack of regulation of three levels of information warfare: political, military strategic and military tactical; (7) nations' thinking about their online security being too parochial for collaboration on crafting global cyber regulations.

To quote Harry D Raduege, Jr., conceivably the world's foremost expert in cyberspace security who is a former lieutenant general in the US air force, cyberspace has become "a battlefield where adversaries are launching cyber attacks of increasing sophistication. The world has dealt with the threat of weapons of mass destruction…in the past. However, in the world of cyberspace, we are now confronted with a new WMD. If we (Americans) do not prepare now, we could one day face a cyber attack that could cripple our government, our economy and our security."

An incisive comment from China's Tang Lan and Zhan Zui: "Information technology and the Internet have become comparable to nuclear forces. During the Cold War nuclear deterrence was able to keep US and Soviet ambitions in check. Based on that logic, cyber deterrence should play a clear role in the information age. But the anonymity, the global reach, the scattered mature, and the interconnections of global works greatly reduce the efficiency of nuclear deterrence and can even render it completely useless. The spread of information technology and Internet also produces an increasing number of vulnerabilities and weaknesses that can be easily exploited."

With experts in the US, China, indeed from all over the world, feeling so concerned about the vulnerability of the state and its citizens to cyber attacks, what are we in Pakistan doing to forestall such a potentially devastating threat?

The writer is a defence and political analyst. Email: isehgal@pathfinder9.com

***************************************

I. THE NEWS

EDITORIAL

THE REAL HAZARA PROBLEM

KASHIF JAHANGIRI

The grievances of those living in Hazara division, the Hazarewals, are not over the name Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, since a large population of Hazara is of Pakhtun origin, myself included. The renaming of NWFP merely triggered expression of their frustration against the treatment meted out to them. The name issue is just a symptom, the root lies elsewhere.

The Hazarewals are labelled as "Panjabiyan" when they cross the Attock Bridge into the Pashto-speaking areas of the province, while they are labelled as "Pathans" when they go to Punjab. They are in a situation of neither here nor there.

The labelling of Hazarewals as "Panjabiyan" is an expression of contempt, since a Pakhtun does not hold much respect for Punjabis--let us be honest to ourselves. A Pakhtun's calling someone a "Punjabi" suggests the victim's alleged cowardice or lack of honour. There is a real issue, the unavoidable contempt in this for Hazarewals, that needs to be addressed.

In Punjab, the "Pathan" label similarly denotes contempt, though there is a tinge of humour to it. For a Punjabi the term "Pathan" can be a reference to someone's alleged lack of common sense. I remember Punjabi friends teasing me by saying that "Pathan koi zaat naheen hai. Yeh aik kaifiyat ka naam hai, jo kisi waqt kisi par bhi taari ho sakti hai." ("Pathan is not an ethnicity; it is a condition which can affect anyone, any time.") In other words, regardless of your ethnicity, you are a Pathan whenever you act foolish. These "Panjabiyan" or "Pathan" slurs are similar to Pakistanis' being called "Pakis" with contempt in the West. President Bush had to apologise when he referred to Pakistanis as "Pakis" in one of his speeches.

While Hazarewals' interaction with Punjabis is incidental, their interaction with the majority ethnic group of their own province is almost unavoidable. If you are a Hazarewal, you get the feel of this contemptuous behaviour as soon as you get into college or university in Peshawar, or get a job in a Pashto-speaking area. This contempt can develop into a sense of hatred in Hazarewals.

Most of my cousins studied in Peshawar University, where they were labelled as "Panjabiyan." They experienced discrimination not just by fellow students but also at the level of the administration. Particularly at the Khyber Medical College, which quite a few of my family members (including my brother and my wife) attended almost two decades ago.

At the time of the interview for admission there, the interviewers did everything possible--including references to the ethnic divide in the province--to try to persuade the applicants to consider admission, instead, in Ayub Medical College in Abbottabad. Fortunately, their applications could not be rejected out of hand because of the students' high grades.

I can quote a number of other examples of friends and family members who have suffered discrimination in employment in Pashto-speaking areas of the province that lie on the other side of the Attock Bridge. There are non-Pakhtuns living in other parts of the province too, so this contemptuous behaviour specifically against them is all the more painful for Hazarewals. The common perception among Hazarewals is this: they have been singled out by Pakhtun nationalists since Hazarewals played a pivotal role in the historic referendum of 1947 in the people of the province voted for its inclusion in Pakistan.

The reaction to the renaming of the province is purely a symptom of the frustration that has been brewing among Hazarewals against their fellow-provincials from across the Attock Bridge. If Hazarewals have accepted geographical names such as "Haripur" (after Hari Singh), "Abbottabad" (after Major Abbott) and "Mansehra" (after Maan Singh), why should they object to "Pakhtunkhwa," which, on the other hand, links them to their ethnic roots?

Most Hazarewals are descendents of proud Pakhtuns who fought against the Sikhs and liberated territory now called Hazara. Conversely, quite a few of those living across the Attock Bridge have nothing to do with the Pakhtun ethnicity but are claiming to have won back their identity as a result of this name-change. For example, the Bilours--who belong to the so-called "Khariaans," a slur which is a reference to Hindko-speaking residents of Peshawar--are non-Pakhtun by origin, even if they present themselves as champions of the Pakhtunkhwa cause.

Nobody finds the moral courage to discuss the contempt issue underlying the demand for a separate Hazara province, although everyone is aware of it. Whom are we trying to fool? If the root cause is not addressed, the unwillingness to face reality is only going to cause more harm in the long run.

Being a Pakhtun from Hazara, I know very well that the renaming of the province is not the real issue. It is only an indicator, and the issue obviously lies elsewhere. The grave situation, the disharmony between the ethnic groups in the province, needs to be addressed before it becomes too late to deal with it.

The writer is an accountant living in Dublin. Email: kashif.jahangiri@gmail.com

***************************************

I. THE NEWS

EDITORIAL

KHAWAJA'S MURDER: A DARK INDICATOR

KAMILA HYAT

The writer is a freelance columnist and former newspaper editor

The sordid murder of Khalid Khawaja, the former ISI official, squadron leader and a man thought at various times to have negotiated between the US, the Pak Army and militants, exposes the many inter-linkages relating to terrorism.

There is, we all know, a long history behind these. The slimy trail it has left winding through our country binds together the American CIA, elements within our establishment, militants and others who have, at various points in time, attempted to influence events in the region.

It is unclear what role Khawaja played precisely in all this. He was believed by some to be a US spy. Others were convinced that he had given up this role years ago, and affiliated himself with the militants. He – and his wife – had figured in the Lal Masjid affair; there seems to be some doubt as to whose side they were on and whether a role of double agent was played in some way. Khawaja had also been active in the 'missing persons' case and was regarded as a father figure by the families of some who had vanished – notably those with suspected militant links.

The soft-spoken, urbane, Khawaja had been able to project himself as a 'moderate'. But his extraordinary interventions in political matters give an indication of how deep the hatred for the PPP runs in various quarters. For reasons that are no longer rooted in any real logic, given the nature the party has assumed, there still seems to run a belief that as a 'liberal' organisation, formerly headed by a woman, the PPP is averse to Islam and an ally of the West.

Whereas it is true that the PPP remains the mainstream party most opposed to militancy, it is also a fact that it has in recent years shown an opportunistic willingness to play along with the establishment and attempt to do business with it. Khawaja was also distrusted by the PML-N, and may have plotted against its government ahead of its overthrow in 1999.

The career of Khalid Khawaja is a rather dark indicator of the kind of state we have become. It is a state where plots and counter-plots – often against elected governments – are hatched; where deals of various kinds are struck and where deep splits in ideology lead to factions working for ends that are at odds with each other. Within this world of conspiracy, it is often hard to know on whose side individuals are. Some, like Khawaja, may have switched loyalties from one quarter to the other. We are unlikely to ever know the full truth. Many secrets died with Khalid Khawaja and have forever been buried with him at the Lal Masjid, which continues to function despite the violent events of 2007 and revelations about the messages delivered from that institution.

Khawaja's death may indicate a change in the times and in the order of events. When he ventured into territory ruled by militants, accompanied by another former ISI official, Colonel (r) Ameer Sultan better known as 'Colonel Imam' and a British-Pakistani film-maker, Khawaja evidently believed he was safe.

He had not catered for the split that is now believed to separate the Pakistani Taliban, increasingly dominated by elements from Punjab, and the Afghan Taliban. Khawaja's loyalty to the Afghans may have been his undoing. The new groups which have emerged from the ranks of militants in Punjab have no affinity with the ISI men who worked hand-in-hand with the former 'mujahideen'. The old alliance may be at breaking point.

Potentially, at least, this could prove an extremely significant development. The present-day leadership of the military appears to have recognised that the old links with the militants need to end. Khawaja's attempts over the last two years to re-establish these ties failed. The possibility that the military and the intelligence agencies could withdraw their hand from the militants would of course raise new hope that they can indeed be defeated. For this to happen it is imperative that the powerful props that have held them up through the years be removed.

The murder also raises questions about what games are being played now. The Punjabi Taliban killed a former ISI man; they also appear to have developed very deep differences with the Afghans. Some reports suggest that the demand to hand over key Afghan Taliban leaders was intended to take these men captive rather than secure their release. There is further confusion. Lack of clarity persists on whether authorities have made any real effort to go after the likes of Mullah Omar, or whether he and other key Afghan leaders were 'protected' in Quetta. This is what Kabul suspects. At the same time we do not know why any effort is not made to go after the militant groups in Punjab or why the provincial leaderships argues that they do not exist. It could be that we are once more seeing various powerful factions play their own games.

It is necessary to bring a halt to these and apply common rules to all players.

A year after the latest bout of the war on terror unfolded in Swat in May 2009, bomb blasts and targeted killings ravage the peace there. Elsewhere there is doubt as to which groups are engaged in the recent bombing spree. The divide between militant groups in some ways weakens them. In others it makes the task of acting against them even harder with a centralised leadership no longer in existence.

For success to be achieved, it is essential the establishment cut off its links with the militants. The strands where there still exist need to be severed and a new order set in place within which there are few killings, fewer conspiracies and a louder voice for people who must have the right to run the affairs of their nation without devious intervention from agents who have through the years established a parallel system of command.

Email: kamilahyat@hotmail.com

***************************************

I. THE NEWS

EDITORIAL

CHAMELEONS

FAROOQ SULEHRIA

The suicide blast in Peshawar on April 19 that claimed 23 lives was a little different, in the sense that instead of targeting the ANP, as usual, the suicide bomber chose a Jamaat-e-Islami demonstration to detonate himself.

The Naib Amir of the Jamaat, Sirajul Haq, was quick to blame the government that had failed to protect people's lives while another leader of the Jamaat, Hafiz Hashmat, accused Blackwater. Not a word was uttered by any of the Jamaat's leaders about the Taliban, who are usually blamed for such incidents. Last year, when the Swat videos shook the entire country, the Jamaat's did not condemn the Taliban.

Similarly, the PML-N is either devious when it comes to the Taliban, or subtly supportive of them. Shahbaz Sharif faced the wrath of the media when he said on March 14 that the PML-N had refused to accept dictation given by external forces. "If this is the stance of the Taliban, then they should not carry out terrorism in Punjab."

On the contrary, the PPP has been pretty vocal in condemning the Taliban. However, this was not the case back in 1996, when Kabul was captured by the Taliban, as the Jamaat termed it a US-sponsored plot to divide Afghanistan along ethnic and linguistic lines.

In May 1996, Qazi Husain Ahmad spent ten days shuttling between Gulbadin Hekmatyar and Ahmad Shah Masood in a last-ditch bid to stitch an alliance to fend off the Taliban. A month before the Hikmatyar-Masood government was routed in September 1996, the Jamaat had announced a decision to open its office in Kabul. Its aversion to Kabul's incoming masters owed to its long-standing support for Hekmatyar.

Meanwhile, Hekmatyar's support for Saddam Hussein had annoyed the Saudis. Perhaps Mansoora (the Jamaat's headquarters in Lahore) had not noticed this change in the Saudi mood. To further illustrate the Jamaat's troubled relationship with the Taliban, it is relevant to mention then-interior minister Naseerullah Babar's remark that the Taliban conquest of Kabul was "only a change of guard" from the Jamaat-e-Islami to the Jamiatul Ulama-e-Islam.

Nawaz Sharif was equally frustrated over the Taliban's victory. He termed Benazir Bhutto's Afghan policy a disaster which had "turned friends into enemies." However, in a few months' time, after he became prime minister in early 1997, his government was quick to recognise the Taliban government. The Taliban would find it hard to believe Shahbaz Sharif's claim that his party did not take any "external dictation."

To escape the Kargil imbroglio, Nawaz Sharif met Bill Clinton on July 4, 1999. Only Nawaz Sharif can tell if Clinton had dictated anything to him on the Taliban or not. On July 6, Washington imposed curbs on the Taliban. The US sanctions got an extra bite when, in mid-August, the Nawaz Sharif government announced restrictions on the Transit Trade Agreement. In early October, Nawaz Sharif travelled to Dubai to brief the Gulf states on his plan to withdraw support for the Taliban and push for Osama bin Laden's extradition. According to the Reuters report, "Sharif said he insisted that the Taliban stop all activities in Pakistan, hand over Osama bin Laden, or ask him to leave Afghanistan, and shut down all training camps."

Nawaz Sharif was ousted before he could persuade the Taliban to do this. Mullah Omar declared Sharif's removal Pakistan's internal matter, a move that came "in reaction to certain moves by foreign powers against the Pakistani nation."

As for the PPP, Naseerullah Babar declared on the Taliban's takeover of Kabul that "the rise of the Taliban is of great advantage to Pakistan. This is the first time there is a government which has no links with India, or anybody else." And Benazir Bhutto, only 39 days away from her dismissal by Farooq Leghari, called it a "welcome development."

The writer is a freelance contributor. Email: mfsulehria@hotmail .com

***************************************

******************************************************************************************

PAKISTAN OBSERVER

EDITORIAL

IT IS FAISAL SHAHZAD, TOMORROW MAY BE SOMEONE ELSE

IT is extremely sad and shocking that once again an unfortunate incident is being linked to Pakistan. As Faisal Shahzad has been arrested in the United States in connection with the failed car bomb attack in Times Square of New York, authorities in Pakistan are fully cooperating and have already arrested father-in-law and associates of the accused. We are confident that soon the mastermind behind the whole affair would also be nabbed and facts would come to light.

At this point of time, the question arises as to why Faisal Shahzad indulged in this extreme sort of abhorring act, which landed him in a dangerous situation and his family in an awkward position. It could be because of the perception that has developed worldwide in general and in the Muslim world in particular that Muslims are being victimised and persecuted by the US-led West. Psychologically speaking, such incidents are in reaction to discriminatory approach of the United States to issues involving Muslims. We have been emphasising in these columns that the issue of terrorism cannot be resolved by the use of force, rather this would generate more resentment. There are races and tribes that would not abandon the policy of revenge under any circumstances. How then the United States and other Western countries think that relatives of those who are mercilessly being killed in drone or missile attacks or spraying of bullets by helicopter gunships would sit idly, rather sing songs of the United States. It is because of this that we have been urging in these columns that instead of eliminating people through brutal use of force, the West should undertake a serious exercise to identify the underlying causes of terrorism and extremism. Until and unless, these are addressed as per demands of justice and fair play, there can't be any meaningful improvement in the situation. We apprehend that today it is Faisal Shahzad, tomorrow maybe someone else, who could indulge in such condemnable acts. As a first step, the US and its allies should move swiftly towards total withdrawal from Afghanistan and Iraq, leaving these countries to take care of their own destiny. This should be followed by genuine moves towards resolution of the political and economic issues that breed extremism and terrorism.

***************************************

PAKISTAN OBSERVER

EDITORIAL

FM QURESHI'S PRINCIPLED POSITION ON KASHMIR

FOREIGN Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi has reiterated Pakistan's principled position for the resolution of Kashmir problem on the basis of UN resolutions and according to aspirations of the Kashmiri people. Speaking in the National Assembly on Tuesday, the Foreign Minister in his statement said the Government was firm in its stance and would continue extending moral, diplomatic and political support to Kashmiris for their right to self-determination.

The statement of Mr Qureshi after the summit between Prime Ministers of Pakistan and India in Bhutan is of special significance. He emphasised that Pakistan had returned to its historical stand on Kashmir issue covering the damages done to foreign policy during the previous regime. It was satisfying that the Minister rejected the notion that Pakistan's position could be harmed in future peace talks with India after the two sides discarded the nomenclature of composite dialogue at the Bhutan summit. We believe that the Government must be clear in its stance on how to discuss and resolve the contentious issues with India. One thing should be clear that New Delhi will not be ready to extend any favours and Pakistan will have to fight out its case at the negotiation table by playing its cards well. India had been delaying the resolution of core issue of Kashmir for the last over six decades despite commitment by late Prime Minister Nehru to the United Nations for a plebiscite. There are eight points specified under the previous format dialogue and these must be taken from where they were left. It is essential to move forward rather than backward which is the real intention of Indian leaders as they keep on changing their stance under one pretext or the other. We strongly believe that Pakistan has a principled position on Kashmir in line with 1948 UN Resolutions and it must stick to it and also at the forthcoming Foreign Ministers' level talks Islamabad must stress for a time frame to settle all the contentious issues.

***************************************

PAKISTAN OBSERVER

EDITORIAL

ARE WE HEADING FOR CIVIL WAR?

IN yet another sign of utter no-confidence in police, administration and the governmental machinery, protestors on Tuesday razed to the ground a police check post in the Zaman Town locality of Karachi. The angry protestors claimed that they were perturbed over rising number of robberies in the area and alleged release of a suspected robber by police. And in a shocking revelation, city police chief has maintained that the police post was not 'sanctioned' and was established without approval of the authorities concerned.

In the past as well, people in some parts of Karachi burnt robbers and thieves to death on the plea that they had no faith in the performance of the police and the justice system. In the first place, nowhere in the civilised world people take the law into their own hands as we have been witnessing here, which speaks volumes about the rule of law. But it is equally unfortunate that neither Provincial nor Federal Governments have so far taken notice of the situation or initiated measures to arrest the trend. The latest incident is particularly worrisome as a police check post has been demolished, which is otherwise considered to be a symbol of rule of law and cradle of protection and safety to the citizens. This is a highly dangerous trend fraught with serious consequences and, therefore, the Government must take urgent notice of the situation. Secondly, it is also regrettable that despite repeated claims there is no attention towards good governance and instead people feel there was no governance at all and that is why they resort to mob justice. Thirdly, the Karachi incident has once again highlighted the high-handedness of police, which is being seen as part of the problem. It is sad that the said check post was not only illegal but the conduct of its officials was also questionable. There are complaints in all parts of the country that in majority of cases, crimes take place in connivance with local police but so far no remedial action has been taken. We have had enough of politicking and it is high time that the Government focuses its attention on governance and issues that agitate the minds of the people.

***************************************

PAKISTAN OBSERVER

EDITORIAL

A FAILED WHITEWASH IS HOGWASH & SWILL!—III

HUMAYUN GAUHAR

The Second Deflection: Similarly, it doesn't make sense for Musharraf to have Benazir out of the way. Nor does it make sense for the Americans to do so for the same reasons, unless you take her "reneging on her promises to the Americans" theory seriously and not as typical political rhetoric to undo the damage already done to her by making all sorts of promises to the US, like allowing the IAEA to interrogate Dr. A. Q. Khan under certain conditions, and to garner people's support before the elections. Unless, of course, you credit the Americans with greater chess-player like deviousness than I do, for I don't think that they are as intelligent as that considering how all their foreign-cum-defense policy initiatives and adventures have come a cropper, as recently as in Afghanistan and Iraq where they have painted themselves into a corner. Musharraf did the NRO deal with Benazir precisely because he was led to believe that it would give his presidency longevity if he shared power with her, as the Americans and British wanted. Her assassination not only got her out of the way, it got Musharraf out of the way too. After Benazir, Musharraf was the biggest loser. And it caused the American plan to scupper. Neither Musharraf nor the Americans benefitted from Benazir's assassination. Instead of whistling in the wind, why do they not look for the real murderers, even starting with the simplistic Agatha Christie type of logic that he who benefits from a crime must be the criminal.

The Two Hose-Downs: The place of the crime was hosed down in Benazir's case, which certainly is downright fishy and stinks of criminal neglect for it obliterated much evidence before it could be collected. So was the road on which Murtaza Bhutto was ruthlessly gunned down by his sister's police, shot not once but repeatedly for he would not die easily, right at the doorstep of their father and grandfather's house. This is equally suspicious for it obliterated much evidence too. It cannot be said that this is Standard Operating Procedure because it causes a snarl up of traffic or because the authorities want to save the poor relatives of the victims from seeing the blood and gore of their loved ones. Since when did the authorities develop a heart? These incidents were beyond stupidity and no amount of explanation will wash them away.

It is being alleged that the orders for the second hose down came from the Military Intelligence Chief, Major General Nadeem Ijaz, and he reported directly to the army chief, General Pervez Musharraf. Wrong! Benazir was killed on December 27, 2007. Musharraf retired from the army on November 28, 2007, a full month earlier. General Ashfaq Parvaiz Kiyani was now army chief. I'm not implying that General Kiyani told Major General Nadeem Ijaz to do so. I'm not even taking the Nadeem Ijaz thing as gospel truth. We only have assertions. But the Commission was not concerned with these matters. All I can say is this: now we don't need a UN Commission to investigate Murtaza Bhutto's murder, for exactly the same arguments will apply to that as the UN has made in Benazir Bhutto's murder case. Just change the names around.Painting a Bull's Eye: The most important incident of the entire murderous episode that led to the assassination of Benazir Bhutto was that she broke with security protocol and stuck her head out of a homemade hatch or sunroof in her armour-plated Toyota Land Cruiser SUV. Toyota said later that it never makes hatches on vehicles of this type. Her Own Security Lapses: Did the UN Commission explore the following?

Why did her people take the armour-plated vehicle to a local mechanic to cut a sunroof out of it, thus seriously compromising its security efficacy? Just so that she needed to be seen by the public? What were her own high falutin' security people doing, allowing this to happen? Why did all those who were in the vehicle with her allow her to stand up and stick her head out and present herself as a target? Did she have a death wish considering that she had been warned repeatedly by Pakistani, Saudi and UAE intelligence? In fact, one of them even dutifully opened the hatch for her. This is what happens when you have brainwashed slaves, not thinking party people.Worse, why did her security people and those inside her vehicle allow her to do this outside the area of the public rally, Liaquat Bagh? There was enough security in the Bagh to prevent her assassins from attacking, despite the fact that they were looking for opportunities. Were her people so scared of her that they didn't have the guts to prevent her from standing up? In their defense they might say that they couldn't stop her out of respect. To knowingly allow a person you 'respect' to obviously go to her death by making herself vulnerable is showing no respect at all. It is the height of criminal negligence, callousness and stupidity, the last being the most pronounced and rampant quality in the party, apart from hypocrisy, though they still cannot match Nawaz Sharif and Co. in this respect.

To compound this madness – for there is no other word for it – her driver stopped the vehicle instead of keeping it moving. Why? What were those inside the vehicle thinking? Had their common sense gone on leave? Her party members allowed her to proceed to her death and did nothing about it. Stupid. There is no other word for it, for even a mentally challenged person would have seen the danger. Musharraf was not in the vehicle with her, was he? Nor were any of the official security personnel that they could be accused of endangering her. There were her and her husband's most trusted people only. I am not for a moment suggesting that all or any of them were complicit in her murder. All I'm showing you is how a tragedy unfolds once "those whom the gods would destroy they first make mad" – or stupid, much the same thing.

Bur regardless of what I feel or say, did the Commission verify whether perhaps all or some of those inside the vehicle were not complicit in her murder? Benazir Bhutto was receiving telephone calls and receiving and sending SMS messages, and not just on her own two mobile phones, one a Blackberry, but also on the phones of others. Did the UN Commission ask to see the records of the phones of everyone in her vehicle? They could easily have got them from the phone companies even if they didn't get the phones. Did they ask for the records of her husband and daughters' mobile phones in Dubai?

It bears endless repetition: If Benazir Bhutto had not stood up and stuck her head out in a stationary vehicle outside the area of the public rally she would be alive today, even if her assassins had attacked nevertheless, which they probably would not have, seeing no opportunity. But when she presented herself as a stationary target, they let loose with everything they had. The question is: Who painted this bull's eye on her forehead? Great Escape? Why did her security chief Mr. Rahman Malik, accompanied by Mr. Babar Awan, now law minister, Mr. Zulfiqar Mirza, now home minister Sindh and retired Lt. General Tauqir Zia leave ahead of her in an armour plated Mercedes and proceed to Zardari House or whatever its called, in Islamabad? Was this also not the height of callousness? Ruthlessness perhaps? They say that they wanted to be at the house first to receive her.

They also say that they heard the bomb blast not 50 yards away but were told that Benazir was f

***************************************

PAKISTAN OBSERVER

EDITORIAL

MINDSET REVIEWED

AYESHA ZEE KHAN

We are a nation of zealous, highly emotional and spirited people. A lot has been written about our characteristics and how we behave. Numerous writers from home and abroad have commented on how we react on certain happenings. Situation how grave maybe, our outlook remains always the same, couldn't care less, numb, if it's not happened to me, everything's alright. How long can we go on acting this ways? Now is the time we ponder on our behaviour and analyze our weakness, fallbacks, let's all of us do an inner checkpoint and review our actions.

Our biggest fallback in my view is the blame game we so inherently carry out. Everything bad is associated to India/ United States, Israeli agenda, active plotting of enemies of Pakistan. Never have we sought to the nearest of all "ourselves" for any bad thing happening to us on daily basis. Outside factors play a more major role in our lives rather than the rule of taking the responsibility individually. The caste/clan culture that exists so deeply in our society has played a major role in the blame game. The Pakistani mindset is clearly marked by a set of persistent assumptions; personalizing the impersonal! Anything or everything is attributed to someone's manipulation and malevolent intentions are it: flood disaster, earthquake rehabilitation, poverty, a child's truancy, marital problems, electrical failures, broken roads etc. You name the domestic problems and there is always a person to blame, a name to throw the bulk of blame on. Anything positive or worthwhile happening in the lives is always good will!

Ethnicity is another factor in the deteriorating scenario of attitudes. Blaming the ethnic Punjabi's, Sindhi's, Pathan's and Balochi's over each other is becoming the new "in" thing. Throwing the blame of Punjabi's not being fair on the rest of the ethnicities are some of the cheap ways our people have adopted to gain popularity, politicians banking on such a slogan. Conspiracy as a cause of events is a constant. The theory is packaged in a paradigm that can be slapped on any situation. In other societies conspiracy theories are marginal; in Pakistan they are main stream. Responsible people propound them and school textbooks offer them as historical truths. Then there is the Pakistani doublethink. The West is portrayed as immoral and yet almost everyone wishes to migrate to the West. Incompetency, contributes 70% and corruption contributes 30% of the 100% failure of the government. Every Government department in the world today needs expertise that are educated and trained in the specific fields….look at us! The people who got themselves elected with fake degrees in basic graduation are the sole fathers of all the departments today. For example, the federal education minister found asking a student whether A' levels is before O' levels because alphabetically A is before O!! If this is competency level of the head of any department be it Education, health, petroleum, water and power etc. what to expect of the juniors.

Corruption is at peak level. What elaborate starting from any department and ending on any sector anything and everything is dependent upon give and take of money. The Current government is concentrating for 5 years in power and making as much money as they can, to take care of the next four generations, they know that they will not be elected next time, they are not bothered and as the track record shows maybe after 10 years of cycle they will return to power again. Everyday life is based on ad hoc decisions and personalized dealings.

Road traffic in Pakistan is another example of doublethink. Drivers' curse others for breaking the rules, yet routinely cross red lights, drive on the wrong side of the road wrongly park the car, over speed in city limits or tailgate. The archetype of the Holy Warrior is embedded in the Pakistani psyche. Pakistanis also believe that given the right connections, anything can be fixed. The pursuit of the 'fix' feeds back on the state, making it all the more arbitrary. The going abroad culture is strong and underscores Pakistani enterprise and the desire to pursue success and advancement in life. We should all as a nation contemplate and do some inner searching to where we are headed, all is still not lost in the storm of being selfish, mean and malicious. There is good out there but concentrated in certain pockets of our society, we need to take that good out and start planning from now on. Our citizens who are into charities and social work should be boasted by us, should be taken as examples of surviving against all odds. We should concentrate in helping those people; only on self reliance can we survive.

***************************************

PAKISTAN OBSERVER

EDITORIAL

CONTROVERSY OVER NATIONAL ANTHEM

RANDOM THOUGHTS

BURHANUDDIN HASAN

There are certain things in the national life like the personality of its founder, its flag or its national anthem which acquire a sanctified status with the passage of time and reasonable people do not create any controversy about them. Unfortunately in Pakistan certain elements continue to create unnecessary controversies on these national icons even after 62 years after the nation's birth. They just want to add confusion in the life of an already confused nation surrounded by various controversies about religion, system of governance and economic difficulties.

It was surprising when an anchor of a private TV channel in one of this Channel's programs claimed that Quaid-e-Azam had asked a Hindu poet Jagannath Azad to write the national anthem of Pakistan which he did. This anthem was played from Radio Pakistan, Lahore at midnight of August 14, 1947. This anchor, who only has a layman's knowledge of Pakistan's history and not enough of Urdu poetry claimed that his research shows that the Quaid selected a Hindu poet to write the emerging Pakistan's national anthem to give a message of friendship and Hindu-Muslim amity to India. Nothing could be far from the truth than this nonsense. The Quaid was not so naive as to select a Hindu poet to write the anthem of the emerging Muslim state of Pakistan which was the result of his life long struggle for the creation of a homeland for Indian Muslims. Quaid-e-Azam was neither the scholar of Urdu poetry nor of music. How could he, then take the responsibility of commissioning an average Hindu poet to write the most important piece of poetry which will be a landmark of Pakistan's identity whilst Pakistan itself was full of outstanding and renowned Urdu poets. The historical fact is that when Pakistan was to come into existence a great number of Urdu poets were writing naghmaas to welcome the newly emerging nation; Jagannath Azad was one of them. It is possible that on the night of August 14, 1947 the people who were in charge of Radio transmission from Lahore, in their excitement put on air Jagannath Azad's naghma which was readily available.

This neither means that it was Pakistan's national anthem, nor that it was selected by Quaid-i-Azam. Two young boys from the audience stood up and aggressively contested the anchor's claim. They said why the TV Channel is raising this controversy after more than half a century. One participant hinted that this sinister move may be part of the channel's business interests with Indian media under a slogan "aman ki asha". There is no harm in promoting peace efforts between India and Pakistan, but not at the cost of the Quaid's image and Pakistan national anthem's integrity or any slur on its writer Hafeez Jallandhry. I would welcome any further information on this subject on my e-mal address given in this column. It may recalled that former President General Ziaul Haq left no stone unturned to mutilate Quaid-e-Azam's speeches and writings in support of his Islamization agenda and against parliamentary form of democracy. Addressing the seventh session of his hand picked Majlis-e-Shoora on August 12, 1983, he made a fantastic claim, which on the face of it was a brazen lie, that the Quaid wrote a personal diary which had been found preserved in the National Archives and had not been published so far, General Zia declared: He said, "The Quaid-e-Azam, wanted to see that the office of the Head of the State should be very effective as well as powerful. A clue to this is available from the personal notebook of Quaid-e-Azam which is still available in our National Archives. The entry has been made in Quaid-e-Azam's own handwriting. The entry is in English and I will read it out to you. In the first line Quaid-e-Azam writes in the diary: "Dangers of parliamentary form of government. He (Jinnah) points to the dangers of the parliamentary form of government as item number one. (i) Parliamentary form of government has worked satisfactorily so far in England. Nowhere else. (ii) Presidential form of government is more suited to Pakistan.

Yes, these are Quaid's own words, inscribed in his diary, which we have preserved. In view of the historical importance of this documentary evidence, the government has decided to issue it to the Press for publication. I believe after this explicit evidence, in fact command, of the Quaid-e-Azam the controversy about our form of government should come to an end, because the form of his choice not only meets the requirements of our modern age but is also very close to Islam."

This discovery of General Ziaul Haq was covered widely by the national media with facsimile of the relevant page of Quaid-e-Azam's diary displayed on front pages. PTV particularly not only splashed the story with the visuals of the diary but also telecast several discussion programs on the subject in which Ziaul Haq's favorite scholars, intellectuals and journalists participated. They considered the President's startling discovery as the scoop of the century and fully supported his claim that in view of the Quaid's clear cut verdict, Pakistan could only have the presidential form of government and none other. One wonders whether this was a figment of Ziaul Haq's own imagination or his spin doctors were responsible for this ingenious lie. But it was so ridiculous that nobody believed it and after Mian Mumtaz Muhammad Khan Daultana and Mr. K.H. Khurshid who was Quaid's Secretary denied the existence of such a diary, it died its natural death. Neither Ziaul Haq, nor any one of his colleagues ever mentioned this imaginary diary again.

Another travesty of the newly acquired freedom by the electronic media was the bizarre coverage given to the marriage of Pakistani cricketer Shoaib Malik and the Indian tennis player Sania Mirza solemnized in the Indian city of Hyderabad which raged over Pakistan's TV sets for more than two weeks. An added attraction was a claim by an Indian girl that Shoaib had married her in the year

***************************************

PAKISTAN OBSERVER

EDITORIAL

UK ELECTIONS 2010

RIZWAN GHANI

Nick Clegg, David Cameron and Gordon Brown leaders of three main parties took Britain into confidence in their TV devates, on their respective party position on EU, UK-US relations, rule of law, wars and human rights. The other matters that were discussed during the debate were energy balance, Pope's upcoming visit and child abuse controversy, restoration of public's faith in country's failed political system, pensions and cooperation on national issues in case of a hung parliament. Opinion polls showed Clegg retained his lead

In his opening remarks Clegg defended democracy, human rights and rule of law. Condemned complicity in torture, opposed UK's going to Iraq war, called for creating a world free of nuclear weapons and opposed wars. Cameron based his appeal on "change" promising a new country with respect, for values, family, accountable government, tax cuts, strong defense, secure borders and as part of "big family" all of us in this together. Brown stuck to his vision of strong economy, more spending vision in post-recession UK strong to avoid another recession and unemployment.

UK and EU. It is a complex issue for UK and three leaders by and large supported being part of EU. Clegg as strongest EU supporter of group pleaded his case successfully by saying that "strong together, weaker apart". He said, EU platform allows UK to fight international crime, climate change, being part of 475 million people base of 27-member state, UK can punch above its size in international politics. Brown supported EU- UK relations due to strong job and business interests within EU. He said UK's economic recovery is dependent on regional growth, and UK needs EU in its fight against "security and terrorism" . Cameron, however vouched to stand up for Britain in Europe and "restore" lost powers of lawmakers back to UK from Brussels. He called for referendum on Lisbon Treaty, which Labour government avoided, fearing public opposition to EU. As per the EU policy, a single state vote against the Treaty could finish it. Cameron voiced his concerns about EU replacing UK in UNSC.

UK, EU and Human Rights. Three leaders avoided the issue. Similarly, pro-human rights EU has so far failed to impose sanctions against UK (and other coalition members) for their alleged involvement in rendition crimes, death of more than one million Iraqis, plight of refugees due to illegal wars, involvement of British troops in war crimes including torture, illegal detention in Iraq and Afghanistan. Similarly, in Britain itself, Human Rights watch groups and legal experts are of the view that Jack Straw is making laws that undermine Britain's traditional moral standing in the world concerning individual freedoms, civil liberties.

London has failed to address concerns about 90- day arrest duration of terror suspect outside magisterial system, illegal phone recording, community policing and roadside police "stop and search" operations of (Muslim) Asians. It shows of double standards. EU is proud of its human rights charter but fails to implement it on UK and other NATO allies. Labour government's abuse of state power including increasing police abuses against asylum seekers, refugees, terror suspects, failure to raise voice against missing persons and minorities is a setback to British legal system and evolving democracies. UK, multinational operations including Afghanistan. Despite opposing Iraq war, Clegg failed to criticize UK's role and participation in illegal Iraq War. Despite Obama's Afghan withdrawal plan, three leaders failed to give a withdrawal timeline for UK's Afghan mission. British public opposes the war and wants the troops back. But the failure to do so shows the hollowness of election slogans of the three prime ministerial race candidates being sold to public in the form of "public first", "vote for change" and "support rule of law". The truth of the matter is like Brown, both Clegg and Cameron support the policy of "might is right" and are ready to conduct business with "bully" states, regimes involved in gross human rights and civil liberties. The debate has shown that UK is not looking at any withdrawal from Afghanistan for now.

Brown and Pakistan. Brown blamed Pakistan twice for acting as "Taliban Haven" to stir fear in millions watching the debate in UK and rest of the world. The fact of the matter is by labeling countries and groups as "terrorists" it is easy to legitimize illegal wars and crimes against humanity. According to UN laws Afghan resistance against illegal invasion and occupation is legitimate and NATO must leave Afghanistan to restore peace in the region. US Congress has not even voted on Afghan war. Similarly, Blair had to leave office due to public disapproval of UK's involvement in Afghan war. Brown instead of blaming Pakistan should uphold British public's demand seeking independent inquiry on 7/7 London Blasts which according to BBC documentary Ripple Effect allegedly seemed an inside job. Without facts, Brown ought to shut up. Islamabad must demand for an apology from Brown for naming Pakistan and ask for independent inquiry on 7/7 to show the world war crimes and human right violations of UK, US and NATO as occupation forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. UK, Renewable Energy policy and Climate Change. Three leaders supported the Energy Plan with renewable energy as the driving force behind it. They offered practical steps. Clegg stressed on use of train service, called for taxes on transport planes, opposed nuclear energy due to high cost in establishing the nuclear plants, and per unit cost. He called for enmass adoption of renewables including wind, solar in homes, hospitals, schools which constitute 27 percent of national energy consumption. Cameron called for improvement in house insulation, scrapping of 3rd runway on Heathrow, proposed "Green Deal" including £6,700 incentives to adopt renewables to reduce "Energy Poverty" to avoid predicted load shedding in 2017.

Furthermore, Brown proposed hybrid cars, Energy Balance Plan with 15 percent energy generation from renewable energy to end dependence on foreign oil. UK despite charging 100 tax on fuel imports sells energy at the cost of under 3 percent of national average income against Pakistan where it is 62 percent. A £ 8.6 bln plan to allow middle class use solar panels is underway in UK. Reportedly, if UK manages to place solar panels on available buildings, the output will exceed current national energy requirements. Allegedly, UK's private energy sector is undermining government's efforts to shift to renewables. Mismanagement in distribution of energy savers is case in point. In some cases, companies simply failed to distribute the energy savers.

In their closing remarks, Clegg asked public to vote for change. Cameron invited electorate to mak

***************************************

PAKISTAN OBSERVER

EDITORIAL

OUR LIBERTY IS OUR BEST DEFENCE

VIEWS FROM ABROAD

WAJAHAT ALI

The arrest of Faisal Shahzad, a 30-year-old US citizen of Pakistani descent, as the alleged driver of the vehicle used in the failed Times Square bombing represents an opportunity to respond effectively to a potential act of terrorism – instead of reacting with fear and hysteria that will inevitably be manipulated by extremist elements. Details are slowly emerging regarding the potential motives of suspect Shahzad, who was arrested at JFK airport as he planned to fly to Dubai, having recently returned from a five-month trip to Pakistan. Despite initial evidence and statements from law enforcement agencies suggesting this incident lacked the sophistication and planning of an international operation, the Pakistani Taliban has nonetheless claimed responsibility for this amateurish and failed attempt.

Their eagerness speaks volumes about their desperation to instil fear in the hearts of the American public by an act of terrorism on the US mainland. The instant resumption of New York's kinetic lifestyle following such an incident clearly demonstrates American resilience and immunity to such intimidation. Regrettably, however, similar moments of tension – though isolated – have in the past been used cynically by bigoted ideological pundits in both non-Muslim American and Muslim communities to sow dissension and enmity. We saw this tendency recently, when a mentally unstable Army major, Nidal Hassan Malik, opened fire and killed 13 soldiers at Fort Hood, Texas. A Nigerian student, Umar Farouk Abdulmuttalab, forever known as the underwear bomber, tried to ignite himself on an airplane on Christmas Day after, staggeringly, getting past security despite having been previously flagged (an unacceptable internal administrative mistake, revealing a lack of communication between security agencies).

Five young American Muslims were arrested in Pakistan for attempting to join a terrorist group after the children's parents and Muslim American community members proactively contacted the FBI and assisted in their investigation (although the five have since protested their innocence). And, most recently, two clowns known as "Revolution Muslim" made veiled threats towards the creators of South Park for making a cartoon mocking the Holy Prophet (PBUH). These incidents of violence or attempted terrorism by radicalised individuals in America – as well as the blank space in the New York skyline that was once graced by the World Trade Centre towers – serve as unending fuel for the rightwing commentators. And those bellicose pundits will inevitably squeeze every drop of righteous anger and fear from this failed Times Square plot, in order to promote a dangerously inaccurate image of an Islamic monolith comprising 1.5 billion diverse individuals as having an innate homicidal aversion to "our freedoms". Attacks will, no doubt, be made on Barack Obama's efforts at conciliation and partnership with Muslim communities – as evidenced by his al-Arabiya interview, his historic speech to Muslims in Cairo, and his outreach to Muslim American organisations and leaders. Sarah Palin and her ilk will argue passionately on Fox News to "profile away" evil-doers – in effect, advocating racial profiling of ethnic minorities, especially of Middle Easterners and South Asians. Anticipating public anxiety, Obama reacted to calls for "greater security" following the failed Christmas Day bombing by implementing catch-all measures – recently amended – to extend special pat-downs and heightened profiling to individuals returning from 14, mostly Muslim, countries. Despite overwhelming evidence showing that racial profiling and the erosion of civil liberties and due process are counterproductive in fighting terrorism, I worry that fear and divisive rhetoric will be used to undermine the mutual trust and co-operation that has been painstakingly built over the past two years between American Muslims and law enforcement agencies.

Rightwing demagogues who proclaim the virtues of the west, and argue that terrorism is unique to the "Muslim world", should be reminded of evidence to the contrary. The recent arrest of nine members of the Christian terrorist militant group, the Hutarees, for conspiring to kill police officers and wage war on the United States government has largely been labelled an anomaly. The suicide flight of disgruntled Joseph Stack into the IRS building in Texas, which killed an innocent public employee, has been overlooked, even as Tea Party-type anger at federal government institutions has been allowed to fester.

Islam, too, has its reckless demagogues. Radicalised Muslim elements manipulate asinine episodes such as satirical cartoon depictions of the Prophet as categorical proof that the "imperialist" west is perpetuating its war on all of Islam and Muslims. Recent violence and threats against those cartoonists who have depicted the Prophet in a disrespectful manner do not emerge from a vacuum, but rather they are symptomatic of a sustained belief in a skewed and simplistic narrative of the "war-mongering west" that finds its evidence in the Iraq war, US support for Israel, civilian casualties in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and cosy US relations with brutal Arab dictatorships. These thugs ultimately bear the greatest blame for betraying the legacy and spirit of their Prophet, who urged moderation and civility.

In the face of the threat from extremists, the greatest mistake Americans could make would be to revisit the rhetoric and security policies of George W Bush, which proved to be disastrous in curbing global terrorism but highly successful in eroding the US's standing in world opinion, and which damaged co-operation with Muslim communities. Ultimately, the best defence is the very same values of freedom, liberty and democracy they wish to defend and protect.

The sad reality of modern, globalised 21st century existence is that the threat of terrorism and violence is a constant, yet manageable and containable, aspect of daily life. Reactionary posturing, rampant ethnic stereotyping, scapegoating of minorities, and provoking mistrust of Muslim Americans and allies have only ever exacerbated the risks. Recent history has shown that a reasoned and moderate perspective, along with sound security measures, vigilant policing, protection of civil liberties and mutual aid are our best hope. As more evidence in this case emerges in coming days, let us hope this philosophy prevails. —The Guardian

***************************************

******************************************************************************************

THE INDEPENDENT

TAKING ON BCL

A picture carried in most of the leading newspapers on Wednesday shows the frenzied attack with a machete by a BCL (Bangladesh Chattra League) follower on another of his rival faction. It surely is a shocker. There is room for debate if the repulsive picture has violated journalistic norms or ethics. But the publication of this picture, it seems, was meant to drive home the message that the student front of the ruling party has outgrown itself. There is no point telling the nation any more that the prime minister has dissociated herself from the student body. Equally unconvincing will be mere threats of taking action against, arguably, the handful of unruly BCL activists who are responsible for such violence and abominable practices.

It is the leaders of the ruling Awami League and the saner section of the student front who should now unite their forces to wage a political war against the notorious elements in the student organisation who have undermined its glorious tradition. There is no point differentiating between crimes of the same category. The picture tells us that the perpetrators are no better than the worst criminals in the law book. From the moral point of view such unchallenged and open acts of extreme violence, committed especially by so-called students, leave a far greater negative impact on society than those by hardened criminals.

It has to be realised that the factions locked in bloody and bitter feuds, far from fighting for any ideal, are actually on a mission of annihilating their rivals for illegal and narrow interests. Their crimes deserve to be treated with iron hands right now. People are unlikely to be convinced that the law enforcement agencies cannot take on the unruly students on different campuses and make them face the law. Whoever are the offenders should be meted out the punishment they deserve. The pictures of internecine violence carried in different newspapers almost on a regular basis clearly show who the criminals are. They and their mentors must not go unpunished.

***************************************

THE INDEPENDENT

EDITORIAL

BRITISH POLLS

With almost a million Bangladeshis participating, the British elections slated for today, has generated a lot of interest in Bangladesh. The fact that for the first time a person of Bangladeshi origin is likely to gain a seat in Britain's parliament or the House of Commons, as it is called, has made it even more interesting for most Bangladeshis. Apart from that nothing else is certain in this year's polls. Political pundits are predicting a "hung parliament" or a "minority government" as the most likely scenarios. But in the absence of an US-style opinion poll that predicts results, it is anybody's guess.

Already the outgoing leader of the Labour party, Prime Minister Gordon Brown, has appealed to voters to cast their vote "tactically', meaning to vote the Lib-Dems where they have a better chance and vise versa. The assumption is that only a coalition government can muster the votes necessary for a confidence-vote. But then it may not come to pass. There have been many instances in modern British political history where a party with a minority of the popular vote has won a majority of parliamentary seats. It all depends on how the support is spread across the constituencies. In fact, if there is a hung parliament or a coalition government that will be a first in modern British history.

After 13 years in power the incumbent Labour party has to carry the controversial legacy of launching an expensive and unpopular war in Iraq and an economy that is still to come out of the recession. This makes Brown – touted as an economic wizard of sorts, earlier — an easy target for his adversaries. The best chances for him are cross-voting by the supporters of the traditional "third party" of British politics – the Lib-Dems. If that does not happen, David Cameroon, the leader of the Conservative Party, may emerge as the next prime minister of Britain.

***************************************

THE INDEPENDENT

EDITORIAL

THE PIOUS RAPIST..!

"..Karnataka CM, B.S. Yeddyurappa called Halappa (the alleged rapist) a 'pious person.." Times of India May 5th

Yes that's what Chief Minister Yeddyurappa called the alleged rapist Halappa, 'a pious person' while strongly defending him and screaming to everybody, "My Food Minister couldn't have raped his friend's wife he is a pious person!"

"Hey there Mr Yeddyurappa, somehow my idea of being pious and yours seem to be slightly different huh?"

"I have seen him going to the temple thrice a day. In my office he does puja and in his office he also does puja twice a day!"

"He does, does he?"

"Yes, yes, he is very pious!"

"Come with me Chief Minister sahib!"

"Where are you taking me?"

"To the jail sir, now shall we talk to that fellow in his cell?"

"He is a criminal, I do not want to talk to him!"

"Ask him whether he did his puja before he committed the robbery?"

"He is a criminal!"

"Sir did you do your rituals before your crime?"

"Yes, yes, I cannot understand how I failed! I did everything! I went to the place of worship, I broke a coconut and still I got caught!"

"Your ministers Mr Chief Minister, are they very religious?"

"All of them are, all of them!"

"I guess they don't take bribes then!"

"He, he, he! Who doesn't take bribes, a little here and there is good no?"

"So worshipping God and taking bribes has no conflict of interest?"

And from the cell I hear a voice shouting, "Worshipping means I should not get caught!"

"You know something Chief Ministerji, maybe there's something we need to teach your ministers, maybe there's something you yourself have to learn when you call somebody 'pious'.

"What is it?"

"Sir, when a man is pious, when he worships God, God himself enters his body, his mind and his soul!"

"Yes, yes, I know!"

"No you don't sir! Then that person should get all the qualities of the God he worships; he becomes pure, he throws out evil thoughts and sir, he definitely wouldn't want to rape his friend's wife like your minister Halappa allegedly did!"

"What are you trying to say?"

"That being pious is not about just following rituals sir, it is about allowing God into our lives and letting Him make us as holy as He is..!"

—bobsbanter@gmail.com

***************************************

THE INDEPENDENT

EDITORIAL

GETTING RID OF THE EXCESS BAGGAGE

M HARUNUR RASHID

Some of the public academic institutions at the tertiary level along with quite a few colleges across the country have been through quite a bit of turmoil to hit the headlines of newspapers. Violence involving use of dreadful sharp tools has ripped these institutions leaving some dead and scores of others injured. As a result some of them had to be closed down sine die. Newspaper reports also raised accusing fingers chiefly at BCL, an associate body of the ruling Awami League, for triggering off these incidents. This does not, of course, augur well for a political party that has been in office for nearly 15 months now.

It is most unfortunate that the pattern of student politics has not changed over the last three decades in this country. With every change of guards, the student body of the ruling party has always been active in occupying halls driving their rivals away at the first available opportunity. It was this nagging aspect of student politics which prompted Ershad to disband his student following, a decision he regretted later in the day. And it was this distressing aspect of violence on campus that made former President Shahabuddin Ahmed to give a clarion call to the political parties to agree on a 10-year moratorium on student politics. With his deep political insight he could realise that unless the political parties withdrew their support to the student bodies, the academic peace and stability, much needed for the development of the academia, was a distant dream. But the political parties turned a deaf ear to his earnest call. This led to the ultra politics which has become so pervasive all over.
Today, what is so baffling is that a few of the student leaders dictate to the educational administrators their conditions for 'peace' on campus. From admissions to grading to tenders - everything has to be done as they would like it to be. So, people queue up behind the student leaders instead of seeing the administrators. And that seems to work like magic. Sometimes, you happen to hear noises here and there, but that is only because of intra-group rivalry. Even inter-party clashes are not unusual and when that happens, the consequences are bloody and dreadful; the institution has to close down until normalcy is restored.

Now, this provides the backdrop in which the Prime Minister gives a call for a digital Bangladesh. According to her vision, the young generation was to get prepared for taking on the responsibility of the digitised future. Having felt frustrated by the unruly conduct of the leaders of the student body, she threatened to sever all connections with the BCL if they did not mend their ways. She thought this warning would restrain them. Well, it didn't. Their violent and rowdy activities continued unabated. Warnings as usual have been uttered by the relevant authorities saying that they would be nabbed without any consideration of their party affiliations. Some indeed have been arrested, but that too failed to restrain them. With violence pervasive on campuses, one can easily see that no substantial progress is likely to be made in the academic sphere. Without securing the peace on campus, the PM's vision of a digital Bangladesh will remain a distant dream.

The students and activists of the ruling Awami League, according to newspaper reports, are interfering with the local administration. They have been accused of having clashed with the police in snatching their colleagues from police custody. There are allegations of snatching tender papers in order to get the job either for themselves or for their chosen contractors. In short, the bureaucrats at the local level are living a life under constant threat. When this sort of tension prevails in the minds of the officers, it will have an adverse effect on the target fulfillment of the Annual Development Programmes.

Students dominating a campus are looked upon as political assets which political parties in general consider a desirable thing. But when they get out of control and catch every bit of money floating in front of them, they cross the limit of academic propriety. No political party should allow that to happen. For in that is contained the seed of destruction. Already, the BCL has much tarnished the image of the ruling Grand Alliance. Some partners like Rashed Khan Menon and Ershad have already spoken against this chaos on academic campuses. Unless something is done in order to restrain the activities of the BCL and other student bodies keeping up the turmoil on campus, things will soon get beyond all controls. With the energy crisis further deepening and water becoming increasingly scarce, the BCL factor could be the last straw on the camel's back.
The Prime Minister had better remember that not all the members of BCL are involved in such nefarious activities. Students who have failed to heed her warning should be got ridden of like excess baggage. The sooner, the better.

(The writer, a professor of English, is Associate Editor of The Independent.)

***************************************

THE INDEPENDENT

EDITORIAL

UK GENERAL ELECTIONS 2010

ARANYA SYED

The United Kingdom general and local elections will be held on 6 May 2010. This is likely to be one of the closest and highly-anticipated elections in a generation. Local elections, as well as referendums, are also scheduled to be held in some areas of the country on the same day. The incumbent centre-left Labour Party will be fighting for a fourth-term in government after former Prime Minister Tony Blair led the party to three successful General Election victories since 1997. This will be the first time current Prime Minister Gordon Brown will be running for the Prime Minister after he took over the reigns from Mr Blair, who resigned from the job in 2007.

Opinion polls conducted since the general elections were called on 6 April 2010 have indicated that the Conservative Party is expected to get the largest share of votes in this year's elections. The centre-right party, which is the oldest political party in the world, is led by David Cameron, who has substantially changed the party. He has made it more modern and is fighting this election on the centre ground of British politics.
The party has increased its intake of Black & Minority Ethnic (BME) and Women parliamentarians since Mr Cameron was elected as the leader of the party in 2005. The centrist Liberal Democrats, under the leadership of Nick Clegg, are expected to substantially increase their share of votes as a result of the General Election TV Leader's Debates, the first in the history of the country.

The TV Debates have been a resounding success in terms of engaging more people in the election campaigns and is most likely to contribute to a bigger voter turnout than in the previous elections. The TV debates were viewed across the country, including in the pubs, where people normally socialise and watch football. The first TV debate on the issue of Home Affairs, conducted by ITV, was won by Mr Clegg, a relatively unknown figure in British politics, which resulted in "Cleggmania" at Fleet Street.

The first debate was arguably the most flat as it revolved mostly around style than substance. The second debate, conducted by Sky, was on the issue of Foreign Affairs, which was largely reported as a draw between Mr Clegg and Mr Cameron while the third debate on the issue of the Economy, the biggest issue in the upcoming elections, conducted by the BBC, somewhat surprisingly resulted in an emphatic victory for Mr Cameron.

Mr Brown, who was the Chancellor of the Exchequer for ten years and an expert on financial issues, was expected to give a strong performance after two lacklustre ones previously, but he came third in all the debates, including this crucial one.

The biggest issue in this election, as mentioned previously, will be the economy after Britain suffered the worst recession in the country's history since the 1930s. The global financial crisis - the Great Recession - resulted in the collapse and bailout of large financial institutions, which has contributed to the biggest budget deficit in Britain's peacetime history (12 per cent of national income) and government debt rising to an astronomical £1.4 trillion. The two major parties fundamentally disagree on how to respond to this issue and this has made the upcoming elections one of the most pivotal in the country's history.

The Conservatives have argued to eliminate "the bulk" of UK's deficit within five years starting from 2010, hich will also mean that they can avoid rise in the National Insurance (NI) "jobs" tax, which Labour have proposed. Mr Brown, on the other hand, has argued that the fragile economy requires "targeted" increase in public spending over the next year to "sustain the recovery" and he is against Mr Cameron's so-called "savage" cuts which he argues will lead the country to a deeper recession.

Several influential business leaders, including the bosses of Marks & Spencer, Next and Sainsbury's have expressed their support of the Tories' plans on the economy and taxation. Most of the newspapers, including The Sun, the biggest-circulated newspaper in the UK, The Times, The Economist and The Financial Times have come out in support of Mr Cameron. The other hot topic in this election has been immigration, especially since Mr Brown's gaffe of referring a lifelong Labour supporter as a "bigoted woman" after she expressed her concerns over European Union (EU) immigration in the country.
Mr Brown's rash and irritable comments, caught on a TV microphone, brought the issue of immigration at the forefront of this election. Mr Cameron has, rightly, not exploited and "banged on" about this issue, unlike previous Tory leaders who led the party to heavy electoral defeats. The Conservatives support the current government's Points Based System (PBS), but unlike Labour they will establish an annual cap on non-EU economic migrants.
It is debatable whether this policy will substantially bring down net immigration, considering only one out of ten immigrants in the country originated from non-EU countries, according to the most up-to-date figures. None of the three mainstream parties have pledged to limit EU-based migrants as they are all committed to being members of this Continental Union. On foreign policy issue both the major parties are committed to supporting the military action in Afghanistan and maintaining UK's independent nuclear deterrent.
Relationship between EU countries will most likely deteriorate if the euro-sceptic Conservatives are back in power and they will also support humanitarian interventions when it is practical and necessary. Mr Cameron has also indicated that he wants a "special relationship" with India and that he will strongly respond to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons, which will be one of the key foreign policy issues for the next government.
Every opinion poll are pointing towards the Conservatives gaining the largest share of votes but whether it would be enough for Mr Cameron to be elected as the next Prime Minister of the country remains to be seen. There is a strong chance that he might not have outright majority of seats to govern, which would result in a hung parliament. Britain's First Past the Past (FPTP) electoral system - also known as "winner takes all" - has made hung parliament a rarity in its history, whereas this phenomenon is common in legislatures with the Proportional Representation (PR) electoral system. The FPTP system combined with Britain's unfair parliamentary boundaries mean that the Conservatives could well end up with more votes but fewer seats at the House of Commons. If the results do point towards a hung parliament then there will be negotiations which could well result in a Lib-Lab coalition. One result is, however, clear: Labour will not receive the largest share of votes, as they did in the last three elections under Mr Blair.
If Mr Brown does lose, he will, undoubtedly, go down as one of the worst Prime Ministers in the country's history - someone who was unelected as a PM and then got booted out after less than three years in office. Another election which people will most likely have a considerable interest on is the General Elections at the Bethnal Green and Bow constituency in London, where it is virtually guaranteed that Britain will have its first ever British-Bangladeshi Member of Parliament (MP) in Westminster.
All the major parties in that constituency has selected a British-Bangladeshi Muslim and the contest will most likely be a two-horse race between Rushanara Ali PPC of the Labour Party and Abjol Miah PPC of the Respect Party, a coalition between far-left Socialists and far-right Islamists, while Zakir Khan PPC (Conservatives) and Ajmal Masroor PPC (Liberal Democrats) were nominated from the other two parties. The Metropolitan Police have, however, started investigations after widespread allegations of postal-vote fraud in this particular constituency, in which British-Bangladeshis amount to 36 per cent of the population.
This promises to be one of the closely fought and open elections in recent history. It is nigh on impossible to predict who will be the Prime Minister on May 7 2010 - the most likeliest outcome is probably the Conservatives coming back in power after 13 years in Opposition and Britain having its youngest PM since the 19th century.
Voter turnout looks set to be higher, mainly as a result of the exciting TV Leader's Debates. However, one person, most certainly will not be voting as it is considered "unconstitutional" for her to vote. We've all heard the saying "beggars can't be choosers". In Britain, neither can, the Queen.

(The writer is based in London, United Kingdom.)

***************************************

THE INDEPENDENT

EDITORIAL

GEOTHERMAL ENERGY AND LITTLE PEOPLE

DR. TERRY LACEY

Being of Irish origins I have always believed in the little people. And if you believe in them you can see them, even in steamy mists near geothermal sites and volcanoes. But at the World Geothermal Congress 2010 in Bali I was not sure how to find them until I met a young German guide.

But first Rodney Gordon Bloomquist, Chairman of the International Geothermal Association Steering Committee told me about the high risks in geothermal development. Even if you can cut your contract risk by going for a Power Purchase Agreement early in the exploration process, if your exploration drilling produces poor results after spending between US$4 and $7 million per hole, "It may still be better to walk away", he said.
Moreover the preparatory and infrastructural costs of the projects and attendant risks are greater for smaller projects than for larger ones since the fixed cost ratio improves with size. The implications of what Bloomquist said were clear. Don't go below 15 to 20 megawatts (MW) in size unless you have a really good reason, like a state subsidy to mitigate drilling risks. So geothermal energy is not a solution for the needs of rural electrification on a smaller scale. Or could it

be?
In Indonesia the economic model and modus operandi of Pertamina Geothermal developing 15 working areas looks 'viable', with cheap money, with plans to develop 3,132 MW of power, with a well-heeled state-backed oil and gas company with good financial credentials levering low-interest loans from multilateral institutions.
But that seems to suggest that to he that hath, he shall have in abundance, while he that hath not, even that which he hath shall be taken away from him.

Where does that leave smaller companies seeking to implement a non-subsidised Independent Power Producer (IPP) model with far less financial clout?And how does that help developers working with projects under 100 MW in size and even right down to under 20 MW? And what about down between 1 MW and 10 MW and even micro projects under 1 MW?

The Indonesian and global expansion of electricity generation capacity from geothermal energy cannot depend only on a few large projects backed by big firms like Chevron, GE's Star Energy and Pertamina Geothermal. It cannot be that only big boys can play. The global credibility of the geothermal industry in a more socially and environmentally conscious world will also depend on helping the poor as well as the rich, the rural as well as the urban, and small communities and interests as well as large ones.

Socially balanced development is also about the little people. And all renewable energy is partly about letting newer and smaller companies and wannabees in rural areas into the gameSo when Dr David Bruhn of the German Research Centre for Geosciences (GFZ) told me that his organization could build a 1 MW geothermal power plant, and had put a 60 Kva modular binary geothermal power plant at the front door of the conference hall, based on low temperature technology, then I began to see the light.

So GFZ expertise in low temperature geothermal power systems could help fill a gap in technology and in local economic and social strategies in rural Indonesia, or East Africa, or Central America, although the main focus of the industry would be on higher temperature technology and larger power plant.

Like Heineken Lager, GFZ technology innovation might be able to reach the parts which other laagers could not reach. But in each case it would need an appropriate contextual economic and social model to do it, based on social and economic viability and active participation, and then local licenses and fabrication to promote local industry.

This innovative German approach to appropriate yet quality engineering along with the rugged and robust approach of the Icelandic geothermal engineers and developers convinced me that there was experience available on how to build viable micro, small and medium-scale geothermal power stations, between 60 and 500 KV, and between 1 and 20 MW. So geothermal energy can help smaller communities and villages. It does not have to be big. It could have a bigger impact on the little people than some people thought.

(The writer is a Jakarta-based columnist of The Independent.)

***************************************

******************************************************************************************

THE AUSTRALIAN

EDITORIAL

WHY FISCAL DISCIPLINE PAYS

VICTORIA IS IN A BETTER BUDGETARY POSITION THAN OTHER STATES

FISCAL discipline pays. Unencumbered by the hefty budget deficits besetting other states, especially Queensland and NSW, the Victorian government delivered a responsible election-year budget on Tuesday. A modest surplus this year of $395 million is projected to increase next year to $872 million and average $1.2bn over the next four years, maintaining the state's AAA credit rating. It is a bottom line that other states would envy, brought about through prudent fiscal discipline by the Brumby and Bracks governments and the difficult reforms of the Kennett era. These included electricity and transport privatisations, and slashing crippling public sector debt.

The big-ticket items in the budget that should underpin economic growth in Victoria and improve services include $9.5bn for infrastructure and $4bn for health, including the $935 million "brinkmanship" bonus that Premier John Brumby squeezed out of Kevin Rudd during their battle over hospital funding.

Although relatively modest, the reduction in payroll tax from 4.95 per cent to 4.9 per cent, taking the impost to its lowest rate for 35 years, will provide a welcome boost to productivity. So will the 3.5 per cent cut in WorkCover premiums. Such relief is important given the forecast that unemployment will rise from 5 per cent to 7 per cent next year. On the positive side, Treasurer John Lenders has paid down a large slice of debt, ensuring that the state's net debt will peak in 2012-3 at 4.3 per cent of gross state product rather than the 5.1 per cent predicted in last year's budget amid the financial crisis.

Aside from federal revenue, a major contributor to the state's coffers has been Victoria's inflated housing market, which has delivered a stamp duty windfall and a 12 per cent increase in land tax. In such a booming property market, it makes sense that the government has cut the first-home buyers grant for existing homes from $9000 to $7000 for those purchasing existing properties. But in an effort to stimulate the building sector outside Melbourne, it has increased the first-home buyers bonus by $4000 for those buying newly built properties in regional areas.

In an election year, announcements of a new rail line in Melbourne's west, a new Bendigo hospital and an extra 1966 police on the beat over five years should find favour with voters. Labor's record on law and order, however, is marred by the lack of an independent crime commission. But Victoria's budgetary position proves the importance of fiscal conservatism and economic reform, values accepted by both sides of politics. Other states should follow.

***************************************

THE AUSTRALIAN

EDITORIAL

TOO MANY TWITS ON TWITTER

THE AGE SHOULD HAVE CHOPPED CATHERINE DEVENY AGES AGO

THE mindless musings of most tweets, fortunately, are limited to 140 characters. But as self-proclaimed "professional pain in the arse" Catherine Deveny has demonstrated, that is more than enough to crudely smear an 11-year-old child, make a tasteless joke of the cancer death of a young woman, vilify our Anzacs as mercenaries or racists, and slander a senior politician as having "the face of a rapist". Paul Ramadge, editor-in-chief of The Age, has commendably consigned Ms Deveny to the spike for "offensive language". But we're surprised that Tony Jones finds her bogan vitriol engaging enough to include her on three Q&A panels within a year and that The Age did not act sooner. Perhaps it was embarrassed after naming her among the top 100 most influential Melburnians in 2007. Barack Obama's wise advice for young people, that employers will check on social network sites, is equally applicable to adults. Tweeters would be better off reading a good book. And if Age readers feel deprived, Rodney Rude might be a comparable replacement.

***************************************

THE AUSTRALIAN

EDITORIAL

NO NEED TO LEAD FROM THE FRONT ON ETS ACTION

GREG SHERIDAN

KEVIN Rudd was right to ditch, or at least postpone for a lengthy period, the emissions trading scheme. Meanwhile Tony Abbott has made an important and strangely unreported speech, setting out his policy on immigration, which is almost as important, strategically, as the Prime Minister's position on the ETS.

The Opposition Leader's speech does as much good for the nation as Rudd's position on the ETS. Both, I believe, have been misinterpreted.

Rudd has said all along that under his leadership Australia would do no more and no less than the rest of the world in combating climate change. In an interview with me in 2008, Rudd said he thought any international deal would be extremely difficult to achieve. He also made it explicitly clear that his government's approach would involve flexibility. If the global consensus was for more aggressive action, Australia would be more ambitious. If the global consensus was for slow action, Australia would similarly adjust.

This is a sound position. It doesn't mean you are a climate change denier. If most economies broadly similar to Australia - that is, the US, Canada, Japan, South Korea and western Europe - were embracing tough emissions reduction targets under ETS-style policies, Australia should do the same to pull our weight and to participate in a carbon market.

But during the past couple of years it became clear nations were abandoning ETS-style policies. Again, in 2008, the president of the World Bank, Bob Zoellick, prefigured this in an interview with me. If the world could not conclude the Doha Round of trade liberalisation in which everyone was a winner, he pointed out, it would be extremely difficult for it to conclude a climate change agreement in which there would be very big losers.

I spend a lot of time in Asia and during the past couple of years it has become clear to me that no developing nation in Asia, and few developed nations anywhere, would commit to binding targets or participate in a global carbon market. Copenhagen confirmed that the biggest greenhouse gas emitter, China, would not only not embrace any targets, it would not even allow any meaningful external monitoring of the broad carbon reduction measures it might take. With some variation, this is the position of other big emitters such as India and Indonesia.

The share of emissions accounted for by developing nations is growing. This reality then fed into the US deliberations, such that it is very unlikely that the US will adopt an ETS-style approach, while Canada's ETS approach is totally ineffective. Japan has put its scheme on the "too hard" list and punted it to the distant future.

I am broadly a climate change agnostic. I don't know whether the scientific consensus is right or not. But I am more than half convinced that we should give the planet the benefit of the doubt and, in any event, cleaning up the environment is a good thing in itself.

But I am 100 per cent opposed to imposing big costs on the Australian economy that are not to be borne by most other developed economies.

We will have no positive effect on other nations if we embrace a scheme that we do not enforce credibly or that cripples our economy. It may very well be that the George W. Bush and John Howard approach of promoting green technology, and better regulation, is the best that can be managed for the moment.

Similarly, the idea that postponing the ETS will hurt us because it will make it harder to meet the 5 per cent reduction target by 2020 is misplaced. Obviously, we won't meet the 2020 target. We will be a few years late. Big deal. I am very pleased the Rudd government chose this course. It has got a bath for it from the commentators, understandably given its exaggerated rhetoric in the past, but it also used the ETS to destroy three Liberal leaders, so in terms of raw politics it has been pretty effective. In the end the public doesn't care nearly as much about the process as about the ultimate decision. Rudd has decided not to sacrifice the economy. That's a good choice.

Abbott's speech on immigration policy merits more attention than it has received. In it he made a few critically important, and correct, strategic decisions. He rightly defends the Howard government's record on stopping illegal immigrants while increasing immigration overall and securing public support for this increase.

Abbott rightly commits to stopping the flood of illegal immigrants and maintaining a strong immigration program. You can't do the latter, he persuasively argues, if you don't do the former. His most important strategic call is to avoid the folly of a population target. Abbott rightly argues that population is a consequence of how many babies people have, which government cannot and should not control, and the immigration level.

Government can control immigration levels but this rightly changes year to year according to economic circumstances, skills shortages and much else.

Abbott's position is nuanced but is generally in favour of a large immigration program. He somewhat defies the opinion polls and he deserves great credit for that. He has eschewed the foolish populism of an anti-immigration stance. This is important in principle and in maintaining the Liberals' credibility with business.

Abbott is explicitly rejecting some of the more foolish remarks of his immigration spokesman Scott Morrison, who bizarrely said recently that Liberal policy was similar to Greens policy, or of environment spokesman Greg Hunt, who thinks a big Australia is a bad thing.

These two are among the Coalition's better performers generally, but they show a silly penchant for historically dangerous populism and chasing the cheap and fraudulent cheers of the deep Green mob, which will never, ever support the Liberal Party anyway.

Abbott's speech dwelled too much on opinion polls - one reason it was under-reported - and gave the impression the Coalition would be happier with 29 million rather than 36 million Australians, but did so with such dexterous flexibility that an Abbott government could pursue growth, surely a bedrock value of the Liberal Party, as energetically as the Howard government did.

Abbott and Rudd get a good mark from me on these decisions.

***************************************

THE AUSTRALIAN

EDITORIAL

THIS TAX WON'T WIN ANY RESPECT

HENRY ERGAS

THE bad news on the death and taxes front is that death is still certain. The worse news, in a world where investors value predictability, is that taxes are not.

The flashpoint is the proposed new tax on mining, which the government (perhaps channelling Aretha Franklin) has termed the Resources Super Profits Tax, or RSPT. Unfortunately, the mining industry believes the proposed scheme delivers anything but R-E-S-P-E-C-T.

And it is so complicated even the Prime Minister finds it impossible to explain.

The truth is that the new tax could be more efficient than relying on royalties. But royalties are not likely to go away any time soon. And adding the two could make matters worse.

So could flaws in the way the proposed tax is designed.

Consider the proposed tax and its effects.

Imagine a company is going to dig a mine at a cost of $100 in year one and without needing to incur any other costs, it will then sell all the output in year two, getting revenues of $120 (after which the mine shuts). Overall, the company will have realised a 20 per cent rate of return.

If its cost of capital (the return investors need to compensate them for risk) is only 10 per cent, its owners have earned super profits, or economic rents, of 10 per cent on top of that.

Now, assume the government taxes the company on the following basis: if the company incurs a cash loss in a year, the tax office will cover 40 per cent of that loss; conversely, if it makes a cash profit, 40 per cent of that profit is due in tax.

In the example above, the company would receive $40 from the government in year one but would pay tax of $48 (40 per cent of $120) in year two.

The government's $40 payment reduces the capital private investors need to provide to $60; on that $60, they now earn $72 ($120 of revenues minus the $48 tax in year two).

There are two important points here. First, the rate of return to investors is unchanged by the tax, but they now get it on a smaller base (earning $72 on private investment costs of $60, rather than $120 on private costs of $100). Second, the government is now effectively an equity investor, taking its share of the risk and getting a commensurate share of the profits.

Of course, the company's stockmarket value is smaller than it would otherwise be, as it now excludes the share of income that will go to government. But so too is the equity investment the new project requires.

This is what economists call a Brown tax, after American economist E.Carey Brown, who proposed it in the 1950s.

In its pure form it has the claimed advantage of leaving investment incentives unchanged, and hence being superior to other forms of taxation.

There is merit in this. But it relies on crucial assumptions. One is that having government as a silent partner, bearing a share of costs and risks, has no effect on the incentives for businesses to be efficient.

But this is incorrect, as every dollar of effort management invests in resisting union wage claims or increasing revenue now yields a smaller absolute return to the owners of the private equity.

The result: like cost-plus contracts in defence, Brown taxes can lead to slack management and slow productivity growth.

These adverse effects, ignored in the Henry review, increase steeply with the tax rate, causing large welfare losses.

Additionally, what the government proposes is not a Brown tax in its pure form.

A crucial difference is Brown taxes are meant to apply from the outset of projects, or at least to allow all costs incurred to be brought to account.

But the tax will have its most immediate effect on existing projects. If only book costs (unadjusted for inflation and other price changes) for those projects are allowed as offsets, then the government will not bear its share of losses and the tax would affect investment incentives.

Moreover, these existing projects are not a random selection of all Australian mining projects over recent decades.

Rather, they are the lucky survivors: the projects profitable enough to start and remain in production. Many others were terminated and have been written off the books, even by current producers.

Those projects costs will apparently be ignored in calculating the tax liability.

This amounts to taxing the winners without funding the losers, as the Brown tax requires.

Further, in a Brown tax, the government contributes when cash losses are incurred.

Not so in the government's proposal, which requires investors to accept a promise that those losses, compounded at the bond rate, will be deducted when any tax liabilities come due.

This is fine if (given the promise the government has made) companies can fund those losses at the bond rate or dispose of them at no cost to someone who can.

In practice, however, they cannot, not least because government's tinker constantly with tax rules, so promises about the distant future lack credibility.

The result: the bond rate understates, perhaps greatly, the cost to investors of deferred payment.

Finally, Brown taxes are a good idea if they replace royalties, as royalties (a tax on each unit sold) distort decisions about how much to produce.

But in the proposal, royalties paid to the states are credited against the amount owed to the commonwealth. This creates an incentive for states to increase royalties, as South Australia has already indicated it may.

Depending on how far this goes, the outcome can be more distorting than a royalty tax alone. Given that the problems of our fiscal federalism remain entirely unsolved, this risk of compounding taxation cannot be ignored.

The proponents of the RSPT tend to compare an ideal Brown tax to existing, imperfect, alternatives. But this is as useful as saying that nirvana is preferable to our earthly vale of tears.

Unfortunately, we have a long history in this country of interventions that, were they capable of perfect implementation, might increase welfare.

Typically, when reality hits, they have the opposite effect. The scientific tariff, which helped ruin our economy for decades, is a striking case in point.

The RSPT, with all of its complexities, risks being deja vu, all over again.

***************************************

THE AUSTRALIAN

EDITORIAL

RUDD HITS FLAT NOTE WITH UNFINISHED SYMPHONY

THE HENRY REVIEW IS A FIRST-CLASS PUBLIC POLICY DOCUMENT AND A RIVETING READ FOR THOSE INTERESTED IN AUSTRALIA'S FISCAL FUTURE.

its real strength is that it reflects contemporary lessons from public finance theory. it is premised on a set of principles that form the basis for thinking about what an ideal tax and income transfer system could look like.

Tax rises in some areas are offset by efficiency gains elsewhere. Though numerous recommendations are debatable, from an economy-wide viewpoint Australia would be well served by a large-scale implementation of its recommendations. Like instruments in an orchestra, they are best played in unison.

The federal government, as conductor, has singled out just a few instruments to play as a small ensemble, notably the resources rent tax, and company tax relief, while adding increased superannuation contributions.

Though there will surely be more recommendations included in the future, the sound of the present ensemble is disappointing for those expecting a symphony.

The Henry review proposes the tax and income transfer system be simple and transparent and essentially be based on raising revenue from limited primary sources. These are personal income, business income, rents on natural resources and land, and private consumption: the orchestral strings, woodwind, percussion and brass sections, if you like.

A key reason many of the review's recommendations will not be implemented is that they are deemed unaffordable at this stage. The great irony is that many of the productivity-enhancing proposals in the review could have formed the basis of a much more beneficial fiscal response to the global financial crisis more than a year ago, especially the measures that would have cut personal and business income taxes.

Instead, driven by the same panic that spooked financial markets, fiscal policy swung into frenzied mode, delivering an unprecedented spending spree that has been credited, quite refutably, with saving the economy from the global recession in 2008-09.

If this ultra-Keynesian spending response to the GFC did play a role in the Australian economy's soft landing, why then has a similar response failed in the US, where the preconditions were all the more relevant?

In the US, extravagant public spending was supposed to prevent unemployment rising above 8 per cent, but unemployment subsequently rose to 10 per cent.

Had some of the Henry review's recommendations been implemented during the GFC, particularly those that would have seen a permanent flattening of the marginal tax rates on personal income and tax cuts for small business, they would have delivered longer-lasting supply side benefits. Compare this with the cash handouts, insulation batts and school buildings, the budgetary cost of which has seen billions of dollars disappear into ceilings and down the drain.

The Henry review was premised on an unchanged overall tax take. However, it is appropriate to ask in this context how Australia's overall taxation level compares internationally.

On this issue, Harvard economist and former chairman of the US president's Council of Economic Advisers Greg Mankiw recently suggested that - compared with other Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development economies of the North Atlantic - the US was a higher-tax country than had been presumed when its overall tax revenue was examined not as a share of gross domestic product but on a per-head basis.

We can look at Australia's tax per head along these lines as well. Pre-GFC, the national tax take was about 26 per cent of GDP according to International Monetary Fund data, compared with 46 per cent for France.

But high taxes are likely to lower GDP, so when total revenue is re-estimated on a per-head basis instead of as a share of GDP, a relatively higher tax burden emerges. Multiplying the tax share of GDP by GDP per head, $55,650 in 2008, we obtain a figure of $14,469 per head a year.

In same currency terms, tax paid per head exceeds that of the US, is in the vicinity of Britain and Germany, and is above those of countries such as Canada, Italy and Spain, yet well short of statist France. On a tax per head basis, we are, therefore, not a low tax economy in the OECD.

But comparing the tax take with OECD economies is somewhat irrelevant in any case because most of Australia's key trading partners are in Asia. Australia's future is obviously tied more to the Eastern hemisphere than to the Western hemisphere. We have to compete against economic practices in Asia. Relatively low income taxes, as well as highly flexible goods, services and labour markets, contribute to Asia's dynamism, as evidenced by its capacity to shrug off the GFC even more quickly than Australia.

When working for the IMF in Singapore a few years back, I found that mere mention to public sector officials about Australia's personal income tax rates was guaranteed to raise laughs of disbelief. High tax rates on personal income also help explain why about a million Australians live and work abroad.

Australia's personal income tax system would be made more competitive by international standards by adopting the Henry review's second recommendation: to apply a constant marginal tax rate for the vast majority of wage and salary earners, made progressive by raising the tax-free threshold.

Nearly all taxes, with the exception of taxes on "bads" such as tobacco, confer a net loss of economic welfare.

The chief risk with this review and its emphasis on how best to levy taxes is that it focuses the fiscal agenda too much on revenue raising as an option for closing the GFC-induced budget deficit. This distracts attention from the need to cut wasteful government expenditure, which would immediately lift domestic saving and take pressure off long-term interest rates. There are many areas of ongoing government expenditure at the federal level that could be cut, including billions of direct assistance to industry.

However, there also must be considerable scope for expenditure reduction in areas where there are substantial overlaps of responsibilities and programs at the federal, state and local government levels, such as industry assistance, water, transport, government services, education and health administration.Identifying the extent of that overlap, and the potential public sector savings to be made to make the Henry review's recommendations affordable, should be a top priority. An independent analysis of government spending overlap, and the design of a blueprint for assigning which level of government should do what, suggests itself as the next fiscal topic for review.

Tony Makin is a professor of economics at Griffith University.

***************************************

THE AUSTRALIAN

EDITORIAL

LET'S NOT BEAT ABOUT THE BUSH, THERE'S ROOM APLENTY

THERE was a time when rural MPs mouthed the word "decentralisation" as if it would solve all the problems that beset our society. They pressured governments to provide incentives to encourage businesses to relocate to small country towns. It was great for the footwear, clothing and other small industries until low-wage countries put them out of business. The result was often catastrophic.

State governments did their best by moving government departments and tertiary education institutions to the bush while Canberra contributed with strategically placed defence establishments.

A concerted effort was made by the Whitlam government, which recognised Australia was one of the most urbanised societies in the world, with some 90 per cent of the population living in urban areas. The Department of Urban and Regional Development set out to establish major growth centres in Albury Wodonga and the Bathurst-Orange district. When Malcolm Fraser came to office he couldn't close DURD down quickly enough. It was the last serious federal attempt at decentralisation.

The major mistake was to try to get people to relocate in inland areas when most preferred the seaside. Which brings us to the immigration-population debate, which could become the major issue at the forthcoming federal election. Treasury suggests Australia will have a population of 36 million by 2050. The Centre for Population and Urban Research predicts it will be 42 million.

Those supporting a "Big Australia" argue there is nothing to fear in growth providing the infrastructure - schools, hospitals, transport - are in place. "Decentralisation" is back in vogue. All governments have to do, they claim, is provide incentives to encourage people to settle in areas they have traditionally avoided.

But they appear unaware that they no longer have to provide vast amounts of money to encourage people to move to the country. What they need to do is to publicise the lifestyle that's available.

There are thousands of small towns and villages close to major cities and towns that have the basic infrastructure to absorb larger populations.

These small towns prospered until the 1950s. Then they stagnated or withered on the vine.

It was a different story on the east coast as an ageing population moved there in retirement. Real estate prices rose as the "sea changers" moved in. It wasn't long before they were looking and feeling like Sydney or Melbourne. The "sea changers" became "tree changers". They had noticed the inland towns and villages that had been stagnant for decades had some very attractive features.

Some will say, "But look at what we are leaving." Really? Let me describe my experience on moving to idyllic Bungendore, a delightful heritage village, established in 1838. On a slow day it takes two minutes from home to the family health centre, chemist, newsagent, butcher, baker, supermarket, liquor store, two hotels and eight restaurants. If you want white goods or furniture you've got a 30-minute drive to Canberra.

"Ah," I hear you say, "but that's all very well for you, you live outside Canberra." That's true but similar lifestyles are available close to Sydney, Wollongong, Newcastle, Gosford, Armidale, Tamworth, Wagga and numerous towns in the other states.

Once living in the country seemed the ultimate isolation. Not any longer. With modern communications, most disadvantages have disappeared. And then there's the friendliness of smaller rural communities, easy access to recreational and sporting facilities and lower levels of crime.

Had governments promoted the lifestyle available in small country towns, our cities would be far less crowded and there would be less opposition to an increased population.

Most who live in our cities do so because their occupation requires them to be there. There are, however, hundreds of thousands of people, including retirees, who do not need to live in cities. And there are many businesses operated from home that do not need to be based in a metropolis.

If governments want to decentralise they should let people know there is an attractive lifestyle available to those who make the move.

Barry Cohen was arts minister in the Hawke government.

***************************************

THE AUSTRALIAN

EDITORIAL

POST-CRISIS, PM SHOULD HAVE LIFTED SIGHTS

INSTEAD OF PAINTING ROCKS WHITE OR DIGGING HOLES AND FILLING THEM IN AGAIN, KEVIN RUDD DECIDED TO GIVE EVERY PRIMARY SCHOOL A BRAND NEW HALL, LIBRARY OR GYM.

The Building the Education Revolution was always a stimulus package, but at least at the end of it, almost 8000 of the nation's primary schools would have something to show for it.

Except that the government wants schools to be happy with that and resents their attempts to ensure they get the most building they can for their buck.

The BER can be a stimulus package and get value for money; the two propositions are not mutually exclusive. Private schools have achieved value for money in their building projects, yet governments seem content to deny this aim to public schools.

No report on the BER to date has looked at whether the buildings being erected are worth what the government is spending, and this has been the main gripe of the schools reported in The Australian over the past year.

It was not until March this year when the NSW Opposition moved for a state parliamentary inquiry and federal Education Minister Julia Gillard set up an inquiry that value for money was associated with the BER.

The Commonwealth Auditor-General cannot specifically look at the value of individual school projects or the pricing structures of contracts, but his report does pick up on a key issue about the value from the program.

The money was handed over by the federal government to schools regardless of the needs of the school or the system as a whole. It did not consider whether a school was in remote Australia, where building costs are much higher than in the big cities.

Funding was allocated based on the number of students enrolled at the beginning of this year, not considering whether it was in an area of growing population.

Nor did the government consider whether the school already had a brand-new hall as well as three tennis courts, pools, or a multi-million-dollar wellbeing centre, as in the case of some private schools.

The government's initial concern to roll out the money as quickly as possible in the face of a global financial crisis is understandable. But once the urgency passed, it could have allowed for a more considered approach, giving value for money.

***************************************

THE AUSTRALIAN

EDITORIAL

JULIA'S TEFLON WEARING A BIT THIN

DENNIS SHANAHAN

JULIA Gillard has been using steel cooking utensils for too long - she's started to scratch her political Teflon.

The Rudd government's star parliamentary performer, most-nominated successor to Kevin Rudd and so far untouchable cabinet member, has developed a political problem just when the government least needed its political pin-up girl to be tied down in a fiasco of her own.

Despite all her stonewalling attempts last year and the first months of this year to deny the existence of a problem in the $16 billion school building program, and her effort to stave off political embarrassment by establishing an inquiry, the Education Mini

***************************************

THE AUSTRALIAN

EDITORIAL

STATE OF DISUNITY TROUBLES LEADERS

IN POLITICS, THEY SAY DISUNITY IS DEATH.

So how does Tony Abbott keep his election dream alive in Queensland, home of the fractious Liberal National Party and an increasing number of conservative state independents?

And how does Kevin Rudd chart a safe campaign course for his government in a state where mining companies fear his tax plans will cost them more than money, and where unions fear the Bligh government's privatisation program will cost them more than jobs?

The sudden departure of two young and troubled LNP members, Aidan McLindon and Rob Messenger, exposes the difficulties this hybrid party has not only in managing its resources and political messages, but in simply preselecting candidates.

McLindon replaced Nationals stalwart Kev Lingard in Beaudesert, a seat Lingard had held for a quarter of a century (partly because the party was afraid to dump him in case it cost them the seat).

Dumping Lingard didn't cost them the seat, but preselecting McLindon has.

The LNP has shown the same indecision ahead of the federal election, protecting all existing MPs (even the duds) and preselecting some unusual candidates in other seats.

With such colourful individuals around, it is no wonder the LNP struggles to keep a lid on internal issues the way Labor normally does. No wonder its messages get lost.

George Brandis this week became deputy Liberal leader in the Senate, where fellow Queenslander Barnaby Joyce is the Nationals leader, but yesterday the two senators found themselves having to explain the LNP's latest ructions (and whether they are Liberal, National or something else).

Labor doesn't suffer an identity crisis, nor preselection problems to the same extent.

Yet Rudd will have similar difficulties getting his message across in his home state.

The PM has tried to stay out of the privatisation debate but Anna Bligh has not shown the same courtesy with regard to his mining super-profits tax, and both issues will feature in the campaign.

Remember, Abbott is used to arguing with members of his own party, but Rudd certainly isn't.

***************************************

THE AUSTRALIAN

EDITORIAL

DEPUTY SIDESTEPS HEAT FROM KITCHEN

SAMANTHA MAIDEN

KEVIN Rudd's "kitchen cabinet" was the war room of the government's response to the global financial crisis.

From pink batts to stimulus cheques to the schools stimulus program, the Prime Minister's gang of four ran the show and silenced leaks.

Critics argue it also sidelined cabinet scrutiny.

It comprised Rudd, Julia Gillard, Wayne Swan and Finance Minister Lindsay Tanner and is formally known as the Strategic Priorities and Budget Committee of cabinet.

On the Rudd government's evidence, its decisions to act on Treasury secretary Ken Henry's advice to "go hard, go households" saved the nation from recession.

But it's also testament to Gillard's political skills that she hasn't experienced more heat for some of its fast-tracked decisions.

Cast your mind back to Gillard's powerful performances when she attacked critics of the schools stimulus program.

"More money is going into this program because it is going gangbusters, because more schools want to be in this program," she told parliament last September. The audit report says that's not right.

The need for the additional funding provided by the government a month earlier was not "the result of more schools seeking to participate than had originally been forecast".

"Ultimately, the need for additional funding provided . . . arose from most schools having sought the maximum payments available," the auditor's report states.

Gillard's department then proceeded to implement the program "aware, at the outset, of the demands for additional funding that would inevitably arise".

Yesterday, Gillard pointed out the program had helped keep "our nation out of recession and 200,000 Australians out of the dole queue".

But how many jobs did the schools stimulus scheme actually save? Although the report clearly states that construction approvals indicate the program contributed to a reversal in the decline in non-residential construction activity caused by the GFC, it is difficult to say.

"The inability to aggregate project-level data means that it is not currently possible to accurately determine the effect of the BER program on employment," the report states.

It was big, it was urgent and it did create jobs and build school halls. But even Gillard admitted yesterday: "Yes, we've been learning as we've rolled it out."

maidens@theaustralian.com.au

***************************************

THE AUSTRALIAN

EDITORIAL

LEAGUE BARKING MAD UP WRONG TREE OVER BETTING

PATRICK SMITH

NOW let us try to make sense of this. Get some proportion to it. We desperately need to get a feel of what is happening in the AFL. Because it appears someone in headquarters has gone quite mad. Stark raving. Barking dog.

The league yesterday punished six men for breaching the AFL betting rules. Take AFL timekeeper Matthew Hollington. He has been suspended for five weeks because he had one bet last year. The amount of the wager was $5.

Now we don't know on which match this leviathan punter plunged but there was a fair chance a couple of the players running around in that match carried two strikes to their name for taking illicit drugs. Maybe cocaine. Perhaps ice. Possibly both. The league will not name those players, nor will it punish them. But Hollington has been named and shamed because he gambled $5.

On Tuesday night, Essendon footballer Andrew Welsh was suspended for four matches because he kneed an opponent in the testicles. West Coast's Andrew Embley was suspended for two matches because he knocked Fremantle's Rhys Palmer senseless when he had his head over the ball and unprotected.

And Luke Hodge, who clobbered Essendon's Welsh with a fist to the head in a marking contest, was not even mentioned in the weekly match review panel's assessment of the weekend's games. But the $5 Matthew Hollington - yep that's his name - has been rubbed out for five matches. Oh, to make matters worse he didn't even have the courage to work the match. He was a trainee timekeeper at the time.

Now let's take the case of AFL goal umpire Chris Appleton. We'll write that again, Chris Appleton, just so all his friends and relatives are aware of his heinous crime. As for the blokes doing the drugs - the cocaine and the ice - their identities are to be kept top secret.

Back to the dastardly Appleton. This bloke placed four bets which, when the AFL's hot-shot accountants got out their computers and calculators, were found to total $60. Well, Chris baby, you cannot do that in the AFL and expect to get away with it. You are better off doping yourself silly with marijuana and topping up with a bottle of grog because you don't get named and shamed for doing that. But with four bets totalling $60, the AFL has banned you for the season.

To underline the enormity of his crime, the AFL put out this statement: "Appleton had been watching the 2009 grand final at a hotel with friends, and had offered to place four bets on behalf of one friend, who did not have access to an account at the venue." Sneaky bastard. Big Bad Barry Hall's punch off the ball that knocked out Brent Staker pales into insignificance. That's why Barry just got a seven-week suspension and Appleton rightly got banned for 16. Appleton is lucky Ian Collins reluctantly disbanded the AFL's firing squad when he was the league's footy manager.

But how we must be grateful to the AFL general manager of football operations Adrian Anderson and his investigative team that they got to the next villains in the nick of time. God knows what horrors would have followed had we not caught this Bonnie and Clyde so quickly.

They are now known as Wise and Wife. Here is how the AFL described their crime. "AFL interchange steward John Wise has been stood down for the remainder of the 2010 season. He had placed four bets during the 2009 season, covering 16 AFL matches, totalling $9. In this case, two of the four bets involved matches in which he had officiated. These were multi-bets in amounts of $1 and $2. He said he had placed the bets on behalf of his wife, but took full responsibility for the bets being placed. His wife confirmed that these bets were placed on her behalf."

Wisely, with betting of such magnitude and with the potential to utterly corrupt the competition, the AFL chose not to privately reprimand these officials. Counsel them. Educate them. Suggest quietly to them that it is wrong for league officials to bet on football matches whether they are involved in those games or not. How else would the football world learn that the AFL condemns betting if they did not make examples out of these reckless punters. No, the AFL community will only become wiser if these people are publicly shamed and their families humiliated.

Now, if they had just done something minor like mainline on heroin, pump a bit of horse tranquiliser into their system. Taken some temazzies, mandies, acid, mushies or special K, well, no big fuss. The AFL can keep that hush, hush. Don't want to hurt the image of the league.

But $9 punters? No, the AFL was right to hunt them down and humiliate them. Got to protect the image of the league. Naming 30-odd drug addicts might expose and harm the AFL culture and reputation, naming mum and dad $1 and $2 punters certainly won't. So the AFL picks and chooses just who to nationally embarrass for public relations reasons only.

Yesterday's actions were hypocritical and an obscene abuse of power. The AFL has gone bonkers. Stark raving. Adrian Anderson owes these abused people an apology.

***************************************

THE AUSTRALIAN

EDITORIAL

WESTPAC SHARES HAMMERED DESPITE BIG PROFIT

JOHN DURIE

GAIL Kelly has ridden the global financial crisis better than most but now faces an investor base sceptical about whether there is another leg to her growth strategy.

This explains the 4.2 per cent decline in the Westpac share price yesterday, based on a perception that all the good news is in the books already, resulting in most analysts shaving full-year profit targets.

Kelly is a victim of her own success and a cycle that doesn't naturally favour Westpac as much as some of its peers, given the 9 per cent swing forecast in business lending to a positive 6 per cent jump next year.

ANZ would tend to be the biggest beneficiary of this swing, and its boss Mike Smith has already trumpeted a bucket-load of big business loans ready to fly out the door.

At the outset there was some nonsense being pedalled -- that Westpac's 30 per cent jump in half-year profit qualifies the big banks for a super-profit tax just like the miners.

The government might have plans for the banks, but a so-called super-profit tax isn't one of them.

Sadly, the government only has itself to blame because of the incompetent way it sold the sound rationale behind a resources rent tax.

It is based on the supercycle in the resources sector, and is aimed at sharing the benefits with the companies concerned -- and the rest of the economy.

Big bank profits are due in part to the fact the government has presided over a big shift in market share to the big four banks, and the two Sydney banks in particular.

This was aided by the financial crisis, which has seen the big get bigger.

Somehow, instead of sticking with the script and calling it a resources rent tax -- which is a valid concept and highly supportable -- the government decided to call it a super-profit tax and made out that the big miners were tax dodgers.

That's spin doctoring gone badly wrong.

As an aside while on this bandwagon: Westpac's BT investment platform attracts $1 in every $4 invested on platforms, according to Kelly.

The Axa wealth.net platform, which the ACCC (but no one else) thinks is revolutionary, is designed as an open access platform.

So how can the ACCC use platforms as the reason for blocking NAB's bid for Axa?

The bigger than expected fall in Westpac's bad debts has meant these must be taken out of full-year earnings forecasts, and the slowdown in net interest income seems to indicate retail banking is running out of steam.

Kelly noted that when you exclude the impact of Treasury and markets, customer-related net interest income actually grew by a respectable 3.5 per cent in each of the past two halves -- but margins are falling.

This is where Kelly is trumpeting productivity gains on top of established community banking stars such as BankSA's Rob Chapman.

Chapman's football team, the Adelaide Crows, may be in the basement but the South Australian economy has performed relatively well.

And when you control 25 per cent of the state's deposits and write 17 per cent of home loans, life looks good in banking.

Chapman is the poster boy for Kelly's multi-brand strategy because his team's South Australian roots mean people are happy to bank with it -- maybe without even realising they are filling Westpac's coffers.

Kelly also uses the different brands to test new technology, so BankSA was the mortgage platform used when St George combined home loans on the same back office systems.

Peter Hanlon is going through the same process now, trying to rationalise back office systems within Westpac, so customers can choose the products they want.

From a back office perspective, the bank has choices on the one system.

That way the bank can pitch business across different retail choices.

Telstra is going through the same process, trying to offer a range of choices but integrating them all from its side of the fence, so when customers change all the different threads can be brought together.

CBA is the market leader in such systems in banking.

Kelly has extended the duration of her long-term funding from four years to five, which is prudent but costly, and another headwind along with continued regulatory uncertainty.

Westpac's return on equity of 17 per cent in the wake of a financial crisis was nothing short of stunning, but the tough part is maintaining the momentum.

High hopes

THE bourse returned to fundamentals for at least a day yesterday, with Rio Tinto bouncing 5 per cent from its intra-day lows to $68.13 a share and BHP Billiton jumping 3.2 per cent to $38.74.

The falls are being blamed on Rudd government proposals for a resources rent tax, but this won't see the light of day before the next calendar year at the earliest.

In the meantime, BHP's profit for the 2011 financial year should bounce about 77 per cent to around the $9.2 billion level on the back of massive iron ore price increases.

The accompanying table shows the relative performance of Rio and BHP against the big four banks. Each time the resource giants have hit new lows, they have bounced big time.

Yesterday might be the start of a longer rally.

After all, the banks, particularly those with a retail focus, are facing the same headwinds that retailers like Woolies have encountered.

Woolies' Mike Luscombe described the government stimulus package last year as driving the equivalent of two years' worth of growth in a single year.

Yesterday, Westpac's Gail Kelly talked of a virtually unprecedented 200-basis-point increase in home loans, from 25 to 27 per cent, due to her excellent execution in grabbing market share while her Melbourne-based comrades were asleep at the wheel.

Back to the main point: the banks have had a strong run into the earnings season over the past three months, with Westpac's total return at 18.2 per cent against ANZ at 16.8, down to NAB at 8.5 per cent and the market at 4.5 per cent.

Just maybe share price momentum will coincide with bank revenue momentum, which has slowed. At the same time, the market may remember actual iron ore prices as opposed to proposed tax changes.

***************************************

THE AUSTRALIAN

EDITORIAL

CLEGG'S CAVALRY ADDS LIFE TO FIGHT

AN officer candidate being interviewed for a posting on the British General Staff was once asked to define the role of cavalry in modern warfare. He replied that it was to lend some colour and dash to what would otherwise be a somewhat dreary and sordid occasion.

Nick Clegg, leader of Britain's Liberal Democrats, is the equivalent of the cavalry in the case of today's British general election.

Until his eruption on to the scene, the muddy battlefield was a dull trench war between two heavily armoured divisions, each of them wearily familiar with the tactics and strategy of the other.

Years ago, when I toiled as a columnist for The Nation, Clegg was my intern. What I chiefly remember, apart from his now-famous personal charm, was how "European" he was. His parentage was partly Dutch and partly Russian. He has since married a Spanish woman and has three children with Spanish names. And, of course, his party is the one most closely identified with the British aspiration to full British engagement in the EU. This is the strength and the weakness of his position, and of his party.

And, while it was inevitable that Gordon Brown's boorishness would one day disclose itself right in front of the electorate, as happened last week, it wasn't certain that on the question at issue he would be more right than wrong.

The annoying old lady who cornered him in the street was upset about "immigration". For decades, this has been a code word for working-class resentment at the arrival of former colonial subjects from the Caribbean and Asia. But this woman was exercised by the huge number of Poles who had come to England not to settle but as "guest workers" in the construction and electrical sectors. The Prime Minister was right to remind her that under the same terms of free movement within the EU, millions of British people had also taken advantage of the right to work on the continent.

There's a sector of the British professional class that probably knows Tuscany and Provence better than it knows large areas of post-industrial Britain. But this "Europeanised" layer is not large enough to swing an election.

Some of those who rate bonds have been warning that a so-called hung parliament, unable to arrive at swift or difficult decisions, would endanger the stability of sterling and cause a crisis of confidence in Britain's financial system.

And a hung parliament is precisely the contingency that Clegg's sudden emergence makes many times more likely. This should not have come as such a surprise. British society is actually a three-party system stitched and corseted into a two-party duopoly.

And it is, ultimately, as a status quo party that Labour is being defeated. Brown comes before us as a man who has spent his life intriguing with neurotic energy for power, only to find, when he attains the prize, that it doesn't soothe his demons after all. A party with a history of radicalism simply cannot afford to present itself as the party of safety first and a steady hand on the Treasury tiller.

Slate

***************************************

THE AUSTRALIAN

EDITORIAL

SOME PEOPLE START TALKING WITHOUT WORRYING ABOUT WHAT THEY ARE SAYING, UNTIL IT'S TOO LATE

UNLESS, THAT IS, THEY DON'T THINK ANYONE IS ACTUALLY LISTENING TO ANYTHING THEY HAVE TO SAY

Whatever the political pain, never apologise, never explain. Education Minister Julia Gillard admits nothing in her response to the Australian National Audit Office report on Building the Education Revolution:

GILLARD welcomed the additional scrutiny from the Auditor-General, who noted that where issues have arisen in the BER program, they were because of the need to deliver it quickly to keep Australians in jobs in the wake of the global financial crisis . . . From day one the program has been focused on delivering value for money, and that will continue until the last classroom has been constructed . . . The Audit Office found through its own survey that more than 95 per cent of school principals saw the program as providing "ongoing value to their school and school community". The Auditor-General has not made any specific recommendations to the government or to the Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations.

It would have been hard to recommend ways in which schools could have received better value, given the terms of reference. As the Auditor-General's report states:

AN examination of individual BER projects was outside the scope of the audit.

"Rail fight back" the front page of Melbourne's Herald Sun screamed on May 4:

LONG-SUFFERING commuters will no longer travel in fear after the Brumby government caved in to pressure to make our trains safe.

At least not the very brave ones. The Herald Sun yesterday, reporting an accident that put five people in hospital::

THE freight train that was struck by a Metro passenger train near Craigieburn last night had correctly stopped at a red light signal.

The rules don't apply when the dogma is decided. Christine Cawsey, from the NSW Secondary Principals Council, tells Deborah Cameron on ABC radio in Sydney why teachers will not supervise the National Assessment Program: Literacy and Numeracy school tests:

SOMETIMES principals and teachers operate for reasons that are beyond what the industrial umpires say on matters of serious conscience, and many teachers I've spoken to have said this just has to be got right.

But did she need to compare NAPLAN to a battle in which two million people died?

THE defence of really core values in education sometimes reminds me of the notion of the defence of Stalingrad.

British Prime Minister Gordon Brown tries to be funny, ABC radio, May 5:

PEOPLE say to me: "You look better than on TV", and I reply: "Thank goodness."

US President Barack Obama succeeds at being funny, The Australian, May 3:

IT'S been quite a year since I've spoken here last - lots of ups, lots of downs - except for my approval ratings, which have just gone down. But that's politics. It doesn't bother me. Besides, I happen to know that my approval ratings are still very high in the country of my birth.

Catherine Deveny says The Age sacked her for "telling grown-up jokes", such as her Twitter line:

I DO so hope Bindi Irwin gets laid.

Which is as grown-up as her comments in a review of Dancing with the Stars, The Age, October 28, 2006:

NEXT series I'd like to see Bindi Irwin, Chopper Read, Amanda Vanstone and Eddie McGuire.

Maybe Deveny will stop going to the Logies; after all, she never enjoys herself. The Age, May 9, 2009:

WHAT did you miss? Pigs in suits and scrags in curtains. Vain, attention-seeking opportunists suffering relevance deprivation hoping to get lucky with one of the members of Hi5 but happy enough to go slops by standing next to Bud Tingwell when he sneezed.

***************************************

******************************************************************************************

THE SYDNEY MORNING HERALD

EDITORIAL

CLASS WARFARE MUST END

The dispute between teachers and the federal Education Minister, Julia Gillard, has obviously reached a point where they must agree to disagree, and Gillard must get on with finding alternative supervisors for next week's planned start of tests under the National Assessment Program Literary and Numeracy (NAPLAN) in the nation's high schools.

The teachers have been joined by the principals of some top selective schools, including the famous James Ruse Agricultural High School, in their concern that the pressures to show good results in the tests will result in schools ''storming'' the tests by excessive practice at the cost of study and creative engagement with the broad curriculum - as has happened in Britain and some other educational jurisdictions. But these are concerns about their own professional ethics - with an obvious answer.

Gillard is correct in her view that parents should get more information about how their children's schools shape up - not to encourage parents to withdraw their children, but for them and local pressure groups to jump up and down for better teaching standards and, if necessary, for more resources to lift their standards.

Teachers fear the tests could result in unfair judgments on principals and teachers struggling with disadvantaged pupils. But teachers come with a record of using union power to protect underperforming colleagues and resisting change.

The issue cries out for very careful management, professionalism, and co-operation between two highly educated bodies of personnel, the teachers and the public servants. Instead we have a classic industrial dispute. The teachers have resorted to a boycott; Gillard is dragging education unions through the industrial courts under threat of civil penalties. Now we learn that children in the Riverina already identified as disadvantaged are becoming hostages to the dispute, with the NSW Department of Education threatening to withhold promised funding because NAPLAN testing has not been done. The teachers should agree to conduct the tests, and Gillard should agree to regular consultations and public reports on the effect of the NAPLAN system.

***************************************

THE SYDNEY MORNING HERALD

EDITORIAL

QUESTIONABLE QUARTERMASTERS

THE public has got used to a seemingly endless saga of cost overruns, delays and performance problems in the big ticket items of defence equipment. Think of the cancelled Seasprite helicopters, the troubled Collins-class submarines, the delayed Wedgetail airborne radar planes and the cost-spiralling Joint Strike Fighter. But these at least have involved complex machines at the advanced margin of technology.

Now it seems the Defence Department is fumbling with delivery of even the most basic items of a soldier's kit.

As the Herald reports today, the Defence Materiel Organisation is selecting and issuing backpacks that aren't the best, ergonomically tested designs for soldiers to carry their quite heavy personal gear on extended patrols. Buckles on their webbing are prone to break; the ammunition magazines for their rifles don't fit the pouches; the clips of their body-armour vests operate unpredictably. Soldiers are spending up to $1000 of their own money to make sure they are outfitted comfortably and reliably in the field.

Nothing could be more calculated to make soldiers feel they are being shortchanged by a defence establishment that costs the taxpayers some $25 billion a year, except perhaps their rations - and there have been complaints about that, too, from the troops in Oruzgan. Personal gear is more than a question of comfort, but a question of safety. A soldier's weapons and personal gear need to be as familiar and reliable as his or her own hands, so that every bit of attention can be focused on the task at hand.

This is not something that should come as a surprise to the senior executives in Defence. The 1999 deployment to East Timor, the first big overseas assignment for the army since Vietnam, revealed shortages of modern equipment like body armour and night-vision goggles, and problems with even mundane items from boots to matches. But perhaps this has been too humble a subject for a Defence bureaucracy that has grown by 23 per cent since then. A review four years ago that recommended sweeping changes to tender procedures has been largely ignored.

There are no doubt a large number of officials trying to do their best, some who've become lazy in their duties, and perhaps a few who've succumbed to opportunities for petty corruption.

A cumbersome, ill-supervised administration has been allowed to go its own way without being obliged to respond to feedback from users.

Under military discipline, soldiers cannot easily take their complaints further. But the defence chiefs in Canberra should be raising a stink on their behalf.

***************************************

THE SYDNEY MORNING HERALD

EDITORIAL

A FINE REMINDER OF HALCYON BAIZE

IT HAS been a long time between frames, but the 58 years that divide Horace Lindrum and Neil Robertson as Australia's only world snooker champions have evaporated seemingly in a trice. Robertson's win on Monday night in Sheffield, scoring 18-13 over Scot Graeme Dott after nearly 12 hours of play, has earned the 28-year-old from Ringwood $411,000 and a suitable sobriquet - ''the Thunder from Down Under''. Robertson might have some way to go to match Lindrum's astonishing, and still unequalled, record of 1000 snooker centuries in public performance, but he has certainly achieved a champion's crowning glory.

Robertson's world ranking has jumped from 5 to 2, and he could soon be No. 1: the incumbent, last year's champion John Higgins, has been suspended by the World Professional Billiards and Snooker Association, pending inquiries into allegations of match-fixing. Neil Robertson has himself pledged to be ''a good ambassador'' in his new role, and this is what international snooker requires. The stigma of corruption lies perilously close to the smooth green surface. Five years ago, Robertson rejected an approach from his compatriot Quinten Hann, to throw matches for money. Later, Hann was suspended for eight years after being caught on camera agreeing to fix a match. In the event, the match was played honestly, but the damage was already done. Robertson can certainly help snooker to regain at least some of its once proud image, not to mention its inherent quirkiness. It is a while since those days of Pot Black, and the entreaties of its legendary commentator, ''Whispering'' Ted Lowe, who once said, ''For those of you who are watching in black-and-white, the pink is next to the green.''

On a wider scale, Robertson should serve as the ideal inspiration for a snooker revival in Australia. In truth, the sport has enjoyed a long and distinguished heritage in this country, particularly this state - not just because of the Lindrum dynasty, but via a generational network of players of all abilities. As The Age reported yesterday, the game's popularity is increasing, particularly among young people. According to the Australian Billiards and Snooker Council, there are more than 40 snooker clubs in Melbourne and more than 500 registered players. Neil Robertson, now he is in snooker's elite, has the potential, by his presence and influence, to make the sport even more attractive and, indeed, more lucrative. ''I've got to try to make the most of this for Australia,'' Robertson said after his win. May he be true to his word

THE SYDNEY MORNING HERALD

EDITORIAL

SCHOOL BUILDING PROGRAM SCORES A BARE PASS

THE AUDITOR-GENERAL COULD ONLY DELIVER A PARTIAL REPORT CARD.

YOU would be forgiven for concluding that the Auditor-General's report on the Rudd government's $16 billion school building program failed to deliver on expectations.

After all, the prevailing tone of media reports leading up to the audit's release yesterday suggested the government was poised for a caning. The fact that this has not come to pass - a reality that cannot be shifted by Opposition Leader Tony Abbott's description of the report as ''scathing'' - does not mean the government merits stunning marks in its delivery so far of the largest component of its stimulus package. Rather, the Australian National Audit Office report on the primary school building program reflects, in part, the probe's limited terms of reference. The pointy questions concerning whether taxpayers have received value for money in school building projects, and the extent of the program's rorting by contractors, were outside the scope of the investigation. It will be up to the taskforce, announced by Education Minister Julia Gillard last month after her department received a draft of the audit office's findings, to explore allegations of waste, profiteering and the like. The taskforce deserves to do its work without knee-jerk attacks on its integrity or prejudgment of its findings.

And while the program's shortcomings demand scrutiny, the context isall-important. The audit report drives this point home in evaluating the program against its overriding aim of easing the construction industry through the potentially crippling impact of the global economic crisis. The report pointed out that the program's effect on employment was too difficult to assess, given most of the money was yet to be spent and arrangements established to monitor this aspect of the program relied on data collected at the project level that ''cannot be aggregated in a meaningful way''. But it also concludes: ''There are some positive early indicators that the program is making progress toward achieving its intended outcomes. Lead economic indicators, including construction approvals, show that the introduction of BER P21 (the primary school building program) contributed to a reversal in the decline in non-residential construction activity that resulted from the global financial crisis.'' The audit also notes that more than 95 per cent of principals who responded to its survey expressed confidence the projects would improve their school communities.The audit does criticise aspects of the program's implementation, while acknowledging the challenge of building infrastructure in almost every school across the country in a third of the time usually allocated for such tasks. Construction deadlines for starting and completing the first two funding rounds were largely missed. Also puzzling is the finding that the ministerial committee steering the project knew they had announced a program with a budget that would cover ''only 90 per cent of possible expenditure''. An additional $1.4 billion was then pulled from, among other sources, the science and language centres element of the school building program, the social housing stimulus program and the low emission assistance plan for renters. The wisdom of these offsets is perhaps open to debate. The audit also found that administrative decisions taken in Canberra ''have unduly constrained the flexibility of [state] authorities to determine how the program will be delivered within their jurisdictions to achieve the intended objectives''. The report identifies the one-size-fits-all approach that has led to some less than ideal outcomes in individual schools.A telling footnote in the report reveals how Canberra bureaucrats were making case-by-case decisions on ''the types of seating and facilities such as air-conditioning and grey-water irrigation systems'' to be included in fitting out buildings.

Source: The Age

**************************************

******************************************************************************************

THE GUARDIAN

EDITORIAL

POLLING DAY WEATHER: WHEN THE SUN WINS IT

IF PAST ELECTIONS ARE ANYTHING TO GO BY, GOOD WEATHER TODAY MAY FAVOUR DAVID CAMERON

"The sun is out, and so are the Tories," declared an apparently jubilant Neil Kinnock on the morning of polling day 1992; but in fact the Tories hung on. Psephologists might easily pore for most of the next decade over the link between good or bad weather and electoral outcomes without reaching any settled conclusion. It is often assumed that turnout goes up in fine weather, but that isn't necessarily so. It fell to its lowest level since 1935 on a day when the sun was out and Labour were in – 1 May 1997.

If, using British Electoral Facts, by Colin Rallings and Michael Thrasher, you check the pattern of election day weather since 1918, a tentative conclusion could be that good weather today might benefit David Cameron. On the seven election days since 1945 where the people threw the government out, five took place in fair or good weather. To put it another way, of nine elections in the same period where the weather was fair or good across most of the country, six saw the incumbents ousted. The Conservatives won on good weather days in 1951 (light fog and frost first thing, but generally fair), 1955, 1959 ("a dry autumn day"), 1970 ("fine everywhere"), 1979 ("fair") and 1992. Labour came home in sunshine in 1945 (though many votes were cast then by servicemen in uncharted weather abroad), 1966 ("a mild day") and 1997 ("sunny and dry"). Some may deduce that this has something to do with the laws of meteorology; others, that it rather reflects the laws of coincidence.

It seems on the whole surprising, given the reputation of Britain's weather, that few elections since 1918 have taken place in foul weather. The worst on this list would appear to be 1918, 1924, 1964 (rain over much of the country) and 1987 (dry and sunny in western districts, but elsewhere, rain, sometimes with thunderstorms). Today's forecast – rain in Wales spreading to most of England, drier and brighter elsewhere – is as intriguingly poised as the contest itself appears to be.

If polling days have come to seem more clement occasions, that is because they are usually nowadays staged in the spring or summer. Between 1918 and the end of 1974, 12 elections out of a total of 17 took place between early October and the end of February. All eight since then have been timed for April, May, June or July. And always on Thursday – a practice governed by no hard and fast rule but the steady preference for 75 years. Before that, Tuesday was chosen in 1931, Wednesday in 1922 and 1924, while 1918 saw a contest on a Saturday. Maybe now that the people of Britain are thought to be thirsty for change, the time may shortly arrive when, as with the Epsom Derby, midweek dates are abandoned in favour of the weekend.

**************************************

THE GUARDIAN

EDITORIAL

GREECE AND THE SINGLE CURRENCY: EUROPE'S EXISTENTIAL CRISIS

THE EUROPEAN UNION HAS BEEN PLUNGED INTO A DISCUSSION CONCERNING THE CENTRAL PROBLEM OF ITS FUTURE DEVELOPMENT

"Quite simply, Europe's future is at stake," said Angela Merkel yesterday. High-pitched rhetoric from a chancellor desperately trying to coax her fellow Germans into throwing billions at Greece? Certainly, but no less true for all that. Because the last few weeks have thrown up two things that should shake up all who might wish the eurozone well. First, it has provided a glimpse of how the single-currency club might fall apart over the next few years. Second, it has posed serious questions about what the single-currency club is for – questions which also cast a sidelight on our own election. In short, this is an existential crisis for an economic and monetary zone that takes in 16 countries and over 400 million people, and which has never before faced a threat so serious.

Let us be clear: the eurozone is not on the verge of breaking up any time soon. Yet the last few weeks may come to appear like a full-dress rehearsal for the final crack-up. There were the remarkable scenes yesterday in Greece, as protesters erupted in fury against the prime minister George Papandreou's plans to slash and burn the public sector. Three people were reportedly killed in a fire in Athens and riot police firing teargas at demonstrators. And all this comes before the latest, biggest round of government spending cuts and tax rises are brought in. Meanwhile, richer countries have dragged their feet over a bailout.

One can see why. Greece is clearly the runt of the eurozone litter, with a tax system so patchy and apparently so discretionary that it more closely resembles a tip box. For Ms Merkel, facing a tough election this Sunday in her own backyard, there is every reason not to rush forward with a lifeline to a foreign country. But her reticence has cost dear. What was only last Christmas a financial bushfire in Greek financial markets has grown and spread, and is now licking at the borders of Spain and Portugal.

Treated early, this problem could have had a cheap and quick fix – a slug of euros from Germany and others in

return for a commitment from Athens to bring down its borrowing within a realistic timeframe. Instead of which, the eurozone has had to share in a £95bn (€110bn) rescue along with the IMF. For his part, Mr Papandreou has had to sign up to a fantastical list of cuts in a bid to reduce borrowing from 13.4% of national income to 3% within four years. Since the Greek prime minister is now pretty much barred from borrowing from the private sector he has very little option but to agree to these demands; but they will be impossible to pull off and the very attempt is likely to sink Greece into a dire economic slump. As bailouts go, this has been a top-to-bottom, alpha-to-omega fiasco. And the very process – the bungling, the infighting, the blockages – gives one a foretaste for how the single currency club might come apart.

It also raises the question of what the eurozone is for. The single-currency project was animated by an idea – shared by European rightwingers and lefties alike – that a huge economic bloc could provide some protection from the volatile forces of free-market capitalism. Very little of that idea has been put into practice. The banking crisis showed that up, with the lack of a common financial regulator across all 16 eurozone members. But the meltdown in Greece has made the problem starker.

As the great philosopher and euro-enthusiast, Jürgen Habermas, put it in an interview this weekend: "At one of its weakest moments, the European Union has been plunged into a discussion concerning the central problem of its future development." This is not a problem solely for the eurozone. In Britain too, all parties have operated on the basis that they could not tame markets, only sweep up after them. Two years after the collapse of Lehman Brothers that dogma looks well past its sell-by date – yet all politicians have struggled to find a decent replacement.

**************************************

******************************************************************************************

DAILY EXPRESS

EDITORIAL

GET THESE EURO IDIOTS OUT

NOW that Britain's public sector deficit is forecast to be bigger than Greece's as a share of GdP, the seriousness of this country's economic predicament must be apparent to all.

One thing is certain: if we were locked in the eurozone and thus unable to control our exchange rate and interest
rates Britain could even now be seeing Greekstyle civil unrest. all those MPs who spent years campaigning to scrap the pound deserve to be turfed out on their ears today.

**************************************

DAILY EXPRESS

EDITORIAL

HE HAS RAGED, LIED AND DRIVEN BRITAIN TO THE BRINK OF RUIN

BY LEO MCKINSTRY

CANDOUR is not a quality usually exhibiited by candidates on the election campaign trail. But Manish Sood, standing for Labour in north West norfolk, told the unvarnished truth this week when he described his party leader as "the worst Prime Minister Britain has ever had". He went on to call Gordon Brown "a disaster" and "a disgrace" who had "destroyed everything that was good about this country".

Mr Sood was absolutely correct in his verdict, though it makes you wonder why on earth he wanted to represent

Labour in this election since Gordon Brown's epic flaws and his grotesque unfitness for the highest office have been obvious for more than a decade.

If there is any justice in British democracy then Gordon Brown will be kicked out by the electorate tonight. The idea of him remaining in power for five more years is a nightmare. on every level he has been an appalling national leader. He has debased our Parliament, bankrupted our public finances, squandered our taxes and
destroyed our British identity. under his catastrophic leadership bureaucracy has expanded remorselessly while our national prestige has declined.

He has placed ideology before the country's interests, party advantage before the needs of the public. riddled with chronic insecurities, a volcanic temper and narcissistic selfpity, he has presided over a dysfunctional Cabinet and a lying, bullying machine within downing Street.

THe election campaign has reflected his brooding negativity and pathological deceit. In the last few days before the start of polling he was a like a ranting maniac on the platform, spouting his wild lies about the Tories and churning out his meaningless promises.

"I'll never believe a word you say again," Brown once said to Blair. Most sensible voters, not caught up with Labour's vicious tribalism, would probably feel the same about the Prime Minister, especially after the recent incident in rochdale when he was all smiles to Gillian duffy and then abused her as a "bigoted woman" behind her back. In that one telling moment the full hypocrisy of Brown was laid bare. This is a man with
nothing but contempt for the British workingclass. all his noisy rhetoric about being "on your side" is hollow.

Indeed, fabrication has been the central theme of Brown's campaign. only yesterday, one of his numerous lies on immigration was exposed. In response to Mrs duffy's com plaint about the number of arrivals from eastern europe,

Brown had said that equal numbers of Britons were now moving to the continent.

But Brussels' own figures have demolished his assertion.

In fact 1,020,000 EU citizens have taken jobs here, four times the number of British nationals working on the continent. This sort of contempt for the truth has been typical of Brown in recent weeks. In the TV debates
he said that, under Labour, the police now spend 80 per cent of their time on the beat, a lie so blatant that even the advertising Standards authority told the Home office to drop this claim since the real figure is just 13 per cent.

His constant attempts to downplay Britain's colossal debt have been incredible. Yesterday, the eu warned that our
fiscal deficit will overtake Greece this year, a forecast that will turn Britain into the most indebted nation in the eu and makes a nonsense of all Brown's empty sloganeering about "Labour investment versus Tory cuts". Brown has been taking the public for fools. There is no money left for investment thanks to his mismanagement.

Brown has elevated lying and hypocrisy into modes of governance. He promised "British jobs for British workers", knowing full well that more than 95 per cent of new jobs have gone to immigrants. He talked of his "prudence" as Chancellor despite his addiction to wasteful public spending. He said he would give the public a referendum on the EU Constitution then denied us any vote when he ratified the Lisbon Treaty. He boasted of his commitment to "hard working families" then lavished welfare benefits on scroungers. under Brown's premiership the average couple who don't work are now £3,258 a year better off whereas a couple with one or both partners working are £2,057 a year worse off.

Even more offensive was his mendacity toward the armed forces, whether it be over troop with drawals from Iraq or equipment supplies to Afghanistan. In a move almost unprecedented for a serving Prime Minister, Brown was forced recently to apologise to the House of Commons over his false claim that defence expenditure increased in real terms during every year of his Chancellorship.

Brown's pose as a champion of freedoms is just as hypocriti cal. In 2007 he promised "to strengthen our liberties and uphold freedom of speech". Yet we now live in a country of thought crimes and mass surveillance, of identity registers and spy cameras in bins. This state authoritarianism is entirely in keeping with Brown's brutal, intolerant personality. Filled with hatred for Middle Britain, he is still conducting the class war that first inspired him in his early days as a Scottish radical agitator in the Seventies when he called for "workers' power", "a massive redistribution of wealth" and the "confiscation" of private assets.

With his lethal mix of dogma and incompetence Brown has dragged us back to the Seventies, when Labour last ruled Britain. and his Government is ending like the last: in failure, debt and social division.

**************************************

DAILY EXPRESS

EDITORIAL

WHY WE ARE THE CENTRE OF WORLD

BY JOHN DILLON

THIS was one of those thumping Spring nights which made you realise exactly why Sepp Blatter broke ranks yesterday and confessed that England is the natural home for the 2018 World Cup.

The Premier League does not have a monopoly on noise and passion.

But where else would the battle for fourth place ignite so much of all that stuff and then create a game played on such a high-wire of tension and anxiety; when the whole shape of the game here for the next decade was up for grabs and was pointed Tottenham's way when Peter Crouch scored in the 82nd minute.

All of Europe covets qualification for the Champions League. The big battalions like Barcelona, Milan, Manchester United and Arsenal take it as read.

Here at Eastlands, the once unlikely dreams and aspirations about punching their way into the elite of the followers of Manchester City and Tottenham created an evening that, surely, was uniquely Anglo-Saxon in its rawness and its desperate energy, no matter how many foreigners were involved.

All this and the return of Tottenham's Aaron Lennon for his first start of 2010 to raise the spirits of Fabio Capello after his fraught few months of worrying about injuries. Along with an effervescent performance in the first half from City's Adam Johnson to give the England coach something else positive to think about.

In an opening 45 minutes in which City had no choice but to simply emphasise attack – and their nerves showed – Johnson delivered an impressive display of invention and intelligence along the right flank.

He was agonisingly close to a goal too, in the 27th minute, only his searing, rising shot from 25 yards was pushed just wide by Tottenham's goalkeeper, Heurelho Gomes.

Ten minutes later, Lennon did a similar teasing act along the Spurs' flank and, in the first serious flash of the talent which has been dormant for so long, dropped in a clever, looping cross which was driven just wide by Gareth Bale.

It certainly wasn't the matter on many minds in this place last night. But perhaps England won't miss David Beckham so much in South Africa after all.

Both these teams contained England players whose international careers would surely benefit from the experience of playing in the Champions League.

The battle to secure it created a game fuelled and then also smothered by a tense, anxious energy that meant it threatened to erupt but didn't quite get there.

City are an impressive sight under Roberto Mancini when their busy, electric forwards like Carlos Tevez and Craig Bellamy surge ahead. But there was an element of over-eagerness about their play in the first 45 minutes.

Tottenham, not renowned in recent years for their solidity at the back, were well disciplined and coped with the danger, although Tevez had skipped past Michael Dawson early on, only to run aground in the penalty area. It meant they had to do something else unfamiliar and fight for scraps up front, although Crouch was unfortunate when he headed Bale's corner against a post. All this reflected the size of the stakes here.

This has been the end-of-season run in which football's ceaseless expansion has created big occasions out of matches other than the familiar collisions of might at the top of the Premier League.

Inter Milan's semi-final triumph in the Champions League against Barcelona commanded the kind of attention here once reserved for domestic matters. By virtue of the same ratcheting up of the hype machine, the meeting of City and Spurs became a one-off cup final kind of night, a moment pumped full of raw noise and hope. But also something more.

It was an evening which might easily dictate the distribution of power throughout the English game for the next 10 years.

Of course, City's Arab owners don't require the income supplied by participation in the Champions League to make sure their big project comes to fruition.

For Tottenham, however, the future was in the balance. Harry Redknapp had catapulted them into this position ahead of his own schedule, even though Martin Jol had led them close in a previous era.

A first foray into the Champions League could, conceivably, provide a turbo-boost to their long-awaited climb to somewhere where they might take a swipe at Arsenal. With a new stadium in the pipeline, Spurs were on the cusp of a bold new era while City were seeking to launch a future set out in the owners' business plan.

Tevez stumbled, tumbled and then collapsed in a heap as he chased a long-shot in the box early in the second half, collapsing to the floor in the end and being denied his claim for a penalty. It signalled their attacking intent for the second half.

But it was also a symbol of the desperation of this fraught and edgy night on football's latest new frontier of hope and anxiety.

**************************************

DAILY EXPRESS

EDITORIAL

CONSIDER THIS WHEN YOU VOTE

BY ANN WIDDECOMBE

TOMORROW the country decides who will get Britain out of the mess Labour got us into. There really is very little choice because a vote for Liberal Democrat is a vote for Labour or rather for a Lib-Lab pact and nobody who lived through the last one can be persuaded that such an arrangement is capable of producing anything other than a series of crises and a great deal of wheeling, dealing and uncertainty.

Nick Clegg gave the game away when he said that the first requirement for his support would be for the party with the largest number of seats to agree to proportional representation. Note that carefully: for Clegg the big issue is not getting the economy working but rather a system of electoral reform which will benefit the Lib Dems. In other words party first, country second.

Confronted with an ebbing of the support he won after the first TV debate he resorts to schoolboyabuse, talking about duck houses and moats. At least the two MPs involved in those controversies resigned and, in any case, neither made a direct claim for the items in question. By contrast Clegg himself claimed for a kitchen and even cake tins. It is not only the hypocrisywhich is breathtaking but the utter pettiness. What about the nation's finances, police, health service and immigration? You would think they might have come first.

David Cameron advances plans for government if the Conservatives win and Clegg calls him arrogant.

So we must presume the Lib Dems have no plans? That they haven't a clue what they would do?

Cameron has demonstrated one massively important qualification for office – he knows how to keep his nerve. Throughout a period in which Conservative fortunes appeared to falter he just carried on, resolute and committed to the policies he set out. By contrast his opponents have turned every which way as the going got tough.

Meanwhile it is not hard to see where an incoming Conservative government can make its first cuts.

Under the allegedly prudent but in reality profligate Gordon Brown first-class rail travel for the Insolvency Service trebled as Britain went bust. Government marketing and advertising reached £2.5billion a year, the department for Culture, Media and Sport increased its spending on consultants by 52 per cent, advertising just 10 vacancies clocked up a bill for £120,000 and its

press releases cost a staggering £5,394 each! Look at the Department for Children, Schools and

Families which spent £3million refurbishing its offices, adding a massage room and "contemplation suite".

Britain is over-governed down to its very rubbish bins on which the State spies with microchips.

It is ruled by unelected quangos, over-zealous civil servants and a slavish, unthinking adherence to the rulebook. Our opinions, or at any rate our right to express them, can no longer include

the controversial or the oddball but must adhere to state orthodoxy. Never has so much information been held on each citizen.

If Labour is elected tomorrow either in their own right or courtesy of Lib Dem support, the trend of pettifogging regulation, reckless spending and state expansion will continue apace. Vote UKIP and you keep in power the most pro-European Government we have ever seen, vote BNP and, quite apart from its essential nastiness, you will keep in power the Government which has made the biggest hash of immigration control since the end of the Second World War, vote for any small party and you lose the opportunity to effect real change. Vote Lib Dem and you guarantee to prop up a discredited, divided Government which understands no language beyond tax high and spend high.

That always was Labour's philosophy. Brown fails as surely as the Foots and Benns of this world to understand that only by freeing up business can it bring in the money we need to run public services.

Heavy taxes and regulation stifle enterprise and deter investment. Cameron alone offers a smaller state, large-scale repeal of burdensome regulation and a cut in the number of MPs, bureaucrats and box tickers. It is a prescription we desperately need and Britain shouldswallow that medicine in the sure knowledge that it will, after the first difficult taste, make us and future generations healthy, prosperous and free.

**************************************

DAILY EXPRESS

EDITORIAL

FINALLY, THE BRITISH PEOPLE CAN DECIDE LABOUR'S FATE

KEN Livingstone once wrote a book called If Voting Changed anything They'd abolish It. He was as wrong about that as he was about almost everything else.

Today is a special day because it marks the moment at which the general public has maximum leverage over the
political class. The British people have it within their power to sack a discredited government and install
a new regime. It is to be profoundly hoped that they will not pass up the opportunity.

The right to vote was hardearned and most older people regard voting as a duty as well as a privilege. Forecasts of a high turnout today suggest that the younger generations are finally coming round to a similar view.

During the final day of campaigning yesterday each party leader reverted to type. david Cameron showed energy and determination as he toured target seats. Gordon Brown spewed out more scare stories about the Conservatives having realised he does not have the capacity to inspire voters.

Lib Dem leader nick Clegg just waffled as another of his party's crackpot immigration policies was placed under scrutiny.

The Lib dems propose to give asylum seekers the right to take jobs. Such a move would encourage hundreds of thousands more migrants to come to Britain and abuse the asylum system in order to access our labour market.

That would in turn have a devastating impact on the employment prospects of Britons looking for work.

Moves by leading lights in the Lib Dems and Labour to encourage tactical voting for each other in order to keep out the Tories show that the two parties are just different varieties of socialists.

The only recommended tactic for voting is this: go and vote Conservative to get Brown out of downing Street.

**************************************

******************************************************************************************

THE GAZETTE

POLITICIANS HYPOCRITICAL ABOUT THEIR EXPENSES

One year ago this week somebody leaked to the Daily Telegraph, in Britain, the shocking list of expense claims by members of Parliament there.

Serene in the knowledge that voters would never know, MPs of all parties had been pigging out. More than 400 of them had over-claimed, many of them ludicrously. From porn-movie rentals to moat cleaning, most MPs had their snouts deep in the trough.

At least four parliamentarians will face charges. The Speaker of the House of Commons resigned under pressure. Prime Minister Gordon Brown apologized to the country "on behalf of all politicians." Many MPs prudently decided not to run again in today's election. The stench has tainted Britain's whole political class.

Rooting around in the cookie jar is not unknown in Canada, either. In February Nova Scotia's auditor-general said "several" legislators had filed "excessive and unreasonable" claims. Two of them resigned. One had charged $8,000 for a generator and a 40-inch TV for his home; another for an Xbox 360 Dance Dance Revolution Universe video game.

In 2007, Newfoundland and Labrador's auditor-general found that dozens of members of the House of Assembly were involved in a long list of dubious expenses, including $200,000 in double billing. One MHA had been repaid for over $34,000 for alcohol - from liquor stores, not by the drink - over 15 years, some of it out of province. Four ex-MHAs went to jail.

Fortunately, our elected representatives in Quebec City and Ottawa are made of sterner stuff. Or so they tell us, anyway. There's no need for voter/taxpayers to know about our expense spending, they say. You can trust us. Liberal MP Marcel Proulx actually claimed that major abuse "couldn't happen here."

Sorry, but we're not so sure.

At both levels, opposition parties bray daily - and often correctly - about the need for governments to be more open, about the treatment of Afghan detainees or the awarding of daycare contracts or whatever might be the flavour of the day. But when it comes to their private use of public money, openness is not an option and the normal partisan conflict vanishes in unanimity.

We are powerfully reminded of Adam Smith's dictum : "People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public." In fairness, we note that the word "conspiracy" is inappropriate, here, because all of this is perfectly, horribly legal.

In Ottawa, MPs hide behind the "Board of Internal Economy," a little-known all-party committee that manages, with nods and winks, to keep the lid on this information. Last weekend for example, Justice Minister Rob Nicholson and Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff separately told reporters there's no need for taxpayers to know more about Parliament's $500 million annual budget , which includes $126 million (in 2008) in expenses.

But auditor-general Sheila Fraser, surely the most-trusted person anywhere near Parliament Hill, has been asking for 10 months now to see these accounts; she has been stonewalled. Former auditor-general Kenneth Dye, supporting Fraser's request, was succinctly correct: "If it's public money, it should be audited by the auditor-general."

MPs unite to say blandly that a private accounting company sees the expense claims, and reports to the Internal Economy people. Everything's fine. There's nothing suspect. But the spending has to be kept secret because, well, ... because. This arrogance is doubly galling at a time when governments are paring spending in other directions.

Quebec is no better. In November 2002 a 10-year Gazette quest for access to MNAs' expense records met ultimate defeat in the Supreme Court, on a 5-4 decision. Since then MNAs have resolutely refused to change the rules.

Journalists keep trying. Last year the Toronto Star asked 37 MPs to reveal their accounts voluntarily; only four, all Liberals, provided any information. Last fall the press gallery association in Quebec City asked MNAs to reveal some of their spending; all three main parties busily looked the other way. Only Amir Khadir, the sole Québec solidaire MNA, produced his figures.

Yet MNAs of all parties piously deplored the excesses of former Lieutenant-Governor Lise Thibault, who was charged with expense-account fraud - after her books had been checked by federal and provincial auditors-general.

Shamelessly, elected representatives who talk non-stop about the public interest continue to subordinate the public's moral right to know, preferring their own freedom to spend without any public scrutiny.

The potential for abuse is the obvious problem, but this is also a great source of public cynicism. We accept that most expense spending is very likely reasonable, and would be approved by a fair-minded outsider. But even the most complacent of fair-minded observers finds it hard to respect politicians who insist on keeping the public in the dark.

In March, the scandal-stung Nova Scotia legislators' Internal Economy Board held a televised meeting, where it adopted new rules: Expense details will now be posted online; receipts will be required; and more. "Transition payments" to those leaving office had already been killed, along with other obscure but lucrative perks.

If Nova Scotia can do that, they all can. And there's no excuse for refusing.

**************************************

******************************************************************************************

THE KOREA TIMES

EDITORIAL

A DIPLOMATIC THREESOME

SEOUL SHOULD BE MORE POSITIVE, FLEXIBLE PLAYER

In less than a week, Chinese President Hu Jintao has met the leaders of both South and North Korea in Beijing. It reaffirms China's near-absolute influence on the Korean Peninsula ― and how the rivaling Koreas have fought with each other to turn back the historical clock to several hundred years ago.

Topping the list of agenda items in the summit between Hu and North Korean leader Kim Jong-il Wednesday was reportedly the North's return to the stalled regional conference to discuss denuclearization of the reclusive regime. Details were not available as this page went to press, but any decision made by Kim might have depended on China ― exactly how much Beijing is ready to give in economic rewards ― to make it happen. This is especially true, as the United States has also made clear its wishes for the resumption of the six-party talks.

And the development would put South Korea in a diplomatic strait jacket ― once again ― much of which is its own making, though. By hastily and one-sidedly pronouncing no contact with North Korea before the cause of the sunken Navy warship Cheonan becomes known without finding out the other participants' positions, Seoul has all but tied its own hands and feet in diplomatic maneuvering.

It was understandable South Korea was miffed at Beijing's go-ahead to Kim's visit, without any prior notice to President Lee Myung-bak when he was there just three days earlier. But Seoul should have stopped at an indirect expression of regret instead of filing a formal protest.

The reaction indicated the South Korean government was mistaken on at least two points: How could it be so naive to think Beijing would side with a relatively new partner ― mostly an economic one ― instead of its blood ally of more than half a century, and how Seoul should regard Kim's visit as Beijing's offering of an indulgence to Pyongyang concerning the Cheonan incident, the full picture of which is still shrouded in mystery.

We are not talking about diplomatic protocol but the practical use of Seoul's responses. Emotional outbursts may please domestic hawks, but will backfire if they end up displeasing partners. Diplomacy is about reading your foreign counterparts' thoughts, not just gratifying the home audience even though major elections are at hand.

That said, the time has long past for China to act more like a global leader as it seeks to be more than a patron of a wayward regional ally. This is why President Hu has been urged to call for Kim to not just return to the nuclear dialogue table, but also to move toward opening up his regime to the outside world and try more positively to improve relations with South Korea.

North Korean leader Kim for his part had to, at least, express some condolences to the victims of the ill-fated warship, if Pyongyang is not responsible for the naval disaster as it claims, and if the issue was discussed even unofficially.

However, what's most lamentable is the situation Seoul finds itself in diplomatically. Just three years ago, South Korea could have turned the North into a more pliant partner, while discussing regional politics with China and the United States on a more equal footing. Now it can do nothing as far as North Korea is concerned except look to Beijing and Washington.

Hard-nosed realists would say such wishful thinking is just a daydream. But dreaming could be better if the reality is a nightmare that has been repeated for centuries.

**************************************

THE KOREA TIMES

EDITORIAL

NONPROLIFERATION REVIEW

THERE'S STILL ROOM FOR MORE US INITIATIVES

A world without nuclear weapons is one of the main foreign policy agendas laid out by U.S. President Barack Obama. And emblematic of this ambitious goal was the U.S. disclosure of the size of its nuclear arsenal for the first time on Monday.

Even more important than the revealed number of U.S. nuclear warheads ― which did not deviate much from experts' estimation at around 5,100 ― was Washington's commitment to openness about its arms programs. Whether the U.S. initiatives will lead to corresponding moves from other nuclear powers ― let alone change the behavior of nuclear outlaws such as North Korea and Iran ― is anybody's guess.

This means other ``official'' holders of atomic weapons, namely China, France and Britain, should show more eagerness to reduce their stockpiles during the ongoing U.N. conference to review the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. Not only have these three countries failed to meet reduction schedules, but also have kept modernizing their arsenals.

Also crucial for a nuclear weapons-free world is how to deal with ``unofficial'' nuclear powers ― Israel, India and Pakistan ― which are virtually allowed to have atomic weapons outside the NPT regime.

The key lies in whether the United States can persuade Israel to agree to the establishment of the nuclear-free zone in the Middle East. The idea was agreed among regional members in 1995 but has yet to make much progress due to Israel's opposition. As long as there are no changes in Tel Aviv's position, dissuading Iran to abandon its nuclear ambition will remain extremely difficult, if not downright impossible. Likewise, North Korea will continue to cite the U.S. nuclear cooperation with another NPT outsider, India, as the example of Washington's double standards and as an excuse for its own weapons development programs.

In most appearances, of the two current biggest nuclear headaches, the North Korean case seems to be far easier to handle, if not solve completely, than the Iranian problem, in view of both the complexity of regional geopolitics and the number of countries involved ― provided the Obama administration is genuinely serious in producing some visible progress in its global nonproliferation efforts.

Much depends on the U.S. determination to no longer rely on nuclear weapons as a means of maintaining or enhancing global security. A recent case in point was Washington's failure to drop Pyongyang and Teheran from its first-strike options. The U.S. officials might refute North Korea has never ceased its nuclear programs since the 1990s, but, seen from a more objective viewpoint, there were many opportunities to dissuade Pyongyang had Washington decided so.

It takes two to tango but the final decision is up to the bigger partner.

**************************************

THE KOREA TIMES

EDITORIAL

EQUAL JUSTICE, BUT NOT EQUAL ACCESS

Cass Gilbert, the architect of the U.S. Supreme Court building, intended his creation to be a powerful and overwhelming symbol of the majesty of the law. The Depression-era Federal Writers' Guide to the capital said the court, opened two years earlier in 1935, ``attains the highest expression of classic grandeur in Washington" and then takes five full pages to explain the symbolism of the statues, carvings and panels as the visitor approaches the massive 13-ton bronze main door.

A frequent visitor to the court compared the line of people waiting at that doorway for a chance to attend an oral argument as akin to a ``pilgrimage." And John Roberts, who argued numerous cases at the court before becoming chief justice, spoke of getting a lump in his throat as he mounted the 44 marble steps to enter the court's Great Hall under the inscription ``Equal Justice Under Law."

As of Monday, the front entrance to the court became symbolic of something else ― the quest for total security that has gripped Washington. As of Monday, the main entrance is closed to visitors. The court may offer equal justice, but not equal access. Entrance to the nation's highest court is now through two ground-level doors tucked away under the main staircase. The visitors may exit through the grand entrance, experiencing Gilbert's approach to the court in reverse.

The new means of entrance allows for more thorough screening for guns and explosives. It was the result of two security surveys. Why the government continues to commission these surveys is something of a mystery since they all come to the same conclusion ― restrict visitor access and search those you do let in more thoroughly. In other words, cut down on the public in the term ``public building."

The new measures were not universally popular. Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer had a dissenting opinion, with Breyer saying that to his knowledge ``no other Supreme Court in the world ― including those, such as Israel's, that face security concerns equal to or greater than ours ― has closed its main entrance to the public."

This is one decision the justices should reverse.

**************************************

THE KOREA TIMES

EDITORIAL

BOY SOLDIERS AND ABUSED GIRLS

BY CLEMENTE FERRER

The Declaration of the Rights of the Child, ratified by the United Nation's General Assembly on Nov. 20, 1959, asserts in Principle 9: ``The child shall be protected against all forms of neglect, cruelty and exploitation. He shall not be the subject of traffic, in any form.''

Wars have destroyed more than 2 million children, disabled 6 million and created 1 million orphans throughout this last decade. More than 15 million children have been expatriated. On Earth, there are more than 600,000 child soldiers.

Sierra Leone is a country where this calamity has nested itself with brutality. Children have been kidnapped, tormented and have been physically abused implanting them with a heart full of resentment and rancour, as well as a tendency for assassination.

They are obliged in being spectators of cruel deaths of their own parents, as well as witnesses of the destruction of impoverished areas. They are narcotized with cocaine to perpetuate savage military actions.

If the practice of enlisting children under 18 years of age in the military and wars dangerously equipped with armaments is a war crime, then Amnesty International has revealed that in more than 35 countries the military, paramilitary forces and armed opposition groups rest upon soldiers that have not even turned 15 years old.

Child soldiers are sent off to the front fiery lines, as patrols and bodyguards; they are cooks and armament, water and edible food deliverers.

However, the case of little girls is degrading; they are the first ones to be tormented by the corporal abuses that are realized by the rest of the recruits.

These abuses generate painful traumas, pregnancies and other diseases like AIDS. Some children have to intervene in sexual and cannibalistic acts with the already dead bodies of their adversaries ― all this under the effects of ethyl alcoholic drinks or alkaloids.

Andrew Mawson, an observer of the cited Eastern African NGO, points out that these fanatic activities are ruining an entire generation.

The devastation of these adolescent lives will severely afflict Uganda for a prolonged period of time.

An advertising campaign repeats once again the following slogan: ``Child soldiers … will be placed in the front lines. And if they die, they'll go to schools and look for others. And after, others as well.''

Jean-Charles, who practices his labor of solidarity in Guru (northern Uganda), states that ``They kidnap children with the intention of turning them into killing machines.

``Dead and mutilated bodies chase me in the middle of the night, airplanes launching bombs from up in the air and rebels assassinating entire villages''; these are the delusions that Kenneth Opwonya, an 18-year-old boy, still has ever since his escape from the Lord's Resistance Army.

Squalid and short, like the majority of Ugandan boys, he reasons with a meager tone, and a gloomy and profound stare about his experience as a Lord's Resistance Army (LRA) captive.

He explains how he was forced to kill against his own free will. ``When the rebels would tell you to kill somebody, and you opposed, they would kill you themselves or would order someone else to kill you with their own hands.''

He recalls how officials would force people to lay on the ground faced down so the victim's face could not be seeing during the moment of their murder.

There were moments where munitions were scarce and, not being able to waste bullets, they were forced to kill the victims with spears.

Kenneth resided with his relatives in a camp for the displaced. Since he heard of the ``Jesuit Refugee Service'' program in Kitgum, he decided to enlist. They train children to develop different abilities so that ex-soldiers could manage themselves on their own.

There are still 250,000 children in regimented power and guerrilla groups in the African Continent. China Keitetsi, a girl soldier, strives to combat this stigma all the way from Denmark.

She remarks that the universe ``has betrayed many Africans,'' who expose their lives on meager boats to reach the European Continent.

She has not been able to return to Uganda, but is building a home in Rwanda, for the offspring of abused girls like herself whose virginities were violated in the front lines.

Keitetsi asserts that ``talking about herself has turned into an armament to help other child soldiers. The pain is forever a part of you. You learn how to live with it and accept what has happened, and that way you don't cry as much everyday.

``They shave off your hair and convert you into a little soldier that must go and talk like a boy. You must be tough and demonstrate that you are as strong as the others. At the same time you are a sex object.''

Everything was frightening; she resisted at 13 years of age and had to give birth all alone in the jungle, just after being harassed and violated.

According to the U.N., more than 2 million children have died due to armed conflict, while 6 million have suffered amputations or unrecoverable disabilities.

Clemente Ferrer is the president of the European Institute for Marketing, Communication and Advertising in Spain. He can be reached at clementeferrer33@gmail.com. The views expressed in the above article are the author's own and do not reflect the editorial policy of The Korea Times.

**************************************

THE KOREA TIMES

EDITORIAL

TWO EXPLOSIONS REFRAME ENERGY DEBATE

BY DALE MCFEATTERS

The blowout at a sunken offshore drilling rig, if indeed it takes 90 days to cap, is on track to be the worst oil spill in our history, surpassing even the wreck of the Exxon Valdez and far exceeding the 1969 Santa Barbara, Calif., spill that led to the moratorium on offshore oil and gas exploration. The explosion and fire that precipitated the blowout killed 11 oil workers.

That followed by 15 days the worst U.S. mining accident in 40 years, an explosion that killed 29 miners in West Virginia. Critics blamed less-than-zealous enforcement of the mine-safety laws rooted in the George W. Bush administration's bias against government regulation.

The Gulf of Mexico oil spill, gushing at 5,000 barrels a day, quickly took on a political dimension. The government's reaction brought unwelcome comparisons to the Bush administration's slow and ineffectual response to Hurricane Katrina that the Obama White House was quick to discount.

In a phone call to the five Republican governors who surround the spill, President Barack Obama promised ``every single recourse available in our response efforts."

He called in the Navy to help and dispatched the secretaries of Interior and Homeland Security and the head of the Environmental Protection Agency to the scene.

Democratic environmentalists were quick to recall the signature ``Drill, baby, drill!" chant at the 2008 Republican convention and note that Sarah Palin is the party's best-known advocate of unrestricted drilling.

But it was Obama who in March and to general approval lifted the long-standing moratorium on offshore oil and gas exploration on the Atlantic coast and the eastern Gulf.

Although the administration was a long way from awarding leases, lifting the moratorium is now on hold pending an investigation into the cause of the Gulf spill and recommendations to prevent another one.

And the spill is threatening an administration-backed climate-and-energy bill that calls for expanded offshore drilling. Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., said he will try to kill the measure if that provision remains, and separately said he would introduce a bill to block Obama's plan to again award offshore leases.

Taken together, the oil spill and the mine disaster is a harsh reminder that our demand for energy has costs. And in an unfortunate bit of timing for fossil-fuel advocates, the spill came just as the Interior Department announced that it would allow a private developer to go ahead with the nation's first offshore wind farm, near Cape Cod.

But for all the talk of solar, wind and biofuels, they will be marginal players and we will be overwhelmingly dependent on oil, natural gas and coal for the foreseeable future. And to extract them as safely and cleanly as possible will require standards, inspection and enforcement.

Dale McFeatters is an editorial writer of Scripps Howard News Service (www.scrippsnews.com)

**************************************

THE KOREA TIMES

EDITORIAL

TAKE VACATION; IT'S YOUR RIGHT

Scripps Howard News Service

The bureaucrats of the European Union, unfettered by such sovereign niceties as government and voters, are free to think Big Thoughts. And here's the latest: Decreeing tourism and vacations basic human rights.

This is the brain child of Antonio Tajani, the EU's commissioner for enterprise and industry, who plans to subsidize vacations for those too poor to afford one and lots of other people as well.

The time off isn't a problem. The EU already mandates a standard of a minimum four weeks' vacation for member nations, and some countries require more. French workers are entitled to six weeks. U.S. employers are not statutorily required to give their workers any.

As a result, American workers generally work longer hours and get less time off than workers in other modern industrialized country. The Tea Party people might want to lighten up on the whining about ``socialism" lest American workers start asking questions and discover Commissioner Tajani. He says, ``Traveling for tourism today is a right."

Tajani's program would subsidize vacation travel for retirees, those over 65, people between 18 and 25 and families facing ``difficult social, financial or personal" circumstances. If the vacationer is elderly or disabled, the EU would pay for someone to accompany them.

The news accounts indicate that the subsidized vacations would be within Europe ― no Tahiti or Las Vegas for the pensioners. The idea would be to build European unity by having northern Europeans visit southern Europe and vice versa.

Britain's Sunday Times reports that Tajani's planners envisage sending young Greeks, for example, to Manchester and Liverpool on industrial archaeology tours to explore abandoned factories and power plants.

To further experience the ``cultural diversity" of Europe, retirees from the English rust belt, in turn, would be given cut-rate trips to Spain. Not meaning to diminish the undoubted attractiveness of an abandoned power plant in the rain, it does seem that the retirees are getting the better half of this deal.

There is a mild pecuniary motive here in that the subsidized travelers could fill up resorts that are underused or in the off-season doldrums. The pensioners might want to ask before the EU packs them off to an underused resort exactly why the resort is underused. The answer could make a staycation look mighty attractive.

The vacation plan is to take full effect in 2013. When it does, a great job is going to open up for someone: the EU's high commissioner for vacations. Update your resume now.

The ``tourism is a human right" scheme could cost the EU hundreds of millions of euros a year. But better not to dwell on the cost. Why spoil the vacation?

For more stories, visit Scripps Howard News Service (www.scrippsnews.com)

***************************************

******************************************************************************************

THE JAPAN TIMES

EDITORIAL

BANKRUPT THEOLOGY LIVES TO DISTRACT ON ANOTHER DAY

BY HECTOR R. TORRES

GENEVA — Now that the global financial crisis is abating, it is time to take stock of our mistakes and ensure that they are not repeated.

Beyond regulatory improvements, preventing payment incentives from rewarding reckless risk taking, and building Chinese walls between originators of securities and rating agencies, we need to discover what made this crisis so difficult to predict.

The International Monetary Fund is our global watchdog, and many believe that it failed to foresee the crisis because it was distracted or looking in the wrong places. I disagree. The problem is that the IMF was unable to interpret the evidence with which it was confronted.

I served on the IMF Board in June 2006 when it discussed its annual review of the United States. The staff "saw" the relaxation of lending standards in the U.S. mortgage market, but noted that "borrowers at risk of significant mortgage payment increases remained a small minority, concentrated mostly among higher-income households that were aware of the attendant risks."

A few months later, in September 2006, just 10 months before the subprime mortgage crisis became apparent to all, the Global Financial Stability Report, one of the IMF's flagship publications, stated that "[m]ajor financial institutions in mature . . . markets [were] . . . healthy, having remained profitable and well capitalized." Moreover, "the financial sectors in many countries" were supposedly "in a strong position to cope with any cyclical challenges and further market corrections to come."

The IMF's radar started blinking only in April 2007, virtually when the problem was already hitting its windshield, but still with little sense of urgency. Clearly the Fund's surveillance of the U.S. economy was ineffective, and its multilateral surveillance of financial markets no better. Admittedly, the IMF was not alone in failing to interpret the underlying facts that triggered the crisis, but that is little consolation.

Before the crisis, the IMF's best-known function — lending to countries with balance-of-payment problems — was becoming irrelevant. Many emerging markets preferred to self-insure by accumulating reserves rather than borrow from the Fund. Ironically, this was leading the IMF to focus on its supervisory role. So, in searching for the causes of the IMF's failure, we can rule out distraction by more urgent matters.

The Fund normally expects that problems come from the usual suspects — economically volatile developing countries — but this time the crisis was developing a few miles away from its headquarters. Perhaps this proximity was at the root of the IMF's failure to interpret the evidence.

If so, it is a failure that raises two key questions. First, is the Fund's governance structure suited to exercising arms-length surveillance of its main shareholders? And, second, did ideological blinders prevent the IMF from acknowledging that deregulation could contribute to a disastrous outcome?

It is inconceivable that the Fund, with its qualified and dedicated staff, would have failed so miserably in detecting and calling attention to the vulnerabilities piling up in the U.S. mortgage market had they occurred in a developing country. But power in the IMF currently follows the logic of its lending role. The more money a country puts into the pool of resources, the more influence it gets.

I, for one, am not happy with the way in which "quotas" to the IMF are calculated, but I have to admit that exchanging money for votes is a perfectly adequate governing structure for a lending institution. But it is not adequate for an institution that is meant to exercise arms-length surveillance of its members — particularly its most influential member, whose domestic policies have global systemic implications.

That "money-for-influence" governance structure indirectly impairs the Fund's capacity to criticize its most important members' economies (let alone police compliance with their obligations).

As I have witnessed several times, if the IMF staff ever do become too candid in their criticism of powerful members, the target governments use their leverage to water down the public communiques issued by the Board.

Now consider the second question — whether the Fund suffered from a mindset that blinded it to the causes of what was happening. As early as August 2005, Raghuram Rajan, the IMF's Economic Counselor (chief economist) at the time, was warning of weaknesses in the U.S. financial markets.

Rajan saw that something potentially dangerous was happening, warning that competition forces were pushing financial markets "to flirt continuously with the limits of illiquidity" and concealing risks from investors in order to outperform competitors.

Perhaps most revealingly, though, Rajan nonetheless optimistically argued that "[d]eregulation has removed artificial barriers preventing entry of new firms, and has encouraged competition between products, institutions, markets, and jurisdictions." In other words, he clearly believed that regulation created "artificial barriers," and that "competition between jurisdictions" — that is, between regulators — was to be welcomed.

Such beliefs come naturally to those committed to the view that markets perform better without regulation, and Rajan's statement is a good illustration of the IMF's creed at the time. And it was this boundless faith in markets' self-regulatory capacity that appears to be at the root of the Fund's failure to find what it was not looking for.

There are now encouraging signs of change at the IMF, but this should not reassure us. As the political economist Fred Block has noted, "societies invariably draw back from the brink of full-scale experimentation with market self-regulation."

Unfortunately, faith in self-regulation is very difficult to dispel, because its priests can always claim that its failures result not from theological bankruptcy, but from insufficient orthodoxy.

***************************************

THE JAPAN TIMES

EDITORIAL

THE LONG DOWNHILL ROAD

The severe business environment for department stores has kept this segment of the retail industry on a downward sales path for two decades.

According to the Japan Department Stores Association, department stores' annual sales dropped from ¥9.7 trillion in 1991 to ¥6.58 trillion in 2009 — a decline of more than ¥3 trillion. And the number of department store employees decreased from 138,000 to less than 100,000. Many midsize department stores in major cities are closing down.

Large shopping centers and stores that specialize in electronic products and men's suits, for example, are intruding onto the traditional turfs of department stores. Sales through the Internet, the decline among Japanese of the habit of sending summer and winter gifts and the higher costs of department stores' goods have contributed to their decline. Many years of stagnant economic growth as well as changes in people's buying preferences are also key factors.

To overcome the difficult environment, department stores have taken various steps such as merging, enlarging sales floors and tying up with trading houses and supermarkets. But the survival strategy of enlarging operations may not work anymore.

A recent nationwide survey of 100 consumer advisers by a Fukuoka consumer trend survey company offers hints for improvement. Fifty-five percent of them said they now buy less at department stores than they did several years ago. A large number complained of high prices, shortages of the merchandise they wanted to buy and difficulties in selecting goods. Yet, 90 percent said they like going to department stores — adding that they like their atmosphere and are attracted by the brands of products sold in department stores.

There may still be a chance for department stores to recover if they carefully choose merchandise for quality and attractiveness, target customer segments, and offer a classy but friendly atmosphere. They also should think about how to enliven the communities in which they operate through cooperation with local governments and store associations.

***************************************

THE JAPAN TIMES

EDITORIAL

NEW ROUNDS OF BUDGET SLASHING

Last year the Hatoyama administration's Government Revitalization Unit scrutinized budget requests for fiscal 2010 under the slogan of slashing wasteful spending of tax money. The process saved ¥690 billion. People gave high marks to the scrutiny not only because it saved money but also because it helped acquaint them with the process of budget formation and shed light on structural problems that are likely to lead to the wasteful use of public money.

In late April the same unit scrutinized 151 projects of 47 independent administrative agencies. It calls for abolishing 36 projects and scaling down more than 50 others. In late May it will examine the work of nonprofit public service corporate bodies. Organizations of both groups are receiving public money from the central government for their operations. On the basis of the scrutiny, the Hatoyama administration plans to work out a basic reform plan to abolish or integrate these organizations.

Apparently the administration hopes the scrutiny will bring about solid achievements and thus help buoy its approval rating, which has dropped to around 20 percent. Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama said people's expectations are great and expressed the hope that the process will "wash away the filth" that has accumulated in those organizations over years.

Administrative reform minister Yukio Edano warned against expectations of huge money savings. What is important for the members of the Government Revitalization Unit is that they determine whether each organization has justifiable goals, whether money is used properly and whether there is duplication of work among the various organizations.

Unit members also should find out whether collusive relations exist between those organizations and government ministries and agencies by which the former offers jobs to retiring bureaucrats, and whether the salaries of officials of those organizations are within reason.

Scenes of this examination can be viewed directly or through the Internet. Unit members should not make a political show of the scrutiny process by bullying officials of the organizations.

***************************************

THE JAPAN TIMES

EDITORIAL

BRAND, BUT DON'T BAN, CREDIT DEFAULT SWAPS

BY LUIGI ZINGALES

CHICAGO — The lawsuit filed last month by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission against Goldman Sachs for securities fraud, charging the bank with misrepresenting the way a collateralized debt obligations had been formed, has revived public disgust at credit default swaps (CDS), the instrument used to bet against these CDOs.

(At last week's Senate hearing on Goldman Sachs, Sen. John McCain had likened the process to wagering at a casino on the outcome of an athletic contest.)

Before the 2008 financial crisis, CDSs were an esoteric product, known only to a restricted number of sophisticated investors and specialized academics. Today, they are a household name, synonymous with unruly speculation, boundless greed and, ultimately, systemic instability.

Indeed, CDSs are blamed as one of the main causes of the financial crisis. The legality of Goldman Sachs' behavior will be determined by a court of law, but CDSs' odious reputation is jeopardizing the survival of this instrument in the court of public opinion.

Riding the populist wave, several politicians have proposed a ban on CDSs. The Greek crisis has further galvanized the anti-CDS camp. After all, isn't it the fault of the CDS market's avaricious speculators that Greece was on the verge of default and that Greek public employees have had to endure deep wage cuts?

In a word, no. Far from being the spawn of the devil, CDSs are a useful financial instrument that can improve not only financial stability, but also the way that companies and countries are run. Banning them will do more harm than good. Any attempt in that direction is detrimental, because it would divert attention from the useful goal of disciplining the CDS market to make it more transparent, stable and efficient.

One key advantage (if not the key advantage) of capitalism over central planning is the information conveyed by market prices. When the demand for potatoes at the current price exceeds supply, the price of potatoes rises, signaling scarcity. Individual farmers do not need any bureaucratic directive to decide whether to plant more potatoes: an increase in prices creates an incentive to plant more potatoes; a decrease in prices is a signal that they should plant less.

The same is true with stock prices. An increase in the stock price of steel manufacturers suggests an increase in the demand for steel, which induces entrepreneurs to start more steel plants and investors to provide them with the money. Conversely, a decrease in the stock price of steel manufacturers leads entrepreneurs to liquidate existing plants and dissuades investors from committing more resources to the sector.

Unfortunately, sometimes prices fail to perform this signaling function properly, as the dot-com and housing bubbles in recent years showed. During the dot-com bubble, prices signaled huge demand in the Internet sector. For this reason, hundreds of millions of dollars were wasted in advertising improbable companies on TV and building network capacity beyond any foreseeable need.

During the housing bubble, prices signaled a severe scarcity of houses. So billions of dollars were poured into new developments in remote locations where nobody wants to live.

Given the large misallocation of resources in such cases, it is vital to understand why prices failed to provide an accurate signal to investors. Why did the United States, with the most developed financial market in the world, experience two major bubbles in less than a decade?

An expansive monetary policy is partly to blame, but the real problem is an institutional setting that favors bullish sentiment.

Pension funds, mutual funds and investment banks are long in the stock market. Shorting a stock is difficult and risky: It is difficult because borrowing stocks is hard to do; it is risky because shorting has a limited upside but an infinite downside. The traditional securities available to investors make it easier to bet in favor of a company than against it, causing prices to be affected more by irrational exuberance than by panic.

In this respect, CDSs are unique. Because they function as insurance on borrowers' ability to meet their obligations, they make it easier to express a negative opinion on a company or a security. To express a negative view via the CDS market, investors do not need to locate securities to borrow (a prerequisite to shorting), and they risk only a limited premium, while they have the opportunity to gain many times that.

It was the CDS market that allowed the negative — and correct — view of the housing market held by John Paulson and others finally to be embedded into market prices. They made the bubble burst. While painful for the rest of society, this is healthy. The longer a bubble lasts, the more damage it causes.

The same reasoning applies to the Greek crisis. The CDSs on Greece provide a useful signal of the country's compromised financial situation. It is thanks to the spike in the CDS market that the Greek government tightened its budget and improved its fiscal position.

Medical tests, too, often bring bad news, but abolishing medical testing does not solve problems, it only hides them, making them worse.

The reason that politicians and corporate managers alike hate CDSs is precisely because CDS rates are so useful and so prompt in exposing their mistakes. Nobody likes to be found wrong. For this reason, politicians and powerful businessmen often cajole the press, the credit rating agencies and even the analysts to portray their actions in a positive light. As the main source of negative information that is not sensitive to power, the CDS market is feared, and politicians want to eliminate it.

Of course, the CDS market is not perfect. In fact, it is not really an organized market, but only an informal virtual exchange. The existing rules are designed not to make it transparent or resilient, but to make it more profitable for large institutions like Goldman Sachs and J.P. Morgan.

So intervention is needed to formalize the CDS market and force appropriate collateralization, so that no government has to step in to rescue any counterparty. But regulating the CDS market does not mean banning it. To do so would only sow the seeds of the next bubble.

Luigi Zingales is professor of entrepreneurship and finance at University of Chicago Graduate School of Business and coauthor, with Raghuram G. Rajan, of "Saving Capitalism from the Capitalists." © 2010 Project Syndicate

***************************************

******************************************************************************************

THE JAKARTA POST

EDITORIAL

THE INDONESIAN 'TRAGEDY'

The departure of Finance Minister Sri Mulyani Indrawati for a top job in the World Bank has all the elements of a Greek Tragedy in an Indonesian context, except that the ending is not necessarily an unhappy one, not even for the chief protagonist.

If anything, it probably is the best outcome for everyone concerned, certainly for Sri Mulyani herself and for her detractors who have been clamoring for her head these past few months, over the Bank Century bailout. It also works for President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono who must have found it distressful that one of his key ministers was being subjected to ridicule by politicians — to the point of affecting her ability to perform.

The managing director job at the World Bank's head office in Washington, to begin in June, provides Sri Mulyani with a graceful exit from the unfortunate political predicament, as she is moving to a senior post at a prestigious international organization.

The writing was on the wall that the Bank Century case could lead to something like this ever since Yudhoyono lost the vote in the House of Representatives in March.

The House declared that the November 2008 decision to bail out Bank Century was flawed and that those responsible for the decision, including Sri Mulyani, should be investigated.

Given her impeccable track record and accolade as a tough reformist minister, no one is seriously accusing Mulyani of foul play. In all the investigations of the Century case so far nothing has suggested she profited from her decision.

Politicians being what they are somehow found a way to keep returning to Mulyani as the one person who made the final decision to bail out the troubled bank. When her detractors won the vote against the government, it effectively deprived her of any political legitimacy to serve as finance minister.

Legally Mulyani may be in the clear, but politically she had been condemned. Never underestimate the power of the House.

She may be serving the President and reports to him only, but she has found it hard if not impossible to work with the House these past two months. The government's latest budget revision was passed by the House last week in the absence of two parties that had boycotted her. On top of this there has been a lengthy investigation by the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) that Mulyani has had to entertain. On Monday, she spent six hours with KPK investigators.

Short of a tragedy, it is still a sad loss for Indonesia to have to let Mulyani go. She became a reform icon not only at home, but is also recognized worldwide, so much so that the World Bank decided to take her away and make the most of her skills and experience. Given the inevitability of her departure, the best we can do now is to wish her well at her new job. Indonesia should be proud that one of its best daughters is heading a prestigious international financial organization.

This should at least ease the tension between the government and the House, as one of the most contentious points in the Bank Century case has now been removed. The other point concerns the fate of Vice President Boediono, who as governor of Bank Indonesia at the time of the bailout was also named in the House's resolution.

Finance ministers come and go, and as good and as valuable Sri Mulyani is to Yudhoyono's Cabinet, she is not irreplaceable. Whoever succeeds her knows they will have big shoes to fill. And may be that is also part of the problem: Sri Mulyani set standards too high for her own good.

What is clear is that Mulyani created her own legacy in the five years she served as finance minister, through the major reforms and reorganization she carried out at the Finance Ministry.

That Indonesia survived the global economic crisis could also be attributed to her work. Rather than lamenting her departure, we should all make sure Mulyani's legacy — the values and principles she introduced, and all the reform work she had begun — continues.

***************************************

THE JAKARTA POST

ETHNIC CHINESE AND THE TEACHING OF HISTORY

ASVI WARMAN ADAM

There have been several amendments to the teaching of Indonesian history since Indonesia's Independence Day. The more authoritarian a regime, the stronger the control it exercises over the official history, as was the case when Guided Democracy (1959-1965) and the New Order (1966-1998) were in power.

Under Soeharto's administration, the three pillars of Chinese culture — the mass media, the organizations and the schools — were torn down. The country's history curriculum never mentioned Chinese culture or the contribution ethnic Chinese had made to the civilization of Indonesia. Following the reform movement, the 1994 national curriculum was revised in 1999.

While Indian and Chinese influences on Indonesian culture did appear in the new history curriculum, there was still no narration of any influential Chinese culture.

According to Prof. Denys Lombard, there are four mega cultures, which Lombard refers to as "nebulas" that brought influence to the archipelago, i.e. Chinese, Indian, Arabian and European.

All these nebulas are part of the Indonesian official teaching of history, except that of Chinese.

The arrival of Hinduism and Buddhism in Indonesia was combined with the histories of Hindu-Buddhist kingdoms: Kutai, Tarumanegara, Sriwijaya, Kediri, Singosari and Majapahit.

The introduction of Islam to Indonesia and its development were an integral part of the rise of Islamic states which include Samudra Pasai, Aceh, Demak, Pajang, Mataram, Cirebon, Banten, Makassar, Ternate and Tidore.

No kingdoms of the Western or Christian nebula were ever recorded; rather, it was connected with Europeans coming to the region. It was unfortunate that no Chinese kingdom ever set foot in Indonesia in the past.

Traditional kingdoms had Buddhist, Hindu or Islamic labels although their existence was not identical to any of the religions.

The school curriculum outlines Indonesian history in the following chronology: pre-history, Hindu-Buddhist kingdoms, Islamic kingdoms, Dutch and Japanese colonization and the formation of the Republic of Indonesia.

The New Order based its teaching of history on the Indonesian National History textbooks edited by Nugroho Notosusanto and his team. The set comprised of six volumes. When the government decided that these books were no longer valid, they published a replacement eight-volume Indonesia dalam Arus Sejarah (Indonesian within the Tide of History).

It discusses Hindu-Buddhist kingdoms in third volume while Islamic states fill the fourth volume of the set. Chinese aspects of Indonesian history are only included in a 24-page article written by A. Dahana on "China dan Kampanye 'Ganyang Malaysia'" ("China and the 'Crush Malaysia' Campaign") which is included in Volume 7 (1950-1965 period) and in a Leo Suryadinata writing, "Peran Kelompok Etnis Tionghoa dan Kebijakan Negara" ("The Role of Ethnic Chinese and State Policy"), a 26-page piece in Volume 8 (New Order).

All eight volumes of the textbooks, that are 5,000 pages long, cover the ethnic Chinese and their culture in only 50 pages — truly a minority.

The printing of Indonesia within the Tide of History was completed in early 2010 but it has not been distributed or put on sale as the official launch by President SBY has yet to be scheduled.

There is no other way other than to write a reference book, through which what the ethnic Chinese have contributed to the civilization of Indonesia could be conveyed to Indonesian students.

I imagine that it would at least contain a) the history of migration of Chinese people to Indonesia, b) use of the terms "China" and "Tionghoa", c) contributions the Chinese nebula has made to the civilization of Indonesia, d) discrimination against ethnic Chinese during the Colonial era, e) the struggle to achieve and protect Indonesian independence (including the story of John Lie, who was named a national hero last year), f) the achievements of Chinese people in many fields (e.g. sports, arts and medical care initiatives), g) state policies on the ethnic Chinese since independence, h) discrimination against the ethnic Chinese during the New Order, i) the significant changes recorded in the reform era and future prospects.

The book should be proposed to the government, in this case to the National Education Ministry, for a formal decision on its authorized use in schools.

The Ministry's Curriculum Center should be encouraged to include items on the Chinese nebula in Indonesia's history curriculum.

The writer is a historian with the Indonesian Institute of Sciences (LIPI). The article is an excerpt of the paper the writer will present at the 7th International Seminar on the Study of the Chinese Overseas (ISSCO) in Singapore, May 7-9, 2010.

***************************************

THE JAKARTA POST

EDITORIAL

ASIA PACIFIC LEADING THE GLOBAL RECOVERY

MIRZA DIRAN

While Western countries were still feeling the pinch of the 2008 global crisis in 2009, the Asia Pacific countries did not disappoint.

The PricewaterhouseCoopers Asia Pacific Merger and Acquisition (M&A) Bulletin reported that major Asia Pacific economies like China, Australia, Indonesia and India, while experiencing a slowdown, continued to register positive growth throughout the global financial crisis of 2008 and 2009.

Asia Pacific bourses gained 53 percent in 2009, reversing a similar-sized loss the year before.

Two-thirds of these gains resulted from a strong first half.

China led the charge by shooting up 61 percent in the first half and ended the year up 76 percent.

Indonesia and Taiwan each gained close to 90 percent, while Hong Kong and Singapore gained over 50 percent each. Australia's All Ordinaries and Japan's Nikkei increased relatively modestly by 33 percent and 24 percent respectively.

The value of M&A activities in the Asia Pacific region for 2009 was US$498 billion, or 3 percent lower than in 2008 and a fifth lower than in 2007. This was due to the global financial crisis that hit in mid-October 2008.

M&A activities, however, picked up in the second half of 2009 in terms of both deal value and volume.

M&A activities reached $263 billion in the second half of 2009, or 12 percent higher than the $235 billion recorded in the first half, and a 30 percent increase from the $203 billion recorded for the same period the previous year, although these activities remained at a lower level than in the periods prior to June 30, 2008.

Asia Pacific's share of the global M&A pie grew from 23 percent in the first half or 2009 to 28 percent in the second half of 2009, at the expense of deals in America and Europe.

The situation showed the relative depth of the economic recessions in America and Europe and the speed of recovery of M&A activities in Asia Pacific. Asia Pacific M&A in the second half of 2009 was dominated by transactions in the resources and financial sectors. Some of the leading Asia Pacific economies are discussed below.

In China, domestic and inbound M&A deal volumes in China in the second half of 2009 returned to 2008 levels, indicating that the impact of the global economic downturn on M&A in China was short-lived.

The M&A activity was driven by domestic Chinese strategic and financial buyer deal activity. Although the value of outbound deals was still only around a third of the value of domestic and inbound transactions, outbound deal activity reached record levels in 2009.

In Japan, M&A total announced value dropped significantly in 2009. Deal characteristics in 2009 included the interest of certain industries in acquiring overseas competitors to increase global sales, further progress on domestic mergers to strengthen businesses and financial bases, and equity injections into struggling firms as a means of securing business assets, sales networks, customers, technologies and brands.

India, meanwhile, witnessed a significant fall in deal activity in 2009, primarily in terms of value, despite a slight revival in the second half of the year.

Analysts, however, said the relatively healthy macroeconomic indicators in India and other emerging markets were anticipated to create greater inbound M&A in 2010.

The telecommunications, oil and gas and banking sectors appear to be key focuses of attention, with the healthcare, education and mid-market IT service segments also attracting deal interest.

Here in Indonesia, M&A activity reached its peak in 2008 but the activities dropped in 2009 due to the global crisis.

Higher deal activity and value were announced during the second half of 2009, marking an increase from the first half of 2009.

The key deals occurred in the energy and mining, industrial products, telecommunications and financial services sectors.

The energy and mining and plantation sectors are forecasted to be the sectors with the most M&A activity in Indonesia, as the recovery of the global economy will drive up fuel and energy consumption.

Political stability, however, will be the key to maintaining the stability of the M&A climate in Indonesia in 2010.

The 21st century has long been hailed as the Pacific century, with the economic and geopolitical centers of the world progressively shifting from the Atlantic to the Pacific Ocean.

The 2008-2009 global financial crisis and recession, and the resultant public debt and slow recovery in the West, have certainly accentuated this inevitable tectonic shift.

With Asia leading the world out of the shadows of this unprecedented crisis, and Asian financial institutions and governments emerging relatively unscathed, a new enthusiasm for deals has emerged, especially in economies with large domestic markets — China, India and Indonesia.

These countries are more capable of rebalancing the fall in Western exports with domestic consumption. We have seen M&A opportunities in the financial services, infrastructure, retail, healthcare and real estate sectors.

Outbound investments from Asian countries will continue to increase in the coming years, in tandem with stronger currencies and a heightened need for resource and food security.

Many people wish to erase 2009 from their memories. Others, however, see it as a game-changing year filled with opportunities. If the brewing sovereign debt crisis in the West and the growing asset bubbles in the East can be contained, 2010, the Chinese Year of the Tiger, will be a roaring year for M&A in Asia Pacific.

The writer is a partner at PricewaterhouseCoopers FAS.

***************************************

THE JAKARTA POST

EDITORIAL

WHAT CAN WE EXPECT FROM NPT REVIEW CONFERENCE?

ANDY RACHMIANTO

In accordance with Article VIII of the of Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT), states parties may convene a conference to review the operation of the Treaty with the objective of assuring the preamble and provisions of the treaty are being realized.

The NPT Review Conference is being held from May 3-28, 2010, in New York, and is expected to be attended by the 188 states that are party to the Treaty.

For the last few decades, preparations and predictions about the review conference has become a ritual among officials, academics, scholars, mass media and civil society.

Prior to and after the conference, these groups analyze what they perceive to be the conference's successes or failures. What can we expect from the NPT Review Conference in 2010?

In 1995, the NPT Review and Extension Conference decided that the treaty would be extended indefinitely. This decision was made as part of the bargain with other decisions on Strengthening the Review Process of the Treaty, the Principles and Objectives for Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament and the Resolution on the Middle East.

Five years later, the NPT Review Conference succeeded in achieving a consensus on adopting a Final Document, which among others, agreed on practical steps for systematic and progressive efforts to nuclear disarmament.

However, situations following the 2000 Review Conference seemed to move against those achievements. Nuclear-weapon-states were not moving quickly enough to fulfill their NPT obligations to eliminate nuclear weapons and uphold their NPT-related nuclear disarmament commitments.

Some nuclear-weapon-states continue to rely on nuclear weapons as part of their military doctrine. The facts also show that instead of disarming or eliminating, they are advancing and developing new types of nuclear weapons.

Since then, many have observed that the treaty has faced serious challenges and was taken to the brink of collapse. In 2005, the conference collapsed and achieved no substantive results.

A few months later, a UN summit also failed to include reference on disarmament and non-proliferation in its outcome document. Therefore, 2005 was not only declared a bad year, but also signified the lowest point of multilateral disarmament and non-proliferation diplomacy.

This time around, it is expected that there will be a difference at the 2010 conference. This conference
is not only timely but also significant for the international community to strengthen global peace and security.

It is also crucial to seriously review previous gains, cautiously take stock of the present situation and suitably chart the future direction in implementing all provisions of the NPT in a balanced, comprehensive and non-discriminatory manner.

At the International Conference on Disarmament and Non-proliferation held in Tehran recently, Indonesian Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa stressed the need to keep a balanced, comprehensive and non-discriminatory approach to the three pillars of the NPT — nuclear disarmament, non-proliferation and the right to the peaceful use of nuclear technology.

He further stated the world has an opportunity at the upcoming NPT conference to move forward the many agenda related to the three pillars. Therefore, Indonesia believes that all signatories should contribute to creating a conducive atmosphere for the success of the conference.

Usually, prior to the convening of a review conference, the opportunity to arrive at a consensus among states parties is being repeated again this year.

Expectation for success is crucial for the survival of the NPT as the cornerstone of global nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament regimes. The prospect of such a success at this coming review conference seems to be promising. This can be seen from some encouraging attitudes emanating from the nuclear-weapon-states to recommit their nuclear disarmament obligations.

Over a year ago in Prague, President Obama reiterated the US's commitment to "seek the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons". It actually marked a shift away from the strategy of the previous administration and has created new momentum for achieving progress at this conference.

On April 6, 2010, the US Administration announced the release of new Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) which was concluded by looking toward a world without nuclear weapons.

The NPR clearly states the commitment of the US not to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear-weapon states that are in compliance with the NPT. Nevertheless, the NPR still recognizes that nuclear weapons may play a role in deterring a conventional or chemical or biological weapons attack against the US or its allies and partners.

This reflects that the NPR remains justify that nuclear weapons may be possibly used in the future
as part of its nuclear doctrine or deterrence.

Another heartening development was the signing of new Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) by President Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev two days later. The new START is a legally binding instrument focusing on the reduction of Russian and US nuclear strategic forces to achieve a world without nuclear weapons.

It also demonstrates that Washington and Moscow are fulfilling their nuclear disarmament commitments and hopefully would give a boost to the overall US-Russian relationship.

Yet, considering that more than 23,000 nuclear warheads still exist, continued pressure on nuclear-weapon-states is necessary.

While the US and Russia have exercised their leadership in enforcing their nuclear disarmament commitments with the new START treaty, they still must continue their work in reducing non-deployed strategic warheads in their stockpiles, including tactical nuclear weapons in Europe.

Similarly, other nuclear-armed-states should also perform similar attitude and commitment towards the total elimination of their nuclear arsenals.

According to Daryl G. Kimbal from a Washington-based Arms Control Association (ACA), unlike in 2005 NPT Review Conference, calling out non-compliant states by name must be avoided since it will complicate efforts to reach agreement. This time around, it is hoped the US and other Western countries will pursue a country-neutral approach.

After all, everyone knows which states are the states of concern. Aside from that, agenda for nuclear weapons threat reduction and elimination has rejuvenated expectation that the conference will come together around a package of proposals to strengthen the treaty.

However, friction over Iran's controversial nuclear issue and a lack of progress on the establishment of nuclear-

weapon-free zone in the Middle East may threaten to overshadow the broad degree of support for the Treaty and measures to update and strengthen it.

Despite states parties could not agree at the last NPT Preparatory Committee Meeting in 2009 on the draft document concerning substantive recommendations for the Review Conference, there was sufficient consensus on the general framework of such a document being agreed.

The draft document will include an action plan on the status of implementation of the three pillars of the Treaty and other provisions such as withdrawal from the treaty.

Considering the need for improving the effectiveness of the strengthened review process to reach a successful outcome at the 2010 NPT Review Conference, we can expect that all states parties will seriously and faithfully pursue a global effort to reduce and ultimately to eliminate the threat posed by nuclear weapons to our children and future generations.

Respectively, Indonesia, in its national position and as Coordinator of the Group of Non-Aligned states, should make every effort to prevent another failure at the 2010 conference.

All states should also be ready to address the development affecting the operation of the NPT and come out with practical outcome to realize the world free of nuclear weapons.

At minimum, reaffirmation of previous agreements and commitments achieved in 1995 and 2000 conferences should serve as a benchmark of success at the 2010 conference.

Indonesia, as coordinator of the Group of Non-Aligned states, should attempt to prevent another failure at the 2010 conference.

The writer is currently participating at the Senior Foreign Service Course, Foreign Ministry. The views expressed are personal.

***************************************

******************************************************************************************

THE MOSCOW TIMES

EDITORIAL

TWO HEADS ARE BETTER THAN ONE

BY NIKOLAI PETROV

United Russia is starting to prepare for October regional elections. This is especially important because the Kremlin's strategy has changed since last fall when United Russia did not let more than one of the other three officially sanctioned parties make it to regional legislatures. Now it will have to compete against all three simultaneously. As a result, United Russia will have somewhat less access to administrative resources than before.

In addition to the parliamentary elections in the Tuva republic and the Belgorod, Kostroma, Magadan and Novosibirsk regions, elections will also be held for 40,000 seats in municipal governmental bodies. The October elections will be the first serious test run prior to the State Duma elections in 2011.

United Russia is focusing its campaign preparations on renewing staff, regrouping its forces and changing tactics. The process of replacing United Russia party secretaries in the regions continues. A couple of days ago, six more party secretaries were replaced not only in regions where United Russia did poorly, but also where protests have been strong over the past year. This includes the Vladimir, Kaluga, Smolensk, Sverdlovsk and Khabarovsk regions and the Udmurtia republic.

A major staffing change is also expected in the office of regional affairs at the party's headquarters. The emphasis will be on bringing in younger workers from the regions who are motivated to gain a foothold in Moscow.

There is another important political innovation: As of January 2011, to be eligible for appointment into the Federation Council, all senators must have been elected by popular vote in a municipal or a regional election at the time of their appointment.

What this means in practice is that United Russia will continue developing its so-called "locomotive" party tickets — those that are headed by celebrity candidates who have no intention of ever becoming deputies. Their only job is to push through lesser-known party members into their respective legislative assemblies. The votes these "locomotives" earn will be counted toward the formation of the party list for federal elections in 2011. Priority in those elections will be given to lawmakers who receive the highest voter support during these earlier stages.

Perhaps most important of all, Prime Minister Vladimir Putin plans to appoint his own person who will take day-to-day control of United Russia from his office in the White House. Up until now, this was done exclusively by Kremlin first deputy chief of staff Vladislav Surkov, who answers to President Dmitry Medvedev. Putin had always been content leaving these duties to Surkov only because the elections did not concern him all that much, or he assumed that United Russia's results were going according to plan. But as Duma and presidential elections are approaching and after the poor results and allegations of fraud in the October vote, Putin was forced to take more direct control of the party.

This means that there will be two centers of power controlling United Russia — Putin's representative from the White House and Surkov from the Kremlin. In a worst case scenario, this could turn into a management disaster with two competing power centers eating each other alive. In the best case, however, it could improve the party's effectiveness by introducing some competition within the United Russia structure. If successful, United Russia could be transformed from its traditional status as a party of androids into being a real political party — or something to close to it.

Nikolai Petrov is a scholar in residence at the Carnegie Moscow Center.

***************************************

THE MOSCOW TIMES

EDITORIAL

THE KREMLIN'S SHOCK TROOPS

BY MICHAEL BOHM

In the weeks since the New START was signed on April 8, committing Russia and the United States to reduce their strategic nuclear arsenals to 800 delivery vehicles and 1,550 warheads, Russian security analysts have been debating whether Moscow should decrease its nuclear arsenal any further or whether this would weaken the country's national security.

Many liberal-leaning analysts argue that Russia, in unison with the United States, can and should reduce the

number of warheads to 1,000 or lower.

But the consensus among leading conservatives is that if the two sides reduce their nuclear arms to these levels, Russia's nuclear deterrence will be rendered ineffective against the United States. This is a Cold War-era argument that is needlessly stoking public fear — and all with the support of a Kremlin that is supposed to be resetting ties with the United States.

The hawkish voices leading this anti-U.S. campaign include Alexei Pushkov, host of TV Center's "Postscriptum" analytical show, and Mikhail Leontyev, host of "Odnako" on Channel One, both of whom never miss an opportunity to warn Russians of subversive U.S. plans to weaken and take advantage of Russia.

But a group of more radical conservatives have taken the fear of U.S. aggression to new levels of absurdity. "You should not forget that the U.S. nuclear policy was always structured to give the United States the ability to deliver a nuclear first strike," warned retired General Leonid Ivashov, who often appears on leading political talk shows, in an April 10 interview with Sovietskaya Rossia. He said the New START would "destroy Russia."

The rhetoric of Zavtra editor Alexander Prokhanov — another favorite guest of television talk shows — is very similar to the classic anti-U.S. propaganda of the Soviet era: that war and violence are the favored tools of U.S. imperialism, starting with the very beginning of the formation of the United States (massacring Native Americans and importing African slaves) and continuing through the 20th and 21st centuries (dropping atomic bombs on Nagasaki and Hiroshima, the Vietnam War, the invasions of Grenada in 1983 and Panama in 1989, and the conflicts in Yugoslavia, Iraq and Afghanistan). U.S. imperialism, he believes, is a continuous history of war, genocide, exploitation and global domination.

But Kremlin-friendly analyst Sergei Kurginyan, president of the Experimental Creative Center think tank, topped them all when he said on Channel One's "Sudite Sami" talk show April 8 that if Russia keeps decreasing its nuclear weapons, its position could be weakened to such a degree that Washington could "destroy us unilaterally without [Russia's] ability to deliver a second strike." Notably, none of the other seven analysts on the program challenged Kurginyan's statement.

The fear that Russia could be next on the U.S. attack list is, thankfully, not voiced by President Dmitry Medvedev or Prime Minister Vladimir Putin and is limited largely to a group of hawkish journalists, retired generals and think tanks. But these voices are given prime-time slots on government-controlled television and reinforce anti-U.S. sentiments among millions of Russians — particularly those over 40 who remember how the Soviet Union for decades depicted Americans as warmongers.

Giving these hawks a public platform — while at the same time denying the same platform to the most vocal and well-known Kremlin opponents — might appear odd amid the current warming of U.S.-Russian relations after the New START signing and on the eve of this weekend's Victory Day parade on Red Square in which U.S. troops will participate for the first time.

But there is a certain logic in the Kremlin's tacit support of the archconservative camp. At first glance, it might appear that the conservatism contradicts the Kremlin's current liberal bent toward better relations with the United States. But by promoting the hawks' regular appearances on popular political talk shows, Medvedev can maintain a cleaner, more diplomatic reputation and leave the "dirty work" to others.

This is yet another manifestation of Russia's double-headed eagle. In the best of Byzantine traditions, one head (Medvedev and the Foreign Ministry) promotes the reset and warm relations with the United States, while the other head (a group of Kremlin-friendly, hawkish journalists and pundits) constantly warns that the United States is Russia's main adversary. The hawks urge the Kremlin to not repeat the same mistakes of Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, President Boris Yeltsin and his Foreign Minister Andrei Kozyrev, whom they deride as having been weak and naive in their admiration of the West and whose concessions cost the Soviet Union and Russia their sovereignty. The hawks say U.S. missile defense, U.S. support of color revolutions, U.S. funding of nongovernmental organizations in Russia and now the New START are all being used to weaken — and perhaps even attack — Russia.

The Kremlin's PR efforts have paid off generously, according to several opinion polls. In an August survey by the independent Levada Center, the respondents chose the United States as Russia's largest enemy, followed by Chechen separatists, the Baltic countries and Georgia, and NATO. In a more recent March 23 poll by Levada, respondents were given four choices for the question, "What is the biggest threat to Russia's national security?" A total of 55.4 percent picked the deployment of U.S. missile defense systems near Russia, while 12.5 percent chose Iran's nuclear program, 13.2 percent chose North Korea's nuclear weapons, and the rest had difficulty answering.

Both surveys highlight the success of the Kremlin's propaganda campaign against the United States. The second survey, in particular, shows the successful campaign against U.S. missile defense that started in 2007, when then-President Putin said U.S. missile defense plans in Poland could start a new Cold War, and peaked in November 2008, when Medvedev threatened to put Iskander missiles in Kaliningrad.

The hawks are the Kremlin's "special forces" — its public relations OMON — that allow it to keep the coals of anti-U.S. sentiment hot in the country. During times of reset, the hawks need to be heard on television to assure concerned conservative Russians that the government is not letting its guard down and is determined to defend the country's national interests against U.S. subversion. And during times of tension, the Kremlin needs these PR "shock troops" even more.

The history of U.S.-Russian relations over the past century shows that periods of detente or resets don't last long, and they are inevitably replaced by much longer periods of tension and confrontational rhetoric. Unfortunately, the Kremlin more often than not believes that the political benefit from having bad relations outweighs the economic and other benefits from having better relations.For reasons very specific to Russia, the country's political dinosaurs still survive and prosper in certain circles in journalism, the military and think tanks. While it is often intriguing to hear their outlandish statements on television — as if the clock has been turned back to the 1950s — it is disturbing to know that they are fanning the flames of irrational anti-U.S. feelings among millions of Russians.

Dinosaurs are fascinating creatures, but it is far better to study them in encyclopedias or museums than to tackle them in the flesh. The sooner the Kremlin declares these Cold War dinosaurs extinct, the better.

***************************************

******************************************************************************************

THE KOREA HERALD

EDITORIAL

ID CHECKS

While Arizona's proposed immigration legislation is drawing fire from immigrant communities across the United States, ugly scenes have long been taking place in Seoul streets and elsewhere between law enforcement officers and illegal immigrants. At Garibong-dong and Jongno 3-ga, one can routinely witness heated conversations between uniformed and plainclothed police and people suspected of being non-citizens who have overstayed their visas.

The new state law of Arizona will require foreign nationals to carry relevant documents at all times. Opponents grumble that people may become the targets of random interrogations on the street because of their appearance. Korea's Resident Registration Law does not require people to carry their resident registration cards at all times but the statute authorizes law enforcement officers to demand people show their state-issued ID when it is "necessary for the performance of their duties including criminal investigation."

Appearance is the key element in the police's selection of "suspects" from among the many people milling in the streets and packing subway stations. In case of women, hairstyles, clothes and accessories offer clues to their being foreigners. Officers can discern immigrants from Northeast China by their accent when they speak Korean, which is strongly influenced by the North Korean dialect.

Not many complaints have been raised. It has been taken for granted for the police to search for, since the war, spy suspects, draft dodgers, fleeing demonstrators and the ambiguous category of "crime-prone people." But in the globalizing Korean society which has about 1 million foreign residents, about half of whom are migrant workers, either legal or illegal, our police and immigration officers need to take a more sophisticated and decent approach to their duties on the street.

Problems will unavoidably arise when officers primarily rely on their sixth sense and apply their own racial criteria in deciding who to check and who not to from among the crowd. Particular caution should be taken not to employ violence under any circumstances. The law asks officers to be kind and courteous in checking ID.

***************************************

THE KOREA HERALD

EDITORIAL

SEOUL-BEIJING TIES

South Korea and China established diplomatic ties in 1992, 39 years after the end of the three-year Korean War in which China fought on the side of North Korea. The bilateral ties grew rapidly to a "comprehensive partnership" in the 21st century and since 2008 Seoul and Beijing have regarded each other as a "strategic partner."

The strategic partnership is primarily applied to the ever-expanding trade relations between the two countries but cooperative ties have elevated even to include military exchanges. China's role as the host of the six-party talks for the denuclearization of North Korea has drawn the two countries closer on the diplomatic front with frequent contacts between top-level officials. Unfortunately however, that strategic partnership exposed its practical limit in Beijing's handling of top-level diplomacy with South and North Korea.

A week ago, President Lee Myung-bak had a half-hour conversation with Chinese President Hu Jintao on the sidelines of the opening of the Shanghai World Exposition. Hu touched on the issue of the sinking of the South Korean warship Cheonan, praising Seoul's scientific and objective investigation of the cause of the naval disaster. But he failed to mention that Kim Jong-il, the primary suspect in the heinous sneak attack -- one of the most heinous since the armistice -- was scheduled to visit China three days later.

Since a special train carrying Kim Jong-il entered China on Monday, Chinese leaders provided him with the highest honor, revealing the great importance they attach to the bilateral relations with the North despite Pyongyang's domestic problems and its unbending pursuit for nuclear armament. Beijing's Foreign Ministry even refused to confirm his visit to the country itself until hours after Kim was received by Hu in a state banquet Wednesday evening.

We can understand Chinese leaders' pragmatism in trying to bring North Korea back to the conference table of the six-party talks with an offer of generous economic aid to the North during Kim's stay in the country. But the recent turn of events indicated that China might be aiming at saving just the "form" of the multilateral denuclearization process it started seven years ago rather than effectively pressuring North Korea into nonproliferation through international cooperation.

Even if North Korea announces its return to the six-way talks after a year of boycotting them, there is no guarantee of rapid progress, given the frustrating experiences following the major agreements in 2005 and 2007. At best, it could provide favorable conditions for direct negotiation between the North and the U.S., yet the naval incident in the West Sea could pose an obstacle for the time being.

China's approach to South Korea since the 1990s at the expense of its "blood ties" with North Korea was made from its recognition of Seoul's value in its economic expansion. South Korea reciprocated with its emphasis on "northern diplomacy" especially with the past liberal governments slighting the traditional ties with the U.S. under the slogan of a "balancing role" between the continental and Pacific forces. Entering the second decade of the 21st century, after the Western economy exposed its weakness through the latest global recession, China must have found great usefulness in keeping North Korea at its side. The Beijing leaders are closing their eyes to the economic policy failures, repression of citizens, the ridiculous third-generation dynastic power transfer scheme and even the dangerous nuclear program in North Korea for the sole objective of keeping a vassal state in its periphery. They are abandoning their obligations as a leading world power and it looks like South Korea is being pushed aside as its neighbor shifts course.

***************************************

THE KOREA HERALD

EDITORIAL

TERRORISM SHOULDN'T CHANGE AMERICA'S VALUES

Are shoe bombers and car bombers facts of American life now? Sadly, they probably are, just as school shootings, gang violence and the occasional rampage by a knife-wielding mental patient at Target are lamentable features of contemporary society. Citizen vigilance and the incompetence of would-be bombers have spared American lives on a couple of occasions now, most recently in Times Square. Nimble police work and improved coordination among law enforcement agencies have saved untold more. Those successes are a reminder of what works in combating violence, whether it is generated on the streets of Los Angeles or in the caves of Afghanistan. They are the appropriate responses of a society in which civil liberties are a source of strength, not weakness, and in which effective law enforcement coexists with respect for privacy and personal freedom.

Britain lived with Irish Republican Army attacks for decades while fighting an urban war over Northern Ireland, just as Israel has faced decades of bloodletting by militants over its occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem. Both countries have struggled to balance policing and democracy. The 9/11 attacks preceded the United States' war in Afghanistan, and it is debatable whether ending U.S. military operations in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan would eliminate the threat of terrorism from Islamic fundamentalists who see the West as the enemy. But certainly these attempts will continue while we are engaged in this kind of prolonged war.

The arrest of a suspect in the Times Square attempt is a testament to excellent police work. Faisal Shahzad was captured at New York's Kennedy Airport after he had boarded a flight to Dubai. Nonetheless, some commentators seized on the attempted car bombing as further proof of an Obama administration failure to advance in a global war on terrorism; Republican Rep. Peter King of New York and Sen. John McCain of Arizona argued against reading Shahzad his Miranda rights, even though he is a naturalized U.S. citizen detained in the United States. Critics should take a deep breath. Even terrorism does not justify this and other aggressive tactics that fall outside the law, such as torture and warrantless wiretapping. Fortunately, Shahzad was read his rights after being questioned for an undetermined period under a public safety exception.

A suicide bomb or car bomb is intended to take lives, of course, but its greater purpose is to instill an incapacitating fear in the survivors and a repressive overreaction on the part of society that somehow serves as warped justification for the original attack. If that happens, a Nigerian on a Christmas Day flight to Detroit, or a Pakistani-American who allegedly bought the SUV that was left in Times Square can succeed even when his bombs fail.

The Los Angeles Times, May 5

***************************************

THE KOREA HERALD

EDITORIAL

HOT MONEY FINDS FAMILIAR HOME FOR EURO REFUGEES

BY WILLIAM PESEK

(Bloomberg News)

It feels a lot like 1996.

It was then, a year before the region plunged into chaos, when investors were rushing to Asia with nary a concern about hot money overwhelming developing economies. It ended in tears for governments, households and financiers alike.

The good news is that Asia is standing its ground amid the global crisis. The bad news is that Asia is home to the next great asset bubble as tidal waves of capital rush its way. Expect lots of interest-rate volatility as central banks search for a balance between healthy growth and too much. And don't be surprised if capital controls are a big part of the process.

Yes, that bane of investors' existence is coming at least moderately into vogue. That was clear in Tashkent, Uzbekistan, this week as policy makers at the International Monetary Fund and Asian Development Bank appeared less hostile to the idea of limiting the movement of money.

As Asia goes full circle from the late 1990s when capital controls were the financial equivalent of a mortal sin, investors are left with no choice but to adapt. That may not be as big a problem as many think. Anything that provides a shock absorber to keep Asia from overheating will be welcome.

"I, as an investor, loathe capital controls in all forms, but we will certainly see more of them," Robert Parker, London-based senior adviser at Credit Suisse Group, told me in Tashkent, where the ADB held its annual meeting.

When I asked Naoyuki Shinohara, deputy managing director of the IMF, he admitted the institution is now more open to such barriers on capital. The key, of course, is not to go too far by inhibiting growth and scaring off foreign investment that's needed to support it.

It's a breathtaking sea change when you consider how the IMF was militantly against controls 12 years ago. Back then, Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad was an international pariah for implementing them. In late 2006, investors chastised Thailand for slapping controls on markets.

The shift speaks to Asia's predicament over the next couple of years.

Asia has weathered the financial crisis, as just about anyone visiting Tashkent agreed. China and India beat the odds and continue to grow strongly. South Korea confounded the skeptics anew, as did Indonesia. Japan's persistent malaise aside, Asia is hot and getting hotter. The trouble is, all this good press means Asia may have too much of a good thing on its hands.

As the U.S. grapples with unemployment, the euro area is trying to avoid disintegration. Greece's woes are reverberating through markets. There's little confidence in Asia that a recent $146 billion bailout will be the last in Europe. The buzz in Asia is who's next?

Even if concerns about contagion from Europe are overdone, Asia must brace for the opposite: fast-accelerating capital flows from West to East. With official interest rates in the euro area, U.K., U.S. and Japan close to zero, world markets are awash in liquidity searching for higher yields.

For many, that means Asia. Emerging markets need to take "urgent action" on the surge of liquidity and capital flowing into their economies because they could spur inflation and trigger another crisis, according to a report last week by Standard Chartered Plc.

One area for concern is debt markets. While vastly improved since the 1990s, Asia still hasn't built the deep, liquid bond arenas needed to stabilize growth. It means that lots of the capital flowing Asia's way will end up in stocks and property.

In a perfect world, investors would move into bonds as asset prices get frothy. The lack of dynamic secondary debt markets means many may just leave Asia, as opposed to diversifying into the region's fixed-income investments. It makes Asia more volatile than it should be in 2010.

Capital controls could help ameliorate the problem. One way to go is to implement "targeted controls," says Masahiro Kawai, head of the Tokyo-based Asian Development Bank Institute. He points to Brazil as an example.

In 2009, Brazil implemented a tax on foreign purchases of stocks and fixed-income investment in a bid to stem the currency's advance. Markets took the step much better than Thailand's 2006 moves, which sent stocks plunging.

A point lost on few is that China and India, which have more conservative regulations than the West, weathered the crisis. With the Group of 20 nations dragging their feet on crafting a safer international financial system, governments will feel pressed to do what they can to tame markets.

Unlike in 1996, Asia knows a tsunami of cash is coming its way and that it comes with risks. Carefully employed, capital controls could siphon some of the heat from Asia's latest hot-money challenge.

Free-market champions are unlikely to concede that any curbs on money flows are appropriate. Smart people can, and will, debate this issue. It's inevitable, though, and the sooner markets learn to live with it, the better.

William Pesek is a Bloomberg News columnist. The opinions expressed are his own. -- Ed.

***************************************

THE KOREA HERALD

EDITORIAL

UNWED BIRTH RATE SIGNALS THE COLLAPSE OF MARRIAGE

BY JENNIFER A. MARSHALL

It's hard to imagine the unemployment rate rising steeply for decades without public outcry. But that's exactly what's happened in the case of another significant indicator: the unwed birth rate.

Hardly anyone noticed this month when new data showed 40 percent of all births are to unmarried mothers. That's way up from 7 percent in the mid-1960s, when a young White House appointee named Daniel Patrick Moynihan tried to sound the alarm.

Moynihan, then an assistant Labor secretary in the Johnson administration, issued a report in 1965 warning that disintegration of the black family in America threatened Johnson's War on Poverty.

"(D)ollars of income, standards of living, and years of education deceive. ... The fundamental problem is that of family structure. (The black) family in the urban ghettos is crumbling. So long as this situation persists, the cycle of poverty and disadvantage will continue to repeat itself."

Regrettably, history proved Moynihan -- the future Democratic senator from New York -- to be correct. When the Moynihan Report was released, one out of four black children was born to an unwed mother. Now, a staggering three out of four black children are born outside marriage.

That fact will cast a long shadow down the course of a child's life. As one prominent black author wrote in 2006:

"(C)hildren living with single mothers are five times more likely to be poor than children in two-parent households. Children in single-parent homes are also more likely to drop out of school and become teen parents, even when income is factored out. And the evidence suggests that on average, children who live with their biological mother and father do better than those who live in stepfamilies or with cohabiting partners."

About two-thirds of poor children live in single-parent homes. Government spends $300 billion annually to assist low-income single parents.

But if poor single mothers married the fathers of their children, nearly two-thirds could escape poverty immediately. About half of unwed mothers are cohabiting with the father at the time of birth, and three out of four are in a romantic relationship with the father. Not only are most of these men employed when the child is born, research shows that more than half earn enough to be the breadwinner and keep a family out of poverty.

Yet discussions of poverty rarely address the collapse of marriage. Two generations of children have paid the price for adults ignoring Moynihan's prophecy.

Avoiding the central problem, many focused on births to teen girls. Indeed, release of the alarming new data that 40 percent of all children and 72 percent of black children are born outside marriage produced headlines concentrating on teen births.

However, only about one in seven out-of-wedlock births is to a girl younger than 18. The typical mother of a child born outside marriage is in her early 20s and without much income or education. In other words, she's not Murphy Brown.

Some have avoided confronting the collapse of marriage for fear of stigmatizing fatherless children. After all, these kids are the innocent victims of the marital chaos.

But they're also already painfully aware of the absence of fathers, points out Dr. Wade Horn, who oversaw programs for children and families at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Children have a natural "father hunger," Horn says. When adults pretend nothing's wrong when Daddy is gone, it tells children their longing is the problem, compounding their hurt and confusion.

To ignore the collapse of marriage is heartless. For the sake of children, especially, we should muster all our ingenuity and resources to restore a culture of marriage in America.

President Barack Obama clearly recognizes the significance of marriage for the welfare of children. The quote above is from his 2006 book "The Audacity of Hope."

In the same passage, Obama concludes: "In light of these facts, policies that strengthen marriage for those who choose it and that discourage unintended births outside of marriage are sensible goals to pursue."

But rather than backing such policies, the president's 2011 budget would eliminate the one program dedicated to encouraging healthy marriage. In its place would be a program promoting a notion of "fatherhood" that oesn't involve the father being married or in the home.

Sadly, President Obama's action is yet another way to avoid addressing the collapse of marriage and its consequences.

The facts speak for themselves. It's time more policy-makers noticed what the facts are saying.

Jennifer A. Marshall is director of the DeVos Center for Religion and Civil Society at The Heritage Foundation and author of "Now and Not Yet: Making Sense of Single Life in the Twenty-First Century." -- Ed.

(McClatchy-Tribune Information Services)

***************************************

THE KOREA HERALD

EDITORIAL

REFORMS REQUIRED TO SAVE THE EURO

JOSEPH E. STIGLITZ

NEW YORK -- The Greek financial crisis has put the very survival of the euro at stake. At the euro's creation, many worried about its long-run viability. When everything went well, these worries were forgotten. But the question of how adjustments would be made if part of the eurozone were hit by a strong adverse shock lingered. Fixing the exchange rate and delegating monetary policy to the European Central Bank eliminated two primary means by which national governments stimulate their economies to avoid recession. What could replace them?

The Nobel laureate Robert Mundell laid out the conditions under which a single currency could work. Europe didn't meet those conditions at the time; it still doesn't. The removal of legal barriers to the movement of workers created a single labor market, but linguistic and cultural differences make American-style labor mobility unachievable.

Moreover, Europe has no way of helping those countries facing severe problems. Consider Spain, which has an unemployment rate of 20 percent –- and more than 40 percent among young people. It had a fiscal surplus before the crisis; after the crisis, its deficit increased to more than 11 percent of GDP. But, under European Union rules, Spain must now cut its spending, which will likely exacerbate unemployment. As its economy slows, the improvement in its fiscal position may be minimal.

Some hoped that the Greek tragedy would convince policymakers that the euro cannot succeed without greater cooperation (including fiscal assistance). But Germany (and its Constitutional Court), partly following popular opinion, has opposed giving Greece the help that it needs.

To many, both in and outside of Greece, this stance was peculiar: billions had been spent saving big banks, but evidently saving a country of eleven million people was taboo. It was not even clear that the help Greece needed should be labeled a bailout: while the funds given to financial institutions like AIG were unlikely to be recouped, a loan to Greece at a reasonable interest rate would likely be repaid.

A series of half-offers and vague promises, intended to calm the market, failed. Just as the United States had cobbled together assistance for Mexico 15 years ago by combining help from the International Monetary Fund and the G7, so, too, the EU put together an assistance program with the IMF. The question was, what conditions would be imposed on Greece? How big would be the adverse impact?

For the EU's smaller countries, the lesson is clear: if they do not reduce their budget deficits, there is a high risk of a speculative attack, with little hope for adequate assistance from their neighbors, at least not without painful and counterproductive pro-cyclical budgetary restraints. As European countries take these measures, their economies are likely to weaken -- with unhappy consequences for the global recovery.

It may be useful to see the euro's problems from a global perspective. The U.S. has complained about China's current-account (trade) surpluses; but, as a percentage of GDP, Germany's surplus is even greater. Assume that the euro was set so that trade in the eurozone as a whole was roughly in balance. In that case, Germany's surplus means that the rest of Europe is in deficit. And the fact that these countries are importing more than they are exporting contributes to their weak economies.

The U.S. has been complaining about China's refusal to allow its exchange rate to appreciate relative to the dollar. But the euro system means that Germany's exchange rate cannot increase relative to other eurozone members. If the exchange rate did increase, Germany would find it more difficult to export and its economic model, based on strong exports, would face a challenge. At the same time, the rest of Europe would export more, GDP would increase and unemployment would decrease.

Germany (like China) views its high savings and export prowess as virtues, not vices. But John Maynard Keynes pointed out that surpluses lead to weak global aggregate demand -- countries running surpluses exert a "negative externality" on their trading partners. Indeed, Keynes believed that it was surplus countries, far more than deficit countries, that posed a threat to global prosperity; he went so far as to recommend a tax on surplus countries.

The social and economic consequences of the current arrangements should be unacceptable. Those countries whose deficits have soared as a result of the global recession should not be forced into a death spiral -- as Argentina was a decade ago.

One proposed solution is for these countries to engineer the equivalent of a devaluation -- a uniform decrease in wages. This, I believe, is unachievable and its distributive consequences are unacceptable. The social tensions would be enormous. It is a fantasy.

There is a second solution: the exit of Germany from the eurozone or the division of the eurozone into two sub-regions. The euro was an interesting experiment, but, like the almost-forgotten exchange-rate mechanism that preceded it and fell apart when speculators attacked the British pound in 1992, it lacks the institutional support required to make it work.

There is a third solution, which Europe may come to realize is the most promising for all: implement the institutional reforms, including the necessary fiscal framework, that should have been made when the euro was launched.

It is not too late for Europe to implement these reforms and thus live up to the ideals, based on solidarity, that underlay the euro's creation. But if Europe cannot do so, then perhaps it is better to admit failure and move on than to extract a high price in unemployment and human suffering in the name of a flawed economic model.

Joseph E. Stiglitz is a professor at Columbia University and a Nobel laureate in economics. -- Ed.

(Project Syndicate)

***************************************

THE KOREA HERALD

EDITORIAL

RELEARNING LESSONS FROM U.S. OIL SPILL

Each news update from the BP oil blowout in the Gulf of Mexico tightens a hard knot in my stomach. Alaskans who lived through the Exxon Valdez oil spill feel dark memories resurfacing. We talk about our sadness for the people in the way, people who don't know what's about to hit them.

"They still seem to think they'll be able to contain this and stop it, and they just can't," said Rick Steiner, a former University of Alaska fisheries extension agent whose life was irrevocably upset by the Exxon Valdez, which spilled at least 11 million gallons of oil in Prince William Sound 21 years ago.

"Not much oil is going to be recovered; they're not going to save much wildlife; they're not going to be able to restore damaged ecosystems."

I remember experts saying the same things when I was a much younger man and Exxon's oil still smelled fresh on the water. But at 26 I couldn't really comprehend the predictions that oil would remain in sheltered shores, poisoning marine ecosystems, for at least 20 years. Now I understand. Steiner and others have shown it to me.

With middle age, I can see the generational pattern of how we forget and then must relearn these things.

In 1969, an oil rig blew off Santa Barbara, and another Alaskan, Interior Secretary Wally Hickel, shut down offshore oil drilling throughout the nation. The Santa Barbara disaster powered the growing environmental movement. The first Earth Day happened a year later, and oil exploration off much of the U.S. coast has been blocked ever since.

Twenty years later, Congress was on the verge of allowing drilling in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and in the salmon-rich waters of Bristol Bay when the Exxon Valdez hit the rocks. Again, America discovered the hazards of crude oil on water. New environmental laws were passed, and plans were shelved for drilling in the wildlife refuge and the bay.

Another 21 years passed. President Obama announced he would end the offshore moratorium. Three weeks later, two days before the 40th anniversary of Earth Day, an explosion and fire on BP's Deepwater Horizon rig presumably killed 11 workers and started this spill.

Shell still plans to drill this summer, with administration support, on leases 50 to 150 miles off Alaska's Arctic Coast, in the Chukchi Sea -- waters where isolation, cold and moving sea ice would make a blowout infinitely more difficult to handle than in the Gulf of Mexico.

Each generation has to learn a new lesson about our limitations; about humility before nature. The story of the Exxon Valdez is complex, but its moral is painfully simple. Technology fails because humans fail. Spills are inevitable. And once they happen, good intentions are useless. We can't fix nature.

Blowout preventers usually work. Tankers usually steer clear of well-charted rocks. Oil can be burned on the water; it can be corralled and scooped up; it can be dispersed by chemicals. Of the oil that unavoidably blows ashore, some lands on exposed, biologically unproductive beaches where it is easy to pick up.

But in a big oil spill, some oil will get away -- usually the vast majority will. Some will find its way into quiet estuaries, protected from waves, the nurseries of fish, the deep muddy beds of clams, the places where long-legged birds pluck their dinner. Either this oil will release poison for years, or people will try to remove it, in the process destroying the life of the estuary and perhaps destroying much of those shores' life-making capacity in the process.

What happens next in the Gulf of Mexico? Symbolic animal rescues. Millions and perhaps billions spent sopping up oil, digging up marshes, sterilizing formerly fecund shores. Investigations, accusations, blame; and statements that no one is to blame, or that we're all to blame. Litigation that outlasts the victims. And, for the affected human communities, loss of livelihood, loss of faith in our institutions, loss of beautiful places that sustain the soul.

And then, more forgetting. Till next time.

Charles Wohlforth is the author of the forthcoming book "The Fate of Nature: Rediscovering Our Ability to Rescue the Earth." -- Ed.

(McClatchy-Tribune Information Services)

By Charles Wohlforth

***************************************

THE KOREA HERALD

EDITORIAL

WAYS TO PREVENT ECHOES OF GREEK TRAGEDY

Greece's financial crisis recalls the folly of American home buyers who took out subprime loans to buy houses they couldn't afford, only to be stuck with a crushing debt when the real estate market collapsed. Thanks to a $146 billion bailout from other European countries and the International Monetary Fund, Greece won't be defaulting -- at least not right away. But the aid package may just be the first in a series to bring the Eurozone back to financial health. And although the details differ, the outlines of Greece's woes are troublingly familiar.

Greece dug itself into a deep hole over the past decade, abetted by low interest rates and willing lenders. The government provided jobs and generous pensions to about one-quarter of the workforce, sacrificing productivity for social stability. After a recession sent the country's deficit soaring, lenders started to balk at the government's demand for credit, pushing Greece toward default. Over the weekend, European finance ministers reluctantly joined the IMF in making $146 billion in loans available for three years -- far more than previously promised. Yet investors remained nervous about the rescue failing and the crisis spreading to other debt-laden countries.

The clearest winners, at least in the short term, are the banks in Greece, Germany, France and elsewhere in Europe, whose outstanding loans to the Greek government will be protected from default. The losers, meanwhile, are government workers and consumers in Greece, who will bear the brunt of the benefit cuts and tax increases designed to slash the country's deficit. They're not going along quietly; government workers have staged a series of debilitating protests, with a general strike scheduled for Wednesday.

The U.S. budget deficit and debt aren't up to Athenian levels. But like Greece, the U.S. government has committed to providing benefits that it cannot afford over the long term. Policymakers have seen the problems in Social Security and Medicare coming for years, but Congress has done little about them. If anything, lawmakers made the task more difficult with this year's health care reform law, which trimmed Medicare spending but dedicated the savings to a new health care insurance program for the working class.

Similarly, state and local governments in California face a growing threat from public employee pension programs that have multibillion-dollar shortfalls. The state also is saddled with a tax system that, although not subject to the rampant evasion that plagues Greece, is still a poor fit for the California's economy. Sacramento and Washington aren't cutting spending while the economy is still underperforming, but that shouldn't stop policymakers from working now to head off the kind of structural problems that pushed Greece to the brink.

The Los Angeles Times, May 5　

***************************************

******************************************************************************************

CHINA DAILY

EDITORIAL

RECOVERY HOPES FADING

Optimism over a stronger and broader than expected global recovery is evaporating as the euro-zone debt crisis deepens.

Chinese policymakers should prepare for a possible double-dip of the world economy while pressing ahead with domestic efforts to squeeze out asset bubbles and prevent economic overheating.

Less than a month after it raised the forecast for global growth to 4.2 percent this year compared with a January forecast of 3.9 percent, the International Monetary Fund now has to join euro-zone countries in the unprecedented 110-billion-euro ($147 billion) three-year Greek bailout. It is still unclear if that will be enough to halt a widening European debt crisis. And if investor fears about the future of euro-zone economies cannot be contained quickly, a new phase of the worst global crisis in decades could be right around the corner.

This darkening global growth prospect makes it more difficult for China to continue in its efforts to cool the sizzling property market and prevent economic overheating.

The Chinese economy expanded by 11.9 percent year-on-year in the first quarter, the fastest growth in nearly three years while property prices in 70 Chinese cities jumped a record 11.7 percent in March.

As a result, the Chinese government recently launched the most draconian campaign yet to cool the property fever and raise the deposit reserve requirement ratio to tighten credit supply.

It takes time for these tightening measures to bear fruit. But the sudden change in the global growth prospects has added to the risk that these policies may be too tight for a solid recovery at home.

Chinese policymakers should certainly pay close attention to the possible impact of a slowed global recovery on the domestic economy. And if a new phase in the global crisis does begin, Chinese policymakers should learn to stanch bank lending and pierce the property bubble sooner than later.

***************************************

CHINA DAILY

EDITORIAL

CUT RED-TAPE IN EDUCATION

Apart from his legendary contributions in the nuclear arena, the well-known scientist Qian Xuesen posed a challenging question: "Why do our schools always fail to produce outstanding talent?"

Although everyone may have an opinion or two regarding the issue, the common consensus revolves around bureaucratization of education. No matter how anxious we are to see "world-class" colleges mushroom here, it would be just wishful thinking so long as our institutions of higher learning are run like miniature bureaucracies by career bureaucrats.

So, when the authorities recently talked about "de-bureaucratization" of education, it came as a ray of hope, although it was immediately dampened by skeptical college managers. Stripping colleges of their administrative rankings may hinder them further since Chinese society largely revolves around administration by the bureaucrats, they contended - a point not entirely unjustified.

Yet, the process is destined to be tricky, and difficult.

Even Premier Wen Jiabao has sounded a note of caution - colleges should be de-bureaucratized in a "step-by-step" manner, he said while commenting on higher education reform during his Youth Day (May 4) visit to Peking University.

Since educators themselves remain ambivalent or reluctant, it is anybody's guess as to how long the process will take. The trouble is, if the schools are managed like government affiliates, the idea of encouraging colleges to be professionally run, too, would be unrealistic.

Not that there are no qualified educators in the bureaucratic set-up. But, the way college caretakers are being appointed, it seems people are always put in wrong places.

Administrative authority usually ranks above professional competence in performance evaluation. Under such circumstances, the emphasis seems to be more on being politically correct than thinking independently.

***************************************

CHINA DAILY

EDITORIAL

NOT THE RIGHT APPROACH

In their pursuit of economic growth, some local governments may have just gone too far, as the recent row over the rights to use the name of a notorious fictional character for promoting the local economy has shown.

The fictional character is none other than Ximen Qing, the protagonist in the controversial novel, The Golden Lotus. In the novel, Ximen is portrayed as leading a life of debauchery with seven concubines, oppressing the common man and taking part in dirty deals with corrupt local officials. It is ludicrous that the three local governments should vie for being the hometown of Ximen, as he is not even a historical figure. More ridiculous, Ximen has long been considered an epitome of debauchery and hooliganism in Chinese culture.

One reason may be that the local governments believe places carrying his name will likely attract more visitors. The local governments, by their action, are sending a message that upholding basic principles is secondary to promoting the economy.

If they can do that by giving publicity to a fictional womanizer and scoundrel, and taking pride in being the hometown of such a guy, they will, we believe, stop at nothing to achieve growth.

Why is local economic growth so important? It will decide whether local leaders get promoted or have enough money from the local treasury to squander on pet projects.

There is no moral consideration in their motivations to promote the local economy. So it is only natural that they do not feel ashamed in so doing. We, however, don't believe they will get anywhere by this gesture.

***************************************

CHINA DAILY

EDITORIAL

TAX RESOURCES PROPERLY

A hint to this nation's policymakers: If they are looking for guidelines to the long-awaited tax reform, take a good look at Australia's latest plan to increase worker pension funds with a new tax on resource projects.

This nation is badly in need of reforming the resource tax to conserve resources and protect the environment. Reform could also help narrow the disparity in incomes, a key problem that China must overcome to develop sustainably.

Though the government's priority is to evolve the resource-intensive model of economic growth, the country is not doing enough to save its resources, particularly because of the need to fight the worst global recession in decades.

This year marks the end of the country's 11th Five-Year plan and it is vital that the authorities reform how China prices and taxes its resources to ensure that resources are used wisely and that the environment is protected in the next five-year period. The reform should both expand the resource tax base to include materials that have not been taxed before and switch to a tariff that charges per unit instead of a tax based on monetary value. The reform will frustrate mining companies by increasing their costs and vex policymakers by adding to inflationary pressures.

But the country's growing appetite for resources has made it more urgent than ever to realign output with its resource supply constraint through a new and more market-based resource pricing and tax system.

One more incentive to reform the resource tax is that the current pricing and tax system unfairly pads the wallets of mining companies and exacerbates the country's widening income gap.

Australia's case indicates that policymakers could kill two birds with one stone if the resource tax is properly collected and used. China needs such a resource tax, too.

***************************************

CHINA DAILY

EDITORIAL

FACTUAL FACTORS IN WEIRD WEATHER

BY JOHN E. COULTER (CHINA DAILY)

Will the world end in 2012? asks a young blogger. No, but rumors about the end of the world in 2012 will, comes a sharp reply. The Newsweek's May 2, 2009, issue carried an article that went to the root of the source of the rumor: the Mayan calendar (actually calendars called "long count") which according to the Gregorian calendar ends in 2012.

The end-of the world hype was created ostensibly to promote the Hollywood science fiction film, 2012, a saga of oceans swallowing up mountains. Search engine Baidu now has a huge number of sensational blog websites for "End of the World in 2012" and "Climate Change Rumors" (in Chinese) with mainly young people blogging a mix of naive and witty responses. Rumors are dangerous and should be met with science. The basic fact about climate change is that climate does change. Abnormal weather certainly affects communities and makes news. The World Metrological Organization says it takes at least 25 years before a place is visited by abnormal weather again. Some recent blizzards, droughts, extreme temperatures, torrential rain and super cyclones across the world and in China are indeed abnormal.

With the world economy squeezing the global environment on which it so desperately depends, human beings have good cause to ask themselves: Are we exacerbating global warming? The answer is "partly yes". Last year, we used 20 billion tons of fossil fuel, emitting 29 billion tons of carbon dioxide into the air. This tonnage is rising faster each year. Mixed with other pollutant gases and with ash particles, it acts like a cover for greenhouse.

Apart from the basic greenhouse effect, the pollutant emissions probably cause other changes, too. The sunlight that reaches oceans, seas, lakes and other water bodies and evaporates water now has to pass through a filter of pollutant gases. The result: Not enough water evaporates to form into clouds leading to drought in many places.

The air on the day side of the globe heats up and expands, while on night side it cools down and shrinks. The effect is like a dual chamber heart pump. When we pollute the fluid circulation to the extent we have, it results in extreme swings of temperature and precipitation that can be likened to giving the natural cycle wild palpitations, maybe up to a tipping point.

***************************************

CHINA DAILY

EDITORIAL

CHINA STILL A DEVELOPING NATION

BY FENG ZHAOKUI (CHINA DAILY)

China's gross domestic product (GDP) touched $4,909 billion last year, according to the country's National Bureau of Statistics. Yet, it is still $160 billion less than Japan's $5,073 billion, as indicated by data from Tokyo.

Given its marvelous economic growth in the past few years, the $160 billion gap will soon be plugged by the world's third largest economy. China is expected to overtake Japan as the world's second largest economy this year if it manages to carry forward its past momentum.

Since the start of the 21st century, China's economic might has successively surpassed that of several developed nations such as Canada, Italy, France, Britain and Germany. The country's growing economic clout on the world stage, along with the sterling economic growth shown by some of its big cities such as Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou, and other eastern coastal regions, has raised a question: Is China a developing or developed nation?

Any trivial matter multiplied by 1.3 billion will turn into a big problem, and any astronomical figure divided by 1.3 billion will be reduced to a tiny number, as Premier Wen Jiabao put it during a press conference at the conclusion of this year's National People's Congress session.

As a country with a population of 1.37 billion, there are few reasons to take pride in the fact that our country's economic bulk has surpassed those countries with populations or land areas much smaller than ours.

Canada has only 2.5 percent of China's population. The proportion is 4.4 percent, 4.6 percent, 4.6 percent, 6.2 percent and 9.5 percent respectively for Italy, France, Britain, Germany and Japan.

China's huge economic aggregate has not changed the fact that its per capita GDP still ranks very low globally. In 2008, the country's per capita GDP was $3,263, which ranked it 98th in the world.

That figure was a little more than one-third of the world's average the same year, which was $9,054. The number was also much less than some other developing countries, such as Brazil and Mexico.

In 1990, the United Nations Development Program conceived the Human Development Index (HDI) as a way to measure the economic and social development of member states.

As a comparative measurement of life expectancy, literacy, education and standards of living for countries worldwide, the HDI is more preferentially used to distinguish whether the country is a developed, a developing or an under-developed country, and it measures the impact of a country's economic policies on its citizens' quality of life.

According to the 2007 HDI, 182 listed countries were divided into four categories in their human development: the very high, high, medium and low level. Countries falling in the first category, which stands above 0.9, are referred to as developed countries, and the last three are all grouped in the developing countries' list.

Last year's HDI indicates that China was 0.772, ranking 92nd among all the 182 nations, which also put the country at a medium level among developing nations.

For the US and Japan, the world's largest and second largest economies, the index was 0.956 and 0.960, ranking them 13th and 10th in the world, respectively, in terms of human development.

The reason why developed countries are also branded as "industrialized developed ones" is that they completed their stages of industrialization much earlier. Despite its fast economic development in the past decades, China is still on the road to industrialization and its economic quality has yet to improve.

The country heavily depends on imports for high-performance material, core parts and major heavy equipment purchases.

Compared with developed countries, China is still at a disadvantage in technological innovations and the "Made-in-China" brand is at the low end of the world's industrial chain given that skilled labor is in short supply.

Among China's manufacturing industry, foreign-funded ventures take up a large portion, and the labor-intensive and middle and low-end high-tech products exported by these ventures have contributed much to its surging export.

Statistics show that exports by China-based foreign manufacturers last year were at $6,722 billion, 56 percent of the country's total and 0.7 percentage points higher than the previous year.

China's ongoing industrialization has been achieved to a large extent by excessive consumption of limited natural resources and environmental degeneration.

According to the International Energy Agency, the country consumed 0.82 ton of standard oil for every $1,000 increase in GDP value in 2007, in contrast to the world average of 0.30 ton of standard oil for the same metric. In the US and Japan, the figure was 0.20 ton and 0.10 ton respectively.

The extensive economic growth and industrialization have pushed China's fast-growing economy to the verge of resource exhaustion and environmental degradation.

Whether or not China can transform its high-energy and high-pollutant industrialization to a resources-conservative and environment-friendly model is the key to whether it can succeed in pushing forward the process.

The dazzling opening ceremony of the Shanghai Expo, as well as the grand and expensively decorated China pavilion, has not changed the basic fact that many of the country's inland regions are still economically underdeveloped.

A harmonious, sustainable ecological environment has increasingly become an important metric of a country's development level.

It is in this regard that China has to travel a long distance before catching up with developed nations.

The author is a researcher at the Institute of Japanese Studies under the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.

***************************************

CHINA DAILY

EDITORIAL

RICCI, RELEVANCE OF TOLERANCE

BY CHEN LONGXIANG (CHINA DAILY)

The history of exchange between ancient China and the West cannot be complete without mentioning the contributions of Marco Polo (1254-1324) and Matteo Ricci, SJ (Li Madou, 1552-1610). If Marco Polo, a merchant from Venice, introduced China to Europeans and left them a magic and rich Orient, then Matteo Ricci was the "cultural icon" who introduced Western science to China, married Chinese cultural and spiritual values to Catholicism, and established cultural communication and collaboration between the East and the West. This year is the fourth death centenary of Ricci, who was buried in Beijing on the orders of Emperor Wanli of the Ming Dynasty (1368-1644) for his contributions to China's science, cartography, mathematics and philosophy.

The Pope praised the Jesuit thus: "Ricci dedicated long years of his life to weaving a profound dialogue between the West and the East working incisively to root the Gospel in the culture of the great people of China. Even today, his example remains a model of fruitful encounter between European and Chinese civilizations."

Why has Ricci enjoyed such a high reputation in China and Europe both? "Ricci mapped out the policy of the Catholic mission in China - the policy of cultural accommodation, which is 'when in Rome, do as the Romans do'," says Zhang Guogang, a Tsinghua University professor whose areas of research are Studies on Society and Institutions of Medieval China and Sino-Foreign Relations.

"Ricci's cultural accommodation approach is essentially a line of thinking and attitude that, with genuine humility, shows respect to Chinese people and culture", Zhang says. "Thanks to this attitude he could be accepted by officials and scholars, and deepen his understanding of China and gradually develop a set of feasible behavioral patterns for missionaries coming to the Middle Kingdom."

Ricci's journey began in Lisbon, Portugal, in 1578. He traveled via India and reached Macao in 1582 where he applied himself to the study of Chinese language and customs. "Like other Europeans, before dealing directly with Chinese people, Ricci could rely only on his European experience and the ideas and practices left by his predecessors to understand China," Zhang says.

The Portuguese Jesuit was different from many Europeans traveling to China, but he could retain or renounce the experiences he had acquired from his predecessors only after being exposed to Chinese culture. His respect for Chinese culture and customs, and his keen insight played a big role in it, though.

Ricci founded the Jesuit tradition of learning the Chinese language and Confucian classics. "Seeing that Chinese culture was strongly intertwined with Confucian values, he realized Christian teachings could be presented as Confucian principles, such as filial piety, reciprocity and personal virtue."

His first book written in Chinese, Treatise on Friendship, (Jiaoyou Lun), in which he says, "My friend is not another person but my second self, so I shall treat my friend just like myself," won him the trust of many Chinese scholars and officials. His knowledge and appreciation of Chinese culture made some Chinese scholar-bureaucrats who came in close contact with him think that he was a "Western Confucian" and came from a "Far Western" state of etiquette, Zhang says.

Instead of excluding traditional Chinese culture, Ricci tried to link Catholicism with Confucianism delicately and use existing Chinese concepts to explain Christianity so that the Jesuits and the Catholic faith they preached could no longer be considered foreign or harmful.

"In other words, the ultimate goal of Ricci's cultural accommodation policy was to integrate Chinese culture and Catholicism and establish a synthesis of Confucian ideology and Catholicism." He initiated the practice of attracting Chinese interest in Christianity by first intriguing them with Western curiosities, including chime clocks, mathematical and astronomical instruments, oil paintings and world maps.

"From the perspective of cultural exchange, Ricci's approach has far-reaching implications in terms of culture innovation. It is a pioneering exploration on cross-cultural collaboration with a breakthrough in the practice of equality and against cultural parochialism." His approach has been preserved as a basic policy of religious integration, which paved the way for the establishment and development of Catholicism in China.

***************************************

******************************************************************************************

DAILY MIRROR

EDITORIAL

PR SYSTEM THAT BRITAIN WANTS

As Sri Lanka is waiting to do away with the PR system to add a semblance of sanity to elections here, the underdog-turned, dark horse of the British polls – the Liberal Democrats see PR as the only hope for people who are sick and tired of the two-party system.

And the failure to make changes to the first past the post system has ensured today's polls as the most chaotic in the history of British elections.

Despite a youthful Nick Clegg leading the popular vote, the electoral system has sealed the fate of the Lib Demos as only the king maker and certainly not the winner. It's either the Conservatives or the beleagured Labour that is going to win more seats and all what Clegg and his team can ask from them is a promise to change the electoral system so that there'll be 'justice' to a third party even at the next parliamentary polls.

While there's a strong chance of Conservatives beating Labour and becoming the party to get the most number of seats, wooing Liberal Democrats and forming the government will still remain a challenge. One of the key demands of Clegg is the introduction of the PR system and Conservatives have so far been against it. Also although Gordon Brown will be under moral obligation to resign in the event of Tories winning more seats, he has the option of continuing as premier till Cameron's party forms the government.

In the event of neither party forming a government a second election will be called. The last time this happened was in 1974 when Harold Wilson called for the elections and won a majority.

In the remote possibility of Labour winning more seats than the Conservatives, a crisis is likely to brew up with Clegg demanding the stepping down of Brown as Labour leader for his party to support Labour.

While Britain has throughout been centre-left liberal the elections today take place in a backdrop of a rapid rise of centre –rise in Europe with them ruling the roost in France, Germany, Italy, Poland and Spain.

If the Clegg phenomena emerged in a country with the PR system the Liberal Democrats would have become the party to clinch most number of seats. The rise of Clegg signals that people want it. However the system is too archaic to allow that to happen.

***************************************

DAILY MIRROR

EDITORIAL

NUTRITION STATUS OF SRI LANKANS: SOLVING EXISTING ISSUES

BY VISAKHA TILLEKERATNE CONSULTANT

The nutrition status of the Sri Lankan population has been a subject of much attention over the past 5 to 10 years. The reason for this could be analysed in many ways. One of these is that we Sri Lankans are justifiably proud of our health and socio economic indicators but our nutrition status indicators are foxing us. Nutrition and food are also "very political" issues around the world, as it has put powerful politicians out of power. It also touches the hearts and minds of the population as all human beings have a basic right to food. Development agencies too have done much to bring this issue to centre stage in a number of ways . Agencies have been especially interested in "emergency" nutrition as the country went through a prolonged conflict. The Government of Sri Lanka too deserves an accolade for designating a Ministry for "Healthcare and Nutrition" and increased investment ,in nutrition related services. But one wonders if a Ministry designated for nutrition within the health sector, in fact defeated the purpose of improving nutrition, as this subject requiring a multi-sectoral approach

However even if one takes a closer look at health indicators, all is not well. Among the health indicators Sri Lanka is so proud of, the Infant Mortality Ratio (IMR) takes pride of place. IMR is determined by a number of factors being effective delivery of a good package of services in antenatal clinics, hospitals and post natal care, having adequate birth weight, not being prone to infections as a new born and upto a year of life and optimum breast feeding and complementary feeding practices. IMR is very low as a national figure as certain Districts have all of the determining factors in the right measure. So it is very clear that in the Districts which have higher IMR all is not well in the determinants. So even the effect of nutrition interventions in having uniform IMR values throughout the country needs to be questioned. This needs to be supplemented with an evenly spread package of health services as well..

Low birth weight has not seen any improvement in the past decade and is stagnating at 16.6 %. The only significant achievements as far as nutrition is concerned, is that one indicator of protein energy malnutrition - stunting or shortness of under 5 children according to age has reduced substantially from the 70s onwards. Stunting is a reflection of long term or chronic under nutrition and reflects the relationship between malnutrition and poverty.

The most rewarding success in one aspect of micronutrient malnutrition is that the reduction of iodine deficiency disorders has progressed to elimination status. The other key micronutrient deficiencies Vitamin A and Iron have seen a reduction across population groups, but not adequately so.However wasting or thinness among under 5s has been hovering around 14% persistently for the past 25 years. According to WHO if wasting levels are over 10% it is considered that the country is in a state of nutritional emergency. So Sri Lanka has been in a "lingering emergency" for the past thirty years.

Weight-for-age the composite or blunt indicator, which reflects a combination of both stunting and wasting also shows very slow improvement. Compounding all this is that as a country typically in transition, Sri Lanka carries the double burden of both under and over nutrition. A less than healthy life style of diets high in salt, sugar and fat and not having enough exercise is swelling overweight and obesity rates and ever increasing chronic diseases.

New Information:

A number of significant pieces of work in shedding light on this situation were done in the recent two years, where the government was supported by UNICEF, WFP , WHO and the the World Bank One of the most interesting is the Nutrition and Food Security Survey (NFSS) 2009, conducted by the MRI led by Dr Renuka Jayatissa. The actual objective of this survey was to see the impact if any, of food price increases on nutritional status. Of course two surveys are required to compare and this was designed to be the first one. These findings do not bode well for Sri Lankans' nutrition achievements in the years to come.Significant information gaps however exist regarding the nutrition status of the adult and elderly, especially males.

Suggested action

It is necessary to calculate the malnutrition status of the whole country either by survey or mathematical modeling. Set a target for nutrition status achievement for the country as a whole and then quantify the target for each District
Map the community nutrition situation with a simple causal analysis, upto Divisional Level, with a general overlay of District characteristics such as socio economic indicators, comparing the assigned target with the resource profile available for nutrition improvement. Draw up plans at the lowest possible level. This could be done through a participatory planning process where the community takes responsibility and leadership. A Government /NGO/community team should be formulated. These plans could be upwardly integrated to Division, District, Province etc. Currently plans are top down.

Quantifying food requirements for the country together with relevant stakeholders is another central level activity, which is not done in a systematic way currently. A District level activity for the officials for example; is to connect poverty and access to food resources and see what actual needs are there for food assistance. A far reaching poverty alleviation plan needs to be put in place in affected Districts as this cannot be only done at the village level. The quantification of poverty alleviation must be closely done in relation to improvement of nutrition.

For enigmas such as persistent wasting, extrapolate causes, model a set of interventions and carry out operational research.

By using a multi-sectoral team approach, and a Division/village resource profile, identify gaps in food resources and request stakeholders to increase resource base through a variety of methods. For instance if animal protein availability or affordability is a problem working with the Livestock Ministry or Aquaculture Development Authority to initiate livestock rearing and inland fisheries. Entities such as Samurdhi and microcredit schemes would assist as part of the villager led plan.

Costing of interventions at all levels should be undertaken as part of the planning process. Measurement of nutrition indicators should be in line with the cost of intervention. The targeting of supplementary feeding programs should be strictly aimed at the malnourished, taking into consideration the degree of malnutrition of a particular child.

The current Integrated Nutrition Package for under 5 s formulated by the Family Health Bureau is a good approach. But the community component of this package should be strengthened far more in order to achieve the community led process. As severe malnutrition levels are very low in Sri Lanka, with very little investment it should not be difficult nor expensive to move a mildly or moderately malnourished child onto the median growth curve. There should be a costing on this as well.

Professionals in Food and Nutrition should be employed at all levels to facilitate nutrition improvements together with other sectors. The Provincial Planning Secretariat should have a Focal Point for nutrition and food security to get all stakeholders together to activate provincial plans. This person should also constantly monitor and evaluate the situation through integrating data from lower levels. The District can have a similar position. It is important for the community at the very lowest level to have easy access to a nutritionist/dietician. The midwife/family health worker too would find this useful to refer their target beneficiaries to such a person, for better quality advice.

A high level coordination sector is a top priority to get the whole exercise moving in the right direction. This should be supported by a coordination structure such as the National Institute of Nutrition, where scientists, trainers, decision makers and implementers work as a team.The nutrition surveillance system already initiated should act as the compass of a well integrated nutrition program and should provide regular reports, for reviewing and making corrective action.

In summary, if we Sri Lankans want to see improvement in nutrition resulting in better health, some serious nutrition planning needs to be undertaken. Diets rich in fruits and vegetable with adequate protein should be actively advocated for and achieved for all age groups, especially as part of complementary feeding. All interventions should be costed against impact. It is also far more prudent for nutrition to be moved into the Planning arena once again, as multi stakeholder ownership will not be achieved in reality. Let us take examples from countries such as Bangladesh, who have made bold inroads and reduced malnutrition substantially and cost effectively, without looking down upon such countries from our oh so superior positions. Of course the situation of Bangladesh is still much worse than Sri Lanka, and the numbers to target are vast. However Bangladesh has been strategic in its approach and civil society continues to play their role. If everything is taken over by the state, this will not be sustainable nor effective. But most of all we need to hold hands with the community and exact behavior changes in nutrition.

Eztracted from article 'Nutrition Status of Sri Lankan - the Enigma and Dilemma

***************************************

DAILY MIRROR

EDITORIAL

NUCLEAR POWER: IS IT THE 'ENERGY MIRACLE' IN THE POST FOSSIL FUEL ERA?

All energy experts worldwide are aware that there is no future for fossil oil and coal because of the high rate of depletion of resources and the prevalent challenges to control climate change. The pertinent question against this backdrop is "what are the alternatives for fossil oil and coal?" Nuclear power which was considered the most promising alternative in the early 1970's lost its momentum drastically in 1980's. However, it is enjoying resurgence in the minds of policy makers as a cheap power option.

Though the last U.S. commercial nuclear reactor to go on-line was way back in February 7, 1996 the current US President Barak Obama recently declared that the US will pay attention to reviving its nuclear power program as an alternative to fossil fuels. In July 2009, the Italian Parliament passed a law that cancelled the results of an earlier referendum of facing out nuclear power and allowed the immediate start of the Italian nuclear program. The Sri Lankan government took the initiative of exploring the possibilities of nuclear options last year despite the fact that CEB has ruled out nuclear power as a candidate option for its long-term generation expansion strategy.

The nuclear power industry so far has gone through three generations. The first generation from the mid 1940's to the mid 1960's . The second generation (which is called the generation of commercial power reactors) started in mid 1960's and came to an end in the mid 1990's. . Third-generation reactors which had passive safety features were less vulnerable to operational upsets, and had a higher availability and longer operating life - typically 60 years.Current reactors in operation around the world are generally considered second or third generation systems. Despite the current popularity of nuclear technology amongst decision makers, we must take a sober look at the dangers that they pose. The Chernobyl catastrophe was 400 times more potent than the Hiroshima bomb. Since the Chernobyl disaster in 1986, there have been at least 22 major accidents at nuclear power stations of which 15 involved radiological releases. Of these, 2 came close to meltdown. The primary goal of Generation IV is to improve nuclear safety, improve proliferation resistance, minimize waste and natural resource utilization, and to decrease the cost of building and running such plants.

Nuclear fusion reactors which are safer and generate less radioactive waste is another option currently under consideration. Many experts and civilians alike believe fusion to be a promising future energy source due to the short lived radioactivity of the produced waste, its low carbon emissions, and its prospective power output.

The European Commission estimates that there may be only 2-3 million tonnes of exploitable uranium sources globally. The global nuclear industry requires approximately 68,000 tonnes of uranium ore a year to operate. At current projections of nuclear capacity, uranium mining operations will need to increase output by 100% within 10-20 years to meet demand. It is estimated that global exploitable reserves of uranium will likely be depleted within 30-40 years. The UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change outlines a scenario whereby 3,000 nuclear reactors would be needed by the year 2100.. If all the world's existing fossil fuel based power stations were replaced by nuclear, there would only be enough uranium for 3-4 years.

Another alternative currently under discussion is to breed uranium from thorium as fission fuel in the thorium fuel cycle. India has also done a great amount of work in the development of a Thorium centred fuel cycle.

As of 2010, India has 19 nuclear power plants in operation generating 4,560 MW out of total plant capacity of

140,000 MW which is just 4.2% of the total power requirement of India. India; the sleeping giant which is about to be awakened can by no means rely on nuclear power. A new nuclear renaissance, such as that already being seen in India, only introduces more risks of future accidents.

Is nuclear power really a solution to climate change? Unfortunately it is not. Nuclear power plants may not directly emit climate-damaging carbon dioxide, but if you look at the whole lifecycle of a nuclear power station it produces 20-40% of the CO2 of a typical gas fired power plant.

France has long been seen as the model nuclear nation – deriving over 70 per cent of its electricity supply from nearly 60 nuclear power reactors. However, in the past few years, heat-waves have brought a number of stations near to closure. The French Government has temporarily allowed the plants to breach safety rules rather than force costly closures.

In 2009, estimates for the cost of a new plant in the U.S. ranged from $6 to $10 billion. In 2008, new nuclear power plant construction costs were rising faster than the costs of other types of power plants. Sri Lanka by no means can afford such high capital costs for power generation at present.

Cheap nuclear power without underlying waste problems is yet been solved. There are also some nuclear experts who warn that the promise is a snare and a delusion. The arguments against nuclear power are as valid today, as they were 20 years ago. The technology is still extremely dangerous; relies on dwindling supplies of uranium; and remains so costly that massive government subsidies are required. It is also vulnerable to terrorism; can feed weapons proliferation; and produces volumes of toxic waste with no satisfactory storage solution. It's not that something new and important and good has happened with nuclear, it's that something new and important and bad has happened with climate change.

Nuclear power is only a straw for the drowning human civilization and the more fundamental questions about the way we live, the nature of our economic system, and how we build meaningful movements for change still remain.

***************************************

DAILY MIRROR

EDITORIAL

A DEAL IS A DEAL

BY: B SKANTHAKUMAR

The European Union's decision, in February, to withdraw Sri Lanka's preferential trading access to its market came as little surprise. Under what is known as the EU's Generalised System of Preferences Plus, commonly referred to as GSP+, duty-free access (currently on more than 6300 product classifications) was extended to a handful of developing countries with poorly diversified economies shortly after the 2004 tsunami in the Indian Ocean. Sri Lanka was eligible on all counts. The zero-duty concession has since been of enormous competitive advantage, covering as it does 90 percent of the island's exports to the EU. Initially granted for a period of three years, renewal of the GSP+ is dependent upon the beneficiary state's ratification and effective implementation of 27 international agreements encompassing human-rights and labour standards, narcotics and corruption eradication, and environmental protection. The EU's scheme, presently enjoyed by 16 countries (mainly in Latin America), therefore couples trade promotion with rights promotion towards its object of poverty reduction, good governance and sustainable development. February's verdict towards Sri Lanka was the culmination of a process that had begun two years earlier, when the EU provisionally renewed the facility while simultaneously initiating, in October 2008, an investigation into the application of selected international conventions ratified by Colombo.

A three-member fact-finding panel of external experts constituted by the European Commission was denied permission to visit the country, and had to rely on secondary sources for its investigation. Its evaluation focused on Sri Lanka's adherence to three international agreements, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT), and the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). Based on this evaluation, the final report by the European Commission, in October 2009, concluded that the "legal and institutional framework giving effect to the ICCPR, CAT and CRC is not sufficient to ensure effective implementation of all relevant obligations provided for by the three instruments."

It also noted that emergency laws overrode legislative safeguards in the ordinary law, and imposed unacceptable restrictions on rights protected by the conventions.

Denouncing the EU move as an affront to national sovereignty and dignity, Colombo authorities refused to cooperate with the investigation, let alone engage on the substantive issues. The government subsequently described the process as "politically motivated and accompanied by a high degree of prejudice", arguing that the GSP+ was being unfairly used as a "weapon" to force a cessation of hostilities with the LTTE, and to resurrect a flawed and futile peace process. For its part, the EU insisted that the decision to investigate Sri Lanka was a technical process unrelated to the war, and squarely conforming to a deal entered into voluntarily and with prior and informed consent to its terms and conditions. Clearly, both sides were being disingenuous.

The military campaign was viewed unfavourably in EU capitals, and there were repeated European diplomatic efforts for a break in hostilities right into the final battle, in May last year. While convenient for some with honest or cynical motives alike, to construe human-rights monitoring as independent of political circumstance and considerations, contact with the everyday world of asymmetrical relations between states and the hypocrisy of great powers is a salutary corrective to this conceit.

Meanwhile, the invocation of sovereignty as a matter of national honour might be more persuasive, if it was not invariably deployed to shield scrutiny of the domestic governance and rights record. Indeed, there is no disquiet at home as to the actual or alleged effects of foreign aid and loans, World Trade Organisation (WTO) agreements, free-trade and foreign-investment pacts, and special economic zones on national sovereignty. Instead, the hyper-nationalists in Colombo wail against the 'neo-colonial' West in public, while submitting in private to their development model premised on export-led growth, trade liberalisation and foreign capital, which intensifies global integration and with it the island's vulnerability to external buffeting.

Although the government claimed to be prepared for the outcome of the GSP+ review, industrialists and workers organisations alike complain that their interests and needs have been consistently ignored. Over half of Sri Lanka's exports to the EU are in readymade garments. Before the GSP+ facility was introduced, the US was Sri Lanka's major market for clothing; but between 2005 and 2008, the EU's share increased by a massive 42 percent and is now the island's single largest market. In addition, the ongoing impact of the global economic crisis has continued to erode the size of the US market, thus making exporters even more dependent on the EU.

Labour unions and workers' organisations are also unimpressed by the government's grandstanding, and the tales of woe spun by industrialists. While supportive of a GSP+ renewal, they claim that very few of the benefits of the arrangement found their way to the workers themselves. According to the Apparel-industry Labour Rights Movement (ALaRM), while jobs were created through the EU scheme, "the quality of this employment and the wage levels were not adequate."Direct employment in the readymade-garments sector is 270,000, 85 percent of whom are women. Reeling under the impact of the global crisis, between 50 and 75 factories closed in the last half of 2009 alone.

ALaRM has urged the government to negotiate in good faith with the EU, calling on Colombo officials to commit to a 'road map' for the implementation of labour rights. In this, four critical issues have been identified: constitutional reform to ensure consistency with ratified international labour conventions; the adoption of trade-union certification procedures, for the purpose of collective bargaining; strengthening and enforcing laws on unfair labour practices, such as victimisation of union activists; and ensuring that any reference of a labour dispute to compulsory arbitration is requested by both parties.

Adding to the pressure, Sri Lanka's GSP eligibility to the US is also under challenge by a major US trade-union federation, which has highlighted the violations of worker rights in the export-processing zones. The loss of US preferences will likely be adverse to export diversification in non-traditional products such as plastics and rubber, vegetable products and machinery and electrical equipment.

The suspension of the GSP+ will take effect from July. The EU has qualified the process as "temporary" and reversible if, as Trade Commissioner Karel De Gucht underlined, measures are taken "that will result in rapid, demonstrable and sustainable progress" on human rights protection and institutional dysfunction. Taking its cue, the government recently despatched a high-level delegation to Brussels consisting of Finance Secretary P B Jayasundera, Foreign Secretary Romesh Jayasinghe, Justice Secretary Suhada Gamlath and Attorney-General Mohan Peiris.

Both Brussels and Colombo appear to be groping for a face-saving compromise. The government will trumpet its forthcoming National Human Rights Action Plan, and will accelerate the resettlement of those displaced during the last phase of the war. The notorious Prevention of Terrorism Act and draconian emergency laws in operation may also be qualified, while the draft Witness and Victim Protection bill could finally become law.

For its part, the EU, will hear the clear and resounding message of April's parliamentary elections: the near two-third majority for the government and a divided and demoralised opposition that is scrambling for its political survival for at least the next six years. A new deal may be in the offing, its winners and losers foretold.

Courtesy Himal Southasia

( Extract from article by B Skanthakumar )

***************************************

DAILY MIRROR

EDITORIAL

CHECK THE BALANCES TO AVOID CHECKMATE

My dear Mahinda Aiya,

Ayubowan, vanakkam, asalamu alaikkum and best wishes as the Administration proclaims a golden era for Sri Lanka – though blank cheques and unbalanced balances are appearing instead of the checks and balances needed for democracy, accountability and good governance.

On the positive side a presidential pardon was granted to senior journalist J. S. Tissainayagam in a move to mark World Press Freedom Day. The new External Affairs Minister G. L. Peiris, in an apparent attempt to improve Sri Lanka's international image, also announced that some emergency regulations were being relaxed. Dr. Peiris appears to have found a way of getting into the inner circle of power, though he has no family connections.

Over the weekend, the subjects assigned to the 38 ministers were gazetted showing that a selected few will reign supreme with most of the vital reins firmly in their hands while most of the others will be little more than figureheads if not literal skeletons in the Cabinet.

The holy scriptures of all religions tell us that for good governance and an equitable distribution of wealth and resources, the leaders need to be selfless, sacrificial and sincere in serving the people. The main temptations that damage good leadership are a desire for domination and the abuse of power, the desire for prestige and popularity and the desire for more wealth. The leaders have the freedom to choose, and if they choose the wrong path they will suffer the consequences.

Economic Development Minister Basil Rajapaksa – now being widely described as the super minister – said it with flowers at the Peradeniya Botanical Gardens on Sunday. The powerful 'loku aiya' said his new ministry, besides having some important institutions directly under it, would coordinate the work of most other ministries which are connected to economic development. It might mean that, since all ministries are in some way connected directly to economic development, he would have some control over them all. Opposition critics are raising questions about how much power the other ministers will have, and whether what we are seeing today is the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) or something more like a Sri Lanka family party.

Another subtle though dangerous trend was reported in a Sunday newspaper and spotlighted by the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) at a news conference. Budgetary time tables have been changed again, and a decision has been taken to present a mini budget in July -- without a vote-on-account approved in parliament for expenditure from May to July. The billions of rupees required for these three months have been approved through special powers given to the finance minister who is also the president. The JVP insists that such special powers are available only when parliament is dissolved and therefore it says that financial control which is one of the main powers of parliament has now been taken over by the executive. The JVP alleges that such a move is an undermining of parliamentary powers and a threat to democracy.

SLFP veterans while keeping their mouths shut officially are known to have told close associates they are deeply concerned and unhappy over what is happening. Some ten years ago the then President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga presented an abortive Constitution which proposed the abolition of the executive presidency and the appointment of an executive prime minister. Indications are that we now have both an executive president and executive prime minister, with the veteran D.M. Jayaratne performing largely ceremonial duties. To avert anything like what happened during the Premadasa regime in 1992 there is now a safety valve or trip switch in parliament.

The main opposition United National Party (UNP) now shattered and battered after an unprecedented series of election defeats, last week alerted the country to a largely unseen but major danger. Ruwan Wijewardene, one of the party's young new MPs warned that a financial crisis was looming. Economic analysts say that the main reason why the new government does not want to even present a vote-on-account for the next three months, is that it cannot come anywhere near to meeting the targets in terms of budget deficits and growth rates.

The country's total debt is a staggering Rs. 825 billion, while revenue trails far behind at Rs. 702 billion.

History tells us that in a democracy the people get the government they deserve because it is the people who make the choice. But the question is how well informed that choice could have been. With the state media over the past few years stooping to the lowest levels of a stooge media, and with millions of people having access mainly to that media, there are questions as to whether the choice was well informed or ill informed. Whatever it may be, the truth of all truths which leaders and others need to remember is that everything, including any royal party, is transient or impermanent and could change in a moment of time.

***************************************

EDITORIAL from The Pioneer, The Times of India, Hindustan Times, The Indian Express, The Financial Express, The Hindu, The Statesman's, The Tribune, Deccan Chronicle, Deccan Herald, Economic Times, The Telegraph, The Assam Tribune, Pakistan Observer, The Asian Age, The News, The Jerusalem Post, Haaretz, The New York Times, China Daily, Japan Times, The Gazette, The Sydney Morning Herald, The Australian, The Guardian, Jakarta Post, The Moscow Times, The Bottom Line and more only on EDITORIAL.

Project By

SAMARTH

a trust – of the people by the people for the people

An Organisation for Rastriya Abhyudaya

(Registered under Registration Act 1908 in Gorakhpur, Regis No – 142- 07/12/2007)

Central Office: Basement, H-136, Shiv Durga Vihar, Lakkarpur, Faridabad – 121009

Cell: - 0091-93131-03060

Email – samarth@samarth.co.in, central.office@samarth.co.in

Registered Office: Rajendra Nagar (East), Near Bhagwati Chowk, Lachchipur

Gorakhnath Road, Gorakhpur – 273 015

SHAPE

EDITORIAL SAMARTH

Google Analytics

Thursday, May 6, 2010

EDITORIAL 06.05.10

No comments:

Post a Comment

Facebook Badge

Blog Archive

SAMARTH a-trust

Followers - EDITORIAL

About Me

Indiae

SAMARTH a-trust

EDITORIAL SAMARTH

Google Analytics

Thursday, May 6, 2010

EDITORIAL 06.05.10

No comments:

Post a Comment

Facebook Badge

Blog Archive

Subscribe To EDITORIAL SAMARTH

SAMARTH a-trust

Followers - EDITORIAL

About Me

Indiae

SAMARTH a-trust