EDITORIAL SAMARTH: EDITORIAL 12.05.10

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 12, edition 000505, 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

AGAINST MODERNITY
MADE FOR EACH OTHER
COUNTDOWN TO CHAOS IN NEPAL - ASHOK K MEHTA
MAKE EDUCATION MARKET FRIENDLY - MK BHAT
CRIME AND PUNISHMENT - PC SHARMA
PAPERING IT OVER - SHIKHA MUKERJEE
UTTARAKHAND SOWING SEEDS FOR A BETTER TOMORROW - BABA MAYARAM

THE TIMES OF INDIA

GREECE AND US
MISSION POSSIBLE
CAN PAKISTAN BE SECULAR? - GAUTAM ADHIKAR
'INDIA CAN BECOME A MEDICAL TOURISM DESTINATION' - ROMAIN MAITRA
HANG 'EM HIGH - JUG SURAIYA

HINDUSTAN TIMES

NO PLACE FOR PARALLEL COURTS
IS HE IN THE HOOD?
STRIKING A HIGH NOTE - MARK SOFER
A BLINKERED VISION - SAGARIKA GHOSE

THE INDIAN EXPRESS

UPWARD & ONWARD
50,000 REASONS
MY CASTE AND I - PRATAP BHANU MEHTA
THE HANDS THAT FED THEM - EJAZ HAIDER
UNUSUAL POWERS OF PERSUASION - JAITHIRTH RAO
THE STRIKE THAT FAILED TO IGNITE CHANGE - YUBARAJ GHIMIRE
THE GREAT GAME FOLIO - C. RAJA MOHAN
VIEW FROM THE LEFT - MANOJCG

THE FINANCIAL EXPRESS

TRAI AGAIN
GEARING UP FOR GROWTH
HOW CAN ORISSA NOT BE GREECE? - AJAY SHAH
BANNING COTTON EXPORT IS NO SOLUTION - MADAN SABNAVIS
TRANSPARENT RATINGS PLEASE - ASHISH SINHA

THE HINDU

ENVIRONMENTAL CATASTROPHE
CHECK ON ARBITRARINESS
SAVING THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION MIRACLE - VIDYA SUBRAHMANIAM
BENCHMARKING REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT - SUJAY NAG
UNEQUAL QUEST FOR EQUALITY - P. S. SURYANARAYANA
WHITE HOUSE IN FINAL PUSH FOR CLIMATE BILL - SUZANNE GOLDENBERG
RECESSION CUTS LABOUR TAXES

THE ASIAN AGE

DNA

THE KHAP TRAP
FRIENDS LIKE THESE
CHINDIAÂ BEE IN JAIRAM RAMESHÂ€™S BONNET - VENKATESAN VEMBU
ROOTING FOR REBELS - AMULYA GANGULI

THE TRIBUNE

JAIRAM'S MANY INDISCRETIONS
'UNCLE JUDGES' TO GO
IMPROVING HIGHER EDUCATION
DAMAGES CAUSED BY RADIOACTIVE SOURCES - BY A. GOPALAKRISHNAN
DOWN TV MEMORY LANE - BY RAMA KASHYAP
SOCIETY NEEDS NO MORAL POLICING - BY SAJLA CHAWLA
HYDRO POWER WITHOUT DAMS! - BY BHARAT DOGRA
BANGALORE DIARY - SHUBHADEEP CHOUDHURY

MUMBAI MIRROR

GETTING REAL IN CITY OF GOLD

BUSINESS STANDARD

LOOSE CANNONS
MISMANAGING FOOD
BUILDING BOSTONS, NOT KANPURS - SANJEEV SANYAL
SEE YOU AT THE POST OFFICE - SUBIR ROY
BENEVOLENT INTERVENTIONS - M J ANTONY
WILL THE CRISIS IN EUROPE SPREAD?
THE GAS IN THE RELIANCE CASE - G V RAMAKRISHNA

THE ECONOMIC TIMES

TOILET TRAINING AND CRICKET!
FOR FAST RESOURCE REALLOCATION
COMBATING KHAP PANCHAYATS
GOVERNANCE & OWNERSHIP IN EXCHANGES - SANDEEP PAREKH
OPEN GAS MARKET STILL A PIPE DREAM - SOMA BANERJEE
NO COUNTRY FOR LADS - VITHALC NADKARNI
STICK TO TIMEFRAMES FOR DISPOSAL OF CASES
PRIORITISE SECURED CREDITORS' CLAIMS
NEED PEOPLE WITH DIFFERENT SPECIALISATIONS: WIPRO CEOS - SUJIT JOHN, MINI JOSEPH TEJASWI & ANSHUL DHAMIJA
EMAMI OFFERS VALUE PRODUCTS: ADITYA V AGARWAL, DIRECTOR, EMAMI GROUP - ANURADHA HIMATSINGKA

DECCAN CHRONICAL

WRONG THING IN THE WRONG PLACE...
PERKY CRAVINGS - BY INDER MALHOTRA
EU IS SINKING. CHEER UP, IT COULD BE WORSE - BY ROGER COHEN
INDIA SHINING OR INDIA STARVING? - BY VANDANA SHIVA
REASONS OF THE HEART - BY S.M. SHAHID
HATRED IS LIKE TAKING POISON - BY DOMINIC EMMANUEL

THE STATESMAN

PAKISTAN EXPOSED
TRIAD' DOCTRINE
ON THIN ICE
IT TAKES TWO TO TANGO - BY MR VENKATESH
UK BIDS FAREWELL TO US-STYLE POLITICS
100 YEARS AGO TODAY
GREECE WRESTLES WITH ITS CONSCIENCE

THE TELEGRAPH

OUTDATED IDEA
CLIFF'S EDGE
FEAR AND FOREBODING - K.P. NAYAR
REAL DEBATE

DECCAN HERALD

CASTE ASIDE
CHINESE FANTASY
SOREN'S GOMANGO ACT - BY SUDHANSHU RANJAN
RESPONSIBILITY IN THE AGE OF CATASTROPHE - BY MARIO SOARES, IPS
DUBIOUS DUBAI - BY VINITA KRSIHNAMURTHY

THE JERUSALEM POST

REJOICE ON JERUSALEM DAY - BY ISI LEIBLER
TERRA INCOGNITA: THE DANGERS TO INFORMATION IN TODAY'S AGE - BY SETH J. FRANTZMAN
ACCEPTING ISRAEL AS THE JEWISH STATE - BY DANIEL PIPES
GRAPEVINE: A 'BIBLICAL WEATHER EVENT' AT THE ISRAEL MUSEUM - BY GREER FAY CASHMAN
CLARITY ON JERUSALEM DAY
JUST PLAIN LUCKY - BY YOSSI ALPHER

HAARETZ

THE MEA SHE'ARIM MOB - BY SHAHAR ILAN
AN IMPORTANT MESSAGE FROM CHINA - BY NEHEMIA SHTRASLER
ISRAELIS' STATE OF DENIAL OVER TREATMENT OF PALESTINIANS - BY YITZHAK LAOR
ACADEMIA AND ECONOMIC GROWTH - BY MOSHE ARENS
JERUSALEM DAY CELEBRATES AN ILLUSORY UNIFICATION - BY DAPHNA GOLAN

THE NEW YORK TIMES

INDUSTRY DOESN'T STEP UP
IS IT SAFE TO GO BACK IN?
A DEAL FOR BETTER SCHOOLS
OUR INNER NEANDERTHAL
THE EVIL OF LESSER EVILISM - BY MAUREEN DOWD
GREECE'S NEWEST ODYSSEY - BY THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
BRITAIN'S COALITION OF PAIN - BY ALEX MASSIE

USA TODAY

OUR VIEW ON ENERGY: DON'T USE OIL SPILL AS EXCUSE TO DEEP-SIX DOMESTIC DRILLING
OPPOSING VIEW ON ENERGY: HALT OFFSHORE EXPLORATION - BY BILL NELSON
WE'RE NOT YET GREECE, BUT ARE WE STILL AMERICA? - BY DAVID M. WALKER
SENATE'S WAY IS NO WAY TO CONFIRM A JUDICIAL MVP - BY JONATHAN TURLEY
WILL PHILIPPINES' CYCLE OF CORRUPTION EVER END? - BY LEWIS M. SIMONS
AFGHAN GLASS IS JUST OVER HALF-FULL - BY ANTHONY CORDESMAN AND MICHAEL O'HANLON

TIMES FREE PRESS

MR. NETANYAHU IN A BIND
STRENGTHEN FDA'S ROLE
HIGH COURT NOMINEE KAGAN
'GOD BLESS AMERICA'
TALIBAN IN TIMES SQUARE?

TEHRAN TIMES

PREPARING FOR THE BIG ONE IN TEHRAN - BY M.A. SAKI

HURRIYET DAILY NEWS

FROM THE BOSPHORUS: STRAIGHT - THE REAL CULPRIT IN BAYKAL'S FALL
WHAT'S GOING ON IN TURKEY? (II) - CÜNEYT ÜLSEVER
BUSINESS JETS WORTH $170 BILLION TO BE SOLD IN 10 YEARS
US AGAINST THEM! - BURAK BEKDİL
SEX, BAYKAL, AND VIDEOTAPE - MUSTAFA AKYOL
BAYKAL'S DEPARTURE IS GOING TO CHANGE A LOT - MEHMET ALİ BİRAND
SEX, POWER AND POLITICIANS - JOOST LAGENDIJK
SHOULD BAYKAL RETURN? - YUSUF KANLI

I.THE NEWS

HILLARY'S CHARGES
SETTING BOUNDARIES
HUNZA AT RISK
THEIR BEST IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH - ZAFAR HILALY
FREEING EDUCATION - BASIL NABI MALIK
WASHINGTON'S TOUGH TALK - AMIR ZIA
THE PRICE OF DEFIANCE - M SAEED KHALID
FIVE-YEAR NPT RITUAL - SHAMSHAD AHMAD
NOT ALL BAD NEWS - MIR JAMILUR RAHMAN

PAKISTAN OBSERVER

RUSSIAN ENVOY IN INDIA LIVING IN FOOL'S PARADISE
A BIG JOKE WITH TOURISM
VERY PERTINENT REMARKS OF APEX COURT
HILLARY'S STATEMENT LIKE INDIAN OUTBURSTS - M ASHRAF MIRZA
PAKISTAN'S EXPECTATIONS FROM WEST - MAHMOOD HUSSAIN
WHY THREATEN PAK, SECRETARY CLINTON? Z - SHAHID R SIDDIQI
WHY US? - SHAIMA SUMAYA
WAR IS FUN: MORE WAR PLEASE - JOHN PILGER

THE AUSTRALIAN

CLAIMING THE CREDIT AS THE GOOD TIMES RETURN
GOOD EFFORT FROM ABBOTT, BUT HE STILL NEEDS MALCOLM
EUROPE CALMS THE BEARS FOR NOW

THE SYDNEY MORNING HERALD

WITH GOOD POLICY - AND A LOT OF LUCK
ALAS, THE GANG'S BACK IN TOWN
POLITICAL WOES SHOULD NOT OBSCURE ECONOMIC SUCCESS

THE GUARDIAN

THE COALITION GOVERNMENT: SWEETENING THE PILL
GOVERNMENT TRANSITIONS: MEMO TO THE FUTURE

THE GAZETTE

WE ALL WANT TO KNOW HOW OUR MONEY'S SPENT
ÇA SENT LA COUPE!

THE JAPAN TIMES

AN INCONCLUSIVE VOTE IN BRITAIN
DEMOCRACY FAR FROM PERFECT - BY DAVID HOWELL
A DANGEROUS DEFICIT OF DEMOCRACY IN BRITAIN - BY KEVIN RAFFERTY

THE JAKARTA POST

SUSNO THE SONGBIRD
NATURAL GAS POLICY REVISITED - HANAN NUGROHO
ACHIEVING SUSTAINABLE ECONOMIC GROWTH - FITHRA FAISAL HASTIADI
DEFENSE AND LEADERS TRANSFORMATION - EVAN A. LAKSMANA

THE KOREA HERALD

ATOMIC RACE
HISTORICAL RECONCILIATION
THE ABUSE OF HISTORY AND THE IRANIAN NUCLEAR BOMB - SHLOMO BEN-AMI
ELENA KAGAN AS SUPREME COURT NOMINEE
WHO GETS REPORTERS' RIGHT TO SHIELD SOURCES?
CARRIERS STILL CRUCIAL TO PROJECTING U.S. POWER
MAKE BP PAY ITS FAIR SHARE OF THE OIL SPILL

CHINA DAILY

HARVESTING RAINWATER
NOT AN EASY EXIT
MIXED SIGNALS FROM KIM'S VISIT - BY ZHANG LIANGUI (CHINA DAILY)
PEOPLE AT HEART OF ADMINISTRATIVE REFORM - BY GRAYSON CLARKE (CHINA DAILY)
HOW DRAGON AND KANGAROO CAN FLY TOGETHER - BY YANG DANZHI (CHINA DAILY)
WILL ASSET BUBBLE GO THE JAPAN WAY? - BY SYETARN HANSAKUL (CHINA DAILY)

DAILY MIRROR

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

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

THE PIONEER

EDITORIAL

AGAINST MODERNITY

KHAPS HAVE NO PLACE IN 21ST CENTURY INDIA

It is extremely unfortunate that someone who had projected himself — and had come to be seen — as a young, educated politician has now chosen to side with regressive social forces in Haryana. That Congress MP Naveen Jindal has decided to champion the cause of khap panchayats and take up their demand for amending the Hindu Marriage Act is deplorable. It is one thing when politicians like INLD chief OP Chautala justify the existence of khap panchayats and defend their so-called role in maintaining 'social harmony' — no one expects anything better from him and his ilk who have traditionally factored in khap panchayats in their electoral calculations. But if young MPs like Mr Jindal — who are supposed to represent the new generation of youthful, forward-looking politicians — start making common cause with khap panchayats then there is every reason to criticise such short-sighted, cynical, competitive electoral politics. For, there is no debate about the fact that these self-proclaimed guardians of social mores are a manifestation of a medieval mindset. Those who justify crimes such as 'honour killings' in order to enforce their writ under the guise of 'safeguarding' our social fabric have no place in 21st century India. There is absolutely nothing pious about their intentions. Khap panchayats are of the same mould as the Taliban: Both use terror to enforce their writ on hapless innocent people; both claim their actions are sanctioned by religion; both take recourse to fanaticism. Those politicians who claim to stand for a modern, forward-looking India must desist the temptation of garnering votes by extending support to khap panchayats; political parties must denounce them and keep a distance.

The demand of khap panchayats to amend the Hindu Marriage Act in a manner so as to reflect their narrow outlook deserves to be rejected without debate or discussion. The Hindu Marriage Act is one of the most egalitarian civil legislations ever enacted and has worked very well since it became law in 1955. Therefore, there is absolutely no reason to tamper with this Act, least of all at the behest of khap panchayats. Moreover, capitulating before the khap panchayats will only encourage other negative forces in society to force their demands through violent means. The price that those who defy the diktats of khap panchayats have to pay is well known — several cases of targeted murders in the name of 'family honour' have surfaced in recent months. To even consider their demand would be to legitimise them. Indeed, any attempt to convey the demands of khap panchayats to Government in order to initiate a 'debate' would be tantamount to granting legitimacy to what is patently unacceptable. The Constitution and not khap panchayats must rule supreme in India.

In any event, khap panchayats do not represent significant opinion, leave alone majority opinion. Their 'influence' is limited to parts of Haryana and western Uttar Pradesh. It is absurd to suggest that khap panchayats represent the 'aspirations' of the Hindu community as a whole — nothing could be farther from the truth. It is welcome that Union Law Minister Veerappa Moily has asserted that the Hindu Marriage Act will not be amended according to the wishes of khap panchayats and that the Government will bring in a new law to punish those guilty of honour killings. This is exactly the kind of firm approach that is needed to keep backward forces at bay.

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

THE PIONEER

EDITORIAL

MADE FOR EACH OTHER

US CAN NEVER ACT AGAINST PAKISTAN

The US has once again demonstrated how weak-kneed it can be while dealing with Pakistan and its global enterprise of exporting terror. After the unravelling of the failed plot to bomb Times Square and the arrest of a Pakistani American, Faisal Shahzad, the Obama Administration had indulged in what has become ritual sabre-rattling by the Americans whenever confronted by the monster of Pakistani terror. Soon after 9/11, the Americans had threatened to bomb Pakistan back to the Stone Age if the then Pakistani regime headed by Gen Pervez Musharraf did not join the US-led war on terror. President George W Bush, not given to the sophistry of his successor, Mr Barack H Obama (the world seems to have forgotten that the current occupant of the White House has a middle name) had been more blunt when he declared: "You are either with us or against us." But though such tough words and fire-and-brimstone threats saw the Pakistanis making a show of joining the American war effort, nothing really changed on the ground. The Islamabad-Rawalpindi alliance became more devious and did under cover what it was doing openly till then. Soon, even that veil was discarded and Pakistan's war on jihadi terror became a terrible joke, despite Frankenstein's monster turning on its creator with mind-numbing cruelty. It's a perverse desire to advance Pakistan's 'strategic' interests by using the weapon of terrorism which continues to compel the Pakistani establishment to nurture jihadis and keep them in fighting spirit. Ironically, the US has been picking up the tab by way of aid to Pakistan to fight terrorism!

If Pakistan had nothing to fear of the Bush Administration, it has no reason to be apprehensive of the Obama Administration's wrath. All it has to do is to feign outrage, organise street demonstrations by mullahs screaming "Death to America", and pass resolutions in its National Assembly. The impact is inevitably magical: Washington begins to bow and scrape to put Islamabad in good humour. Therefore, it is not surprising that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's dire warning to Pakistan that it should be prepared for the consequences if any link was found between its agencies and Shahzad has now turned into whimpering clarification by apologetic bureaucrats in the Obama Administration. As was to be expected, Pakistan furiously remonstrated after Ms Clinton's comments and its lawmakers raucously denounced America while mullahs took to the streets. By Tuesday, anger in Washington had given way to placatory statements, including the incredible clarification that Ms Clinton had been misquoted. In a sense, Pakistan and the US are made for each other.

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

THE PIONEER

EDITORIAL

COUNTDOWN TO CHAOS IN NEPAL

ASHOK K MEHTA

Operation Topple, the Maoist-led indefinite strike to unseat the coalition Government headed by Prime Minister Madhav Kumar Nepal through mass mobilisation and street power has misfired. It was billed as the last battle of the decisive phase of an urban-centric insurrection — even called Jan Andolan III — to recover power Mr Pushpa Kamal Dahal 'Prachanda' and his party had lost constitutionally in May 2009 due to their ill-fated attempt to sack Army Chief Gen Rukmangad Katowal.

The latest people's uprising had the lofty aim of promulgating peace and a people's Constitution from the streets after removing the Nepal Government by a final assault on Singha Durbar, the historic seat of power in Kathmandu.

What went wrong? The Maoists are known to plan operations meticulously, stage-managing every minute detail and factoring the unexpected. But they overlooked the law of diminishing returns when ordinary people, fired with expectations of a new Nepal, were instead confronted with periodic disruptions in normal life (and 12-hour power cuts) due to the Maoists' protracted campaigns of protest and agitation to win back power. "We decided to withdraw the strike due to hardships faced by the people and to foil the Government's conspiracy to instigate confrontation among the masses," announced Prachanda last Friday.

At least the English print media openly questioned the Maoists' un-constitutional strategy to recover power by substituting peaceful protests with selective violence. For once civil society, media, professionals, business and industry staged a peace rally opposing Maoist misuse of people's power. For a change, international pressure from the entire diplomatic corps in Kathmandu, criticism by the UN Human Rights Commissioner Richard Bennett blaming the Maoists for using lathis and rods and involving children, and, significantly, lack of support from Kathmandu's prosperous Newari community were the other reasons for the orders to retreat and regroup.

Prachanda blamed the media and intelligentsia for their 'dishonesty' in working against the Maoist movement and said: "We will settle scores with journalists and intellectuals." The threat has to be taken seriously after what has happened in the past to journalists like Uma Singh, Tika Bisht, Muktinath Adhikary and others. While 27 professionals have sought an apology from Prachanda for his "indecent, irresponsible and undemocratic threat of war", the Federation of Nepali Journalists has issued a statement accusing him of creating terror in the media. The riposte taken together is unprecedented. The banner headline in Republica encapsulated the mood in Kathmandu: "Triumph of People Power: Maoists Withdraw Strike." Another newspaper headline read: "Silent Majority Awakens: Big Setback for Maoists."

Useful lessons have emerged from the failed people's uprising. First, what worked against King Gyanendra during April 2006 will not bear fruit against a constitutionally-installed Government. In seizing power, Maoists have tried two of their options: The gun which they abandoned by choice in 2006; and gradual subversion of the state through mass mobilisation, threat, intimidation and psy-war. This is the favoured strategy.

Returning to the jungles is a closed option but options for waging war by other means — as 'Operation Topple' has shown — have not been exhausted. While some of the Maoist leaders may have transformed into legislators espousing democracy, their foot soldiers in both the People's Liberation Army and Young Communist League remain in the business of smash and grab. From the recent cacophony of bluster and rhetoric, the one sane word that has resonated is 'consensus'. Only by adding compromise to consensus is there a reasonable chance of crafting the elusive package deal to break the political deadlock.

Initially the Maoists had said they would call off the indefinite strike only once Mr Nepal had resigned followed by a national unity Government led by Prachanda. Their fallback position is that Mr Nepal has to go before any talks can take place with the Government. But Mr Nepal, after the Maoist withdrawal of the strike, has raised the stakes for his resignation from "call off the strike and find a national consensus candidate to replace me" to "first disband YCL and integrate Maoist combatants". The peace process is turning into a game of snakes and ladders.

While most people in Nepal are saying that the prickly issues are the PLA's integration and drafting a new Constitution, few are focussed on the centrality of who gets to lead a national unity Government of consensus — Prachanda, as the Maoists insist, or someone else? The rehabilitation and integration of the PLA is a tactical problem and has little bearing on drafting the Constitution except whether it should be completed before it or after. What numbers — 5,000 or 8,000 PLA fighters — are to be integrated with the Nepali Army is a bargaining chip in the package deal.

The two other outstanding issues are dismantling of the YCL and return of seized properties. Even if they agree, it will not be easy for Maoists to implement these on the ground before May 24 (the proposed date for clinching the deal), just four days before the deadline of May 28, when the Constituent Assembly will cease to exist and

the 2006 interim council will expire.

Sixteen days are left to put the peace process back on the rails. Nepalis claim they have the divine skills to wrap up any agreement at the eleventh hour. This time around a new Comprehensive Peace Agreement, reworking the implementation of past commitments within the framework of a new national unity Government, appears to be a bridge too far. The reality is that only a Government with Maoists on board can achieve a two-thirds majority to avert a constitutional crisis on May 28.

Assuming Nepal succeeds in forming a national unity Government before May 28 with a package deal, the Constituent Assembly can then amend the interim Constitution, extending its life by six or 12 months. Should this not be possible President Ram Baran Yadav (whom the Maoists detest) will resume Emergency powers to either extend the House by six months or order fresh elections. The Maoists will want neither the dissolution of the House (as they will lose their primacy as the single largest party) nor new elections for fear of the unexpected, resulting from the fall in their popularity.

Finding a consensus Prime Minister for the national unity Government is the challenge, for he would have to belong to a party other than the three main ones — Maoists, Nepali Congress and UML. Prachanda as Prime Minister, on the other hand, will acknowledge the people's mandate, but through the back door.

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

THE PIONEER

EDITORIAL

MAKE EDUCATION MARKET FRIENDLY

MK BHAT

The hype created by the Human Resource Development Ministry regarding changes in higher education makes it imperative to evaluate the costs and the benefits of the planned reforms. Higher education in the country is under pressure to perform mainly due to the increase in demand in the service sector and an increase in the number of students going abroad for further studies. The latter, representing a serious outflow of funds and resources from the country, is increasing every year. Indian students spend more than $ 40 billion annually for their education abroad. Earlier, students preferred foreign institutions for specialised studies only. But now, our youth are even opting to do their graduate studies from foreign varsities.

The question arises: Why can't our universities attract international students like they used to in the past? The truth is our varsities fall way short of the mark when it comes to research. Thus, in order to compete with international universities and restore the prestige that higher education in India once had, a huge amount of investment, both financial and material, is required at the higher education level. Our education system needs to be market-oriented.

It is not cheap labour but the availability of a vibrant pool of scientists, engineers, management specialists, etc, that can help India surge forward. But suspicion regarding private educational institutions on one hand and the failure of regulatory authorities to maintain acceptable standards of quality in higher education on the other, has made things murky. On top of this, the Government has neither funds nor the will to improve the existing set-up. This is exemplified by the culture of paid seats that has come to be.

Government institutes for higher studies continue to draw students because they hardly have any competition. But it is precisely because of this reason that they have failed to adopt to market changes. Thus, for higher education in India to improve, there needs to be competition for the Government-aided colleges along with a more welcoming approach to the private education sector, notwithstanding strict scrutiny.

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

THE PIONEER

OPED

CRIME AND PUNISHMENT

THE TRIAL OF AJMAL AMIR KASAB SHOWS THAT OUR CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM CAN DELIVER RESULTS IN TIME EVEN WHILE FOLLOWING THE DUE COURSE OF JUSTICE. IT RESTORES FAITH IN INDIA AS A COUNTRY GOVERNED BY LAW AND UPHOLDS THE MAJESTY OF THE INDIAN JUDICIARY. YET, WE DO NEED URGENT REFORMS AND A TOUGH LAW TO COMBAT TERRORISM TO SAFEGUARD INDIA'S SOVEREIGNTY

PC SHARMA

The media coverage of the trial and sentencing of Mohammed Ajmal Amir Kasab has been most telling. "Kasab gets what he gave — DEATH", said a headline in a leading daily articulating, perhaps, the cathartic relief that Judge Tahilyani's judgement seemed to have given to millions of people troubled by feelings of vengeance and vendetta.

No terrorist strike schemed in and launched from a foreign land convulsed the nation more than the events of 26/11. Being in fight for long against home-grown as well as foreign-based terrorism, India woke up to an altogether new reality on November 26, 2008 when Mumbai was attacked by depredators coming from Pakistan via the sea route. This strike was first of its kind for the targets chosen and weaponry employed. In its intensity, it was close to an invasion. Obviously a traumatised nation demanded quick response and speedy justice.

The trial of the case registered against the only surviving accused, Kasab, took 17 months. Six hundred and fifty witnesses were examined and an estimated Rs 35 crore was spent, a major portion of which was used for ensuring foolproof security to the prisoner at Arthur Road Jail. In a system often criticised for its delays and interlocutory litigations, Kasab's trial, therefore, deserves genuine applause for delivering speedy justice.

People are exercised over the acquittal of the two Indian men accused in the case, Fahim Ansari and Sabauddin, who are said to have laid the ground for the terrorist attack. Certainly, the law will take its course in their case but let this not cloud our view of the Indian criminal justice system of its fairness, transparency and freedom from prejudice. The high legal standards displayed in providing legal aid to Kasab demonstrates the majesty of our legal system which has, undoubtedly, enhanced India's reputation as a nation espousing the rule of law. It goes without saying that this case is also an example of the human rights standards being followed in India even for people accused of, and under trial for, the gravest of offences.

Mumbai was blighted in the past also by serial bombings in March 1993 and the bombing of commuter trains in July 2006, resulting in the loss of hundreds of innocent lives and huge damage to and destruction of property. The task before the investigating agencies and the courts was, undoubtedly, both daunting and stupendous, but the long time taken in investigations and the much longer time taken for trial tended to undermine the faith of the people in the credibility of the criminal justice system. A stay was granted on the trial of those accused of being involved in the train bombings which has been vacated only a few days back. The judgement in the cases of the 1993 serial bombings was delivered in 2007. In comparison, the trial of Kasab has been the fastest and should serve to restore faith in the criminal justice system.

Kasab's case holds both a lesson and a hope. It is a lesson for the state to learn that cases of terrorism demand fast track investigations and speedy trials and it is hoped that a sound justice delivery system can be an answer to terrorism. Needless to say it is an imperative in the context of terrorism which has been universally acknowledged as a threat to human existence and civilisation.

Justice lies not in retaliatory actions (though when the situation demands it is criminal not to resort to them). In a society governed by the rule of law it has to be pursued intrinsically through the criminal justice system and within the boundaries of constitutionally granted norms. But if a crime has been committed, the criminal justice system must operate to mete out punishment following the due process of law. As has been famously said, "Law should not sit simply, while those who defy it go free and those who seek its protection lose hope."

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has, on several occasions, stated unequivocally at national and international fora that fighting terrorism should be accorded utmost priority. Let strengthening our criminal justice system, too, be accorded the same priority "to ensure the protection of the weak against the strong, law abiding against the lawless, peaceful against the violent".

In his report on reforming the criminal justice system, Justice Malimath has critically examined the areas that need urgent reforms aimed at, among other things, providing "effective response to the challenge of terrorism". Former Chief Justice of India KG Balakrishnan, in a recent interview, said, "India should consider putting in place a tough anti-terror law that can enable and help probe agencies crack terror cases… it is time for Parliament to debate the need for a suitable anti-terror law in India." Let us address this issue seriously; as jurist Fali Nariman puts it: "This is the last bus to catch."

Kasab's case also calls into focus the role of the police. They are the first in setting the legal machinery in motion in the criminal justice system. Police investigations of terrorist crimes —which are crimes under the established laws of the land — are the bedrock of all court trials. Their response has to be the first response in any situation that imperils internal stability.

Failings in the functioning of the police have been critically examined by the High Level Inquiry Committee appointed in the aftermath of 26/11 and headed by former Union Home Secretary RD Pradhan. Chinks in their armour have been clearly identified. While applauding the supreme sacrifices made by the police and the people in confronting the terror attack, the committee has not failed to point out the lapses on the part of individual officers which deserve serious action and should not be ignored at all.

Regarding the failure of intelligence agencies, indeed, there was failure. A new genre of advisories and warnings lacking in specificity and couched in abstract terminology is not a good name for intelligence. Credible intelligence containing area-specific information which has proximity to events serves the purpose of not only forewarning but fore-assuming as well.

Lastly, this is a moment in independent India's history that should compel all wings of the state — the executive, the legislature and the judiciary — to do serious reflection on the need to usher in reforms in all their respective spheres that should act as a bulwark against not only terrorism and militancy but any threat to India's sovereignty. If we do that we shall re-emerge as a nation stronger in spirit, buoyed by a new vision and united forever.

-- The writer is a Member of the National Human Rights Commission and former Director of CBI.

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

THE PIONEER

OPED

PAPERING IT OVER

WITH CIVIC POLLS NEARING, TRINAMOOL AND CONGRESS DOWNPLAY DIFFERENCES IN BENGAL

SHIKHA MUKERJEE

Clarity, surely, rather than confusion was the objective of the Trinamool Congress-Congress decision for a mutual separation, at least for the forthcoming municipal elections. As celebrity political faces from the Congress abandon the grand old party, the latest being Ms Mohua Moitra, to join Ms Mamata Banerjee the acrimony and the bitterness ought to have spiralled.

Curiously, the contrary is true. With election day coming up, both sides seem to be eager to present a patch-up. Having lashed out in the most vivid language, Ms Banerjee's volte-face urging her party candidates in Kolkata to speak with restraint, avoid hurling abuse and blaming the Congress for the break-up is intriguing. The Congress always more staid had not indulged in over the top descriptions of the Trinamool Congress after the break-up. Even so, the Congress is trying to impress upon voters that the decision to separate is a temporary affair.

If neither side is comfortable going it alone and both want to leave almost every door open to stage a quick re-entry once the municipal elections are over, then why did they indulge in acrimonious exchanges in the first place? In 13 out of 81 municipalities, the Trinamool Congress and the Congress have reached seat adjustments. With 20 days left to go, the chances of more adjustments are increasing, giving a lie to the ringing declarations of rivalry that preceded the final date for submitting nominations.

Ms Banerjee has welcomed what she described as the "peoples" eagerness to bring about an alliance in specific areas and for specific seats. Bitter Congress leaders like Mr Abdul Mannan have accepted that mutual adjustments of the two parties in Hooghly district are naturally occurring phenomena.

While there could be a variety of reasons for the Trinamool Congress and the Congress belatedly agreeing to say and do nothing that will jeopardise the alliance once this test run is over, the most obvious is that they need each other. The Congress needs the Trinamool Congress to project a respectable presence in West Bengal. The Trinamool Congress needs the Congress even more because the 13-14 per cent votes that the "signboard party" attracts could mean a world of difference for Ms Banerjee, certainly in Kolkata, where the mother of all battles is being fought and in Hooghly and East and West Midnapore where the Communist Party of India(Marxists) are on shaky ground.

This being the municipal elections, there are no rural votes to compensate the damage for any of the parties in the fray. Unlike the urban voter, especially the Kolkata voter, who is notoriously fickle, the rural voter takes longer to switch political sides. Therefore appealing to voters and delivering a message that sticks is critical. The deliberate underplaying of differences, rivalries and bitterness between the Trinamool Congress and the Congress is clearly an attempt to ensure that the non-CPI(M) voter goes in for tactical voting; that is, pressing the button on the symbol most likely to win in that constituency.

There are "theories" galore about how all this is affecting the canny Kolkata voter for one and the urban voter in the remaining 80 municipalities across the State. The first theory is that "even though the Trinamool Congress is a bad option, there is no alternative." In other words, the CPI(M) is not an option under any circumstances. The second theory is that "the Congress will be wiped out" having fallen apart from the Trinamool Congress. Underlying this is the presumption that the grand old party has no independent presence in West Bengal. The third theory is that "the Congress may do badly but the Trinamool Congress will do worse," implying that the CPI(M) will benefit from the rift. None of the theories, of course gives the CPI(M) a chance at winning in Kolkata and long odds at winning in all the 54 municipalities that it controlled after the 2005 elections.

The abundance of theories and the variety of choices that the voter has indicates that at the ground level, there is a churning. The municipal elections may reflect some of that churning up, but it could take longer for the soil to be fully ploughed up and to resettle. As has happened in Uttar Pradesh, the Congress is beginning to revive after being almost wiped out. It is presumably because the party has a phoenix like capacity to be reborn that there was a fight with the Trinamool Congress. The test of course is not for the Congress to stay in the game with a respectable number of winners; this election is about the CPI(M)'s capacity to deliver the impossible — 50 per cent of votes in every ward of the 81 municipalities where elections are being held. Ambitious, delusional or realistic? Voters and the CPI(M) will find out on May 30..

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

THE PIONEER

OPED

UTTARAKHAND SOWING SEEDS FOR A BETTER TOMORROW

THE WAY FORWARD TO SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE LIES IN STICKING TO TRADITIONAL METHODS, WRITES BABA MAYARAM

At a recent agricultural festival in Indore, Uttarakhand was represented by a stall displaying traditional seeds. Fascinated by their texture, colours and sizes, I was tempted to pick them up. The stall stocked small plastic bags containing seeds of dhan, rajma, mundwa (kodo), marsa (ram dana), jhangora, wheat, lobia and bhatt. I later learnt that the credit for this display and the 'seed movement' that has ensured that these seeds remain in circulation amidst an environment of aggressive biotech altered varieties goes to conservationist Vijay Jaddhari. He comes from the land of the Chipko Movement which practised the Gandhian methods of satyagraha and non-violent resistance, through the act of hugging trees to protect them from being felled.

Mr Jaddhari has actively been protecting the biodiversity of the region through the 'seeds movement'. He started to revive traditional agricultural practices once he sensed the damage chemical fertilisers and new technologies could wreak on farming practices. This was the motivation behind the movement and at the core of this lay urgency to protect local varieties of seeds.

The move towards replacing traditional practices with chemical agriculture has, according to him, been a surreptitious one. Hapless farmers, unaware of the disastrous effects of chemical fertilisers, were literally lured into using them. This in a sense signified the departure from traditional and sustainable agricultural practices.

According to Mr Jaddhari, "We tried to find native seeds… we kept searching for it. Finally, we met such farmers who do mixed farming". This was a turning point in his search This was the concept of 'Barahanaja' which literally means 12 seeds at one time.

This holistic agricultural practice has been handed down for generations. 'Barahanaja' helps in producing a good crop, retaining productivity of the land and ensuring that the cultivation is integrated with animal husbandry, the other crucial sphere in the agricultural sector. Farming and maintaining livestock are two pillars of the agricultural economy and 'Barahanaja' lends itself very well to this interface.

The number 12 is only indicative; it does not mean that the cropping and sowing pattern cannot use more varieties. The core idea is the strengthening of the twin pillars of farming and animal husbandry. This implies optimum utilisation of by-products of each to boost the other. For instance, the non-harvested portions of the crop become fodder for animals and the dung from the animals become fertile manure for the farms. By-products of harvested crops could also be used to produce bio-fertiliser this holistic pattern of agriculture has been the base of traditional farming.

Going back to the stall at the agricultural festival, I was curious to know what kinds of seeds are commonly used for this 'wonder package'. I learnt that koda (mundwa), marsa (ramdana), ogal (kuttu), jonyala (jawar), corn, rajma, gahath (kulath), bhatt, raiyas, urad, sunta, ragadwas, tor, mung, bhanjgir, til, jakhya, san, kakhdi are some of the varieties. The cultivation pattern hinges on the irrigation facilities available. Thirteen per cent of land in Uttarakhand has irrigation facilities while 87 per cent remains non-irrigated. Interestingly, it is the un-irrigated land, which is suitable for cultivation of Barahanaja, dalhan (a mix of 'dal' seeds), tilhan (a mix of oil-producing seeds). It is common to find fields left uncultivated after harvest, a natural way to enable it to regain fertility. In today's milieu when the focus is to suck out the most from the land, this seems a misnomer. It would be considered a good farming practice, for instance, to produce three crops in a year. However, this is tantamount to the abuse of nutrients and moisture inherent in the soil. This would eventually render the soil unfit for use beyond the immediate sense.

'Barahanaja' though in use in Uttarakhand is not confined to the region alone. The actual seeds may differ but the concept remains universal. Several mixed-crop cultivation patterns are popular in dry lands of Madhya Pradesh. One such is 'Utera' practiced in forestlands of Hoshangabad. Here farmers sow corn, urad, soyabean and jawar. The dry lands of Satpuda forest and non-irrigated areas are used for Utera. 'Birra' a modified form of Utera uses wheat and chana.

It is undeniable that Barahanaja and similar practices are invaluable for the ecology as it retains the productivity of the soil and thus ensures sustainable agriculture. They play a vital role in protecting rural livelihoods, which in our country are largely agriculture based. This type of mixed farming signifies a safety net for farmers. If one harvest fails, one can cover the deficit in the next harvest. This does not happen in the case of cash crops as if once damaged by insects or natural calamities, the loss for farmers is permanent.

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

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

THE TIMES OF INDIA

COMMENT

GREECE AND US

The near-trillion dollar EU-IMF bailout for Greece and other weakened Eurozone nations was meant to "shock and awe". It achieved the intended effect, at least early this week. Indian shares gained the most in Asia piggybacking on a big global markets rally, with the Sensex on Monday swinging to a 10-month high after a week of bearish sentiments. With Portugal, Spain, Ireland and Italy threatening to catch Greece's flu, investors had been spooked everywhere. The global economy's recovery is still fragile. That this rebound won't be derailed courtesy resolute action the US, UK and Japan have also unlocked liquidity channels got a thumbs up from the bourses.

While letting Greece sink was never an option, EU members have shown grit about sticking together. This was key to rebuilding market confidence in their ability to tackle any sovereign debt issues and shield the euro. But are Europe's troubles over? Not just yet. The bailout package may have political costs for individual governments. It's resented in many European societies, including big player Germany. As for Greece, austerity-related conditionalities mandating deep cuts in public spending that'll affect workers are unpopular. Protests against them may not subside anytime soon. It's also felt that easy aid flow to loan-hungry European nations could deepen their long-term indebtedness apart from fuelling inflation, unless fiscal discipline and institutional reform go hand in hand.

For India, the EU's a hefty trade partner and investor. Besides, Europe makes for over a fourth of its exports. So, we can't but be concerned how the Greek drama plays out. But if the issue is contagion, it may be said that India's relatively insulated. If anything, since the US subprime crisis broke in 2008, emerging economies and growth engines like India and China have looked in top form as investment destinations. Concerning Greece's more recent turmoil, policymakers rightly say India's stock can only rise further with global funds seeking secure parking lots. It's no accident the government is said to be considering hiking the FII limit in the domestic debt market.

However, one reason why Asian dynamos like India won't be hit hard by Greece is precisely the way their debt market has been structured to manage risks. Global rating agency Standard & Poor's has said high debt countries like India are unlikely to face investor fickleness, unlike European nations, because they borrow mainly domestically and keep external debt manageable. The importance of instruments for financial cushioning should be kept in mind in these uncertain times. The other obvious lesson for us is that growth, fiscal rectitude and reform are interrelated. Post-Lehman global crises have demonstrated this like never before.

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

THE TIMES OF INDIA

COMMENT

MISSION POSSIBLE

When the government of India proposed to inject substantial funding to boost its solar energy mission that aimed to generate 20,000 mw of grid connected power by 2020 the idea was to encourage both the demand and supply side of an energy resource that was renewable as well as clean. Investment in solar and renewable energy should be strategic, as these are sectors that will be big in the near future and enhanced Indian capabilities in solar and renewable energies will stand the country in good stead in more ways than one. If we could develop indigenous nuclear capabilities, why not solar or renewable know-how as well? In developed countries in Europe, for example, there has been ample investment by local companies in solar energy production, opening up markets not only at home but also in the export area.

In that context the government's decision to import wholesale solar cells and modules from other countries to attain the objectives of the solar mission, rather than source them from domestic equipment makers, is disappointing. Contrast China, where a $586 billion stimulus package has been given to encourage domestic manufacturers. Though the government's argument is that opening the market to foreign competitors will only help speed up achievement of solar energy mission goals, care has to be taken not to kill off domestic initiative altogether. Some ways to negotiate this chasm are to initiate joint ventures between foreign and domestic manufacturers, adding value to the product, and mandating a certain amount of domestic content in renewable energy imports as many other countries do.

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

THE TIMES OF INDIA

EDITORIAL

CAN PAKISTAN BE SECULAR?

GAUTAM ADHIKAR

WASHINGTON: To anyone who knew him in this country, Faisal Shahzad seemed like a likeable but unremarkable young man, a naturalised American citizen, living a middle class life in Connecticut with his wife and two children. Then came Saturday, May 1, 2010, when he allegedly tried to blow up a van loaded with explosives in New York's crowded Times Square. He failed and was later arrested. His story has set off a flurry of questions here: Why did he do it? What are the links between Islam and jihad? And, why does Pakistan figure so ominously in a majority of terror-related incidents around the world?

The British authorities said sometime ago that 70 per cent of terror-related events in their country had a link with Pakistan. Indians can shake their heads in empathy; so can the Americans after a series of attempted cases of terrorism involving US citizens becoming radicalised after hooking up with jihadi outfits in Pakistan. What is it with Pakistan that jihadis find such a hospitable climate for their activities?

Writing in The Washington Post last Monday, Fareed Zakaria asked why Pakistan remained a terrorist hothouse at a time when jihadists were losing support elsewhere in the Muslim world. "The answer is simple," he said. "From its founding, the Pakistani government has supported and encouraged jihadi groups, creating an atmosphere that has allowed them to flourish." Unsurprisingly, it's a conclusion with which many thoughtful Pakistanis agree. That much was evident last Monday at a seminar in this town.

Inaugurating the conference on 'Competing Religious Narratives in Pakistan: Can Islam Be an Agency for Peace', Husain Haqqani, Pakistan's erudite ambassador to the US, offered a strikingly candid set of observations. He began by quoting from an April 1957 essay by Hasan Suhrawardy, then the prime minister, in which the veteran politician wondered, apparently in exasperation with Islamist ideologues, whether the insertion in the constitution of the adjective "Islamic" to describe the state was meant in any way to be a sign of courage or moral excellence. Today, said Haqqani, the 'vision' thing is hardly discussed. Popular discourse in Pakistan is over trivialities and dominated by conspiracy theories.

Is Pakistan an ideological state? Or is it a nation state, asked the ambassador, making it clear that he stood with those who wanted it to be a nation, in which secular politics formed the chief channel of discourse, and not a theocratic entity. "Politics is the grand avenue of service to humanity," he declared. Religious parties could have a legitimate role in politics but they must not have a veto over the country's direction by threatening those who would support pluralism and democracy.

Haqqani's act was followed by similarly insightful and forthright presentations by, among others, two Pakistani intellectuals. Farzana Shaikh, who is with Chatham House in London, pleaded for the introduction of a minimal form of secularism in a rapidly declining Pakistan which she said was struggling to survive in "desperate times". The state's identity was not clear from its very start. Given the circumstances in which the demand for a separate nation called Pakistan arose, even its early secularists had to rely on Islamic terminology to state their case. "An ambiguous and ample role was awarded to Islam," she pointed out. Later, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto flirted with a form of "folk Islam" while General Zia-ul Haq openly implemented an "ulema-inspired, shariatised Islam". The military, in power for most of that country's life, relies today on a "Muslim communal discourse".

Ayesha Siddiqa, who wrote a fine account in her book Military Inc of the spread of the Pakistani military's financial tentacles, warned that jihadist influence was far more widespread than just in the FATA region. Contrary to the belief of many who thought some jihadi groups worked independently from others, she asserted that all jihadists were interconnected. She too pleaded for an attempt by the country's elite to separate Islam from politics of the state. For that to happen the educated would have to "create a new narrative" on secular politics and give up attempts to argue that this or that variety of Islam, such as Sufism, could bring moderation to the land.

It is probably too late in the day to introduce a strict form of secularism in Pakistan. The nation was founded as a separate land for Muslims of the subcontinent. That did not happen; most Muslims in South Asia live outside Pakistan, which in fact stopped further Muslim migration soon after its creation. It has become a military state, with a patina of democratic representation without real power. And it is becoming a land for ideological Islamists instead of a nation for Muslims. Can secularism work there?

Secularism exists in various forms. The French have a hard variety, in which the state tries to preserve a republican non-religious uniformity; the Americans believe in keeping equidistance from all religions while maintaining a wall between religion and the state. India offers a third variety, in which the secular state tries to treat all religions equally; the state, as well as the judiciary, often intervenes in religious affairs while religious considerations can influence public policy. But it maintains a pluralist tolerance and allows all religions free play.

Can Pakistan become a bit like India? Probably not, but it may be worth a thought.

The writer is a FICCI-EWC fellow at East West Centre.

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

THE TIMES OF INDIA

'INDIA CAN BECOME A MEDICAL TOURISM DESTINATION'

ROMAIN MAITRA

Thailand imparts seminal importance to tourism. From fewer than 1,00,000 foreign tourists five decades ago, it now welcomes over 14 million overseas visitors each year. Zadok S Lempert, a noted expert in healthcare tourism and president, Medico Management & Travel Services International Co Ltd, Bangkok, spoke with Romain Maitra about how health and medical care could be successfully combined with tourism:

What is the scope of medical tourism offered in Thailand?

Thailand looks back upon a rich traditional and natural alternative medical history containing the famous Thai massage and the well-known Thai wellness spa therapy. Complementing these physical treatments, Thailand banks on a very special cuisine, made of fresh vegetables, fruits, herbs, which when cooked carefully with fish, is the basis for many detoxification, weight loss, rejuvenation methods for people who wish to refresh and re-energise from a hectic lifestyle.

All these are part of the complementary medical treatments available alongside the numerous state-of-the-art hospitals in Bangkok and the major cities of the country, which were developed over the past 5-6 years. These hospitals now termed as 'international' have upgraded their facilities and personnel to cater to the needs and expectations of demanding international visitors. They offer special reception facilities with multilingual staff, swift and sophisticated referral procedures, leading edge diagnostic technology paired with experienced and knowledgeable physicians who have gained practical experience abroad. The range of treatments in the hospitals covers different parts of the body, from top to toe, and the prices are very reasonable for people coming from the dollar/euro/pound zones.

How do you combine tourism with the medical treatment package?

People who travel with the purpose of purchasing medical and wellness treatments alongside any other desired infrastructural services (logistics, attractions) are defined as medical tourists, and belong to the special interest segments of general tourism. Hospitals, besides having to offer specialised medical interventions, have become part of overall travel-services packages. Although the major point of interest for a medical tourist is taking care of his health conditions, complementary services like airport welcome, transportation, accommodation, escort and translations, accounting-audits are also booked and assembled into a services package.

Accompanying persons (family, partners or friends) need attention while their companions are being treated. To complete the whole picture, rehabilitation treatment is usually provided in specialised health resorts, mostly outside of towns. Besides, specialised packages in rehabilitation, prevention, rejuvenation, re-energising mostly sought after by Europeans seeking holistic treatment vacations should also be considered part of the larger healthcare tourism. These are booked as typical (however, specialised) vacation packages.

Do you think India has the potential to develop medical tourism?

India has all the ingredients to develop into a sophisticated medical tourism destination. It has a long-standing traditional herbal and alternative treatments history, it has various weather zones to cater for different types of stay, people speak English, its academics and physicians are sophisticated and knowledgeable. What is needed now is the upgrading of infrastructure and facilities.

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

THE TIMES OF INDIA

HANG 'EM HIGH

JUG SURAIYA

Last week, the media were full of images of joyous celebrations in various parts of India. People were shown lighting celebratory firecrackers and distributing sweets. One young lad held up a large placard with a message scrawled on it: 'Hang him in Bhendi Bazaar'. The reference, of course, was to Ajmal Kasab, the abominated and sole surviving assassin of 26/11.

Interestingly enough, all the people shown on television and in the papers seemed to be Muslims, as could be told by the caps they were wearing. Do Muslims in India have to try harder than the majority community to prove their patriotism, as some have suggested? Or is it just that it is the media which create this impression through their own bias in the selection of images that they make public?

In any event, the boy with the placard seemed to sum up the overall public mood, across all communities: most people wanted Kasab to hang, and not a few wanted him to be hanged in public. Regrettably for them, the authorities tend to be prissy about these matters and are unlikely to oblige. If Kasab is eventually hanged -- and this still remains a big 'if', dependent as it is on further due processes of the law, including the possibility of a presidential pardon -- it will be a closely-guarded, almost hush-hush affair, attended only by law enforcement personnel, representatives of the legal system, official physicians and perhaps a maulvi.

Those who believe in the deterrence factor of capital punishment might be puzzled by the veil of discretion with which officialdom masks the executions it periodically carries out. If the legal and moral justification for capital punishment -- be it for a terrorist like Kasab, or any other perpetrator of the 'rarest of rare' crimes -- is not revenge but the belief that it will deter future criminality, then surely it would make sense to make hanging and other forms of execution as public as possible, ensure prime-time viewing, so to speak, to maximise their deterrent message?

However, in India and in other countries where capital punishment is still practised, the authorities concerned tend to be squeamish about making such events into a public tamasha. This was not always the case. Till as late as the early 19th century, public hangings were quite the order of the day in many parts of the world, including England and Europe. Eyewitness accounts have described them as being festive occasions, like fun fairs, with vendors of snacks and souvenirs doing brisk business.

Particularly popular as a spectator sport was the form of execution, discontinued in the 18th century, in which the condemned person was hung, drawn and quartered: hung by the neck till almost dead, brought down and disembowelled alive, and then 'quartered' by having both arms and legs chopped off.

These extreme methods of making condemned persons pay 'their just dues to society' were gradually discontinued because of qualms that such spectacles -- whether or not they deterred criminals in the making -- might brutalise the general populace. It is such fears of societal brutalisation that has made all executions -- including those carried out by 'humane' injection in the US -- off-limits for the public.

Are such fears justified in the Indian context? The widespread enthusiasm generated by news of Kasab's death sentence suggests that they might not be. As so-called 'honour' killings, bride-burning, and regular outbreaks of caste and communal carnage show, India's is a violent society, a polity of a billion-plus in which human life is cheap. Would a few, well deserved public executions further brutalise us?

A lot of people who said they wanted a grandstand view of Kasab's execution don't seem to think so. If public executions regain favour thanks to popular support they might even become money-spinning events. Could there be a rival to T20, a new IPL: the Indian Phansi League?

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

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

HINDUSTAN TIMES

EDITORIAL

NO PLACE FOR PARALLEL COURTS

ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES CAN HAVE NO TRUCK WITH BACKWARD KHAP PANCHAYATS

Regressive forces are known to take a mile when given an inch. This seems to be the case with the khap panchayats of Haryana who have now taken to issuing ultimatums to MPs and MLAs to support their illegal acts which masquerade as tradition. Recent statements from a former chief minister of the state and a prominent MP appear to have emboldened these village courts which dispense instant justice to those they perceive as crossing the lines of `culture' and `tradition'. The main issue that these khaps have been raising is that of marriages within the same gotra for which they have sought amendments to the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
Fortunately, the government has turned this down. It is a fact that under guise of punishing, often with death, those who pur- portedly marry within their caste, the khaps are actually vic- timising those who chose to marry someone of their choice.

Very few who have been at the receiving end of the khaps' bru- tal justice have actually married within their own caste. No one has the right to take the law into their own hands, and this crime is doubly compounded when it seemingly gets the sanc- tion of elected representatives who are the ultimate custodi- ans of the law.

While these public functionaries may intend to express their support for traditional societal structures, the message that goes out is that they condone the barbaric practices unleashed by these khaps. The Haryana khaps should take a leaf out of the book of the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee in Punjab that decreed that anyone found guilty of female foeticide or sex selection tests would be ostracised from the community. It has also instituted a cradle scheme for unwanted girl children. Haryana has the second highest per capita income in the country but among the lowest male- female sex ratios. The khaps would be better employed fighting these social evils than trying to ensure the purity of caste in marriage.

The disregard for the due process of law on the part of the khaps was blatantly on display in a recent incident in Mirchpur village in which 20 Dalit homes were torched by upper castes. A handicapped girl and her father died in the incident. Yet the khaps have decreed that the culprits were innocent and issued an ultimatum to the government that they be released. The khaps must clearly be told both by the law enforcement agencies and elected representatives that no one has any quarrel with upholding traditions. But when under guise of doing so, they are threatening the constitutionally guaranteed right to life of people, they must face the appropri- ate punishment. No one should have the licence to run a parallel judiciary.

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

HINDUSTAN TIMES

IS HE IN THE HOOD?

Is the poor lady feeling the pressures of office? How else can you explain US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's latest take on Pakistan's commitment to the hunt for Osama bin Laden? In an interview to a TV channel, Ms Clinton said some lower-level officials in the Pakistani administration, not the top leaders, know where bin Laden and Mullah Omar are. However, she added, the US needs to "stand up to the current dispensation in Islamabad" because there's a "sea change" in their assurance towards the anti-terror strategy. Are we the only ones who are confused?

But how did Ms Clinton get this bit of news? Surely, there's no hotline between these lowly officials and her office. Or is this part of a cunning ploy on the part of US spooks to let old Osama know that his whereabouts are no longer of great concern to the mighty and that this knowledge is in the hands of those lower down the pecking order? Could this egg him on to fold up his tent in the Tora Bora caves and reveal himself to the world if only to reinforce that he cannot be taken so lightly.

But perhaps Ms Clinton in her efforts to sound menacing is missing a vital piece of information that eagle-eyes M. Ahmadinejad of Iran has discerned. The fact that Osama may be lurking around somewhere near 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Now the Iranian prez may be on to something. Where better to cool your heels when Uncle Sam is looking for you all over the world than near the Commander-in-Chief of the US forces. Maybe someone low down in the US administration's hierarchy has some dope on this.

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

HINDUSTAN TIMES

STRIKING A HIGH NOTE

MARK SOFER

In the words of the founding father of Zionism, Theodore Herzl, "If you will it, it is no dream". This year we celebrate Herzl's 150th birthday, together with 62 years of Israel's independence, and 18 years of diplomatic relations between Israel and India. The number 18 in Jewish tradition signifies life, and I can proudly say that never have the relations between our two countries been more alive than they are today.

Mutual civilian trade has multiplied over 20-fold, cultural relations are booming, agricultural ties on both the federal and state level are unprecedented and other fields of joint interest such as tourism, defence, homeland security, political interaction, telecommunication and academic cooperation have blossomed far beyond expectations.

Underlying these dynamics lies the high repute in India for Israeli achievements in the fields of water management, drip-irrigation technologies, "making the desert bloom" and hi-tech innovation, coupled with the awe and admiration in Israeli society for Indian culture and mentality and its capacity to absorb and adapt state-of-the-art technology. At the basis of Israeli and Indian society lie the highest respect for education and the family, a shared value system of democracy and freedom of expression, and striving for just peace for themselves and their neighbours in their respective conflict-ridden regions.

While mutual civilian trade has topped the $4 billion mark and two-way investment is not lagging far behind, I feel perhaps the greatest sense of pride in the burgeoning agricultural activity between us. Since the signing of the Indo-Israel Agriculture Cooperation Agreement in 2007, this cooperation has grown dramatically. Aimed at the small farmer, it encompasses the setting-up of excellence centres in such fields as horticulture, floriculture, post-harvest management, training, yield improvement and new technologies, with the emphasis on Haryana, Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu, Gujarat and Rajasthan.

At the private sector level too, Indo-Israeli agricultural cooperation has reached new heights as seen in the establishment in Rajasthan of seven olive plantations, using the world's most advanced technologies or by the establishment of a dairy farm in Andhra Pradesh using Israeli technology that brings yields of over 40 litres of milk per cow per day. Israeli drip-irrigation systems are prevalent throughout India and our new area of cooperation — water management and technologies — offers great promise in this era of rising food prices.

But over and above the practical ramifications of Indo-Israel cooperation lies the friendship between our people. Annually 40,000 Israeli tourists visit India. This 'pilgrimage' to India is common for young people after their national service and for their parents who come to discover 'Incredible India's' past and are fascinated with its present. India is a big hit in Israel. There are local variations of the palak paneer and masala dosa in the numerous small Indian restaurants throughout the country. Bollywood films are watched on cable TV channels and the faculties of Indian studies are exceptionally popular among Israeli students.

In the final analysis, bilateral relations must be dedicated, primarily, to the betterment of the welfare of our respective populations. It is against this background that Indo-Israel relations can look to the future with a true sense of enhanced optimism.

It is tragic that the resolution of the conflicts in South and West Asia has yet to be achieved. In the Middle East, the rise of extremism, the polarisation and mistrust are all deeply troubling, but I am of the firm belief there are enough pragmatists on both sides of the divide who can — and will — turn the tide away from demonisation toward confidence–building and, eventually, accommodation.

It is my hope and prayer that this year will bring together Israel, the Palestinians and the wider Arab world in a just and lasting peace for the benefit of the children of all the peoples in our war-torn region.

Mark Sofer is Ambassador of Israel to India

The views expressed by the author are personal

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

HINDUSTAN TIMES

A BLINKERED VISION

SAGARIKA GHOSE

The headlines scream almost every day: 'Girl allegedly murdered because of inter-caste romance', 'Couple killed by relatives because of caste honour'. The matrimonials are unabashed: 'Match sought for fair khatri girl' or 'Brahmin boy seeks Brahmin partner.' A Delhi mother whispers that her daughter's choice of husband is not "our kind of person," but stops short of admitting that the prospective groom is not from the same caste. Characters in Bollywood films bear surnames that are drawn from the very narrow social pool of Sharma, Mehta and Roy. Indians may be holidaying in Phuket, shopping at Mango and devouring Sex and the City. But one social reality just refuses to go away. And that reality is caste.

Should caste matter to a modern Indian? Of course it shouldn't. Yet, whether we like it or not, caste is still a defining category. Excluding a narrow westernised elite band, Indians marry according to caste, socialise within similar castes, education is determined by caste and caste, by and large, corresponds to class when it comes to backwardness. Twenty years ago when then Prime Minister V.P. Singh implemented the Mandal recommendations reserving 27 per cent government jobs for Other Backward Classes (OBCs), many caste Hindus heard the word OBC for the first time. Today there are similar feelings of dread that the government has decided to include caste in the 2011 census. But it's time that the elite and middle class came to terms with caste, debated it openly and exorcised caste demons.

When Parliament pushed for a caste census there was near panic about an impending caste war. It was argued that counting OBCs would only add further muscle power to the caste chieftains to once again lobby for that terrible 'Q' word: quotas. But will counting OBCs make caste loyalties deeper or will it, on the other hand, provide, for the first time, hard reliable information on how many OBC castes are there and what their numerical strength is? Confronted by real numbers, it may be more difficult for the quota warriors to argue for reservations. The Constitution makers aimed to progressively abolish caste discrimination, not abolish caste as an identity. Unless we all understand and study caste, we will never be able to fight it or develop a genuinely anti-caste mindset.

Political scientists Yogendra Yadav and Satish Deshpande say that a colonial caste-based census where all castes, including the Hindu 'upper castes' , are counted and ranked is neither feasible nor desirable. What we need is to count OBCs in the same manner as we count SCs and STs. We need to count Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBCs) in order to get an accurate picture of their actual number. We are, thus, not counting all castes, but only backward communities. When reservations for OBCs have been provided for at the Union and state levels, surely a census is essential to find out what the hard numbers are and whether the quotas are accurate.

So how does caste operate nowadays? There is the robust argument that caste is irrelevant in contemporary India. What matters is quality health and education for all irrespective of caste. Increasingly, elections are showing that caste is no longer the sole criterion for voting preferences: voters are voting for bijli, sadak, pani, padhai and hardworking candidates and not for Gujjars, Reddys and Ezhavas. But while caste may be irrelevant for a minority, it is highly relevant — indeed saliently — for others.

When it comes to social and economic progress, certain castes have done better than others and the advantages of the English language and a modern education are distributed along caste lines. Generalisations are risky, and rural Brahmins can be impoverished and backward too. Yet, access to English and to quality education has traditionally been the monopoly of upper castes. Class and caste are still by and large coterminous, and there is every likelihood that an upper class person in India is also 'upper

caste' and a 'lower class' person is also 'lower caste'. Secure amid our Krishnamurthys, Sens and Vermas, we never stop to think about how we got so secure in the first place.

The English-speaking elite is overwhelmingly 'upper caste' that is comprising the forward levels of the Hindu varna system. The Bengali 'bhadralok' class, or the genteel class, which was supposed to be the only non-caste class in India, is also a caste-based category, as the bhadralok are restricted to the upper caste even though they may not be exclusively Brahmin. A Bengali Dalit bhadralok is still unheard of. In 1996, when B.N. Uniyal undertook a survey of national newspapers, he found that among 686 journalists accredited to the government, 454 were upper caste, the remaining 232 did not carry their caste names and in a random sample of 47, not a single one was a Dalit. In a survey of matrimonial advertising carried out in 2000, ad agency McCann Erickson noted that caste remains as important in the new century as it was four decades ago. In 2002, Virginius Xaxa found that only six of Delhi University's 311 professors are Dalits.

Thus, a caste census should not be seen as simply a political instrument designed to secure quotas. The fight against caste is best fought when we know the enemy. Caste is an immutable, invisible and overwhelming reality in our daily lives. If we continue to act as if caste does not exist, or deny its existence, we would be failing to do battle with one of the most urgent social inequalities of our time.

Sagarika Ghose is Senior Editor, CNN-IBN

ghosesagarika@gmail.com

The views expressed by the author are personal

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

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

THE INDIAN EXPRESS

EDITORIAL

UPWARD & ONWARD

One good thing came out of the Greek crisis that seized the world markets over the past week: the price of petroleum, which had seemed to be heading inexorably upward, plateaued. But Europe seems to have decided to bail itself out, and while this is good news for international economic stability, it means that oil futures are heading through the roof again, with investors betting that the price of oil will head back up towards $80 and perhaps eventually $100 a barrel. And that has definite repercussions for Indian policy-makers — and not so pleasant ones either. Because India has for too long avoided taking the necessary steps to liberalise oil pricing, to pass international prices on to the actual consumers of petrol products, the thought of pricier oil this summer has us sweating.

It would be difficult to find an informed voice in government that would not agree with the proposition that the current system, in which the exchequer subsidises oil, is unsustainable. It is an environmental disaster; artificially low prices won't help us adjust to a future with scarcer oil. It creates an unpluggable hole in the Centre's already dangerously high fiscal deficit: the oil ministry has just asked the finance ministry for Rs 19,621 crore to make up for the difference between how much kerosene and gas costs, and how much consumers pay for it — quaintly called "under-recoveries", when a more honest word is "losses". And it shoves a big burden off onto oil marketing companies — the Oil and Natural Gas Corporation and Oil India Ltd are shelling out Rs 14,430 crore because of under-recoveries on petrol and diesel. ONGC and OIL sell to the public sector "downstream" majors — IOC, HPCL, BPCL — which have been forced to absorb Rs 80,000 crore losses since 2004-05; this is in spite of massive, but partial, compensation from the finance ministry, Rs 14,000 crore this year alone. Forcing publicly floated PSUs to share some of the burden of a government decision is the same as any majority shareholder that bullies his minority shareholders into doing something that's not in their interest.

We now have a date for when the empowered group of ministers that's considering oil price deregulation is due to meet. They know what they have to do: follow the expert Parekh Committee report's recommendations, freeing the price of petrol and diesel and raising that for kerosene and cooking gas. Otherwise, as international prices go up further, we might be almost Rs 100,000 crore in the red before the summer's out.

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

INDIAN EXPRESS

50,000 REASONS

A full fifty thousand." Or in the original: "Poore pachaas hajaar." That's all it took for Mac Mohan to count amongst the icons of Hindi cinema. In turn the veteran actor of 175 films was for ever profiled by those three words in the 1975 hit Sholay. In the most famous scene in India's most famous film, Gabbar Singh mock-asks his sidekick Sambha, played by Mac Mohan, "What price has the government placed on me?" Sambha's three-word answer has been imitated by millions since. Mac Mohan's death from cancer this week shines the light, yet again, on the film that continues to grip us 35 years later.

Sholay is India's highest grossing film ever (adjusting for inflation), and every trivial detail is part of popular culture. Apart from Sambha's baritone, the bumbling Soorma Bhopali was such a hit, that it spawned an eponymous film of its own. Amjad Khan's front-shot moment, where lying on his stomach his gleeful eyes track a fly until he suddenly swats it, may have become Bollywood Villainy 101. But in later biscuit commercials, Amjad Khan reprised the role for comic relief. Even Ramnagaram, the south Karnataka village whose boulder-strewn terrain gave Sholay its Wild West feel, is now a pilgrimage spot. Imitation is often the clearest evidence of flattery, and besides cinematic take-offs, Gabbar Singh's mannerisms, for instance, were copied by bad guys far and wide.

Film aficionados often wonder how a Spaghetti Western rip-off with a clichéd plot line could etch itself on the Indian psyche. Memorable characters provide one answer. But perhaps the film's competing themes of private vengeance and official justice provide another. The legal system is always there, from jail scenes and police chases to the tense finale where Gabbar is handed over to the police, instead of being stamped to death. But so is the urge for private vengeance: an ex-cop hires two small-time crooks to protect himself from bigger fish; having lost Jai (Amitabh Bachchan), Veeru (Dharmendra) takes on Gabbar to get even. And in the director-approved alternative ending, Gabbar is shown being killed by a vengeful Thakur (Sanjeev Kumar). Whatever be the reasons — and there could well be, in Sambha-speak, a "full fifty thousand" — Sholay's grip shows no sign of relaxing.

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

THE INDIAN EXPRESS

EDITORIAL

MY CASTE AND I

PRATAP BHANU MEHTA

The decision to, in principle, enumerate caste in the Census is a monumental travesty. At one stroke, it trivialises all that modern India has stood for, and condemns it to the tyranny of an insidious kind of identity politics. The call to enumerate caste in the Census is nothing but a raw assertion of power wearing the garb of social justice, an ideological projection of Indian society masquerading under the colour of social science, and a politics of bad faith being projected as a concern for the poor.

It is not news that India is deeply structured by hierarchies of various kinds, including caste. These hierarchies still appallingly define structures of opportunity and oppression. But the vision of a just and modern India was founded on an aspiration to promote justice without falling into the same pinched up identities that had kept us narrow and bigoted for so long. The premises of a caste census reproduce the very things we had so long laboured to fight. The precise contours of the Census are still not clear, and much of the debate has been on the practical difficulties of this exercise. But there is little doubt how enumerating caste will condemn us in a normative sense.

First, a caste census condemns us to the tyranny of compulsory identities. The premise of enumeration is that we can never escape caste. Our identities are not something we can choose; they are given as non-negotiable facts which we can never escape. The state has legitimised the principle that we will always be our caste. This is a way of diminishing our freedom, agency and dignity in a way that even votaries of tradition could not dream of. It takes away the fundamental freedoms we need to define ourselves. Is there not a deeper indignity being inflicted on those to whom emancipation is being promised? You will be your caste, no matter what. There is a risk of gracelessness here. But we have too many purveyors for whom social justice is endless stratagem to assert the power of compulsory group identity, rather than finding the means to escape it. In the name of breaking open prisons, they imprison us even more.

Second, a caste census condemns us to misidentify the remedies of injustice. Caste has, particularly for Dalits, been an axis of deprivation. And discrimination needs to be addressed. But it does not follow from that fact that you need a census to attack injustice. Make a list of all the things that are necessary to empower the disempowered: education, resources, food security, economic resources, political participation, etc. Not a single one of the major things that need to be done to make an impact on people's empowerment requires a caste census. The instruments of justice are ready at hand, if we only shed diversionary illusions. The focus of justice should be on universalising basic provision, as is now possible. It is simply false to say that building a just India requires Census data on caste.

Third, giving in to a caste census is giving in to a discourse of raw political power. The blunt truth is that designing remedial measures for Dalits, including addressing discrimination does not require a census. This demand has rather been fuelled by politically assertive groups like OBCs, who first hijacked the Dalit discourse on deprivation to their own ends.

Fourth, a caste census is the basis for a self-destructive politics. The consequences of a caste census depend a lot on the terms on which a census is carried out: whether it enumerates all jatis or counts OBCs. Which particular groups solidify and mobilise their identities may be an open question. But what is not an open question is that mobilisation will take place only along caste lines, displacing other and more consequential axes of stratification. It will also reinforce an inordinate emphasis on the politics of reservation, pitting one group against the other for purported benefits.

Fifth, a caste census invites misrecognition. Census did not create castes and the deprivations associated with it. But it is naive to think that a caste census is an enumeration of an objective reality. In a context where the state privileges certain categories over other, gives incentives to certain group identities, enumeration based on caste creates its own reality. Caste pre-existed the classifications of the modern state; but the classifications we use fundamentally transform the institution. In that sense, the Census will bring into being a new social reality; it will not simply describe an objective one. Caste facts are shadows created by our politics.

Sixth, the politics of caste has diminished our sense of self. Imagine what society has become: a vast web of enumeration and suspicion. Dealing with discrimination is one thing. But testing the legitimacy of every institution by seeing how many of what caste there are undermines both the purpose of the institution and our own relationship to it. The project of enumerating caste in Census is fundamentally inspired by a cast of mind that measures the legitimacy of everything largely through caste. What more pinched up conception of citizenship can we imagine?

Seventh, the politics of caste has also largely become the politics of cowardice and hypocrisy. It has not produced much justice, and has in fact diverted attention from things that are more consequential. But what it has produced is a fundamental distortion of our character, where the variance between what we privately acknowledge to be true and what we profess in public increases by the day. Indeed, the subtle corrosion of reason and character alike that the tyranny of caste categories is producing by displacing reason with identity, reciprocity with group narcissism, is a price we are already paying.

Finally, the manner in which the Congress took the decision betrays its fundamental casualness about all the values that form our moral compass. A well-considered decision, taken by nationalist leaders whose understandings of both moral values and our infirmities as a nation far surpassed ours, was overturned in a matter of minutes at the altar of political expediency. It sends the message of crass political instrumentalism. The backlash may not be immediately apparent, in part because the opposition has also stopped thinking. But the Congress's casual caving in to a retrograde demand is reminiscent of all reactionary politics it spawned in the '80s, pitting one group against another. And what does it say about its character, that its young MPs, exemplars of India's modernity, have no will to resist? It is already a sign of how small caste makes it. And now we will count it at every step.

The writer is president, Centre for Policy Research, Delhi

express@expressindia.com

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

THE INDIAN EXPRESS

EDITORIAL

THE HANDS THAT FED THEM

EJAZ HAIDER

Khalid Khawaja, a former air force officer and known sympathiser of the Taliban, was killed by a group of Punjabi sectarian terrorists on April 30. His body was dumped near the town of Mir Ali in North Waziristan. The fate of his two other companions, Brigadier Amir Sultan Tarar (retd), a former Special Services Group and ISI officer, better known by the nom de guerre Colonel Imam, and Assad Qureshi, a Pakistani-British documentary-maker, still hangs in the balance.

Why would the militants kill Khawaja, whose sympathies for the ultra-right were known and documented? Even more, why would they capture Colonel Imam who has had, and retains, deep linkages with the Taliban? Imam, an infantry-SSG officer helped organise the emerging Taliban in the '90s. Unlike Khawaja, who was more a braggart, Imam has known personally, and had access to, the top Taliban leadership, including Mullah Omar.

The episode reveals some interesting facts about how these groups are configured, what the allegiance pattern is, and whether they can be talked to and trusted.

Khawaja was a mediocre officer and was suspended from flying at the pre-solo stage while at the PAF Academy. He subsequently served as an air traffic control officer. It doesn't seem like he showed much talent there either, and as squadron leader was sent to the ISI. That was in the mid-'80s. While there, he was never involved with the Afghan theatre but had developed a religious streak. That made him write a letter to then-President and army chief General Zia-ul-Haq, asking Zia to enforce true Islam in the country. That got him reverted to the air force from where he was relieved.

After that Khawaja kept travelling to Afghanistan and developed some links with groups there through charity work. But he liked to present himself as a big actor. He was questioned and arrested for having met with Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl after the latter went missing in Karachi. Khawaja also told some journalists that he was instrumental in trying to get then-CIA Director James Woolsey to talk to the Taliban. At one point he said that he had arranged for Nawaz Sharif to meet with Osama bin Laden and that bin Laden had funded Sharif's campaign against Benazir Bhutto.

In 2007 it was reported that he was acting as an interlocutor between the government and the Lal Masjid clerics. Ironically, the militants killed him primarily for having played a double game then, and for having linkages with the ISI and the CIA.

Khawaja's family told me he was on a "peace mission" and wanted to dissuade the Tehreek-e Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and its various affiliate groups from their violent activities within Pakistan. He had made an earlier trip to North Waziristan carrying a list of militants that, he told the TTP leadership, were working for India's Research and Analysis Wing. At the time the TTP leadership was on the run and relocating after its strongholds in South Waziristan were captured by the army.

In the murky world where intelligence agencies interact with the "bad guys", playing this kind of role can always be dangerous. But Khawaja's credentials gave him confidence.

It seems that his eagerness to play a mediator's role, which might have more to do with his desire to pull off something big rather than any double game that he was playing, also made the TTP and its affiliate groups suspicious of him.

What Khawaja wasn't counting on was the fact that the groups, now led by very brash 20- and 30-somethings, have no regard for the older leaders, most of whom are either under arrest, have gone underground or stay at a safe distance from the war zone.

The younger fighter-leaders also have no previous linkages with any of the intelligence agencies. They have been burnished in the crucible of a war in which intelligence agencies like the ISI are seen as siding with the enemy — that is, the United States. The ISI is to be attacked and the last two years have seen multiple attacks on the agency's detachments, safe houses and vehicles.

Much effort was made to get Khawaja and his companions released and the interlocutors included many heavyweights — but to no avail. North Waziristan has become a witches' brew. It houses multiple groups, and while they cooperate in mounting attacks on the army or defending against any military operation, central leadership is very loose to non-existent. There is no papal figure to control the actions of groups, sub-groups and, in many cases, sub-sub-groups. This has consequences for policy-making, both at the operational and strategic levels.

Khawaja has paid for Icarian overreach. But by killing Khawaja the Pakistani extremist groups may also have overreached. Those who have been supporting them in the media and the courts would now be less confident of a beast that can eat its own kind.

The writer is national affairs editor, 'Newsweek Pakistan'

express@expressindia.com

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

THE INDIAN EXPRESS

EDITORIAL

UNUSUAL POWERS OF PERSUASION

JAITHIRTH RAO

It was hilarious to watch Hillary Clinton on TV threatening Pakistan with unmentioned dire consequences if a "successful" terrorist attack was launched against the US by a person with a Pakistani connection. Unsuccessful terrorist attacks are quite okay is what she seemed to say!

American pressure should work on Pakistan, shouldn't it? The US is a superpower and most countries, unless they are powerful like China or Russia or eccentric like Venezuela, Iran or North Korea, are amenable to superpower persuasion. Additionally, the US and Pakistan have been allies for almost 60 years. The US is Pakistan's principal arms supplier and aid-giver. After the attacks on the World Trade Centre, the Bush administration arm-twisted Pakistan. Secretary of State Colin Powell is supposed to have talked of bombing Pakistan unless they broke off diplomatic relations with Mullah Omar's government in Afghanistan. Things have changed since then. The Pakistani response is all over the place — the US needs to deal with its citizens, Pakistan will arrest some family members of the accused, but framing a person of Pakistani origin is part of an Indian-Jewish conspiracy etc., etc. The Obama administration does not have the reputation of being able to follow through with bombing threats, like Bush did. Hillary has less clout with Pakistan than Powell did. That is the biggest change of the last decade. Ally or no ally, arms-supplier or not — the Pakistanis just do not care about America enough to succumb to American pressure or even listen to American lectures.

From India's perspective, both Vajpayee and Manmohan Singh have operated on the basis that the best way for India to influence Pakistan is to do so through the US. At the time of Musharraf's Kargil misadventure, US pressure did seem to work on at least some sections of the Pakistani government. In retrospect, that has begun to look like an isolated outlier. Currently, the American administration tells us that they are putting pressure on Pakistan to deal firmly with the conspirators behind the Mumbai attacks. But it does not seem to be working. Of course, the US administration could be lying to us and this would not be the first time that they have practiced terminological inexactitude. But watching Hillary Clinton on TV suggests to me that American pressure just won't work.

The vast majority of Pakistanis hate and distrust their oldest ally. Every opinion poll conducted in that country comes up with this conclusion. Members of the Pakistani elite too are cynical about the US. They feel that successive American administrations have used them: Pakistani bases were used to spy on the Soviet Union during the Eisenhower days; in Nixon's time, Pakistani troops were used by Jordan, an American client state, to fight Palestinians; Nixon and Kissinger used Pakistan as a conduit to Mao's China; the Reagan administration used Pakistan to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan; today American drones casually violate Pakistani airspace killing Afghan terrorists and Pakistani civilians in equal measure. The result is that even the most "progressive" English-speaking, Scotch-drinking Pakistani leaders are almost viscerally anti-American. Of course, religious fundamentalists, who have continued to grow in numbers and influence over the last 60 years, view America as the Satan that seeks to corrupt the young and undermine their traditions. There is simply no pro-American constituency left in Pakistan. In political terms, being seen as succumbing to US pressure on Indo-Pak issues would not just be a mild vote-loser. It would be suicidal for any public figure in Pakistan.

India, on its own has very little influence in Pakistan. Candle-lit vigils at Wagah and maudlin ghazal-filled evenings cannot change the fact that Pakistanis view us as the neighbourhood bully who split their country some 40 years ago, and who still hangs on to pieces of geography that rightfully belong to Pakistan. The average Pakistani no doubt does not support terrorist attacks in Mumbai. But that does not mean that they are incensed about it. Many of them actually believe in wild conspiracy theories that imply that the Indian government is actively behind terrorist attacks in Lahore and Peshawar. Sympathy for India is at best limited. In this situation, why would any Pakistani leader ruin his domestic position by advocating cooperation with India? What then does India do? The question that has haunted all his predecessors, now rests with

Manmohan Singh. How can we have a modicum of influence on the policies and actions of our troubled neighbour? The question arises: if we cannot influence them, if the Americans won't and for that matter, can't bully them, where do we turn?

Eureka — two words, one country: Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia has tremendous credibility in Pakistan. The religious fundamentalists respect the Saudis as the original Wahabis; Saudi Arabia has in the past helped resolve tensions between Pakistani leaders like Musharraf and Nawaz Sharif; Pakistan respects the Saudi monarchy so much that the town of Lyallpur has been renamed Faisalabad in honour of a Saudi king; all Pakistani leaders need Saudi visas to make their pilgrimages to Mecca and Medina; the Saudis have pots of money which they are willing and able to use to further their interests.

Now we begin to understand why Manmohan Singh is the first Indian prime minister after Indira Gandhi to visit Saudi Arabia! Despite the tweeting controversy, it is clear that Saudi Arabia is a welcome "interlocutor" for us! As a high growth economy, we are a good place for the Saudis to invest their funds in equities. And Dr Singh has welcomed this. Over the next few years, if Saudi investment in India increases dramatically, as it should, they will automatically have a vested interest in India's stability and will have an incentive to influence Pakistani leaders to tread the path of reason. Given that the Saudis are credible in Pakistan, they actually do make for good interlocutors (again that word!), which the Americans no longer are. Dr Singh's next stop should be Beijing. China too has credibility with Pakistan!

The writer divides his time between Mumbai and Bangalore

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

THE INDIAN EXPRESS

EDITORIAL

THE STRIKE THAT FAILED TO IGNITE CHANGE

YUBARAJ GHIMIRE

The government mostly stayed indoors as the Unified Communist Party of Nepal-Maoists (UCPPN-M) cadres across the country, armed with lathis and Nepali khukuris, brought the nation to a standstill for six days.

During those six days, the government response was limited to issuing statements denouncing the strike and briefing diplomats on the unfairness of pushing people to misery and shortage.

But ordinary people came out on the streets — in some cases, in confrontational mode — clashing with Maoist cadre and asserting their right to livelihood. What could be more painful for the farmers, who had to throw out their produce on the streets, after the strike blocked their access to the regular markets? Subsistence was even harder for daily wage earners. About 300,000 industrial employees suffered as industries and business were forced to close down. According to available government figures, hotels suffered losses close to a billion rupees. All this made the Maoists appear anti-poor and anti-proletariat.

The Maoists took this unpopular step as its cadres and sympathisers were apparently confident that their party would capture power this time, declare a constitution from the street, and have it endorsed by the "people" on the appropriate occasion. But that calculation was decisively dashed when the media — including the ones who initially sympathised — changed their tune, and the Kathmandu community refused to extend the hand of cooperation towards Maoists. Their message to the Maoists was clear: they must sit and talk it out with other political parties and chart out a clear agenda for promulgation of the constitution and total adherence to the peace process.

To demonstrate public support to this line and record their displeasure towards the Maoist strike, various professional groups and the Federation of Nepal Chamber of Commerce hosted a massive peace rally in the capital on May 7, ignoring the Maoist warning that it will be taken as a challenge to their "decisive movement". Lathi-wielding cadres were deployed to warn the pro-peace, white-clad citizens — but they had little impact.

That perhaps came as the biggest setback to the strike. Top Maoist leaders privately admitted that the hostility towards the movement, both at home and in the international community, was much more than initially perceived. The easy way out was to call it off. But asking the cadres who had come to the capital determined to capture power to go back empty-handed would have its own costs. Loss of face would have been the certain and undesirable consequence of that withdrawal.

The UCPN-M leadership made every effort to minimise that erosion in its credibility when Prachanda addressed the cadres in Kathmandu's open theatre on May 8, a day after the withdrawal of the strike. He targeted the media, organisers of the peace rally, the "intelligentsia", and Kathmandu locals, among others. His abusive, slander-filled speech reflected frustration, as he threatened to settle scores with journalists. He had harsher words for the Kathmandu community — "you have insulted the ordinary village people who came here to catalyse a change. You will have to pay the price". And on May 9, the cadres implemented that command with fury, injuring at least half a dozen.

No one knows yet whether the outbursts were aimed at pacifying the UCPN-M cadres who could have otherwise targeted their own leaders for this "surrender" or whether Prachanda was referring to a future where conflict and "annihilation of the class enemies" would be a given. Maoists, with their insurgent background, are not yet used to accepting setbacks normal for democratic parties. The past four years of the peace process have not seen the Maoists transforming into a democratic party. Instead, the major pro-democracy parties including the Nepali Congress and the Communist Party of Nepal-Unified Marxist Leninist (CPN-UML), have followed every agenda and method dictated by the Maoists, ostensibly to stop them from raising arms. "We agreed to abolish our commitment to constitutional monarchy on assurance from the Maoists that they would come to peace and the democratic fold", declared Congress leader K.P. Sitaula, who played a crucial role in what now appears like a fledgling peace process. The extent of division between the political forces that joined hands to oust the monarchy in 2006 has ensured that they are no closer to their common pledge to deliver a new constitution and a stable democracy paving the way for economic prosperity.

In the coming days, the Maoist course of action will determine the future of the peace process and that of democracy. Already, people have started openly venting their frustration and sense of betrayal about the Maoists and other political parties. The withdrawal of the Maoist strike in no way guarantees citizens' support to the current government. The "heroic" forces of the 2006's political change are fast falling in people's esteem. The cost to the cause of peace and democracy will be heavy, to say the least.

yubaraj.ghimire@expressindia.com

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

THE INDIAN EXPRESS

EDITORIAL

THE GREAT GAME FOLIO

C. RAJA MOHAN

Karzai's tough love

After more than a year of hurling public insults at Hamid Karzai, the Obama administration has finally decided to bite its tongue and show a bit of respect to the Afghan president.

A day before he arrived in Washington for a fence-mending visit this week, news leaks from the White House said that President Obama has ordered a new set of new rules in the engagement with Karzai. Underlining the new approach, The Washington Post ran an op-ed piece signed by Karzai. As it receives Karzai, who has gone to Washington with 12 of his senior cabinet ministers, the Obama administration is signalling its commitment to a comprehensive and expansive dialogue with Kabul.

Washington's course correction was long overdue, as the Democrats who swept into power at the turn of 2009 had badly underestimated the survival skills of Afghan leaders and their capacity to surprise their overbearing benefactors.

It is one thing for Obama to make nice to Karzai; it is entirely another to find ways to bridge the growing distance between Washington and Kabul. Beyond the smiles and public embrace of Karzai, news reports from Washington say Obama is expected to be quite tough in his demands that the Afghan president get his act together and address US concerns on corruption and governance.

If Obama is consumed by the belief that good governance is the key to winning the war in Afghanistan, Karzai is quite concerned that Washington will cut and run from Kabul, sooner than later. The two leaders are also deeply divided over the timing and principles that must guide the engagement with the Taliban leadership and its local leaders.

The disagreements between Washington and Kabul are even sharper on the role of Pakistan in the construction of a durable order in and around Afghanistan.

Whether they begin to narrow their differences or merely paper them over this week, both Obama and Karzai know that a new phase in the political evolution of Afghanistan is at hand and that the current status quo can't hold for much longer. Washington's decisions taken this week after the meeting with Karzai are bound to have immediate consequences for all those with stakes in the future of Afghanistan — including the Taliban, Pakistan and India.

Paying Pindi

As links between the suspected Times Square bomber Faisal Shahzad and extremist groups in Pakistan come to light, there are expectations in Delhi that the Obama administration might begin to review its current dalliance with Islamabad and finally crack down hard on the sources of international terrorism and their supporters in Pakistan.

Some of Washington's warnings to Pakistan — especially from the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton — have got much play in India. Sceptics, however, would dismiss any suggestion of a fundamental change in Obama's Pakistan policy. They insist that the bigger the trouble with Pakistan, the larger will be the cheque that Washington will write for the Pakistan army headquartered in Rawalpindi.

The cynics have a point. For six decades, the relationship between Washington and Rawalpindi has been simple and transactional. (West) Pakistan occupies a strategic space and its army was for geopolitical hire. The bigger the perceived American need, higher the cost — economic and political — of hiring Pindi's services. This paradigm could surely change some day when the US concludes the arrangement is not working.

The Times Square plot has by no means brought us closer to that moment. In the next few weeks, we will know how many boxes the Obama administration might check in the long list of deliverables that Army Chief Ashfaq Kayani had left behind when he was in Washington leading Pakistan's strategic dialogue with the United States.

Wooing Tehran

After Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao's visit to Tehran in February, it is now the turn of the External Affairs Minister S. M. Krishna who is heading to Iran this week to participate in yet another meeting of third world leaders.

No one is holding their breath to see what the G-15, long presumed dead until the Islamic Republic chose to revive it, might do. Krishna, however, will get a chance to intensify Delhi's current political outreach to Tehran.

As Washington's embrace of Pindi gets tighter, Delhi's insurance policy now seems to include the search for a stronger partnership with Tehran. What is not clear at this stage is how far India and Iran can satisfy each other's concerns without affecting their political equities elsewhere.

raja.mohan@expressindia.com

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

THE INDIAN EXPRESS

EDITORIAL

VIEW FROM THE LEFT

MANOJCG

BLAME US

Whether Islamic terrorism or the new Hindu variety, Indian communists have found a US angle behind them all. Their argument: the CIA has been found to be behind a number of terrorist attacks that took place in different parts of the world after 9/11, and the agency controls and guides even Osama bin Laden.

The lead editorial in the latest edition of CPI mouthpiece New Age says that ever since the 9/11 attacks happened, the US has been trying to convince everyone that the WTC attackers have spread all over the world and they are the only threat to the world peace.

"We are not contending that there is no Islamic fundamentalist organisation that carried out the heinous crimes of killing innocent people through bomb blasts and other such actions. Our assertion is that these fundamentalist organisations and leaders like Taliban and Osama bin Laden are the creation of US agencies," it says.

"Even, today they are controlled and guided by the CIA and other imperialist agencies and its agents like David Headley," it says. The CPI's arguments are in the context of revelations that Hindutva outfits have a role in the Ajmer as well as the Mecca Masjid blasts.

So, the CPI wants the government to take a fresh look at all incidents of terrorist attacks and apart from Islamic fundamentalist outfits, it should also probe the role of Hindu groups. In CPI's view, "Hindutvawadi forces, particularly the RSS outfits had been hand in glove with imperialist forces since their inception."

HISTORY REFRESHER

On the 65th anniversary of the end of World War II, the CPM makes a forceful attempt to reiterate the role played by the erstwhile Soviet Union in defeating Hitler's Nazi Germany. The attempt, according to the CPM, was necessitated because of "falsification of history" by the West.

It feels a strong ideological campaign is underway to decry the role of communism and the USSR in defeating fascism. An important corollary of such an attempt, it points out, is equating communism with fascism as was recently done by the Organisation of Security and Cooperation in Europe.

"The effort is to distort history with an intent to intensify the anti-communist propaganda by seeking to portray the victory of the Western allies in the Second World War as the triumph of the struggle against fascism and communism. They deliberately conceal the fact that for every Allied soldier who laid down his life, courageously fighting fascism, there were forty Soviet soldiers who laid down their lives," it says.

The special edition titled "65th anniversary of victory against Fascism" argues that it was the Communist Red Flag and the Red Army that played the decisive role in defeating fascism and liberating humanity and claims that the reason for launching an aggressive anti-communist propaganda drive is US imperialism's urgent need to establish its credentials.

BIOTECH TERMS

The comrades view the proposed Biotechnology Regulatory Authority Bill as a piece of legislation directed against farmers and in favour of multi-national companies like Monsanto. It feels that states would be left without any say in matters related to biotechnology since the bill envisages only an advisory role for them.

Against this backdrop, the Left wants the "pro-multinational sections" in the bill rectified. It feels risk assessment cannot be left to the three regulatory divisions proposed by the bill, but should instead consist of an evaluation of the biosafety dossier submitted by the crop/product developer including mandatory independent, public scrutiny and independent testing for further verification of results.

An article in New Age says the nuclear liability legislation should have express clauses on "redressal or compensation and remediation or cleaning up" and a clause that "makes the crop developer solely liable for any leakage, contamination and so on throughout every stage of the product development cycle." It feels that a penalty of a year's imprisonment and Rs 2 lakh fine is no deterrent, and should be enhanced. Interestingly, it argues that the clause spelling out punishment for those who mislead the public about the safety of genetically modified organisms without any evidence or scientific record is targeted at civil society groups, and wants it removed.

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

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

THE FINANCIAL EXPRESS

EDITORIAL

TRAI AGAIN

Telecom Regulatory Authority of India's much-awaited report on spectrum allocation and pricing was expected to shed light on the telecom minister's arbitrary giveaway of 2G licences at throwaway prices in 2008. Instead, the telecom regulator seems to have, rather unfortunately, endorsed A Raja's rather dubious handing out of 2G spectrum by saying that it simply wasn't feasible to conduct auctions in the 800-1,800 Mhz spectrum band. Trai, therefore, believes that telecom minister A Raja's actions did not cost the exchequer much money at all, certainly not the Rs 60,000 crore that is often bandied about by critics of the telecom minister. After having set out this logic, Trai peculiarly goes on to suggest that from now on 2G spectrum could be priced at a level discovered through 3G auctions, thereby endorsing auctions as an appropriate way to discover prices. But the regulator ought to have applied the same logic on auctions and price discovery to the 2G licences that were handed out in 2008 without auctions, at what were 2001 prices.

There can be no defence for the manner in which the telecom ministry gave out the 2G licences to Unitech, Swan et al. The fact that these were given at below market prices was more than evident when Unitech and Swan sold out stakes to mobile operators Telenor and Etisalat at prices that were many multiples of the fee paid for the licence and spectrum. Given that Unitech and Swan had set up none of the infrastructure necessary to actually operate 2G services, the buyers were essentially paying what they thought was a good price just for the licence and spectrum. So, Trai's contention that no significant revenue was lost to the exchequer or that there would be insufficient buyers in an auction for 2G spectrum is simply not borne out by facts. Trai also struck a blow on the biggest existing service providers by mandating that they all pay a charge for spectrum that they hold beyond 6.2 Mhz. Again, the price to be paid will be linked to the discovery made at the 3G auctions. This is ostensibly to create a better level playing field for all operators. However, given that Trai has overlooked the biggest distortion in the telecom sector in recent years—the giveaway of 2G licence at a pittance by A Raja—its claims on bringing a level playing field elsewhere will be met with suspicion.

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

THE FINANCIAL EXPRESS

EDITORIAL

GEARING UP FOR GROWTH

Buoyed by strong economic recovery and rising consumer confidence, growth in cars sales touched a new high of 39% last month, which was the biggest rise in sales since April 1999. The buoyant sentiment was evident across the board with 14 of the total 16 carmakers witnessing healthy growth in demand in the first month of the current financial year. The month of April usually reports subdued sales as consumers and institutions bunch purchases at the close of the financial year in March to take advantage of tax breaks on depreciation. On that count, the numbers for April are impressive, underlining the pent-up demand for the sector. More robust was the sales growth of medium and high commercial vehicles at 103%, which reported de-growth for more than a year during the global financial crisis. The trend reversal now further substantiates the domestic growth story and the pick-up in industrial activity across all sectors. But these staggering numbers are not cheering automakers entirely this time around as the rise in the cost of raw materials—steel, rubber and aluminium—will likely dent the profit margins of companies. Steel prices went up 28% in the December to March quarter and rubber prices by 20% in the same period. The industry association, Siam, expects the automobile sector to grow at around 14% this financial year as compared to 26% last year and the rise in interest rates and spike in oil prices are the other major headwinds that the industry will have to factor in the medium term.

Anecdotal evidence suggests that companies have started facing severe bottlenecks in sourcing components, as manufacturers did not anticipate such a quick recovery after the crisis. In fact, a number of vehicle makers and suppliers had cut back on production during the slowdown and since the demand turnaround was faster than expected, the capacity crisis has stymied the sector now. Analysts are estimating a lead-time of 3-6 months to bridge the supply-demand gap and the rise in cost of raw materials may further widen the gap. Although a major part of the recovery in the auto sector came from the government stimulus package and banks reducing their lending rates, the automobile industry will now have to chalk out a long-term strategy. Global auto manufacturers are keen to develop India as a manufacturing hub for auto components and are ramping up the value of components they source from India. With the growing popularity of India in the automotive component sector, the Investment Commission has set a target of attracting foreign investment worth $5 billion for the next five years. Launch of new models and ample liquidity will augur well and ensure that companies hold back price hikes in the near-term.

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

THE FINANCIAL EXPRESS

COLUMN

HOW CAN ORISSA NOT BE GREECE?

AJAY SHAH

The euro is probably not a good currency for Greece. Is the rupee a good currency for Orissa? The answer is only a partial Yes. More needs to be done on intra-India mobility of goods and people.

When the euro was created, the countries of Europe were compared with states of the US. If the US gains a lot by being a single big country with a single currency, should Europe not have a similar arrangement? The bottleneck lies in the stabilisation policy. Before the euro, when Greece experienced bad times, the most important element of stabilisation was exchange rate flexibility. In good times, a floating exchange rate appreciates. In bad times, a floating exchange rate depreciates.

By signing up for the euro, Greece lost this powerful tool of stabilisation. But how does the US handle this? If there are bad times in Michigan or in Texas, there is no exchange rate that can depreciate. The story runs in two steps. When there are bad times in Texas, wages go down, which brings more business to firms in Texas. And, when times are bad in Texas, people leave. The number of migrants does not need to be large, in order to deliver the desired result, but a significant scale of migration is essential.

What about India? If there is a downturn in Orissa, there is no currency that can depreciate. How can stabilisation be achieved? How can Orissa stave off a Greece-style protracted slump? The answer is: through nationwide trade and labour mobility. When Orissa has a downturn, wages go down. Firms in Orissa should get more business from all across the country, which requires India as a unified common market. And, people should migrate out of Orissa.

The US does this right, where a unified currency goes along with full mobility of goods and people. The euro is not such a great idea for Europe because while they have a single common market for goods, they do not have adequate labour mobility. A single currency is not such a great idea for the states of India, since we lack full mobility of both goods and labour. Our currency unification strongly requires national integration on the crucial issues of movement of goods and people.

The agenda of India as a unified common market has come to be accepted. It requires building high quality infrastructure, including roads, railways, ports and airports, supporting intra-India trade. It requires implementing the GST, accompanied by the removal of each of the myriad state and local taxes that interfere with intra-India trade.

The agenda of creating conditions conducive to migration is less understood. It involves five issues. The first is the language barrier. Individuals who know English are more capable of moving between locations across the country. The spread of English education (which, in turn, is associated with private schools) helps increase labour mobility.

The second dimension is rented housing. In pre-independence India, it was easy for a migrant landing in Bombay to rent a home. Today, this is not the case in most cities. By emphasising the rights of tenants, the legal system has led to a shrivelling of the rental market. On a related theme, tax rules need to have a level playing field between renting and owning. A country with more rental housing has more labour mobility.

The third dimension lies in transaction taxes such as stamp duty on the purchase or sale of real estate. The easier it is for a person to sell a home in one city and buy a home in another city, the more labour mobility goes up. This is yet another ramification of the deep idea in public finance that all transaction taxes—whether stamp duty or securities transaction tax—must be eliminated.

The fourth dimension lies in the interface between citizens and the state. Migrants often face considerable problems in accessing public services. This constitutes one element of the motivation behind the UID project. In addition, state and local governments need to create a more migration-friendly framework by offering citizen interfaces in English rather than exclusively in the local language.

The fifth dimension is maps and road signs. There is a continuum in mobility from travel to migration. Out-of-towners and migrants are more easily able to get around when signage and maps are good.

In the past, India has got away with a migration-unfriendly environment owing to the domination of informal labour contracting. When bad times came to Orissa, migration did not take place and trade in goods was stifled, so wages fell sharply. In the future, the footprint of Indian labour law will go up, owing to a bigger formal sector. This will yield reduced wage flexibility and set the stage for Greece-style distress. Hence, it is important to push on three fronts: reform labour law, achieve a single common market and create a migration-friendly environment.

The author is an economist with interests in finance, pensions and macroeconomics

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

THE FINANCIAL EXPRESS

COLUMN

BANNING COTTON EXPORT IS NO SOLUTION

MADAN SABNAVIS

The decision to ban the export of cotton is significant as it has implications, not just for the industry, but also for the ideology that guides policy. In the past, too, the policy response to higher prices has been to restrict the export of the product. This was witnessed in the case of pulses and wheat in 2007, maize in 2008 and sugar in 2009—and now in cotton. The dynamics of such price movements and policy reaction needs to be put in perspective.

Cotton is a unique crop that was influenced by the introduction of the Bt variety, which has had an impact on its cultivation. Prices are sensitive to supply conditions. While there is a minimum support price that is offered to farmers, it is under discussion as the subsidy bill has been increasing. Production has tended to be cyclical and output that had started accelerating from 2003-04 to peak at around 26 million bales in 2007-08, slipped in 2008-09 to 22 million bales and remained stagnant in 2009-10. Demand, on the other hand, has been increasing from both domestic and global segments. This has been the primary reason for the increase in prices.

India is the second largest exporter of cotton in the world and a ban on these transactions means that some of the purchasers like Bangladesh, Pakistan, China, etc, will be affected and will have to look out for other avenues to sustain their textile industries. Quantitatively speaking, around 2.5 million bales of cotton will be required from other countries to fill in this gap.

The immediate impact is that the 25% increase witnessed in prices has been arrested, affecting the incomes of the farmers. From a price of around Rs 2,900-3,000 per quintal that had been fixed, they are now getting a lower return of around Rs 2,500 on account of this move, as the shortage has translated into excess supply. This fall in income has affected the incomes of farmers, especially those who cultivate a single crop in a year. Farmers had earlier tended to bring in more area under cotton cultivation by using Bt seeds. However, with lower prices this season, there could be a tendency for them to move to other crops such as soybean, which

is the closest substitute, in terms of soil conditions. This could affect the future area under cultivation, which will re-create the problem of supply in the next season.

The ban has already seen the global prices rising as major importers have started looking at sourcing cotton from other countries, particularly the US, which is the largest exporter of cotton. This has put pressure on the prices, which was reflected in the ICE cotton futures that have shown an upward movement. Higher international prices do tend to get buffered into domestic prices with price correlation being around 60-80% for most products. So, in the medium run, prices may remain at a higher level.

The broader issue to be debated is whether or not an export ban is a solution to the problem of higher prices. The argument here is that as long as prices are being guided by fundamentals, enhancing supplies is the only way to reduce prices. There are some issues regarding when a ban should be imposed. The first is that farmers would tend to substitute cotton with other crops, which will tilt the crop-balance in favour of others. Second, while prices will come down in the immediate run, the change in cropping pattern will affect prices in the following season. Third, export bans in particular will turn the competitive advantage in the product to other suppliers, which can make it difficult to recoup the loss in market share. Fourth, the very industry that the government is trying to protect through such a ban will find it more difficult to plan in the future with both the supply and demand sides being potentially affected. Last, such bans would affect the external credibility of the industry as legal disputes arise from reneging on contracts. This will impact the country's ability to export in the future.

Interventions are hence not normally advisable, either in the form of bans (in terms of exports or futures trading) or price intervention through diktat. The issue is not just one of supporting the farmers or the user industry. With growing integration of commodity markets and prices, it will be difficult to control these linkages. An export ban will only push the country out of the market, which will be leveraged by competitors. And as we have seen in the case of sugar, bans did not help with the global price linkage returning to push up the prices further. There is need for more extensive debate on the issue of export ban, which goes beyond the current issue of cotton.

The author is chief economist, CARE ratings. These are his personal views

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

THE FINANCIAL EXPRESS

COLUMN

TRANSPARENT RATINGS PLEASE

ASHISH SINHA

Whether private broadcasters and advertisers like it or not, the government is going to get a direct say in the business of television ratings. It is not only going to review the existing system of TRPs, but it is also going to look for an active role for itself. This means, all the secrecy surrounding the TRP business may just get replaced by a transparent system, or so the government hopes. The broadcasters, advertisers and rating agencies are alarmed with the move as they see direct government interference in their private business. Well they should not be.

All private stakeholders should see this as a positive move. A government-backed TRP system in the future will help the advertisers, as it will throw up a transparent mechanism. The rating agencies will also find a role for themselves in the future TRP system, as it is specialised work that will require their necessary expertise and participation. The review of TRP system will encompass the entire methodology adopted by the existing systems of TAM and aMap, the two private TV measurement bodies. The government may just infuse funds to seed more people-meters—a device that captures the viewership data that ultimately helps in generating TRPs, something the private agencies could not do so far.

But the point of worry for the broadcasters is the linkage drawn by the government between TRP and the televised content. Broadcasters are alarmed that under the garb of putting a transparent system for TRP, the government may dictate the course of television content. The I&B ministry has assumed that misleading TRPs tend to adversely impact the viewers at large. Instead of keeping the broadcasters, advertisers and the existing ratings agency out of loop on the future TRP system, it will be prudent on the part of the government to take into confidence all the stakeholders. Lack of trust between the current ratings agencies and other stakeholders should be replaced by a transparent system of approaching a new TRP system. If the government demands transparency in the TRP business, it should start the process by adopting a transparent approach to any future TRP system.

ashish.sinha@expressindia.com

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

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

THE HINDU

EDITORIAL

ENVIRONMENTAL CATASTROPHE

The explosion that destroyed the offshore oilrig, Deepwater Horizon, at a well owned by British Petroleum in the Gulf of Mexico has been an environmental catastrophe. A surge of gas and oil burst through safety valves and exploded, killing 11 of the 126 crew on April 20. The rig, owned by the BP contractor, Transocean, and partly equipped by Halliburton, then sank on to the well-head itself and is at a depth of about 1,500 metres. Current estimates are that 210,000 gallons of oil are flowing into the ocean every day. All attempts to cap the well have so far failed. A relief well to intercept the damaged one would take about three months to drill. The technicalities are extremely challenging, as only robot submarines can do work at these depths. The oil spill will cause the extensive death of marine and related wildlife, and could seriously harm the entire coastal economy of Louisiana, Alabama, and Florida, as well as parts of Texas. Oil that strikes the coastline could enter the food chain through the vegetation. Recovery from this huge setback will take years.

The catastrophe is also changing the political climate. There is rising public anger against the oil industry and a widespread demand for federal government action. BP's initial evasiveness was a repetition of its conduct over the 1989 stranding of the oil tanker Exxon Valdez in Alaskan waters. Then, 10.8 million gallons of oil were spilt and investigators later found that BP had neither the rubber booms (as it had claimed) so that the oil could be contained, nor the teams to deploy the booms. This time, some nine million gallons have already been spilt, and many people involved are speaking out. Some of the rig survivors have said they felt coerced by company officials to sign statements that they had not seen what happened. When in office, U.S. Vice-President Dick Cheney, a former Halliburton executive, exempted the oil industry from using expensive safety switches. The Obama administration, however, is moving with commendable speed to bring the industry in line. BP will have to pay all costs, including those for U.S. Navy and Coastguard help; President Obama has suspended permission for new offshore drilling; and federal regulators are to inspect all relevant installations. Congress has drafted legislation to raise oil company liability from $75 million to $10 billion. Significantly, the American States most affected by this calamity have been governed, in recent years, by Republican leaders who have been ideologically committed to doing away with governmental regulation. Now the people living in these States are paying the price.

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

THE HINDU

CHECK ON ARBITRARINESS

The recent Supreme Court judgment falls short of guaranteeing Governors security of tenure but will have the salutary effect of discouraging their removal from office on political or subjective grounds. The five-member Constitution Bench, which heard a writ petition challenging the dismissal of four Governors after the United Progressive Alliance government assumed office in 2004, held that the removal of a Governor is open to judicial review "if the aggrieved person is able to demonstrate prima facie that his removal was either arbitrary, mala fide, capricious or whimsical." In a way, the court has staked out a middle ground. While it has rejected the petitioner's contention that Governors may be removed only for compelling reasons such as physical or mental disability and acts of corruption, it has also refused to accept that the power of dismissal by the President under Article 156 (1) of the Constitution is absolute and unfettered. While the reasons for removal need not be spelt out, there must exist "valid reasons"; these would vary depending on the "facts and circumstances" of each case. While desisting from enumerating the valid reasons and grounds for dismissal, the court has clearly stated that being "out of sync with the policies and ideologies of the Union government or party in power at the Centre" is not one of them.

At a practical level, the issue of the dismissal of Governors is closely tied up with the nature of their appointment. Politicians and retired bureaucrats close to those in power are favoured choices for the post — a practice that tends to erode independence and impartiality. The Supreme Court may hold that Governors are neither employees nor agents of the central government but in practice many of them do behave like agents. The Sarkaria Commission recommended that apart from being eminent in some walk of life, a Governor should not have taken too great a part in politics, particularly in the recent past. The spirit of the latest judgment, which cites various recommendations of the Sarkaria Commission and the National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution, is to press for a measure of security of tenure to gubernatorial office. But the Supreme Court rightly points out that it is for the legislature to consider such recommendations; as a court of law, its powers are limited, in this context, to examining the issue of removing Governors in the light of Article 156. It is doubtful that this judgment will put a stop to the arbitrary removal of Governor. But it will certainly make the central government think twice before exercising a power that has so often been misused.

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

THE HINDU

LEADER PAGE ARTICLES

SAVING THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION MIRACLE

THE RTI JUGGERNAUT HAS BEGUN TO ROLL OVER INDIAN BABUDOM. LET US NOT TURN THE CLOCK BACK.

VIDYA SUBRAHMANIAM

Over the past week, there have been reports that the Prime Minister's Office, responding to Sonia Gandhi's muscular intervention, is backing off on the dreaded amendments to the Right to Information Act, 2005.

On the other hand, it is worth remembering that the amendments scare has never been too far away. It resurfaced as recently as April 30, 2010 — this time in the benign form of a friendly letter to an RTI applicant. The letter, from the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT), was in response to his application seeking details of the amendments under consideration, and it confirmed that far-reaching changes were in fact under way.

And yet, whatever the outcome of this see-sawing confrontation between the government and the growing band of RTI stakeholders — activists, Information Commissioners, ordinary citizens — one thing is clear. Almost against its will, official India is changing.

The DoPT's letter is an example in itself. In the past, the department, the nodal government agency for matters relating to RTI, would get into a lather if anyone so much as asked a question. RTI activists and the Central Information Commission (CIC) fought a marathon battle to get the DoPT to acknowledge that the Act allowed access to file-notings. The department stubbornly maintained the opposite on its website, providing just the excuse the other Ministries needed to stonewall demands for file-notings.

The DoPT's April 30 letter is accommodating to the point of disbelief. In reply to "point number 8," it says: "copy of file noting is enclosed." Was this the same government organ that possessively clutched file-notings to its bosom? Not just the DoPT. There is reason to believe that RTI glasnost is wrecking babudom's practised ways everywhere in government. If today we know for a fact that Ms Gandhi and the Prime Minister hold opposing views on amending the RTI Act, it is thanks, ironically, to RTI. The Manmohan Singh-Sonia Gandhi correspondence was accessed by Subhash Chandra Agrawal, an RTI zealot with an unmatched penchant for bombarding government offices with complicated queries — the kind that would have normally got the government bristling.

Yet today he has in his possession documents of unimaginable importance. To name only a few: The entire 2004 and 2010 Padma awards records, including a 2004 "secret" letter from A.P.J. Abdul Kalam to Atal Bihari Vajpayee on norms for deciding the awards; information on the wealth and assets of judges as well as expenditure on the travels of judges and their spouses; files relating to appointment of judges; the Naveen Chawla-N.Gopalaswami correspondence; details of RTI amendments under consideration; and most recently, a CIC ruling extending the RTI Act to correspondence between the Prime Minister and the President.

Indian Express has scooped significant stories using the RTI Act, and recently published the entire lot of letters exchanged between Ms Gandhi and Dr. Manmohan Singh over the term of the first United Progressive Alliance government. The letters confirm what many have suspected for long: that two different visions inform the offices of the Prime Minister and the Congress president.

The CIC has far surpassed expectations, pushing the envelope to uphold transparency and accountability in the public sphere, and shaking up the judicial fraternity with its daring interpretation of the RTI Act. The CIC's January 2009 ruling that the Act covers the assets of Supreme Court judges is beyond anything one could have imagined in pre-RTI India.

To understand the import of this decision one has only to look at the incredible phenomenon of the Supreme Court appealing to itself against the Delhi High Court order upholding the CIC's ruling in the judges' assets case. Significantly, the effect of all this has been to open rather than shut doors. One judge after another has come out voluntarily to declare his assets.

A little over a month ago, this writer filed two RTI applications with the Ministry of Rural Development. Twenty days later, I got a call from the Ministry. Over the following week, officials incessantly fussed over me, worrying that I was not finding the time to go over and inspect the files. Once in the hallowed corridors of Krishi Bhawan, officials eagerly obliged with mounds of files, pointing out file-notings and such, and printing out photocopies late into the evening.

In the case of the second application, the Ministry overshot the RTI deadline of one month by five days. But no harm done. A Deputy Secretary was on the phone profusely apologising for the "unwarranted" delay. The ease with which officials parted with file-notings was a knock-out surprise. Indeed, the experience was almost surreal. Did I owe the kindness to my being a journalist or was something else happening here? The former possibility is fairly ruled out because the fourth estate is not a particular favourite of the bureaucracy.

In truth, not just me, RTI applicants everywhere are possibly finding it just a bit easier to approach the giant behemoth called the government. The term "top secret" which was the bureaucracy's single biggest weapon, no longer looks that forbidding. A correspondent from The Hindu approached a member of the Padma awards committee seeking details of the controversial Padma Bhushan award to NRI hotelier Sant Singh Chatwal. The member threw a fit: "How dare you even call me? Don't you know our decisions are secret?" Yet thanks to RTI, within days we had full information, not just on the award to Mr. Chatwal but on the 1,163 names considered by the committee. The awards committee member, like so many from the "secrecy" era, had not understood that what was secret in his time was open information today. The Hindu correspondent actually held in her hand President Kalam's "secret" note to Prime Minister Vajpayee. And the letter was handed out by the Home Ministry, once the proud repository of all things secret.

Spectacular as these breakthroughs are, it is the smaller stories involving a score of poor RTI applicants that truly point to the transfer of power taking place on the ground. Central Information Commissioner Shailesh Gandhi's favourite story is of a man in rags who was treated with respect at the ration office only because he had filed an RTI application. "The same officer who used to treat him like dirt offered him a chair and tea," says Mr. Gandhi. "The man understood the power of information, and told me what he had achieved was far more than a ration card. From being always overpowered, he actually felt powerful."

The implications of this transformation are surely not lost on the top echelons of government. Though not fully by any means, feudal, secretive India has adapted to an open information culture sooner than anyone could have anticipated. Who could have thought that government departments would treat information seekers with deference? If this is the case with the number of RTI users still being minuscule, one can guess the scale of the havoc a fully operative RTI Act would cause.

Says RTI pioneer Aruna Roy: "What we are witnessing is a potentially massive transfer of power. This is democracy at the grassroots, and that is why it is hard to believe that the government will let go of the amendments. RTI has opened a million cans of worms. It has put the fear of God into the bureaucracy."

And so we have a strange situation. One half of the government is ever so slowly relaxing its hold on information, while the other half is far from giving up. The conflict becomes visible every now and then. Last month, the Home Ministry released the details of the 2010 Padma awards aspirants but advised the RTI applicant who sought them not to make them public.

At a South Asia RTI workshop convened in Delhi recently, delegates from Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal and Sri Lanka seemed in awe of the Indian achievement in RTI. Pakistan framed a freedom of information ordinance in 2002. However, official data from that country shows that all its federal departments and ministries put together get less than five information applications a month. Between 2003 and 2007, only 51 complaints reached the office of the Federal Ombudsman (equivalent to the Indian CIC). Of these, only eight were filed by ordinary citizens. The Indian CIC in the single year of 2009 received 21,500 appeals and complaints, of which it disposed of 19,500.

India's RTI activists and Information Officers are an unusually inspired lot. Chief Information Commissioner Wajahat Habibullah has passed landmark rulings that have changed the rules of governance. Information Commissioner Gandhi has been working with a rare dedication, spending his own money to employ staff, and disposing of 5,800 cases annually. Aruna Roy and countless other activists breathe and sleep RTI.

For all their sake, and more importantly, for the sake of the common citizens, the miracle called the Indian RTI Act must be saved.

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

THE HINDU

BENCHMARKING REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT

DESPITE THE BEST OF INTENTIONS ON THE PART OF THE GOVERNMENT, MANY PEOPLE HIT BY LAND ACQUISITION FOR PROJECTS CONTINUE TO GET A RAW DEAL. ONE CORPORATE'S EFFORTS IN THIS FIELD MAY SERVE AS A MODEL TO FOLLOW.

SUJAY NAG

The Government of India had laid down as the objective of the Rehabilitation and Resettlement Bill, 2007, the "rehabilitation and resettlement of persons affected by the acquisition of land for projects of public purpose or involuntary displacement due to any other reason, and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto."

Yet, as recent communications from the former Minister for Rural Development, Raghuvansh Prasad Singh, to the Prime Minister pointed out, the government's inaction on the Bills concerning land acquisition amendment and rehabilitation and resettlement (R&R) has been striking. He has sought to drive home the point that activists, social scientists and development economists have been making: that there is poor commitment to recognising the role of those who give up their critical assets for the sake of development as key stakeholders in development projects. The apparent urgency in having these bills introduced in the Lok Sabha on February 24, 2009 and passed the next day petered out into nothingness: the bills were not even introduced in the Rajya Sabha.

Understandably, members of the lobby that wants to usher in quick industrialisation will want to ride roughshod as they mount the "efficient use of resources" horse. They will not be overly concerned about brushing off the indigent, on whose way of life, culture and livelihoods they will want to trample. The point is that in a democratic structure — irrespective of the state of dispossession of the poor — it is not quite possible to bypass the legitimate rights of any stakeholder all the time.

For a government that constantly talks of inclusive growth, stakeholder rights become all the more significant if they pertain to the sector that is ' excluded' from the substantial development that the country claims. Indeed, there had seemed to be a fair recognition of the plight of the displaced in the proposed Bill, which provided for the "basic minimum requirements that all projects leading to involuntary displacement must address." The Bill has a saving clause to enable State governments, public sector undertakings, agencies or other bodies to continue to provide or put in place greater benefit levels than those prescribed under the Bill. It seemed to have responded to India's horrific record on the R&R front for those displaced by "planned development" in the post-Independence era, especially in the power, mining, heavy industry and irrigation spaces. Even by conservative estimates some 50 million persons have been displaced and only about 25 per cent of them have been resettled. The reality is grimmer.

Given this perspective and the government's hesitation to put in place an R&R policy, it is imperative that those planning investments in these areas peopled by vulnerable communities take the business of R&R as seriously as they take other commercial calculations. Self-interest, if nothing else, should inform them that the support of a fair and transparent R&R policy, preceded by the establishment of a healthy relationship with the host community, would be critical to the success of any investment.

The contours of what a good R&R plan should be are fairly well-known. There are enlightened corporates in the public and private sectors that have executed fair R&R programmes, as there are many that have ignored them with impunity. But for the Bill, there is no law that seeks to confer on ousted persons the explicit right to rehabilitation.

Some models

It is important, then, to examine some R&R schemes and position them as models that deserve emulation. Tata Steel's "Parivar" concept for those displaced by its development initiatives seeks to provide a protective umbrella for rehabilitated families. The beneficiaries are given a sense of belonging by means of identity cards. More important, the documentation of the promises made to each beneficiary is monitored to ensure that the company delivers on them.

The objective is to ensure that the quality of life of each beneficiary is substantially improved by way of improved civic infrastructure, supported by sound socio-economic and cultural infrastructure. This includes a training programme for skill-upgradation through an initiative called 'Prerana', under which 373 people have been trained in different trades. Of these, 201 have been absorbed by construction partners and 47 families have found self-employment. In more specific terms, one member of every displaced extended family (there are 1,200 of them) is given employment or one-time assistance in lieu of employment. The company is offering a tenth of an acre (4,356 square feet) of homestead land (developed plots) to each displaced extended family in its rehabilitation colonies at Trijanga, Sansailo and Gobarghati. There is free transportation for those shifting with their belongings; a welcome package comprising 39 utility items, and provision for transit camp accommodation and rented house facilities apart from payment assistance for a temporary shed. Each Tata Steel 'Parivar' resettlement colony has a free dispensary, all-weather motorable roads, concrete drainage, piped water and electricity connection to each house, street lighting and solid waste and garbage management facilities. The family is given a month's groceries and Rs. 1 lakh as house-building assistance over and above the Rs. 1.5 lakh mentioned in the R&R policy, as well as the extra replacement value of the structures in the original village. Families also get a monthly maintenance allowance of Rs. 2,300 till they are appropriately employed.

Other components of the R&R package are free medical treatment, crop compensation, house structure payment and livestock compensation. Children of the displaced or their nominees get the Tata Parivar Scholarship to pursue engineering, medical or diploma courses. Some 39 families have benefited from this.

The land-owners received the first round of compensation during the period 1992-95. Given the passage of time and the concerns of land-owners, Tata Steel gave an additional ex-gratia equivalent to Rs. 400,000 an acre of acquired land to match the market value. The company is paying for the replacement value of the additional structures constructed on the land. Some government land in the project area was encroached upon by families that were to be displaced and an ex-gratia proportionate to the land encroached is being given. This is done in consultation with the community and the district authorities, to address the concern of loss of tenancy rights.

There are two special initiatives. One is to empower people through Self Help Groups: 22 SHGs with 295 women members are engaged in income-generating programmes such as poultry and goat -rearing, pickle-making, food processing, mushroom cultivation, phenyl making, Saura painting, stone carving, stitching, and nursery and backyard-farming. Besides, 11 SHGs formed by 167 men are engaged in micro-level enterprises. The second initiative is built around educating the children of the displaced through a pre-school education (balwadi) programme that is mainstreamed with government and private schools. Children are also enrolled in residential ashram schools and the Kalinga Institute of Social Science in Bhubaneswar.

The company has internal and external redressal cells that take care of any day-to-day grievances of the relocated persons. The external cell provides third-party checks, helps audit R&R activities and provides independent feedback on stakeholder concerns.

Overall, the idea is for companies to go beyond mere lip service. The per family spend on the rehabilitation package works out to Rs. 16.91 lakh. The total expenditure is around Rs. 213 crore. Does that resolve all issues around displacement? It may not. At least it provides a global benchmark around how companies ought to address the concerns of the key stakeholders in a development process.

( Sujay Nag is a former senior resident representative of Tata International in Bangladesh.)

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

THE HINDU

UNEQUAL QUEST FOR EQUALITY

JAPAN NOW THINKS THAT IT MUST RELUCTANTLY CONTINUE PLAYING SECOND-FIDDLE TO THE UNITED STATES ON A KEY MILITARY QUESTION. AND PRIME MINISTER YUKIO HATOYAMA HAS DISCOVERED A NEW ISSUE TO CHEER WASHINGTON WILLINGLY.

P. S. SURYANARAYANA

Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama has emphasised how difficult it is to say 'no' to the United States over its military preferences in his own country. The message, after he held urgent consultations with his cabinet colleagues on May 10, is that he remains unable to strike an "equal relationship" with the U.S., despite his efforts to do so since he became Prime Minister over eight months ago.

The U.S. is Japan's long-standing military ally. At the same time, Japan, China, and South Korea are also engaged in trilateral diplomacy at the summit level under what can be described as Fukuoka consensus. The consensus is in essence a political matter of potential hedging against the U.S. by these three neighbouring Northeast Asian countries. It was at Tokyo's initiative, prior to Mr. Hatoyama's rise to power last September, that these three countries held their first-ever full-fledged summit at Fukuoka in Japan. Under this process, the Foreign Ministers of Japan, China, and South Korea will now meet on Saturday and Sunday (May 15 and 16) to prepared the ground for yet another summit.

Many in the Japanese prefecture of Okinawa want the Americans to wind up their show and go home. Okinawa is home to some state-of-the-art military bases that underpin Washington's forward-deployment strategy in East Asia. Mr. Hatoyama visited Naha, Okinawa's capital, last week to apologise for his inability to negotiate a reduction in the U.S. military footprint in that prefecture.

At stake now is the popular clamour among the people of Okinawa for shifting the U.S. Marine Corps' Futenma Air Station out of that prefecture or, if possible, out of Japan altogether. The factors driving this demand include Washington's perceived "imposition" of this facility on a densely-populated area. Another key issue is the "unacceptable" off-base "misconduct" of U.S. Marines. And the Futenma issue is just one manifestation of an overall unease, among sizable sections of the Japanese, over the ubiquitous U.S. military presence in their country.

Under an existing Japan-U.S. accord, entered into before Mr. Hatoyama's ascent to power last September, the Futenma station is to be shifted to a less populated area in Okinawa itself. In his electoral pledge, he committed himself to getting this base shifted out of Okinawa or even Japan altogether. In a change of political tune, he has now said that it will be difficult to get this done, because of two reasons: the current state of Japan-U.S. relations and the continuing role of this base in the effective deterrence that the American troops in Japan provide for its benefit and for Asia-Pacific stability.

If Japan now thinks that it must reluctantly continue playing second fiddle to the U.S. on a key military question, Mr. Hatoyama has in fact discovered a new issue to cheer Washington willingly. He can be happily on the same political wavelength as U.S. President Barack Obama over his quest for a new American dream of a "world without nuclear weapons" at some unknowable stage in the future.

Surely, Mr. Obama's futuristic vision of a nuclear-weapons-free world and the existential presence of U.S. troops in Japan are totally different issues on Mr. Hatoyama's agenda. But there is in fact no real irony about a possible partnership between Japan and the U.S. for efforts to create a "world without nuclear weapons."

Japan is the only country to have been bombed with nuclear weapons – at the hands of the U.S. itself in the Second World War. Successive governments thereafter in these two countries have, by and large and almost until recently, justified their military alliance as a mutually-convenient sequel to the outcome of the Second World War. Surely, a sequel in just realpolitik terms!

The alliance was firmed up in the 1950s and 1960s. Since then, those realpolitik terms have generally been understood differently in these two countries. Shorn of the intricacies of those perceptions, the alliance was upheld, until almost a year ago, by nearly all successive governments in both Tokyo and Washington. On balance, the general refrain was that the alliance was in fact suited to the differing national interests of Japan and the U.S. More importantly, these interests were also seen to be compatible and not mutually exclusive in scope.

Decisive, in such a contemporary context, is a new political nuance which can be detected in the current public debate in Japan over its ties with the U.S. Surely, the Japanese leaders like Mr. Hatoyama and others, including those in some key prefectures, have not given up the conventional view that the national interests of Japan and the U.S. are essentially compatible. However, the new nuance is that the independent national interests of Japan and the U.S. are somewhat mutually exclusive in certain respects.

In particular, Japanese leaders increasingly tend to recognise that their policy towards China must be a constructive engagement and not containment of any kind at the global or East Asian level. Mr. Obama does not, of course, advocate an open containment of China in its relentless drive for economic and military modernisation. However, he has not also abandoned the basic tenets of Washington's foreign policy, which are still designed to sustain U.S primacy as the world's reigning superpower. In a sense, therefore, Mr. Obama's actions are primarily designed to pull the U.S. out of its current distress.

From a U.S. perspective, there is perhaps nothing wrong about this, but Mr. Hatoyama does not want to see Japan's ties with China under the U.S. prism. This sense of autonomy is not really negated by his latest move for accommodating the U.S. "interests" in Okinawa. Such an apparent appeasement of the U.S. is obviously seen by him as some diplomatic nicety dictated by the present reality of Japan's dependence on the American deterrence. This brand of foreign-policy nuance in Japan is also reinforced by a growing popular aspiration there for a return to "normality" as a sovereign nation.

The persistent lack of "equality" in Japan's engagement with the U.S. is traceable to the significant asymmetry of the relative political and economic strengths of the two countries in their alliance calculus. Of equal relevance is the inevitable disparity between their differing vision coefficients.

Even under a "new-age leader" like Mr. Obama, the U.S. continues to see itself as a global superpower, although its capabilities in that position are fast eroding, especially so in the all-important economic domain and not really in the military sphere so far. And, Mr. Hatoyama's latest comments in Okinawa show that he has begun to see America's military dimension as being beneficial to Japan. Interestingly in this overall context, an expert like Michael Mandelbaum, who is known for the idea of a frugal superpower, has suggested that the current "retrenchment" in U.S. global power can be traced to the country's "fiscal condition" in particular.

By contrast, Japan is a quintessential East Asian power in the neighbourhood of China, which remains on the rise as a potential superpower.

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

THE HINDU

WHITE HOUSE IN FINAL PUSH FOR CLIMATE BILL

THERE ARE CONCERNS THAT THE DEBATE ABOUT THE ENERGY FUTURE COULD BE LOST IN THE WRANGLING ABOUT OFFSHORE OIL DRILLING PERMITS.

SUZANNE GOLDENBERG

U.S. Senators are set to take a last run at producing a climate and energy law on Wednesday, betting on the spectre of environmental disaster raised by the BP oil spill to build support for a comprehensive overhaul of America's energy strategy.

But despite a strong push from the Obama administration, there are concerns that the debate about the energy future could be lost in the wrangling about offshore oil drilling permits.

The official roll-out by Senators John Kerry and Joe Lieberman caps eight months of negotiations with political figures and industry executives aimed at getting broad support in Congress for shifting the economy away from coal and oil and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Climate legislation passed by the U.S. Senate could unblock a major obstacle which prevented agreement on a binding global deal at last year's Copenhagen summit.

"We are more encouraged today that we can secure the necessary votes to pass this legislation this year in part because the last weeks have given everyone with a stake in this issue a heightened understanding that as a nation, we can no longer wait to solve this problem which threatens our economy, our security and our environment," Kerry and Lieberman said in a joint statement.

The White House is also trying to use the disaster to make a case for a bill. "This accident, this tragedy, is actually heightening people's interest in energy in this country and in wanting a different energy plan," Carol Browner, the White House climate adviser told Bloomberg television at the weekend.

Time is fast running out for climate and energy legislation, with Democrats expected to suffer heavy losses in the mid-term elections.

But the thinking in Congress is that the economic disaster in the Gulf is more likely to hurt, than help, such efforts in large part because offshore drilling was a key part of the proposals.

The two Senators deliberately gave a boost to offshore drilling under a strategy that saw the Obama administration and the White House working to build support among Republicans and industries that stood to be affected by the new regulations.

Early drafts promised to build more nuclear power plants and expand offshore oil drilling. The pro-business message was further underlined in plans for a roll-out originally scheduled for last month, which envisaged a public show of support from big oil companies. The proposal is expected to require a 17 per cent cut in emissions levels from 2005 levels by 2020. Earlier versions suggested a sector-by-sector approach to emissions cuts. Electricity producers would face a cap in 2012, with heavily polluting industries such as steel and cement manufacturers winning a delay until 2012.

In addition to financial incentives for nuclear power and offshore oil and gas drilling, the proposals would have created funds for carbon capture and storage.

The proposals would also have curbed the powers of the Environmental Protection Agency to acting on emissions, and would have stopped states, such as California, from imposing more stringent environmental regulations.

Such concessions to the nuclear and oil industry, while angering environmentalists, do not appear to have created a solid bank of Republican support.

Kerry and Lieberman lost their lone Republican ally, Lindsey Graham. The South Carolina Senator, who initially withdrew his support over a dispute about immigration, now argues the spill in the Gulf has wrecked any chance of success.

"There are not nearly 60 votes today and I do not see them materialising until we deal with the uncertainty of the immigration debate and the consequences of the oil spill," he said in a statement.

The Senate majority leader, Harry Reid, also cast doubt this week on the likelihood of getting a comprehensive climate and energy bill through the Sentate. He told Spanish language Univision network a limited energy-only bill — that would not cap emissions — stood a better chance.

Meanwhile, the battle lines are being drawn on offshore drilling. Some Democratic Senators are now threatening to vote against any climate bill that allows expanded drilling. "I will have a very hard time ever voting for offshore drilling again," Senator Jay Rockefeller, a West Virginia Democrat told reporters.

Others, including Graham, remain adamant in their support for drilling.

Environmental organisations are also expanding their campaigns against drilling, both in the Gulf of Mexico, and new projects scheduled for Alaska.

That could force yet another revision to the proposal by the time it sees the light of day on Wednesday. "The one part we are still talking about is the offshore drilling," Lieberman told reporters. "The other parts are really in pretty solid shape."

— © Guardian Newspapers Limited, 2010

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

THE HINDU

RECESSION CUTS LABOUR TAXES

The economic recession has reduced taxes on the workers' earnings in most developed countries, the Paris-based Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) said on Tuesday in a report.

Due to government stimulus packages and guarantee measures after the worst global depression since the Second World War, "average tax and social security burdens on employment incomes fell slightly in 24 out of 30 OECD countries last year," the OECD reported. According to the OECD's annual Taxing Wages report, New Zealand, which already imposed relatively low taxes on labour incomes, recorded the biggest falls. Turkey and Sweden also recorded big declines.

OECD said last year many countries cut income taxes, some reduced employer social security contributions and others, including Germany, Japan and the United States, recorded lower wage tax due to lower average wages after the economic crisis. Hungary, Greece and France were the highest-tax countries for one-earner married couples with two children earning the average wage. The difference between the total cost of employing a person and their net take-home pay, or "tax wedge," was 43.7 per cent in Hungary and 41.7 per cent in Greece and France, well above the OECD average level of 26 per cent, the report said.

For single workers, Belgium, Hungary and Germany recorded the highest "tax wedges" at 55.2 per cent, 53.4 per cent and 50.9 per cent, respectively. At the other end of the scale, Mexico, New Zealand and South Korea took only 15.3 per cent, 18.4 per cent and 19.7 per cent, respectively. This scale's average reading for OECD countries was 36.4 per cent.

— Xinhua

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

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

THE ASIAN AGE

EDITORIAL

WRONG THING IN THE WRONG PLACE...

It is a pity about minister of state for environment Jairam Ramesh. He is among a small set of ministers who are intellectually well-equipped and steeped into the modernist tradition. More of this kind are needed as India seeks to forge ahead. A minister needs to understand this country's complex realities and show a subtle grasp of its interplay with other nations. At the same time, it is clear that political adeptness and a sense of proportion are necessary qualifications for senior government functionaries if they seek to court success in framing appropriate policy and in its successful dissemination and implementation. It is in these realms that many who run the race come up short, as the case of Mr Ramesh demonstrates so well. Everything which he had to say in Beijing about India's security establishment and the home ministry being "paranoid", "alarmist" and "defensive" in assessing Chinese investments in India amounts to caricaturing this country's overall equation with a powerful neighbour with which relations have been more down than up. Even so, Mr Ramesh's assertions on these counts constitute the lesser of his follies. Far more serious is the minister taking up cudgels for Chinese multinational Huawei, a company that attracted adverse notice from the beginning of its innings in India. The point here, however, is that Mr Ramesh's observations in respect of Huawei expose him and his government to the charge of lobbying for particular international business entities. For a political party or a minister, it would be a sin even to speak up for an Indian business venture in the way that Mr Ramesh has done for the Chinese firm.
The BJP has already accused Mr Ramesh of lobbying for Chinese commercial establishments. It is decent of the party not to demand his ouster from the government. Or maybe it just plans to carry out a campaign against UPA-2 on the issue of foreign multinationals and their flag-bearers within the council of ministers. Such a campaign can get off the ground only if a minister charged with a misdemeanour is permitted to remain in office. Not long ago Shashi Tharoor had to go when the first whiff of his possible financial involvement with a prospective IPL franchisee surfaced. Had he been allowed to stay on, Mr Ramesh's controversial statements in support of a Chinese company would have been an additionality of an unsavoury kind. And now if Mr Ramesh stays put, the breaking of another scandal — and no modern governments are immune to the possibility — can affect the composure of the Union council of ministers.

Even if Mr Ramesh had not batted for Huawei, what he has had to say about the functioning of the Union home ministry on the issue of Chinese investments in India is enough grist to the Opposition mill. The Manmohan Singh government should count itself lucky that the controversy did not break during a session of Parliament. But there can be little doubt that questions will be raised during the Monsoon Session. While it is up to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Congress president Sonia Gandhi to decide what to do with Mr Ramesh, doubts over the functioning of foreign companies in India, and the manner in which the government tackles these, is a legitimate concern for the country. Parliament will be within its right to ask the necessary questions.
Apart from pointing out the inadvisability of one minister criticising the domain of another, the Prime Minister has quite correctly questioned the propriety of a minister being critical of his own government while on foreign soil. It is pertinent to point out that leading Opposition figures also make it a point not to hit out at the government when they travel abroad.

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

THE ASIAN AGE

EDITORIAL

HATRED IS LIKE TAKING POISON

A young man once asked his grandfather about an injustice that had left him enraged. The grandfather admitted that he, too, had felt such rage. "I feel as if I have two wolves fighting in my heart", he told him. "One wolf is the vengeful, angry, violent one. The other wolf is the loving, compassionate one".

The grandfather continued, "I, too, at times, have felt great hate for those who have taken so much from my life with no sorrow for what they do. But hate wears you down, and does not hurt your enemy. It is like taking poison and wishing your enemy would die". When he finished talking, the grandson asked him, "Which wolf will win the fight in your heart?" "The one I feed", replied the grandfather.

Perhaps it was due to two wolves fighting in the heart of Peter, one of the disciples of Jesus, that he asked Jesus, "Lord, how many times shall I forgive my brother when he sins against me? Up to seven times?" Jesus answered, "I tell you, not seven times, but seventy-seven times" (Math 18:21-22).

One of the major struggles we often face in our lives is to do with people who need our forgiveness or those from whom we seek forgiveness. Sometimes we find it as difficult to forgive someone as others might find to forgive us for our wrongdoing. Nurturing a grudge against someone, we feel, gives us psychological satisfaction.

A few years ago when Gladys Staines, whose husband Graham and two young sons were burnt to death, appeared before the cameras after the incident and declared that she forgave the murderers, it left everyone stunned. Almost five years later when she decided to go back to her country, one of the leading newspapers carried an Internet survey which asked its readers, "Is the example that Gladys Staines set in India worth emulating?" A substantial 59.23 per cent of readers responded with a firm "No".

The readers' answers were born out of their (and our) own human, often extremely painful, experiences, where forgiving someone for such monstrous acts rarely surfaces as an option. Thus one is not surprised when one hears from the family members of the victims of violence that they want the culprit to be punished. As far as law is concerned that is what should, of course, be done.

But whether the law punishes the culprit or not, what happens to the one who suffers the loss and starts building hatred towards the other in one's heart. And what about those times when issues are more personal than legal? For instance, when we are betrayed by a friend or when a trusted person stabs us in the back or someone whom we have never harmed goes and does terrible things against us. Such incidents, besides leaving us wounded, make us angry, hurt and bitter. We may keep looking for an occasion to pay back the person in the same coin — and this, if we do not take care, can eat us up from within.

King Yudhishthira was asked by Draupadi, referring to the answer of Prahlad to his grandson Vali, "If forgiveness or might was meritorious?" In a rather long response Yudhishthira answered, "O beautiful one, one should forgive under every injury. It has been said that the continuation of species is due to man being forgiving. He, indeed, is a wise and excellent person who has conquered his wrath and shows forgiveness even when insulted, oppressed and angered by a strong person… forgiveness is the might of the mighty; forgiveness is sacrifice; forgiveness is quiet of mind".

No wonder then that when his disciples asked Jesus to teach them to pray, Jesus made it a point to make the prayer powerful but also added something to the prayer that would bring great healing: "…And forgive us our sins as we forgive those who sin against us…" and hastened to add, "For if you forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if you do not forgive men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses" (Math 6: 12 & 14-15).

Jesus is doing his best to show the importance and, indeed, the usefulness of forgiving others, like the grandfather telling his grandson that "hate wears you down, and does not hurt your enemy. It is like taking poison and wishing your enemy would die". Would we really not be creators of an incredible society when we would be able to forgive one another from our heart? And would that not be an ideal recipe worth adopting in the daily menu of life?

— Father Dominic Emmanuel, a founder-member of Parliament of Religions, is currently the director of communication of the Delhi Catholic Church. He was awarded the National Communal Harmony Award 2008 by the Government of India.

Dominic Emmanuel

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

THE ASIAN AGE

EDITORIAL

INDIA SHINING OR INDIA STARVING?

India became independent soon after the Great Bengal Famine that claimed two million lives. An independent and free India reclaimed her food sovereignty and food security.

The Harijan, a newspaper published by Mahatma Gandhi and banned from 1942 to 1946, was full of articles written by Gandhi during 1946-1947 on how to deal with food scarcity politically, and by Mira Behn, Kumarappa and Pyarelal on how to grow more food using internal resources. On June 10, 1947, referring to the food problem at a prayer meeting, Gandhi said: "The first lesson we must learn is of self-help and self-reliance. If we assimilate this lesson, we shall at once free ourselves from disastrous dependence upon foreign countries and ultimate bankruptcy. This is not said in arrogance but as a matter of fact. We are not a small place... We are a subcontinent, a nation of nearly 400 millions. We are a country of mighty rivers and a rich variety of agricultural land with inexhaustible cattle-wealth. That our cattle give much less milk than we need is entirely our own fault. Our cattle-wealth is any day capable of giving us all the milk we need. Our country, if it had not been neglected during the past few centuries, should not today only be providing herself with sufficient food, but also be playing a useful role in supplying the outside world with much-needed foodstuffs of which the late war has unfortunately left practically the whole world in want. This does not exclude India".

Recognising that the crisis in agriculture was related to a breakdown of nature's processes, India's first agriculture minister, K.M. Munshi, worked out a detailed strategy on rebuilding and regenerating the ecological base of productivity in agriculture, with the recognition that the diversity of India's soils, crops and climates had to be taken into account. The need to plan from the bottom, to consider every individual village and sometimes every individual field was considered essential for the programme called "land transformation". At a seminar on September 27, 1951, Munshi told the state directors of agricultural extension: "Study the life's cycle in the village under your charge in both its aspects — hydrological and nutritional. Find out where the cycle has been disturbed and estimate the steps necessary for restoring it. Work out the village in four of its aspects: existing conditions; steps necessary for completing the hydrological cycle; steps necessary to complete the nutritional cycle, and a complete picture of the village when the cycle is restored; and have faith in yourself and the programme. Nothing is too mean and nothing too difficult for the man who believes that the restoration of the life's cycle is not only essential for freedom and happiness of India but is essential for her very existence".

Every fourth Indian is hungry today, according to United Nations data. India has beaten Sub-Saharan Africa as the capital of hunger: One million children die every year as a result of under-nutrition and hunger; 61 million children are stunted; 25 million are wasted; 42 per cent of the world's underweight children are now in India.
Tinkering with fragments of the broken chain will not fix it. The food chain begins with the natural capital of soil, water and seed. The second link is the work of hardworking small, marginal farmers and landless peasants, most of whom are women. The final link is eating.

The first link has been broken by ecological degradation and corporate hijack of seed, land and water. When peasants lose access to land, seed and water, they lose access to food. Increase in hunger is a direct consequence.

The second link that has been broken is the capacity of the farmer, the food producer, to produce food. Rising costs of production, falling farm prices, and the destruction of food procurement by dismantling the public distribution system (PDS) creates debt. Since farmers are the backbone of India's food security and food sovereignty, breaking the farmers' back is breaking the nation's food security. There can be no food security in a deepening agrarian crisis.

The third link in the food chain is people's entitlement and right to food. The combination of rising food prices, decreasing production of pulses and nutritious millets has reduced the access of the poor to adequate food and nutrition. Hunger and malnutrition are its inevitable consequences.

And while millions of our fellow citizens starve, the government fiddles with poverty figures — 37 per cent in the Tendulkar Committee Report, 50 per cent in the Saxena Report, 77 per cent in the Unorganised Sector Report. This is a deliberate attempt to avoid addressing the rootcause of hunger and poverty. Poverty is a consequence, not a cause. But instead of addressing the food crisis, the government is addressing a fragment of the consequences of the crisis.

In the context of the food and nutrition crisis, the proposed National Food Security Act (NFSA) is a mere fig leaf. It is inadequate because it ignores the first two links in the food chain, and reduces the scope of existing schemes for the poor and vulnerable. For example, the NFSA offers only 25 kgs of grain, instead of the 35 kgs per family per month fixed by the Supreme Court. The Indian Council of Medical Research fixes the caloric norms at 2,400 Kcal in rural areas and 2,100 Kcal in urban areas. The Tendulkar Committee, which is now the Planning Commission's official basis, fixes average calorie consumption at 1,776 Kcal in urban areas and 1,999 Kcal for rural areas. Through juggling figures the hungry become well fed, the poor become non-poor.

Food security demands a universal PDS that serves both the poor farmers and the poor eaters by ensuring fair prices throughout the food chain. Instead the government is committed to ever-narrowing "targeting" because it is committed to handing over agriculture to global agri-business, and handling over so-called food security schemes to companies like Sodexo who will collect our tax money to distribute food coupons to the poor, who will in turn use the food coupons to increase the profits of MNCs.

As small farmers are displaced by agri-businesses, the destruction of natural capital will increase, further weakening the first link in the food chain. The agrarian crisis facing two-thirds of rural India will deepen. For a country as large, as poor, as hungry as India, food sovereignty and self-reliance in food production is not a luxury, it is a food security imperative.

Dr Vandana Shiva is the executive director of the Navdanya Trust

Vandana Shiva

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

THE ASIAN AGE

EDITORIAL

PERKY CRAVINGS

ALTHOUGH some of the unavoidable legislative work, such as passage of the Finance Bill and even the introduction of the controversial Nuclear Liability Bill, was somehow gone through, the almost daily disruption of both Houses remained the hallmark of the parliamentary session that was adjourned sine die last week. However, despite all the raucous noise and heated exchanges that, at least once, stopped just short of fisticuffs, Parliament managed to deliver one unanimous message loud and clear: It called for an immediate hike in the pay and perks of its members. In precise terms the demand was that the salary of members of Parliament (MPs) should be at least a rupee more than that of the top civil servants. This is on par with what prevails in France, and is perfectly legitimate, and merits support.

In fact, ever since a similar, though not identical, demand was first raised in the second Lok Sabha (1957-62) I have been arguing that India's lawmakers should be paid as well as its civil servants and other professionals serving in the public sector. If that were done, the MPs' allowances would also be taxed, along with their salaries. But unfortunately, right since the dawn of Independence, politicians ruling this country, including ministers, of course, have devised a salary structure for themselves that neatly covers up greed with hypocrisy.
Invoking the name of the Mahatma, they usually pretend that they want a modest pay. No wonder even today an MP's monthly salary is Rs 16,000 which, making allowance for the phenomenal inflation over six decades, is as much of a pittance as it used to be when it was only a few hundred rupees. But the bulk of the politicians' earnings have always consisted of non-taxable daily allowance for attending Parliament or its countless committees that continue to meet even while Parliament is in recess. There are several other untaxed perks, driving one sociologist to remark that whatever R.H. Tawney might have said, Indian society was both "acquisitive and perquisite".

To be sure, there are some perks that MPs who have to contest an election every five years, if not oftener, must get. For instance, each member of the Lok Sabha has to maintain two houses, one in his/her constituency and another in New Delhi. Normally, a pied-à-terre in the capital would do. But the reality is that a large number of members occupy sprawling bungalows in Lutyen's Delhi. Remarkably, many of them are members of the Rajya Sabha who have no popular election to fight and no constituency to nurse. To make matters a lot worse, even after ceasing to be MP and/or minister, a surprisingly large number of them refuse to vacate the lavish houses. The government's directorate of estates bangs its head against their walls but to no avail. The facility of free travel within the country and abroad available to the chosen ones is also enviable.
And then there are such windfalls as Members of Parliament's local area development scheme (MPLADS). Under it every MP has at his/her disposal Rs 2 crores a year for local area development projects in his/her constituency. Although the MP decides what has to be done, it is the collector of the district who is supposed to get the project executed. Yet, over the years, there has been no end to allegations of people's representatives siphoning off a lot of cash. One MP had seen nothing wrong in spending MPLADS funds on building a tennis court in a posh club. And now that the Supreme Court has rejected a PIL praying for the abolition of MPLADS nobody is going to be able to interfere with this largesse.

Important though these matters are, they are really sideshows. The key issue is whether in their anxiety to be a cut above the highest civil servants our MPs are prepared to abide by the discipline, constraints and rules applicable to the bureaucracy here as well as in the French Republic. No one can be appointed even a lower division clerk, leave alone to all-India services such as the Indian Administrative Service, Indian Foreign Service etc, if there is an adverse report against him/her. Civil servants found to be making money on the side are suspended and prosecuted. The gargantuan 2G spectrum scam underscores that politicians are immune from such risks!

No one suggests that there should be a police verification of those offering themselves as candidates in elections. But surely the current situation in which criminals get merrily elected to Parliament and even adorn ministerial chairs has to end before the deserved pay hike for MPs can take effect. It is no good anyone arguing that delay in the conviction of the politicians charged with the most heinous crimes is the fault of the judiciary, not of anyone else. The grave problem can and must be resolved if all political parties unite to amend the Election Law, and if need be the Constitution, to keep criminals out of the electoral process.
During the last days of the Budget session, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) had shouted itself hoarse against the Congress-led government's "misuse and abuse" of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). A BJP delegation even met the President to press the demand that the premier investigative agency be freed from the government's control. Why didn't the saffron party bring about this much-needed reform when it was in power for six years? And what prevents it today from offering its full cooperation in unbinding the CBI and keeping criminals out of politics?

The matter does not end there. There is also the question whether after a manifold increase in their pay and perks our MPs would work and let the nation's apex legislature function.

The members of the US Senate and House may be paid much more than lawmakers elsewhere, $174,000 a year, but they work most diligently. They initiate the laws, not the government. Congressional hearings keep the administration on its toes. Here we have daily barracking, rushing to the well of the House, rude exchanges and so on. This cannot be allowed to go on forever. The wholesome principle "No Work, No Pay" must apply to Parliament, too.

Inder Malhotra

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

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

DNA

EDITORIAL

THE KHAP TRAP

What is the best way to deal with an old-fashioned caste council of elders when they invoke customary prohibitions against endogamous, or some kind of consanguineous, marriages?

One way is to shout down their insistence on banning sagotra marriages in the name of modernity and enlightened rationalism.

That has already started happening in the television news channels and in English newspapers.

But this may not be the most effective way of either proving the point or winning the argument. The old mindset survives for various reasons, but customary taboos cannot be wished away just like that. The battle for minds and hearts cannot be won merely through slanging matches or TV debates.

The English-educated crowd here may want to change the laws to change society but that may not be enough. Decades after we made casteism a crime, we still haven't changed society completely. Compared to caste discrimination, the khap injunction on sagotra weddings is not exactly a crime against humanity.

It's merely outdated. One of the things sociologists and anthropologists have learned is that customs have something to do with the needs of a society at a particular stage of evolution, and quite often many customs survive as vestiges even after the conditions that gave rise to them have passed away.

The Haryana khap members who ordered a boy killed for violating the sagotra rule are probably unaware of the irrelevance of the ban in current circumstances.

However, it is one thing to tolerate old customs, quite another to justify murder for sagotra marriages. The latter is simply unpardonable.

A dialogue with the diehards may be a good and even useful thing, but even this may turn into a hurdle race of sorts. This is indeed the history of social reforms. It seems that there are not enough reformers from within the communities in many parts of north India. It is a reflection of the limited penetration of modern ideas in this region compared to other parts of the country.

It is useful to remember the Marxist maxim that in the evolution of society a contradiction emerges between the mode of production and the social relations of an earlier mode.

This is what we are witnessing in the life of the Jat and other communities. Rapid and radical economic changes will ultimately wear away the old customs. What north India needs is rapid industrialisation and urbanisation.

Once the closed rural societies melt away, the old customs will die away and some of the rural no-changers will be shouted down by younger members.

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

DNA

EDITORIAL

FRIENDS LIKE THESE

Pakistan must count itself as very lucky to have a friend like the US. Whatever the provocation, the US seems to find enough rationalisation to stand by it.

Nations which have displeased the US in the past have faced consequences, but not Pakistan. The latest revelation, that an American of Pakistani origin was behind the botched attempt to set off a car bomb in the crowded Times Square area of New York, has forced the US to rap it on the knuckles.

But that's about it.

US secretary of state Hillary Clinton remarked sharply that if any attack on the US had been successful, the consequences for Pakistan would have been "severe".

However, behind the harsh words there is little more than a mild rebuke. It is clear to the world, and especially here from India, that Pakistan is a hub for terrorists.

The US can make a fine point of the fact that the present Pakistan government is not responsible for the

organisations which plan and carry out acts of terrorism, but that is no more than giving its ally a smokescreen to hide behind.

In fact, the attempt to attack New York again is a warning to the US that it tacitly supports Pakistan only at its own peril. The statement by the Russian ambassador to India, Alexander Kadakin, that satellite imagery and intelligence show that there are at least 40 terror camps along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border is significant here.

The world can see that the US is weak when it comes to Pakistan and has started to voice its own fears. As the most important component of the erstwhile Soviet Union, Russia has a stake in the area. The US must sooner rather than later reassess its Pakistan policy.

India has been crying itself hoarse about the use of Pakistani soil to foment terrorism, but has largely been ignored on the pretext of India's Kashmir policy. It is now clear that the terrorism that emanates from our western neighbour has long surpassed its stake in the so-called Kashmir dream and is now taking on the world.

Pakistan's defence has been that it too is a victim of terrorism. That may well be true, but there is one crucial difference: the terrorism bedevilling Pakistan is its own creation. The one India faces is inflicted on us from across the border. The US knows the difference, but now needs to act on what it already knows.

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

DNA

CHINDIAÂ BEE IN JAIRAM RAMESHÂ€™S BONNET

VENKATESAN VEMBU

It isn't easy to summon up an eloquent defence of Jairam Ramesh, the latest in a long line of ministers to be afflicted with an acute case of foot-in-mouth-itis.

His public criticism of two other ministries in the government of which he is a part — over restrictions on Chinese equipments in the Indian telecom sector on grounds of national security — violates established norms of propriety in governance. If he's been summoned to the professorial prime minister Manmohan Singh's chambers and rapped on the knuckles for mis-speaking on issues beyond his ministerial ambit, it's fair to say he deserved it.

On the other hand, it isn't difficult to trace and even defend the intellectual source of Jairam Ramesh's articulations that have landed him in this controversy. The man who is credited with coining the portmanteau word 'Chindia' — to refer to the modern-day rise of civilisational twins China and India — has long been banging the drum for enhanced economic cooperation between the two countries.

In fact, this isn't even the first time that Jairam has spoken out against Indian security paranoia over Chinese investments and a "schizophrenic" Indian mindset when it comes to full-fledged economic ties with China. In his 2005 book Making Sense of Chindia, he addresses it several times and makes a coherent case for mature economic diplomacy without "demonising" China or "romanticising" ancient civilisational links.

It is possible to argue, of course, that the 'Chindia' bee that buzzes in Jairam Ramesh's bonnet represents an oversimplification of the complex Sino-Indian relationship.

Enhanced economic cooperation, as reflected in galloping bilateral trade, has not automatically translated into better political relations; in fact, given the skewed profile of bilateral trade and China's admittedly mercantilist policies, even trade relations have come under strain.

But it is also true that India has acquired notoriety on the world trade platform for its wilful and excessive invocation of anti-dumping duties and non-tariff barriers to mask protectionist trade policies. National security interests do, of course, override trade considerations; nevertheless, India's opaque record on this front inhibits a wider appreciation of the legitimacy of its claims — and opens it up to criticism about "paranoia" in the security establishment.

At another level, the commentary stirred up by the latest controversy shows up a disquieting shrinking of the 'middle ground' in the public rhetoric, particularly when it comes to perceptions of public security vis-a-vis China. It also reflects a failure of official India to give voice to a confident, coherent outlining of our 'core national interests' around which a stable relationship with China can be build.

The latest "security hurdle" to sourcing Chinese telecom equipment can be traced to objections from the Intelligence Bureau; given the agency's undistinguished record in credible intelligence gathering down the years, and its particularly dubious role in the lead-up to the 1962 war with China, it may be unwise to formulate policy on so significant a relationship without additional field intelligence.

One other aspect of this episode is puzzling: why did an intelligent, articulate man like Jairam Ramesh, who obviously knows the limits of his ministerial brief, overreach and position himself so squarely — and fancifully — as the centrepiece of enhanced 'Chindia' relations?

Does he hanker for a bigger role for himself beyond serving as environment minister? The answer may lie in an interview he gave to a weekly magazine in 1998, in which he said: "Why wouldn't I like to be Prime Minister? Maybe 10 years down the line." Twelve years have since gone by; perhaps Jairam Ramesh is feeling restless.

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

DNA

ROOTING FOR REBELS

AMULYA GANGULI

Civil libertarians are up in arms against any possible police action against Arundhati Roy for her pro-Maoist stance.

There are several big guns like Aruna Roy and Jean Dreze who favour a virtual anticipatory bail for the Booker prize winner. Their contention is that support for Maoist insurgency doesn't constitute a crime. Mamata Banerjee, too, is of the same view although, she was far more forthright in her expression of support for the Sahitya Akademi prize winner Mahashweta Devi. West Bengal would "burn", she had threatened, if the pro-Maoist writer was arrested.

There will be a measure of support for these views although not everyone will endorse Mamata's method of protest. The essence of such liberalism is that the freedom of expression should not be suppressed. It is also undeniable that Maoism elicits a kind of snobbery, especially among the well-off, where support for the rebels is intended to stress their superiority via an overt empathy with the downtrodden.

Or it may be a guilt complexharboured by the affluent over the destitution of the underprivileged. It is the same complex which makes a section of the upper castes root for Mayawati. Since the Maoists are supposed to be fighting for the poor, their supporters in polite society claim a higher moral status than their critics, who are the "running dogs" of capitalism, to turn to a phrase used in Mao Zedong's time against Liu Shaochi and the chairman's other opponents during the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution.

The pro-Maoists believe that their case is ethically foolproof. There are occasional muted murmurs about the violence perpetrated by the insurgents, such as the killing of policemen in Dantewada. But, as the more vocal among the apologists point out, such incidents are unavoidable where the Maoists have to defend themselves.

It is the old Leftist argument about the state being the more violent of the two while the working class merely fends off the attacks of the rich and the powerful, thereby causing a few casualties in the process. The underlying assumption is that the state does not really represent the "people". The legitimacy for this stand is drawn from the historical battles of the Bolsheviks, Mao's guerrillas, Fidel Castro's jungle warriors and Ho Chi Minh's peasant army.

The scene in India is a little different in that it is neither a monarchy, nor a dictatorship, nor is it under a regime which is propped up by the Americans although the last allegation is made in a roundabout way.

The main charge made by Roy, Mahashweta Devi and others is that Indian democracy is devoid of any sympathy for the oppressed because its present-day rulers are under the thumb of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. Again, this is an old Marxist characterisation of a bourgeois government as a committee of the exploiters.

However, even if the pro-poor credentials of the Maoist supporters are conceded for argument's sake, the point remains as to what extent this entitles them to behave as virtual subversives. The answer may become clearer if the activities of another group of militants — the Islamic fundamentalists — are taken into account.

Will the state allow their supporters the luxury of using the openness of democracy to speak for them? And will the champions of human rights be as vocal in their endorsement of the jehadi cause as the Maoist uprising?

Probably not. Yet, the jehadis claim to represent an even larger section of people than the Maoists, who speak for the poor in India only. The Islamists, on the other hand, believe that they are voicing the grievances of the ummah or the entire community of Muslims, who live under dictatorial regimes which are in league with the Americans.

In India, Simi and the Indian Mujahideen have joined the terrorists apparently for the reason stated earlier, and also because of the depressed condition of Muslims in this country and the violence unleashed against them by a seemingly biased state machinery during communal outbreaks, as in Gujarat. Like the Maoists, the jehadis also do not expect any redressal of their grievances under the existing system and want to supplant it in India (as well as in the Muslim countries run by America's "puppets") with one which is true to Islamic tenets. Their caliphate is no different in this respect from the Marxist utopia.

Despite this similarity, there are two reasons why the civil rights groups are more restrained about the Islamic fundamentalists than about the Maoists. The first is the fear that the state may be less indulgent towards them if they lean too far towards the jehadis. The society too, will not be all that permissive.

And the second is that Islamic militancy lacks the romantic appeal of Marxism, which is not dissimilar to the unending charm of the Robin Hood legend. Islamism, with its stark puritanism based on the "opium" of religion and the oppression of women, lacks that appeal for the left-liberals.

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

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

THE TRIBUNE

EDITORIAL

JAIRAM'S MANY INDISCRETIONS

THE MINISTER MUST LEARN TO RESPECT PROTOCOL

Union Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh has only himself to blame for the reprimand he has received at the hands of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh under full media focus. His indiscretion lay in his criticism of the government of which he is a part while he was in China in defiance of the norms that enjoin Cabinet colleagues to desist from commenting on the functioning of other ministries especially when they are on foreign soil. Clearly, Jairam Ramesh breached protocol when he described the Home Ministry as being "alarmist" and "overly defensive" about the entry of Chinese companies in India while speaking to media persons in Beijing. He went on to say that India must be much more relaxed in its approach to Chinese investments and get rid of "needless restrictions." Considering that the ban on the import of telecom equipment from Chinese firm Huawei for installation in border areas, which Jairam was provoked by, was motivated by security concerns, Jairam's stand was even more shocking. Being a no-nonsense man, it is hardly surprising that Home Minister P. Chidambaram was quick to complain to the Prime Minister who then called up Jairam to reprimand him.

That Jairam needed to be checked becomes evident when seen in the context of the spate of public gaffes committed by him earlier which embarrassed the government. In the run-up to the Copenhagen summit on climate change last year, he had to be contradicted by the Prime Minister when he said India would match China in carbon emission cuts. He was forced to retract by reiterating that India would not accept any legally-binding emission cut targets. Then at a function to release an environment report Jairam caused acute embarrassment when he waxed eloquent that "if there was a Nobel prize for dirt and filth, India would win it." A few weeks ago, he caused eyebrows to rise when he termed the wearing of gowns in convocations a "barbaric colonial practice." Some of Jairam's controversial statements may have had an element of truth in them, but making them was indiscreet and avoidable.

There indeed can be no two opinions that Jairam needs to mend his ways. There is no doubt that he is erudite and brings to bear on his job of Environment Minister a great deal of expertise. However, unless he learns to respect standards of protocol and propriety, his position as minister would become indefensible.

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

THE TRIBUNE

EDITORIAL

'UNCLE JUDGES' TO GO

KITH-AND-KIN SHADOW ON JUSTICE

Ideally, judges on their own should stay away from courts where their relatives practise. But since this has not happened, Law Minister Veerappa Moily has come out with the idea of taking an undertaking from judges at the time of their elevation that they will not function in a court where any of their relatives practises. The Law Commission of India too had disapproved of the existence of "uncle judges" in its report on judicial reforms submitted in August, 2009. The commission had noted that an advocate whose near relative or well-wisher is a judge in a higher court had better chances of becoming a judge. The judiciary, obviously, is not free from nepotism.

The issue had gained prominence a few years ago when Chief Justice B.K. Roy of the Punjab and Haryana High Court issued an order barring 10-12 judges from hearing cases argued by their own relatives. Many advocates supported the Chief Justice's directive and sought transfers of judges whose kin practised in the high court. The number of judges not being able to uphold judicial propriety, however, is small. There are many examples of judges withdrawing themselves from courts where their kin practised or from cases where there was a conflict of interest.

It is not the case that every judge would tend to favour his or her relative. An advocate may very well win a case in the court of his "uncle judge" on the strength of his legal skills. But his/her success will always remain suspect. It is the perception that matters a lot. Justice should not only be done but also appear to have been done in every case. The proposal to have an entry test for advocates will, hopefully, keep off those who enter and flourish in the legal profession mainly on the strength of their connections.

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

THE TRIBUNE

EDITORIAL

IMPROVING HIGHER EDUCATION

NCHER BILL MUST BE PASSED FAST

It is unfortunate that the National Council of Higher Education and Research Bill that is meant to bring about the much-needed reforms in higher education has hit a roadblock. Four states namely Kerala, Tamil Nadu, West Bengal and Gujarat have rejected the draft Bill that proposes to make NCHER the apex body for higher education. While it is apt that the government has decided to rework the law, there is an urgent need to iron out differences and pass the Bill at the earliest. The moot question is not of less or more centralisation but how best to stop students from falling prey to peddlers of substandard education.

Over the years the quality of higher education in India barring some institutions of excellence has left much to be desired. In the recent past grant of deemed university status without proper checks and balances has been one of the many ills that plagued higher education. The Yashpal Committee to Advise on Renovation and Rejuvenation of Higher Education had made many recommendations including setting up of an all-encompassing body to boost higher education. The proposed Bill besides establishing NCHER, which will subsume existing bodies like the UGC and AICTE, also proposes to shortlist candidates for the post of VCs. However, several state governments have resisted the proposals and called them anti-federal.

There is no denying that since education falls in the Concurrent List the concern of the states must be taken into account. The government's decision to redraft the Bill particularly to make the NCHER more accountable than regulatory is in this spirit. At the same time states should realise that education is too important a subject and cannot be used as a pretext for gaining political brownie points. Transparency in the selection of VCs is a must and setting up a national registry with names of eligible persons for the posts of VCs can stop political meddling in the selection process. In the interest of the future of the youth who can only be empowered by quality education, the Centre and the dissenting states must come around and see to it that the Bill, whose various provisions are aimed at improving the standards of education, is passed.

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

THE TRIBUNE

COLUMN

DAMAGES CAUSED BY RADIOACTIVE SOURCES

N-LIABILITY BILL NEEDS TO BE REVISED

BY A. GOPALAKRISHNAN

In a recent radiation exposure incident involving Co-60 radioactive sources at the premises of scrap dealers in Delhi, 11 persons are so far identified to have received high levels of radiation. The incident is being investigated by the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB), the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) and other agencies under the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) .

This incident may not have happened if the AERB, the DAE and the AEC had exercised due diligence in comprehensively accounting for all radioactive materials in the public domain and ensured that they are safely stored, used and disposed of by the licensees. It is now clear that the AERB was unaware of the existence of these sources prior to the incident. One wonders how many hundreds more similar orphan sources have been missed by the AERB, and are lurking somewhere to create havoc!

It is reported that a sum of Rs 200,000 is being granted by the Delhi government as compensation to each victim of the incident. There is no indication how this paltry compensation, equivalent to about $4,500, was arrived at. I suspect that most of the victims who received high radiation are prime candidates for early incidence of cancer, and will not only need a few million rupees each for hospitalisation and medical care, but will also face a reduced lifespan and total income.

The government's announcement of a measly compensation prompted me to check the quantum of damage payment each of these victims would have received if only the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Bill 2010 , which is about to be introduced in Parliament, had already become a law. To my surprise, I find that the proposed Liability Bill specifically excludes compensation for any damage caused by radioactive items like the ones commonly used in industrial, medical and research applications in this country.

It is noticed that Section-2 (f) of the Liability Bill, as it stands today, defines "nuclear damage" as the loss of life or personal injury to a person, loss of or damage to property, etc — to the extent the loss or damage arises out of, or results from, ionising radiation emitted — from nuclear fuel or "radioactive products or waste".

However, Section-2(o) of the Bill further defines that "radioactive products or waste" means any radioactive material produced in or material made radioactive by exposure to radiation incidental to the production or utilisation of nuclear fuel, but does not include radioisotopes which have reached the final stage of fabrication so as to be usable for any scientific, medical, agricultural, commercial or industrial purpose.

Interestingly, under the urging of the Prime Minister and the PMO, the AEC and its subordinate organisations like the DAE, the AERB, the Nuclear Power Corporation, etc, have been feverishly working during the last two years to finalise a Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Bill for early introduction in Parliament. This task appears to have been progressing with the close but unofficial involvement of the industrial federations and business councils in India and the US, who under the current Prime Minister have had a decisive say in dictating how the Indian nuclear sector should be re-shaped, managed and regulated. The US President and the State Department have also been pressing our Prime Minister at every available opportunity for the early passage of such a Bill so that US nuclear companies can start selling reactors to India.

Though India started operating its first nuclear power reactor in October 1969 at Tarapur, so far no Indian government has been worried about the nuclear damage that nuclear operations can cause, and the compensation to be meted out to the victims in such instances, until the US pressure for liability legislation started building up after the Indo-US nuclear deal was put in place. The Prime Minister's present anxiety about the passage of the Bill is also mainly due to this US pressure and not because of any sudden compassion for the potential Indian accident victims and their likely suffering .

The middlemen in India — representing industry, the government and politics — who were facilitating the passage of the nuclear deal are looking forward to lucrative private sector nuclear employment and other financial benefits, and they are also, therefore, eager to rush the Liability Bill through Parliament for their personal gains. Given this background, it is no wonder that those who drafted the Bill focussed only on the big-money items like nuclear reactors and associated sub-systems, and decided to omit the compensation for potential damages from radioactive sources, a matter in which neither the Americans nor our government has any specific interest.

In India, several thousands of radioactive items are either locally fabricated or imported for large-scale use in various infrastructural activities. These include Cobalt-60 sources like the 100 to 500 kilo-curie source package at the Gajrawadi sewage treatment plant in Baroda, various Gamma Chambers carrying 14,000 curies or more of Co-60, and the sources dealing in medical and industrial equipment bought from within India or abroad . All these have enormous potential to cause serious and widespread damage to several hundreds of people, if lost or misused, or acquired by terrorist groups for their nefarious activities.

Under these circumstances, the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Bill, to be introduced soon in Parliament, must be held back and substantially revised to comprehensively cover the issue of damages and liability arising from radioactive sources and the just compensation thereof.n

The writer is a former Chairman of the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board of the Government of India.

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

THE TRIBUNE

COLUMN

DOWN TV MEMORY LANE

BY RAMA KASHYAP

Sitting in the comfort of his bedroom, as my son surfs scores of channels to view the programme of his choice on a flat-screen television with the clarity which is amazing, I cannot help recalling my own growing-up days.

In the early 70s, when television had not made entry into most Indian homes, a big Murphy radio (as big as a T.V) occupied a place of pride in our drawing room. Much to the annoyance of my father, every Sunday, with my ears glued to the radio, I would listen to Sound Track (an hour-long programme based on film story) at a volume so low that no one else could hear. That was the time when for all the news, views and entertainment, there was one and only one All India Radio to depend upon.

Television arrived with a big bang in our life. The city was buzzing with excitement when Pakeezah, a Meena Kumari starrer, was to be shown by Jalandhar Doordarshan in its inaugural telecast. Unforgettable was my first date with T.V. Huddled together in our neighbour's drawing room, we watched in amazement, the black and white movie in a dark room (lights were switched off to create the ambience of a cinema hall).

Towards the late 70s, when long antennae started dotting the landscape of the city, our excitement was tremendous when we purchased our first T.V set. A black and white television with wooden shutters replaced our grand old Murphy radio. But viewing television in those days was a challenging task, needing a lot of patience and manoeuvering. Every now and then somebody had to climb on the rooftop to adjust the direction of the antenna; there would be a loud exchange of words regarding the picture quality.

Often we would slap the T.V to adjust the picture. Eventually when the reception was clear we would merrily settle down to watch the programme. Of course there was not much to choose from. Unlike today, it was Doordarshan monopoly with the telecast being limited to just a few hours in the evening.

Yet those few hours of evening telecast were eagerly awaited; my favourite being Chitraahar, a programme based on film songs. Especially nostalgic are the memories of serials like Hum Log, Buniyad, Ramayana and Mahabharata which caught the fancy of the nation.

During the telecast of Mahabharata, keeping all the activities on hold, people would remain glued to their television sets. No wonder the roads looked deserted and a curfew-like situation was created in the city during the telecast. I still remember, when on my sister's wedding, the relatives won't get ready until telecast of Mahabharata episode from Doordarshan was over. Such was the addiction to the serial!

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

THE TRIBUNE

OPED

SOCIETY NEEDS NO MORAL POLICING

ACTRESS KHUSHBOO MAKES A POINT

BY SAJLA CHAWLA

Organisations like the Shiv Sena and Ram Sene, which do not have a well-defined ideology, play the card of public morality, hoping to get validation for their existence. They think the public would fall for their self-righteous dos and don'ts of social behaviour. Political mileage and publicity is sought by picking up the issue of women's sexuality and its expression.

Take the case of famous actress Khushboo. Her spontaneous, off-the-cuff remarks were objected to by some self-righteous, moralistic people and organisations and a whole debate ensued about pre-marital sex. Sex is such a personal experience and personal choice that no social regimentation can really kill the impulse.

How then in a democratic country, where men and women rub shoulders at work places, offices, colleges or while commuting or on social occasions, can it be possible to monitor the personal lives of people and consequently their sexual lives?

It is a fact of modern existence that the internet, mobile phones, smses make communication and accessibility between the sexes easy. Khushboo merely accepted this reality and remarked that it was fine for girls to indulge in pre-marital sex after taking precautions to keep unwanted pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases at bay. Later, she justified her statement by saying no educated man could expect his partner to be a virgin.

In no way does the statement encourage or discourage pre-marital sex. It only speaks of what is an evident reality of our times and hence the need to be careful. However, the organisations which objected to this deliberately misconstrued it and implied that she, as an icon, was encouraging pre-marital sex, which according to society, is immoral for all, especially for women!

In a patriarchal society, women often have to bear the burden of morality, much more than men. From their childhood they are supposed to be demure, subservient and need to uphold family honour by acting in a socially acceptable way. Women's sexuality still makes many people cringe with embarrassment. Socio-economic inequalities inherent in our society make women vulnerable in all relationships. But now when women are coming out of their cocoons and making individual choices regarding career, lifestyle, partners and social behaviour, society is suddenly at a loss at handling this liberation.

In psychological terms people who are the least at ease with their own "self", talk and gossip the most about others. Their morality gets easily threatened by someone who embodies a different set of morality. And is that morality so shaky that to protect it, you have to go on witch-hunting and public lynching as was done to Khushboo?

Ram Sene has branded "social choices" for women as "social vices". Referring to the attack on women in a pub by his party workers, Muthalik said: "Women are being misused and misguided. We oppose this. Women have to be protected as the law has failed. We are the custodians of Indian culture… Their method was wrong. I apologise for that. It should not have happened. But it was done to save our daughters and mothers from an alien culture".

We would like to ask Muthalik what he is protecting us against. Is he voicing his concerns about feticide or going on hunger strike against the practice of dowry or leading a campaign against rapes? No. His Ram Sene ignores all such issues. Instead, its workers attack women in a pub.

A similar impulse led to a fatwa against Sania Mirza for her short skirt. The "culture" that Muthalik seeks to protect itself is so multifarious that one cannot ascribe a single monolithic definition to it. India is a country where different eras coexist simultaneously and often anachronistically.

We live in many Indias. There is the India of highly educated, economically independent urban women who get a chance to make their own choices in everything that matters. There is a rural India where women on the wrong side of class, caste and gender have almost no choices at all.

There is a liberal India which almost follows the West in its lifestyle and values and there is a feudal India with an extreme patriarchal set-up as is evident in parallel law enforcers like Khap Panchayats. There is an India where everything is commoditised in the great economic boom and there is an India that does not get two meals a day. In a country that shows no uniform development, there are bound to be clashes – economic, moral, ethical, personal or social. A country cannot move forward unless its entire people walk together. When they do not walk together, fundamentalist and moral brigades get a chance to exploit social, cultural and economic inequalities and indulge in moral policing.

For a large majority like us, who live their lives without much sexual deviation or aberration or propensity, relationships are deeply emotional and personal along with being physical. Now why in the world would we as individuals be influenced by the likes of Ram Sene regarding our own individual sexual choices?

Khushboo has rightly made her triumphant statement as she emerged victorious after a long and traumatic battle against the moral brigades. Like her, we all want these people, who harangue about other people's morality, to SHUT UP.

The writer is a former teacher of Delhi University

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

THE TRIBUNE

OPED

HYDRO POWER WITHOUT DAMS!

BY BHARAT DOGRA

In recent years there has been a growing concern about the social and environmental impact of dam projects. At the same time at the time of escalating energy crisis, many people do not want to give up the potential of hydro power. In the middle of this dilemma now comes the interesting and thought-provoking news that it can be possible to harness significant amounts of hydro power without having to build dams.

Explaining this concept, Patrick Mccully, Executive Director, "International Rivers", writes in 'World Rivers Review' (March 2010), "Non-dam hydro comes in a diversity of forms. It includes all technologies to generate electricity using water without dams. The two sectors receiving the most attention are wave power and 'hydro-kinetic' turbines that capture energy from the flow of water in rivers, estuaries and ocean currents, and even irrigation canals and water supply and disposal pipes."

Patrick Mccully writes that hydro-kinetic turbines should not be confused with "run-of-river" hydro power which includes a dam, but usually not a large reservoir. This clarification is important in the context of India, particularly hydro development in the Himalayan region.

Here when big dam projects like Tehri faced a lot of criticism for their adverse social and environmental impact, the authorities came up with the alternative of "run of the river" projects which were promised as environmentally safe. However, in the case of many of these projects, this turned out to be a false promise. Actually some of these small dam and tunnel projects also proved to be highly disruptive, particularly when a chain of such projects was constructed in ecologically sensitive areas in ways which involved an indiscriminate use of explosives. Therefore, there is a need to be cautious when alternatives to large dam projects are examined.

In fact, even Mccully agrees that not all non-dam hydro technologies may be benign and environmentally appropriate at all sites but it appears likely, he asserts, that these technologies could be very low impact compared with dam-based hydro. However, more research is needed to ensure that the turbines and associated facilities do not harm fish or other aquatic life. In the case of 'conduit hydro' — kinetic turbines installed in pipes and irrigation canals — environmentally impacts can be almost zero.

Again if we look in India's context in the Himalayan region, we are immediately reminded of the tens of thousands of watermills that already exist (called ghats or ghrats or by other names) in Uttarakhand, Himachal Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmmir and the north-eastern states.

These water-mills can be slightly improvised to add hydro-generation which can meet a hamlet's needs. I recently saw an example of such "conduit hydro" near Uttarakashi and it was very impressive.

An additional benefit I saw here of decentralised functioning was that power-generation had been stopped at a time when villagers needed more irrigation water. Such adjustment with the villagers' needs is only possible in a system which is managed by villagers themselves. This is what we really need in India's context.

The question of appropriate technology is also linked to who controls technology and in whose interest. This aspect should have been given importance but unfortunately the government neglected this crucial aspect when the government was exploring alternatives to big dams. This is why in a hurry so-called alternative projects were awarded to companies which did not really understand the needs of villagers.

This led to further problems which also attracted national attention in the upper parts of the Ganga/Bhagirathi river. However, in other areas also serious problems have emerged. We need to be very careful about the alternatives that villagers truly need. Perhaps the first step should be to help villagers to repair and give a new lease of life to ghrats (watermills) and guls (irrigational channels) and then we can consider the next step of environment-friendly small-scale hydro generation.

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

THE TRIBUNE

OPED

BANGALORE DIARY

GETTING ENGAGED

SHUBHADEEP CHOUDHURY

Bollywood actor Sanjay Khan's luxury hotel at the outskirts of Bangalore would see another high-profile event after actor Hrithik Roshan got married at the same venue with Sanjay Khan's daughter, Suzanne. This time it is Shashi Tharoor who is getting engaged to his ladylove Sunanda Pushkar at the hotel. Their affair made headlines when the IPL scandal broke and Tharoor lost his place in the Union Council of Ministers for helping Sunanda become a co-owner of the Kochi IPL team without her investing any money.

The couple visited the hotel last month and apparently liked the spa and overall ambience of the place. The engagement, it is learnt, will take place next month. The hotel, belonging to one of Bollywood's most stylish actors, boasts of a helipad also. This is considered an advantage since many of the guests are expected to arrive for the function in choppers. The couple has already booked the resort, though details like food menu, etc, are yet to be finalised.

Racing car

It's been India's IT hub for long. But Bangalore is quickly making a mark in other areas of technology development as well. Students of PES Institute of Technology in the city have built a racing car which has been named Haya. The car, which has been created as part of students' college project, will be exhibited at the Formula SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers) competition in Michigan, USA, starting from May 12. Some of the world's best engineers compete in the event to design a small Formula-style car. The car is meant for non-professional race enthusiasts.

Halappa sick?

Karnataka minister Hartal Halappa, accused of raping his friend's wife, complained of chest pain and got himself admitted to hospital after he was arrested. Nobody is ready to believe that Halappa, who resigned from the Cabinet in the wake of the controversy, is really ill.

"Hallapa uncle needs some 'MENTOS' ..dimaak ki batti jalane ke liye .. same old ideas , why are people not being creative anymore", wrote a young reader to an evening daily which provides an opportunity to its readers to air their views. "Earlier hospitals were there to save patients' lives. Now to squeeze money from innocent people and save criminal politicians, rapists and murderers", wrote another reader.

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

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

MUMBAI MIRROR

EDITORIAL

GETTING REAL IN CITY OF GOLD

Mahesh Manjrekar's film on the lives of workers after the closure of textile mills in Mumbai continues to do well despite leaving many viewers disappointed

Yet another person disappointed, or disillusioned as he puts it, in his letter to the editor of a Marathi daily. "There was much hype," he says, "that Mahesh Manjrekar had made a film that would be a great support for the mill workers' struggle. But his focus turns out to be one family. The Lalbaug area which we see in the opening scene suddenly vanishes and we zoom into the chawl where this family lives."

Another letter comes from someone who once lived in this chawl and was witness to the tenacity and dignity with which mill workers fought the combined power of greedy mill-owners and their conniving cronies in government. This woman charges Manjrekar with having distorted reality to add insult to their injury.
Meanwhile, Manjrekar's Lalbaug Parel and its Hindi sibling City of Gold are doing very well thank you. And if some people are disappointed, so be it. Manjrekar has gone on record to say that his aim is to ensure that the producer who has invested money in his film gets his returns. Manjrekar's trilogy on the Marathi manoos of which Lalbaug Parel is the third part, works on a successful formula. He identifies an issue close to the Marathi heart, portrays the species as victims of non-Marathi moneybags, injects the story with as much violence or pious preaching as it will take, cocks a contemptuous snook at old-world redundants like logic, reality and historical truth, and brings the tale to a close with a sentimental flourish. His pace is racy, his technical standards high and actors' performances good. In City of Gold, the version I saw, Seema Biswas (mother), Veena Jamkar (Manju) and Karan Patel (Naru) turn in very fine performances. The audience doesn't ask for more. Their paisa, along with the producer's, is positively vasool.

The letter writer who talks about the advertising hype that preceded the film, must remember that similarly hyped fairness creams do not alter skin colour and wearing a certain brand of baniyan doesn't get drooling women to drape themselves over the wearer.

Marketing is marketing. But the film itself does not deceive. Manjrekar makes it very clear right at the outset, that he is steering clear of the struggle itself.

The film opens with the narrator and his live-in partner looking down at Lalbaug from the exalted heights of a highrise where they plan to set up home. So what do we have here? A narrator who has left behind not only his old home and his class, but also the institution of marriage. From this spatial and cultural distance, he shows his partner the chawl where he once lived. She is utterly charmed. Imagine! He lived down there. Tell me all about it, please, she says. What he tells her is the story.

Naturally, his story is about his family – parents, two brothers, one sister – and a few neighbours. Amongst them is Mami, who wears hipster nauwaris and teeny-weeny cholis. Mami lusts after the narrator's brother Mohan and has a baby by him. The husband, made aware of his inadequacies, understands, and the menage a trois and the child live happily ever after.

Some more sex is provided by the sister, Manju, who sleeps with the local grocer's son and later with other men. While the other men are doing their bit, the camera zooms in on the wad of notes clutched in her helpless hand. She's doing it for the money, see?

Blood and gore are provided by Naru and his gang who work for the local Bhai.

They have a ball kicking, punching and pumping bullets into people identified by their boss for the treatment.
So where do the real mill workers get off? Perhaps Manjrekar should have dedicated the film to them: "To all those who fought and suffered with dignity, but could not be made the subject of this film for commercial reasons."

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

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

EDITORIAL

LOOSE CANNONS

PRIME MINISTER'S HEADACHE, MEDIA'S DELIGHT

Barely a month ago, on the 10th of April to be precise, the cabinet secretary of the Government of India wrote a letter to all the members of the Union Council of Ministers, letting them know that the prime minister would like them not to go beyond their brief in interacting with the media. The letter was quite categorical. The cabinet secretary conveyed "the decision of prime minister that in respect of issues considered to be sensitive by him, one ministry/department will be designated as the nodal ministry/department as a single point for interaction with the media and accurate articulation of the actions taken/being contemplated by government as well as the stance adopted by government" (underlined in the original). How much more explicit can a prime ministerial directive get? Even if the cabinet secretary and the Prime Minister's Office had not got around to finishing the process of designating "nodal ministries/departments" that could be the "single point for interaction with media" on issues like India's policy on foreign direct investment (FDI) in telecommunications and power sectors, or, in general, on India's policy on Chinese investments in India, it would require a considerable stretching of one's imagination to think that a minister for environment and forests would be the appropriate node or single point! One can pardon a minister in the external affairs ministry, even a compulsive media attention-grabber like Shashi Tharoor, speaking on China. One can even pardon a minister for telecommunications, even someone who unabashedly promotes corporate interests, like A Raja, speaking on FDI in telecom. But whatever took hold of our minister for climate change and tigers that he should roar so eloquently about the climate for Chinese investment in India?

Not only has Jairam Ramesh, the union minister for environment and forests, spoken out of turn but he has also flouted a prime ministerial directive and embarrassed India. Having just sacked Mr Tharoor for his indiscretions, the prime minister may not have the heart, the stomach and the energy to sack yet another minister. But his telephonic reprimand was the least he could do. Pity a prime minister who finds his best and brightest commit such unacceptable faux pas. In a talent-deficient ministry, Mr Tharoor and Mr Ramesh are among the few who have what it takes to be an efficient and competent member of the Union Council of Ministers. Both have proved their mettle in their time in office. If the prime minister were reconstituting his Council of Ministers, neither would have been on his first list of dismissals on the grounds of incompetence, even if there are other good reasons for putting them out to pasture, as was the case with Mr Tharoor. It is perhaps a realisation of their relative worth that must make them so over-confident and arrogant that they have become political loose cannons and media's delight. Ministers like them should learn from the example of the prime minister himself, and other senior ministers like Pranab Mukherjee and P Chidambaram, whose quiet competence, not flashy hubris nor arrogant self-importance, has stood the government and the nation in good stead.

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

BUSINESS STANDARD

EDITORIAL

MISMANAGING FOOD

TIME TO RETHINK FOOD PROCUREMENT POLICY

Bizarre are the ways of the government when it comes to managing, or mismanaging, the country's food economy. On the one hand, it goes on mopping up bulk of the wheat and rice arriving in the mandis to build up its grain stocks, clearly to prevent foodgrain prices from falling below the minimum support price (MSP) level. On the other hand, it plans to offload 3 million tonnes of wheat and rice, in addition to the normal supplies from the public distribution system (PDS), to slash its overflowing grain stocks and bring down grain prices. This is not only bad management but also bad economics. The empowered group of ministers, which has taken this decision, has pegged the sale price of wheat at Rs 8.42 a kg, nearly half of the actual economic cost (procurement cost plus overheads) of around Rs 16 a kg. Similarly, rice is to be sold at Rs 11.85 a kg, against its effective economic cost of around Rs 19 a kg. This will cost the exchequer Rs 2,000 crore over and above the food subsidy, which is set to overshoot this year's budgetary provision of around Rs 55,600 crore by a wide margin. Some estimates project it at over Rs 70,000 crore this year. The subsidy bill is soaring also because of higher inventory carrying costs due to over-stocking and non-revision of the issue prices of wheat and rice for the PDS since 2002, even though the procurement prices have nearly doubled during this period. On the eve of the beginning of the current rabi marketing season on April 1, the government held over 16 million tonnes of wheat, four times the buffer norm of 4 million tonnes, and over 26 million tonnes of rice, nearly two-and-half times the buffer need of 12.2 million tonnes. Since then over 20 million tonnes more wheat have been bought from the fresh crop and the purchases are still continuing.

To top it all, the government eliminated import duty on wheat in November 2009. This was the time when the domestic wheat availability had turned comfortable, thanks to a couple of surplus wheat harvests, and the international prices had begun to soften. This mistimed, as also needless, policy intervention has resulted in regular wheat imports at southern ports, where its landed cost works out cheaper than the cost of wheat transported from the north, accentuating the grain glut. So, why should an open-ended grain procurement policy continue? The total requirement of the PDS is much lower than the government's annual purchases. Even if the government goes in for a new food security law, giving the right to the poor to get 35 kg grains per month, instead of the original proposal of 25 kg, the total foodgrain requirement will still not increase as, even today, the ration card holders, poor as well non-poor, are entitled to this much grains. In fact, the grain bill may decline if the non-poor are taken out of the PDS system after the enactment of the food law. There is, thus, an urgent need for the government to revisit its food management policy and think of a system which would ensure availability of grains to the really poor at affordable prices without over-stocking and needlessly stressing the exchequer.

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

BUSINESS STANDARD

EDITORIAL

SANJEEV SANYAL: BUILDING BOSTONS, NOT KANPURS

WHY INDIAN CITIES MUST LEVERAGE THEIR UNIVERSITIES

SANJEEV SANYAL

Around the world, universities are the stuff that makes great cities. Imagine Boston without Harvard, MIT and the myriad other institutions that are clustered around the Boston-Cambridge area. In Britain, Oxford and Cambridge are vibrant urban centres that derive their vigour almost entirely from playing host to famous universities. Even large and diversified global cities like London and New York would be much diminished without the intellectual clustering of LSE, Columbia, UCL and NYU. In each case, the universities are an integral part of the urban landscape and are consciously leveraged by their host cities.

Yet, Indian cities do not think of their universities and research institutes as important drivers of urban growth. At most, they are seen as utilitarian places for teaching students. Their importance for clustering human capital and driving innovation is simply not seen as part of overall urban strategy. Indeed, universities built after Independence have been sealed off on campuses, often in distant locations, that deliberately discourage interaction with the wider city. Thus, Kanpur and Kharagpur benefit little from being host to a prestigious institution like the IIT. This is absurd.

The software of cities

Urban development is not just about the "hardware" — buildings, roads, plumbing and so on. It is the people, their social/economic activity and their continuous interaction that bring cities alive. Successful cities are those that can cluster human capital and encourage innovation, creativity and exchange of ideas. This has always been true. Think of the great cities of the past: Athens, Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, Ujjain and Varanasi. However, the this factor has become even more important in the 21st century. Never before has the economic value of ideation and creativity been greater. In short, the "software" is critical to the evolution of a city.

Universities are key to the software of a city. They attract young talent, encourage the churn of ideas and trigger innovation. The physical infrastructure of the university provides the venue for conferences, seminars and cultural/sporting events that allow for intense human interaction. Note how NYU played an important role in regenerating Lower Manhattan in the 90's.

Next generation global cities like Singapore recognise this dynamic and use it actively as part of urban/national economic strategy. For instance, Singapore has built out a number of new institutions like Singapore Management University over the last decade. In most cases, these have been clustered in the middle of the city rather than on remote campuses. The city benefits from having a throughput of young people in the city-centre. At the same time, the university benefits from easy access to industry, government and urban "buzz".

Prior to Independence, the urban role of universities was appreciated. The colleges of Bombay and Calcutta Universities were built into the city much like the colleges of London. Even Delhi University, although built as a separate campus, was still seen as a part of the overall urban fabric. There were even important towns like Allahabad and Aligarh that were driven largely by their vibrant universities, much like Oxford and Cambridge.

Contrast this to how tertiary education institutions were built after Independence. All the IITs and IIMs are large, sealed campuses built originally outside the city. The model was the industrial-era factory township. The physical walls that surround them have continued to wall them off socially and intellectually from their host cities even where urban growth has brought them inside the city. How different from the urban campuses of MIT and Harvard Business School. This is a loss to both sides.

Perpetuating the mistake

We appear to have learned little from our past mistake. Indeed, this is not even considered an issue worthy of attention and debate. Thus, the establishment of a new university or institute is still about acquiring large tracts of land, often hundreds of acres, and then building out stand-alone buildings. If anything, success is measured by how much land has been acquired rather than the quality of education/research.

This is a very wasteful process at many levels. First, it is unnecessarily converting productive farm and forest land. Why does Vedanta need 6,000 acres in Orissa and IIT Jodhpur 700 acres in Rajasthan for teaching a few thousand students? Second, it requires the creation of expensive infrastructure in isolated locations, including staff housing, convocation halls, seminar rooms and so on. How many times a year is the convocation hall used by the institution itself? In a city location, these facilities would have added to the overall urban infrastructure. Third, such remote campuses are inconsiderate of the social, educational and career needs of the families of the faculty and staff. This is a major constraint to finding good faculty. We cannot build universities as if they are industrial-era factory townships where the wives stay at home and the children study in the company school. Finally, and most damagingly, these campuses are unable to generate the externalities that one would associate with a good academic/research institute. Students come and leave. There is no clustering or inter-linkage with the real world.

The proposed IIT in Jodhpur is an example of how we are perpetuating the flawed model. The government has already acquired 700 acres of land about 22 km from Jodhpur. There a lot of talk about how it will be a "green" campus with solar panels and electric buses ferrying people from the city/airport. A number of complex options are being discussed to supply it with water. This is all meaningless when the most energy-efficient solution is to have had a compact campus that is nearer to the city. This would have automatically reduced the need to travel long distances and recreate social infrastructure. In addition, Jodhpur city has a problem with rising water tables and there is absolutely no need for expensive water-supply technologies when it can simply be pumped out. Worst of all, given the distance, the existing city will gain nothing from the creation of all the new and expensive infrastructure.

To conclude, universities are an important part of the urban economy and should be seen as an integral part of city-building. As we build out new institutions, we urgently need to stop thinking of them as fenced-off factory townships. We do not need more Kanpurs and Kharagpurs. If India wants to play on the global stage, it needs to create its very own Bostons and Oxfords.

The author is president, Sustainable Planet Institute

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

BUSINESS STANDARD

EDITORIAL

SEE YOU AT THE POST OFFICE

INDIA'S POSTAL SYSTEM IS A HUGE ASSET WHICH IS CURRENTLY UNDER-UTILISED, UNDER-SKILLED AND UNDER-DEVELOPED

SUBIR ROY

India's postal system is a huge asset which is currently under-utilised, under-skilled and under-developed. The 1.5 lakh post offices in a country of 6.4 lakh villages (that's where the post office really matters) represent a reach unmatched by any other organisation. If it is developed and used well, it can give a leg-up to those parts of the country and their denizens who have benefited the least from the high growth of the post-reform period.

Till not so long ago, post offices were relics of the past where the urban middle class would not venture unless absolutely necessary. The burgeoning private courier companies appeared to be driving the last nail in the coffin of the slowly declining giant. But then, just as hope always triumphs in India, the post office began to change. It gave itself a new logo, prominent urban post offices began giving themselves a new look and you could spot PCs across counters.

The post office management is now getting bolder by the day and big brothers in the government have given it permission to spend Rs 2,000 crore in the next two years to bring in an IT revolution. All post offices will be linked, a core banking solution will be installed and pre-paid cards will be introduced with which you will be able to send money from anywhere to any post office through your cellular phone. All that the person at the other end will have to do to get instant credit is have a savings bank account with his post office.

For that last leg of the operation to be completed, the post office's savings bank operations will have to be transformed. That can happen in only one way — by converting the financial services operations of the postal department into a proper bank, giving it a banking licence. Banks have well defined procedures and processes, the skills needed to run them are standardised, as are the benchmarks by which they can be judged. And you can easily get the public sector banks to lend a helping hand to enable the Post Bank of India (PBI) to get going. Initially, PBI will be an outreach for the established banks, but over time it should be able to give vigorous competition.

A parliamentary standing committee has again reiterated the demand for such a bank to be set up. And if or when (it is really a matter of time) it is, it will be a behemoth from day one. In financial year 2008, postal savings bank schemes had total outstandings of Rs 3.4 lakh crore, which was second only to the deposits of the State Bank of India that stood at Rs 5.4 lakh crore. (ICICI Bank came third at Rs 2.4 lakh crore deposits.) In the same year, postal mail traffic fell by 4 per cent. So did the number of money orders, by 8 per cent, but their total value went up by 7.8 per cent. Simultaneously, the post office's "business development activities", the cumbersome name for newer services like Speedpost, grew revenues by 24 per cent to almost a quarter of the department's total revenue. So like it or not, the post office is changing. It only makes sense to get it to change the right way.

Once the post office becomes a bank with a logistical arm and not the other way round, it will be able to bury the canard that it is a loss-making outfit. In 2008, the postal department's budgetary deficit was Rs 1,511 crore. If it were a bank with assets equal to the savings bank liabilities, it should have been able to earn a very modest return on assets of 0.5 per cent, which would have put it at the bottom of the public sector banks league table. That works out to Rs 1,727 crore, over Rs 200 crore more than the deficit. Right now it is the Government of India and the finance ministry that keep the postal department poor. All the deposits go to the central exchequer, to be passed on to states as loans in proportion to their small savings. The department earns a fee to run the inefficient and archaic savings bank system.

Why is it necessary to reinvent the post office and improve the self-esteem of postal employees? The post office with its reach is the best placed to open bank accounts for the beneficiaries of the rural employment programme, recipients of government pensions and the like. The postman remains the best equipped to affirm a person's proof of residence. Once the banking function of the post office gets going and expands, it will give a boost to India's financial savings the same way bank nationalisation did and helped push up the national savings rate. The whole scenario is predicated on PBI being run efficiently and on keeping its transaction costs low with the use of information technology and processes for handling no-frill accounts currently being evolved.

The big question is, what does PBI do with its deposits which are relatively costlier as postal rates are higher than banks'. It should remain a narrow bank, eschewing retail and commercial lending and instead investing in secure but relatively high-yielding bonds issued by infrastructure companies looking for longer term funds. PBI could also subscribe to Nabard bonds whose proceeds Nabard could lend to microfinance organisations whose members could get paid through their savings bank accounts with PBI. You have a bit of a virtuous cycle there. An efficient PBI will not only boost financial inclusion but help reduce fraud in social welfare payments. All this must be made to happen.

subirkroy@gmail.com

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

BUSINESS STANDARD

EDITORIAL

BENEVOLENT INTERVENTIONS

JUDGES HAVE OFTEN STEPPED IN TO FILL A LEGISLATIVE VACUUM AND SUCH FORAYS HAVE BENEFITED SOCIETY

M J ANTONY

Jurists never tire of an old chicken-or-egg wrangle: Whether judges should merely declare law or make law. The question has become momentous in this country as lawmakers are found more in the well of Parliament shouting at each other than debating Bills to catch up with the times. This definitely leaves large gaps between the ageing laws and the new problems faced by society, which has to run fast, like Alice in Wonderland, to remain where it is.

One bench of the Supreme Court, in December last year, asked the chief justice to set up a Constitution bench to sort out the riddle of separation of powers, in the University of Kerala vs Council of Principals case. The bench was of the opinion that judges could neither make law nor take over executive functions, nor act as an "interim Parliament".

While the question still awaits a definitive answer, a bench headed by the ex-chief justice last week did make law in the field of cheque-bouncing. Though the sun is setting on the age of cheques, complaints of cheques being issued without sufficient fund in the account are mounting. More and more special courts are being set up in cities to tackle cases under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

In the Damodar Prabhu vs Sayed Babalal case, the Supreme Court pointed out that "at present a disproportionately large number of cases involving dishonour of cheques is choking our criminal justice system, especially at the level of magistrates' courts. As per the 213th report of the Law Commission, more than 38 lakh cheque -bouncing cases were pending as of October 2008. This is putting an unprecedented strain on our judicial system".

The relevant provisions of the Act have been amended several times in recent years, but the ingenuity of the drawers of cheques, aided by their lawyers, has always outstepped the law's reach. Therefore, the Supreme Court itself passed certain "guidelines", which will have the force of law.

Since one of its own benches has questioned such exercise in judicial activism, the judgment was almost apologetic while laying down the rules. It explained: "We are conscious of the view that the judicial endorsement of the guidelines could be seen as an act of judicial law making and, therefore, an intrusion into the legislative domain. It must be kept in mind that the Act does not carry any guidance on how to proceed with the compounding of offences under the Act."

It was to fill the crevices in the law that the court laid down the new rules. The judgment said: "Even in the past, this court has used its power to frame guidelines where there was a legislative vacuum."

The court has used the power under Article 142 of the Constitution which grants it the discretion to pass any order to do "complete justice". This power is unique to the Indian Constitution, and is one reason why the Supreme Court is called one of the most powerful courts in any democratic country. The power is rarely used, but in extreme cases that called for urgent and equitable solution of knotty issues, the court has not stood idle bowing to the doctrine of "separation of powers" of the judiciary, executive and legislature.

In fact, the Constitution does not follow the doctrine strictly and there is a lot of overlapping between the roles of the three arms of the state. Therefore, the court has a duty to do "complete justice" in certain circumstances, and it has declared that it will do so.

As early as in 1980, in the First Judges Case (S P Gupta vs President of India), a Constitution bench asserted its power thus: "Law does not operate in a vacuum. It is, therefore, intended to serve a social purpose and it cannot be interpreted without taking into account the social, economic and political setting in which it is intended to operate. It is here that the judge is called upon to perform a creative function. He has to inject flesh and blood in the dry skeleton provided by the legislature and by a process of dynamic interpretation, invest it with a meaning which will harmonise the law with the prevailing concepts and values and make it an effective instrument for delivery of justice."

The courts have followed this policy since then. Where the lawmakers feared to tread, the courts have dared to set the rules. They have laid down rules for the protection of women at the workplace in the Sakshi judgment; framed regulations for adoption of children in the L K Pandey cases; and "intruded" into the executive and legislative powers in environment matters. Society is better on account of these judicial sorties.

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

BUSINESS STANDARD

EDITORIAL

WILL THE CRISIS IN EUROPE SPREAD?

The euro 750-bn package shows the will to protect the EU, but yoking structurally surplus nations to deficit ones makes the euro's survival risky - more capital flows to the US and emerging markets will hurt them.

Huge debt write-offs will still be required, a single-currency Europe cannot survive. Greater flows to the US and emerging markets as a result of the crisis will hit these countries

The European Union (EU) has surprised most with an unprecedented euro 750 billion emergency plan to prevent the Greek crisis from spreading to other parts of Europe. Given the size of the earlier bailout package, this shows a level of political will we have not seen so far. If the Greek crisis had spread to Portugal, the problem would have become more serious since once bond yields rose there, Spanish banks would have been in trouble. So it is not surprising that markets have reacted the way they have to the package which will help firewall Spain and Portugal. But I would still predict that the euro zone, as we know it, will probably not survive.

First, give credit to the EU for getting ahead of the curve and stanching the very serious prospect of contagion. For now, by deploying the Powell doctrine — throwing as much fiscal ammunition as possible in the form of money and especially guarantees of wobbly government IOUs — the crisis has been averted.

Unfortunately, the flip side of this intervention is the massive moral hazard created both by bailing out holders of government paper and now by letting the pressure off countries like Greece, Spain and Portugal to undertake massive adjustment. The good case scenario is that financial markets stabilise, growth returns and the problem countries can grow out of trouble. In the case of Greece, that looks very unlikely because its fiscal predicament requires not just adjustment and financing but devaluation and debt restructuring. Substantial debt write-offs will remain necessary. But in the medium run, two serious doubts remain about the euro zone. The recent package runs against everything Germany and German economic orthodoxy stands for. It will soon realise that it can no longer acquiesce in the situation of being the country that bails out profligate southern partners.

The second and perhaps more important, the European crisis has shown us that the attempt to integrate the periphery into the core has failed comprehensively. How it is possible to have structurally surplus countries such as Germany yoked to structurally deficit countries? So, there has to be a de facto, if not de jure, separation between the periphery and core countries. Germany is not likely to say it will generate more demand in order to avoid surpluses so that the periphery can be kept happy. In the long run, it is probably more sustainable to have deficit countries with their own currencies with perhaps the others converging around one with Germany as the anchor.

For now, the crisis might be contained, but the risk remains that uncertainty in Europe will spill over to the rest of the world in the sense there will be a flight to the dollar and to emerging markets. The strengthening of the dollar will slow US' growth a bit, but it's not going to be like Lehman since consumer spending is back; and Germany is growing again. I don't know if this is double dip since I think the US recovery will go on, with the recent turmoil not strong enough to derail US recovery. But the process is not going to be smooth, and we'll see lots of ups and downs. When the smoke clears, we'll find that there's a lot more debt that needs to be restructured in countries like Greece and Portugal, and there will be a need for two sets of currencies in Europe. Things will go up and down for another 6-12 months before they finally settle.

Uncertainty in Europe also means a problem for emerging markets since, apart from the US, they will also see large currency inflows and an appreciation in currencies. At this point, countries will be faced with the classic trilemma, so I think they'll have to start thinking of a Tobin tax. To the extent the dollar appreciates a bit, and China keeps to the peg, this will allow it to appreciate a bit automatically. RBI will have to think carefully about what it wants to do — does it want the rupee to go to 40 against the dollar?

Capital coming to emerging markets will hurt exports growth, but it won't dampen overall growth since investment levels will pick up as a result, and so will consumption. But the big danger here is of the asset bubbles that it will create, and the distortionary impact that has, including possible policy action by the central bank to correct that. Ways have to be looked at to dampen inflows.

Arvind Subramanian is also senior fellow, Centre for Global Development and senior research professor, Johns Hopkins University

Things look bad for Europe and will get worse before improving. But the problems in southern Europe are unlikely to implode into another October 2008-style crisis. Unlike the October crisis, which only a handful of analysts had foreseen, southern Europe's oncoming, inextricable mess was seen by many. The world is replete with examples of large and persistent fiscal deficits, fixed exchange rate, and falling productivity ending in tears. Southern Europe was no different. Yet the party went on for quite a while as the market kept funding the deficit-laden countries, hoping that the strength of the core (Germany and France) of the EU would delay the day of reckoning. But scarred by the October crisis, markets today are quite touchy about excessive leverage, be it in companies, banks, or governments. And so, the day of reckoning is here.

Things have also been muddied by the overlay of the economics and politics of being in the EU. Typically, countries extricate themselves from a sovereign debt crisis through a combination of fiscal tightening, monetising and restructuring the of the debt, and devaluing of the currency. But, remaining within the euro zone precludes devaluation; direct monetisation is ruled out by the Lisbon treaty; and debt restructuring is likely to be a no-go area for now. So the entire burden of adjustment has fallen on fiscal policy, which is daunting, given the massive size of the deficit and debt of these countries.

So despite the ¤110 billion rescue package for Greece aimed at taking it out from the funding market until 2013, the contagion spread to Ireland and Portugal, with Spain and Italy being threatened to be the next in line. The combined funding needs of these countries are so large (¤200 billion in next three months) that a rescue package seems inconceivable. While moral suasion on European banks and co-opting them in the Greek rescue package may reduce the risk of their cutting exposure to southern European assets, these banks have increasingly tapped the US markets for funding. US money funds can quickly become wary of the asset quality of the European banks, engulfing the whole of the EU in a crisis. The consequent economic slowdown in Europe and the further weakening of the euro would adversely affect both the US and the emerging economies. And those who prophesied a double dip in global growth would be proven right, although for entirely different reasons.

But while the economics of the EU may have hamstrung the crisis management, the politics of the EU is the key to resolving and containing this crisis. As long as the political commitment to the EU is intact, economic solutions will be stitched together. And there are solutions, thanks to our vast experiences of dealing with past debt crises. Measures such as debt buy-back by the European Central Bank (ECB) in the secondary market directly or through a created entity; extension of the ECB repo window to two-three years; EU-provided debt guarantees; and reinstated foreign exchange swap lines with the US Fed will be needed along with fiscal consolidation and structural reforms, to allay fears of financial markets.

But, in the absence of a central fiscal authority, the euro zone is finding hard to coordinate actions. And this means that ECB has to step in. This won't be easy. ECB will need to credibly explain that it is taking these extraordinary steps to preserve financial stability just as the Bank of England had to argue why monetising the deficit was needed to meet its inflation target not too long ago.

Unlike the October crisis, when the nature and the extent of the problem and that of the solutions were largely unknown causing financial markets to freeze, this time around the problem and the solutions are both known. Financial markets will remain in turmoil, but the crisis will not blow up as long as the market believes there is political commitment to the EU.

We have seen monetary and fiscal authorities globally take extraordinary actions in the last two years. Sunday's $1 trillion EU/IMF stabilisation fund is one such action. Perhaps as subsequent market reaction suggests more steps may be needed and likely delivered. The good news is that the EU is getting there. The bad news is the trillion dollars and probably some more will be added to the already massive global liquidity. But I guess in these extraordinary times we will worry about that a bit later.

Views expressed are personal

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

BUSINESS STANDARD

EDITORIAL

THE GAS IN THE RELIANCE CASE

THE GOVERNMENT CANNOT EXERCISE ITS SOVEREIGN RIGHTS TWICE OVER

G V RAMAKRISHNA

The first successful round of bidding for exploration and production of oil and natural gas in all the offshore areas of the country was conducted in 1985, when I was petroleum secretary. As many as seven international oil companies had bid for about 10 oil blocks, but none of them found any oil or gas.

Under the production sharing contract (PSC), there is a cost- and profit-sharing arrangement between the successful exploration company and the government. The gas utilisation contract has been added in the last few years.

The recent judgment of the Supreme Court on the natural gas distribution and pricing by Reliance Industries Ltd (RIL) raises several important questions.

According to the PSC, the oil or gas that is produced is shared between the government and the exploring party. Also, the company's share is determined after taking into account the share of the government, levy of royalty and other charges that will be paid to the government. The government also has the right to acquire the company's share of the natural resource (gas in this case) at an agreed pricing based on international prices prevailing from time to time, or as agreed in the PSC. If the government chooses not to buy the natural resource from the company, the company will be free to sell the oil (gas) to any party at a price to be determined by the company. It may sell to a sister oil company or to a third party at a price determined by it. It may sell a part of the oil or gas to the government and another to some other party. The price that the company charges the government government may be different from the price it chooses to charge the third party. As an owner of the natural resource, the government could use a price for determining the share of the private contractor, or for determining tax liability but could not force the private contractor to sell his share to another private party at a price determined by the government.

In the present case, the government fixed a price of $4.2 per million British thermal unit (mmBtu) of gas but RIL agreed to sell the gas at $2.34 to NTPC, which is a government company. The remaining part of the share of gas belonging to RIL can be sold by the company to a party at a price of its choice. If it chooses to sell gas at $2 per mmBtu, it is a contractual arrangement between the seller (RIL) and the buyer.

In exercising its sovereign right over the gas, the government has already taken its share of the gas and paid to RIL, a pre-determined price under the PSC. Having paid the government its dues, RIL will be free to sell the gas to any party of its choice and at a price agreed by it to the third party. This arrangement will come into operation only after the government has exercised its right and has agreed to pass on the company's share of gas under the PSC. The government cannot exercise the sovereign right twice over, once in determining the price, in which it will get its share, and again in fixing the price at which the company can sell its share to a party of its choice and at a price of its choice.

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

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

THE ECONOMIC TIMES

EDITORIAL

TOILET TRAINING AND CRICKET!

Members of Pakistan's Senate and National Assembly committee on sports have reacted as they know best to the disappointing performance of the 2009 World T20 champions in this year's tournament in the West Indies by calling for a probe!

The previous probe into Pakistan's disappointing performance on last winter's tour of Australia had even included feedback by the then team coach Intikab Alam on not just the infighting between past and present captains but the poor toilet habits of some players. Whether the ongoing World T20 tournament will also provide coaching feedback on the effect of inadequate toilet training remains to be seen! The reaction of cricket fans could be to wonder whether Pakistan's Senate and National Assembly legislators do not have more serious and fundamental issues to deal with.

However, there is always the possibility that Pakistan's legislators have been informed of something which the ordinary sports fan is ignorant of. Child psychologists tell us that good toilet training has a life-long impact.

If Pakistan could not score those two runs which would have made the difference between losing and winning in the crucial World T20 game against New Zealand, it could be because victory ultimately goes to the team which is better able to hold on to its nerve and everything else at the crucial stage. Like the cricketing experts keep telling us, that's what separates the men from the boys.

If it's a case for children of "you've got to go when you've got to go", the adult response could be one of "when the going gets tough, the tough get going"! It just may be that India's performance in the ongoing tournament in the West Indies was also affected by the fact that unlike ODIs and Test cricket, the T20 variety does not allow for a drinks-break where players can quickly go round the corner! Viewers can, or so Aamir Khan tells us in a commercial, take a toilet-break by recording the live action!

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

THE ECONOMIC TIMES

EDITORIAL

FOR FAST RESOURCE REALLOCATION

Now that the Supreme Court has finally approved formation of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), the government must quickly constitute the body to deal with corporate insolvency and other corporate law matters.

Modern economies must allow companies to restructure swiftly, close down businesses that no longer make commercial sense, sell assets or parts of the business if the situation so demands. Speedy redeployment in production of assets — land, physical and human capital — locked up in unviable units is essential for an economy's efficiency.

Unfortunately, restructuring companies has been difficult and winding up operations near impossible, given the slow pace of judicial decision-making and societal aversion to closure of any enterprise. Managements would be reviled for selling off assets. What resulted was sub-optimal employment of various factors of production, with limited mobility for factors from less productive to more productive activities.

In many instances , plant and machinery have rusted into junk, while the company awaited rehabilitation by the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (BIFR). Also, capital worth thousands of crore rupees would be locked up in these companies, burdening banks and creditors. In that sense, the Supreme Court's decision to uphold the constitution of the tribunal as envisaged by the 2002 Companies Amendment Act, although much delayed, is welcome. The verdict raises hope that the tribunal once created, would speed up the process for restructuring or winding up companies, for mergers and acquisitions as well as for addressing shareholder grievances, and that cases would be decided in a time-bound manner.

The NCLT is envisaged to be a companies' court subsuming the functions of the Company Law Board, and the BIFR, and the high court's mandate to approve M&A and liquidation of companies. The quality of justice dispensed by the new tribunal will ultimately depend on the quality of its members and technical staff. The government would need to appoint the right people, and with dispatch.

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

THE ECONOMIC TIMES

EDITORIAL

COMBATING KHAP PANCHAYATS

The problem of caste bodies in various parts of India passing edicts against certain marriages and relationships , and much else, is one of tradition — or what is purported to be tradition — coming up against a liberal-democratic modernity.

The law must be invoked fully against such illegal actions. But it is also a case for achieving a larger social transformation. And, critically, all political parties must spell out an unambiguous agenda on that front. In that context, the support extended by some politicians , including a Congress MP from Haryana, to such khap panchayats is highly condemnable.

Indeed, the problem is also partly located in the legitimacy accorded to such feudal and retrograde formations by the political class. The wider malaise afflicting politics in India is creating and maintaining competitive identities. And in turn, that has so emboldened such caste bodies, as is the case in Haryana, that they have openly threatened all MPs and MLAs in the state to support their regressive agenda of making their caste bias a law by amending the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

It is patently clear that the demand to ban marriages within the same sub-caste , and within the same village, isn't only about preserving some sort of tradition. It is also about seeking to control bodies and curbing basic human and individual freedom and liberty.

The khap panchayats are directly challenging the Constitution. This isn't an armed rebellion or insurrection. But in principle, it is similar to the Taliban — seeking an overthrow or amendment of secular, liberal law based on retrograde notions of identity, religion and tradition. Witness the alarming fact of the Haryana trial judge who had handed out the death penalty to five persons for the double murder of a newly married couple seeking a transfer as she fears for her life.

But combating this cannot be solely about implementing the law. The political class, as part of the project of enabling that social transformation must also seek to engage these caste formations and their defenders . That all tradition isn't good, or even that it can't remain ossified and has to evolve and absorb the rights and laws of a democratic age, is a concept that must be embedded in society at large.

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

THE ECONOMIC TIMES

EDITORIAL

GOVERNANCE & OWNERSHIP IN EXCHANGES

SANDEEP PAREKH

Dear Dr Jalan, I was delighted to know that a person of your stature and knowledge will be leading the effort to rethink the ownership and governance structure of stock exchanges, clearing entities and depositories. In India, we have had a very poorly thought out structure which inhibits competition and promotes entry barriers. Exchanges are a profitable business in India, in fact very profitable, with operating margins of over 40%.

There is nothing wrong with being competitive and innovative and thus profitable. Unfortunately, it is less innovation and more regulatory fiat making it difficult to set up competing exchanges that explains exchange profitability. Sebi regulations today restrict ownership of exchanges to 5% (15% in some cases) for any person along with persons acting in concert. Imagine a person who has the expertise, the money and the willingness to set up a new exchange. Such an entity, must find up to 19 investors who are willing to also invest in the new exchange and they must not be acting in concert. Each would thus have a financial stake which is substantial, but with virtually no voice in the management of the exchange. There would not be many takers for such a proposition. Witness the lethargic investments in the Bombay Stock Exchange despite liberalising the 5% limit to 15% for several entities. Add to that the unnecessary requirement of having a capital of Rs 100 crore, and the answer is clear why new exchanges have not entered the business.

The rationale for a 5% or 15% limit on control is the fear that ordinary companies will set up exchanges and since they will be conflicted, there is possibility of actual conflicts where their own stock or stock trade information of other companies is compromised . While the possibility exists, the remedy of a virtual ban on new entrants is wrong. Will anyone trade on an exchange which doesn't provide complete security? (See my column, ET, 13 Jan)

The Rs 100-crore capital requirement ignores how exchanges are run. Exchanges are essentially bundles of IT and surveillance systems. They don't need much capital. Requiring a large capital could have two rationales. To exclude small players or a lack of understanding of risk management based on the historical fact of exchanges being bundled with the clearing function. In an exchange transaction, everyone knows that the exchange guarantees the trade or in market lingo, acts as the counterparty, acting as buyer to every seller and seller to every buyer.

Thus, if any person defaults, the other party faces no risk. This perception is not accurate in reality. Actually, it is not the exchange which acts as the counterparty but the clearing corporation or house which guarantees each trade and which does the risk management. It is the clearing body which requires capital adequacy and closer risk management supervision. Even at BSE, where the clearing is done in-house, the rules and byelaws actually try to ring fence the exchange from default at the clearing house level.

In a modern electronic exchange where securities, whether equity, debt or currency, are traded, after the initial handshake on the price, virtually all the other work, from guarantee of settlement, to risk management and collection of margins and final payment takes place on the clearing entity. This entity could be a clearing corporation or an in-house clearing house (BSE model). Where it is a clearing corporation, it could either be a subsidiary (NSE model) or an independent body clearing for many exchanges (US model). Each model has various issues which heighten or lower regulatory concerns.

True, small, fly-by-night operators should not run exchanges. But if size is the eligibility criterion, a drug lord would be welcome while the door would be shut on an entrepreneur who can design a cheaper and better exchange system, with an outsourced capital intensive clearing function. Combined with the requirement of finding 19 other people with money but no brains, this would indeed be tough.

While exchanges are a liquidity-inviting-more-liquidity business, the supranormal profits of even the second exchange points to a malaise in the competitive environment of exchanges. Compare this position to the wafer thin, or rather negative margins in the currency derivatives market where there are three, instead of two players competing for business.

The way forward is quite clear. Lower entry barriers and, simultaneously, enhance regulatory scrutiny. Do away with the pointless Rs 100 crore capital requirement and focus scrutiny on clearing entities. The clearing entities need to move away from inhouse functions or a subsidiary function to professional clearing entities. Decidedly, these professional entities will provide more issues to resolve and possibility of a race to the bottom and thus require superior regulatory supervision. On the other hand, the lazy regulatory philosophy of banning knives will need to give way to better patrolling, surveillance and enforcement.

(The author teaches at IIM, Ahmedabad)

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

THE ECONOMIC TIMES

OPEN GAS MARKET STILL A PIPE DREAM

SOMA BANERJEE

The Supreme Court verdict in the case between Reliance Industries (RIL) and Reliance Natural Resources (RNRL) has brought crystal-clear clarity to the supreme role of the government in the gas sector. According to the verdict, the government will take the final call on pricing, marketing and utilisation of gas.

Put simply, once an energy company discovers gas, the government walks in to fix the consumer list to whom the gas will be sold, the price at which it will be sold, and the quantity that each consumer will get. The energy company that will take the risk of equity investment in exploration will have to be content with a rate of return that the government will deem fit as per its wisdom, keeping 'national priorities' in mind.

While this is perhaps the 'best solution in the given circumstances', it may not work in the long term. Private investors would want more flexibility and a decontrolled regime if they are to invest big bucks in the country's hydrocarbon sector. So, while the verdict has removed the uncertainty for RIL, RNRL and millions of shareholders, it will be seen with scepticism by future investors.

In fact, even existing investors would be wary if this was to be the permanent policy. As global fund manager, Arvind Sanger, managing partner of Geosphere Capital Management, said, the government can always second-guess the price at which the fuel will be sold. More importantly , while regulation is necessary in imperfect markets — like in India where demand far outstrips supply — the question is whether it should be the government that should double up as the regulator? After all, governmentowned companies are also competing with private oil companies for the same blocks. The government's role in fixing all these terms could certainly lead to questions over conflict of interest.

There is an urgent need to establish an independent, empowered regulator for the sector who should be able to take such decisions till the market evolves. More importantly, the regulator should be in a position to evolve the policies from time to time reflecting the evolution of the market in India and the changing global gas market.

That apart, the government has to initiate and proactively work towards establishing a market in the country. One of the biggest impediments in developing the country's gas market is the abysmal growth of the pipeline sector. Just like power transmission lines that carry electricity from the production point to the consumer, pipelines have to be up and running if the country has to maximise its gas potential.

The thumb rule for such investments is 1:1.5, that is, for every rupee spent on generation, Rs 1.5 needs to be spent on building transmission and distribution lines. The same, or perhaps more, is true of the natural gas sector. So, with gas production ramping up with new producers in the game, there is an urgent need to create pipelines, both trunk and spur, across the country that will allow consumers to access the gas.

At this point, there are only two trunk pipelines in the country: the HBJ pipeline that connects the western coast to northern India, and the recently-commissioned Kakinada-Bharuch pipeline by Reliance Gas Transmission India (RGTIL). The entire southern region, which has enough and more gas consumers like fertiliser, power and industry, has a huge unmet demand. Lack of pipeline in the region leaves the region with no choice but to buy expensive alternatives like naphtha or imported liquefied natural gas. This also tends to impact price bids. While RIL cannot be blamed — as it was following government directives — bids for the Krishna-Godavari gas — the first attempt to adopt a transparent discovery mechanism — were only called from consumers who had stranded capacity, i.e., consumers who were unable to operate at full capacity due to lack of gas.

The entire process of price discovery can only be ascertained if all players can participate in the bidding process. This will need the country to develop a gas pipeline network like the developed markets. The spot market in such economies constantly reflects changes in global demand-supply dynamics. For instance, gas prices have crashed to just about $3 per million British thermal units (mmBtu) from the highs of $11-12 per mmBtu just a year ago with the discovery and popular acceptance of shale gas in the US as an alternative form of energy source. Unfortunately, little has been done to get the pipelines going. In fact, the government's flip-flop on pipeline policy and the differences between the petroleum ministry and the petroleum and natural regulatory board — which has largely been left with little powers — has only delayed the construction of pipelines. The pipeline sector needs to be opened up and investors should be allowed to invest in trunk and spurt pipelines as long as they can take the risk of getting the gas and the consumers. The government's role in this has only jeopardised the growth and deregulation of the gas industry.

Policymakers who launched the new exploration licensing policy (Nelp) in 1999 had sought to initiate deregulation in the upstream exploration sector with this move — something which even defence lawyers (RIL's legal counsels) cited while arguing the case. RIL chief counsellor Harish Salve admitted that at one point, RIL too had approached the government for its marketing rights. The objective behind Nelp was to open up exploration to private oil companies as opposed to the earlier regime where private oil companies had to mandatorily tie up with a national oil companies to get production rights.

So, while a private oil company could take up a block identified by the government for exploration, it would have to bring in a PSU oil company as a partner to begin producing crude oil or gas. Blocks such Panna Mukta and Cairn's Barmer are cases on such nominated blocks before Nelp was introduced.

The Supreme Court verdict has brought in the much-needed clarity, removing all doubts about who manages affairs in the gas sector in the country, but this can only be a stop-gap solution to the larger issue of evolving India's natural gas market. Is the government listening?

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

THE ECONOMIC TIMES

EDITORIAL

NO COUNTRY FOR LADS

VITHALC NADKARNI

In her bestseller The Female Brain the American psychiatrist Louann Brizendine famously, and incorrectly, claimed that women use an average of 20,000 words a day compared with only 7,000 for men. Some feminists positively purred at the statement. But they were absolutely livid with her other claim that new mothers suffered from "mommy brain" and were incapable of focusing on anything other than their child.

Brizendine excised the women more-loquaciousthan-men bit from the paperback edition after a leading science weekly criticised her for having failed "to meet even the most basic standards of scientific accuracy and balance".

As for the 'mommy brain', as a self-professed feminist, Brizendine admits that her views may be painful to many modern women . Now she hopes that her latest book, The Male Brain, will help women to see the world through "male-coloured glasses" so they can better understand their sons and lovers. So why is your teenage son bored and surly? Blame it on the hormones, she advises. For if testosterone were beer, Brizendine suggests, a nine-yearold boy would be getting the equivalent of half a pint a day.

But by the time he is 15, he is flooded with the equivalent of nearly two gallons a day of the stuff. The macho hormone blunts his ability to read facial expressions and heightens his sensitivity to criticism.

No wonder the testosterone drenched reward centres in his brain require intensely hyped up sensations for their activation. That could account for his penchant for all those high-risk behaviours. Because the male brain is "marinated in testosterone" from the eighth week she goes on to conclude controversially that it is hardwired to cause men to lie, to take risks and to suppress their emotions.

To be fair, she also points out how the school system conflicts with teenage boys' freedom-seeking brains and their sleep cycle. Brizendine , who has a 20-year-old son, hopes to stimulate public debate on the way boys are educated and prepared for manhood.

Her work also puts a huge question mark on the conditioning and harvest of hormone-rich youngsters for conflicts around the world. There's a tragic mismatch between their potential and the way they're mown before they get there. She says with deeper understanding of the male brain and with right policies we could create more humane expectations for boys and men.

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

THE ECONOMIC TIMES

EDITORIAL

STICK TO TIMEFRAMES FOR DISPOSAL OF CASES

The Sarfaesi Act was enacted to allow banks and financial institutions to recover debt by enforcing security without intervention of courts. However, defaulters often misuse the provisions of the Act. They often file frivolous litigation before the debt recovery tribunal (DRT) to delay the process initiated by the bank against them. The problem is compounded by the Tribunal not being able to take these matters on a priority basis.

Although there is a timeframe for disposal of disputes under Sarfaesi Act, it is usually overstepped. The lawyers play a significant part in delaying the hearings of such applications by seeking unnecessary adjournments. The Tribunals should be strictly directed to adhere to timeframes.

Frivolous litigation can be restricted by inserting appropriate provisions in the Act for payment of actual costs. Also, the notice period for a delinquent borrower can be shortened to 15 or 30 days since the account has become a non performing asset and the borrower is aware of this. The seven days provided for banks to respond to the borrower's reply is too short and should be suitably enhanced.

Further, when the possession of the secured asset is to be taken in areas other than cities — where there are Chief Metropolitan Magistrates — the secured creditor has to approach the District Magistrate — who is also the District Collector. However, the district collector is invariably unavailable to attend to these matters due to his pre-occupation with other duties, leading to inordinate delays. It would be appropriate to substitute the District Magistrate with the Chief Judicial Magistrate to hasten the proceedings.

The proposal to amend the Sarfaesi Act wherein the district administration is to be involved in taking of possession of secured asset could result in time over-runs. Therefore, the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate should continue with the stipulation that orders to be issued within a fixed timeframe (maximum 60 days). However, banks and financial institutions are ill-equipped to take over the management of business of the borrower due to lack of expertise in business management.

By F M ALEXANDER Of Counsel Juris Corp.

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

THE ECONOMIC TIMES

EDITORIAL

PRIORITISE SECURED CREDITORS' CLAIMS

The objective of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest (Sarfaesi) Act was to facilitate expeditious recovery of defaulted loans of banks and financial institutions.

The enforcement power of securities conferred on banks by virtue of this legislation has led to a drop in nonperforming assets (NPA) of banks at 1-2 % of total advances. It has also brought about better discipline among borrowers to repay loans.

The effectiveness of the Act notwithstanding, there are loopholes that need to be plugged. One issue is the priority of claims of government (arrears of tax) provided in certain taxation laws that defeats the recovery efforts of banks. There have been cases where entire amount recovered by a bank was directed to be deposited in government treasury.

The Sarfaesi Act needs to be amended to recognise the priority of claims of the secured creditor even over claims of revenue. Such an amendment would be in conformity with the provisions of the Companies Act that recognises the priority of secured debt over claims of the revenue. When banks arrive at settlements with borrowers for repayment of banks dues, consent orders are to be obtained from debt recovery tribunals (DRTs) in pending recovery proceedings in terms of the settlement.

Some DRTs have taken a stand that only they can approve such settlement terms and banks have no powers to finalise the settlement terms. It is necessary to amend the law to bring it in conformity with the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code that requires the court to pass orders in terms of the settlement whenever the suit is settled out of court.

The Act also provides a comfort to the secured lenders for recovery by taking possession of the securities. Secured credit is the driving force of the economy and the comfort of recovery provided by Sarfaesi Act results in augmentation of secured lending, thereby driving economic growth. There is a need to view the provisions of the Act from this perspective, rather than treat it as a draconian edict providing powers of recovery to the banks.

By M R UMARJI, Chief Adviser (Legal) IBA.

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

THE ECONOMIC TIMES

EDITORIAL

NEED PEOPLE WITH DIFFERENT SPECIALISATIONS: WIPRO CEOS

SUJIT JOHN, MINI JOSEPH TEJASWI & ANSHUL DHAMIJA

Post recession, global customers want more for less, and they want Indian IT outsourcing vendors to take on more complex projects. In a discussion with TOI, Wipro's joint CEOs Girish Paranjpe and Suresh Vaswani talked about how the $6-billion company was adapting to the new environment. Excerpts from the interview:

Is the nature of demand from global customers changing?

They are talking a lot more with us about business transformation projects. Earlier, global customers would look at the likes of IBM and Accenture for the big transformation projects and only look at Indian IT for some offshoring. Today, IBM, Accenture, Wipro, TCS, Infosys are equal options for them. We have to provide everything — consulting, business advisory services, IT and BPO. With one big customer, we had a five-hour discussion, of which only about a half hour was spent with the CIO. They wanted us to look at every aspect of their business to increase efficiencies.

How are you adapting to this environment?

The new environment requires that we have more specialized talent, greater expertise in different domains, and be more efficient. Clients are not saying, give me 10,000 people more; they are saying, what more can you do. They are looking at newer technologies like cloud computing, which requires understanding of these technologies.

Earlier, there was this big focus on one number — how many people will we hire. Revenue growth and headcount growth were completely correlated.

We are breaking that correlation, which we call our non-linear initiative. We started this two years ago. In the year ended March 2010, we think about 8% of our revenue was non-linear. We call it non-linear when the revenue growth is at least 15% higher than the corresponding headcount growth. We think that the 8% can double in the next 12 to 18 months. We are using a lot of training, tools, technology, frameworks, etc to drive non-linearity.

How is this impacting employee profile?

Having lots of people just writing code is not good enough. We need people with different specializations. One initiative we have is to give technical inputs to employees every year, to try and elevate them to a new level each year. Under this initiative, called Unified Competency Framework, every person has to take a test and only if he qualifies is he eligible for a promotion, no matter his years of experience. We started implementing this rigorously over the last one year.

Suresh Vaswani (L) with Girish Paranjpe. "We plan to have more women in the company, more locals overseas, more physically challenged and more underprivileged sections," say Jt CEOs

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

THE ECONOMIC TIMES

EDITORIAL

EMAMI OFFERS VALUE PRODUCTS: ADITYA V AGARWAL, DIRECTOR, EMAMI GROUP

ANURADHA HIMATSINGKA

Kolkata-based FMCG major Emami is applying cream to its image to change into a premium brand in India. At the same time, the company is diversifying and had entered the edible oils space in February with its 'Health and Tasty' brand, endorsed by MS Dhoni and Preity Zeinta.

It has also been scouting for palm oil plantation opportunities in Malaysia and Indonesia to plant its feet firmly in this market. The dark continent, Africa, which contributes 33% to the company's international business, is sitting firm on Emami's radar. The company is planning to have at least three manufacturing units here in three years. Aditya V Agarwal, Director, Emami Group, said that the company will keep focussing on value-for-money products in an interview with ET. Excerpts:

Emami is looked upon as a 'fuddy duddy' brand. Is a brand makeover in the offing?

Every brand has its own image and I strongly believe that Emami is not looked upon as a 'fuddy duddy', dull or not a happening brand. I feel India's premium brands do not command the same perception as foreign brands. Emami does not offer a modern and a young brand but 'value-for-money products' catering to a segment which is large in terms of number and also have the purchasing power.

Besides, we have seen that Indian's loyalty towards premium brands is less as compared to 'not-so-premium' brands like ours. A lot of snob value is also attached to use of premium products till they are imported. But demand for the same product dips as soon as the product is made available locally by the manufacturer. Brand makeover is a constant endeavour being taken by companies at large and is getting communicated through packaging, advertisements and several other such communications that we have been doing over the years. Since we are aspiring for a premium brand image, we will not go for major changes.

What are the challenges that you might face in terms of branding?

Business challenges are always there and we are fighting it everyday. The new challenge which Indian market is facing is regionalisation. Even political parties are facing the problem.

We are working around the problem. We need to add more regional flavour to our portfolio apart from the initiatives we have taken in the recent past. For example, we have Bollywood stars like Shah Rukh Khan and Amitabh Bachchan for Navratna Oil.

But we have roped in Chiranjeevi in Andhra Pradesh to promote the same oil, Surya in Tamil Nadu and Upendra in Karnataka even though we are a national player. The ad promos have also been shot at picturesque sites of these states to get the regional flavour. These initiatives are being taken although we are a national player.

Does the company, still playing in the low-end products, aspire for high-end products?

Emami does not produce low-end brands but value-for-money products. Navratna is the costliest oil in the cool oil category. Sona Chandi Chyawanprash is also one of the most expensive products in its category. Though we have been toying with the idea of launching some high-end products, we don't think India is a market of high-end products. Even if it is, the volume will be small.

Emami is probably the only company to rope in multiple Bollywood stars for endorsing its products. Does it all convert into sales?

We are a commercial organisation and we work out the commercial return of each and every move that we make. Some are tangible and can be calculated directly, and some like excitement in the minds of retailers, sales team or even consumers are intangible and cannot be calculated.

We do believe that endorsement of Bollywood stars does make a huge difference. It is not Emami alone but corporates have over the years relied on celebrities to increase the visibility of their brand and in turn, increase sales. All our top brands like Boroplus, Navratna and Fair & Handsome have gained popularity due to celebrity association.

Does Emami has the management bandwidth to take on MNCs?

We compete with HUL in the cream segment with our Fair & Handsome brand; in the chyawanprash category, our Sona Chandi Chyawanprash takes on Dabur; Zandu balm is there in the pain relief balm category to compete with Amrutanjan.

Every FMCG company has tried to enter the cool oil category but could not make a dent and had to withdraw their brands. Incidentally, we have four brands which are category leaders and not many company can boast of this. All our brands occupy the No.2 or No.3 slots in their respective categories and this, I feel, proves that we are successful.

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

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

DECCAN CHRONICAL

EDITORIAL

WRONG THING IN THE WRONG PLACE...

It is a pity about minister of state for environment Jairam Ramesh. He is among a small set of ministers who are intellectually well-equipped and steeped into the modernist tradition. More of this kind are needed as India seeks to forge ahead. A minister needs to understand this country's complex realities and show a subtle grasp of its interplay with other nations. At the same time, it is clear that political adeptness and a sense of proportion are necessary qualifications for senior government functionaries if they seek to court success in framing appropriate policy and in its successful dissemination and implementation. It is in these realms that many who run the race come up short, as the case of Mr Ramesh demonstrates so well. Everything which he had to say in Beijing about India's security establishment and the home ministry being "paranoid", "alarmist" and "defensive" in assessing Chinese investments in India amounts to caricaturing this country's overall equation with a powerful neighbour with which relations have been more down than up. Even so, Mr Ramesh's assertions on these counts constitute the lesser of his follies. Far more serious is the minister taking up cudgels for Chinese multinational Huawei, a company that attracted adverse notice from the beginning of its innings in India. The point here, however, is that Mr Ramesh's observations in respect of Huawei expose him and his government to the charge of lobbying for particular international business entities. For a political party or a minister, it would be a sin even to speak up for an Indian business venture in the way that Mr Ramesh has done for the Chinese firm. The BJP has already accused Mr Ramesh of lobbying for Chinese commercial establishments. It is decent of the party not to demand his ouster from the government. Or maybe it just plans to carry out a campaign against UPA-2 on the issue of foreign multinationals and their flag-bearers within the council of ministers. Such a campaign can get off the ground only if a minister charged with a misdemeanour is permitted to remain in office. Not long ago Shashi Tharoor had to go when the first whiff of his possible financial involvement with a prospective IPL franchisee surfaced. Had he been allowed to stay on, Mr Ramesh's controversial statements in support of a Chinese company would have been an additionality of an unsavoury kind. And now if Mr Ramesh stays put, the breaking of another scandal — and no modern governments are immune to the possibility — can affect the composure of the Union council of ministers. Even if Mr Ramesh had not batted for Huawei, what he has had to say about the functioning of the Union home ministry on the issue of Chinese investments in India is enough grist to the Opposition mill. The Manmohan Singh government should count itself lucky that the controversy did not break during a session of Parliament

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

DECCAN CHRONICAL

EDITORIAL

PERKY CRAVINGS

BY INDER MALHOTRA

Invoking the name of the Mahatma, they usually pretend that they want a modest pay. No wonder even today an MP's monthly salary is Rs 16,000 which, making allowance for the phenomenal inflation over six decades, is as much of a pittance as it used to be when it was only a few hundred rupees. But the bulk of the politicians' earnings have always consisted of non-taxable daily allowance for attending Parliament or its countless committees that continue to meet even while Parliament is in recess. There are several other untaxed perks, driving one sociologist to remark that whatever R.H. Tawney might have said, Indian society was both "acquisitive and perquisite".

And then there are such windfalls as Members of Parliament's local area development scheme (MPLADS). Under it every MP has at his/her disposal Rs 2 crores a year for local area development projects in his/her constituency. Although the MP decides what has to be done, it is the collector of the district who is supposed to get the project executed. Yet, over the years, there has been no end to allegations of people's representatives siphoning off a lot of cash. One MP had seen nothing wrong in spending MPLADS funds on building a tennis court in a posh club. And now that the Supreme Court has rejected a PIL praying for the abolition of MPLADS nobody is going to be able to interfere with this largesse.

During the last days of the Budget session, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) had shouted itself hoarse against the Congress-led government's "misuse and abuse" of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). A BJP delegation even met the President to press the demand that the premier investigative agency be freed from the government's control. Why didn't the saffron party bring about this much-needed reform when it was in power for six years? And what prevents it today from offering its full cooperation in unbinding the CBI and keeping criminals out of politics?

The matter does not end there. There is also the question whether after a manifold increase in their pay and perks our MPs would work and let the nation's apex legislature function.

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

DECCAN CHRONICAL

EDITORIAL

EU IS SINKING. CHEER UP, IT COULD BE WORSE

BY ROGER COHEN

These are interesting times in Europe, both in Greece, where the sunlit European idea began, and in Britain, where it fizzles in the drizzle.

Greece, facing the tab for a long free lunch, is now the most hated member of the euro club. Germans are cancelling their Greek holidays (and reckon Greece should be selling its islands rather than taking their hard-earned money), North Europeans don't think they should be paying for Greek retirement at 53.

Britain, having shunned the now parlous single-currency club, has been hit with a European curse, in the form of coalition politics. David Cameron and his Europe-bashing Tories look like they may be getting into bed with Nick Clegg and his Europe-hugging Liberal Democrats: That would make even Israel's Labour-to-religious-right coalition look ideologically harmonious.

It's hard to know whether to laugh or cry. There is something irresistibly comical about post-Lisbon Europe with all its talk about punching its weight on the world stage — and the euro was supposed to be a political tool — reduced to a brawl over freeloading Greece, while Clegg tries to persuade himself that Cameron's rightist Latvian loony allies in the European Parliament don't really matter after all.

The minuet over Greece between dilatory, Bordeaux-sipping Angela Merkel of Germany and fidgety, mineral-water chugging Nicolas Sarkozy of France is also so agonising — the fury just beneath the forced friendship — as to be guffaw-worthy.

But of course people are dying in Greece, which is serious; and Americans are seeing their 401(k)'s wiped out by Greek contagion, which they believe to be serious; and the most important political experiment of the second half of the 20th century — the European Union — is in real trouble, which is more serious than it might appear. There's a case for holding the mirth.

Let's play the blame game, so dear to European leaders, for a moment. I'm sick of all this rubbish about

speculators ("wolf-pack behaviour" and the rest). So desperate are Europe's ministers to pass the buck that they're even blaming ratings agencies for taking note of the fact that Greece is broke — that's their job! — when said ministers have just finished blaming the agencies for ignoring risk — that's not their job! — in the run-up to the 2008 meltdown.

No, the blame for the Greek mess lies much deeper: in allowing Greece into the euro in the euphoria of 2000 and then watering down the stability pact (deficits not to exceed three per cent of national output) for France and Germany; in the current post-European German condition; and in the demise of any cohesive EU ambition as the British view of a loose trade pact rather than political union prevails.

Greece used to inflate away its inefficiency. It's OK not to pay taxes if you can impose taxation in the form of devaluations. That became impossible with the euro, but the practices — of tax evasion and rampant corruption and 14 months' salary — remained until the world woke up to the fact that Athens has a 13 per cent deficit as well as a new EU-funded airport.

Europe now faces the choice Timothy Geithner faced in the United States over a year ago: costly containment or collapse. I don't see a serious alternative to the $140 billion EU and International Monetary Fund Greek rescue; and an even bigger EU emergency funding facility should help shore up confidence. But the core problem — that the euro has bound vastly disparate nations in a halfway house where monetary and fiscal policy are not under unified direction — will fester.

It will fester in part because Germany has turned away from Europe. Merkel's delaying tactics have been shameful, costly — and revealing. Solidarity of the European kind is now a dirty word in Germany ("The Greeks are stealing our money!" screams the Bild tabloid) when European solidarity was once Germany's route out of post-war shame. There's something a little obscene about Germans wagging a finger at all these Greeks who have crossed the road on a red light.

If solidarity goes, Europe goes. As Ivan Krastev, a visiting fellow at the Institute for Human Sciences in Vienna, put it to me, "Without solidarity, how do you convince Poles that Germans are prepared to die for them?"

But cohesion is at low ebb. I said the euro was a political project; it was. For the French, it had much to do with European unity, with "deepening" the European idea, and with a strong political Europe. With the Cold War's end, that's gone. "Broadening" has replaced deepening, to Britain's satisfaction and the single currency's cost.

A Cameron Cabinet is not going to rectify that, with or without England's prettiest polyglot, Clegg. It remains to be seen whether sterling will be sunk by Britain's own deficit woes or will benefit from standing clear of the euro mess. Certainly Britain doesn't have the money to buy the Greek islands and if Germany did, everyone would get nervous.

The party's over but, hey, let's all raise a glass (of ouzo) on the sinking European ship. It could be worse.

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

DECCAN CHRONICAL

EDITORIAL

INDIA SHINING OR INDIA STARVING?

BY VANDANA SHIVA

India became independent soon after the Great Bengal Famine that claimed two million lives. An independent and free India reclaimed her food sovereignty and food security.

THE FOOD system is broken once again. Per capita consumption has dropped from 177 cal/day to 150 cal/day. And it has been broken deliberately through the Structural Adjustment Policies of the World Bank, part of the trade liberalisation rules of the World Trade Organisation. It is also being continuously broken by the obsession of the government to turn seed, food and land into marketable commodities so that corporate profits grow, even though farmers commit suicide and children starve. Two lakh farmers have committed suicide in India since 1997. Farmers' suicides are triggered by debt, and the debt trap is created by a corporate-driven agriculture that maximises corporate profits by pushing non-renewable seeds and agri-chemicals on impoverished and innocent farmers. Every fourth Indian is hungry today, according to United Nations data. India has beaten Sub-Saharan Africa as the capital of hunger: One million children die every year as a result of under-nutrition and hunger; 61 million children are stunted; 25 million are wasted; 42 per cent of the world's underweight children are now in India.

Tinkering with fragments of the broken chain will not fix it. The food chain begins with the natural capital of soil, water and seed. The second link is the work of hardworking small, marginal farmers and landless peasants, most of whom are women. The final link is eating.

- Dr Vandana Shiva is the executive director of the Navdanya Trust

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

DECCAN CHRONICAL

EDITORIAL

REASONS OF THE HEART

BY S.M. SHAHID

"For three weeks you have been after the poor fellow, even though Zia ul-Haq se aage jahan aur bhi hain", said Babboo.

"He was after you and me for 11 years", I replied.

"There are other topics to write on, topics that the masses love to talk about, hear about and watch with relish. For instance, you totally forgot the hottest of them all: Sania Mirza and Shoaib Sialkoti", said Babboo.

"He is Shoaib Malik, not Shoaib Sialkoti. Not even Allama Iqbal and Faiz Ahmad Faiz affixed with their name the word 'Sialkoti'. But, never mind, they didn't play cricket either."

"What's your point?"

"I am wondering why a cricket star from Sialkot landed in a former enemy country to marry a girl who didn't even play cricket", I said.

"She is a tennis star, you fool."

"I know, but why?"

"They met in Hobart", informed Babboo.

"Hobart?"

"It's in Australia. That's where both lost their matches and, perhaps in order to get over the dejection, they decided to fall in love. It is generally seen that in moments of common grief two perfectly normal and sensible people can become sentimental, fall in love, and even marry. On the other hand, when you are riding the crest, you have no time for such frivolous things", Babboo said.

"But even if they were in love, had they known what kind of media invasion they would face, I am sure they would have avoided tying the knot publicly. No two love birds in their right mind would stand helplessly, surrounded by a pack of wolves ready to tear them to bits?"

"You are right, Babboo. Not only the media, even the government and the people went berserk. A lady federal minister got so carried away that she crossed all limits and presented the tennis queen with a 25-tola gold crown. It was mass psychosis, and it was frightening, if you ask me", for once Babboo and I were in agreement.

"The TV announcers were so seized with mental turbulence that they started asking Sania Mirza extremely silly questions: 'Do you think you are going to be a good omen for Shoaib Malik?' Very embarrassing, you know."

"Yes, and one of the channels kept running a strip: 'Sania smiled today!'"

"And what about those cheap Pakistani love songs? Anyone having a refined taste for music, apne baal noch le ga. Even Shoaib and Sania would not like to hear such trashy songs, no matter what the occasion."

By now, both Babboo and I realised that there was no element of debate in our conversation. He at once changed track: "As you know, both Allama Iqbal and Faiz Ahmad Faiz too came from Sialkot and I am not sure what kind of music they played at their wedding, but they were at least sensible enough not to have crossed borders in order to fall in love and get married".

"There were no borders in those days, you fool", I corrected Babboo.

"They could have crossed into USSR or China", he argued.

"Shut up, yaar!"

"No, honestly, I feel Shoaib Malik should have taken into consideration — while going all the way to marry an Indian girl — the hassles inherent in such a venture, hassles like visas, culture shocks and communal backlash!"

"Hai apna dil to awara, na janey kis pe aye ga", I said.

"It is a silly song sung by a great singer", said Babboo, and added: "In the selection of British counties these cricketers would be shrewd enough to know what the package was, but in matters of the heart, phissal jate hain. Also, I tell you, Shoaib has not set a good example for young immature Pakistani cricketers who might be tempted to follow in his footsteps and start exploring for conjugal sign-ups in Zimbabwe, South Africa or the West Indies".

"Aren't you talking like TV anchors?" I said.

"Maybe, if you mean stretching a simple fact of life to ridiculous limits, getting excited on the slightest pretext, behaving most of the time in a juvenile manner — all because my employers have told me that I am there as long as I keep 'Breaking News'! Aaj Sania muskura deen, aaj Shoaib ne ek purani haray rung ki T-shirt pahan kar swalon ke jawab diye…"

"Have you realised that now all is quiet on the Western Front?" I pointed out.

"Eastern Front!" Babboo corrected me.

"Why?"

"Everything has a limit. They are tired and exhausted. Media ko ab saanp soongh gaya hai!"

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

DECCAN CHRONICAL

EDITORIAL

HATRED IS LIKE TAKING POISON

BY DOMINIC EMMANUEL

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

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

THE STATESMAN

EDITORIAL

PAKISTAN EXPOSED

A TERSE MESSAGE FROM THE USA

Hillary Clinton's warning to the Pakistan government in the wake of the abortive bomb blast in New York's Times Square has served to dissipate the recent simulated bonhomie between the visiting civil/GHQ delegation and the State Department. America has now put Pakistan on notice. Relations have soured further with Sunday's assertion by the Obama administration that the Pakistani Taliban was behind the plot. And this has been couched in the blunt message that Islamabad must move against the Islamist militants in the tribal belt. America has moved swiftly from courteous diplomacy to strong pressure, and this itself signals a definite change in stance. "If there is a successful attack, we will have to act," is the Administration's blunt message. The warning is reminiscent of Condoleezza Rice's threat to Islamabad ~ "act or we will" ~ in the immediate aftermath of 26/11. For all that, the reality remains that Pakistan has done little or nothing to rein in the Taliban, a challenge at once domestic and offshore. It has scarcely been forthright about its intentions. Its action against the militants have been half-baked at best and reluctant at worst. Meanwhile, the NY plot that misfired thickens. Washington's misgivings are confirmed with the Pakistani American, Faizal Shahzad, admitting to the bomb plot.

The timing of the US warning is significant not merely because of its promptness; it coincides with a possible shift in strategy. Notably, the debate over whether America should extend its presence beyond the Af-Pak frontier to Pakistani soil. Aside from the increasing drone attacks, Pakistan is sceptical about the possible involvement of American ground troops in due course of time. Significant, therefore, is last Friday's meeting between General McChrystal and General Kayani. Quite obviously it was held in the backdrop of the Taliban's Times Square misadventure. The US commander in Afghanistan didn't mince his words in his interaction with Pakistan's army chief. "You can't pretend any longer that this is not going on. We are saying you have to go to North Waziristan." Which place incidentally was Faizal Shahzad's training turf in the bastion of Pakistan's Taliban and the Al Qaida. The American Ambassador, Anne Patterson's meeting with President Zardari illustrates that the USA has upped the ante, both diplomatically and militarily. But does the ISI have the will to counter the jihadists? This is the question the world must seek an answer to. In the interim, Pakistan stands exposed in the comity of nations. Not that it terribly matters to a fractious country.

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

THE STATESMAN

EDITORIAL

TRIAD' DOCTRINE

WILL IT BE ACCEPTED, IMPLEMENTED?

FULL marks to the Chief of the Army Staff for talking of a "triad" of user, developer and producer in boosting the floundering indigenous defence manufacture effort. General VK Singh may have been speaking in the limited context of artillery firepower, but his observation is valid across the entire production scenario which is marked by the dismal reality that 70 per cent of military hardware continues to be imported. However, what is articulated in the seminar room seldom percolates beyond it so the General must set about reversing a mindset that has contributed in no small way to the army and air force ~ not the navy, for skewed reasons perhaps ~ distancing themselves from domestic development and production. Sure the "brass" will refute that, but the buyer-seller equation persists. Who can deny that had the in-house expertise and experience of the Army and Air Force been sincerely dovetailed into the MBT and LCA programmes they might not have attracted the "flagship failure" tag now attached to the DRDO's key projects. Those are two prominent examples, but the price of non-involvement has been paid ~ very often in foreign exchange ~ almost all down the line. That the "threat" from across land and air frontiers can be so easily sold to the sarkar has made resources available for liberally exercising the import option, placing indigenous alternatives on the priority backburner. The fact that the navy traditionally received the crumbs of the defence budgetary allocations fuelled a drive that has spanned Nilgiri through Delhi to Shivalik with an aircraft carrier and a nuclear-powered submarine in the offing. Much of those successful programmes, undoubtedly they have shortcomings too, have been Navy-propelled.

Should the Army chief seek to "force" his triad doctrine to its logical conclusion he must identify the competence available in his service that can be seconded to the DRDO and production agencies. In fact that should be expanded into an all-service exercise, and the ministry must carry the process forward by ending the isolated functioning of developer and producer by bringing them under a single, accountable head. It has been convenient for the Army and Air Force to stay aloof, not get their hands dirty, lest they then be saddled with "donkeys". But for how long can the exchequer be bled to sustain a less-than-responsible attitude?

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

THE STATESMAN

EDITORIAL

ON THIN ICE

RIGIDITY PROVING NEPAL'S BANE

POLITICIANS in Nepal are yet to show flexibility on what constitutes a consensus on the formation of a national government to help the constituent assembly meet the 30 May deadline for submission of a new constitution. At a trying time such as this, political parties should have displayed the same exemplary spirit they did in narrowing down differences while preparing the historic November 2006 Comprehensive Peace Agreement. Ever since Maoist Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal Prachanda stepped down in May last year in protest against the President's action in reinstating the army chief whom he had dismissed, the country has gone from bad to worse. The Maoists laid siege to parliament for nearly seven months demanding a debate on the presidential action and during this period nothing moved. Now they want the Nepal Communist Party (Unified Marxist-Leninist)-led coalition government of Madhav Kumar Nepal to step down to make room for a consensus government and "civilian supremacy". The Nepali Congress is firm on its preconditions that the Maoists must disband the Young Communist League, agree to terms on rehabilitation of Maoist combatants and return to the original owners all property seized during the rebellion days. In such a situation, there does not appear to be any hope of a breakthrough.

Last December's five-day Maoist strike failed to move the Prime Minister. If last week's six-day indefinite strike had continued there would have been large-scale public resentment and violence. Mercifully, it was suspended but only until the end of this week during which the Maoists say they will "wait and see" whether the Prime Minister vacates the seat. The possibility of the President taking over the country after 30 May is becoming a reality. Perhaps Madhav Kumar Nepal will restore some semblance of political peace if he resigns. After all, dissidents and even several party central committee members are reportedly against his continuance.

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

THE STATESMAN

EDITORIAL

IT TAKES TWO TO TANGO

GOVERNMENT GOOFS UP, THE OPPOSITION ALLOWS IT TO

BY MR VENKATESH

L'affaire Hassan Ali is an enigma wrapped in a puzzle, packed in a conundrum and delivered through a riddle. What adds credence to the allegation that virtually the entire political establishment is enmeshed in this imbroglio is its complete silence in the recently concluded Budget session of Parliament. To understand this conspiracy ~ yes conspiracy ~ of our political class some chilling facts relating to Hassan Ali would at the

outset have to be narrated.

It may be recalled that the Union government, in an affidavit filed before the Supreme Court stated that the tax demand pending against Hassan Ali was Rs 71,849.59 crore. (In contrast, the Income-tax levy on all individuals for the financial year 2009-10 is a mere Rs 113,000 crore only.) That was in May 2009. Subsequently, disclosing the list of defaulters in Parliament, the government informed that Hassan Ali topped the list of tax defaulters with outstanding arrears of more than Rs 50,000 crore. That was in August 2009.

Budget papers

IT may be noted that the Budget papers contain details of all tax dues (Income-Tax, Excise, Customs and Service Tax) to the Government (Annexure 10 to the Revenue Budget). This also details cases where the assessee has either disputed the same through an appeal as well as those where the assessee has not preferred an appeal. Believe it or not ~ Hassan Ali ~ the single largest tax defaulter was missed out by the Budget papers. That was in February 2010.

But the issue does not end here. Interestingly, the Finance Minister had in a post-Budget interview to The Week suggested that this tax from Hassan Ali was realized to the last penny. Perhaps it was an unintended slip-up by the FM. Subsequently, the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) clarified that this money was not collected at all from Hassan Ali, barring a few million rupees. A classical case of the left arm of the government not knowing what the right one was up to! Simultaneously, the CBDT claims that serious efforts are on to recover this gargantuan amount of tax from Hassan Ali.

While one does not doubt these efforts of the CBDT, what adds to our consternation is the amendment to the Income-Tax Act by Budget 2010 that allows tax evaders (including Hassan Ali) to approach the Settlement Commission and settle their tax disputes amicably. This is where tax experts are split down the middle. Some experts argue that this amendment to the IT Act would directly benefit Hassan Ali while others are of the opinion that it would not. It may be of interest to note that Hassan Ali had previously attempted to seek an amicable settlement to his tax issues in 2007, albeit unsuccessfully, through the Settlement Commission route. Needless to emphasize, the next move of Hassan Ali shall be watched with great interest.

Naturally, the debate is not about the efforts of the CBDT or the Government in attempting to recover the tax dues from Hassan Ali. Nor does the slip-up by the Finance Minister (or The Week) matter. Given the track record of the Government in tackling such convoluted issues in the past, all this posturing is akin to the proverbial rain dance of the African tribal chief. After all, the lessons of several past scams, notably Bofors, are too fresh in our minds to even take the explanations (Letters Rogatory, attaching immovable properties et al) of these institutions seriously.

Obviously, from here on only two explanations are possible. Someone in the Finance Ministry was incompetent or was programmed to be incompetent, probably the latter. And that is the crux of the issue.
If the amount of tax raised in excess of Rs 50,000 crore is any indication, it is obvious that under the prevailing tax rates, the income of Hassan Ali should be in excess of Rs 150,000 crore. And that is a conservative estimate even assuming that it was spread over a few years. Given the fact that Hassan Ali has a few properties across the country and a stud farm, the extent of his wealth, especially as deposits in foreign banks is mind-boggling.

Source of income

More importantly, what was his source of income that led to this huge tax bill in the first place? Surely, his stud farm cannot be the source of this gargantuan wealth. Has he laundered the entire earnings and parked it abroad? In the alternative has he parked some money in India too? Where is the balance? Has he routed some of this wealth into the stock exchanges in India through the opaque Participatory Note route? Was he laundering wealth of several prominent Indians and possibly some terrorists? Several questions that remain unanswered to this date.

Obviously, the "wealth" of Hassan Ali is not his wealth. Rather, it is quite possible that he is a conduit for several persons across the political spectrum, celebrities, industrial houses and of course criminals. That explains the thundering silence of our elite on this issue.

The IPL and even the Spectrum scam by comparison were relatively minor issues. Yet they rocked Parliament for several days in the recently concluded Budget session. In contrast, the entire Opposition (including the BJP and the Left) remained silent on the Hassan Ali issue. In the process, by refusing to raise this issue and nail the government on this affair, the Opposition actually bailed out the government.

The reason for the generosity of the Opposition is inexplicable unless of course one concedes that there is a tacit understanding and a convergence of interest between the Government and the Opposition in hushing up the Hassan Ali case.

The writer is a Chennai-based Chartered Accountant. He can be reached at mrv@mrv.net.in This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

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

THE STATESMAN

EDITORIAL

UK BIDS FAREWELL TO US-STYLE POLITICS

10 May 2010 marked the 70th anniversary of the formation of Winston Churchill's coalition government during World War II. By 8 May 1940, it had become clear that then Prime Minister and Conservative candidate Neville Chamberlain was incapable of leading Britain against a belligerent Germany. Consequently, he stepped down and made way for Churchill, who embarked on his historic prime ministerial term, one that ended with Britain's victory. He led a coalition government from 1940 to 1945 and brought in the Liberals and Labour as well.
Seventy years later, a lot has changed but some calculations still remain the same. What aided Churchill in leading his coalition was probably fear of German advance in Europe, an external threat that unified all three parties. Today, the United Kingdom faces the maximum threat from within the country, and it is not just from home-grown terrorists. The debts and the budget deficits are the UK's biggest worries. Yet, just like 1940, the British parliamentary arithmetic refuses to let the Conservatives govern the UK, despite the fact that the party won the maximum votes. For David Cameron, leader of the Conservative party, the jubilation of gaining 100 seats in this year's election is lost in having to strike a deal with Nick Clegg's Liberal Democratic party and making them a "comprehensive offer".

April 2010 was the most fascinating pre-election period that the UK saw in decades. It heralded a series of firsts in the election history of this country. The Americanisation of British elections was hard to miss. A little bit of telly, over three Thursday evenings transformed a relatively open election in unprecedented ways. There is no denying that the US-style televised debates were historic. American and other debate experts were brought in to anticipate all possibilities. For the first time, party leaders faced each other in front of the entire nation and talked directly about facts and figures. Also, for the first time, Nick Clegg enjoyed the luxury of putting his face before the nation, a privilege that has never been granted to any Lib Dem leader before him.

It was not only the broadcasters who found a new toy to play with, courtesy America; the bloggers and tweeters found a wealth of new trivia to engage with. Just like presidential candidates in the USA, the prime ministerial candidates in the UK answered questions posed to them through Youtube, Facebook and Twitter. No stone was left unturned to engage the electorate. If all that was not enough, speculation on Nick Clegg as the "British Obama" brought parliamentary elections in the UK closer to the US presidential elections.

But on 6 May, as results started pouring in, it was clear that the UK had bid farewell to US-style politics. The stark reality of parliamentary elections and arithmetic was brought home by the hung parliament. Whereas the US voted Obama to victory, Clegg admitted to the BBC that in the UK, voters "decided to stick with what they knew best". Despite Clegg's pre-election surge in the polls after the leaders' TV debates, the Lib Dems won only 57 seats, which is down five on their result in 2005. For the past few days, what has been going on are negotiations between parties, primarily between the Conservatives and the Lib Dems. After Cameron made his offer of coalition to the Lib Dems on 7 May, keeping the "national interest" in mind, it is now Clegg's turn to respond.

A face-to-face meeting between Labour leader Gordon Brown and Clegg took place after it was reported that other top leaders of both parties met secretly over the weekend. In fact, some top Lib Dem leaders told the BBC that if Brown decided to step down as Prime Minister, a Lib-Lab coalition might be possible, though "illegitimate". Anything seems possible. It is also important to bear in mind that though the negotiating teams from the Conservatives and the Lib Dems are engaged in working out a coalition that all think are going in a "positive" direction, the ultimate decision will not be for them to make. Whatever decision is taken by the parties has to be aproved by 75 per cent of their MPs and 75 per cent of the parties' parliamentary bodies. So, for all the changes that Americanised politics induced in the UK, the stress levels related to a coalition government remains.
Clegg may not have proved to be Britain's Obama but it would be interesting to see if Cameron, if he is Prime Minister, has in him Churchill's skills to take one party, that is, the Lib Dems on board with him. Churchill took on two, 70 years ago, and, as many in the UK would agree now, he did just fine.

The writer is the London-based correspondentof The Statesman

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

THE STATESMAN

EDITORIAL

100 YEARS AGO TODAY

NEWS ITEMS

TAXI-CABS FOR CALCUTTA

The first shipment of motor Taxi-cabs for Calcutta has now arrived by the S.S. Kincraig. The following are the various stands chosen:-

1. Loudon Street, corner of Theatre Road; 2. Opposite Bengal Club; 3. Opposite Great Eastern Hotel; 4. Fairlie Place, corner of Clive Street; 5. Store Road, Ballygunge; 6. Judges Court Road, Alipore; 7. Opposite Grand Hotel; 8. Inside Howrah Station; 9. Inside Sealdah Station; 10. Inside Fort William.

Other stands will be settled as necessity arises and the Company will always gladly consider any suggestions made about any required stands.

We are informed that the Company has acquired 40,000 sqr feet of land situated at Elgin Road, where the construction of a garage and repair works will be started almost immediately.

The Manager of the Indian Motor Taxi-Cab Company writes:- We find in your paper of Sunday the 8th instand a reference to our Company in the shape of an inquiry as to when a Taxi-Cab service is to be started in Calcutta. We have pleasure in informing you that we began service today (Monday) in Calcutta with some of the cars which have been received last week and which will be all placed in service during the next few days. We trust this service will give satisfaction to the public and shall be very happy to receive any suggestions which may tend to improve the said service.

The Allahabad Anglo-Indian Association, as a result of a recent conference, have appointed a sub-committee consisting of Messrs. Chiene Milsted and Robbie, to consider means of forming an employment bureau for the benefit of the unemployed of the community in these provinces.

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

THE STATESMAN

EDITORIAL

GREECE WRESTLES WITH ITS CONSCIENCE

Number 23 Stadiou Street was once an elegant, cream-painted 19th-century villa close to the centre of Athens. It now stands, shabbily, on one of the many fault lines in the Greek capital. If you walk south towards Syntagma (Constitution) Square and the Acropolis, you find broad pavements and the expensive shops of any big Western city. If you walk to the north, the pavements splinter crazily, as if there had recently been an earthquake. You enter the Athenian, anarchist heartland.

Number 23 Stadiou Street is now a branch of the Marfin Egnatia Bank. Last week, persons believed to belong to an anarchist group (this being Greece, a thousand conspiracy theories thrive) threw a burning bottle of petrol through a downstairs window. The fire brigade was slow to arrive through crowds of mostly peaceful demonstrators. The bank security doors locked automatically. Some bank officials, working through a supposedly general strike, escaped. Three junior employees, a man and two women, died.

The pavement outside the bank has since become a shrine. Stadiou Street is now the place where Greece wrestles with its own conscience and its new-found status as a kind of sovereign Lehman Brothers: an overloaded, political and financial basket case which might tip the European, and world, economy back into recession.

Some mourners stare in blank disbelief at the charred windows. Others kiss the stones of the building, as if it were a place of Orthodox religious pilgrimage. There are heaps of roses, lilies and chrysanthemums.
Theresa Theologou, 41, a supermarket checkout worker, placed a bundle of red geraniums on the pile. "I didn't know these people but they could have been me. I have a daughter, and the dead child could have been my child," she said in excellent English. "I also work in the private sector. I also was ordered by my bosses to work through the general strike. They didn't deserve to die for that. The crisis in Greece is not their fault. It is not Europe's fault. It's not the markets' fault. I will tell you whose fault it is. Our politicians are thieves."
Pyromaniacs are people who like to play with fire. Pyromaniac is a Greek word, just like crisis, tragedy, Europe, catastrophe and paranoia are Greek words. Was it the young, masked, pyromanic prigs who threw the Molotov cocktail which set light to the building? Was it the pyromanic markets goading Greece closer and closer to the flames of financial calamity in recent weeks? Was it the European Union, which has, pyromanically, promised to send in the firefighters on half-a-dozen occasions but failed to supply water for their hoses? Greeks have learned, in recent weeks, to beware of northern Europeans, especially Germans, bearing gifts.

First and foremost, the fire was the fault of a small (very small) group of young, masked anarchists who bombarded riot police, overturned cars and hurled Molotov cocktails after a mostly peaceful, 70,000-strong demonstration broke up. They were drunk on self-righteous hatred of "the system", the Socialist-led Greek government, the European Union, the euro and, above all, "The Banks", as an emblem of capitalism and speculation.

The burning of the Marfin Egnatia Bank was, to the vast majority of Greeks, an aberration. Whatever the profound anger at the many-layered crisis enfolding the country, it is wrong to assume that further, serious violence is hanging in the dusty, Athenian air this spring.

The skirmishes between demonstrators and police after parliament passed a 30bn Euro austerity package were reported by some foreign, financial commentators as "riots". Hardly. They were more like a foolish, ritual dance in which the police (quite unnecessarily) swept demonstrators from Constitution Square and the demonstrators burned a few dustbins and threw a few stones as they departed.

The mood was summed up by Sissi Alonistiotou, editor of three weekly supplements of the respected, independent newspaper, Eleftherotypia (freedom of the press). Sissi said that she had come to the demonstration partly as a journalist, but mostly as a member of the public.

The bank deaths have stunned a country, which was already close to a nervous breakdown. Many Greeks interviewed in the last couple of days suggested that the fatal fire might actually calm the situation, acting as a kind of catharsis, just like the deaths at the end of a classical Greek tragedy. It would have been worse, they said, far more inflammatory, if one of the anarchist demonstrators had been killed. That might have touched off the kind of revengeful, rolling riots seen in Athens in December 2008.

Other Greeks fear that that the nation's anger, and sense of helplessness, is now so great that further violence is inevitable.

The massed ranks of the Communists marched past the burned bank. They chanted, "Communism is the voice of the people. No to the profits of capitalism." At every intersection, young Communists formed into a disciplined phalanx to prevent the march from being disturbed. They carried small flags, attached to short staves as thick as baseball bats.

George Kasimatis, president of the Greek chambers of commerce, supports the austerity package but bemoans the fact that the EU did not act earlier. "Two months ago the pain might have been less for Greece and for the whole world," he said. "Now we expect to lose 100,000 small businesses by the end of the year. I am not a politician. I do not wish to talk about the prospects for political violence but it cannot be excluded. And what we need most of all – especially for our biggest industry, tourism, is calm."

Two months ago, the mood in Greece was one of a dull, but resigned, acceptance that the game was up. Most people were ready to accept sacrifices, so long as the pain was spread evenly. Whether pain can ever be spread evenly in a system so endemically corrupt and perverse as the Levantine political and economic system of Greece is open to question. How can anyone trust a system in which large sections of the wealthiest members of society – from ship-owners to lawyers and doctors – have traditionally, and quite legally, evaded almost all direct taxes?

One of the subsidiary tragedies of the last few weeks has been the humiliation – by the markets and by Greece's eurozone partners – of a decent and competent Greek Prime Minister, George Papandreou, and Finance minister, George Papaconstantinou. A couple of months ago, many Greeks on both the Right and Left were prepared to accept that Papandreou was an honest man and Greece's last, best hope. He had started, albeit clumsily and slowly, to clear up the injustices and anomalies built into the Greek system. In return, most people were ready, despite union protests, to accept some immediate pain.

Now there is a sense of bewilderment and resentment that the self-fulfilling pressure of the markets has forced Greece into an even deeper hole than the one that it made for itself. And there is anger that other Euroland countries, and the Germans in particular, promised debt relief which never came or was too vaguely formulated to scare off the financial-market speculators. Papandreou is now dismissed by many Greeks – not all – as just another bumbling, self-interested chieftain of a corrupt ruling class.

The Independent

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

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

THE TELEGRAPH

OUTDATED IDEA

Nobody is quite sure exactly what it is a governor does in India. Positioned somewhat like the president who stands at the head of the nation's government, he or she is in a ceremonial post. But unlike the president, who is elected by a special method, the governor is nominated by the Union home ministry, and has no executive powers. Only when there is a total breakdown of governance within the state, which is rare, does the governor have a role in first, reporting it to the Centre and then, if need be, carrying out the dictates of Central rule. The idea may have been to replicate the president's apolitical position in the governor's, but it does not work that way. The governor is seen, in polite terms, as a "bridge" between the Centre and the states, and the convention of changing governors every time a different party comes to power at the Centre is almost as old as the ideal itself.

But the Supreme Court has ruled that governors cannot be removed on grounds of "lack of confidence" or "conflict of political and ideological opinions" by the party in power at the Centre. The ruling was made in response to a petition challenging the removal of the governors of Uttar Pradesh, Gujarat, Haryana and Goa in 2004 by the United Progressive Alliance government when it came to power in its first stint by defeating the National Democratic Alliance. The ruling exposes the machinery behind the appointment and removal of governors, which has been called arbitrary. Yet it is a pity that such a matter should be brought to court at all. Not only has the convention governing these appointments always been premised on reigning political dynamics, but governors are also appointees of the home ministry. As such, it is up to the home ministry, which is inevitably guided by whichever government is in power, to decide whether a governor should go or stay. In a polity that is built of competing political parties, the logic cannot be anything but political. And any post that is not an elected one would be subject to these ups and downs. Petitioning the court in such a matter is an attempt to impose one category of values on a completely different system of logic.

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

THE TELEGRAPH

EDITORIAL

CLIFF'S EDGE

By the end of this month, Nepal may turn into a country without a government, a parliament and even a constitution. The Maoists there are working to ensure that the Himalayan State withers away in such a fashion. Before they can achieve that, they want to hold the government — and the people — to ransom. Their indefinite strike from May 2, which they had to call off in the face of public anger, was aimed at forcing a constitutional void. Nepal is currently run by a transitional government and a constituent assembly elected on the basis of an interim constitution. The assembly had a mandate to prepare a draft constitution during its term, which ends on May 28. It is obvious now that the assembly cannot do that. Worse, an extension of the assembly's term has become uncertain because the Maoists will not support any such move by the present government. And the government cannot muster the necessary majority in the assembly without the support of the Maoists, who have the largest number of seats. If such a constitutional crisis happens, it will be grist to the Maoists' mill. They have been working toward this ever since they left the interim government over the issue of the integration of their armed cadre with the Nepal Army.

However, a large part of the blame for the mess lies with the prime minister, Madhav Kumar Nepal. Right from the time he took over the reins of his 22-party coalition government, his primary aim has been to keep the Maoists at bay. This is not only confrontational politics at its worst but also a betrayal of the popular mandate. For all their bullying tactics, the Maoists form the largest political group in Nepal. Any government that denies this reality will lack both credibility and popular support. Mr Nepal's anxiety to settle scores with the Maoist leader, Pushpa Kamal Dahal, has clearly distracted the former from more important business. His government failed to do enough in order to keep its commitment to prepare the draft constitution on time. More worrying is the fear that Mr Nepal's incompetence might endanger the peace process that ended the 10-year-long Maoist insurgency in the country. The United Nations' Mission in Nepal and several foreign powers want the prime minister to mend fences with the Maoists. Many parties and social groups now favour a national unity government to take charge and reach a political consensus. The future of the peace process is far more important for Nepal than its leaders' personal ambitions.

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

THE TELEGRAPH

EDITORIAL

FEAR AND FOREBODING

THE UNION HOME MINISTRY SHOULD STICK TO ITS OWN TURF

K.P. NAYAR

Pulling up Jairam Ramesh, the minister of state with independent charge of environment and forests, for his comments on the Union home ministry's paranoia over China will not solve any problem. It will only push a legitimate issue under the carpet and only for the time being.

The 'problem' of the home ministry in its present incarnation is far more complex than anything that can be addressed in a mere phone call from the prime minister, Manmohan Singh, to his minister for environment. Ramesh has merely scratched the surface of a larger issue that has the potential to eventually eat into the fundamental structure of the Indian government and destroy the country's integrity as a State, which respects the rights of its citizens and residents.

The environment minister has obvious worries about the home ministry's "alarmist" approach to China, but what ought to be more alarming is that the Union home minister, Palaniappan Chidambaram, has so egregiously eroded the functional independence of the ministry of external affairs that there is now a logical case to merge the foreign and home ministries into one entity.

For that matter, tangentially, the home ministry has in recent months been steadily encroaching on what ought to be the domain of the commerce ministry, the flow of foreign investments into India and the work of the Indian Council for Cultural Relations. Deliberately or otherwise, the prime minister's office and the cabinet secretariat have also ceded considerable space to Chidambaram since he took over as home minister.

Take, for instance, S.M. Krishna's dogged effort since assuming office as external affairs minister to simplify and expedite the issue of passports. Consular services represent the public face of the MEA, and Krishna has pursued his mission as part of a belief that travel should be a basic right of every citizen of modern India without having to grease the palms of flat-footed policemen for a dubious 'clearance' before the issue of a travel document.

Krishna went about implementing his vision of 21st-century passport offices, emboldened by the success of his effort as Karnataka chief minister in transforming Bangalore into an Asian version of America's Silicon Valley. But Chidambaram's ministry has stopped Krishna in his tracks by refusing to dilute the power of policemen to ultimately control the right of ordinary Indians to a passport.

India's consular and citizenship rules are at their best archaic. Among the web of rules is one in fine print which says that if a passport expired more than a year ago and its holder is applying for a new passport, the application automatically becomes what is known as a "citizenship case". What it means is that a new passport cannot be issued until the officer handling the case is satisfied that the hapless applicant has not acquired another country's citizenship during the period when his passport was not valid.

It was a rule that nobody bothered to invoke until recently. But it is a reflection of the fear that the Union home ministry has now managed to spread — even in ministries and offices outside North Block — that those in government who take decisions which affect the lives of Indians are increasingly implementing the letter of the law. The result is a situation across the board in which man is made for the law and not the other way round, as it ought to be in any democracy.

That feeling of fear is perhaps only to be expected when a home ministry resorts to Orwellian behaviour and not only tries to seize control of the visas and passports process from the MEA, but even of the right to think itself from the ICCR, the ministry of human resource development and other similar agencies which ought to have nothing to do with Chidambaram's turf.

In February, the Union home ministry issued an order that scholars from Iran who wish to attend any conference of an academic nature must get prior clearance from the home ministry before they can be granted a visa by the Indian embassy in Tehran. The external affairs minister announced last month that he would travel to Iran in May. He is on a mission, which has the signature of the prime minister. The visit also has the explicit approval of Sonia Gandhi. Krishna's trip is an effort to improve bilateral relations, primarily on account of the worsening situation in Afghanistan, which urgently demands greater regional coordination.

If Krishna had not been an inherently decent man and did not have the experience of a chief minister and a governor in handling affairs of State, he too would have told the media before his trip or in Tehran that the home ministry is "alarmist" and "paranoid" about Iran, a country which has proved in the past to be India's friend in need.

India's high commissioner in Colombo recently told South Block that the Sri Lankans are extremely upset about a similar rule which requires Sri Lankan scholars to apply for a visa six weeks ahead if they plan to visit India for any seminar or workshop, so that the home ministry can suitably vet the visitor and flag a green light to the high commission. Because a McCarthy-type atmosphere reminiscent of the United States of America in the 1950s is now incipient in India on account of the actions of the home ministry, this high commissioner did not want to put any of this in writing. He is related to a prominent leader of the Bharatiya Janata Party and whispers in South Block speak of fears that the modern day McCarthys of North Block may well have used that connection to have their way on this issue over the envoy's objections.

If the ICCR or the ministry of human resource development or the MEA's division dealing with public diplomacy were to organize an event on the Bengali poet, Kazi Nazrul Islam, those coming from Bangladesh too would have to be pre-cleared by the home ministry before an invitation can be extended to them. The choice of words by Ramesh — "alarmist, paranoid" — are understatements when the home secretary, G.K. Pillai, pompously claims, as he did on Monday, that "our interests, our policy is to ensure that national security is protected" considering what such mindless vetting of some Bangladeshi scholar may reveal about Nazrul Islam's poetry.

Incidentally, Ramesh may not have been aware, when he spoke to Indian journalists in Beijing, that Chinese scholars too are covered by this February fatwa by the home ministry. He was certainly not aware, nor was the prime minister, that the very first Chinese scholar who was recently approved to visit Sikkim since it became a part of India in 1973 and was duly given a visa was unceremoniously stopped by minions of the home ministry as she crossed into Sikkim on her way from Bagdogra airport. It required a very high-level intervention from Indian diplomats in China before she was allowed to proceed to Gangtok. Does one need any bigger proof of the home ministry's paranoia about China when it chooses to selectively recognize visas issued by Indian missions and posts in China?

Commercial officers at Indian consulates in the US, Canada and the United Kingdom are frustrated that business ties between India and these countries are being jeopardized by the home ministry's ham-handed visa policies since Chidambaram took charge of the ministry. But they too dare not commit these problems in writing. And mostly, their bosses are unwilling to challenge the home ministry in the current atmosphere of fear of retribution for speaking their minds.

An Indonesian conglomerate, which has invested in India and wanted to expand its operations, has its plans put on hold after the home ministry expressed reservations about the company's plans to bring in some employees from Taiwan. What Ramesh did not know, it appears, was that the home ministry is paranoid not only about China but about anyone with Chinese features. Elsewhere in the world, this would be called racial profiling, but in the home secretary's dictionary, it is known as protecting national security.

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

THE TELEGRAPH

EDITORIAL

REAL DEBATE

WORDCAGE -STEPHEN HUGH-JONES

'Mr Gladstone' —W.E. Gladstone, Queen Victoria's least favourite and most famous prime minister — could hold a crowd for two hours and more with a speech. These days, we're told, all that persuades in politics is sound bites, tweeting and opinion polls. I wonder. For all its tsunami of evasions, hypocrisies and plain lies, of tireless pontification by on-screen pundits, Britain's election campaign showed that the seriously-spoken, thought-out word still has remarkable power, even when it's claptrap.

Gladstone's verbosity was nothing unusual among the politicians of his day. The 19th-century speech now most famous is Abraham Lincoln's Gettysburg address. Yet the keynote speaker that day was not he but Edward Everett, a defeated runner for the vice-presidency at the election that brought Lincoln to power. Everett spoke, and spoke well, for two hours, using over 13,000 words. Lincoln used 271 in less than three minutes. No contest, by today's standards. But not everyone thought so then.

Lincoln's address, said the Chicago Tribune, "will live among the annals of man". The Chicago Times called it "silly, flat, and dishwatery". That view was shaped by political animus, it's true. But our forebears did indeed like weighty words and plenty of them. If Gladstone was as ponderous with his queen as with other audiences, little wonder Victoria was said to have complained once that he addressed her "as if I was a public meeting".

Nor did this sort of oratory die fast, or everywhere. I once listened to a three-hour speech from a 1960s Italian politician — and filled barely one page of a small notebook with anything worth reporting. In 1961, I heard Nehru on Mumbai's Chowpatty sands. His audience was not quite as huge as the press had it. In those days, convention held that at that venue he drew a million listeners. I paced out the crowd, and, even if all were skinny and narrow-shouldered, there weren't above 250,000. Still, that's a lot — and not many had left by the late time I did.

Britain's election brought nothing like this. But it produced a novelty that improbably recalled the past: three 90-minute televised debates among the three main parties' leaders. True, the three were told to keep their remarks short and sharp. But I had never imagined that Britain's televiewers would stand for 90 unbroken minutes of serious political argument. Yet so it was, and — for a couple of weeks — British politics was turned upside down: after 80 years of near-irrelevance, Gladstone's Liberal Party, today's Liberal Democrats, was back in business.

Thanks to the command of language (and, I grant, the youthful good looks) of the Lib-Dems' leader. One can overvalue persuasion, as against fact. There are indeed Britons — as in several countries, India not least — who'd like electoral law to do so: one ninny wrote to a London paper urging a ban on the publication of opinion-poll results during the campaigns, so voters could hear more about party policies.

The politicians' usual argument for this is so that we shan't be influenced by dubious pollsters; as against, presumably, their ever-truthful selves. This is rubbish. Pollsters aim at fact, politicians seldom do so, and if either group is to be censored, it should be they. Happily, most of us think neither should be. Sure, free speech will include free lying. But so be it; and as an addict of language, I rejoice to see politicians, honest or less so, rediscover its use for solid argument in real debate.

Well, fairly solid, fairly real. The three men were held to their promises of brevity and, as the election results showed, the effects too were short-lived. Triviality will probably triumph in the end: the sound bite, the Twitterbug, the political blogger's semi-literate ranting and abuse, the 30-second YouTube clip. But maybe that dismal day can be postponed at least till I'm no longer around to lament it.

thewordcage@yahoo.co.uk

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

******************************************************************************************DECCAN HERALD

EDITORIAL

CASTE ASIDE

''PARTIES ARE PLAYING POLITICS WITH CENSUS.''

The government seems to have been persuaded by political parties to accept the demand for collection of caste data about citizens as part of the 2011 census operations. Most parties, especially those identified with the backward castes, had made a strong demand for inclusion of caste as a category in the census during the last session of parliament. The Union cabinet discussed the matter and was reported to have been divided on it. The decision to finally go in for a caste census lacks logic and rationale. The last caste census was done in the country in 1931. It was stopped because eliciting information about the caste status of citizens amounts indirectly to accepting castes. Caste is reality of Indian life even now but it is wrong and unnecessary to put an official stamp on it.

The argument that caste data will help to find out the relationship between caste and economic status cannot be accepted. Census is not social and economic survey. The details gained from it cannot be reliably used for formulation of policies that address social or economic backwardness. The census enumerators are not qualified and trained to undertake a scientific and rigorous survey. There are many practical difficulties inherent in a caste survey. The government has listed about 6,000 castes and sub-castes. The states have their own lists. There are other surveys that add thousands more to these lists. Enumeration and categorisation of such large and confusing data is beyond the scope the census. The top census authorities and the home ministry have opposed the idea as it was felt that it would compromise the integrity of the census and make the exercise far more complex and difficult.

The demand for caste-wise information has mainly arisen from the feeling that the number of people belonging to backward castes may be more than what is estimated now. Parties are also looking at the political potential of demanding changes in reservation percentages on the basis of the new data. But moves to make such changes in the reservation system can be socially disruptive and can lead to political turmoil. Neither an increase in the overall reservation limit nor any change in the relative shares of castes in the reservation pie will be advisable or desirable. Parties are playing politics with census for their own narrow gains. Instead of trying to reduce the role and relevance of caste in society and politics, they are promoting it.

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

DECCAN HERALD

EDITORIAL

CHINESE FANTASY

''IT IS SHOW-CASING CHINA AS THE WORLD'S FACTORY.''

With the opening of the Shanghai World Expo on May 1, China has sought to create another symbol of its rising power and project its premier city as the world's metropolis of the future. There is nothing understated about the expo and in typical Chinese idiom, everything about it is done to mega scale and in the superlative. At a cost of $45 billion, more than what China spent on the 2004 Olympics, it is called China's economic Olympics.

Billions more are spent on improving the city's infrastructure. The expo will be on for six
months and is expected to attract 70 million visitors, ie one out of every 100 people on earth, and will easily surpass any other expo held anywhere in the past.

The idea is to showcase China as the world's factory and impress the globe with the strides it has taken. The achievement does not need iteration but China wants to say it with pomp and spectacle. There are doubts about the economic returns from the expo as the investment may not be recouped during its duration. It is not a trade fair and so there won't be any business deals. But China does not seem to mind, as the aim is more brand-building than business. It is an attempt to create a fantasy of shapes and colour as a metaphor for the new China. China has recently been keen on projecting its soft power, in support of the increasing economic and political power it is wielding in the world. The Shanghai extravaganza is also meant to convey the message of power and aspiration with aplomb. There is criticism that thousands of people were displaced from the land where the huge pavilions have come up and from the nearby area where another big project, a Disneyland, is taking shape. But China has lived with the criticism for long.

The grand project also serves a domestic purpose. It panders to rising Chinese nationalism and pride and appeals to the people as another symbol of excellence admired by the world. Chinese authorities are keen to fuel the patriotic sentiment among the people to keep in check the various conflicts arising from development. There may also be subtle a political dimension. The expo may signify the return of the assertive and nationalist Shanghai faction in the communist party to the centrestage. Whatever be the meanings, the expo is made to stun and vow the world.

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

DECCAN HERALD

EDITORIAL

SOREN'S GOMANGO ACT

BY SUDHANSHU RANJAN

There is an urgent need to debar chief ministers from voting in parliament by consensus or by law.

Jharkhand Chief Minister Shibu Soren became the second chief minster to participate in the voting in Lok Sabha on April 27. Over 11 years ago, then Orissa Chief Minister Giridhar Gomango created a history of sorts when he cast his vote in the Lok Sabha on April 17, 1999, in favour of the no-confidence motion against the NDA government headed by Atal Behari Vajpayee. His vote proved crucial as the government fell on the floor of the House by just one vote. Then BJP had taken strong exception to Gomango's participation in the vote. Ultimately, then Speaker GMC Balayogi left it to Gomango's conscience as he could not have asked him (Gomango) not to vote when he was still a member of Lok Sabha. Gomango participated in the vote and later justified his stand that he was bound by the party whip. While Gomango pulled down the NDA government, Shibu Soren destabilised his own government as an incensed BJP withdrew support to Soren's government within one day.

The BJP, which traduced the Congress in 1999 for directing Gomango to participate in the no confidence vote, had no compunction in calling Shibu Soren to vote for the cut motion.

The BJP distanced itself from Soren after he sprang a surprise by voting in favour of the government betraying his alliance partner, but again lapped him up once the carrot of chief ministerial chair was dangled before it. Apart from being immoral, the BJP acted unwisely by calling Soren to Delhi. Cut motions have never been passed in Lok Sabha and this time too it never appeared that the scale was so evenly balanced that even one vote could tilt it.

It is a question of propriety, not of technicality. The Indian parliament is not supreme or sovereign like the British parliament. Barring some exceptions, state legislatures are autonomous and sovereign like parliament. Soren is a member of one sovereign body (Lok Sabha) while he heads a state government which is responsible to another sovereign body, the state legislative assembly. By virtue of being the chief minister he has been participating in the proceedings of the Vidhan Sabha even without being its member. So, he participated in the proceedings of two sovereign bodies simultaneously.

It was a repeat of what Gomango did earlier. Now imagine a situation that the Union government dismisses the Jharkhand government and imposes President's rule. Now will Soren come and cast his vote on the motion in parliament which has to ratify the dismissal? If yes, then will not militate against the basic principle of natural justice that nobody can be a judge in his own cause?

The Constitution provides that any one can be appointed minister, chief minister or even prime minister for a period of six months but s/he has to get elected to the respective House within that period in order to continue in that post. This was done to obviate the technical requirement which could prevent competent people from getting these posts even though it is in public interest. In Nepal, this provision of six months applies only to ministers and not the prime minister. That is why, in 1991, Krishna Prasad Bhattarai could not become prime minister again after losing the election despite his immaculate career and support from different cross sections.

Dual membership

In India, there is no provision of dual membership of the legislature. If a member of one House is elected for another House, then s/he has to relinquish the membership of either House within 14 days. Only once dual membership was allowed when members of provincial legislatures were made eligible for becoming members of the Constituent Assembly also. When the Central Assembly was converted into the Constituent Assembly for framing the constitution, it was decided to have as many representatives from states as were in the Central Assembly. This number was divided among all provinces in proportion of their population. Under the provision of dual membership, MLAs were elected members of the Constituent Assembly also, and all chief ministers, several ministers and even speakers. This was done to give a voice to states in the shaping of the Constitution. They were not supposed to make or unmake the government as it was a national government in which representatives of all parties including the Muslim League and the Justice Party were accommodated in the cabinet. As soon as the Constitution was adopted on Nov 26, 1949, the Constituent Assembly was converted into the Provisional Parliament and representatives with dual membership vacated their seats.

Elections were held for those vacant seats and dual membership was barred. However, MPs who become chief ministers seem to be enjoying dual membership. Some provisions spring up from the rich soil of necessity but the technicality should not be enlarged to the extent that its very spirit is subverted.

The Speakers' conference should take up this issue and if a resolution is passed that a chief minister or minister in a state will not be allowed to vote in parliament, then such a member will be debarred from voting by the presiding officer, and the whip will not apply to him. In fact, whip is not a fully democratic method to discipline members. In western democracies, representatives exercise a 'free mandate', where as in Communist-dominated countries, the rule is that of the 'imperative mandate' which subordinates the representative totally to the party hierarchy. In both Germany and France, this principle of 'free mandate' has been incorporated in the Constitution. Article 27 of the French Constitution is categorical that any imperative mandate to a member of parliament is null and void. President De Gaulle took recourse to this article for justifying his refusal to call a special session of parliament in 1960. However, in the Indian context, whip is essential to some extent otherwise horse trading will finish democracy.

There is a need to debar chief ministers from voting in parliament by consensus or by law. Earlier, the situation did not arise as states had strong leaders and MPs or ministers from the Centre did not go back to the state as chief minister. The first instance of an MP becoming chief minister is that of Prakash Chandra Sethi who went to Madhya Pradesh in January 1972 when he was an MP. Now it often happens.

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

DECCAN HERALD

EDITORIAL

RESPONSIBILITY IN THE AGE OF CATASTROPHE

BY MARIO SOARES, IPS

Weapons sales should be reduced and a culture of peace should be establish-ed and nourished.

Even Pangloss from Voltaire's Candide, with his incurable optimism, would find today's world hard going. Nature and humanity have let loose their respective demons and no one can rein them in. In many areas, the earth has battered us repeatedly with cyclones, tidal waves, earthquakes, floods, and most recently the eruption of a volcano in Iceland that shut down airports across northern and central Europe. It is a sad and unprecedented spectacle.

Some — the rash and least discerning — will say that these are simply normal, natural occurrences. But for those who are 80 or older, as I am, and never saw or even heard of anything like this series of catastrophes, it is prudent to ask whether it is possible that man is to a certain extent responsible, having threatened the natural equilibrium of the planet, abusing and degrading it with his blind, unconscious actions.

Vested interests

The Climate Change Summit held in Copenhagen last December was supposed to condemn and address global warming but ended in total failure in the form of a suspicious agreement worked out at the last minute between China and the US. By coincidence — perhaps — these two great powers happen to be the largest polluters on the planet. They managed to stymie the European contingent, which they dismissed as of marginal importance, and various delegations from other continents who were expecting positive results from the meeting.

What is more worrying is that certain scientists have taken positions openly contrary to the overwhelming majority of ecologists and are asserting that global warming is not caused by human activity or the excessive use of hydrocarbons but is rather a natural phenomenon. This suggests to me that there are some people willing to pursue financial gain at any cost and place their immediate interests above any other consideration without a peep from their consciences — if they have one.

However, I am convinced that at the next World Climate Change Conference scientific truth will prevail and the major powers will be obliged to respect rules intended to radically contain global warming.

But the risks the planet now contends with are not just those considered natural catastrophes, which occur with clear and worrying frequency. Global terrorism continues to wreak havoc, since 2001. Too many nations have nuclear weapons. These must be limited. In this context, a remarkable development with very positive political and geostrategic ramifications is the agreement that Barack Obama succeeded in working out with Russia and China to reduce the three countries' nuclear weapon arsenals and keep non-nuclear nations from obtaining them.

In a world as dangerous as ours — consider only the number of unresolved armed conflicts underway — it is essential that weapon sales be reduced and that a culture of peace, now tirelessly promoted by former UNESCO director-general Federico Mayor Zaragoza, be established and nourished. At the same time we must avoid and control to the greatest extent possible every form of incitement to violence that is constantly propagated via the media and especially television (consciously or not), now in a clear process of escalation.

All governments of the world that see themselves as upholding the rule of law and that must therefore respect and protect human rights have an obligation to adopt policies and measures to create a culture of peace and repudiate systematically, with teaching, all of the forms of violence that enter our homes daily. We must do this for the health and survival of our descendants and the future of humanity.

The threats we face today come from various directions: uncertain and directionless political leadership, an unregulated economy waiting for the current crisis to pass, and the string of calamities. It is time for the people of the world to open their eyes, react, and demand solutions.

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

DECCAN HERALD

EDITORIAL

DUBIOUS DUBAI

BY VINITA KRSIHNAMURTHY

Life should have been smooth sailing, but for a 'Modi'fied problem.

Poor Dubai seems to be having a bad year. The otherwise booming real estate collapsed into a debt trap as if the tall spire of Burj Khalifa had pricked the bubble. And no one expected that creating an International City would invite all kinds of international problems.

First, Israeli gunmen chose to murder a senior Hamas leader in a Dubai hotel. Then as if to fill in the gap for M F Hussein who moved to neighbouring Qatar, the city now awaits Shoaib Malik and Sania Mirza to make their home there. Of course Malik had earlier bowled another Hyderabadi maiden over and many shouted that it wasn't quite cricket. Thanks to Dubai that played third umpire, the match was set.

While the Shoaib-Sania story was their internal affair, the great Dubai story is about the Indian Premier League's external affair. One fine morning, the 'who's who of Dubai' were curiously asking "Who's She?" about the glamourous owner of an IPL team. Even the 'karmayogis' from 'Karama' wanted to know the 'satya' from 'Satwa'. Apparently most of the P3Ps were content to mingle with the stars, but one of them asked for the moon and actually found one mooning over her. The benevolent radiance also purportedly arranged a rendezvous with a sports club and 70 crores in equity — no sweat!

Life should have been smooth sailing, but for a 'Modi'fied problem. The IPL commissioner wasn't happy with the successful Team Kochi bid. So while the moon tweeted, he decided to blow the whistle. The former used technology to wax eloquent about his views and latest muse while the latter recorded transactions. Anyway, damning evidence or a convenient excuse for higher authorities to get rid of a liability saw the moon completely eclipsed.

In India, no other game can match cricket when it comes to ugly scandals. Dubai should have known this before opening its cricket stadium exactly a year ago. Now all it can do is sigh and ready a villa on the stationary fronds of Palm Jumeirah for the latest migrants from the Indian subcontinent — Mr and Mrs Tharoor.

. ***************************************

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

THE JERUSALEM POST

EDITORIAL

REJOICE ON JERUSALEM DAY

BY ISI LEIBLER

Jerusalem, referred to over 600 times in the Bible, has represented the cornerstone of our Jewish identity for more than three millennia since it became the capital of King David's Israelite monarchy. It remained at the core of our spiritual longings following the second dispersion when for 2,000 years our forefathers faced Jerusalem in their daily prayers, yearning for a return to their ancestral homeland. Moreover, even throughout their exile, Jews retained a significant presence in their Holy City and since the 1840s have constituted the largest group inhabiting the city.

Jerusalem also has major religious significance for Christians and Muslims, both of whom denied freedom of worship to other religions when they ruled over the city. During the Jordanian control of the Old City from 1948 to 1967, in flagrant breach of armistice agreements, Jews were refused all access to holy sites, and synagogues and graveyards were desecrated and destroyed. And the world remained silent.

Since the reunification of Jerusalem in 1967, the government of Israel – for the first time – ensured that all faiths could freely worship and maintain their religious institutions. If anything, the Israeli authorities discriminated against Jews, denying them the right to worship on the Temple Mount lest Muslims took offense.

Yet to this day many Palestinians deny that there ever was a Jewish presence in the city and make preposterous allegations that the Jewish holy sites, including the Temple, were Zionist fabrications concocted to justify "the Jewish colonialist enterprise."

To this end they have been systematically destroying archeological evidence on the Temple Mount.

In addition, we are now faced with a determined campaign in which most of the world, including the Obama administration, is pressuring us to once again divide Jerusalem. Even prime minister Yitzhak Rabin, an architect of the Oslo Accords, on the eve of his assassination warned the Knesset that Jerusalem must remain united. And indeed in this day and age the concept of dividing cities is considered retrograde.

We are also painfully aware of the appalling track records of many Islamic states which deny freedom of worship to non-Muslims. The record of the Palestinians in this context is particularly vile, and we should be

under no illusions how they would behave if they gained control of the holy sites.

But beyond this there is also the question of security. Every Israeli withdrawal in recent years has led to emboldening the jihadists and intensified aggression and terror. A division of Jerusalem would virtually guarantee that a corrupt or impotent Palestinian Authority or a rabid Hamas would be tempted to launch terror actions against neighboring Jewish areas.

JERUSALEM DAY should therefore not merely be a day of celebration. It should also be a day in which we pledge that, irrespective of the creative solutions devised to provide greater autonomy for Arabs in Jerusalem, the city must never be divided and Israel must remain the custodian to guarantee freedom of worship to Jews, Muslims and Christians.

Alas, today, many of us tend to overdramatize the challenges confronting us and display a penchant for self criticism which approaches masochism. Jerusalem Day should be a day when we give thanks to the Almighty for His intervention and pay tribute to those who fought against overwhelming odds to reunite the city and establish our national homeland.

Despite successive wars, facing ongoing terror and still being surrounded by enemies pledged to destroy us, Israel is here to stay. Seven and half million Israeli citizens, three quarters of whom are Jews, have achieved a demographic critical mass and notwithstanding the many doomsday predictions, the Jewish state can never be undone.

And despite an absence of natural resources, we have transformed our country into a veritable economic powerhouse which has achieved miraculous progress in science, technology, industry and agriculture. Tiny Israel has more hi-tech start-ups and companies listed on NASDAQ than any country other than the US. Our arts and cultural development is expanding and we continue producing Nobel Prize winners.

We have undergone a religious revival and today there are more Jews in Israel learning

Torah than in any age in Jewish history.

We have successfully absorbed millions of Jews, the majority being Holocaust survivors and refugees finding haven from oppression. They originate from all four corners of the globe ranging from Western olim to Ethiopians. And while the integration process has still a long way to go, no society in the world has succeeded in absorbing such a mass of immigrants and molding them into a nation.

WE SEE the shocking global resurgence of anti-Semitism, mankind's oldest and perennial hatred, throughout the Western world. Many Diaspora Jews, especially in Europe, have reached the obvious conclusion that there is no future for their children in societies that treat them as pariahs. In contrast, our children live without ever experiencing the pain and humiliation of discrimination or being treated as inferior. For them Jewish identity is natural and requires no justification. The world applies double standards against us. With millions of innocent human beings murdered or denied human rights, we Jews remain the people who dwell alone.

The bitter lesson of our history has been that while we are obliged to forge alliances, ultimately we must rely on our own resources, rather than the goodwill of others. That is why we should continuously celebrate the fact that after 2,000 years of persecution, degradation and exile, the creation of a Jewish state has now empowered us. We must realize that so long as the majority of our people remain determined, our future rests in our own hands Those who wail about our shortcomings and the corruption within our ranks should realize that it is a mark of a a healthy society when it transparently discloses its weaknesses and exacts harsh punishment on leaders who transgress.

We failed to achieve peace with our neighbors because we lack a peace partner. For years we deluded ourselves into believing that providing Arabs with land would achieve peace, only to belatedly realize that the Palestinian goal was neither peace, nor an independent state for themselves. Their primary objective was to deny legitimacy to Jewish sovereignty in the region.

When in years to come, our neighbors ultimately come to the realization that they can never vanquish us, they will follow the example of Egypt and Jordan – and appoint leaders who will peacefully coexist and enjoy prosperity with us.

I often contemplate what our grandparents would have thought during the dark years of the Holocaust had someone predicted to them that the Jewish people would rise like a phoenix from the ashes to resurrect a Jewish homeland which would become the greatest success story of our century. That is the theme that should run through our minds as we celebrate Jerusalem Day. And it should make us smile.

leibler@netvision.net.il

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

THE JERUSALEM POST

EDITORIAL

TERRA INCOGNITA: THE DANGERS TO INFORMATION IN TODAY'S AGE

BY SETH J. FRANTZMAN

In the early 1980s, Peter Armstrong, a BBC television producer, had a brilliant idea; he would produce a modern Domesday book fit for the information age. The original Domesday book had been compiled between 1085 and 1086, following William the Conqueror's conquest of England. It was intended as a survey of all the land holdings and places in England, with the very typical government interest in finding out who could be taxed and for how much. Armstrong hoped to harness new computing technology to create a massive database, complete with pictures, maps and interactive video. He hoped to have the project completed by 1986 for the 900th anniversary of the original.

The project, with funding from the BBC and the European Commission, was completed on time and included a wealth of information and data. The public, it seems, lost interest and while the original intention was to have the information available in libraries and educational facilities, the exorbitant cost of the disks produced ($7,000) and ignorance of their existence meant they passed into irrelevance.

In 2002, Lloyd Grossman, a UK broadcaster, noted that as technology outpaced itself, it was endangering older formats that were becoming not only obsolete but would lead to irretrievable losses in data. Grossman was right. It turned out that in 2002 the number of computers that could access the 1986 Domesday data was dwindling. Emergency meetings and a campaign by the BBC resulted in a team from the University of Leeds and University of Michigan developing a way to "migrate" the old data to new formats that could be read by computers of 2010.

The story of the new Domesday book is but one example of the way new technologies may ultimately frustrate researchers and archivists who believe they are preserving data. The irony will be that in 100 years it may be hard to access information about the 1990s, while information from the 1890s remains. But there are other problems with the way information is being a protected: Modern technologies are being used by archives to "preserve" information only to result in the disappearance of the resources themselves.

CONSIDER A few examples from Israel. There was once an aerial photo archive at the Hebrew University's Geography Department. The archive contained images from the British 1944-1945 aerial survey of Mandatory Palestine. The British had embarked on something unique at the time – an aerial survey of every meter of the country using low-flying planes with cameras. Copies of the images ended up in a few places in Israel: the Survey of Israel offices in Tel Aviv, Hebrew University, and some found their way to Yad Izhak Ben-Zvi (a Jerusalem archive established in memory of the country's second president).

At one point someone decided to scan the aerial photos that the university had at its Mount Scopus campus. The idea was simple: Scanning the images would allow everyone in the world to see them. They were briefly put on-line and then vanished. Two years ago, it was still possible to get access to the archive by special appointment. But by then the scanned images cost around $20 each, supposedly offsetting an archive that was barely open. Eventually the last archivist at the "archive" was let go and the doors closed for good.

The Central Zionist Archives committed a similar act, although with different results. It has an indescribably extraordinary collection of maps from the pre-state period. These are both British survey maps and maps prepared by various Zionist organizations then purchasing and developing the land. The archive decided to scan the maps with the intention of preserving them and making them more accessible to the public. The result was that the public, or even researchers, may no longer access the original maps but must make do with a zoomable image on a computer that can be downloaded by the archive for a fee of $15 for the first map and $9 for each additional one.

As anyone who has read a book on a computer or Amazon's Kindle will reveal, the experience of seeing a scanned image on a computer is not the same as holding it in one's hand.

Compare this to the Israel State Archives, which continues to have an "archaic" policy of allowing people to view the actual files and photograph them free of charge. Compare it to the map libraries at Hebrew University, both of which contain invaluable maps, that also allow researchers to photograph them for free. In the interest of making the maps available to all, the Central Zionist Archives actually made the originals inaccessible and made it cost-prohibitive to work with them.

ARCHIVES ARE undergoing a slow but apparently inevitable process of digitalization. One by one, collections are scanned and then hidden in vaults. The scanned images sometimes are then made available for a fee. For the archive, this saves personnel hours of schlepping files back and forth. It also apparently preserves the files for eternity. Or does it? The Domesday scandal reveals that the appearance of the miracle of modern methods of preservation can also be like the Sirens were to Ulysses – a dangerous temptation that may destroy the entire edifice.

The writer is a fellow at the Jerusalem Institute for Market Studies.

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

THE JERUSALEM POST

EDITORIAL

ACCEPTING ISRAEL AS THE JEWISH STATE

BY DANIEL PIPES

When a major Arab state finally signed a peace treaty with Israel, it was long assumed, the Arab-Israeli conflict would end. The Egypt-Israel peace treaty of 1979, however, buried that expectation; it had the perverse effect of making other states – and also the Egyptian populace – even more anti-Zionist.

The 1980s gave birth to a hope that, instead, Palestinian recognition of Israel would close the conflict. The total failure of the 1993 Declaration of Principles (also known as the Oslo Accords) then buried that expectation.

What now? Starting about 2007, a new focus has emerged, of winning acceptance of Israel as a sovereign Jewish state. Israel's former prime minister Ehud Olmert set the terms: "I do not intend to compromise in any way over the issue of the Jewish state. This will be a condition for our recognition of a Palestinian state."

Olmert was Israel's worst prime minister, but he got this one right. Arab-Israeli diplomacy has dealt with a myriad of subsidiary issues while tiptoeing around the conflict's central issue: "Should there be a Jewish state?" Disagreement over this answer – rather than over Israel's boundaries, its exercise of self-defense, its control of the Temple Mount, its water consumption, its housing construction in West Bank towns, diplomatic relations with Egypt, or the existence of a Palestinian state – is the key issue.

Palestinian leaders responded with howls of outrage, declaring they "absolutely refused" to accept Israel as a Jewish state. They even pretended to be shocked at the notion of a state defined by religion, although their own "Constitution of the State of Palestine," third draft, states that "Arabic and Islam are the official Palestinian language and religion."

Olmert's efforts went nowhere.

ON TAKING over the premiership in early 2009, Binyamin Netanyahu reiterated Olmert's point in his diplomacy. Regrettably, the Obama administration endorsed the Palestinian position, again sidelining the Israeli demand. (Instead, it focuses on housing for Jews in Jerusalem. Talk about the heart of the issue.) If Palestinian politicians reject Israel's Jewish nature, what about the Palestinian and the broader Arab and Muslim publics? Polls and other evidence suggest a long-term average of 20 percent acceptance of Israel, whether in the Mandatory period or now, whether by Muslims in Canada or by Palestinians in Lebanon.

To learn more about current Arab opinion, the Middle East Forum commissioned Pechter Middle East Polls to ask a simple question of 1,000 adults in each of four countries: "Islam defines [your state]; under the right circumstances, would you accept a Jewish state of Israel?" (In Lebanon, the question differed slightly: "Islam defines most states in the Middle East; under the right circumstances, would you accept a Jewish state of Israel?") The results: 26 percent of Egyptians and 9% of urban Saudi subjects answered (in November 2009) in the affirmative, as did 9% of Jordanians and 5% of Lebanese (in April 2010).

The polls reveal broad consensus across such differences as occupation, socioeconomic standing and age. For no discernable reason, more Egyptian women and Saudi and Jordanian men accept a Jewish Israel than their gender counterparts, whereas among the Lebanese both sexes rank similarly. Some significant variations exist, however: as one would expect in Lebanon, 16% of (largely Christian) north Lebanon accepts a Jewish Israel in contrast to just 1% in the (mostly Shi'ite) Bekaa Valley.

More significantly, weighting these responses by the size of their populations (respectively, 79, 29, 6 and 4 million) translates into an overall average of 20% acceptance of Israel's Jewishness – neatly confirming the existing percentage.

Although 20% constitutes a small minority, its consistency over time and place offers encouragement. That one-fifth of Muslims, Arabs and even Palestinians accept Israel as a Jewish state suggests that, despite a near-century of indoctrination and intimidation, a base for resolving the Arab-Israeli conflict does exist.

Would-be peacemakers must direct their attention to increasing the size of this moderate cohort.

Getting from 20% to, say, 60% would fundamentally shift the politics of the Middle East, displacing Israel from its exaggerated role and releasing the peoples of this blighted region to address their real challenges. Not Zionism but such, oh, minor problems as autocracy, brutality, cruelty, conspiracism, religious intolerance, apocalypticism, political extremism, misogyny, slavery, economic backwardness, brain drain, capital flight, corruption and drought.

The writer (www.DanielPipes.org) is director of the Middle East Forum and Taube distinguished visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution of Stanford University.

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

THE JERUSALEM POST

EDITORIAL

GRAPEVINE: A 'BIBLICAL WEATHER EVENT' AT THE ISRAEL MUSEUM

BY GREER FAY CASHMAN

THE LAST thing that Israel Museum director James Snyder anticipated – at the ceremony naming David Jesselson of Switzerland and Israel, Patricia Lazar Landau of France, Ninah and Michael Lynne of the US, Isaac Molcho and Amos Oz of Israel and Jonathan Rosen of the US as honorary fellows of the museum – was a dust storm. The ceremony was held outdoors and more than 500 people from 15 countries shivered as the wind disheveled their appearance, howled through the microphone and blew dust into their faces.

Making the best of the situation Snyder in observing that many challenges still have to be faced in Jerusalem, said: "We're having a biblical weather event." To gales of laughter he added: "Don't worry about how your hair looks, because I don't worry about how my hair looks." Snyder's white mane is usually immaculately coiffed.

He was actually unperturbed about the inclement weather, because he was so thrilled that this was the largest gathering on record of the International Council, with 520 people from 15 countries despite the global economic slump. Many of the attendees raved about Snyder's sophisticated fund-raising talents, and the Israeli expatriates present said that in light of what he has done to win friends of affluence and influence for the museum, he was deserving of the Israel Prize. Snyder protested that he could never receive it because he doesn't have Israeli citizenship. But it was noted that Israel Prize laureate Zubin Mehta is likewise not a citizen.

AMERICAN MEMBERS of the Israel Museum's International Council were very excited about the appointment of Elena Kagan to the US Supreme Court. "Not only another woman, but another Jewish woman," one exclaimed in a mix of joy and wonder.

GENERALLY SPEAKING, when heads of foreign missions hold receptions in their residences, the food is not kosher, though occasionally there may be a small kosher table for guests who are religiously observant. However at the Europe Day reception hosted by the head of the delegation of the European Union, Ambassador Andrew Standley and his wife Judith, the whole affair was kosher, and many people commented favorably about the standard of catering and the fact that there were food islands all over the spacious garden of the residence, ensuring that people would not have to stand in long lines.

This was the couple's first Europe Day celebration since their arrival last year, and it was a milestone Europe Day in that it marked the 60th anniversary of the vision and declaration of then French foreign minister Robert Schuman that marked the beginning of the integration of Europe and the laying of the foundations of the EU. Schuman envisaged a supranational community which would prevent war on European soil and would encourage world peace.

Standley noted that 27 member countries were simultaneously celebrating Europe Day. He also emphasized the EU's commitment to Israel's right to exist in peace and security and said that the EU supports Israel's dream to live in peace with its neighbors. As a result of the Treaty of Lisbon that went into force in December 2009, said Standley, EU delegations around the world will be called to play greater roles in the EU's foreign policy. In this context, he looked forward to closer relations with Israel.

Justice Minister Yaakov Neeman, who represented the government, saluted the achievements of the EU and referred to Europe's relationship with the Jewish people that spanned a period of more than two millennia. This relationship had at times been dramatic and painful, he said, and other times creative and progressive.

At the conclusion of the official ceremony Standley, Neeman and Gad Propper, the honorary consul for New Zealand, went into a huddle. But they weren't discussing politics. They were talking about skiing. Neeman is known to be a great ski enthusiast.

AMONG THE guests at the EU reception was Ibrahim al-Waqili, who represents 45 Beduin communities which are not recognized by the government even though their rights to the land on which they live were recognized by the Ottoman authorities before the British Mandate. The 80,000 people living in these communities receive support from the EU, said Waqili, but not from the State of Israel. He spent much of the evening in one-on-one discussions with various ambassadors to explain that contrary to Israeli arguments that they could not possibly own the land they claim because they are nomads, the Beduin have been where they are for centuries and are only semi-nomadic.

ACTING ON behalf of the queen of England, British Ambassador Tom Phillips last week presented an honorary MBE (member of the Order of the British Empire) to Natie Shevel, regional director for Israel of the United Jewish Israel Appeal, in recognition of his services toward strengthening links between the UK and Israel. The investiture ceremony was attended by Shevel's family, friends and UJIA colleagues.

Phillips paid tribute to Shevel's central role in overseeing the delivery of some £8 million annually from funds raised in the UK to charitable programs here, noting his part "in an organization at the heart of the people-to-people links between Israel and the UK which make such an important contribution to the bilateral relationship between our two countries, and of course to Israel's development."

THE WHO'S who of the early heroes of the Zionist movement were frequent guests at the home of her parents in London, and Esther Lucas, 92, likewise played her role in history. She related some of the details recently to youngsters in Herzliya within the framework of an United Nations Special Committee on Palestine project they were doing in conjunction with the city's celebrations of the 150th anniversary of Theodor Herzl's birth. Lucas told them about an UNSCOP delegation that convened in Jerusalem in the summer of 1947 from June 15 to July 20.

It wasn't secondhand information that she was conveying. In 1946, she was seconded from the British Foreign Office to the UN Preparatory Commission in London, where she became a documents officer. She attended the UN's first Security Council and General Assembly. This prompted Jewish Agency executive Walter Eytan, whose lectures she had attended as a student at Oxford University, to ask her if she would like to liaise with the UNSCOP delegates.

At the time, Lucas was living in Kibbutz Kfar Blum and could only get a release from there via a letter signed by Golda Meir. Lucas was already familiar with Moshe Sharett whom she'd known through Habonim, and who had come to see her off in London, giving her a shopping bag to pass on to his sister who was married to the head of the Hagana. It was only much later that Lucas realized that there must have been an important message sewn into the lining of the bag. She also knew Abba Eban, whom she had met through the Jewish Students'

Organization when she was at Oxford.

In talking to the students Lucas recalled UNSCOP delegates Emil Sandstrom, a pro-Zionist from Sweden, a country that had been neutral during the war and was not one of the original allies. He shared the sentiments of Enrique Fabregat of Uruguay, who was very interested in there being a Jewish state and voted for partition. In the final vote, seven delegates voted for the motion, four pro-Arab delegates voted against and one abstained. The delegates not only visited Jewish, Arab and other communities, they also went to surrounding countries and to the DP camps in Europe. Lucas accompanied them only in Palestine and was invited to their receptions. "All through the proceedings in 1947 we were wondering what the results would be," she says. "I'm glad to have experienced what followed and to be able to look back and say: I was there."

MAY 3 is known as Constitution Day in Poland, commemorating the constitution of May 3, 1791, which is regarded as Europe's first and the world's second modern national constitution (following the 1788 ratification of the US Constitution). It took on an additional dimension this year, because it came soon after the tragic death in an air crash of Polish president Lech Kaczynski. Thus Polish Ambassador Agnieszka Magdziak-Miszewska dedicated this year's Constitution Day to a memorial concert by the Ra'anana Symphonette Orchestra for Kaczynski, his wife Maria and all 96 victims of the tragedy.

In an emotion-filled address, she voiced appreciation to all the friends of Poland who had expressed their condolences to her personally and who had signed the condolence book at the Polish Embassy and in Jerusalem. Among those present were Ra'anana Mayor Nahum Hofree and Russian Ambassador Piotr Stegny. Magdziak-Miszewska also used the occasion to honor three Israelis of Polish background – Zvi Bergman, Aleksander Klugman and Yossi Levy – for their exceptional contributions in enhancing ties with Poland. They were conferred with the high Polish orders, which were officially approved by Kaczynski before the tragedy.

GREEK PATRIARCH Theophilos III is blessed with a radiant smile and a perpetual expression of serenity tinged with humor. The smile is so magnetic that most of the guests attending a cocktail reception at Jerusalem's King David Hotel hosted by Tasos Tzionis, the ambassador of Cyprus, in honor of Marios Garoyian, president of its House of Representatives, were instantly drawn in his direction. In response to a comment on the smile, Theophilos said that he had realized as a very young man that he had been blessed with a lifelong gift. "People can take anything away from me except my smile," he said.

Most ambassadors who send out invitations include their names. Tzionis didn't – perhaps out of force of habit. For instance, he refused to reveal anything that had taken place during Garoyian's meeting with President Shimon Peres, even to the extent of making the motion that indicated that his lips were sealed. "Anyone would think you belonged to Mossad," said the reporter who was trying to pry information out of him. "As a matter of fact," he confessed, "I was in charge of the Cypriot Security Agency for five years before I came to Israel."

Aside from a large representation of Greek Orthodox clergy, guests included former ambassadors to Cyprus Mordechai Paltzur and Aharon Lopez and former Foreign Ministry director-general Shlomo Avineri, who arrived late because he had attended a dinner hosted by the Israel Council on Foreign Relations in honor of Araz Azimov, the deputy foreign minister of Azerbaijan.

Among the other guests were members of the Israel Cyprus Friendship Association, including Shimshon Bober, chairman of its sports committee who had been to Cyprus 30 times with Israeli teams and who unfortunately died a few days after the reception. Other association members included Prof. Emanuel Gutman, who as an envoy of the Yishuv, had worked in the British detention camps in Cyprus, teaching Hebrew to future immigrants. Some of members of the association were born in Cyprus to Holocaust survivors in the camps, and others came to Cyprus as child Holocaust survivors.

Among those born in the camps was Zahavit Blumenfeld who, until some 12 years ago, hadn't given much thought to her place of birth until she happened to have been a cancer patient at Tel Hashomer. One day she saw a couple wandering around in the corridors, not sure of where to go. She asked if she could help, and it transpired that the man and his wife were from Cyprus and had come here for the wife to be treated for cancer. Blumenfeld told them that she was also born in Cyprus but didn't remember much. A friendship developed. She took them around the country. They invited her to Cyprus and she subsequently discovered that many Cypriots come here for cancer treatment. She became active in the association and chairs its health committee.

AMONG THE recipients of honorary doctorates conferred by Bar-Ilan University this week was Rabbi Chananya Chollack, 55, the founding director of Ezer Mizion. A graduate of Ponevezh Yeshiva in Bnei Brak, Chollak, as a young newlywed, became personally aware of the needs of hospital patients and their families when his father-in-law was hospitalized. Chollak spent a lot of time visiting his father-in-law and noticed that no provisions were made for families that spent long days and nights at the bedsides of seriously ill relatives.

In 1979 he founded Ezer Mizion as a modest initiative. Initially, the organization provided hot meals cooked by his wife, Leah, to the families of hospital patients. He expanded the distribution and organized for neighbors to put extra vegetables and water in the soup, and a little more meat in the pot, so that more food could be made available. Word got out and requests came pouring in. Chollak didn't know how to refuse, and his initially modest venture grew into an empire of volunteers.

Under his capable leadership Ezer Mizion grew to become the country's largest nonprofit organization, which today does a lot more than distribute food. It lends medical equipment, offers medical advice, helps the elderly, maintains community welfare services, supports children with special needs and establishes sheltered housing for people with mental disorders. Although he has 16 children, four of whom he adopted when their parents succumbed to fatal diseases, Chollak continues to direct Ezer Mizion and remains accessible around the clock, providing a personal role model for the professional staff and volunteers.

Ezer Mizion and Chollak have received numerous awards including the Israel Prize.

The organization's flagship project revolves around the work that it does with cancer patients, especially juveniles. In 1996, Ezer Mizion, along with Dr. Bracha Zisser, established Oranit for children from outlying parts of the country, so that they could have a place to stay and to study while undergoing treatment. Another vital project spearheaded with Dr. Zisser was the establishment of a national bone-marrow registry, which has facilitated hundreds of life-saving transplants.

THE EVER gracious and vivacious Lady J, formally known as Lady Amelie Jakobovits, left an enormous vacuum when she died last week. Lady J used to raise a laugh when she told the story about knowing that the food was kosher when she and Lord Jakobovits were invited to dine at Buckingham Palace. The kosher caterer who supplied the food for the then chief rabbi and his wife was given the menu that would be served to the other guests. The food was served on new royal crested dishes, but there was nonetheless an obvious difference. The kosher portions were much larger.

EVERYONE WILL be metaphorically on the ball tonight at the residence of French Ambassador Christophe Bigot, who is a hosting a welcome reception for Luis Fernandez, the new coach of the national soccer team. Though born in Spain, Fernandez played on France's national team for 10 years as well as for teams in Paris and Cannes. He also managed several French teams following his retirement as a player, and from 2005-2006, he was the coach of Betar Jerusalem.

IN RECENT years, Yad Vashem, in conjunction with the Immigrant Absorption Ministry and other organizations and institutions, has placed the main focus of its VE Day commemorations on veterans of the Red Army. Busloads of beribboned and bemedalled elderly immigrants from the former Soviet Union come to Yad Vashem for a ceremony which is conducted in both Russian and Hebrew.

This year, the Jerusalem Municipality, World War II Veterans Association, Organization of Disabled Soldiers and Partisans together with the ministry also organized a festive march through downtown Jerusalem to the Harmony Culture Center which is largely a cultural outlet for Russian-speaking immigrants.

MOST EVENTS at the Menachem Begin Heritage Center are fairly well attended, but it was quite a surprise to see how many IZL veterans filled the auditorium, lined the stairs and enthusiastically belted out the song of Betar for the 100th anniversary commemoration of the birth of David Raziel, who was appointed by Ze'ev Jabotinsky to be the Irgun's commander in chief. Raziel had joined the Hagana in Jerusalem in reaction to the Hebron massacres of 1929, but broke away and became one of the founding members of the Irgun.

Although the Irgun was dedicated to fighting the British, Raziel decided in 1939 that it was more important to fight the Nazis. In 1941, he was sent to Iraq where he was killed in action. The Iraqis refused for years to return his body. Eventually, the British transferred it to Cyprus for temporary burial, but it was not until 20 years after his death that his remains were brought here and reinterred on Mount Herzl. His wife Shoshana died only a few weeks ago. She had been pregnant when he left for Iraq and gave birth to a boy after he was killed. She had intended to call the child David, but the infant died when he was only a few days old. She never remarried, and devoted her life to preserving her husband's memory.

Among the speakers at the 100th anniversary commemoration was Mordechai Sarig of the Jabotinsky Institute, who declared that of the eight commanders-in-chief of the Irgun, only two had left a permanent impact – Raziel and Menachem Begin. Among the other speakers was Begin's son, Minister without Portfolio Bennie Begin.

greerfc@gmail.com

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

THE JERUSALEM POST

EDITORIAL

CLARITY ON JERUSALEM DAY

On May 12, 1968, the government announced that the 28th of the Jewish month of Iyar, the day in 1967 that the Western Wall was liberated, would henceforth be known as Jerusalem Day. On March 23, 1998, it became law.

Today, the nation celebrates the 43rd anniversary of that Six-Day War victory in Jerusalem and the near-miraculous trouncing of the combined armies of Syria, Jordan and Egypt, all supported in their endeavor to destroy the Jewish state by the Soviet Union. But today, Jerusalem has become the epicenter of a major diplomatic storm precipitating a crisis with Israel's most important ally.

Under the Bush and Clinton administrations, the US essentially ignored building in the large, established, national-consensus Jewish neighborhoods of east Jerusalem where about 200,000 Jews live. The Obama administration changed tack.

Last July, the White House failed to persuade Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to freeze construction for Jews in east Jerusalem. In November there was further tension over building in Gilo. And relations plummeted to a new low in March over the Ramat Shlomo imbroglio.

Meanwhile, the Palestinian Authority, taking advantage of the new US emphases, has ratcheted up the pressure. Israel's actions and plans in Jerusalem were one of the central themes of March's summit of the Arab League. "Jerusalem and its environs are a trust of Allah," Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas told the gathering. "Saving it from the settlement monster and the danger of Judaization is a personal commandment incumbent on all of us." Abbas is also refusing to enter into direct talks with Israel unless Netanyahu accepts a construction freeze in eastern Jerusalem – a "red line" the prime minister has said he will not cross.

The PA's newly adamant position on Jerusalem contrasts sharply with reports, including in this newspaper, that Abbas, in his negotiations with former prime minister Ehud Olmert, had signalled a readiness to acknowledge Israeli sovereignty in certain Jewish Jerusalem neighborhoods over the pre-1967 line, including Ramat Shlomo and Gilo. Now, of course, having stayed away from the negotiating table while the Obama administration applied pressure on his behalf, and having only reluctantly consented even to the new US-mediated "proximity" talks, Abbas has no imperative to contemplate even any such small compromise.

FROM THE Israeli side, meanwhile, the messages on Jerusalem have been confused. Last July, Netanyahu was adamant that he would "not accept any limitations on our sovereignty in Jerusalem. I told him [Obama] Jerusalem is not a settlement, and it has nothing to do with discussions on a freeze."

In contrast, in a recent interview with Channel 2 news, Netanyahu drew a distinction between the city's post-1967 Jewish neighborhoods and its Arab neighborhoods, and he specified that the permanent fate of the Arab neighborhoods was indeed a subject for final-status discussion – a position frequently espoused by Kadima and Labor, but not normally by the Likud.

At the beginning of this week, it was suggested that Netanyahu had led US envoy George Mitchell to understand that there would be a two-year freeze on building in Ramat Shlomo. Subsequently, the prime minister clarified that refraining from building there was due merely to technical and bureaucratic issues.

Of Netanyahu's coalition partners, Labor would back a temporary Jerusalem freeze in the cause of substantive negotiations, United Torah Judaism might go along; so too, might Shas. Some in the Likud emphatically would not; the same could probably be said of Israel Beiteinu. Jerusalem's Mayor Nir Barkat, for his part, declared on Monday that municipal construction would in fact continue in all sections of Jerusalem, for both Jews and Arabs.

PLAINLY, THE Israeli cacophony is damaging. It has produced a lack of clarity where the US is concerned and is being exploited by the Palestinians.

Netanyahu made a lot of sense in his late April TV interview, asking indignantly "Why do I have to give in on Jerusalem?" when referring to Jewish neighborhoods built over the Green Line such as French Hill, but noting, where Arab neighborhoods like Abu Dis and Shuafat were concerned, "That's a different question." No one, he elaborated, "wants to add a greater Arab populace to Jerusalem," but there was a "legitimate concern" that "if you get out of there," Iran would fill the vacuum in one guise or another, as it had done in Lebanon and Gaza.

As it examines and resolves such dilemmas, Netanyahu's government needs to formulate a clear policy on east Jerusalem and make sure that his coalition members, Jerusalem's mayor and other official talking heads understand and follow it.

Because as things stand on Jerusalem, 43 years later, we continue to negotiate with ourselves.

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

THE JERUSALEM POST

EDITORIAL

JUST PLAIN LUCKY

BY YOSSI ALPHER

The Israeli-Palestinian proximity talks which began this week will almost certainly end in failure. There is little room for optimism regarding these talks or any other form of peace process that brings together the political camps of PM Binyamin Netanyahu and PA President Mahmoud Abbas.

The gap between the core beliefs of Netanyahu and Abbas is simply too wide. The former wants to hold on to "united Jerusalem" and the Jordan Valley and is bound by his right-wing coalition to an even more demanding territorial concept, if not to effective neutralization of the two-state concept. His settler allies are sure to look for opportunities to sabotage the talks. Netanyahu himself is building up an "incitement" file with which to batter the Palestinians, even as Israel's own problem of incitement against Palestinians grows under a reactionary government.

For his part, Abbas insists on the right of return and exclusive Arab control over the Temple Mount in Jerusalem – both inevitably deal-breakers. And between his own Fatah hawks and Hamas, Abbas is constrained even further.

To his credit, Netanyahu prefers direct negotiations. It is Abbas who appears to fear face-to-face meetings that might, when they fail, compromise his standing in the eyes of his extremists, and who has linked even his agreement to a mere four months of proximity talks to Arab League approval. Here we have not one but three steps backward for the Israeli-Palestinian peace process: indirect rather than direct talks, an Arab veto and a short time limit.

Netanyahu needs these negotiations more than Abbas, and he needs them to last as long as possible. Israel now confronts an active school of thought within the US military that blames the Israeli-Palestinian stalemate for American difficulties in Iraq and Afghanistan and for Iranian and Hizballah propaganda successes in the Arab world. To the extent that Israel is held to blame for the stalemate – Abbas, who should be sharing the blame, seemingly gets a pass from his fellow Muslims – it is sustaining serious damage to its image in the halls of power in Washington.

The new peace process, however problematic and partial, helps mitigate that damage by enabling US generals in the field to point to at least temporary US success in cultivating Arab-Israel peace.

In the Netanyahu government, only Defense Minister Ehud Barak appears to understand the gravity of this new linkage equation. Netanyahu thinks everything is fine with America because American Jews still support Israel. Hence, he is just plain lucky to have these proximity talks. Under these circumstances, he is not likely to recognize the urgent need to reorganize his coalition and replace right-wingers with centrists.

The advent of proximity talks follows some 15 months of mediation mistakes by the US. Yet the only mitigating factors in this otherwise bleak picture appear to be President Barack Obama's commitment and the determination of his peace emissary, George Mitchell.

If Obama is indeed readying his own final status proposal and/or an international peace conference for the day the failure of these talks can no longer be denied, he should direct his attention away from the looming Netanyahu-Abbas failure – a wise mediator would not step into that huge gap with "bridging" proposals – and toward the only success story in town: the Palestinian Authority's bottom-up state-building program in the West Bank.

American efforts should focus not only on the hapless task of squeezing success out of doomed proximity talks, but on the inevitable political endgame suggested by the Palestinians' successful state-building effort: international recognition of their state followed by a concerted effort to focus Israeli-Palestinian negotiations on the issues of inter-state borders and security, including Jerusalem.

The writer is coeditor of the bitterlemons family of internet publications. He is former director of the Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies at Tel Aviv University. This piece was first published by www.bitterlemons.org and is reprinted with permission.

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

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

HAARETZ

EDITORIAL

THE MEA SHE'ARIM MOB

BY SHAHAR ILAN

Soldiers patrolling through the streets of Mea She'arim during Passover week found themselves in a situation they generally encounter only on the Palestinian side of the border. Local residents, the hard core of Jerusalem's ultra-Orthodox community, began hurling stones at them. The soldiers were at a loss. The police were called in and were greeted by similar violence. The assailants explained to the ultra-Orthodox media that the army was using the neighborhood to simulate operations in an inner-city environment, and the Haredim didn't want to let the authorities ruin the holiday atmosphere.

Hardly a week goes by in Mea She'arim without a stone-throwing incident, the torching of garbage containers or the blocking of streets. The public has gotten so used to the violence there that it's hard to notice that a new phenomenon has sprung up. In the past, the violence took place in the neighborhood mainly because of religious struggles. Now the very entrance of a government agency or service provider is a pretext for protest. Mea She'arim has become a dangerous place to visit.

In March, for example, police officers were attacked when they answered a call to break up a fight between a landlord and his tenants. In December, someone there painted "An end to filthy pictures" on the motorbike of a cable-company technician. Attacks on buses, window smashing and tire puncturing have become routine in Mea She'arim. On April 1, the ultra-Orthodox Web site Kikar Hashabbat reported: "Passersby tell us that dozens of yeshiva students threw stones at a bus while some of their friends tried to block it with garbage cans. The rioters were trying to get on the bus to separate the male and female passengers."

The neighborhood has become a lawless no-man's-land. It's part of the ultra-Orthodox community's process of radicalization. But there's no reason for radicalization to lead to unrestrained violence. These are not isolated excesses - large crowds take part in the incidents. Mea She'arim is ruled by the rabbinical court of the Eda Haredit, the extreme ultra-Orthodox group that could stop the riotous behavior if it wanted to. But it doesn't want to.

The violence is encouraged by the police's kid-glove policy and fear of a full-scale confrontation with the ultra-Orthodox. Quite often, instead of facing off with the rioters, the police simply close off the neighborhood. There are daily attacks on soldiers, police, technicians and bus passengers without a clear response. The locals realize that Israeli law does not apply to them. They are immune to punishment.

It's not hard to understand the police. They know that arresting ultra-Orthodox offenders and using reasonable force in Mea She'arim will generate heavy political pressure and draw sharp criticism from the United Torah Judaism party. Still, they must go back to enforcing the law of the land in the neighborhood. To do so, they must act firmly against rioters, use riot-dispersal measures and make arrests that lead to prosecutions. The internal security minister must give the police whatever backing is necessary.

Similarly, the authorities and service providers should function in Mea She'arim as they do in all other dangerous environments and cease operating until security is restored. This would not be collective punishment, but self-preservation. The same applies to the Egged bus company, which repeatedly endangers its passengers by entering Mea She'arim. It should stop doing so until the mob attacks on buses cease.

The writer is deputy director for research and public relations at Hiddush, a group that promotes religious freedom and equality.

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

HAARETZ

EDITORIAL

AN IMPORTANT MESSAGE FROM CHINA

BY NEHEMIA SHTRASLER

Yuval Steinitz has a refined sense of humor. Otherwise, he would not find time to tell us from faraway China - where he has been for nine days already - that "in a year or two, economists will beat their breasts over the poor advice they gave the governments of the United States and Europe, advice that led them into major budget deficits."

Is that so, Mr. Finance Minister? Is it really the "economists" who were at fault, not the politicians who set economic policy? And why cast your gaze as far as the United States and Europe? Better to examine what's happening right here in our own house.

The finance minister recently submitted the 2011 budget, which contains a deficit of 3 percent of gross domestic product and a 2.6 percent rise in spending, compared with the previous standard rate of 1.7 percent. And if that were not enough, Steinitz also said that "the swollen public sector is no longer quite so bloated."

In other words, we have reached the end of our travails and can now stop scrimping and saving. We can now gorge ourselves well past satiety, because we are, after all, nice and trim.

Yet is the public sector really so fit? Maybe the minister ought to look around and see the bloated delegation he brought with him to China. But that, of course, is only small change.

He could also visit one of the superfluous government ministries, or the Defense Ministry, to figure out why streamlining plans have failed to progress. Maybe he could look at the number of unnecessary layers of management at the Education Ministry, or how many pointless local authorities still exist. And what about the bureaucratic encumbrances and excessive salaries at the Israel Airports Authority, Israel Electric Corporation and Port Authority? The list is long.

Steinitz's remarks are dangerous because they give the green light to interest groups, unions and lawmakers to pressure him for handouts. But no less grave is the fact that the head of the Finance Ministry's budget division, Udi Nissan, has thrown his weight behind increasing the budget as well. His misguided, dangerous position violates the budget division's long-standing tradition of fighting for a smaller, sleeker government, so that greater resources will remain for private-sector investment and development - the only real way to achieve sustained economic growth.

No budget director before him ever suggested increasing spending, and rightly so: That is the diametric opposite of his role. Lawmakers and ministers are supposed to demand ever more funds, but the budget director has to play the bad guy, the wicked lender who watches the till and ensures a deficit of 0 percent, not 3 percent. That would rapidly reduce the national debt to at most 50 percent of GDP, from its current, dangerous level of 80 percent. It would save the Israeli economy from the next global or regional crisis.

It seems we are suffering from the Greek disease: We are unwilling to invest today so that tomorrow will be better. Instead of doing what must be done, our government merely panders to the public. Echoing Greece's leaders, our prime minister parrots the line that he needs more money "to improve social services."

And the problem lies not just with our government. The Histadrut labor federation is now demanding higher

wages for public-sector workers, as is the norm in Greece. Lawmakers enact populist legislation that increases spending and undermines efforts to shift people from welfare to work, such as by terminating the Wisconsin program.

Steinitz and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu are doing nothing to change a situation in which 65 percent of ultra-Orthodox men do not work - a loss to GDP of NIS 12 billion a year. Nor are they addressing the question of what will happen in 30 years, when 78 percent of elementary school students will be ultra-Orthodox or Arab. Who will work then? What kind of minority will prop up the majority?

We are marching wide-eyed into a crisis that has already been written on the wall. Just lift your eyes and look. But of course it is much easier to present the public with a rose-tinted picture of where we are headed, congratulate ourselves on joining the OECD and continue our lovely visit to China.

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

HAARETZ

EDITORIAL

ISRAELIS' STATE OF DENIAL OVER TREATMENT OF PALESTINIANS

BY YITZHAK LAOR

Israelis love military secrets. Books by retired security officers, former spies and former members of the Shin Bet security service and Mossad sell well. An entire culture is built around "what it is forbidden to talk about but nevertheless we like to know." Not merely stories from the past - for example, how the "Red Prince" (Ali Hassan Salameh of Black September ) was assassinated in Beirut in 1979 - but also the Dubai affair, which is an excellent example of the public's lust to know, hear, see and consume news. Even the failure was of interest to the public, and the matter had moral backing. This moral backing goes well with the desire to know: "Even if we did not kill him, he deserved to die," they said on TV.

There is one thing the public does not want to know, or perhaps "most of the public" is a more cautious expression, and we are not talking about a military secret. A survey carried out two weeks ago by the Tami Steinmetz Center for Peace Research, which was published in Haaretz, touched on the issue: The only thing the public does not want to hear about is the repression of the Palestinians. This is not a matter of keeping secrets, but of denial.

It is doubtful whether a survey is necessary. It suffices to watch the news on commercial television in order to understand that what is going on in the territories "doesn't sell." But the matter is more grave. What is happening in the territories is becoming taboo. Not only do people not want to know because there is something to know (otherwise people would not refuse to know ), the army is seen as the sole legitimate source of information about events in the territories.

But the army lies, to put it mildly. The language it uses to describe firing at non-violent Palestinian demonstrators is always laden with euphemisms, and the need to explain arises only when organizations like B'Tselem publish pictures in which it can be seen, for example, how settlers open fire and the army does not lift a finger. That is an example of the kind of things Israelis do not want to know about.

The territories are far away. The Palestinians live far away. This hallucination can be attributed to the walls, the separation roads, the army and the TV news. "Judea and Samaria" are close. The settlers live among us. There are photographs of them, their homes are photographed. They are in the army. They are the army. But the separation between those who are very close, who have the right to vote, weapons, rights and state financial support, and those who live at the same physical distance but must be left far away, on the other side of the walls, the fences, the roadblocks - this separation is made with the aid of the refusal to know. The denial.

Human rights organizations are persecuted - simple as that - exactly in the name of the refusal to know. "It is forbidden to know" means that it is forbidden for our consciousness to move freely among the facts, the scenes, the voices, the options. All these were supposed to comprise the awareness of the Israeli who lives five minutes from these unimaginable things - 43 years of military dictatorship over another people.

The security claims are dwarfed by the opposite claim - that the security situation is a function of the disinheriting (of the Palestinians ), the control of their natural resources and the never-ending restrictions on their way of life. But the other claim can in no way compete with the Israeli way of thinking: We are here and they are not here. The only freedom is the freedom to be and to blot out whatever casts doubt on the safety of the knowledge that denies this.

When the principal of the Ironi Aleph school in Tel Aviv wanted to take his teachers to see the roadblocks, they attacked him angrily and demanded that he be called for a hearing. The few prophesies of Karl Marx that came true included one that he wrote about in a short article in 1870: "The nation that oppresses another nation forges its own chains," he said. There is no better historic moment to demonstrate this prophesy than the moment we are now living.

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

HAARETZ

EDITORIA

ACADEMIA AND ECONOMIC GROWTH

BY MOSHE ARENS

Much research has been carried out over the years on the causes of economic growth. In recent decades, in the age of the technological revolution, it has been recognized that the availability of scientific and technical skills are the primary motor propelling countries' economies. These skills are acquired in the countries' educational systems. At the top of the pyramid of an educational system stand the universities. The quality of the universities is a good indication of a country's economic growth potential.

In certain cases another element can be added to this evaluation, namely the immigration of skilled scientific and technical personnel who add to a country's reservoir of skills. Here, too, high-quality universities play an important role, as they serve as a magnet for talented young people from abroad who come to study at these universities and frequently stay after completing their studies, contributing to the economies of their host countries.

The outstanding example of this phenomenon is the United States of America. It is a world leader in science and technology, a country that can pride itself on having some of the world's best universities. Talented and skilled immigrants, many attracted by American universities, continually add to the large pool of home-grown talent and knowledge. One need only look at the publications of some of America's best universities, like Harvard, MIT or Caltech, to see the large number of foreign students attending America's best universities. This has been an important factor in spurring constant economic growth in the United States, outpacing most countries.

Israel is another outstanding example of the relation between skills in the sciences and technology among the population and economic growth. For a number of years the country's economic growth has been linked to the development of high-tech, and a good part of foreign investment has gone to this fast-developing sector. A very substantial boost to Israel's innate capabilities has been the large immigration from the former Soviet Union in recent years, some having already obtained much of their education there, others who continued their education in Israel. A significant part of Israeli economic growth in recent years can be credited to them.

The conclusion from this analysis is that priority must be given to allocating the country's resources to education, especially to the universities. These budgetary allocations should be seen as investments in the country's human infrastructure, investments that will bring large returns in future years that will benefit Israel's entire population.

However, when looking today at the state of Israel's universities, almost all of them suffering from severe financial problems, it seems that government budgets in recent years did not take account of the relationship between the quality of the universities and the country's economic growth. What's worse, one result of the universities' poor financial situation is that many talented students who go abroad for their graduate studies do not return, and many university lecturers end up teaching and conducting research abroad. Some of Israel's best academic talent is today in America.

It is high time that this situation be rectified. Government allocations to universities, and to research at universities, must be increased substantially. The number of universities has to be increas ed.

There is no reason for the dogmatic insistence, one that seems to be supported by the existing universities, that no new universities be established, even though Israel's population has increased greatly since the last of the universities received recognition. A special program should be initiated to bring back the many Israeli academics currently abroad because of the lack of opportunities at Israeli universities in recent years. We need an accelerated program to raise the academic level of Israeli universities, providing budgetary incentives for academic achievements. And consideration should be given to degree courses in science and technology in English, tailored to students from abroad.

Israel can probably make no better investment at the present time. The return on the investment for the nation's economy is certain, and it will not be long in coming.

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

HAARETZ

EDITORIAL

JERUSALEM DAY CELEBRATES AN ILLUSORY UNIFICATION

BY DAPHNA GOLAN

A few weeks after we said "Next year in Jerusalem" at the Passover seder, Jerusalem Day has arrived, forcing us to ask whether this is the Jerusalem we meant. Jerusalem is currently enjoying a pleasant spring. The sun is shining. And in the west of the city, traffic circles are blossoming, while thousands of armed policemen and civilians are afraid of the next explosion.

Is this the Jerusalem to which Diaspora Jews dreamed of returning? The united Jerusalem that stretches from Shoafat to Beit Sahur? A city where on one side they build a monster like the Holyland apartment complex, and on the other there is no master plan, there are almost no building opportunities, and thousands of people live in fear that their homes, which were built without permits, will be demolished?

Did we imagine that when the Jews returned to Jerusalem they would evacuate Palestinians from their homes in order to settle in them? Is it possible to celebrate the "unification of Jerusalem" when Palestinian families in Sheikh Jarrah are expelled from their homes under the aegis of the court to let Jews live there in their stead?

As opposed to the Jewish holidays, which are celebrated at home and bring us close to the Jerusalem that is in our hearts, Jerusalem Day invites us to go outside, to performances, rallies and a parade through the streets of the city. On billboards, Mayor Nir Barkat invites us to "participate in celebrating the 43rd anniversary of the city's unification," as well as in Education Week, whose theme is "Breakthroughs Beyond the Walls." This theme, Barkat said, "conveys our conviction that through competent education, it is possible to break out of dangerous vicious circles, overcome obstacles and look forward into the future."

But "Breakthroughs Beyond the Walls" education week includes no mention of Nadia, who cannot get to her school in Jerusalem because of the wall. No thought is given to the thousands of Palestinian children for whom the schools have no room, or to the hundreds of children harmed by pollution from a factory next to the only school dedicated in East Jerusalem this year. In Jerusalem, which is celebrating its holiday with drums and dancing, 74 percent of Palestinian children and 47.7 percent of Jewish children live in poverty.

The victory parades on Jerusalem Day celebrate a unification that never took place in a city whose unity was invented. In 1967, Jerusalem tripled in size, swallowing up East Jerusalem as well as 28 Palestinian villages. Today it is the largest city in Israel, and its borders are an insult to the map. Over one-third of the privately-owned land in East Jerusalem has been confiscated, and neighborhoods for Jews only have been built on it.

Jerusalem, which celebrates its unification today, is a city divided between Jews, for whom the city is planned, and Palestinians, whom the State of Israel views as foreigners in their own city. Construction for Jews only continues, even though in recent years the negative balance of migration from Jerusalem has only grown, such that when we subtract the thousands of Jews leaving the city from the natural increase, the city's Jewish population is hardly changed.

But for Palestinians, whose average fertility rate is higher and who are not leaving the city, not a single neighborhood has been built. There is no master plan and building permits are very scarce. But there are many demolitions of homes built without a permit.

Divided Jerusalem is celebrating a unification that never took place. It is celebrating occupation and ongoing discrimination against more than one-third of the city's residents, to whom the municipality allocates less than 14 percent of its budget.

The Jewish people's connection to Jerusalem has no need of parades with thousands of armed policemen and civilians. What Jerusalem needs is fresh thinking that learns from the past and offers hope to all the city's residents: Palestinians and Israelis, Muslims, Christians and Jews. Next year in a Jerusalem that is rebuilt with equality.

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

******************************************************************************************THE NEW YORK TIMES

EDITORIAL

INDUSTRY DOESN'T STEP UP

Who is to blame for last month's catastrophic oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico? The other guy. At least that's what three oil executives, predictably and cynically, told a Senate hearing on Tuesday.

The Obama administration and Congress are going to have to press a lot harder to figure out what went wrong and what must be changed — including how the industry needs to be regulated — to ensure this never happens again.

There is no question about the scale of the destruction. The blowout on a deep-water drilling rig has already dumped nearly 3.5 million gallons of oil into the gulf, and the companies involved have yet to figure out how to stop it. If left unchecked, the spill will almost certainly inflict terrible damage on Louisiana's coastline and its fishing industry, and possibly other gulf states.

The hearings produced almost none of the answers needed. The BP America chairman, Lamar McKay, blamed a malfunctioning blowout preventer installed by Transocean, the operator of the drilling rig. Transocean's boss, Steven Newman, said the problem may have been a mishandling of the cement that is supposed to keep gas from escaping up the well pipe to the surface. Tim Probert, a president of Halliburton, which was responsible for the cement, suggested that his company was only following instructions from BP.

Round and round the blame game went — the "liability chase," Senator Robert Menendez of New Jersey called it.

The only sign of progress for the day — there was not any in the gulf — came from Interior Secretary Ken Salazar. He announced that the administration intended to split the federal agency that oversees offshore drilling into two parts — one to award drilling leases and collect fees and royalties (worth $13 billion a year) and the other to inspect oil rigs and write and enforce safety regulations. He argued that the move would eliminate conflicts of interest both "real and perceived."

The tales of how the agency, the Minerals Management Service, was corrupted by industry in the Bush years (employees took gifts, steered contracts to favored clients and engaged in drugs and sex with oil company employees) are legendary. Mr. Salazar has taken steps to change that culture.

Only now, after this disastrous spill, are we learning how even when the agency's regulators tried to do their jobs they were repeatedly rolled or rebuffed by industry.

There have been widespread reports, for instance, that the Minerals Management Service had asked industry for more backup systems for the blowout preventers but then accepted industry's assurances that the devices were virtually foolproof. There also have been reports that some agency officials wanted to subject the BP project to a complete environmental impact review but, in the end, accepted BP's assurances that a huge oil spill was unlikely.

The agency clearly failed to press industry to modernize the equipment it uses to combat spills. The technology on display in the gulf — the booms, skimmers and chemical dispersants — seems largely unchanged from the days of the Exxon Valdez disaster in 1989.

We will not know what went wrong this time until the Interior Department and Congress finish their investigations. What we do know is that the country deserves a far more transparent, far less self-serving response from BP and its subcontractors.

We are also waiting to hear Mr. Salazar's plans for building a robust and impartial regulatory system, one able to ride herd on a large and lucrative industry that cannot be trusted to police itself.

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

THE NEW YORK TIMES

IS IT SAFE TO GO BACK IN?

What could be worse than a 20-minute, 1,000-point drop in the stock market? A 20-minute, 1,000-point drop that defies explanation.

At a Congressional hearing on Tuesday, federal regulators and stock-exchange executives said they had no one explanation for the plunge last week that briefly wiped out about $1 trillion in market value.

Experts said they had not found hacker or terrorist activity; no "fat finger" error in which an order for millions of shares was entered as billions; no unusually large single-stock trade that triggered the decline. Nor were regulators prepared to conclude that a "confluence of events" caused the nose dive, said Mary Schapiro, chairwoman of the Securities and Exchange Commission.

What the experts could agree on is that differing rules among various exchanges about temporarily halting or slowing trading made the drop worse. In that light, regulators took the right steps earlier this week, to immediately revise marketwide circuit breakers that stop trading during a major decline and to draft similar rules for individual stocks.

To be thorough, however, an investigation will have to extend beyond the events of last Thursday. Federal officials must develop a coherent regulatory strategy for monitoring developments in the electronic trading of stocks, options, futures and other derivatives. In the past several years, high-speed computerized trades have come to dominate traditional trading but without expanding regulatory tools and techniques to guarantee fairness.

Writing in March in Finance & Development, a journal of the International Monetary Fund, Randall Dodd highlighted three trading strategies in which the potential for instability may outweigh any efficiency gains:

¶High-frequency trading can match thousands of buyers and sellers a minute, creating bigger and more abrupt price changes than would otherwise be the case.

¶Flash trading occurs when buy or sell prices flash on a trader's screen before becoming public, allowing the trader to act before others in the market have the information. The New York Stock Exchange has rightly outlawed flash trading. The S.E.C. has proposed to ban flash trades but has not yet finalized its rule. After last week, the agency should move quickly.

¶The S.E.C. also must move quickly to finalize proposed rules to regulate dark pools, electronic trading systems used by big investors to conduct large trades without going through a fully transparent exchange. That allows large transactions to occur without moving the market price, but it does so by selectively sharing market information, rendering publicly available information about prices unreliable.

Figuring out what went wrong is important but is only a first step in restoring investor confidence.

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

THE NEW YORK TIMES

A DEAL FOR BETTER SCHOOLS

When school officials and unions work together, students have a real chance to come out on top. That was clear this week when the State Education Department and New York's teachers' unions announced agreement on a rigorous teacher evaluation system.

The Legislature should quickly approve the deal. It would improve New York's schools and the state's chances in the second round of the federal Race to the Top competition for hundreds of millions of dollars in education grants.

The proposal, which resembles one developed through a similar partnership in New Haven, does away with the shoddy evaluation system under which teachers are observed briefly in the classroom and even the most ineffective ones regularly receive glowing ratings.

The new system would require more intensive monitoring and would finally take student performance into account. Teachers would eventually be measured on a 100-point scale, with 25 points based on how much students improve on the standardized state exams and 15 percent based on locally selected measures. The remaining part of the evaluation would be locally determined, consistent with state regulations, and could include such things as evaluations by a school principal, peer observations, a teacher's ability to produce lesson plans and so on.

Teachers would be categorized as highly effective, effective, developing or ineffective. Those who need help would be given coaching. Those rated ineffective for two consecutive years could be fired through a hearing process that would take no longer than 60 days. Right now that process can drag on for more than a year.

The State Education Department deserves particular praise, as do the two union presidents, Richard Iannuzzi of New York State United Teachers and Michael Mulgrew of the United Federation of Teachers, the city's union. They worked on this deal even though their members are angry about impending layoffs. The Legislature should move swiftly on the bill so that the state can meet the next Race to the Top application deadline. It is due on June 1.

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

THE NEW YORK TIMES

OUR INNER NEANDERTHAL

If things had gone differently, this editorial might have been written by a Neanderthal contemplating the discovery that a small but significant portion of his or her DNA was derived from ancestral humans, who lost out in the struggle for survival some 30,000 years ago. Things went the other way, and this editorial is being written by a human musing on the recent discovery that 1 percent to 4 percent of our human DNA is derived from Neanderthals.

That does not sound like a very large percentage. But it is the clearest evidence so far that some interbreeding occurred between humans and Neanderthals. The research, led by a team from the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology and published last week in Science, is also evidence of how much skill scientists have gained in obtaining and decoding DNA samples from ancient bones.

The team compared genome sequences from three Neanderthals — dating from roughly 38,000 to 44,000 years ago — to sequences from five present-day humans from various parts of the world. In addition to the likelihood of interbreeding, the research shows that Neanderthals are closer to humans of European and Asian origin than they are to humans of African origin.

Neanderthal fossils have been found only in Europe and western Asia. Yet the similarity to Chinese and Papuan genomic sequences is just as close, even though no Neanderthal fossils have been found there. It suggests that one possible location for the mixing of Neanderthals and ancestral non-African humans is the Middle East, where they may have overlapped for more than 50,000 years. Humans have always told tales of their ancestry. New scientific techniques are giving us a more complex story to tell.

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

THE NEW YORK TIMES

THE EVIL OF LESSER EVILISM

BY MAUREEN DOWD

WASHINGTON

Everybody here lies.

But with the arrival of Hamid Karzai, the mendacity blossomed into absurdity.

The question for the Obama White House is not whether it can grow to appreciate the caped capo who runs Afghanistan. (President Obama can't stand him.) The question is whether Karzai will fall for all the guff they're throwing at him.

Ambassador Karl Eikenberry and Gen. Stanley McChrystal were paraded into the White House press room to pretend as though their dispute about the efficacy of the surge, given Karzai's serious flaws as a partner, has been put to rest. (It hasn't.)

The administration crooned a reassuring lullaby to the colicky Karzai: that it has a long-term commitment in Afghanistan (it doesn't) and an endgame there (it doesn't) and that it knows that the upcoming Kandahar offensive will work (it doesn't).

Asked by a reporter about the change from sticks to carrots, Richard Holbrooke, the special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan who has had contentious sessions with Karzai, replied: "No, I certainly don't think it's changed." (It has.)

For their part, the Afghans promise to work on stemming corruption and stopping the poppy trade. (They won't.)

The administration is trying to delay the inconvenient truth that Karzai wants reconciliation with Taliban leaders; this makes the U.S. cringe, thinking of Mullah Omar and other 9/11 killers.

Like a lover who has learned from bitter experience that his fickle mistress responds better to sweets than rants, the administration has abruptly switched from nagging the corrupt Afghan president to nuzzling him.

On Tuesday evening, Karzai was honored at a starry State Department reception along with his ministers — or at least the ones he could get into the country. He didn't bring his brother, the C.I.A. pal and drug lord, or other especially sleazy government officials.

President Obama, who last month was threatening to rescind the invitation to the maddening dandy, will have an Oval Office meeting and Rose Garden press conference with Karzai on Wednesday.

The Afghan leader was also due to be feted Wednesday night at a private dinner at the home of Vice President Biden, who once stalked out of a Karzai supper at the palace in Kabul when the Afghan president claimed there was no corruption, and got furious again last month when Karzai said he would join the Taliban if foreign interference continued. (Translation: Stop upbraiding me, Obama, you're stuck with me.)

On Thursday, Karzai is slated to get a special treat — a long, intimate walk in a Georgetown garden with Hillary Clinton — the one person in the administration who prides herself on getting along with him. Romantic strolls through gardens, the administration has decided, are the best way to move the corrupt coxcomb to its point of view.

Last October, when Karzai was trying to purloin the election with a million illegal votes, John Kerry persuaded him to agree to a runoff by taking a long walk through rosebushes and the presidential mosque on the palace grounds in Kabul.

Both Kerry and Hillary bonded with Karzai by confiding how they, too, had felt very wounded by a bruising election experience. "Sometimes there are tough things," Kerry told the Afghan leader. Yeah, like if you had to steal an election twice.

The Taliban in Pakistan is training jihadis to attack New York, belying again W.'s chuckleheaded contention that we have to wage war against terrorists abroad so we don't have to face them at home. Our battles meant to diminish enemies replenish them. The inept Times Square bomber was infuriated by U.S. drone attacks in Pakistan.

The Pentagon, the public and administration allies are all expressing frustration with Afghanistan. A majority in a new ABC News/Washington Post poll says Afghanistan is not worth the cost.

A report by the Center for American Progress run by John Podesta, Bill Clinton's chief of staff who helped lead the Obama transition, faulted the administration, saying it "has not yet outlined a clear plan for transferring control to the Afghan state or sufficiently prioritized the reforms needed to ensure that it can one day stand on its own." A Pentagon report also shows that General McChrystal's boast that he could wheel "a government in a box" into Marja was premature.

The Pentagon said there had been "some success in clearing insurgents from their strongholds" but "progress in introducing governance and development to these areas to move toward hold and build operations has been slow.

"The insurgents' tactic of re-infiltrating the cleared areas to perform executions has played a role in dissuading locals from siding with the Afghan government, which has complicated efforts to introduce effective governance."

A walk in the garden, it's not.

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

THE NEW YORK TIMES

GREECE'S NEWEST ODYSSEY

BY THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN

Athens

For a man whose country's wobbly finances have kept the world on edge for months, the Greek prime minister, George Papandreou, evinces an Obama-Zen-like calm. He is just back from meeting fellow European Union leaders, who decided to try to stave off a Greek meltdown and an E.U. crackup with a show of overwhelming force — committing nearly $1 trillion to support the economy of any ailing member state. But over a lunch of Greek salad and grilled fish, Papandreou makes clear that he knows that the deal with the E.U. was not your garden-variety bailout-for-budget-cuts. No, if you really look closely at what it will take for Greece to mend its economy, this is actually a bailout-for-a-revolution. Greece's entire economic and political system will have to change for Greeks to deliver their side of this bargain.

Papandreou says he is ready and so, too, he insists, is his country: "People are saying to me, 'change this country — go ahead and change it.' People realize that it needs change. You don't want to miss this opportunity."

How Greece performs will not only affect Greeks, but the value of the euro and the whole 27-nation European Union. Yes, I know, the E.U. is the world's most opaque and boring organization. But it is actually America's not-so-identical twin and the world's largest economy. It is, in fact, "the United States of Europe," and, in my view, two United States are better than one. If this one over here fractures, it will affect everything from how many exports America has in the next year to how many allies America has in the next war.

Sitting in a rooftop restaurant with a view of the Acropolis, I ask Papandreou to put on his safari hat and tell me what it was like to be hunted by the electronic bond herd for six months.

"Because of the 2008 crisis, all the market players have become much more risk-averse, so they are on a hair trigger," explains the center-left prime minister, who was voted in by a large majority in October to fix this mess. Today's market players are "like an animal that has been wounded, and so it recoils at the slightest motion. So any rumor about you can become a self-fulfilling prophecy."

Comparing bond players to some kind of living beasts may be unfair to beasts, he suggests. These markets "are not even human anymore. Some of these things are computerized, and they just go into automatic mode" when they see a hint of trouble.

Because of their profligacy, Greeks have been living under this market scrutiny for so many months, he added, that today "every Greek from age 3 to 93 knows what a 'bond spread' means. 'What's the spread today? Are they widening?' People had never heard about this before," and it created a paralyzing uncertainty. "Should I buy, consume, save, invest, take my money out of the country?"

The only way for Greece to end this uncertainty was with an unprecedented commitment by the European Union to backstop Greek debts and with an unprecedented commitment by Greece to put its economy on a strict diet — set by the International Monetary Fund — with quarterly budget targets that Athens has to meet to receive additional support.

"Now we will have a respite," said Papandreou — not to relax, but so the Greek government can begin "the deep changes ... the small revolution" in how this country is governed, with particular emphasis on changing the incentive system here from one that focused way too many Greeks on getting a lifetime government job to one focused on stimulating private initiative.

The cabinet has already approved increasing the average retirement age for public sector workers from 61 to 65. Average public sector wages have been cut 20 percent, and pensions by 10 percent. The value-added tax was raised from 19 percent to 23 percent, and there's been an excise tax increase of about 30 percent on gas, alcohol and tobacco. The number of municipalities is proposed to shrink from 1,000 to 400 and public-owned companies from 6,000 to 2,000 to save money and red tape. So far, the deficit is down 40 percent from last year.

But Papandreou, whose official car is a Prius hybrid, says that to sustain these wrenching reforms requires Greeks to become stakeholders in the process. That will only happen, he argues, if there is a sense of "justice" — Greeks want to see big tax cheaters and corrupt officials prosecuted — and if the people feel their leaders have a vision. "We need to give this country a dream — where we are going," so the sacrifices make sense.

"We're going to bring in best practices from Europe and around the world to reform this country," says Papandreou. "It is difficult, and there will be protests, and people will feel bitter, but it will be one of the most creative times Greece has gone through."

Can Greece have a civic revolution? The odds are long, but you won't need to consult the I.M.F. to determine the answer. Just watch Greek young people. In six months, if you see them migrating, then short Greece. If you see them sticking it out here, though, it means they think there is something worth staying for, and you might even want to buy a Greek bond or two.

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

THE NEW YORK TIMES

BRITAIN'S COALITION OF PAIN

BY ALEX MASSIE

London

DAVID CAMERON spoke for Britain on Tuesday. Asked by a reporter if there was anything to report from the latest rounds of interparty negotiations over building a government from the rubble of last week's election, Mr. Cameron, the leader of the Conservatives, joked: "I don't know. No one tells me anything any more."

Most predictions these past few days were as durable as sunshine in England in spring but, nevertheless, Mr. Cameron is our prime minister, replacing Gordon Brown, and our three-sided parliamentary version of the War of the Roses has come to an end.

The best and worst aspects of Mr. Brown's character were revealed in the manner of his departure. His semi-resignation on Monday represented the worst: his plan to remain at 10 Downing Street until autumn if Labour was to be part of the new government had little to do with the national interest. Rather, it was a political suicide bombing, intended only to wreck the prospects of a coalition between the Tories and the third-place party, Nick Clegg's Liberal Democrats.

By contrast, Mr. Brown's second resignation, from the office of prime minister on Tuesday, showed him at his dignified best. Even opponents could feel some sympathy as the curtain fell on his career. Soon after, Mr. Cameron arrived at Buckingham Palace to "kiss hands" with Queen Elizabeth II and become, at 43, the youngest prime minister since Lord Liverpool in 1812.

Still, looking back, it was touch and go. On Monday evening it seemed as though Mr. Brown's audacious, last-gasp maneuver might work. Although Mr. Clegg had suggested that the Conservatives' plurality in last Thursday's vote gave them the first right to form a government, Mr. Brown revealed on Monday that the Liberal Democrats were courting Labour.

Then, a seemingly endless parade of Labour ministers appeared on television insisting that, despite losing 91 seats in the House of Commons and getting two million votes fewer than the Conservatives, they had not actually lost the election. Like Monty Python's Black Knight, they claimed defeat was "only a flesh wound" and nothing serious enough to require a change of government.

And so the electorate was asked to contemplate the extraordinary spectacle of a Labour-Liberal Democrat "Losers' Alliance." While constitutionally permissible, such an arrangement can't be squared with any residual British sense of fair play. More pertinent, it wouldn't even have commanded a majority in the House of Commons, and would have had to purchase the support of Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish parties.

Fortunately, sanity prevailed. Talks with Labour broke down and, as one senior Liberal Democrat leader put it, the Tories represented "the only deal in town." This put Mr. Clegg in a bind. He knew that if his party joined the Conservatives, it risked being punished in the next election by voters in Scotland and the north of England; if it supported Labour, it risked a hammering in southern and southwestern England. Heads they lose and tails they lose too.

Nevertheless, to govern is to choose, and the arguments in favor of a Tory-Liberal Democrat deal were simply too persuasive. First, the arithmetic: together they will command 363 seats in the Commons, well above the 326 needed for a majority. This augurs stability, meaning the next election can be put off until 2015, as opposed to our voting again in a few months.

Second, while the parties inhabit opposite wings of the political spectrum, they have a surprising amount in common. On civil liberties, tax reform, education reform and decentralizing the political system — the keystones of the Tories' "Big Society" package — they share a philosophical commitment that puts the individual before the state and a political belief in the value of Edmund Burke's "little platoons": families, neighborhood associations, charities, churches and the like.

This common ground, perhaps, eased the way for deals on the messy particulars, like the number of ministry positions Mr. Clegg's party will get and how far the coalition will go on electoral reform and other Liberal Democratic priorities. Given the economy, none of this seems terribly urgent, anyway.

The government's immediate task will be to reassure the markets that Britain is serious about repairing its ruined public finances. This was the election issue the parties all preferred to ignore, fancying, correctly, that the electorate couldn't handle the truth about the forthcoming Era of No Money. But that reckoning can be postponed no longer. Morgan Stanley on Tuesday advised investors to short the pound, a warning shot that should concentrate minds in Westminster.

For Mr. Cameron, if not for his backbenchers, a partnership with the Liberal Democrats has some advantages. The government will be unpopular initially as it cuts public spending and raises taxes. Why not share the responsibility — and blame — for those decisions?

The government is also likely to be less influential on the international stage than its predecessors. As a Tory-Liberal alliance could be broken by arguments over the European Union, Britain's relationship with Brussels will be placed in cryogenic suspended animation with the label, "Do Not Waken Before 2015." And a Tory-Liberal partnership will need to compromise on Afghanistan. Both want the mission "clarified" and agree that the commitment cannot be indefinite.

This, as with much else in Britain this week, is open for negotiation. But one thing will have changed: David Cameron knows that after 13 years in the wilderness, the Conservatives are back.

Alex Massie writes on politics for The Spectator.

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

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

USA TODAY

EDITORIAL

OUR VIEW ON ENERGY: DON'T USE OIL SPILL AS EXCUSE TO DEEP-SIX DOMESTIC DRILLING

The easy thing to do after the catastrophic oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico would be to kill President Obama's shiny new plan to expand offshore drilling. Many formerly pro-drilling coastal politicians, from California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to Florida Gov. Charlie Crist, are calling for doing just that.

But parochial interests and short-term thinking are the traditional ruin of U.S. energy policy.

Decades of refusal to expand domestic drilling, or make gasoline more expensive, have left the nation addicted to foreign oil. As pretty much everyone knows by now, this is an invisible, slow-motion disaster that transfers tens of billions of dollars a year to unfriendly regimes and leaves the nation vulnerable to wars and oil shocks.

Meanwhile, decades of refusal to build more nuclear plants, or deal with the waste disposal issue, since the 1979 accident at Three Mile Island have left the U.S. overly dependent on electricity from coal that is dangerous to mine and contributes to climate change.

So as nice as it would be to halt oil exploration along the coastline or in the Alaskan wilderness, years of feckless energy policy have forfeited that luxury. The question now isn't whether to drill, but how to do so more safely, particularly in deep water, while developing clean-energy replacements such as wind, solar and biofuels.

If only that were easy or quick. Alternative energy provides about 6% of transportation fuel. The Energy Information Administration forecasts that 25 years from now, it will provide about 15%. Even if that doubled or tripled, the nation would still need substantial quantities of oil.

About one-third of U.S. oil production comes from the Gulf. Curbing or killing the plan to expand offshore drilling would take off the table an estimated 40 billion to 60 billion barrels of economically recoverable oil — about six to eight years of U.S. consumption at current rates. That oil is needed to help reduce imports and bridge to a time when more planes, trains and automobiles can run on alternative fuels. Currently, of the nearly 250 million cars and trucks on American roads, only about 700,000 run on alternative fuels. Phasing out gasoline-powered vehicles is going to be a long, slow process.

Being stuck with petroleum for now, however, doesn't mean pursuing a heedless "drill, baby, drill" policy. The Gulf of Mexico disaster exposed the oil industry's failure to anticipate, and develop a robust response to, a deep-sea blowout.

True, this is the first serious drilling-related spill in U.S. waters since the one off Santa Barbara, Calif., in 1969.But when BP executives say they never could have imagined the sort of accident that occurred nearly three weeks ago in the Gulf, an assertion repeated at Tuesday's finger-pointing congressional hearing into the spill, they are either misinformed or ignorant about their business.

An industry study documented more than 100 cases of blowout-preventer failures in just two years in the 1990s— none as serious as this one, but warning signs nonetheless. Worse, a catastrophic failure in foreign waters should have sounded alarm bells. In 1979, a blowout preventer failed to cut the flow of oil at a Mexican offshore well near the Yucatan Peninsula. That one took about 295 days to control and spilled 140 million gallons of oil into the Gulf of Mexico. (An estimated 4 million gallons have spilled from the Deepwater Horizon accident.)

Before offshore drilling expands, the industry should have to show that it is far better prepared than BP was to deal with accidents, and the government must beef up its oversight. On Tuesday, the administration announced plans to split the Minerals Management Services into one unit to enforce safety rules and a second unit to collect royalties. That would help eliminate the conflict of interest between the agency's dual missions, much as was necessary with federal oversight of the airline industry.

Just as one plane crash doesn't mean that the nation should stop building jetliners and airports, one horrific spill can't be allowed to dictate energy policy for decades. The nation needs the oil. But it can learn from the mess in the Gulf to minimize the chances of anything like it happening again.

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

USA TODAY

EDITORIAL

OPPOSING VIEW ON ENERGY: HALT OFFSHORE EXPLORATION

BY BILL NELSON

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled."

That's what Nobel Prize-winning physicist Richard Feynman said in 1986. Judging by recent events, it's more true today than ever.

The failure of the Deepwater Horizon test well in the Gulf of Mexico is a horrible tragedy. But hopefully, it will be something from which we gain wisdom.

We still don't know how bad it will be, but some scientists say the Gulf loop currents could take this oil to the Florida Keys, and then to the southeast part of the state.

BP's CEO, Tony Hayward, acknowledged to me that economic damages will exceed the current $75 million cap on liability for drilling accidents. So I've joined with Sens. Robert Menendez and Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey to introduce legislation to raise that cap to $10 billion. I've also joined with Rep. Kendrick Meek of Florida in calling for moratoria on offshore oil exploration and drilling in new areas. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar likely will adopt changes I and others have asked for regarding the regulators who inspect oil rigs, investigate oil companies and enforce safety regulations.

Meantime, the scope of this crisis in the Gulf should prompt the president and all lawmakers to re-examine Big Oil's safety claims and call for a halt to the industry's push for drilling in new offshore areas.

Over the past four decades, I've fought the industry's immensely powerful lobby in Washington to keep oil rigs away from Florida and other coastal states. I've argued that a big spill could not only harm Florida's tourism-driven economy and unique environment, but also usurp the country's last major military training and testing range in the eastern Gulf.

Whether offshore drilling ever becomes safer, there just isn't enough oil in the eastern Gulf or along most of the Atlantic seaboard to justify the enormous risks from a blowout, spill or shipping accident, like the Exxon Valdez.

On the broader energy issue, America must lessen its reliance on foreign oil. But there's no need to expand drilling into new areas. Oil and gas companies right now have some 31 million acres under lease in parts of the Gulf where they aren't even drilling yet.

The ultimate answer to America's energy needs lies not in oil, but in the rapid development of alternative fuels.

And I think we can help pay for an accelerated national energy program by ending the billions of dollars in

giveaways to Big Oil, by making sure it pays all its taxes and royalties.

Bill Nelson, a Democrat, is the senior U.S. senator from Florida.

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

USA TODAY

EDITORIAL

WE'RE NOT YET GREECE, BUT ARE WE STILL AMERICA?

BY DAVID M. WALKER

As I have traveled the country recently, promoting the need for fiscal responsibility, many people have asked me: Are we Greece?

Greece is beset by economic crisis, driven in large part by dramatic increases in spending, escalating deficits and growing debt burdens. Foreign investors have lost confidence in its ability to repay its debt, and the European Union has had to bail out the beleaguered Greek treasury, just like a too-big-to-fail bank.

If the first part of that story sounds familiar, it should. Over the past 40 years, the U.S. government spending has grown by almost 300% net of inflation, and our revenues haven't kept pace. The result is that our current deficits, when adjusted for inflation, are the highest as a percentage of our economy since World War II.

In that respect, we sure look a lot like Greece, or at least we will in the near future. As a percentage of our economy, total federal, state and local public debt in the U.S. already exceeds levels in Spain, and are comparable to Ireland and Great Britain. We will reach Portugal's levels within two years and Greece's levels within 10 years on our present course.

To be sure, there are some big differences between the U.S. and Greece. We are by far the largest economy in the world. The dollar also represents more than 60% of the world's reserve currency. That means, unlike the situation in Greece, our foreign creditors will give us the benefit of the doubt for a while. They know that our current deficits are designed to deal with the recent recession.

But they also see the very grave threat of the escalating deficits we will face in the future based on our current fiscal path. These projected structural deficits are driven largely by rising health care costs, known demographic trends, and the cost of financing what we will need to borrow to pay for increased spending. There is near universal agreement on the seriousness of our longer-term outlook, including President Obama and prominent past economic and political leaders from both major parties.

So, are we Greece? Not yet. But if we don't change course and recognize that we are not exempt from the

fundamental laws of prudent finance, we could be in the not too distant future.

There's another question worth considering: Are we still America? Our nation and too many of our citizens have become addicted to consumption and debt. But we can change our ways. Every previous generation has taken steps to keep America strong and improve the standard of living for future generations. Thanks to our forbearers, we are the richest and most powerful nation on earth. Then again, back in the day, so was Greece.

What can we do to ensure that the America our children inherit is better in the future? After all, this isn't just about getting our finances in order; it's about the hopes and dreams of the American people. It's about ensuring that our social safety net is solvent and secure, that we have resources to invest in research, education and infrastructure, and that America remains a land of opportunity and tranquility.

Ultimately, we will need to take a range of steps to recapture fiscal flexibility and stabilize our debt-to-GDP ratio. This might include re-imposing tough but realistic statutory budget controls, achieving comprehensive Social Security reform, increasing savings rates, addressing health care costs, implementing defense and other spending reprioritization and constraint, and engaging in comprehensive tax reform that raises more revenues.

But the first step, of course, is to summon our age-old American spirit to take bold actions to ensure the United States of America never ends up like Greece. The time to start avoiding a crisis and building a better future is now.

David M. Walker served as U.S. comptroller general from 1998 to 2008 and currently serves as the president & CEO of the Peter G. Peterson Foundation.

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

USA TODAY

EDITORIAL

SENATE'S WAY IS NO WAY TO CONFIRM A JUDICIAL MVP

BY JONATHAN TURLEY

President Obama's nomination of Solicitor General Elena Kagan for the Supreme Court formally starts one of our most flawed constitutional traditions: the Senate confirmation hearings. It is enough to make the Framers blush, a process once described by Kagan herself as a " vapid and hollow charade." From movies to baseball, other fields select top candidates based on proven and unequalled performance. For court nominees, we often seek not the most valuable player but the most confirmable person.

The sad fact is that there is more demonstrated ability and evaluation in American Idol than these Senate hearings. The Constitution is silent on the standard for confirmation, and most senators view their job as confirming individual competence rather than comparative excellence. Under the Ginsburg rule (named after Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg), nominees are also allowed to refuse to answer many questions on their specific legal views. As a result, what legal discussion that is generated is often little more than platitudes and generalities — like picking a doctor based solely on his stated commitment to "good health" and his strong opposition to premature death.

Other professions struggle to find the best person through a process of comparison — as opposed to high court confirmations where a single nominee is judged against herself.

•The College of Cardinals. Any unmarried Catholic male can be chosen as pontiff, though since Pope Urban VI in 1378, all popes have been selected from the ranks of cardinals. This means that the process compares more than 100 eligible candidates. When each cardinal casts his secret vote, he gives a Latin oath stating, "I call as my witness Christ the Lord who will be my judge, that my vote is given to the one who before God I think should be elected." In confirmation hearings, the choice is only the president's, with nominees often selected for political rather than intellectual viability.

•Baseball's MVP. The most valuable player in Major League Baseball is awarded by the Baseball Writers Association of America, the people who observe the performance of players over a lengthy season before selecting the best candidate. Conversely, senators never inquire as to whether a jurist is really the best choice among jurists, professors and lawyers who are widely cited as the intellectual leaders of their generation. We effectively select our judicial MVPs based on how good they look on a baseball card as opposed to their actual stats. If law professors and legal commentators selected nominees as sports writers select MVPs, few if any of the past dozen nominees would have made the final list — let alone the final choice.

•The Academy Awards. Of course, one could make selections of nominees based on the quality of their writings. When the Academy Awards are selected, the decision of who is the best actor or director is made by the roughly 6,000 members of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. While Academy voters compare the specific body of work of a candidate with other artists, senators avoid such comparisons and seem to prefer nominees with little prior writing (such as law review articles). It is like the Academy voting on the best movies based on trailers.

If we really wanted to select a judicial MVP, we would start by making comparisons between candidates, selecting from the clear leaders in the legal field, and demanding to see outstanding contributions to law as a prerequisite for confirmation. We would also discard the Ginsburg rule. If they state (as did nominee Clarence Thomas) that they just haven't thought much about issues such as Roe v. Wade, they should be told to come back once they have. As Kagan once said, "When the Senate ceases to engage nominees in meaningful discussion of legal issues, the confirmation process takes on an air of vacuity and farce."

In Kagan's case, she appeared to endorse controversial views from the Bush administration in limiting civil liberties in the war on terror — views diametrically opposed to some of the most important decisions of the man she hopes to replace, Justice John Paul Stevens.

We were once able to put the likes of Louis Brandeis, Oliver Wendell Holmes and Joseph Story on the court. We now have a process that favors hope over experience with the advantage going to those nominees with the least writing and slimmest record.

No one is asking for white smoke to appear over the Capitol Dome to show a divinely selected nominee. But there is a serious problem when we take greater care in selecting our movies and MVPs than our justices.

Jonathan Turley, the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University, is a member of USA TODAY's Board of Contributors.

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

USA TODAY

EDITORIAL

WILL PHILIPPINES' CYCLE OF CORRUPTION EVER END?

BY LEWIS M. SIMONS

Any Americans who hold out the faint hope that our onetime colony the Philippines might yet drag itself out of an unending cycle of poverty, corruption and violence must now bet on the long odds that newly elected President Benigno Aquino III will act against the best interests of his elitist class.

The son of the late president Corazon "Cory" Aquino and her murdered husband, Benigno "Ninoy" Jr., the understated "Noynoy," as nickname-obsessed Filipinos know him, is but the latest of the super-rich, land-owning, fair-skinned mestizos to rule the 92 million people of the archipelago since the United States granted them independence in the wake of World War II.

These elites exercise their political will and control the Philippines' economy through domination of massive agricultural, industrial and commercial empires. "The mestizo ruling class feels no obligation to the peons down the line," Lee Kuan Yew, the founder of neighboring, middle-class, meritocratic Singapore, told me.

The mestizos are the descendants of Spanish friars and soldiers, who colonized the islands from 1564 to 1898, and some of the islands' 100 or so different indigenous peoples. These relationships gave rise to an upper crust, upon whom the Spanish colonists and then the Americans relied and through whom they operated for centuries. Indeed, the U.S. government continues to depend on personal relations with the Filipino elites in order to influence sensitive political and military power in this critical corner of Southeast Asia.

Bitter laughter

Our reliance on individuals who largely are tainted by scandal, corruption and — certainly for two decades under President Ferdinand E. Marcos— brutality, explains the hostile part of the love-hate relationship many ordinary Filipinos have with Americans. When then-Vice President George H.W. Bush publicly told the reviled Marcos in 1981, "We love you for your adherence to democratic principles and the democratic process," millions laughed bitterly.

The elites emerge from luxurious seclusion in their walled-in mansions and vast estates to mix with the masses only at election time, when they make outrageous promises they have neither the intention nor the ability to deliver.

In his successful campaign, the new President Aquino vowed to subdivide Hacienda Luisita, his family's vast sugar plantation in Tarlac province, among some 10,000 tenant-farmer families. Each family is entitled to at least 25 acres of the 16,000-acre property under a land-reform program instituted by none other than President Corazon Aquino in 1989.

Other members of the family, however, have steadfastly opposed the idea. In 2004, the family summoned armed government militia to the plantation to put down a tenant demonstration. The troops killed seven protesters and hung the body of one, a youth leader, from the gate of the plantation.

The congressman representing the farmers of Hacienda Luisita at the time was Noynoy Aquino. Now president, the unmarried 50-year-old says he has asked his relatives, who are co-owners of the plantation, to find ways to distribute the land. "We are concerned with the welfare of the farmers there, and we want to distribute the assets to the farmers," he said during the campaign. "The only problem is how we will transfer the assets without passing the debts that have been incurred."

The tenants are skeptical. Still, as they demonstrated in this week's election — most notable, perhaps, for being the first computerized national voting in Southeast Asia — Filipinos are possessed of a strong sentimental streak. Many of those who supported Aquino against a field of eight other candidates acknowledged that they did so because of fond memories of his martyred father — murdered under Marcos' orders — and his sainted mother.

Reasons for hope

Cory Aquino was swept into office in 1986 on the wings of a "people's power" revolution in the streets of central Manila. Cory Aquino advertised herself as a "plain housewife" who took the audacious step to run for president only to win justice for Ninoy. Her dramatic victory forced the 20-year-Marcos kleptocracy into exile in Hawaii and thrilled people around the world. When the moment of glory faded, though, she proved an ineffectual and uninspiring leader. Her six years in office were marked by ceaseless dissent and nine coup attempts.

Cory Aquino died of cancer last August and her long-tarnished halo reappeared, as though miraculously, newly gleaming, over the balding head of her son. Unsettlingly, Noynoy, who told a reporter recently that he "wasn't clamoring to be the person responsible for solving all the problems" of the Philippines, is sweeping into the riverfront Spanish colonial-era Malacanang Palace with much the same romanticized hope that accompanied his late mother.

Perhaps this unassuming, pool-shooting, jazz-loving bachelor will justify at least some of that hope. Perhaps he will mean what he said immediately after the election: "I will not only not steal, but I'll have the corrupt arrested."

Perhaps his campaign promise to investigate his predecessor, outgoing President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, on allegations of corruption will not backfire, setting off yet more political strife in a country that cannot afford such distraction. Perhaps his promise to crack down on the nation's blatant tax evaders will not bring these powerful clans and families down on his neck. Perhaps the new president will stand up for those who elected him and against those who spawned him.

Perhaps.

Lewis M. Simons, a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist, is the co-author with Sen. Christopher S. Bond of The Next Front: Southeast Asia and the Road to Global Peace with Islam.

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

USA TODAY

EDITORIAL

AFGHAN GLASS IS JUST OVER HALF-FULL

BY ANTHONY CORDESMAN AND MICHAEL O'HANLON

KANDAHAR, Afghanistan — As Afghan President Hamid Karzai and President Obama meet today in Washington, activity is picking up in the war zone. Soon, U.S. troop totals will exceed those in Iraq for the first time since early 2003. Progress on the battlefield does not yet rival the progress in Iraq during the surge of 2007, but the intensity of effort feels comparable, and some good things are happening.

Yet there is a great deal more for both countries to do. Thankfully, the recent spats between some Obama administration officials and Karzai have been recognized as counterproductive by both sides; we have no choice but to work together.

First, the good news. Some 20,000 Afghan army recruits are in training at a time, as Afghanistan and NATO move toward meeting the interim goal of 134,000 Afghan soldiers for this fall. Increased military pay, hostile fire pay and other improvements in compensation have brought down the attrition rates.

Basic training improvements have also raised the quality of troops. Illiterate enlisted soldiers now have literacy training. NATO has set up specialized courses for training non-commissioned officers — the kind of soldiers who make militaries work at the ground level. The national military academy for training officers has tripled enrollment. Better yet, we have persuaded the Afghan government to adopt better practices on how those officers are selected and then on how they are assigned to duty. Thus, nepotism and favoritism have declined.

Best of all, Gen. Stanley McChrystal's concept of intensive partnering between NATO forces and Afghan units means that training continues well after new soldiers leave basic training. In fact, the new approach is to team a NATO unit with an Afghan unit and have them patrol, plan and fight together.

There is other good news, too. U.S. Ambassador Karl Eikenberry now has 1,000 American civilians under his oversight. More than 100 are in the crucial south of the country, helping Afghans develop health and education services, roads, irrigation systems and basic government structures.

U.S. special operations forces and other NATO units have become much more lethal, producing major increases in the attrition rate of insurgent leaders. Although this war is now more about creating safety for Afghan citizens than killing bad guys, doing the latter can help with the former.

Corruption still festers

Even so, big problems remain. As Afghan, U.S. and Canadian forces gear up their efforts to reassert government control in the key southern city of Kandahar, two key challenges must be addressed.

First is the problem of building the Afghan police. They are on average less competent, more corrupt and less accomplished than the army. To make matters worse, the police force's training remains weaker than the army's. Rather than rely on coalition soldiers as trainers (the U.S., like most coalition countries, has no such gendarmerie from which to draw trainers), we rely largely on private contractors. Even counting them, we remain several hundred trainers short. Moreover, McChrystal's partnering concept is more difficult to apply to the police, who work in small units in dispersed locations. This means on-the-job apprenticeship cannot compensate as well for weak initial training.

The second big problem is corruption combined with weak governance. Karzai continues to preside over a very corrupt country and has not done enough to send the message that traditional practices must change. On top of that, NATO and the international community have not adequately figured out how to deal with the host of self-seeking officials, rival groups, power brokers and other problems in governance at provincial and local levels. This situation helps feed the insurgency because those not able to get contracts or other benefits often get angry and take up arms in resistance.

Neither of these issues can be resolved quickly, but progress is possible.

On the corruption issue, in addition to respectfully asking Karzai to do more, we also need to do better. Intelligence-gathering needs to better identify corrupt companies. We also need changes to American procurement law so that we can help Afghan upstart firms, which are often unable to handle the onerous paperwork requirements of the U.S. contracting system (though they're often more honest than established companies). Regarding the Afghan police, perhaps Obama could induce European allies to provide more trainers. This would make a huge difference.

In for the long haul

Finally, we also need to reassure Afghans, as well as Pakistanis and other key nations, that we support an enduring strategic partnership with Afghanistan, even after U.S. troop numbers decline. We must clarify that the July 2011 date President Obama has set to begin the U.S. troop drawdown does not imply a rapid departure. Many in the region still misunderstand his words.

The glass is slightly more than half-full. We have a bit more battlefield momentum in Afghanistan than a year ago, and we still have other strengths as well — a strong international coalition, excellent U.S. forces, a rapidly improving Afghan army, and a resilient Afghan people who dislike the Taliban and who want this mission to succeed.

But we could still lose the war, and it is important that Obama and Karzai approach today's meeting with that sobering fact urgently in mind.

Anthony Cordesman holds the Arleigh Burke Chair at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Michael O'Hanlon is senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and co-author of Toughing It Out in Afghanistan.

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

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

TIMES FREE PRESS

EDITORIAL

MR. NETANYAHU IN A BIND

Hopes for peace -- or at least meaningful progress towards that elusive goal -- soared in the Mideast and elsewhere around the globe over the weekend when Palestinian leaders agreed to indirect peace talks with their Israeli counterparts. Prospects seemed bright. U.S. special envoy George Mitchell was to broker the so-called proximity talks and hope that the discussions ultimately would lead to direct talks between the parties bloomed. The optimism, as is often the case in the region, was misplaced.

Less than two days after the agreement to restart talks -- they've been on hold for almost 18 months -- was reached, Israel announced that it planned to expand settlements in East Jerusalem. Palestinians have said in the past that such a step could scuttle the talks. They reiterated that stance Monday. At this writing, Mr. Mitchell's mission continues, but Israel's announcement certainly puts them in jeopardy.

An Israeli spokesman said Monday that "building is expected to begin soon in several places ... where [construction] bids have been issued." He provided little additional information, thus making it unclear if construction was imminent or if it would commence in the future. Whatever the case, the announcement that Israel intended to expand Jewish settlements in East Jerusalem brought an immediate and negative response from the chief Palestinian negotiator in the talks.

"If they begin doing this [the building projects], I think they will take down the proximity talks, Saeb Erekat said. "The whole concept behind proximity talks is to give George Mitchell and U.S. President Barack Obama the chance they deserve. The "chance" referred to by Mr. Erekat is the opportunity for Mr. Mitchell to establish a framework in which meaningful, face-to-face talks about Mideast peace can be held.

It's not the first time in recent months that Israeli announcements of continued or impending settlement construction has threatened the fragile détente that allows Israeli and Palestinian leaders to speak, albeit it indirectly. An announcement by a highly placed Israeli official during Vice President Joe Biden's visit to Israel earlier this year rocked the region and tested the long-standing diplomatic ties between the United States and Israel. That testing is likely to continue.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is candid about the settlement issue. He seems to favor a partial if not full freeze in construction. Unfortunately, the coalition that allows him to remain in power takes a different view. Right-wing members of the coalition as well as opposition leaders want Israel to continue settlement building, regardless of the diplomatic cost.

That short-sighted view leaves Mr. Netanyahu in a bind. He can pursue peace and risk losing office, or he can support settlement building, probably stay in office and jeopardize any useful talks in the region. Hopefully, the prime minister can find a path that allows him to mollify his political opponents and continue the pursuit of peace.

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

TIMES FREE PRESS

EDITORIAL

STRENGTHEN FDA'S ROLE

A national recall of romaine lettuce that has sickened people with a rare strain of E. coli poisoning is another in a lengthy list of reminders that the nation's food safety controls are inadequate. Improvement is needed.

The recall, which covers Tennessee, Georgia, 21 other states and the District of Columbia, is for lettuce primarily sold to food service and wholesale customers by a single distributor. The recall does not involve bagged or mixed lettuce in supermarkets, though it is possible, health officials say, that some of the contaminated product might have been used in salad bars. The recall is worrisome, both because it could cause illness or death and because it is another in a series of problems created by food-borne contaminants.

In recent years, reports of widespread illness and even deaths from contaminated foods -- including meat, chicken, peanuts, peppers, cantaloupe, tomatoes and spinach -- have prompted a series of recalls. That history, plus the present concern about romaine lettuce, strongly suggests that Congress should revisit and strengthen the nation's food-safety regulations and enhance the Food and Drug Administration's power to enforce them.

Long-delayed legislation to do both is moving through Congress, but it inexplicably has been delayed. Prompt consideration and discussion of the bill followed by approval would help safeguard the nation's food chain and protect the health of Americans.

At least 19 people have been made ill in the current E. coli poisoning outbreak, and another 10 probable cases are being investigated by the Centers for Disease Control. The investigation is moving slowly. E. coli O145, the strain linked to the romaine lettuce, is more difficult to identify than the more common E. coli O157 implicated in many other food-borne illnesses. Only a handful of labs in the country, according to a CDC official, can do the test necessary to identify the less common strain.

The current outbreak appears to be on the wane and those made ill by the lettuce have recovered or are on the way to recovery without lasting effect. Officials, in fact, believe, but can't be sure, that the worst is over since the "use by" date of the lettuce implicated in the E. coli outbreak has expired. Still, the outbreak should not be ignored; the next food-bone illness might not be so limited or so benign.

The recall of the romaine lettuce is both positive and negative evidence of a job well done. On the one hand, the FDA and businesses involved acted promptly to prevent widespread illness once it became evident that a dangerous food had reached the marketplace. In the best of worlds, however, the FDA should have the ability to prevent such foodstuffs from reaching consumers. Nothing can guarantee absolute safety in the nation's food supply, but passage of a meaningful food safety bill would elevate standards and enhance disease prevention.

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

TIMES FREE PRESS

EDITORIAL

HIGH COURT NOMINEE KAGAN

What kind of judge -- or justice of the Supreme Court of the United States -- would you want to hear "your" case, if you had one, whatever it might be?

Most of us -- unless we were at legal fault -- would readily agree that we would want a judge (or justice) who is "learned in the law," understands and upholds the Constitution of the United States, is brilliant in intellect, wise and perceptive -- and is impartial in devotion to justice, with no preconceived philosophic agenda having any influence.

With "good" judges or justices, we might never know, or fear, whether a judge or justice is "liberal" or "conservative," if he or she is totally devoted to upholding the Constitution, the law and justice.

But unfortunately, as all of us have seen too often in recent years, that standard is not always upheld by the presidents who nominate justices, or by the senators who confirm justices, or by the justices themselves.

Justice John Paul Stevens has announced his retirement from the high court. President Barack Obama has selected his second Supreme Court nominee. She is Elena Kagan, who has been dean of Harvard Law School and U.S. solicitor general, "the government's lawyer."

She will be examined by members of the United States Senate. With Democrats in the Senate majority, in all likelihood she will be confirmed.

But is she the most qualified choice to become a justice on the Supreme Court?

By all reports, she is a fine and highly intelligent lady, who came up "the hard way." She has no previous judicial experience. It is best for Supreme Court nominees to have had previous court experience, which may reveal ability, personal qualifications and possible prejudices, such as an inclination to "legislate" rather than just "judge" impartially.

With the nominee having had no judicial experience and little legal writing, some are wondering just what her philosophy may be. One case that may give a clue involved her position in kicking U.S. military recruiters out of Harvard Law School's recruitment office because of the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy that involves recruitment of homosexual members for the armed forces.

The nominee surely will be questioned about that -- and other pertinent issues.

We hope she can assure us she can become a brilliant and impartial justice -- and then live up to that standard. Will her answers give that assurance in the examination yet to come?

Our goal in selecting all Supreme Court justices should be defense of the Constitution and impartial justice under the law for all.

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

TIMES FREE PRESS

EDITORIAL

'GOD BLESS AMERICA'

In one of the unique gatherings characteristic of Chattanooga, 1,500 local citizens met at the Convention Center on Monday at daybreak for our community's 32nd annual Leadership Prayer Breakfast. It continued one of our community's finest traditions with real meaning.

Such occasions don't "just happen." It takes lots of volunteer community work and cooperation to make such events take place.

Charles Monroe was chairman, assisted by Vice Chairmen Judge Clarence Shattuck, Jackson Wingfield, Tom Francescon and Lee Atchley, with Henry Henegar and Jim Ruane also working with the vigorous committee.

The featured speaker was Dr. David Barton, who heads a national pro-family organization, WallBuilders. He presented a colorful, fast-paced history of our great nation and its religious freedom.

After Chamber of Commerce President Tom Edd Wilson welcomed the big crowd, Donald Jackson presented an Old Testament reading and Dr. Jim Scales followed with a New Testament reading. John Zeiser led prayer for our national and state leaders, and David Parker led prayer for our city and county leaders.

Our national colors were placed by "Mike" Battery of the Marines, with invocation by Mrs. Stacie Caraway and a duet by Christine and Darrin Hassevoort.

Dr. Barton reminded us of America's unique history of freedom, our Christian heritage, and the amazing fact that just 4 percent of the people of our world live in this nation of freedom but that it possesses 25 percent of the world's material blessings. Dr. Barton called it "American exceptionalism."

In noting our unusual good fortune, he offered the challenge for us to remember our Christian heritage -- with gratitude.

Chattanooga is a wonderful community of fine people in a land that is blessedly free. The annual prayer breakfast provided a formal opportunity for us to give thanks to God, "from Whom all blessings flow."

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

TIMES FREE PRESS

EDITORIAL

TALIBAN IN TIMES SQUARE?

The radical Muslim Taliban gave safe harbor to terrorist Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan prior to and after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

So it is alarming that the Taliban are believed to have been behind the recent attempted car bombing in New York City's Times Square. The Obama administration said it found new evidence pointing to the Taliban in Pakistan, which borders Afghanistan. That is a reversal from its original statement that the suspect probably acted alone.

The suspected would-be bomber, Faisal Shahzad, is a recently naturalized U.S. citizen of Pakistani origin. He has said he trained with radical Muslims in his homeland.

Fortunately for the many people who were in Times Square when a vehicle full of potential explosives was left there, ineffective components were used and it did not explode.

But think of the devastation it could have wrought -- both physically to the immediate victims and emotionally to our nation -- if it had gone off. And what if terrorists drove car bombs into crowded areas from New York to Los Angeles, and to dozens of crowded cities in between, and simultaneously detonated them? There is very little direct defense against such vicious acts.

That makes it absolutely vital that our nation stay on the offensive against terrorists -- both at home and abroad -- to keep them off balance and unable to re-enact the horrible events of 9/11. They have made it clear they seek to harm us. We should reduce as much as possible their opportunities to do so by defeating them wherever they may be.

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

TIMES FREE PRESS

EDITORIAL

TALIBAN IN TIMES SQUARE?

The radical Muslim Taliban gave safe harbor to terrorist Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan prior to and after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

The suspected would-be bomber, Faisal Shahzad, is a recently naturalized U.S. citizen of Pakistani origin. He has said he trained with radical Muslims in his homeland.

Fortunately for the many people who were in Times Square when a vehicle full of potential explosives was left there, ineffective components were used and it did not explode.

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

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

TEHRAN TIMES

EDITORIAL

PREPARING FOR THE BIG ONE IN TEHRAN

BY M.A. SAKI

These days there is much talk about the high probability that a major earthquake is due to strike Tehran.

Some of the areas of the metropolis most likely to incur severe damage in a major earthquake have even been identified.

The Tehran governor's office has also taken some preparatory steps, such as holding earthquake drills in which tent hospitals were set up outside Tehran.

And the president has announced that he believes that about five million citizens must be convinced to move out of Tehran in order to save lives and improve the efficiency of the city's response to a major earthquake.

However, it is unreasonable to expect five million people to leave Tehran.

The city is currently home to about 10 million people and relocating about five million citizens would be neither practical nor economical.

Even now, about a quarter of a million people immigrate to Tehran annually in search of employment.

A number of proposals have been made, such as relocating the capital to another part of Iran less prone to major earthquakes, moving large military garrisons and the headquarters and factories of major companies like Iran Khodro and Saipa to other cities, taking measures to strictly enforce building codes, and formulating a plan to quickly relocate residences and workplaces sitting directly on top of fault lines.

The suggestion to move residences and workplaces from areas most likely to incur severe damage in a major earthquake may seem odd, but if a quake were to strike Tehran, the death toll and the economic losses would far outweigh the cost of relocation.

The 2003 earthquake in Bam in southeastern Iran, which caused about 30,000 deaths and great material damage, should serve as an example.

The Tehran Municipality has started a project to renovate the old and congested neighborhoods of south Tehran, but the pace of the implementation of the plan should be accelerated.

Seismologists have warned that it is very likely that Tehran will be hit by a major earthquake in the future.

And since earthquakes occur in cycles and the last major earthquake in Tehran occurred in 1830, it seems that a big one is due.

Taking all this into consideration, it is clear that Tehran must make serious efforts to prepare for the big one.

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

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

HURRIYET DAILY NEWS

EDITORIAL

FROM THE BOSPHORUS: STRAIGHT - THE REAL CULPRIT IN BAYKAL'S FALL

Keeping in mind that the Istanbul media alone hosts more than 400 daily newspaper columnists, there is little we can add to the deluge of commentary following the disgrace and resignation of Deniz Baykal, who until Monday was the head of the Republican Peoples' Party, or CHP.

How grave a sin is his indirectly acknowledged adultery? How damning the subplot of the career trajectory of a secretary promoted to member of Parliament? How depraved the mind that apparently filmed the two with a hidden video camera? How depraved the mind that ushered the clip to the Internet for the entire world to see?

The newsprint to explore all these topics will no doubt consume as many trees as a small forest fire. Perhaps even as many as a modest forest fire, given the indications that Baykal views his departure as more of a leave of absence than a resignation. So we will leave this commentary to others more qualified.

We do think it worth, however, pondering the culprit about which little has been said. This is neither a person nor a thing. Rather, it is the rules by which Turkish political parties function.

For Turkey actually does not have political parties in the sense that they are conceived of in any advanced democracy. Rather, Turkey has patronage networks that operate under the label of political party. Party leaders are despots. They effectively pick delegates to party congresses. They personally draft the party lists and candidate ballot positions in each and every constituency at election time. This guarantees that lawmakers have little connection to the constituencies they allegedly serve. It is in fact not uncommon for a candidate to run from one city in one election and another city in the next and this is seen as a minor detail. Parties benefit from a generous public dole, hence their cavernous headquarter buildings that have no counterpart for say America's Republicans or Germany's Social Democrats.

There is no small irony in the fact that the only party in Turkey with any resemblance of internal democracy and inclusiveness toward such groups as women is the pro-Kurdish Peace and Democracy Party, or BDP. But that is another story. In short, Turkish political parties are fiefdoms, sort of second cousins to the structures in one-party states. We saw this just last week when a short-lived witch hunt ensued after several members of the ruling Justice and Development Party, or AKP, strayed from the orders of their captain and commander in a significant vote.

It is this closed feature of the Turkish political landscape that incubates and nurtures conspiratorial tactics, plotting and backstabbing and all manner of gamesmanship. We think this had as much to do with the fall of Baykal as did anything else cited in the waves of commentary now breaking over public life in Turkey.

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

HURRIYET DAILY NEWS

EDITORIAL

WHAT'S GOING ON IN TURKEY? (II)

CÜNEYT ÜLSEVER

We are witnessing power struggle deepening into the private lives of political party leaders.

I wrote yesterday. The struggle is not only over the constitutional amendment package but to change the public

order that has managed to survive since the establishment of the Republic.

Founders of the republic, military-civilian-elite bureaucrats, applied impositions at the beginning, considering all were urgent and necessary.

There was no time for their vision to settle in. Therefore, the founding elite targeted "lifestyle" and decided to change the 600-year-old habits over the night.

They asked masses to adopt "modern lifestyle" and abandon "conservative lifestyle."

But none was aware of the fact the targeted lifestyle required giving up men's own values including apparel, eating habits, mind-body-and-spirit, philosophy and estheticism.

Masses, on the other hand, read visions of the republican elite as the denial of existence as the country faced a split between modern and conservative lifestyles.

The state instrument remained in the hands of the elite for a long time. Conservatives had to comply with exclusion from economic, political and social life unless they were willing to accept modernism.

Conservatives were alienated from professions having strong representative characteristics. In politics, they accepted tasks linked with masses and failed social inclusion.

Clearly, they stuck in ghettos and were forced to live in closed circles.

Conservatives adopting modern life benefited from advantages of being elite in every area. A new public order was established as part of a closed economic structure. Ankara backed Istanbul through public procurements and credits as Istanbul financed politics in Ankara through ever-growing economic power; even more so, Istanbul shaped up politics in the capital.

According to modernists, conservatives have no right to object to such system for they were representing what is old and dead. Besides, the minute they surrendered, all doors were opened to them.

People failed to distinguish what was right and wrong. So it was necessary to tame up masses, according to the elite. That's why the state instrument was needed.

The modernist truly believed in that what they were doing was definitely right and was not imposition.

As I wrote yesterday, a power struggle continues in the country, but this is not a fight between social classes.

Since social stratification stemmed from having different lifestyles and conservative lifestyle revolved around religious institution, political differentiation rather occurred between people with high religious sensitivities and laics.

However, during the late President Turgut Özal period, conservative Anatolian capital owners started to change the direction of power balance as conservatives had sufficient amount of money to finance politics.

We will continue tomorrow.

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

HURRIYET DAILY NEWS

EDITORIAL

BUSINESS JETS WORTH $170 BILLION TO BE SOLD IN 10 YEARS

As the impacts of the economic turmoil are gradually diminishing on aviation, a rally has started in the business jets market. The sector will keep its stable growth after 2012. The sector will sell 11,933 aircraft worth $170 billion within the upcoming 10 years.

The economic crisis, which started in September 2008 with the collapse of Lehman Brothers, has hit business jets most in aviation. Orders were either cancelled or delayed and companies facing financial troubles sold planes for less than their actual value.

The crisis hit sales of planes with small- and medium-sized body, worth $4 million to $24 million, the worst. Due to the cancellation of orders, contraction reached 42.8 percent. Manufacturers were dismissed thousands of workers and new plane projects were suspended until the recovery of the market.

The disruption in large-body, long-range aircraft worth more than $25 million was less than expected. The cancellation of orders to international companies with better financial situations remained at just 4 percent. Planes such as Gulfstream G550, Global Express, Falcon 7X could find customers over their actual value in second hand.

Propeller planes, which normally see lower sales compared to jets, drew high interest due to the crisis. The companies flying in short distances and abstaining from the high costs of jets oriented to turboprop engine planes such as King Air, Piaggio P180 and Cessna Caravan. The sales rose 10 percent.

The research revealed that the bad days are now over. As of 2012, the sales will reach the level of golden years of 2006 to 2008, with an average of 1,300 planes delivered annually. As of 2014, the figure is expected to climb to 2,000 planes annually. Within the upcoming 10 years, a total of 11,933 planes worth $170 billion will be sold. Light business jets draw highest demand. In this market, the total sales of Cessna Mustang, Embraer Phenom 100, Honda Jet models will reach 2,929 units. The sales of medium and larger body group such as Challenger 300, 605, Embraer Legacy 600/650, Falcon 2000, 900, Citation X, Gulfstream G250 will reach 2,184 units.

From passenger to business jet

Meanwhile, there is an activity in the market consisting of the business jets converted from former passenger planes. Once new planes such as Boeing 787 and Airbus A350 start operations at airlines, the delivery of their business jet models will also start.

Businesspeople traveling with a crowd and need larger spaces, particularly Arabs and Russians, are among the top customers for these planes. In smaller body, there are business jets such as Brazilian Embraer's Legacy 600, Lineage 1000, converted from regional aircraft. Moreover, Avro's planes in RJ and ATR series, which airlines sell for cheap, are purchased for $3 million to $4 million and turned into business jets with slight costs. This market is closely monitored by the businesspeople that would like to own large planes with less cost.

Private plane and helicopter manufacturers competed at the European Business Aviation Convention & Exhibition, or EBACE, which was more active compared to the previous two years. There were 486 companies with 74 planes in the fair on its 10th year in Geneva.

The Turkey representatives of the manufacturers were also at the EBACE. Turkish companies Gözen Group and Arkas were also among the participants.

Having overcome its financial problems, Eclipse has started production again. The manufacturer, whose name is now Eclipse Aerospace, aims at partnerships with Turkish companies to produce parts.

The Turkish market is getting more active with the new aircraft to be delivered in the upcoming term, such as Gulfstream G550, Global Express XRS, Falcon 7X, Challenger 850, Challenger 300, Phenom 300 and Cessna Mustang.

ucebeci@hurriyet.com.tr

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

HURRIYET DAILY NEWS

EDITORIAL

US AGAINST THEM!

BURAK BEKDİL

Let's be realistic. Suppose someone illegally, immorally videotaped the prime minister or a cabinet minister in what looks like an extramarital affair. Suppose further that that same someone delivered the tape to the Republican People's Party, or CHP, headquarters. What would have been the chances that the Old Guard at the HQ sit down over a long meeting table, have deliberations on what to do with the tape and eventually decide that secretly making this illegal material public would be immoral and agree to return it to the sender?

I'll tell you what: Nil. I'll also tell you what would have happened in that case. Someone at the Executive Board would have been tasked to carefully and ultra-discreetly leak the tape to a friendly journalist for maximum possible coverage in any means of media.

So the heart-broken CHP fans have no right to accuse the ruling Justice and Development Party, or AKP, for what they mysteriously – and unconvincingly – view as a plot, especially when they don't have any evidence to prove so.

CHP leader Deniz Baykal's emotional announcement to step down may have left behind tears and anger among party fans, but it has also left behind several unanswered questions. For instance, why did Mr. Baykal resign if, as he claimed, the videotape featuring him in an affair with an MP (and formerly his private secretary) was a "gross fabrication?"

Mind you, Mr. Baykal neither denied nor accepted the affair which we presume was the reason why he quit. Watching him make a pre-prepared sentimental speech, I almost feared he would do as senior religious figures have traditionally done in the face of evidence of a morally inexcusable act: I don't remember anything, I must have been drugged!

Having an affair or being faithful to his marriage is entirely Mr. Baykal's own business. So is his decision to step down as party leader. And so is his future chase for the "plotters" of this grandiose conspiracy. If a court verdict proves that the tape is not authentic, Mr. Baykal can then decide whether to make a comeback or not. Until then he will only have moral obligations, not legal, to the public.

All the same it is a pity that the Turks are once again ideologically blind. The same ideological polarization happened in the 1970s when for every leftist every rightist was bad and vice versa. Those were the days when people were killed because of what they wore, which newspaper they read, which café they frequented, which neighborhood they lived in, the shape of their moustache and even the songs they listened to.

Fortunately, Turks no longer kill Turks because of some trivial politically manifest behavior. But the general line of "judgment" is still based on an ideological divide, not along right and left wing this time, but along secular and pious worldviews.

Every little thing seems to have been reduced to a meaningless "us against them" equation. When the whole country eventually loses its principles, senses, fair judgment and soul, there will be no winner in what the Wall Street Journal called the "bloodless civil war."

In 2008, Hüseyin Üzmez, a 78-year-old Islamist columnist, was arrested on charges of sexually abusing a 14-year-old girl. Mr. Üzmez was eventually convicted of his crime. But immediately after the incident occupied headlines in the press, a chorus of Muslim intellectuals rushed to Mr. Üzmez's aid with articles filling several column inches and arguing that "this was either a secularist plot or the Muslim man must have been drugged." It was the same "us-against-them" thinking that pushed everyone on the pious camp to Mr. Üzmez's side.

Today we are witnessing a similar thing happening again, with differences that do not change the heart of the matter. This time the secularists are in trouble because their all-too-clean leader has been deeply embarrassed. I know that the Üzmez and Baykal cases are different. Mr. Üzmez's act constituted a serious offense whereas Mr. Baykal's affair can only be judged ethically. Ethically… That is the magic word. The two episodes are different from other points too.

Mr. Üzmez's case was based on an official complaint, and therefore was a judicial matter. Mr. Baykal's "affair" is based on a video whose authenticity is unknown at this stage. The Baykal video is also a judicial case, but not with Mr. Baykal standing as defendant. If caught one day the person or persons who produced and released the tape will be charged for violating privacy. The evidence against Mr. Üzmez was collected by the prosecutors. The evidence against Mr. Baykal was produced and released illegally. But none of that is of any importance.

Sadly I read dozens of opinion pieces, columns, analyses, behind-the-scenes reports and other commentaries, including readers' comments, on the Baykal case, and most reflected the same Turkish malady: It's us against them!

Secularist columnists rushed to Mr. Baykal's aid just like Islamist columnists had rushed to Mr. Üzmez's aide.

The pro-Baykal propaganda claimed the tape was a conspiracy, the single word that you hear most often if a warrior on either side of the great Turkish divide is caught red-handed. Funnily, Mr. Baykal's defenders established that the video was a fabrication even when Mr. Baykal himself did not refute the allegations, or without any credible report that told us the tape was not authentic.

An extramarital affair is not illegal, but not generally appreciated either. There was not even a single comment that condemned the CHP leader conditionally – if the tape is authentic… It's still "us against them." I have even heard secularists defending Mr. Baykal on the grounds that "but the Islamists protect and safeguard their wrong-doers, why shouldn't we?" Yes, they often do. But if you repeat their behavior you will have no right to criticize them.

As for myself, I have a dream, knowing it will never come true. The great Turkish divide has been drawn along the wrong lines: secular and secularist Turks vs. pious and Islamist Turks. A better divide line could have been decent, honest Turks (secular, secularist, pious and Islamist) vs. corrupt, deceitful, immoral and dishonest Turks (secular, secularist, pious and Islamist).

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

HURRIYET DAILY NEWS

EDITORIAL

SEX, BAYKAL, AND VIDEOTAPE

MUSTAFA AKYOL

I am not really very curious about what other people do in their bedrooms. But the recent sex scandal that shook Deniz Baykal, the opposition leader, is too political to dismiss.

In case you haven't heard the news, here is the brief story: Last Thursday, an Islamist website ran the footage of a hidden camera showing Mr. Baykal with a female deputy of his party, the Republican People's Party, or CHP. The setting was a private house, and the scenes were much too private for these two people, which are both married to other people.

As you can imagine, the "Baykal affair" hit the headlines instantly. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan ordered an instant ban on the scenes, but they were already all over. What was disturbing was not just the "A" word (a.k.a. adultery), but the fact that Baykal had made her lady friend, Nesrin Baytok, a member of the Parliament in 2002, and that her husband got sweet contracts from CHP municipalities.

Conspiracies everywhere

In just a few hours, everybody started to ask, "Who really did this?" Someone had obviously set Mr. Baykal up by putting a camera in a place that he would not have preferred to have one. But there was nothing more than that to find a culprit. The Islamist website (habervaktim.com, which is informally affiliated with the radical and vulgar daily Vakit) was probably chosen as a medium for its known recklessness. But who chose them and passed the video was, and still is, unclear.

Yet we Turks love filling such gaps in facts with our subjective opinions. So, people from all political camps started to throw their respective conspiracy theories. A few figures from CHP blamed the renegade Şişli mayor, Mustafa Sarıgül, who is busy these days forming a new center-left political party. (This was joined with another bizarre news of an allegation that Sarıgül wanted to get Baykal shot!) Other CHP members suspected an internal coup against Baykal within his party. The CHP will have its general congress in just two weeks, and this seemed to be a perfect time to bring its all-powerful leader down.

Other conspiracy theories put the blame on the AKP government and its "Islamist" supporters. The crucial timing, according to this scenario, was not the CHP congress but the constitutional amendment package that the AKP has just passed from Parliament. Taking Baykal down at this critical juncture, the story went, would break the spearhead of the anti-AKP crusade, and put the last nail in the coffin of "the secular Republic."

Meanwhile, some pro-AKP figures created their own conspiracy theories. This was, they argued, cooked by anti-AKP forces to put the blame on the incumbent party. A Turkish reader who emailed me the other day was quite concerned about this. "Don't you see Mustafa Bey," he was asking, "this was done to accuse the AKP for spying, and thus to create a justification for a new closure case."

Well, I am not "seeing" any of these conspiracies yet, for there is simply no fact that we can base them upon. What I rather see is the following.

First, Baykal could not have continued his political career after such a nasty scandal. Yes, it was quite unethical to videotape him secretly and then pass the views to the media, but what was revealed in those scenes was also quite unethical. It is worse then the Clinton-Lewinsky affair, for that was only about intimacy. (Or, according to Mr. Clinton's categories, even a lesser form of that.) But this case is also about the political ascendance of a woman thanks to her intimacy with the party's leader. This is no small matter.

A hell of a comeback?

So, secondly, Baykal should have resigned, as he did the other day. But he should have done it a bit more humbly. He, instead, lashed out against "the conspirators," and put the blame directly on the government. He, in other words, joined the choir of conspiracy theorists without putting any credible evidence to the table.

I think Erdoğan was right to react to this accusation in his response to Baykal, which came only three hours later.

To me, as well, it doesn't seem credible that the AKP leadership will do something this nasty (and risky) just to get rid of Baykal. "We have actually been quite happy with Mr. Baykal," Ömer Çelik, one of Erdoğan's closest aids, said half-jokingly on the TV the other night. "He makes sure that the CHP remains a rigid ideological party with limited popular appeal."

My humble guess is that this scandal has something to do with a power struggle within the CHP rather than being an attack on the party. But Baykal is now trying to turn this into his advantage by portraying the whole affair as an AKP conspiracy against him, his party, and "Atatürk's Republic."

By this rhetoric, he might be even hoping for a victorious comeback, as he did shortly after his resignation in 1999 following an election defeat.

If he can pull that off, I will, in turn, take my hat off, for such a persistent in-house success without any real political success is an amazing success.

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

HURRIYET DAILY NEWS

EDITORIAL

BAYKAL'S DEPARTURE IS GOING TO CHANGE A LOT

MEHMET ALİ BİRAND

Deniz Baykal especially during recent years has received much criticism. People complaint, that because of him young and bright leaders were hindered and the party could not adjust to changing conditions.

I think Deniz Baykal was the most talented leader that the CHP could come up with. It was time for a change, but it would have been better if it would've taken place after upcoming elections in order not to take on the risk of making change in the leadership of the party right before elections.

There is no decent captain within the party anyway.

Anyhow, it's all over with.

Let's look ahead.

Deniz Baykal and his attitude in recent years was not only an opposition leader. He'd also become a leader for a significant part of the nationalists, the Kemalists, the military and the judiciary.

When he spoke he claimed these segments like no one else could. Everyone would focus on him. His way of

articulating himself was as important as his words.

With rhetoric that Bahçeli never could posses Baykal used to give the administration a hard time and was an opposition leader that even battered and bruised and intimidated the administration.

The AKP will be relieved by Baykal's retreat. No matter what anyone says, the nationalist segment, to say the least, will remain without a protector until the CHP gets up and back on its feet and finds another leader. Until then they will keep staggering.

AKP will get some relief at the referendum and elections

Don't get me wrong or misinterpret my article. I don't think the administration has anything to do with it. An administration wouldn't harbor such an ugly and risky deed. But we should not ignore that the administration will have some relief considering present circumstances.

The CHP from now on will get lost in such internal accounting and appointing a leader that it will be difficult for the party to conduct opposition during the referendum that will take place two months from now.

If the AKP manages the referendum smoothly then we should not ignore the possibility that the AKP could move 2011 elections to an earlier date and have the country vote even before the CHP is able to get back on its feet.

In such a situation, it is not hard to guess how easy it would be for the AKP to win.

Deniz Baykal's resignation is one of the most vehement and important aftershocks experienced in Turkey.

Russia is Turkey's most important business partner

Turkey is hosting its most important business partner and neighbor.

No matter how you look at it, Russian President Medvedev's visit is very crucial in respect to Turkey.

We always say that we have a strategic collaboration with the United States. And we call Washington our strategic ally. But we are all aware that it is a hollow partnership. Neither the Americans nor Ankara take the word "strategic" serious.

We also try to form a strategic partnership with many countries around us. But they know that this will only be words. If you were to ask me which country best reflects the expression "strategic partnership," I'd say Russia without hesitation.

Trade between Turkey and Russia amounts to $35 billion whereas trade with the United States vegetates around $15 billion. Our relationship with Washington is limited to a political relationship between a regional power and a super power. There is no rationale for the skinny trade volume between the largest economy in the world and the rising star in the region. As long as it stays at this level relations are condemned to erode.

Numbers in our relationship with Russia reflect the energy and depth of the relationship:

A great part of our energy need is met by Russia. Turkey obtains 62% of its gas from Russia.

Russian tourists keep Antalya on its feet. The number of tourists coming from Russia amounted to more than 2,640,000 in 2009.

Turkish contractors have the best success in the Russian market. There are 300 Turkish firms that realize 22 percent of contractor services in Russia.

Numbers quoted above are way beyond a hollow strategic partnership. For, these are concrete numbers that will increase in times to come.

You may guess Ankara's weight in the region in case of an intensified relationship between Turkey and Russia.

As a matter of fact, this reality is progressively starting to prove itself.

Let's not make miscalculations, collaboration between Turkey and Russia will shape the region in years to come. You'll see more rapprochement of the two countries. Commercial relations reaching these levels will be the driving force of the relationship.

I know that one other aspect of the relationship having come this far is a rapprochement between Erdoğan and Putin based on mutual trust. From now on this needs to continue on the same level.

Based on all of these reasons the visit of Russian Minister of State Medvedev should not be considered important only in respect to these two countries but also in respect to the region

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

HURRIYET DAILY NEWS

EDITORIAL

SEX, POWER AND POLITICIANS

JOOST LAGENDIJK

Once in a while, it happens in every country. A politician is caught with his pants down. An anonymous source sends a tape to the media of a married Member of Parliament or a minister having sexual intercourse with a woman who is clearly not his wife. Most of the time, the messenger turns out to be a personal or political enemy of the exposed politician or a thrill-seeking journalist. Sometimes party rivals cannot find a better way to get rid of their colleague than exploiting the dark sides of his personal life. But the consequences of these reported acts of indecent behavior differ strongly per country.

We all know how Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi gains popularity each time the media report about his affairs with young students or more experienced call girls. Other Europeans keep wondering how it is possible that the guy gets away with it but apparently most Italians see the erotic adventures of their political leader as a further proof of his continuous masculine strength and ability to lead the nation by example. In France, the press normally does not report on these kinds of incidents. But when, after many years, it turns out that a former president of the Republic had a long affair with his mistress, most French do not judge him too harshly on that faux pas. On the other hand, in Germany it would be extremely difficult for a politician to survive the publication of embarrassing pictures.

In the Netherlands, there was a similar case as we witness now in Turkey, some years ago on the local level. A well known social democrat was caught on security cameras while having sex with a liberal colleague in the parking lot of the town hall. For weeks the news made it to the headlines. Many calls were made on the haunted politician to resign, both from within his own party and from the opposition. The reason most mentioned was the expectation that, from then on, the man would not be able to function properly because everybody would only see him as the famous adulterer and not any longer as the talented representative, defending the interests of his electorate. In the end, he did not give in, claiming it was a painful but personal matter, not a political one. He stayed on as a member of the local government and, two years later, became the mayor of another big town.

To be honest, I personally agree with the assessment that politicians should be judged on their public performance and not on their private life. Unless what they do totally contradicts what they say. One example being conservatives who preach the values of family life but who then turn out to be the regular customers of prostitutes.

In the case of Deniz Baykal, we are not talking about such hypocrisy that should indeed be punished. As you know, according to me, the CHP leader should have stepped down in the past for other reasons, the most important one being his dogmatic opposition to the further democratization of Turkey. But he should not leave politics because of an affair with a colleague to which both, as far as we know, agreed.

In fact, I do not think that this is the real reason behind Baykal's announcement to step down. I cannot believe that the man who, for so many years, personally remodeled the CHP, would give up that power only because of the present allegations. On the basis of the information that we now have, my guess is that there are two possibilities. Firstly, Baykal is brilliantly using this unforeseen incident to strengthen his own position in the run-up to the party conference. If and when a desperate party calls on him to reconsider his decision, I am convinced he will. Result: a united party with a tested leader that managed to survive this cowardly attack by anti-CHP forces. Second option: the leaked tape is part of a planned assault by opponents within CHP on the man seen by many as the main obstacle to future electoral success. Baykal is fully aware of this internal opposition and has made the calculation that stepping down first and coming back later, will strengthen his hand inside the party.

For those reasons, I think that this affair will not be categorized in political history as another example of sex and the politician. Better file it under power and how to keep hold of it

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

HURRIYET DAILY NEWS

EDITORIAL

SHOULD BAYKAL RETURN?

YUSUF KANLI

Even though those in power currently in Turkey might not share the idea, the country's ninth president, Süleyman Demirel, is the dean of Turkish politics.

For more than 50 years he was in active politics. He first came to power in 1965 in the aftermath of the return to democracy after the 1960 coup, was in power during the 1971 coup by memorandum and was in power in the 1980 coup. Forced many times to leave government, but no coup, internal exile, political ban or virtual house arrest succeeded in bringing an end to his political life, which he eventually crowned with seven years in the presidency during which he won the hearts and minds of even his diehard opponents. Ever since his presidential term came to an end in May 2000, he has been an above-politics fatherly figure in Turkish politics.

"Politicians should come and go through the votes of the people. What we are witnessing nowadays is not definitely a civilized development… Politics is a difficult thing in Turkey. It is a great amorality to ruin the reputation of a politician through resorting to some ugly and immoral methods. There was poisonous gas in Turkish politics, now nuclear bombs have entered Turkish politics," said Demirel, commenting on Baykal being forced to step down from the leadership of the main opposition Republican People's Party, or CHP.

The writer of this column is no fan of Baykal and indeed has written many times in this column over the past many years that his leadership of the CHP and rather conservative political approach has been the biggest impediment to the advance of social democrat politics in this country. Unfortunately he has been no different from other Turkish political leaders in using to the maximum the anti-democratic clauses of the laws on election and political parties and silencing the critics and opponents within the party through various methods, including expulsion from the party or making changes in the party statute and making virtually impossible any challenge to his leadership at party's conventions.

Yet, politicians should come and go through vote. Otherwise, through duel of tapes, backstage Byzantine tactics and all sorts of amorality or, as Demirel described, the use of nuclear bombs to battle political opponents, this country will turn into a "Wild West" where all kinds of dirty wars will become routine.

Baykal's resignation from party leadership is not an exit from active politics, but indeed a step aimed at both containing the damage the nuclear bomb fired on him and the CHP, while at the same time generating a spirit of togetherness and a determination in the CHP and among the supporters of the CHP not to surrender to amorality and fight back.

Perpetrators of the conspiracy against Baykal and the CHP most probably made some serious miscalculations. Baykal, sure, was a political leader who nourished himself a reputation as if he was glued to the leadership, was quite comfortable being a "perennial" opposition leader with ample time to spend with his grandchildren and had no ambition of coming to power and thus assuming the responsibility of administration.

Therefore, it was perhaps normal for the perpetrators to assume that with the release of the sex tape – the accuracy of which is not yet confirmed – Baykal would not resign from CHP leadership and would be compelled to fight for his own political survival rather than waging an effective campaign to get the people to vote down the constitutional amendment package which, if approved by the nation, might create a high judiciary obedient to the ruling Justice and Development Party, or AKP. Baykal's resignation has foiled the conspiracy or the designed result of the conspiracy.

Of course, resignation from party leadership was a very difficult decision to make and indeed a very responsible attitude a politician could adopt. And, definitely, politicians, like governments, should come and go through the vote of the people. Yet, Baykal has not quit active politics by resigning from the CHP leadership. On the contrary he has elevated himself to a new and enforced position to fight better the conspiracy he and his party was subjected to. With his decision he has won the admiration of the people as a "responsible politician."

If Baykal, under pressure from the delegates, youth and women branches and the entire organization of the CHP agrees to become a candidate for leadership he will definitely be re-elected but he not only will become a lame duck leader who staged an immoral comeback game and the perception that he is a politician glued to the chair of the perennial opposition leader will be consolidated.

Whereas, today Baykal has elevated himself to the status of the Willy Brandt of the Turkish social democrat movement while, at the same time, has sharpened the opposition to the AKP rule of the country

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

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

I. THE NEWS

EDITORIAL

HILLARY'S CHARGES

While making it a point to praise the Pakistani government for its efforts against terrorism, the US secretary of state has also levelled some rather serious charges. She says that people in government, even if not those at the highest levels, know more about where top terrorist leaders, including Osama bin Laden and Mullah Omar, are located than they say. It is hard to know what evidence the US has to back such charges. It is also a fact that similar allegations have been made before. Like Ms Clinton's latest assertions in a television interview, the main purpose appears to be to heap pressure on Pakistan. The weight must surely be an uncomfortable one. The question is why Islamabad does not do more to prevent it from being laden on. The impression that it is willing to move against terrorism only when pushed to do so by Washington is damaging both at home and the international level.

It is of course impossible to say who knows what, and for that matter whether or not the 'information' is accurate. There has for years been conjecture about the whereabouts of Mullah Omar. As for Bin Laden, it is unclear if he is dead or alive. But we would expect Pakistan's vast intelligence network to be able to establish these facts and also pin-point the whereabouts of key individuals. The failure to do so is disturbing and the consequences cannot be pleasant. There is another dimension to all this. Rather than simply trying to placate Washington or respond to the tough orders delivered from there, Islamabad needs to take the initiative itself. It must ensure that any strategy against terrorism serves its own interests, at least as much as those of the US. In this respect it is essential that it plans the strategy to be pursued itself. There must today be some question as to just how relevant men like Bin Laden are in the wider struggle against militancy. The fact is that this threat has been divided and sub-divided many times, spawning groups that exist in many places. It is only in our interest if Islamabad makes a greater effort to bring them to book, and by doing so demonstrate its commitment to fight terror without appearing to cave in to orders barked out by US leaders.

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

I. THE NEWS

EDITORIAL

SETTING BOUNDARIES

Once again the chief justice of Pakistan has gone to bat for the rule of law, and for that rule to apply to all no matter their place or station. A three-member bench heard a case on Monday against the construction of commercial buildings within Fatimah Jinnah Park, including a McDonalds, a bowling alley and most lately a club, misleadingly named the 'Citizens Club' which far from being a facility for the citizenry would be for the use of the elites, similar to those that use the Islamabad Club. The park is one of the most popular public spaces in Islamabad. It has seen tasteful and appropriate development of children's play areas that are well-equipped and maintained. Part of its beauty lies in the fact that it is there for all, rich and poor alike, and anybody may come and go freely -- or not.

It appears that permissions for the construction of all these developments have been given by three prime ministers who have acted in direct contravention of the Constitution by so doing. As the chief justice observed during the proceedings, prime ministers may have authority, but they do not of themselves constitute the law, and are beholden to both the law and the constitution. For its part the Capital Development Authority on the one hand has a duty to provide recreational facilities befitting a capital city, and on the other to protect public space from private exploitation. It may be reasonably argued that a fast-food outlet and a (single-storey) bowling alley are legitimate use of public space as they are open to all; but the construction of an exclusive enclave within public space is a development beyond the pale and needs stopping in its tracks – no matter who granted the 'right' to build it. Achieving a balance in this matter will be for the apex court to decide. The fait accompli presented by ten-pin bowling and burgers is arguably in the public interest as they enhance a public amenity, whereas a club for rich fat cats does not. It is to be hoped that the apex court rules – pragmatically - in favour of the poorer majority.

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

I. THE NEWS

EDITORIAL

HUNZA AT RISK

Thousands of people in Hunza-nagar, in Upper Hunza, face the risk of displacement as fears mount that a lake in the Hunza River, created by a landslide in January, could burst its banks. Authorities have asked villages which face a flooding threat to begin evacuation. About 1,200 people who lost homes as a result of the landslide are already housed in makeshift shelters located at schools. The catastrophe in Hunza where around 13,000 people face displacement has received limited attention in the mainstream media. Despite diligent work by the FWO to create a spillaway for water dammed in the river, it has proved impossible to re-open road links. People trapped in the Gojal tehsil say they have received little help and have faced acute food shortages. It must now be hoped the difficult task of moving people in danger out of their homes can be managed in an organised manner.

There is also a need to ensure that the people who have moved away are offered adequate shelter and assistance. There is another dimension to the natural disaster. At present the Karakorum Highway, offering Pakistan a vital link with China, stands blocked. Some experts have raised questions over whether the road can be salvaged. It is of course essential that this happen. Every effort must be made to save the highway and help from other nations sought if required. The task, it is already clear, is not easy. The terrain is inhospitable, the natural disaster unfortunate. But all possible effort is required to re-open the Karakorum Highway, essential both for trade and to keep intact the many benefits Pakistan derives from its links with China.

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

I. THE NEWS

THEIR BEST IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH

ZAFAR HILALY

By the looks of it, the Romans considered civilisation as a way of living, an attitude of mind, of which the foremost principal was equal respect for men and their beliefs. They assessed the degree of civilisation of each nation not only by its laws or constitutions, or its literature or culture, or its wondrous edifices, but also by how much respect its society offered to its fellow man and his beliefs. By such a yardstick we are in the Stone Age, and regressing.

While our society is divided between the rich and the poor, the literate and the illiterate, the powerful and the weak, it is the desire of all, rich, poor, weak, strong alike, to have more of the necessities of existence regardless of the respect owed to their fellow man, which is troubling. And it is religion that deficient societies such as ours exploit to obtain for themselves an advantage.

Sadly, more wars have been fought, more turmoil generated and more lives lost in the name of religion than any other cause in world history. Religion has been used to motivate the populace even when power and lucre have been the goals. Muslim nations fighting each other declare their adversary kafir before they join the battle. This makes it easier for them to go on a killing spree which even genuine kafirs would balk at.

As Pakistan comprises (virtually) only Muslims, one would have thought that religion could not be made an issue or exploited as an instrument of social or political change. But because without religion no fight seems worth dying for, sectarian differences are bandied about as reason enough to kill. The length of the beard, the manner of the dress, the extent of covering of the woman's body and the observance of rituals--all are made to count. And all this in a society where priests do not (as yet) rule.

Thus, today the Annual Confidential Reports of all government officers require the reporting officer to indicate whether the officer being reported on is a good Muslim. That Pakistan's greatest hypocrite, Ziaul Haq, a declared accessory to a (judicial) murder, was responsible, says it all. In Pakistan, the murderer and his victim, the robber and the robbed, all seek His help, which is understandable, but what is not is how one of them expects to retrieve his property while the other make off with it at the same time, and all with God's help.

Needless to say, in a society which places prime importance on a man's religious obligations rather than those to his fellow men or the state, which is the case in Pakistan, turmoil will prevail. Especially if each sect believes that any other interpretation of the Sharia is heretical, nay, beyond the pale of Islam. Our clerics wrangle for religion, fight for it, and die for it, anything but live for it. They prefer to politicise Islam rather than make politics Islamic.

Today, those who would have us forcibly abandon our beliefs, and our interpretation of the Sharia, are the Taliban. One would have thought that because they were a small minority and because their beliefs were against the grain of our culture and ethos society's response would have been swift, united and decisive. That was not the case. It required the Taliban to visit mind-boggling cruelties on the populace over a considerable period of time before the tide of public opinion finally turned against them. And this should have been a signal to our rulers just how badly they are perceived and how woeful their performance has been that antediluvian medieval bigots could be considered as rivals for public affection. And, more so, how deep is the malignancy that afflicts society and the danger that the malaise might become terminal unless drastic remedial measures are taken.

And yet, today one has to strain to see if anything is being done. Action, it is said, will furnish belief. However, the only action one sees is by the army. More must be done to reclaim lost hope in the areas affected by the insurgency. Those who teach and preach our Islam must return and relocate among the people. And teachers, health workers, civil servants and judges do the same. The unemployment and poverty which coexist with acts of murder, sabotage and public demoralisation, like the destruction of police stations, hospitals and schools that seem to have become the pattern with the same destabilising aims, must be thwarted. All of which is possible, but none of which will be, unless a completely new paradigm is in place.

With the civil government unable to cope, the key lies in transforming the role of the army from a mere deterrent force to one that will not only "clear and hold" but also "build." Every home destroyed or damaged as a result of the fighting must be rebuilt. And while all this is going on the populace must be protected and secured against the depredations of the enemy, which only the army can ensure.

The effort must be a comprehensive one. Education makes us what we are. Not only has the fate of the country but also the power of government depended on control of the schools. Alas, this power has slipped from the grasp of successive governments.

Of the 33,000 madressahs which are functioning today, only 13,000 are registered. The rest operate largely unmonitored and unsupervised, free to teach what they wish, even though education is the soul of a society. Of course, not all of them are churning out potential recruits for the Taliban, but many do, because 11,000 students annually emerge from madressahs with nothing else but the ability to recite the Quran by heart. Their intellect "is perfectly and permanently preserved at the stage of boyhood." Well-developed bodies and underdeveloped minds. In any case, as a great teacher once said, "What is the use of transmitting knowledge if the individual's total development lags behind?" What, indeed, one may ask, is the point of being able to read if one is unable to distinguish what is worth reading?

In this regard, it is not that this government has no plan, it does not even know where to begin.

The crisis that Pakistan confronts today is far greater than any experienced in the past. We are witnessing a comprehensive and systemic failure of governance. Nor can we merely sit on our hands as the clock winds down to the predictable denouement. If we believe that things are bad, we have a duty to prevent them from

worsening, regardless of the consequences.

The government claims that it is doing its best, but clearly its best is not enough. And neither the politicians nor the military can do it on their own. The government cannot tackle the extremists by itself as the police, though brave, are decrepit. And the military needs help to mobilise public support. The two must, therefore, come together. Perhaps one way to start would be the formation of a government of national unity.

The writer is a former ambassador. Email: charles123it@hotmail.com

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

I. THE NEWS

EDITORIAL

FREEING EDUCATION

BASIL NABI MALIK

Though much attention has been paid by the media to the various clauses of the 18th Amendment, the guaranteeing of the right to education in the newly enacted Article 25A of the Constitution has not received little meaningful coverage. The right to education has been considered fundamental in the Constitution under Articles 9, 14, 18, 20 and 22 in the pre-18th Amendment era.

As no explicit clause guaranteeing the same had ever been included in the constitution prior to the 18th Amendment, the courts addressed the issue by widening the ambit of the right to life under Article 9, taken together with other articles, to include the right to education. As such, it was stated that in order to be able to sustain a minimum standard of living, to uphold your right to life, a certain level of education was necessary. This implicated Articles 14, 18, 20, and 22, which elaborate upon issues of the dignity of man, the right to trade or to carry on a lawful profession, the right to manage one's religious institutions of teaching, and pertinent safeguards in respect to religion in educational institutions.

Along with these articles, Article 37 of the Constitution was often mentioned as it sys the state shall provide free and compulsory education to its citizens at the earliest, subject to the availability of resources. However, the latter provision is within the Principles of Policy section of the Constitution which, vide Article 30, is not enforceable by any court of law in Pakistan. The courts therefore have seldom questioned the policy decisions made by the government with regard to education, unless they were made in unfair exercise of authority.

However, in defining the tight to education, the Supreme Court in 2000 SCMR 1222 has said that the "right to seek admission in an educational institution and to continue studies therein was always subject to the rules of discipline prescribed by the institution, and therefore, a student who intended to pursue his studies in the institution was bound by such rules." Furthermore, the Sindh High Court in 2007 PLD Kar 116 stated that any "unreasonable restraint, hindrance or condition on its (the right to education) exercise would be ultra vires [a violation of] the Constitution".

This seems to have been further elucidated in several cases, including two Lahore High Court cases, 2006 CLC 463 and 2005 PLD Lah. 428, which, when taken together, seem to enunciate that whereas an individual has the right to "seek" education, the Constitution does not explicitly guarantee any right to "free education". This appeared to restrict the application of the legal concept to a person having an equal right to attend an educational institution, subject to his fulfilling the lawful prerequisites of gaining admission into the said educational institution, including its financial requirements.

However, the 18th Amendment thereafter enacted Article 25A, which states: "The state shall provide free and compulsory education to all children of the age of five to sixteen years in such manner as may be determined by law". Here the right seems to have been redefined to include free education.

Although quite laudable, there are several impediments to its enforcement.

The most problematic part of this clause is the portion which states that the right to education shall be provided "in such manner as may be determined by law". At the moment, there seems to be no defined manner via which one could in fact dispense free education to the masses, and hence the question arises as to whether Article 25A would be enforceable in the absence of any explicit legal instrument delineating a manner of implementing it, as is apparently required by the said article. If one takes the view that the legislature would have to enact a legal instrument or legislation to enforce and implement the said article, the same would amount to rendering the constitutional article redundant in the meanwhile, and as is well settled, the courts would never attribute redundancy to any provision of the law. Furthermore, the word "law" not only constitutes statutory provisions and legislation, but also judicial principles set down by the courts of law. Hence, it may very well be the case that where the government and parliament are seen as failing in their responsibility to implement the said fundamental right, the court may via various judicial principles, including that of legitimate expectations and vested rights, start enforcing it, or at least make an attempt at doing so.

However, if in fact the above-mentioned impediments are resolved, certain questions still remain. For example, out of the estimated population of 185 million, children aged between 0-14 years are said to account for an approximate 40 per cent of the total populace. Hence, the question as to how the government intends to provide free education to such a massive demographic as encapsulated by the enumerated age bracket in Article 25A is yet to be answered. Furthermore, amongst other issues, the enforceability of the right may open the floodgates with respect to increased litigation in the high courts and the Supreme Court, further aggravating an already beleaguered and overworked superior judiciary.

With that said, nothing stated above takes away anything from the fact that the enactment of Article 25A is an achievement in itself. It is fraught with certain difficulties and bottlenecks which perhaps should have been anticipated and addressed prior to the passage of the 18th Amendment.

The writer is a Karachi-based lawyer. Email: basil.nabi@gmail.com

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

I. THE NEWS

EDITORIAL

WASHINGTON'S TOUGH TALK

AMIR ZIA

The US frustration over Pakistan's inability to curb militant activities on its soil and counter the scourge of extremist mindset has spilled again in public. This time, the tough-talk came from none other than US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton who, in an interview with CBS, said that Washington warned Islamabad of "severe consequences" if a successful extremist attack in the United States was traced back to Pakistan. In the interview, Clinton's praise for Pakistan's recent role in the war on terrorism comes as an after-thought and a balancing act with an uneasy ally, which appears dragging feet on many issues seen crucial by Washington and its western partners in the fight against Al Qaeda and other militant groups inspired by it.

Although Clinton refrained from explaining what the United States meant by those "severe consequences", the tough overtones of her message to Pakistan's civil and military leadership came through loud and clear, underlining both the complexity and fragility of relationship between the two countries.

The Obama administration, which so far proved more considerate than its predecessor regarding Islamabad's difficulties in tackling the problem of terrorism and extremism, slightly deviated from its approach by giving a tough public message. While many Pakistani politicians, analysts and commentators are likely to see Clinton's statement as yet another opportunity to fan anti-US hysteria in the country and discuss myriad conspiracy theories, there has been hardly any serious soul-searching regarding the fact that why most global and regional acts of terror have their tentacles in Pakistan. Why does Pakistan attract fanatics and extremists of all shades and colours from across the globe? Why does it remain a fertile breeding ground for the local militant and extremist groups?

Faisal Shahzad, belonging to an educated and affluent family, is the latest, but definitely not the last, addition to the long and expanding list of Pakistani extremists -- going international. And even before the US secretary of state appeared on CBS, many Pakistani political pundits started calling this arrest as yet another "American conspiracy" against the Islamic Republic. The fact that this educated gentleman tried to explode a bomb in the heart of New York was conveniently forgotten and so was the information that he was trained to do so in the lawless tribal region of Pakistan.

Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi seemed to brush aside the attempted terror assault by saying that it was a reaction to drone attacks on Al Qaeda and Taliban militants in the tribal region – a fait accompli. His statement seems to provide justification more on behalf of the Taliban's actions rather than express Pakistan's determination to tackle the problem. A couple of days later Qureshi seems to calm his agitated nerves by saying that Faisal is not a Pakistani national, but a naturalised American citizen. As if this fact would help end Pakistan's responsibility. Pakistan's powerful military establishment, despite being on the forefront in the war on terrorism, in its initial reaction appeared in self-denial regarding Faisal's suspected links with the Pakistani terror network. Inter-Services Public Relations' Director General Major-General Athar Abbas said that it was premature to say that Faisal, son of a retired high-ranking air force official, had any connection with extremists operating in Pakistan.

This casual approach and off-the-cuff statements of civil and military officials are not going to help Pakistan ward off the tremendous pressure by the world and regional powers, which are singling it out for being the hub of terrorist and extremist forces. The world justifiably wants Pakistan to establish the writ of state on its territory. That means putting an end to the private militias, self-styled religious militant groups, their ideological mentors, financiers and abettors. Certainly, the task is easier said than done if one keeps in mind the past role of the state and its western allies, who helped create these very monsters they are being forced to fight now.

The Pakistani state failed to establish its writ on vast stretches of its territory, allowing them to stay lawless, ungoverned and backward. The task of establishing the writ became more complex and difficult due to the fact that religious extremism and fanaticism have countless facets and shades both in the mainstream urban centres as well as rural areas. Small and seemingly innocent ideological, political and financial contributions even by lawful and legal institutions and organisations often contribute in promoting radicalism and militancy in society. And the irony remains that the state institutions themselves played a major role in promoting these groups, which hound them now and refuse to unravel.

The situation is aggravated by the fact that the civil and military leadership failed to see and tackle the issue in its totality. Pakistan's approach since the Musharraf era has been fire-fighting and managing those broken arrows that failed to follow dictates of the state under the changed post-9/11 circumstances. The thrust of this approach has been more on fighting the symptoms rather than changing the direction of state policy and taking long-term measures for the eradication of religious extremism in all its forms and manifestations.

Even now, Pakistan seems to act under pressure against extremist individuals and groups, but leaving enough space where they can regroup, breathe, rest, revitalise and attack. Pakistan's lack of will or inability to act in a decisive manner against the terror network and its support structure is bringing more pressure on Islamabad. The message as stated by US Attorney General Eric Holder following the failed New York terror attack remains loud and clear -- either Islamabad acts against these forces or let the other do this task.

But Washington's tough public talk makes the Pakistan government's job more difficult. It gives firepower to the opposition and rightwing groups to confuse and scuttle the real issues of extremism and terrorism in the anti-US rhetoric. Yes, public warnings only strengthen the reactionary and extremist forces. The US should be seen as helping Pakistan in coming out of the vortex of terrorism rather than giving an impression that it is being bullied by the superpower. Just as in the case with India, militants will go to any extent to put strains in the Pakistan-US relations if they could with a terror strike, which remains a possibility.

Knee-jerk reactions and public warnings would certainly be counterproductive. On its part, Pakistan in its own enlightened self-interest should take the ownership of the war against extremism and terrorism, which is hurting the country more than any other nation. Along with surgical military operations, there is a need to counter militants and their allies on ideological and political grounds – a front which so far has been ignored.

Pakistani leaders should also ponder as to what the United States means by "severe consequences". As the tidings are, pressure on Islamabad is all set to increase. Will civil and military leaders be able to use this pressure to the country's advantage? Pakistan needs a proactive approach rather than a reactionary one when it comes to combating terrorism. And most important, Islamabad has to come out straight regarding its efforts and sacrifices and match its words with action.

The writer is business editor, The News. Email: amir.zia@gmail.com

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

I. THE NEWS

EDITORIAL

THE PRICE OF DEFIANCE

M SAEED KHALID

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's harsh criticism of the United States at the NPT Review Conference on May 3 and at a press conference the following day was given prominent coverage by the news media. But the real news was buried in a small paragraph reminding the readers that just as the Iranian president reiterated the peaceful nature of his country's nuclear programme, the American and European diplomats were working elsewhere to reach agreement with Russia and China on a fourth round of UN sanctions on Iran for pursuing its uranium enrichment activities.

Also on-board are the UK, France and Germany in formulating new sanctions not only because they agree with America's assessment of Iranian plans, but also because the other available options are not palatable for them. The idea of doing nothing while Iran goes ahead with its nuclear plans is the least appealing to them because it would change the regional power balance further in Iran's favour. A nuclear-capable Iran can lead to a rethink in some other countries about the West's ability to stop nations from following the nuclear path. The other reason for the Europeans coming along is that they do not support the hawkish ideas of Israel and the US of attacking Iran like it was done against Iraq seven years ago. Their preferred option has been to engage Iran, by exerting diplomatic pressure combined with incentives of trade and investment, even help it in building nuclear power plants.

Iran is already under US and UN sanctions with serious consequences. They have hurt Iran's trade and foreign investment. The civil aviation sector has been hit the hardest as Iran can neither buy the US planes nor the parts for its existing US-origin aircraft. The US succeeded in getting international sanctions on Iran through the Security Council in 2006 to stop Iran's trade in sensitive nuclear materials and technology. These restrictions were intensified by Resolution 1747 in March 2007. The third round of UN sanctions in 2008 restricts import of dual-use technology and asks the member states to inspect cargoes suspected of transporting nuclear materials to and from Iran. Measures like travel ban and freezing assets were imposed on individuals and companies engaged in Iran's nuclear programme. The US is aiming at a fourth round of US sanctions which would extend the blacklist to members of the Revolutionary Guards and firms controlled by them.

The Obama administration's big push for tightening the sanctions cannot materialise without green-light from Russia and China, and that is the reason a consensus on economic sanctions is taking longer than the US would have liked. Moscow and Beijing are faced with a dilemma; the two probably have a better understanding of Iran's motives and methods. They may even think that further sanctions would lead to the Iranian regime taking a harder line on the nuclear issue while the people are hit by economic and commercial restrictions. Nobody has forgotten how sanctions helped the Iraqi regime to tighten its grip on power and suppress any semblance of opposition.

Russia and China have important economic stakes in Iran. China would outright reject sanctions on oil trade as Iran is an important source of its oil imports while Russia has taken the position that restriction on petroleum imports by Iran is also a no-go area as that would result in hardship for ordinary citizens. Beyond these concerns lurks the larger question of the global power balance; Russia has vital geopolitical interests in the region surrounding Iran. Any move it makes on Iran will also take into account the likely consequences in terms of western influence in the Middle East and Central Asia.

President Obama and his team have been working extra hard to gain China's support on new sanctions but the result so far does not look promising. The Chinese might appreciate Obama's quality of patience, resulting in a change from the usual ramming technique the US diplomats have applied in the United Nations. The ongoing discussions on Iran sanctions give China a unique opportunity of acting as an emerging pole of power. As America's clout in global economic structure wanes and that of China gradually moves up, we may be entering a new phase where the current and the future super powers are posturing with an eye to the future. They can opt to co-exist and bring some relief to the anxious world or they can jostle and keep the rest of the world guessing about their fate.

The partisans of a quick decline of the unipolar system may be hoping that China will support Iran and show the direction towards a new power system wherein China and Iran, with some help from Russia, will constitute a counter-weight to the West. In a globalised world, the chances of realising such a dream do not look bright unless Iran reconnects with the mainstream of nations. The West's ability in building strong alliances has provided it the wherewithal for winning on the global chessboard. The lesson for those aspiring to challenge the western dominance is to match the western alliance by building a similar network.

The countries trying to withstand the US pressure are not lacking arguments, foremost being America's double standards, for instance, Washington has mobilised the international community against Iran while remaining impassive to Israel's nuclear weapon programme and offering a civil-nuclear deal to India.

The West may see China as the country which can persuade Iran to moderate its stance on uranium enrichment. But that may not be enough to bring a change in Iran's position. Iran's neighbours wonder if President Ahmadinejad is aware of the limitations of grandstanding as a substitute to a system of alliances. In order to have important and dependable allies, he needs to accommodate their views. The ball is squarely in his court.

The writer is a former ambassador of Pakistan to the European Union. Email: saeed. saeedk@gmail.com

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

I. THE NEWS

EDITORIAL

FIVE-YEAR NPT RITUAL

SHAMSHAD AHMAD

The 2010 Review Conference (RevCon) on the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) is currently taking place in New York, almost as a global non-event. The world remains focused on a host of other issues, with the dream of a nuclear-weapons-free world becoming more and more elusive.

Since the NPT came into force in 1970, the five-yearly review conferences have been taking place to assess the implementation of the treaty's provisions and to make "recommendations on measures to further strengthen it." In the first four review conferences, the most noteworthy common feature was the disillusionment of the non-nuclear parties with what they considered the failure of the three nuclear parties, the US, UK and the Soviet Union, to live up to their treaty obligations.

Article VI of the NPT obligates all signatory parties "to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament, and on a treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict international control." The treaty's preamble contains a similar undertaking on the part of the signatories.

The three nuclear parties were then viewed clearly in breach of their obligation to implement Article VI and the preamble, which are aimed primarily at preventing "vertical" proliferation. The nuclear powers were more interested in reducing the risks of "horizontal" proliferation and pursued their own non-proliferation agendas in an arbitrary and discriminatory manner.

Twenty-five years after the NPT entered into force, a conference of the state parties was held, as mandated in Article X, to decide whether the treaty should be extended indefinitely or for an additional fixed period, or periods. Accordingly, in 1995, the state parties at a conference decided to extend the treaty indefinitely. The non-nuclear states agreed to this extension only after the nuclear-weapons states assured them of their continued commitment to the complete elimination of nuclear weapons.

The 2000 RevCon was the first occasion for soul-searching and an opportunity to the state parties to reflect and find as to what went wrong in realisation of the NPT's objectives. The non-nuclear states wanted a clearer commitment from the nuclear-weapons states to complete elimination of nuclear weapons. They also defined 13 steps to serve as benchmarks of their progress in that direction. The nuclear-weapons states, once again as a ritual, undertook to pursue the goal of "total elimination" of their nuclear arsenals.

Like the earlier review conferences, the current one is not likely to go beyond the usual rhetoric. In recent years, agendas to NPT conferences have remained an inconsequential procedural matter. For most governments, the composition of the agenda has been a subject of political value. At the 2005 RevCon, no substantive discussions could begin for almost three weeks due to disputes over the agenda. A key sticking point is the 2000 conference mandate for review of the treaty taking into account the decisions and resolution adopted in 1995.

The success of the 2010 conference will depend on whether the nuclear-weapons-states will still agree to certain new elements in the context of Article VI. These include their unequivocal commitment to total elimination of their own nuclear arsenals, acceptance of the principle of irreversibility vis-à-vis nuclear disarmament, nuclear and other related arms-control measures, voluntary transparency in terms of their nuclear-weapons capability and implementation of agreements pursuant to Article VI, further reduction of non-strategic (tactical) nuclear weapons, and measures to further reduce the operational status of nuclear weapons.

If global disarmament is beyond reach today, it is only because the multilateral system is being used to legitimise the strategic and security setup for a few. There has been a progressive erosion of genuine will towards disarmament, as witnessed in the unifocal, self-serving non-proliferation policies of the key powers, violation of treaty obligations and the weakening of UN disarmament institutions.

The last session of the Geneva-based Conference on Disarmament is a case in point, where an attempt was made yet again to bulldoze a selective and preferential agenda, rather than adopt an integrated approach to holistically address the four core issues identified as crucial elements of nuclear disarmament. As a result, the consensus underpinning disarmament and non-proliferation has weakened. There are clear differences of perspective, approach and modalities among states to promote international and regional peace and security through disarmament and non-proliferation.

If global disarmament is beyond reach today, it is only because the multilateral system is being used to legitimise the strategic and security setup for a few. Ironically, their own huge nuclear stockpiles do not seem to prevent the nuclear powers from demanding that the rest of the world refrain from attempts to join the nuclear club, or be subject to punitive measures, a situation that amounts to telling people not to smoke while you have a cigarette dangling from your mouth.

Lack of progress in the resolution of longstanding regional disputes, emergence of new forms of conflicts, which emanate from power asymmetries, as well as economic and social disparities and injustices, continue to obstruct the objective of equal security for all. In addition to horizontal and vertical proliferation of WMDs at state level, the threat of acquisition and use of WMDs by non-state actors has become a growing concern. An attempt is also being made to "redefine" the whole nuclear issue by shifting the focus from nuclear disarmament to nuclear terrorism.

The new focus was reinforced at the nuclear security summit hosted by President Barack Obama in Washington last month. No one disputes the gravity and immediacy of the nuclear terrorist threat to global security. One hopes the global strategy emerging from the Washington summit will be implemented on a time-bound basis "to secure vulnerable nuclear materials, break up black markets, detect and intercept materials in transit, and use financial tools to disrupt illicit trade in nuclear materials."

But this strategy will not be a substitute to the overarching goal of a nuclear-weapons-free world. Unless the nuclear-weapons states change their view of global security, there is no prospect for a global consensus on disarmament in pursuit of a nuclear-weapons-free world. Echoing the global sentiment, President Obama has himself been calling for such a world. But he admitted that he may not live long enough to see it, and that the US will maintain a nuclear arsenal "as long as these weapons exist."

The end of the Cold War had provided an opportunity for reversion to the concept of collective security, engendering hopes that peace would no longer remain hostage to antagonistic, heavily militarised blocs. But today, tens of thousands of nuclear weapons still remain in arsenals around the world. Together, the US and Russia alone possess more than 95 per cent of the world's nuclear weapons.

The situation has been aggravated by the burgeoning arms trade and country-specific discriminatory supply of nuclear fuel and technology by some of the major nuclear powers. Discriminatory and short-sighted policies providing selective access to nuclear technology for narrow gains in disregard of equitably applicable criteria-based approach have further undermined the international non-proliferation regime and detract from its credibility and legitimacy. These selective country-specific arrangements are likely to facilitate diversion of nuclear material for military purposes.

Undue restrictions on the development of nuclear technology for peaceful purposes, a right guaranteed under Article IV, only serve to strengthen the monopoly of a few countries over nuclear technology, forcing others to look for ways outside the treaty. Such discrimination is dangerous for the integrity of the regime. Unless the NPT regime is reconciled to the nuclear reality and the three de facto nuclear states are incorporated into the non-proliferation regime, there will remain a gaping hole in the NPT regime. India's former external affairs minister Jaswant Singh had rightly called for an end to "nuclear apartheid."

Email: shamshad1941@yahoo.com

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

I. THE NEWS

EDITORIAL

NOT ALL BAD NEWS

MIR JAMILUR RAHMAN

A clash of the titans appears imminent. The law secretary has resigned. Punjab chief minister Shahbaz Sharif accuses the federal government of protecting Hamesh Khan. The government is functioning without an attorney general, while the number of former attorney-generals is multiplying. We are probably reaching a stage where Law Minister Babar Awan will be forced to appoint himself attorney general. This will be in addition to his current multifarious activities. The NAB chairman is on the brink of resignation. The stock market is sliding.

In a few weeks the new budget will be announced. People fear that a VAT will be imposed on goods and services, including education. Taxing of education sounds funny. The government has failed to provide education and if somebody tries to do it, the students are penalised by a VAT. Similarly, the government has failed to provide security to citizens, but if a citizen hires a security guard for his house, he is taxed heavily (19 per cent).

The picture is quite gloomy. Ms Clinton has added to the gloom by warning Pakistan of severe consequences if a terror plot like the failed Times Square bombing was traced to Pakistan. Ms Clinton should keep one thing in mind: it was not Pakistan that gave US citizenship to Faisal Shahzad.

People are sick of gloomy topics. Therefore, today I have picked a topic which will cheer up people. And that topic is marriage.

Last month the subcontinent witnessed the marriage of Shoaib Malik and Sania Mirza. It was a grand spectacle with plenty of drama thrown in by Miss Siddiqui. Until the last moment people were under suspense whether the marriage of the century could go ahead. The replication of Shoaib-Sania wedding would neither happen this century, nor in the next. The ingredients that popularised and dramatised the Shoaib-Sania marriage are not likely to reassemble again.

The star-studded wedding remained a best kept secret until it was announced officially. When they faced the TV cameras, the cricket star and the tennis star won the hearts of Indians and Pakistanis. The men admired the traditional wedding dress worn by the groom and women were captivated by the glitter of Sania's bridal dress. It was a fairyland wedding which enchanted people. They ecstatically watched the happy couple, forgetting their own pains and miseries for a few days. This wedding brought a better understanding among the peoples of the two countries. People on either side of the border realised that it is not monsters that live on the other side. They are people just like them, striving to make both ends meet.

There were celebrity marriages in Pakistan as well. However, they were solemnised quietly. The reason was the high political profiles of both the brides and the ageing bridegrooms, and all were second marriages. Perhaps the grooms thought they would be derided for marrying a second time when they are past 50 with children already married or of marriageable age. They have kept their first wives, though. They are affluent, with enough means of running two households. Some of the women they have married themselves hold important political and state positions. They are all steadfastly attached to the PPP. Who are they? Wait and see. Soon the marriages will be made public and the readers would get the shock of their lives.

Clarification: Three weeks ago, I had quoted Mr Ahsan Iqbal on the independent judiciary. The quotation was taken from a press interview of his. Mr Ahsan Iqbal has clarified that he never uttered the words.

Email: mirjrahman@hotmail .com

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

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

PAKISTAN OBSERVER

EDITORIAL

RUSSIAN ENVOY IN INDIA LIVING IN FOOL'S PARADISE

IN an apparent bid to please the host country, Russian Ambassador to India Alexander M Kadakin has made remarks about presence of so-called terrorist training camps on Pakistan-Afghanistan border and the role of India in Afghanistan, which have nothing to do with the ground realities. These remarks also speak volumes about Russia's highly biased posture against Pakistan, which has been striving hard for years to normalise relations with the erstwhile superpower.

Mr Kadakin has made a 'disclosure' about presence of not few but forty terrorist training camps in the border area, adding that Pakistan has not done much to dismantle such infrastructure. This is really funny on his part to churn out such a baseless propaganda, as his 'revelation' shows that only he is privy to the presence of these camps. Otherwise, this is an era of high tech and satellite imagery that make it possible to carry out drone and missile attacks with pin-point accuracy. How can then such a large number of camps can remain operative and that too in an area that is focus of the spying and surveillance equipment of the entire world? It is really strange that no one on earth except the worthy Ambassador knows about presence of these camps. Again, the Russian Envoy has come out with yet another ridiculous idea about India's major role in 'peace and stability' in Afghanistan. Russia has been protesting to the West over its alleged interference and influence in Georgia, a Russian neighbour where Moscow believes interest of the West is against the national and strategic interest of the Russian Federation. Similarly, Russia is also sceptical of American and Western influence in Central Asian Republics, as it believes these former States of the then Soviet Union fall under Moscow's sphere of influence. In this backdrop, one may point out that Pakistan and Afghanistan share 2640 kilometre long border and Islamabad would not like presence of India in Afghanistan against its strategic interests. It is also a fact that India has been misusing its presence in Afghanistan to destabilise Pakistan and creating misunderstanding between Kabul and Islamabad. Therefore, to say the least, the Ambassador seems to be living in fool's paradise and one doesn't know in what particular state of mind he churned out such ridiculous statements.

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

PAKISTAN OBSERVER

EDITORIAL

VERY PERTINENT REMARKS OF APEX COURT

THE Supreme Court of Pakistan has pointed out towards violation of the Constitution by the Capital Development Authority (CDA) in granting lease to some of the entities particularly the fast food chain McDonald in the capital's Fatima Jinnah Park. Hearing the case about construction of some structures in the park, the court observed that it would not compromise on violation of the Constitution or the law.

The remarks made by the Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry and Justice Khalilur Rehman Ramday reflected once again the resolve of the court to uphold supremacy of the Constitution, which augurs well for rule of law in the country. The Chief Justice observed that the court could have validated the NRO but it wanted supremacy of the Constitution and law and, therefore, the Constitution was given full protection. It was because of the repeated resolve being expressed by the Chief Justice and other judges of the apex court that people have pinned great hopes and expectations on the court that it would ultimately be able to ensure the rule of law in the country. In fact, there is a need to inculcate a culture where all organisations and institutions work strictly within the ambit of law and Constitution as only then the country would be able to progress and prosper. Regrettably, in the past, the Constitution was considered as a piece of paper, drastically marginalized and sometimes twisted to suit the requirements of rulers. It is because of the determination of the Supreme Court to reverse the trend that the whole nation is at the back of the judiciary and we are confident that the apex court would be able to make a difference. Here, we would also point out towards long delays in disposal of cases and reiterate our oft-repeated proposal for introduction of second shifts in courts as is being done in the case of some government schools. The Chief Justice has the capacity, capability and vision to go for out-of-the-box solution to issues confronting the judiciary and hopefully he would succeed

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

PAKISTAN OBSERVER

EDITORIAL

A BIG JOKE WITH TOURISM

MINISTER for Tourism Maulana Atta-ur-Rehman has come out with a disclosure that new Tourism Policy has been finalised and will be presented to the Cabinet after receiving input from the Provinces. The capabilities of the Minister, who is brother of heavy weight JUI (F) Chief Maulana Fazalur Rahman, are well known to anybody and everybody who has some interest in tourism.

It is a well-known fact that the Minister got the post only and only on political considerations ignoring merit as he is totally blank about ever expanding tourism industry the world over and its demands. Many countries including Islamic countries like Turkey, Egypt and Morocco are earning billions of dollars annually from tourism which has become a major industry. Pakistan has tremendous potential like beaches along the Balochistan coast, mountain peaks in Gilgit-Baltistan and the old civilisations sites like Mohenjodaro and Taxila to attract tourists. Several Tourism Policies had been announced in the past and one is confident that the new policy would have been prepared on the basis of the earlier ones because the Minister has no knowledge of choices of tourists like security, cheap transport and residential facilities. Tourists are shy to visit Pakistan due to the menace of terrorism and these misguided people have destroyed many tourist facilities in Swat including the famous Malam Jabba ski resort. Before making statement about the policy, the worthy Minister should have mustered enough courage to visit the destroyed facilities in Swat and ordered their renovation or reconstruction. No doubt, areas of tourist attraction other than Swat, like Kaghan, Naran, Gilgit-Baltistan are peaceful yet no attempt has been made by the Ministry of Tourism to highlight this point. We feel so sorry that for many reasons tourism has become a dying phenomenon and the menace of militancy has ditched it further deep and mere announcement of a policy would not revive it. The need of the hour is to have well educated people in the field of tourism on the top having skill, vision and links with international tour operators if the Government is serious to revive this vital industry.

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

PAKISTAN OBSERVER

EDITORIAL

HILLARY'S STATEMENT LIKE INDIAN OUTBURSTS

M ASHRAF MIRZA

The United States has also started talking in India's tone and terror on the issue of terrorism besides hurling identical threats to Pakistan. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has, in a TV interview, threatened Pakistan with 'very severe consequences' if any more terror plot like the failed Times Square bombing was traced to its tribal territory. The threat is, of course, not different from New Delhi's warning of dire results should another Mumbai like incident take place in India. Like Indian outbursts, Hillary's statement is also totally uncalled for since she has, in the same breath, acknowledged Pakistan's positive role in the fight against terror. It's rather provocative in view of Pakistan's predicaments that it has long endured due to its support to the US military operations in Afghanistan.

Hillary's statement was backed by US Attorney General Eric Holder. 'If Pakistan fails to take appropriate action against the Taliban, the US will', he said. He, however, played down the prospect of a direct US military action in Pakistan by saying that 'Islamabad has been cooperative with us and we have been satisfied with the work they have done'. There is, however, glaring contradiction in the statements of the Obama administration and US military officials on the issue of accused Faisal Shahzad's conduct. Gen David Petraeus, chief of the US anti-terror war in Afghanistan and Iraq says that Faisal was the 'lone wolf', who was 'inspired' by militants in Pakistan but doesn't have direct contact with them. His view was endorsed by Secretary for Homeland Security Janet Napolitano. But Attorney General Eric Holder and Chief counter-terrorism advisor John Brennan have taken a totally different stance. Holder firmly said that the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan was behind the failed attack. 'We have now developed evidence that shows the Pakistani Taliban were behind the attack…we know that they helped facilitate it, they helped finance it and that he was working at their direction', he said.

Interestingly, The New York Times has termed this contradiction as a calculated measure to increase pressure on Pak army to attack the Taliban's bastion in North Waziristan. It's evident from the contradictory statements that the incident is being used as a pretext to intimidate Pakistan to make it submit to the persistent US demands for military action in North Waziristan agency that the Pak Army has hitherto hesitated in order to avoid opening of new fronts since the forces are already committed in several areas in the Tribal Areas. It's disgusting that that the United States has opted to play tricks with Pakistan even after a decade of its unwavered cooperation in its war against terror during which Pakistan has rendered more sacrifices than any other country in the world. The casualties suffered by Pakistan's military and civilian population are far more than the NATO forces in Afghanistan. It has also committed more troops in the anti-terror war than the combined strength of the NATO forces. Yet it's being pressured to 'do more' in utter disregard to the objective realities.

The truth is that Faisal is not a Pakistani citizen even by descent. He is US citizen and has nothing to do with the Pakistani Taliban. He has never received bomb making training in Waziristan as alleged in the after-thought assertions by the Obama administration officials contrary to Gen Patearus's categorical statement that he was the 'lone wolf' inspired by the terrorists in Pakistan. The ugly aspect of the situation is that Pakistan is being made scapegoat for no rhyme or reason. Hillary Clinton's threatening tone talk is totally uncalled for. The people of Pakistan have obviously been dismayed at her statement as they had the presumption that she is an ardent supporter of truth. Their presumption has unfortunately been shattered. No one knows better than the US Secretary of State herself that Pakistan itself is the victim of terrorism. It has also amply proven through its conduct over the past decade that it's opposed to the menace of terrorism in all its forms and manifestations.

Islamabad has had enough of the bitter consequence of its support to the US invasion of Afghanistan as well as its war against al-Qaeda in the landlocked country. It has long endured death and destruction at the hands of terrorists, who have not spared even the places of worship and killed Pakistan's men, women and children mercilessly in the pursuit of their heinous agenda. Pakistan has fought bravely against the terrorists. Its recent military operations in Swat and SouthWaziristan agency have been acknowledged worldwide as its unequivocal commitment to weed out the menace from its soil. Yet the threat of 'very severe consequences' in case of an incident like the one at Times Square is simply regrettable. It's a brazen attempt to focus as if Pakistan is directly involved in the incident with no justification whatsoever. The people of Pakistan don't mind such outbursts from the India that is yet to reconcile to the existence of Pakistan as a sovereign country, but a statement of this kind from US Secretary of State is totally unwarranted.

It's rather offensive. Pakistan's tragedy is that it's not only being targeted by the terrorists and militants but is also being subjected to unabated drone attacks by the United States resulting in massive civilian casualties. There have been 34 missile strikes so far this year, at least two every week, according to figures compiled by the New America Foundation. This compares to 53 for all of last year and 30 during the last year of the Bush administration. It's also reported that the size of the drone fleet deployed over Pakistan has been doubled since Obama took office in January 2009. Civilian deaths caused by Western arms are a source of deep anger in Pakistan. Indeed, while claiming that only a handful of civilians have been slain in the missile attacks, US officials acknowledge that the CIA does not know the names of the more than 500 people it admits to have been killed. According to the New America Foundation, of the up to 247 people reported killed in attacks carried out so far in 2010 only seven have been publicly identified as militants..

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

PAKISTAN OBSERVER

EDITORIAL

PAKISTAN'S EXPECTATIONS FROM WEST

MAHMOOD HUSSAIN

Reports from Washington and European capitals speak of growing understanding about problems faced by Pakistan because of its strategic and crucial role in the war against extremism and terrorism. The problem that confront Islamabad include economic as well as defensive in nature. In doing so, senior US officials had recognized Pakistan's concerns about India and conceded that Washington's growing ties with New Delhi were a cause of concern for Islamabad. But Pakistan would be more than satisfied in case the United States of America adopts a realistic policy and use its ties with New Delhi for the promotion of peace in South Asia and conflict resolution in he region. In this connection the latest observations of the Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi is satisfying when he said that India restarted talks with Pakistan because of the pressure exerted by United States and European Union.

But statement of the foreign minister assuring the US and also India that civil and military aid including unarmed drones when supplied to Pakistan would not be used against India. Shah Mehmood Qureshi said the military equipment that we are getting from the United States should not worry India, because it is meant for counter-terrorism and to enhance our capacity to fight terrorist networks. But what would happen in case the terrorism came through India as it had been taking place in case of Balochistan? However the positive realizations that are pouring in from the west is because of the restoration of democracy in the country and sincerity of the democratic government in carrying forward economic activity speedily and fight out extremism and terrorism.

It is also because of the repeated calls by President Asif Ali Zardari and Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani to the international community to do more for peace and development of the people of Pakistan severely affected by militancy and terror. The latest positive gestures had come from the US Under Secretary of Defence Michele Flournoy and the American Ambassador in Islamabad Anne W Patterson. Addressing a meeting in Washington Michele Flournoy said that continued funding both in military and civilian fields is essential for Pakistan to counter insurgency operation. She said the United States had assured full support to meet energy and water requirements of Pakistan.

She said Obama administration is working on a plan to provide helicopters to Pak army. It had already refurbished Russian made MI-17 helicopters being used by the security forces in Pakistan. Under Secretary Flournoy and other US officials who spoke recently to the House Armed Services Committee urged lawmakers to provide funding for billions of dollars of planned US military and civilian aid to Pakistan during the next five years.

Addressing a dinner in Lahore Ambassador Anne W. Patterson said approval from the Congress is being sought for the reconstruction opportunity zones in Pakistan. She said the American Business Forum is working actively to promote trade, commerce and business between Pakistan and the United States of America. The ambassador said US is also striving to ensure access of the Pakistani products in the markets of its friendly countries. These assertions and indications are encouraging but claims and promises have to be transformed into reality and there has to be sustainability in the policies. The people of Pakistan were justified in being suspicious over the years with regard to US and other western countries policies with regard to Pakistan. The country had to be reassured that as it combats the terrorist threat, it is not exposing itself to increased risk along its eastern border. The US is also expected to strengthen Islamabad's conventional defense systems as well.

Although extremist attacks have led to the repositioning of substantial Pakistani forces, Pakistan's strategic concerns about India remain pre-eminent. One stands satisfied over the recent US supply of latest surveillance aircraft to Pakistan and sale of F-16 aircraft later this year would be a sign of this burgeoning relationship between the two countries. By September 2011, Pakistan is sure to receive a total of 18 of these planes. According to a Washington Post report these planes, will for the first time allow Pakistan to conduct nighttime air operations. There are confirmed reports that Pakistan would soon get drone planes from Turkey. Obviously it is taking place after taking Washington into confidence fulfilling Islamabad's long-term demand that drones are given to Pakistan so that it can take action against the militants hiding in the rugged tribal areas and US actions directly against them are violation of territorial integrity that only deserves condemnation.

Besides providing military equipment, the US has to accept and declare in clear terms that Pakistan had genuine interests in Afghanistan and those interests need to be protected. Pakistan also needs support and encouragement by the international community to fight extremism and terrorism. The European Union, which is part of Nato forces fighting out militancy in Afghanistan, has to review their policy towards Pakistan. The preferential treatment and concessions should be given importance for Pakistan to help boost its economy. Pakistan had been trying to convince the international community that whatever problem it was faced with was not because of its own wrongdoings. On the contrary it was because of the ongoing war against terrorism initiated by the US and its allies in which the civilized world was interested. It was therefore obligatory on the part of the international community to extend a helping hand towards Pakistan that had offered unmatched sacrifices in eliminating the scourge of terror and extremism. The US and the West should also play their part towards resolution of the Kashmir, water and other disputes between Pakistan and India. New Delhi has to be told by its western friends to stop interfering in the domestic affairs of Pakistan and do away with the policy to de-stabilise Pakistan by supporting the ongoing insurgency in Balochistan.

The West has to convince India to look beyond Mumbai carnage. That's not the only issue faced by the people of South Asia. If despite Pakistan's insistence India backs out from dialogue, that will prove the inference that New Delhi had never been interested in resolving the contentious issues and was just resorting to delaying practices. Pakistan had entered into a new era of democracy, rule of law and human rights. It had suffered greatly from terrorism and religious extremism. It is therefore justified to urge the international community to reinforce their support for Pakistan.

It is hoped that in the due course of time the world at large shall start appreciating the policies being followed by Pakistan. They have to realize that it's a democratic government and the Pakistani nation stands behind the elected administration. They must take it for granted that no power can win the war on terror in this part of the world unless Pakistan is associated in the fight and the country's losses in the prolonged fight against terrorism is compensated.

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

PAKISTAN OBSERVER

EDITORIAL

WHY THREATEN PAK, SECRETARY CLINTON? Z

SHAHID R SIDDIQI

The threats hurled at Pakistan by the US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton of 'very serious consequences' if terror attempt like the failed Time Square bombing were to succeed and found to have originated in Pakistan, comes as a surprise. Coming as it does, after reports that no credible linkages have been established between the alleged bomber and terrorists in North Waziristan nor is there any evidence to suggest that this occurred due to any lapse or negligence on the part of Pakistan, her utterances were entirely uncalled for. "No credible evidence has been found so far that the Pakistani-American man accused in the Times Square bombing attempt received any serious terrorist training from the Pakistani Taliban or another radical Islamic group, six U.S. officials said Thursday" said McClatchy Newspapers, Washington. The paper quoted US officials as having said, "It's a lot of speculation at this point." It quoted another official who said that Faisal Shahzad may have, at the most, had "incidental contact" with a terrorist organization.

This makes sense. Had Shahzad received proper training from the terrorists, who are known to possess professional expertise in making and using explosive devices, he would not have done such an immature job. Claims by the US Attorney General Eric Holder of having conclusive evidence implicating Pakistani Taliban of having facilitated this attack is vague and does not cut much ice, particularly when the episode and Clinton's statement look more like tactics to pressurize Pakistan Army into launching operations in North Waziristan. Pakistan Army has categorically stated that it has no evidence yet to establish Shahzad's link with the terrorists in North Waziristan. General David Petraeus after his meeting with General Kayani during a rush visit to Islamabad last week also described Shahzad a "lone wolf". And then shortly afterwards came the denial from TTP of such connection, refuting an earlier claim on its behalf that it says was dubiously made by an unrecognized caller.

With no evidence so far conclusively proving involvement of TTP or other terror groups in North Waziristan, if Secretary Clinton insists on drawing conclusions of her own and chooses to threaten Pakistan, she is irresponsibly jumping the gun. Not stopping at that, she goes on to blame Pakistan of playing a double game in the past. When relationship between Pakistan and the US is already edgy, which President Obama claims to be strengthening, such rush to judgment on her part will not only seriously harm the ongoing cooperation between the two countries to root out terrorism from this region but further intensify anti American sentiment gripping this country. Known to be hawkish towards Pakistan, perhaps in her estimation it amounts to a double game if Pakistan refuses to carry out orders that are suicidal, and it is no double game when America ditches an ally in times of need. Secretary Clinton's attitude can be interpreted to symbolize three things. Firstly, the much trumpeted long term understandings reached by the American leadership and army commanders with their Pakistani counterparts over last year is merely an arrangement of convenience for the Americans, liable to be brushed aside when needed. Secondly, the American administration will use this incident to rebuild American public opinion in favor of escalation of war. And thirdly, it will insist that Pakistan Army undertakes the North Waziristan operation now, whether or not it has the capacity at this point. In any case Clinton's statement does not auger well for the credibility of President Obama in the eyes of Pakistanis whom he assured in his December 2009 policy speech: "In the past, we too often defined our relationship with Pakistan narrowly. Those days are over.... The Pakistani people must know America will remain a strong supporter of Pakistan's security and prosperity long after the guns have fallen silent, so that the great potential of its people can be unleashed".

Secretary Clinton's statement has also put at risk the security and well being of the Americans of Pakistani origin that have remained vulnerable to public backlash since 9/11. Although most politicians have exercised caution, loose talk by some has caused serious implications for the Muslim and Pakistani communities in the US. Incidents such as those of Shahzad and statements such as those of Clinton come back to haunt these communities and exacerbate the security risks, humiliation and discrimination they have suffered for nine years. Among other reprisals after 9/11, Pakistani merchants in New York recall a drive-by shooting at a Pakistani restaurant in Brooklyn that shook the community and caused the restaurant to close. The Pakistani-American community has become suspect mainly due to the paranoia about Islam and Pakistan craftily created in the minds of the common Americans by the Christian right and the corporate media controlled by Jewish interests and irresponsible attitude of rightwing Republicans. Add to this mix the frequent manipulations by agencies of the federal government who have their own axe to grind. The information is given a twist, insignificant incidents of violence in Pakistan are blown out of proportion into headline news and Islam is projected as a religion that promotes terrorism, with insinuations that both of these are a threat to American security.

Secretary Clinton is no doubt aware that the administration she represents is committed to the American people about the withdrawal of its troops to begin by middle of 2011. President Obama cannot face the American voters in 2012 unless American troops begin to head home from Afghanistan and the war starts winding down. He has already declared that Pakistan would be the centerpiece of American policy in the closing years of this war. America now needs Pakistan as much as Pakistan needs America. President Obama has given a long term commitment for a mutually beneficial relationship between the US and Pakistan. Why then should she appear to be at odds with President Obama's declared policy? Why should she be taking an aggressive stance against Pakistan when Pakistan is cooperating with the US to the fullest possible extent, remaining within the bounds of its own national security interests? Is there a method in the madness?

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

PAKISTAN OBSERVER

EDITORIAL

WHY US?

SHAIMA SUMAYA

It was May Day. A bomber targeting a local market in busy Sohrab Chowk, detonated himself when he saw security forces approaching towards him. He was successful however in ending the lives of at least three people and wounding at least 12 and destroying 12 shops in the process. As usual the dead could not be identified; it would take time. There was a vibe in the area of the presence of suicide bombers. The blast was condemned by all including Chief Minister Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Ameer Haider Khan Hoti who ordered a probe into the incident. Then in Lahore, two low intensity blasts took place near a café in Raiwand, the den of the Sharif family and the PML-N. In this particular incident however, there was damage to property but no loss of life. It is routine for Pakistanis to live with death wandering amongst them. The person with the tendency to kill and destroy can be one of the folks walking besides you or living in your area. Then one day the nation wakes up to a blast, and asks the typical questions, Where? When? How many?

Where are the wounded? Will they make it? The attack is condemned by the ruling aristocracy of Pakistan who order investigations. What will become of those investigations, no one knows and how can any one possibly keep track? Suicide bombs, explosions, death and injury are now mere statistics. "The death of one person is an event; the death of millions is a statistic." Joseph Stalin. As cruel as this quotation by Stalin may seem it has become reality in Pakistan. Because in Pakistan, death and destruction and the infrastructure for it is available in ways like no other in the world. Pakistan has become a State unique in circumstances and events.

May Day in Pakistan was more eventful. In Karachi the CID Police arrested an activist of Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) during a raid in Baldia Town after a tip off and fighter planes carried out bombardment on militants' dens in Kasha, Sheikhan and Saif Darra killing nine militants and wounding five in Orakzai Agency. Strangely on May Day Maulana Fazl-ur-Rehman, Chief of the Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam Fazal group, whose contribution during the Afghan war cannot be ignored, issued a statement that peace cannot be restored in Pakistan until and unless it parts ways with the United States and refuses to accept its dominance. Then news broke on the other side of the world in the United States of America. New York's Times Square was sealed after police removed a sports utility vehicle used in what authorities described as a failed bombing attempt. The US authorities started to hunt for the car's driver.

On May 3, a special court has held Ajmal Kasab - the lone surviving terrorist from the 26/11 Mumbai attacks - guilty of murder and of waging war against the nation. This verdict was reached after a12; 850-page charge sheet which included testimony of FBI officials facilitated by Global Positioning System and Voice Over Internet Protocol (VOIP) to prove that the killers of 26/11 came and orchestrated their attack from Pakistan. The Indian prosecution stated what the State had already been saying that LeT were involved in the attacks. Pakistanis were about to have a déjà vu the next day. The FBI issued a statement "At approximately 11:45 p.m. EDT, Faisal Shahzad was taken into custody," after the FBI and detectives of the New York City Police Department arrested Shahzad for allegedly driving a car bomb into Times Square on the evening of May 1, 2010. He was taken into custody at John F. Kennedy International Airport. While on the flight, he was identified by the Department of Homeland Security's United States Customs and Border Protection. U.S. Attorney Eric Holder in a written statement declared about Shehzad "But it's clear that the intent behind this terrorist act was to kill Americans." From the time the bomb was discovered to the time Faisal was arrested, it took approximately 53 hours and 20 minutes. The NYPD Commissioner Raymond Kelly in a statement said "In the real world, 53 is a pretty good number," he said, comparing the investigation with a fictional situation in the television series "24." Our image and credibility was being compared to a TV serial and now it was the American's turn to teach us statistics. The Pakistani community in particular and other minorities were afraid despite of repeated assurances from US Government authorities. This insecurity and fear of further marginalization spread from the US to Europe where Muslims and other minorities are seriously marginalized. Boys and men with the names of either "Faisal" or "Shehzad" are afraid to even speak out their names. As much as the Western countries chant their values of equality and liberty, the experiences of minorities there are altogether different. The accomplice, Faisal as the famous American expression goes 'started singing like a canary'. He was very cooperative with US authorities. He claimed to be a lone wolf who received training from the Waziristan region and phone calls made from his mobile to Pakistan shortly before the failed bombing plot support his claim. He later confessed that Yemeni-American cleric, in hiding in Yemen Anwar al-Awlaki, who earlier this year was placed on the CIA hit-list for assassination, was responsible in instigating such an act from him. Faisal and al-Awlaki have a lot in common. They came from affluent families, loved the American way of life, made a life for themselves there, got US citizenship, had hobbies and past times to enjoy, believed in co-existence, then they woke up to US foreign policy and other activities that involves the US that seriously hurt Muslim sentiment and decided that they were living amongst 'evil' and they had to fight against it.

The Pakistani Government behaved in the same way as they did when the Indians held Kasab. At first Rehman Malik said that Pakistan will do whatever it can will to bring Faisal to justice when the man was not even put on trial in the US, even his nationality was not known and then he declared Faisal's arrest as a conspiracy against Pakistan. Finally the Foreign Minister issued a statement that Faisal was not a Pakistani. Bravo! It is true that Pakistan is haven for terrorists who come to Pakistan and even cross the border to Afghanistan. The vast mountains in the country and along the Pak-Afghan border serve as the perfect refuge and hideout for them. Indeed, this is one mountainous war our security forces are fighting and time and again terrorist acting in packs or lone wolves attack the country and cause mayhem which is something Pakistanis have become familiar with.

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

PAKISTAN OBSERVER

EDITORIAL

WAR IS FUN: MORE WAR PLEASE

VIEWS FROM ABROAD

JOHN PILGER

Is there any difference between Australia's leaders and the three front-runners in Britain's election when it comes to attitudes to war? There was nothing I recognised from reporting war. Nothing on the spectacle of children's limbs hanging in trees and nothing on the burden of shit in your trousers. War is a good read. War is fun. More war, please. On April 25, the day before I flew out of Australia, I sat in a bar beneath the great sails of the Sydney Opera House. It was Anzac Day, the 95th anniversary of the invasion of Ottoman Turkey by Australian and New Zealand troops at the behest of British imperialism.

The landing was an incompetent stunt of blood sacrifice conjured by Winston Churchill, yet it is celebrated in Australia as an unofficial national day. The ABC evening news always comes live from the sacred shore at Gallipoli, where, this year, as many as 8,000 flag-wrapped Antipodeans listened, dewy-eyed, to the Australian governor-general Quentin Bryce, who is the Queen's viceroy, describe the point of pointless mass killing. It was, she said, all about a "love of nation, of service, of family, the love we allow ourselves to receive. [It is a love that] rejoices in the truth. It bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. And it never fails." Of all the attempts at justifying state murder I can recall, this drivel of DIY therapy, clearly aimed at the young, takes the blue riband. Not once did Bryce honour the fallen with the two words that the survivors of 1915 brought home with them: "Never again." Not once did she refer to a truly heroic anti-conscription campaign, led by women, that stemmed the flow of Australian blood in the first world war, the product not of a gormlessness that "believes all things" but of anger in defence of life.

The next item on the TV news was the Australian Defence Minister John Faulkner, with the troops in Afghanistan. Bathed in the light of a perfect sunrise, he made the Anzac connection to the illegal invasion of Afghanistan in which, on February 12 last year, Australian soldiers killed five children. No mention was made of them. On cue, this was followed by an item that a war memorial in Sydney had been "defaced by men of Middle Eastern appearance." More war, please. In the bar of the Opera House, a young man wore campaign medals that were not his. That is the fashion now. Smashing his beer glass on the floor, he stepped over the mess, which was cleaned up by another young man who the TV newsreader would say was of Middle Eastern appearance. Once again, war is a fashionable extremism for those suckered by the Edwardian notion that a man needs to prove himself "under fire" in a country whose people he derides as "gooks" or "ragheads" or simply "scum." (The current public inquiry in London into the torture and murder of an Iraqi hotel receptionist Baha Mousa by British troops has heard that "the attitude held" was that "all Iraqis were scum.")

There is a hitch. In this, the ninth year of the thoroughly Edwardian invasion of Afghanistan, more than two-thirds of the home populations of the invaders want their troops to get out of where they have no right to be. This is true of Australia, the United States, Britain, Canada and Germany. What this says is that, behind the media facade of politicised ritual, such as the parade of coffins through Wootton Bassett, millions of people are trusting their own critical and moral intelligence and ignoring propaganda that has militarised contemporary history, journalism and parliamentary politics - Australia's Labour Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, for instance, describes the military as his country's "highest calling."

Here in Britain, Polly Toynbee anoints the war criminal Tony Blair as "the perfect emblem for his people's own contradictory whims." No, he was the perfect emblem for a liberal intelligentsia prepared cynically to indulge his crime. That is the unsaid of the British election campaign, along with the fact that 77 per cent of the British people want the troops home.

In Iraq, duly forgotten, what has been done is a holocaust. More than a million people are dead and four million have been driven from their homes. Not a single mention has been made of them in the entire campaign. Rather, the news is that Blair is Labour's "secret weapon." All three party leaders are warmongers. Nick Clegg, the darling of former Blair-lovers, says that, as prime minister, he would "participate" in another invasion of a "failed state" provided there is "the right equipment, the right resources."

That is what Brown and Cameron almost certainly intend to cut from the health service. Edward S Herman explained this genteel extremism in his essay The Banality Of Evil. There is a strict division of labour, ranging from the scientists working in the laboratories of the weapons industry, to the intelligence and "national security" personnel who supply the paranoia and "strategies," to the politicians who approve them. As for journalists, our task is to censor by omission and make the crime seem normal for you, the public. — The New Statesman

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

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

THE AUSTRALIAN

EDITORIAL

CLAIMING THE CREDIT AS THE GOOD TIMES RETURN

THE ECONOMIC CYCLE HAS COME TO THE BUDGET'S RESCUE

THE revised economic and fiscal projections in Wayne Swan's pre-election budget are impressive and should give Australian families renewed confidence and optimism for the future. But the question many Australians should, and will, ask, as they look past the smoke and mirrors, is whether the improvements in economic growth and public finances reflected in the budget are the result of the government's economic management, or have occurred in spite of it.

These are, no doubt, a "beautiful set of numbers". On Monday, The Australian said that, to be judged a success, the budget bottom line would need comprehensively to exceed the $46.6bn deficit for the current financial year predicted in the mid-year review, with the return to surplus coming at least two years earlier than the scheduled 2015-16 date. Mr Swan has delivered a deficit of $40.8bn - a massive $16bn improvement on the forecast in last year's budget. And if Mr Swan and his Treasury officials have got their forecasts right - which we have come to know is a big "if" - the budget will be back in the black three years ahead of schedule, in 2012-13. Net debt will also return to zero three years earlier than expected. Compared with other developed economies, such as the US, Italy and Japan - where net debt will still be 1.5 times the size of annual economic output in 2015 - these numbers are spectacular.

There is even better news on growth and jobs, with the economy tipped to expand by 3.25 per cent this financial year, and 4 per cent in 2011-12. Unemployment, which last year was forecast to peak at 8.5 per cent, flattened out last year at 5.8 per cent and is forecast to fall to 4.75 in the current financial year. The spectre of joblessness has lifted for tens of thousands of Australian families.

Clearly, Australia's pain during the global financial crisis was much shallower than that of the rest of the developed world, and the recovery will be much faster. Mr Swan wants to claim as much of the credit as possible, arguing that without the government's $50bn stimulus measures, the economy would have contracted by 0.7 per cent in 2009 instead of growing by 1.4 per cent. Meanwhile, nearly every page of the budget documents spruiks Mr Swan's supposedly hard-nosed savings measures as the foundation of the budget rebound.

Yes and no - but mostly, no. A spike in the prices paid for Australia's iron-ore, gas and coal exports, booming demand in China, and an aggressive program of interest rate cuts by the Reserve Bank had at least as much to do with the economy's resilience during the downturn as anything Mr Swan and Kevin Rudd came up with. As for the budget bottom line, stalwarts of the Howard era would argue, with some justice, that there is nothing like zero net debt (money in the bank, in fact) to quarantine an economy going into a world financial and economic crisis.

As far as the stimulus is concerned, don't bother looking for mentions of home insulation and school building schemes in the budget papers, because they are few and far between. While the government's early stimulus measures were necessary and welcome, it is a tragedy - and, in the case of home insulation, a human tragedy - that so much of the money was spent for political gain, rather than being focused on productive infrastructure to remove bottlenecks at terminals and improve road and rail links. Projected growth of 3.25 per cent in 2010-11 suggests Malcolm Turnbull was right about halving the overall size of the stimulus measures, and that they could have been wound back much earlier, saving taxpayers billions that have been wasted on overpriced shelter sheds and demountables. Suggestions in the budget, obsessively reiterated by Mr Swan yesterday, that the current European fiscal crisis somehow justifies the long tail on the local stimulus spend, is a classic example of post-hoc rationalisation of a very bad idea.

As for the budget bottom line, the documents show the heft of "parameter variations" - that is, higher than expected growth - as much more significant than that of policy decisions on the fiscal turnaround. Mr Swan says "savings measures" in the budget will reap more than $30bn in the four years to 2013-14, but fully half of these "savings" are captured by the new slugs on mining profits ($12bn) and smokers ($5bn). By cynically gaming the timing of both the release of the Henry review into tax reform - as cover for the mining super tax - and the backflip on an emissions trading scheme, Mr Rudd and Mr Swan have been able to make the budget projections in the outward years look much rosier. Last night, Mr Swan told parliament he was "outlining a reform agenda" while meeting "the highest standards of responsible economic management". In fact, the budget leaves the Rudd government's reform, and fiscal management, credentials looking about as hollow as they did before. It would take a very powerful microscope to find reform.

Clearly, Mr Rudd will stake his claim as a reformer on his health and hospitals reforms. Until now, that claim rested entirely on the deal he struck last month with the states - a deal that was almost entirely limited to who pays for what. There is more detail in the budget. A concern of the states was that a new system of "activity-based funding" for hospitals, together with stricter targets for treatment times in emergency departments, would have the perverse outcome of spiking demand, putting more people, who don't need to be in hospital, into hospital beds. The measures, worth about $900m, announced in the budget - more nurses working alongside GPs, and another go at the long-promised "GP super clinics" - will go part of the way to bolstering primary care and easing the pressure on hospitals.

There are some other good ideas in the budget, but they hardly amount to major reform. The plan to put $5.6bn of the mining profits tax take into an infrastructure fund is welcome: as Michael Stutchbury wrote in The Australian yesterday, such a fund can help insulate the economy from boom-and-bust resource cycles and divert proceeds from the current boom into productive capital. Equally welcome is the government's response to the report by Mark Johnson on strengthening Australia's position as a regional financial centre, which will lead to a stronger regulatory climate for foreign financial institutions operating in Australia. The move towards simplified tax returns and the 50 per cent discount on interest income - which, together, will cost $1.8bn over four years - are also well-judged, but could just as easily have been announced as part of the response to the Henry review.

But in the end, with an election due this side of Christmas, this budget is much more about politics than policy. Increasingly distrusted by Australians as a shape-shifter, Mr Rudd will now try to fix himself in their minds as a fiscal conservative and sound economic manager. He will try to use the partly cooked budget numbers to neutralise Tony Abbott's portrayal of him as "debt and deficit" addicted. And by way of the tax on mining profits, he will appeal to his increasingly alienated blue-collar constituency as the slayer of "foreign" companies and the redistributor of the bounty of Australia's mineral wealth.

But the way Mr Rudd and Mr Swan have framed the debate on the mining tax - a measure to which The Australian has given some conditional support - reveals the fundamental flaw in their claims to sound economic management: they see the resources boom as a problem, not an opportunity. There are even bizarre suggestions in the budget it could be healthy for a few mining projects to fall over. Current conditions suggest the focus for handling the boom should be on more flexible labour markets, lower taxes, cutting middle-class welfare, boosting infrastructure and easing capacity constraints. But with an election looming, this all appears too hard.

Ultimately, capitalism has been much kinder to Kevin Rudd than he has been to it. The politician who, in his essayistic period, babbled about the failure of the "great neo-liberal experiment", did not sufficiently trust the automatic stabilisers of the open Australian economy, and its fundamental strengths, when trouble struck two years ago. Mr Rudd and Mr Swan have generally been poor judges of the economic cycle. Mr Swan's first budget was all about the spectre of inflation and the need to cut spending. Lehman Brothers collapsed five months later, and Mr Swan was back on deck with his stimulus program. This time he clearly over-corrected, and the opportunity for an adjustment that came along in the budget 12 months ago was missed. Partly as a result of that, inflation is again on the minds of central bankers, and the pain threatens Mr Rudd in the mortgage belt, where the 2010 election will be lost and won.

This time around, it is the mining companies that, above all, have provided the river of gold that has made it possible for Mr Rudd to deliver a plausible election budget. But by portraying them as the Sheriff of Nottingham, and himself in the Rusty Crowe role as Robin Hood, Mr Rudd is playing fast and loose with the people who gave him, and us, a way through the financial crisis. He risks hobbling the golden calf.

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

THE AUSTRALIAN

EDITORIAL

GOOD EFFORT FROM ABBOTT, BUT HE STILL NEEDS MALCOLM

THE COALITION MUST DEMONSTRATE ITS ECONOMIC CREDENTIALS

LESS than three years after being routed at the ballot box and less than six months after changing leaders for the third time, the Coalition is, incredibly, competitive with Labor. Newspoll has Tony Abbott with an election-winning lead; Nielsen has him neck and neck with Kevin Rudd. Even so, the Opposition Leader needs to do more to convince voters he can be trusted with the nation's economic future. Thursday night's reply to the budget will be a test of Mr Abbott's economic credentials. He will have to offer a plan for taking Australia forward, not just a critique of Labor's budget. Mr Abbott should also move quickly to beef up the opposition's economic firepower by bringing former leader Malcolm Turnbull back into the tent.

The primary voting intentions revealed in the opinion polls show voters are falling out of love with the Prime Minister but are still not rushing into the arms of Mr Abbott. They have abandoned Labor but are parking their votes with other parties, not the conservatives. This suggests that since he took over last December, Mr Abbott has been effective in chipping away at Mr Rudd's veneer, operating as a real opposition and exploiting Labor's mistakes and backdowns. He has been more successful than his predecessors, Brendan Nelson and Mr Turnbull. According to Newspoll, Dr Nelson's best effort was to narrow the gap in two-party-preferred terms to 10 points; Mr Turnbull did better, achieving a gap of four points. But the primary vote for the Coalition, while higher under Mr Abbott, does not yet reflect the flight from Labor. Mr Abbott has shored up his base but must now win over the swinging voters.

Of course, much of the credit for Mr Rudd's collapse must go to the Prime Minister himself. His own goal in dumping the emissions trading scheme; his string of broken promises; and his uncertainty over his resources super-profits tax have damaged his image. While his relationship with the electorate appears to have been souring for some months, Mr Rudd has had a particularly bad few weeks, gaining little traction from his hospitals package and being battered by the flawed home insulation program and the rollout of schools construction. As the government prepares for tonight's budget, the parliamentary party is anxious, concerned about a Prime Minister who has suddenly lost his gloss with the public.

This presents a big opportunity for the Coalition, but if he is to gain lasting support, Mr Abbott needs to strengthen his economic team. Neither opposition Treasury spokesman Joe Hockey nor finance spokesman Andrew Robb is really taking the fight to the government. Mr Robb is a skilled political strategist but has not yet cut through with the electorate in the finance role. Mr Hockey is more charismatic but has gaps in his economic knowledge. On Sunday's Insiders program on ABC TV, he showed again he is not working hard enough. In contrast, Mr Turnbull has the economic cred and the communications nous to attack the government on policy issues. It is true the former leader has two monkeys on his back: his support for the ETS, and his disastrous handling of the Godwin Grech affair. But we believe Mr Turnbull's talent cancels out any lingering problems he carries from these issues. He is the only Coalition politician who has been able to lay a glove on Wayne Swan. Before his misjudgment on Grech, Mr Turnbull was making an impact on the government's high debt-and-deficit approach and challenging the need for its $42 billion stimulus package.

Clearly, the optimum position for the Coalition would be Peter Costello as the leader with proven economic credentials, and Mr Abbott as the deputy with energy, conviction and an ability to connect with the electorate. Given this is not an option, Mr Abbott needs help. He is not convincing on the economy and has not displayed a sure grasp of financial detail and concepts. His book Battlelines suggests he is more comfortable spending on family welfare than with the fiscally prudent, low-intervention economics needed in a modern society. Mr Abbott did the right thing in moving Barnaby Joyce out of the finance job when the Nationals senator made a hash of it. Now he needs to harness Mr Turnbull's abilities. For his part, the member for Wentworth must understand a return to the opposition front bench means he must agree with the Coalition's stand against the ETS. Anything less would be unconscionable. But given the ETS has been shelved for now, Mr Turnbull will not be put to the test on the policy in the immediate future. Indeed, astutely handled, his commitment to carbon reduction could be a plus for the Coalition, attracting voters disappointed with Labor but who see the Greens as a step too far. This then is the challenge for Mr Abbott as he tries to capitalise on Labor's woes. His energy and authenticity have taken the Coalition a long way. Going further will depend in part on whether he has the good sense, and courage, to work with a potential rival in Mr

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

THE AUSTRALIAN

EDITORIAL

EUROPE CALMS THE BEARS FOR NOW

THE BAILOUT OF GREECE MUST BE REINFORCED BY SPENDING CUTS

YESTERDAY'S rebound of 2.55 per cent on the Australian stockmarket showed that the E750 billion ($1071bn) bailout for the eurozone by the European Union and the IMF had quelled investor concern, at least in the immediate term, about Europe's sovereign debt crisis. The crisis has been threatening the stability of financial markets worldwide, but yesterday's rallies were far from the end of the story - time will tell how effectively, if at all, the bailout plan will limit fallout. Concrete action was essential to assuage fears that the pressure on Greece could spread to the debt-ridden economies of Portugal, Spain, Ireland, Iceland and Italy. At the same time, the magnitude of the plan highlights the gravity of Europe's problems, fuelling fears that global recovery will be stymied.

After 11-hour marathon talks, eurozone leaders agreed on a three-year plan that goes far beyond bailing out Greece. The plan is designed to rescue eurozone economies that strike financial troubles. It involves E60bn from the EU Commission, E440bn from the 16-nations of the eurozone and E250bn from the International Monetary Fund to provide what French President Nicolas Sarkozy termed a "systemic response . . . to a systemic crisis".

The plan ushers in a new era of interdependence in the eurozone, in which states sharing the currency will assume unprecedented responsibilities for each other's finances. It overturns the previous modus operandi under which each eurozone country was solely responsible for managing its own budget. The safety net, however, is no panacea for debt. As eurozone governments grow more dependent on one another, they will need, as a group, to pay much closer attention to each other's fiscal policies, possibly to the extent of imposing penalties for spendthrift governments.

Wisely, Spain and Portugal have announced proactive measures to reduce their towering budget deficits more quickly than announced previously. Spain has pledged to cut its deficit to 9.3 per cent of gross domestic product this year, from 11.2 per cent last year and to 6.5 per cent next year. Portugal plans to cut its deficit to 7.3 per cent of GDP this year, after incurring a deficit of 9.4 per cent of GDP last year. Greece's budget deficit was 13.6 per cent and Ireland's 14.3 per cent, which prompted the Irish government to cut public sector salaries by 5 to 15 per cent and cut health, education and welfare programs. While Britain is not in the eurozone, the turmoil underlines the urgency for whoever forms government to make unpopular cuts to reduce the British budget deficit, which will reach 12 per cent of GDP this year, imposing a borrowing requirement of pound stg. 175bn ($291bn). The situation in Greece is a dire warning as to why radical action cannot be avoided.

There is no room for complacency in Europe, but yesterday's decision by the European Central Bank to buy eurozone government bonds to help stabilise fractured markets was a useful step in the right direction. Late last month, as fears of a Greek government default on its debt escalated, the Greek bond market plunged while the bond yield, which has an inverse relationship with price, soared. The ECB's move is designed to help halt the cycle of speculative attacks and loss of investor confidence in the bond markets of Greece and other heavily indebted European nations.

The restoration of any semblance of real prosperity in much of Europe, however, will be a long haul. For Greece, the bailout package, in theory will allow the government to roll over debts for two years and finance its deficit as it enacts major spending cuts. While the package has steadied the ship for now, the package will work only if governments that have lived beyond their means have the will to weather years of bitterness and unpopularity as they put their houses in order.

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

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

THE SYDNEY MORNING HERALD

EDITORIAL

WITH GOOD POLICY - AND A LOT OF LUCK

AUSTRALIA is still a fortunate country. Just how much shows in the Treasury figures behind last night's budget. Alone among the world's advanced economies, Australia recorded positive growth last year that is set to accelerate over the next year. It is also achieving an unrivalled return to fiscal stability, with government debt peaking at 6.1 per cent of gross domestic product in two years, tiny compared to the debt ratios elsewhere that have soared to 100 per cent of GDP and beyond.

Kevin Rudd's government goes into an election with a real spending increase of less than 1 per cent, thanks to already announced measures - dropping the troublesome insulation, childcare and emissions trading schemes and shaking down smokers for more excise - that largely cover big new health allocations.

In the coming four years, net budget spending is virtually neutral, thanks to the resource super profits tax starting in time to finance big giveaways in company tax and infrastructure.

Meanwhile, we have some modest nods to tax reform that raise thresholds at the lowest incomes, reward savings and cut out the consultant middlemen from individual tax returns.

Good luck, or good management? Wayne Swan would have to admit a fair measure of the former, as well as proclaiming the latter. Australia is luckily endowed with resources and proximity to the emerging Asian giants that need them. The past year has seen another big improvement in our terms of trade, from a strong rise in the price of our exports such as iron ore and coal and steady or falling prices for many imports. Few economies have had an outside rescue like that.

Still, in a different political era, leaders might have continued the stimulatory spend, just in case of contagion from Europe or a bursting of Chinese bubbles. Fortunately, fiscal responsibility has become part of the political competition here. As much as Rudd likes announcing multibillion-dollar programs with "remaking the nation" titles, he's ready to dump them to remain an "economic conservative".

But the fiscal laurels have been regained with little pain, except for the poor minority who lost their jobs in the global financial crisis. That we are focusing on the macro-economics - instead of the cowardly backdown on the ETS, the other policy fumbles, or the tax grabs from miners and smokers - is partly a result of a clever deconstruction of the budget process to make the awkward bits last week's news. It also reflects our luck rubbing off on the government.

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

THE SYDNEY MORNING HERALD

EDITORIAL

ALAS, THE GANG'S BACK IN TOWN

Hopes the old gang might finally be shuffling off the stage of public life have, alas, been dashed. Not only have Eddie Obeid and Joe Tripodi denied they'll quit politics at the state election in March, their old dance partner Reba Meagher has hung out her shingle as yet another Labor government embarrassment-turned-political lobbyist.

Her advocacy now for the NSW division of the Australian Hotels Association - which wants to avoid licensing restrictions aimed at curbing drunkenness and violence - sits oddly with the responsible drinking campaign she launched as health minister in 2008. But consistency was never her long suit. Whatever influence the pubs are wagering she retains will surely evaporate in March.

Voters would hope that Tripodi and Obeid would similarly evaporate. Their lot, boisterous union allies included, have done more than perhaps anyone to bring the government into disrepute.

Obeid's disingenuousness was on show when he recently said the Labor Party should have allowed the Carr government to sell the electricity sector in 1997, when it was worth a lot more than now. Obeid knows his own key role in defeating that sale, motivated not by economic reasoning but by political revenge. Obeid can be treacherous. He can be a bully, too, threatening the preselections of Labor MPs and other candidates who don't toe his line. But mostly he's shrewd enough to resort first to patronage and flattery. It's not his fault entirely that the calibre of MPs in state parliaments has been in steep decline for years .But the Labor story might have been different had a few had the good sense and a little more ticker to put Obeid in his place early on.

Tripodi's is a different story. An acolyte of Obeid's, he's often cast as the master's apprentice. But Tripodi is a lot smarter than Obeid: his grasp of public policy is, indeed, probably without peer in the Keneally government. A former research economist with the Reserve Bank, Tripodi is also more interested in policy outcomes. His weakness was that he allowed that to be suborned by trophy politics, where the victors take all spoils and where gamesmanship triumphs over public interest.

In that, Obeid and Tripodi are joined at the hip. They deserve to sink together, and soon.

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

THE SYDNEY MORNING HERALD

EDITORIAL

POLITICAL WOES SHOULD NOT OBSCURE ECONOMIC SUCCESS

TWELVE months ago, when the global financial crisis still dominated the political horizon, Treasurer Wayne Swan used images of crisis and sacrifice to chart the Rudd government's fiscal strategy for the coming financial year. The 2009-10 budget, he said, had been ''forged in the fire of the most challenging economic conditions since the Great Depression''. Last night, as he explained that budget's successor, Mr Swan might have been expected to strike an exultant note. All the indicators point to a steadily recovering economy, vindicating the level of fiscal stimulus and refuting the claims of those who maintained that Australia was accumulating an intolerable debt burden. And indeed, the Treasurer seized his opportunity to remind Australians that the country has not only emerged from the crisis faster than other advanced economies but will be out of debt sooner: the budget will return to surplus in three years, not six as was projected last year.

The government can afford to boast. If Mr Swan mostly managed to curb the wilder flights of the self-congratulatory rhetoric, however, it was probably in recognition that sometimes even good news impresses less than it should do. By the measure of economic stewardship, the government ought to rank high in public esteem; its difficulty in this election year is that voters may increasingly be disposed to take recovery for granted, and judge it on other matters such as the abandonment of the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme.

Nonetheless, the numbers proclaim a success story. A growth rate of 3.25 per cent has kept the deficit to $40.8 billion rather than the $57.1 billion forecast last year, allowing the government's announcement of a faster than expected return to surplus. In 2011-12, the growth rate is expected to rise to 4 per cent while unemployment continues to fall, to 4.75 per cent. Net debt will peak in the same year at 6.1 per cent of gross domestic product - again lower than expected, and less than a tenth the average debt level of major advanced economies. Comparisons between Australia's prospects and those of Greece, which some members of the opposition have sought to make, can only charitably be described as crazy hyperbole.

The spending in this budget contained few surprises, at least in big-ticket items. Many had been leaked in advance, as is now customary, and some had already been adopted as policy, most notably the resources rent tax that will fund a rise in the superannuation guarantee to 12 per cent. These initiatives do not come into force until 2012-13, when the budget's bottom line is projected to be in the black again. The mining industry is not in imminent danger of being crippled by confiscatory rates of taxation, as some of its advocates have suggested, and when the new tax is levied its impact will be partly offset by the effective ending of state royalties and the scaling back of company tax to a top rate of 28 per cent. In the context of the budget's forward estimates, the tax is hardly the bogey that its announcement as part of the government's response to the Henry review of taxation seems to have allowed it to become.

If the government hopes that the budget's chief environmental initiative, a $652 million fund to seed private investment in renewable energy projects, will mollify those angered by the deferral of emissions trading, it will almost certainly be disappointed. The allocation, though laudable, is a modest one, as is the $661 million to be spent over four years on workforce training and apprenticeships. More innovative is the 50 per cent tax discount on interest earned from bank deposits and other savings instruments, which will be available from July next year. It will not only foster thrift, but by doing so it should also, over time, increase the number of Australians who can borrow at less burdensome rates of interest. An associated increase in the deposit base of smaller lending institutions such as credit unions and building societies should, too, make it easier for them to compete with the major banks, which absorbed too many of their rivals during the financial crisis.

As expected, the budget contains additional health spending to top up that promised in the Commonwealth's agreement with the states to become the dominant funder of public hospitals. To ease pressure on hospitals it is not sufficient to boost their finances directly; it is also necessary to improve the quality of primary health care, which is now the sole responsibility of the Commonwealth. The $772 million to be spent on upgrading GP clinics and providing better after-hours access to GP care is a welcome first step in that process.

When an election is looming, it is rare for governments to resist the temptation to propel the contents of the pork barrel in almost any direction that seems politically expedient. The Rudd government has chosen instead to bring down a budget that testifies to its resolve to continue prudent economic management; for that it deserves the nation's thanks, even if the voters reserve the right to withhold their gratitude for other reasons. And on the voters' judgment, the Treasurer may have the last word: at his news conference yesterday, Mr Swan said: ''This budget wasn't designed to shift opinion polls and I don't believe it will.''

Source: The Age

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

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

THE GUARDIAN

EDITORIAL

THE COALITION GOVERNMENT: SWEETENING THE PILL

A coalition is a better alternative for Britain – and for liberals – than a Conservative minority government

The window of opportunity for the centre-left opened on Monday. The Liberal Democrats stared through it for less than 24 hours. Then the window closed once more, and now – for the first time in 13 years – Britain has a Conservative prime minister, albeit one of moderate temperament who intends to serve at the head of a coalition. By this afternoon it was clear that there would be no Labour-Liberal Democrat alliance. Instead, Nick Clegg and his negotiators threw in their lot with David Cameron and his Tory party.

That decision sealed Labour's fate and ended Gordon Brown's prime ministership. Soon, Mr Brown was speaking from No 10 for the final time, giving a touching farewell, before one final journey to Buckingham Palace. His dignified statement included his immediate resignation as Labour leader, a move that shores up his reputation as a party man by preparing the way for Labour to face the future with a new leader as soon as possible.

By the close of the day, however, Labour was very much old news. Within half an hour of Mr Brown's departure, it was the new man's turn in the spotlight, delivering a measured address which gave a generous nod to Mr Brown's record of public service. Despite the familiarity of the rituals by which the old regime was ushered out and the new one was ushered in, the youngest prime minister since Lord Liverpool is fast becoming one who will preside over a new form of politics, even if that has less to do with his initial plans than the scrappy manner of his arrival. After the first hung election in 36 years, the politicians of Britain's radical centre and centre-right have responded by stretching out across party lines to arrive at the verge of a formal coalition government, the first since the second world war. With Conservatives and Liberal Democrats looking set to sit side by side round the cabinet table, it is possible that party politics will never be quite the same again. Reports that the new government will soon fix parliamentary terms will, we hope, prove to be only the first of many indicators of how the fact of coalition will rewrite the political rules.

Even so, there can be no disguising the disappointment of many at this turn of events. The Liberal Democrats and Labour had a historic opportunity to form a democratically legitimate progressive coalition at a crucial moment. Labour appears to have bent over backwards to make policy compromises. In the end it was the Liberal Democrats who said no thanks, this is not going to work for us, and headed for Mr Cameron's door instead. It is a decision with huge and as yet unforeseeable consequences for all the parties – none of which is unaffected by it. In fairness to the Lib Dems, it has to be admitted that the Commons arithmetic with Labour was far more difficult than with the Tories, and that Labour's partisan recalcitrants spent much of the day in front of the cameras illustrating just why the management of such a coalition might be a nightmare. But don't kid yourselves. This was Britain's best fair-votes moment for at least 80 years. The moment was missed. It is a national opportunity lost.

In fairness also to Mr Clegg, on whom the label of not-so-secret Tory will now be unjustly pinned, it must also be said that he did not choose the cards the electorate dealt him last Thursday. The numbers and the difficult problem of appearing to rescue a defeated government inevitably stayed his hand in the dealings with Labour. The Conservative option was clearly easier arithmetically, and its legitimacy understandable as a first step in the negotiations. Mr Clegg gave Labour its chance, too – not "squalidly" (Daily Mail); not "a coup" (Daily Telegraph), but properly, openly and constitutionally. The outcome is of course a major blow to the centre-left, both short-term and existentially. But it has to be said that Mr Clegg at least appears to have played his hand fairly and well. Certainly, by taking the time to reach out to both sides of the political aisles, the Liberal Democrat leader did a great deal to sweeten the prospect of an alliance that will lean to the right of his progressive party.

It also has to be said that opportunity is not absent from the emerging Tory-Lib Dem coalition either. Such a coalition is a better alternative for Britain – and for liberals – than a Conservative minority government, never mind a Tory majority. The presence of Liberal Democrats around the cabinet table and the possibility of direct Liberal Democrat ministerial authority in some policy areas is a cause for hope, not despair. Every concession – whether on tax or civil liberty or the shape of the government – that the negotiators have won from the Tories over the past few days is a small reason to hope that Mr Clegg's party will make their values and their presence felt, for the better. Already tonight there were suggestions that Conservative inheritance tax plans – which would have given most to those in least need – might be abandoned. Mr Cameron's own pet plan for fiscal favours for married couples was always an illiberal proposal, and it is one which could soon bite the dust now that Liberals seem set to enjoy their first taste of power in living memory. And this government will be headed, too, by a prime minister who often appears to be – not least to his currently agitated rightwing backwoods – a genuinely liberal Tory, which is an authentic and honourable tradition.

All this will be tested in the crucible over the coming months. The new government will take office with the books awash in red ink. Both the yellow and the blue wings of the new alliance were well aware of this, and yet they both campaigned in the recent election on the promise that they could cut taxes related to income. The great test of both parties will be whether the rich can be made to pay their fair share for the debt, or whether instead the burden will fall on the poor and those on lower incomes through service cuts and rises in VAT. Labour, regrouping, will see future opportunity here. Today, though, may still be a liberal moment of a kind. Not the one we, and others, sought. A very fragile one. But not a moment entirely without possibility either.

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

THE GUARDIAN

EDITORIAL

GOVERNMENT TRANSITIONS: MEMO TO THE FUTURE

BRITAIN SHOULD LEARN FROM COUNTRIES WHICH HAVE A PHASED POST-ELECTION HANDOVER

If Britain did not realise it before, it knows it now. Forming a government in a hung parliament takes time. Agreeing to hold talks, negotiating, reporting back, signing off – all these things take days, not hours, especially when alternative coalitions have to be examined and tested. As it happens, Britain's political parties have done their May 2010 deal in a relatively short period – a little under five days since the election result was known. Compared with other jurisdictions, this is business briskly done. Scotland's three coalitions since 1999 have required six, 13 and 12 days, while Wales's 2007 formation took fully two months. In New Zealand in 1996, after the country's first proportional representation election, the political parties took eight weeks to strike a deal. And in the US, 11 weeks always pass between a presidential election and inauguration day.

The past few days have been good political theatre and good for talking heads on College Green, as well as the stuff of future theses. But the whole novel process has passed without any air of crisis. Most of those involved appeared, in public at least, to behave very reasonably. Government of a sort has continued, even to the extent that the chancellor participated, fully and legitimately, in important talks on the eurozone's crisis. The idea that the markets would be reduced to hysteria by the process of government-forming has proved to be wholly fallacious. The Cassandras who prophesied doom and confusion got the situation wrong, from beginning to end.

Memo to the future: from the vantage point of the transition process of 2010, the following thoughts may prove useful. Britain's system was challenged but not overwhelmed by a hung election. The process went well, largely because the civil service had given prior thought to how it would react, and because the parties responded in a very practical way to resolve the situation. There would, though, be great merit in trying to formalise the post-election period so the whole process is even better insulated against media and market pressure. Britain should learn from countries like Australia and Canada which have a phased post-election handover, with the outgoing government remaining in power in a caretaker capacity for a period of perhaps a week, while the necessary preparations and discussions take place. As the Institute for Government concluded in a report on transitions last year, "there are advantages in a phased handover over a few days, or even a week, as opposed to the adrenaline and urgency of an overnight change". The events of May 2010 have more than vindicated that judgment. A sensible transition between governments should now be written into law.

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

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

THE GAZETTE

WE ALL WANT TO KNOW HOW OUR MONEY'S SPENT

BRAVO, GILLES DUCEPPE!

We don't often begin an editorial in this newspaper with those words, but this week the Bloc Québécois leader did something that Canadians in all provinces and of all parties can support wholeheartedly. He would be prepared, he said, to open up MPs' parliamentary budgets to auditor-general Sheila Fraser, as she has been asking for 10 months now. But if the other parties don't agree, this still won't happen.

Operating the offices of MPs and senators costs Canadians $500 million a year, but for decades MPs of all parties have resolutely kept the public from knowing much about where that money goes. An enormous expense-account scandal in the British Parliament, and smaller but still shaming ones in Newfoundland and Nova Scotia, have left MPs and Quebec MNAs unmoved.

This week the Board of Internal Economy, the all-party committee that deals with such matters behind closed doors, met again - and again reached no decision on Fraser's request.

But public pressure is starting to build up. In a poll for The Gazette and Le Devoir this month, Léger Marketing found that 91 per cent of Quebecers want to see the details of MPs' and MNAs' spending.

Note that giving Fraser's office access falls short of full public disclosure. But it would at least be a step in the right direction. Currently MPs' accounts are audited by a private company, with the finding kept permanently secret from the public that pays the bills. What Fraser wants to do is a "performance audit," a more rigorous version designed to find out if taxpayers are getting their money's worth.

Conservative, Liberal, and New Democratic MPs from the Board of Internal Economy all remained stonily silent on the question. The Halifax Chronicle-Herald reported last week that the board's members have already decided, informally, to refuse Fraser's request. We can hope that Duceppe's initiative, marking the first break in MPs' massive and self-interested solidarity on this issue, will shame the other parties into changing their views as well.

Particularly sad this week was the ritual washing of hands by the Prime Minister's Office. It would not be appropriate, a spokesman said, for Stephen Harper to comment on this before the board makes a decision. Really? Why ever not? Harper comments in advance on almost every other aspect of government process. He was elected in 2006 on a platform of open government and transparency; has he forgotten that?

The board's latest delay seems to us, as it seems to Kevin Gaudet of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, like a deliberate stall: "It sounds to me like they're just using delay tactics to delay announcing what we fear, which is that they have no intention of having the A-G do a value-for-money audit," Gaudet said. Unpopular decisions - such as, say, a rejection of Fraser's request - are often issued on Friday afternoons in the summer, when nobody's paying attention.

Last Thursday we wrote at length on this subject (montrealgazette.com/opinion and click on "More editorials"). Strikingly, not one MP or MNA chose to attempt to defend the current practices. So today we have an invitation for all MPs and MNAs: Send us a defence of keeping your accounts secret. Subject to the usual editorial standards, The Gazette will publish at least one such text on the page opposite. If there are no replies, we'll report that fact. If there's any excuse for this private spending of public money, surely the public ought to hear it.

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

THE GAZETTE

ÇA SENT LA COUPE!

A wise sports fan we know likes to say that what's really important about your favourite team's season is the journey, not the destination.

Winning a championship is fine, but what's more reliably rewarding is the annual season-long ritual of following a team: being hopeful during training camp, enjoying regular-season games, studying the stats, taking pleasure in hot streaks and suffering through slumps, following injury news and roster moves, checking the standings daily as the season concludes. All that repays a fan's loyalty even if the team tanks in the first playoff round.

When the Canadiens were holding on by their fingernails to the last playoff spot, five weeks ago, many Montrealers took a certain solace in that view. But now our boys have dragged another powerhouse team to Game Seven.

There's no denying that our club's unforeseen playoff persistence against supposedly-superior teams has awakened, in many a Habs' fan, a powerful appetite that can be quenched only by the sight of Halak or Cammalleri skating around hoisting a certain piece of shiny hardware.

The team's "second season" performance has been better than almost anyone thought was possible. And they are not, we trust, done yet. Go, Habs, go!

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

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

THE JAPAN TIMES

EDITORIAL

AN INCONCLUSIVE VOTE IN BRITAIN

There was no winner in last week's election in Britain. The Conservative Party took the most seats overall, but no party emerged with a clear majority, leaving the country facing the prospect of its first hung parliament since the 1970s. That underscores the depths of the divisions in Britain and the difficulties any government will face as it tries to deal with the myriad problems that ended Labour's 13 years in power. Ominously, those problems are only set to intensify.

A party must lay claim to 326 seats in Britain's 650 House of Commons to claim the right to form a government. In last week's ballot, the Conservatives won 306 seats, for a gain of 113 seats, while Labour took 258 seats (loss of 87 seats) and the Liberal Democrats claimed 57 seats (loss of six seats). Smaller, mostly regional, parties won the remainder.

Those results are disappointing across the board. The Conservatives were supposed to capitalize on the fatigue created by 13 years of Labour's rule to claim an outright majority. They failed. Labour suffered its worst electoral defeat in 80 years and Prime Minister Gordon Brown will go down in history as the man who ended his party's remarkable electoral run, whether it was his fault or not. Finally, the much-anticipated groundswell of support for the Liberal Democrats — prodded by the winning performance of party head Mr. Nicholas Clegg in televised debates — never materialized. Not only did the party fail to catapult itself into the ranks of the other two mainstays, but it actually lost seats.

The result is a hung parliament, in which no party commands a majority. It softens somewhat the sting of the showing of Mr. Clegg's party as he is now being courted by the Conservatives and Labour alike. Tory leader Mr. David Cameron has reached out to Mr. Clegg but initial talks have been inconclusive. Reportedly, the key question is reform of the electoral system — a pure single-seat constituencies system that greatly reduces chances of a third-party winning seats. The Conservatives are also divided on the issue of whether to give Cabinet seats to the Liberal Democrats, with some preferring that the party govern with the support of smaller parties, if they can be corralled.

Mr. Brown has also reached out to Mr. Clegg. While both Mr. Brown and Mr. Clegg agree that the Conservatives, having won the most seats, should have the first chance to form a government, the Liberal Democrats actually have more in common with the Labour agenda, although they differ on some important issues — most significantly, the electoral reform that would boost a third party's prospects in a vote. During the campaign, Mr. Clegg opposed the idea of Mr. Brown "squatting" at 10 Downing Street, hinting that he might be amenable to a deal with a Labour Party led by someone else. On Monday Mr. Brown announced he will resign as Labour leader by fall. Yet even a Labour-Liberal Democrat coalition would not claim a majority.

Britain has an unhappy history with hung parliaments. The last case occurred in 1974, when Conservative Prime Minister Edward Heath called an election that Labour won without claiming an absolute majority. Mr. Heath tried to stay in office by forging a coalition with the Liberal Party, but he was forced out a mere four days later. Mr. Harold Wilson, from Labour, took over for a tumultuous eight-month reign. Mr. James Callaghan followed as prime minister in a minority Labour government but he was held hostage to the demands of small parties that exerted maximum leverage in an attempt to exploit his weakness. The result was virtual paralysis that led to an economic crisis and forced the country to seek a bailout from the International Monetary Fund.

Ominously, some of those same conditions are evident today. The election was held amid great uncertainty in Europe created by Greece's economic crisis. The fears of contagion are real; while most observers have focused on Spain and Portugal, Britain is not immune.

The country's budget deficit will exceed that of Greece next year and getting Britain's economic house in order is the next prime minister's first priority. But that promises to be a painful exercise that could turn public opinion against the ruling party and could scare potential coalition partners away.

A fear of inaction is already manifest. The British pound hit a one-year low against the dollar the day after the vote and even fell in value against the euro, which was being hammered in the wake of the Greek crisis. A stock index tied to the British economy dropped 4 percent. Europeans are also concerned that Mr. Cameron's dismal showing — weeks ago, a landslide victory was a foregone conclusion — undermines his own credibility and will make it more difficult for him to sideline his party's euro skeptics. It is worth noting that the Liberal Democrats are more favorable toward Europe. That fault line may prove to difficult to overcome as the two parties try to forge a common platform.

Negotiations will continue, and finding solid common ground is likely to prove elusive. A loose agreement to cooperate on electoral reform may be the best the two parties can muster, but that is not the basis for firm governance. By every indication, Britain needs a government that can make hard decisions and stick to them. It may be that even the British people have lost this ballot.

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

THE JAPAN TIMES

EDITORIAL

DEMOCRACY FAR FROM PERFECT

BY DAVID HOWELL

Prime ministers refusing to leave, political parties with a large number of votes being excluded and dubious coalitions being negotiated — which country are we in, the United Kingdom or Iraq?

The parallels between current political events in London and Baghdad are truly striking, although they cannot be pushed too far. To be fair to incumbent British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, he was obliged by constitutional custom to stay on in office as caretaker until some sustainable arrangement between the various parties could be agreed.

By contrast in Baghdad — where uncertainty has been continuing since the election in March — the entrenched prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki, has point blank refused to concede to the leader of the slightly larger Iraqiya party, Ayad Allawi, and has vigorously maneuvered to sew a coalition of Shiite groups together to keep out his challenger. This is an ominous development for Iraq and will intensify the fury of both Sunni and other groups that feel they are once again being excluded unfairly from power. If it goes ahead, more violence is bound to follow.

One hopes that in London matters are being more swiftly resolved and that excluded groups will not resort to extreme measures — although the situation nearly came to violence on election night when hundreds, maybe thousands, of would-be voters found they could not get into the voting booths before the appointed closing time (10 p.m.) and erupted in fury.

At the time of writing it is not possible to predict how either of these situations is going to work out, or how political stability and firm government are going to be restored in either country. But there is one general lesson to be drawn from these stormy events that deserves to be emphasized: Democracy is a very tricky and complex concept, often leading to unpredictable and unsettling results, and no individual country or society can claim to have the ideal solution.

In the U.K., the apparently simple method by which members of Parliament are elected — the person with the most votes in each district or constituency being the winner — has produced the present confused outcome, with parties like the Liberal Democrats receiving large numbers of votes overall, but winning few seats as a result. This has reinforced demands for a new voting system, notably proportional representation, which may seem fairer but can and does produce even more confused results in practice.

In Iraq, one is left wondering whether all this voting, balloting and party struggling is really the path to stable government at all, or whether it takes account of the completely different cultural background compared with Western democracies, and the far greater importance of tribal and family links, and other less noble pressures. The same thought could be applied to Afghanistan, where Western soldiers have died in an attempt to ensure Western-type elections in Kabul, which have only led to more chaos and instability.

The lesson here is that democracy is not just about votes and political maneuvers. One hears commentators glibly calling in the media for more elections and more voting as though this alone will lead to more accountability and better government. But in reality democracy only "works" if much deeper conditions and attitudes are set right. It requires respected constitutions, an upright and wise judiciary administering law in predictable and rule-based ways, and a well-dispersed pattern of power in the hands of people and organizations — including the media — who know how to use it responsibly, fairly and in a self-controlled way.

Above all, workable democracy requires political classes that are trusted and, yes, trust each other, even though they may have sharply diverging opinions. The true democrat in any society likes all democrats and has friends of all political persuasions. The true democrat also recognizes political structures and cultures vary hugely from country to country and does not try to impose blueprint models on other societies.

Unfortunately, recent times in Western capitals have seen the predominance of shallow and ideologically driven opinion-formers who understand neither of these fundamental points about democracy. Poorly educated and inexperienced "experts" have peddled political elections as the answer to all problems — like some quack medicine — for instance by demanding an elected House of Lords to counterbalance the power of the House of Commons at Westminster.

Excitable journalists have lost all sense of fairness, caution and balance in exercising their undoubted power and influence. Politicians have worked themselves into states of venomous hostility toward their opponents that destroy acceptance and agreement. Judges have bowed to political fashion. Constitutional reformers have vandalized constitutions. Above all, the ignoramuses of the real nature and meaning of democracy, especially in the Western world, have tried to impose their own models on other cultures — notably the Middle East — with disastrous results. Iraq is the most obvious current example, but there are many others.

Perhaps the muddle and confusion of the U.K.'s latest democratic experience will bring a pause for reflection and a wiser understanding of what democracy really means, of its limitations and how it really works. It is not that simple.

David Howell is a former British Cabinet minister and former chairman of the Commons Foreign Affairs Committee. He is now a member of the House of Lords (howelld@parliament.uk) (www.lordhowell.com).

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

THE JAPAN TIMES

EDITORIAL

A DANGEROUS DEFICIT OF DEMOCRACY IN BRITAIN

BY KEVIN RAFFERTY

Special to The Japan Times

HONG KONG — In spite of the United Kingdom's robust and rumbustious election campaign, once the votes were counted and the winning members of Parliament (MPs) were declared, it was clear that the U.K. is suffering a dangerous and growing democratic deficit.

Yes, this election has been different and there is the excuse that the voters returned a hung parliament, where no party has a majority, so there is lots of horse trading that has to be done in private to try to put together a workable government with sufficient support to tackle pressing problems, which include mounting government deficits and debts, high unemployment and a fragile currency.

The Conservatives claim a moral victory by being the biggest party, with 306 of the 650 seats and 36.1 percent of the popular vote, but not enough to form a majority. Brown and his Labour Party that has ruled for three elections and 13 years won only 258 seats with 29 percent of the popular vote, but still maintains the constitutional right to continue in office in the absence of any other leader with "a mandate." The Liberal Democrats won 23 percent of the popular vote but got only 57 seats because of the British first-past- the-post electoral system under which someone can be elected with far fewer than half the vote.

The extent of the distortion is clear in the number of MPs the major parties got for each 1 percent share of the popular vote. The Conservatives won 8.476 MPs for each 1 percent of the popular vote; Labour did slightly better, with 8.897 MPs for each 1 percent; but the Liberal Democrats (LibDems) were shortchanged, getting only 2.478 members. The LibDems point out that governments habitually gain power with the support of only 25 percent of the population (including those who didn't vote).

It is part of the shameless greed for power — and a feature of the democratic deficit — that Labour offered the LibDems an instant election reform law to tempt them into a coalition arrangement. It is hard to think of a more certain recipe for disaster, not least because there would be a bitter row that could halt government completely. Conservatives would certainly oppose proportional representation, for which the LibDems are pressing, and election reform is a much broader concept, which needs careful thought and planning.

In the medium term, proportional representation could be an answer to part of the democratic deficit because it would probably bring about regular hung parliaments and continuous serious discussions about policy. But to rush in is risky, not least because there are so many different forms of proportional representation that even the support of a popular referendum would not settle.

The present first-past-the-post system makes sure that the most popular candidate is elected, even if he or she is only popular with a minority. Other possible methods include a single transferable vote or a list system, in which voters rank their candidates. But both of these often mean that the least unpopular person is chosen. The Japanese hybrid system of constituency MPs and a proportional representation national list is worth considering. But in the U.K. there are also live issues of what to do about the House of Lords, which is still only half-reformed with the disqualification of most hereditary peers from the legislative process.

The democratic deficit runs wide and deep and starts on the campaign trail when the leaders and candidates have to press the flesh, but they are less than honest about answering questions. None of the major parties came clean about how they would tackle the U.K.'s growing budget deficit that Brown has steadily accumulated as finance chief under Prime Minister Tony Blair and then as prime minister, and which the International Monetary Fund warned was unsustainable even before the world recession.

All parties produce manifestos, including specific and vague promises on a smorgasbord of issues, on the basis of which they can claim that the electorate supports their policies, however well or badly designed.

The democratic deficit continues with the fact that voters, once they have made their "X" on the ballot paper have limited means of making their views known. They can write letters to newspapers or lobby their local MPs at the "surgeries" the MPs hold regularly. But today's MPs, rather than being the wise men exercising their discretion at all times that Edmund Burke spoke of, are increasingly cannon fodder used to pass whatever laws their party leaders demand. Wise retired civil servants in the U.K. have increasingly complained that laws are increasingly badly drafted and half-baked.

Party leaders meanwhile retreat behind a wall of security and spin, emerging from time to time to hold "press conferences" at which there are either no questions or only banal ones with banal answers.

The U.K. is not unique. I got an e-mail recently from Michelle Obama and one from Barack Obama answering questions I had not asked. This fake dialogue — which is really only White House spin to promote its own agenda — was sparked by a simple question I asked — about the president's China travel schedule that his office never deigned to answer: When did Obama hold a proper press conference where he had to answer questions he preferred were not asked?

In these days of constant threats and high security, political leaders live in an unreal bubble. But they are not super-humans. Indeed, because of the heavy pressures on them, are probably more prone to make miscalculations and mistakes than ordinary people. Somehow they must find ways of coming out of their protective cocoons to smell the ordure — and occasionally the sweet roses — that their policies have produced, or the democratic deficit will catch up with us all.

Kevin Rafferty is a British journalist who has worked for the Financial Times, The Guardian and The Sun

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

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

THE JAKARTA POST

EDITORIAL

SUSNO THE SONGBIRD

Should we laugh or cry? This is the continuing drama at the National Police as police generals pounce on each other.

On Monday, the National Police finally detained one of their own, Comr. Gen. Susno Duadji, the former detective chief and, equally important, the former deputy of the transaction analysis center, where all sorts of amazing data on his colleagues apparently first poured into his hands.

It was on the basis of this data that he has named, one by one, fellow police officers and their allies in the tax offfice, in alleged scandals of tax evasion, case brokerage efforts and others; each one leading to revelations of another initial, another official, who have amassed supposedly illegal mounds of wealth, be they junior or senior officers and officials.

Police have charged Susno only on one count so far, that he received bribes in the case of a fish farm company, allegedly in return for halting investigation of fraud implicating the firm.

The public is waiting to see how long the police can keep a straight face, as if they remain our credible National Police dedicated to protect and to serve – while several of their higher echelons have been implicated in the tunes of Susno the songbird.

A police chief is squeezed between a rock and a hard place if he were to take steps to immediately shut Susno up — for the target would only grab another file and sing some more, probably even mentioning his superiors.

Now people shake their heads, mumbling at the increasingly questionable credibility of the police. No one is saying they're not working hard at chasing and catching our terrorists. But when general after general is implicated in graft, how can the police work to protect and serve while they're busy guessing their top general's next move. How can they cover any remaining traces of what one can imagine is much more under the carpet?

In the thick of this plot, who are the good guys? Susno seeks public sympathy with his capacity for headlines, and goes as far as requesting witness protection. The Judicial Mafia Taskforce has said that whistle-blower he may be, there are also limits on who is entitled to witness protection, if you're suspected to be right in the thick of things.

Susno emerged in the spotlight last year as the owner of the voice repeatedly heard on the nationwide broadcast recordings of Anggodo Widjojo, the businessman seeking the detective chief's help in return for letting off his brother from a graft investgation.

Since then, Susno the "crocodile", as he implied himself as, against what he dubbed were the "lizards", or small time investigators, has bought time, a lot of time, by unraveling others who could potentially go down the drain with him.

He was removed from his post but retains his uniform, which comes in handy whenever he wishes to show clout.

His lawyer says Susno's arrest yesterday proves he was "trapped"', but the public must be forgiven for not really knowing who's trapping who, or whether it really matters.

What matters is that any party and whistle-blower, hero or villain can expose our corrupt officers and officials across state institutions, and replace them with people who may at least think twice in continuing corrupt habits.

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

THE JAKARTA POST

NATURAL GAS POLICY REVISITED

HANAN NUGROHO

For four decades Indonesia has implemented the "explorer's view" in developing its natural gas industry.

"Sell the gas to the off-taker offering the highest price at well head".

Using this approach — one we have been practicing since the early period of the natural gas industry development in Indonesia — our gas reserves have gone to foreign countries which were able to pay higher prices than domestic buyers may afford.

The natural gas industry might produce higher economic value through value added creation, jobs and domestic taxes if it was developed integrally along its value chain, from upstream to downstream in a single domestic market.

Studies showed that values of developing natural gas in Indonesia (as fuel for electricity and feedstock for petrochemicals, etc.) would be larger than the current practices of exporting them to foreign markets.

There are several methods to transport natural gas. The largest application is by flowing the "dry gas" through pipelines or transporting them using the LNG (liquefied natural gas) technology chain.

Regarding the LNG method, natural gas is liquefied (making its volume much smaller) and is therefore easier to transport across the ocean using an LNG ship. At the destination port (receiving terminal) LNG is re-gasified then transported using high pressure pipelines to major consumers, mainly power plants.

For nearly three decades Indonesia was the world's largest exporter of LNG (with Badak 22.6 MTPA and Arun 12.5 MTPA). The huge volume of LNG (comparable to 3-5 times of natural gas consumed in Java) is exported to Japan, South Korea and Taiwan. Qatar took over the position in 2006.

Badak is the first LNG plant built in Indonesia and exported its first cargo in 1977. Arun followed the next year. In terms of speed in developing the LNG industry (from gas field discovery to the first cargo delivered), both are among the fastest in the world.

The exports from Badak and Arun had made East Asian the world's largest LNG trade region.

In addition to exports LNG, we send huge volume of natural gas by pipeline from South Sumatra and Riau Archipelago to Singapore (675 mmcfd) and Malaysia (250 mmcfd).

When Badak and Arun started exporting, our demand for energy was very low; cheap oil (and massive use of traditional biomass) was sufficient to fulfill our energy requirements. Technology for using natural gas — in the combined cycle power plant for instance — was still developed; many of us did not know the prospect of natural as the queen of fuels.

In the 1970s, Indonesia started the first Five Year Development Plan. Since then, not only the country's manufacturing industry has grown fast, demand for energy has increased, electricity in particular.

To meet the increasing demand, natural gas promised to be the best option as this energy is cheaper, cleaner, more efficient than oil, and the reserves are much larger than that of oil.

When giant gas-fueled power plants were built in Java in the 1990s (Muara Karang, Muara Tawar, Tanjung Priok, Gresik, Tambak Lorok) there was growing concern that the country must secure gas supply for the very expensive plants, which was relying on offshore sources close to Java.

In addition to gas dedicated to those huge plants, the introduction to natural gas in Java through the development of gas transmission and distribution facilities during the 1980-90s has increased potential demand for natural gas considerably. Unfortunately, Java's indigenous gas reserve is limited. The dense island is already a natural gas deficit one.

The signing of the LNG sales contract from Tangguh to China in 2002 — where the gas was sold cheaply at US$3.3 per mmbtu — hurt contract parties of the previous sales for Indonesian LNG.

The domestic power and manufacturing industry was also wondering why the government decided to prioritize "other country first" rather than to meet their thirsty for gas.

Gas allocation (supply to domestic market or to export the gas) has become a hot issue in Indonesian natural gas policy. Donggi-Senoro is a recent case showing increasing tension of the issue.

DS-LNG consortium (Mitsubishi, Pertamina and Medco) signed a Head of Agreement with Chubu and Kansai Electric Power Cos. in February 2009, wherein each company set to be delivered with 1 MTPA of LNG for 15 years, starting from 2012.

However, the agreements and the overall LNG plant project's continuity had been rocked by then vice president Jusuf Kalla's remark last year that natural gas from Senoro and Matindok fields (planned to supply the plant) must be sold to domestic users.

So far, the new government has not decided on the Donggi-Senoro gas allocation.

Some points are underlined here. Giving priority to domestic market is a sound policy that — in longer terms — promises better and more economic benefits for our country (including revenue for the government), also lowering the risk associated with future energy shortage.

But this approach — to be fully materialized — requires long term commitment and large efforts.
First, we have to accelerate the development of domestic natural gas infrastructure (transmission, distribution and an LNG receiving terminal, etc.).

Different to oil and coal, the use of natural gas requires that specific infrastructure is prepared in a timely manner before the gas can be flowed. Our demand centers for gas are in Java, meaning that infrastructure to transport gas to and within Java must be developed in tandem with the decision to flow the gas.

Merely a political euphoria to allocate our gas to domestic markets does not guarantee that the gas will flow to desired destinations. Other derivation policies and action plans are needed to ensure that the strategic policy works.

Despite our wealth of natural gas reserves, fast growing demand and relatively low cost for constructing natural gas infrastructure (compared to government energy subsidy paid each year), infrastructure to serve our domestic market remains far underdeveloped.

Second, export buyers are always able to pay at higher prices, providing clear and more stable revenue to the government. However, this does not always mean that — in the longer term —the economic benefits of exploiting our natural gas are larger if it is exported than it was used to serve the domestic market.

To bridge domestic buyers' affordability, the government may temporarily provide subsidy for using natural gas. For equivalent energy produced, giving subsidy to the use of natural gas will need lesser amount of funds than that to oil.

On the other side, surely, we will no longer afford to pay the increasing costs for oil imports (which currently has reached one third of Indonesia's import values).

Summing up, it will be more beneficial if we start shifting our energy economic policy from "export gas/LNG, import oil" progressively to "use more gas domestically, reduce oil imports".

To bridge domestic buyers' affordability, the government may temporarily provide subsidy for using natural gas.

The writer is senior energy planner and an economist with the National Development Planning Agency. The opinions expressed are his own.

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

THE JAKARTA POST

EDITORIAL

ACHIEVING SUSTAINABLE ECONOMIC GROWTH

FITHRA FAISAL HASTIADI

Sri Mulyani Indrawati has resigned from the hot seat, a shocking fact amid the positive trend of Indonesian economy.

The challenging task is waiting for the successor that is to maintain the remarkable achievement of Mulyani.

Under Mulyani, the Indonesian economy has been transformed into a hot commodity that creates a growing jealousy from neighboring countries. Whether the new minister is capable has become a major issue here.

A good figure, whoever they are, will not be able to solve the issue of sustainability without a proper identification. But it is never meant to be a one man or woman show. A deep and concise coordination is needed across the ministry. A hard task indeed but it is doable. This article proposes some factors that need to be addressed in reaching the quest for sustainable growth.

Adopted from Khoirrunurofik's work in 2002, the author made some econometric simulation to determine the factors that have significantly contributed to economic growth. The first pairing variables are control of corruption and government effectiveness.

It is agreeable that corruption will go against all norms, as it will impede development by the dysfunction of a political system or institution in which government officials, political officials or employees seek illegitimate personal gain through actions such as bribery, extortion, cronyism, nepotism, patronage, graft and embezzlement.

Alas, the control of corruption indicators for Indonesia in Asia Pacific has been lying at the ground level since 1998. The government effectiveness index rings the same bell. The government is still not able to solve the latent problem of coordination. This condition leads to a policy failure across sectors.

Another factor that also matters is democracy. The finding tells us about the negative impact of democracy for the economic growth in Indonesia.

This fact is not very surprising since democracy is still finding its form in Indonesia. We have to define what democracy means in order to make it work.

Recent progress shows that democracy creates negative externalities in the form of corruption and budget ineffectiveness. This is happening because the trend toward fiscal decentralization has dismantled the central government scope of control.

The shallow control has undoubtedly been capitalized by some officials to find their way in enhancing personal welfare. The incentives to cheat are being capitalized even more given the new scheme of
the local election that incorporates a lot of money to entertain the stakeholders.

In terms of the budgeting process, the local governments still have a hard time allocating funds efficiently or even worse, they cannot find the way to channel it. As a result, idle funds are being kept in local banks which is resulting to a persistent pressure to the monetary authority since these banks invest the funds in the form of a central bank's note.

The next factor is physical infrastructure such as roads, bridges and electricity that can provide steadiness and assuredness in attracting foreign direct investment.

In other words, good infrastructure will only lead to sustainable inter trade and investment. Should Indonesia seek to achieve sustainable growth, she should at least solve the latent problems of unprepared infrastructure especially on the electricity sector. The idea is how to increase the capital spending in the national budget (APBN), which is subject to a gradual cut in routine spending.

Another factor that supports the growth sustainability is the exchange rate. One should know that volatile exchange rates will hamper the initial macroeconomic condition. Take a look at the rupiah's value, amid the positive campaign from Bank Indonesia, it still looks very sluggish to adjust from its initial level.

An anomaly since the spread of the interest rate between the BI rate and Fed rate has broadened in a way that it could act as an incentive to the fund owners to flood the Indonesian market with massive capital inflow, which in turn leverages the rupiah.

So, what is the problem? The keyword is expectation, in which the market still has negative expectations of the rupiah. An old story is retold, a story about the decoupling effect which happens between the real economic sector and the financial sector, a story that still has not found the end.
This fact contributes to the fragility of the Indonesian economic base that leads to market distrust. One thing that should be noted is that the reason to invest in Indonesia, aside from the strong economic base, is because of the expectation from the investors there will be future economic gain.

Efforts to bring the Indonesian economy onto its path is not like it has never been done before but it has not effectively been done. The principles of a good macroeconomic framework are credibility, flexibility and political legitimation. The rule of law could create credibility if the rule is widely known and well understood by the public. With credibility, it is easier to handle economic turbulence with the policy instrument that is controlled by the economic authority.

Credibility can function more when there is a transparent and accountable framework that strengthens political legitimacy. Effective policy would merge if the policy makers have the ability to react promptly every time in encounters an unprecedented shock. Credible policy makers are those who make the policy with respect for transparency. With a high level of transparency, any economic shock can be easily diminished.

Without transparency, every policy with regards to economic target and fiscal rule will become obsolete since the public cannot compare between the target and realization. Moreover, the political legitimacy becomes very important since the policies being made should reflect the national consensus. This in turn creates balance of power and also general responsibilities, which could reduce the negative effect from the uncoordinated policy.

Under Mulyani, the Indonesian economy has been transformed into a hot commodity.

The writer, teaching staff at the Faculty of Economics, the University of Indonesia, is a PhD student at the Graduate School of Asia Pacific Studies, Waseda University, Japan.

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

THE JAKARTA POST

EDITORIAL

DEFENSE AND LEADERS TRANSFORMATION

EVAN A. LAKSMANA

This month, the Indonesian Military (TNI) would have embarked on around 12 years of reform since Soeharto fell in 1998. Though civil society groups might still cry foul over their lack of "wholehearted" willingness to change, we need to think about what's next; the transition from a "military reform"-oriented process to a "defense transformation".

A "reform" agenda implies fixing certain aspects of the military's "distorted" roles and functions. Given that Soeharto abused the military as a regime maintenance tool, this would logically mean focusing on getting the TNI out of politics and out of business, and submit to democratic civilian control and the rule of law.

These goals however, though clearly not without merit, touch only the "symptom", not the root causes of the problems surrounding TNI's reposition and re-functio-nalization.

A "transformation" process on the other hand suggests a complete overhaul of the military's world view, institutions, and even missions and future development.

This is not the same as modifying the TNI's doctrines and increasing their defense spending on complex weapons systems — as the Defense Ministry recently announced.

Instead, a defense transformation implies an institutional and paradigm shift on how the military views itself, educates and trains its members, how it equips itself and how it plans to fight.

This requires an overhaul of the entire education and training system, strategic and operational plans, as well as defense budgeting and the management process along with acquisition and R&D practices.

This process, however, requires a different approach than what we have seen for the past decade practiced by civil society groups and the government.

For one thing, a defense transformation process is long and winding — not to mention extremely complicated and expensive. So one should not adopt the same mentality of expecting instant results and definitive outcomes within a short time span.

For another, it requires the presence of a strong civilian defense community with advanced expertise to help plan and manage the transformation process in a, for a lack of a better term, "technocratic" way. Of course, recent announcements by officials that nearly all aspects of military life is now "classified" couldn't help this process any easier.

That said, despite these complexities and challenges, we have to start somewhere. This means that first and foremost we need to clearly articulate and envision the kind of leadership to guide us in our defense transformation journey.

In this regard, "transformative leaders" might provide the answer. Leaders are needed who can induce followers — by creating a deep sense of ownership among them and appealing to their values — to rise above their self-interests to a higher purpose, and more importantly, to develop them into leaders themselves.

In essence, according to James MacGregor Burns, who first coined the term back in the 1970s, transformational leadership is a process that continues until, "leaders and followers help each other to advance to a higher lever of morale and motivation."

These processes, therefore, could "redesign" perceptions and values of the members of the organization — a necessary foundation for any institutional and paradigm shift within the TNI in the future.

It could also allow the military to go beyond the existing "transactional leadership" — exchanging something of value the leaders possess or control that followers want in return for their service, which historical studies have shown to have been critical for the TNI high command, and even the president, to fully control and enforce order within the ranks.

But more importantly, in the long run, transformational leaders could create future leaders, not obedient followers, with a better contextual intelligence: the ability to recognize and diagnose the plethora of contextual factors inherent in the strategic environment and adapt accordingly.

This is because by appealing to a higher sense of value and purpose as well as deeper affinity, the TNI's future leaders can eventually learn to develop a good grasp of past events, acute awareness of present variables and a vision of preferred futures — the three main preconditions of contextual intelligence, according to Matthew Kutz in his "Leadership Review" article.

As such, when transformative leaders within the defense establishment transform its followers into leaders themselves, leaders with better contextual intelligence, the TNI's long-term organizational flexibility and adaptability will increase as well, especially amid a rapidly changing strategic environment.

To sum up, a defense transformation process is the next logical step following the near completion of the 1998-driven military reform. As such, transformative leaders are needed to circumnavigate the process — leaders who are, as former US Naval War College president James Stockdale said, "Great teachers, able to give those around [them] a sense of perspective and to set the moral, social and motivational climate among his followers."

The writer is a researcher with the Centre for Strategic and International Studies, Jakarta,
and is currently an ASC fellow at the Asia Pacific Center for Security Studies in Honolulu.

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

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

THE KOREA HERALD

EDITORIAL

ATOMIC RACE

It is disappointing to hear that Korea has failed in its bid for a nuclear reactor project in Jordan. The Middle East country picked a consortium led by French nuclear group Areva and Japan's Mitsubishi Heavy Industries as the preferred negotiation partner for the construction of its first commercial nuclear power plant.

Our disappointment is all the greater as the failure came after a South Korean consortium clinched a $200 million research reactor deal from Jordan in January this year. At the time, we thought the order, won by the Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute and Daewoo Engineering & Construction, would increase the chance of the consortium led by Korea Electric Power Corp. winning the much larger commercial reactor project as well.

Reports say Korea almost gave up on the project due to differences with the Jordanian government over financing and construction methods. While the Korean consortium proposed to build the plant on a turn-key basis, Jordan wanted to split it into several projects and award them to local contractors through a bidding process. The client also wanted the builder to finance the entire construction project.

The failure raises the question whether Korea can maintain its foothold in the global nuclear power plant market. Korea made a successful entry into the market late last year by winning a $20-billion project from the United Arab Emirates. But it prompted the industry's conventional powerhouses in France, Japan and the U.S. to join forces to stop Korea's advance.

The Jordanian case illustrates the need for Korea to improve its financing capability. The Korean nuclear industry has secured a strong competitive edge in terms of price and quality, but not in financing. As a nuclear plant project is a mega deal, the client often requires the builder to foot the bill and recoup the costs by operating the facilities.

Another area where Korea needs improvement is to forge partnership with global players. Areva of France and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries of Japan formed an alliance for the Jordanian project to avenge their loss to Korea in bidding for the UAE project. To face such formidable rivals as GE of the United States as well as Areva and Mitsubishi, Korean companies need to form strategic partnerships with other players.

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

THE KOREA HERALD

EDITORIAL

HISTORICAL RECONCILIATION

Different interpretations of the past have frequently marred relations between Korea and Japan. Japan's annexation of Korea in 1910 is a case in point. Korea maintains the annexation was null and void because Japan coerced it to sign an annexation treaty. Japan, of course, rejects this view and argues the treaty was valid, thus justifying its imperialist aggression.

This official Japanese view of the annexation faces a serious challenge as a group of Japanese intellectuals have voluntarily stood up to rectify it. On Monday, 100 Japanese scholars, writers and lawyers, together with the same number of Korean peers, issued a statement declaring unequivocally that the 1910 annexation treaty was invalid. It was the first time that Japanese intellectuals collectively rejected the distorted mainstream Japanese view of the annexation and sided with the Korean interpretation.

We laud the courage of the group, which included Kenzaburo Oe, the 1994 Nobel laureate in literature, and Wada Haruki, emeritus professor at the University of Tokyo and authority on the modern history of Korea. They have made a meaningful step toward historical reconcilation between Korea and Japan.

The group's righteous move does not stop at simply issuing a statement. To raise public awareness, they plan to collect signatures from other leading figures in Japan, run ads in the New York Times and other foreign media, and hold symposiums in Seoul and Tokyo. Furthermore, they intend to submit their statement to the Tokyo government around Aug. 15, Korea's Liberation Day, and urge it officially acknowledge the illegality of the treaty. If the Tokyo government respects their demand, it would be a truly remarkable way to mark the centenary of the annexation.

The move has gained some momentum. It has inspired lawmakers in Japan and Korea to promote the issuance of a similar joint statement in August. From the Japanese side, about 100 lawmakers are expected to endorse the statement. According to reports, these lawmakers also seek to pass a resolution confirming the invalidity of the annexation through the National Diet of Japan within this year.

We really hope this unprecedented campaign catalyzes a new movement in Japan to correct distorted historical interpretations. As is widely known, Japan has persistently sought to justify and glorify its history of imperialist aggression. Japan's repeated territorial claim to Dokdo, Korea's easternmost islets in the East Sea, also stems from a distorted view of history.

When Tokyo makes a claim to Dokdo, it always triggers anti-Japanese sentiment and heightens diplomatic tension across the Korea Strait. Seoul cannot help responding to Tokyo's claim to the islets because it is an encroachment on Korea's sovereignty.

Japan made the latest claim to Dokdo on March 30, when it approved five social studies textbooks for elementary school students which describe Dokdo as Japanese territory. The decision triggered condemnation from Seoul for indoctrinating young students with false historical claims. Seoul was particularly angry because of the timing of Tokyo's move – it came just four days after a South Korean warship went under in the West Sea, killing 46 sailors and plunging the entire nation into deep sorrow. Tokyo took advantage of its neighbor's misfortune to approve misleading textbooks.

For Korea, it is necessary to take issue with Japan's incorrect historical view. Otherwise, Japan will have no qualms about distorting history. All this boils down to the following point: Without a fundamental shift in historical views on the Japanese side, it is impossible for Korea and Japan to achieve historical reconciliation, and without such reconciliation it is hard to expect full-fledged cooperation in business and other fields. We hope the Japanese intellectuals' move gains further momentum and can evolve into a process of historical reconciliation.

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

THE KOREA HERALD

EDITORIAL

THE ABUSE OF HISTORY AND THE IRANIAN NUCLEAR BOMB

SHLOMO BEN-AMI

TEL AVIV -– Saturated with their often tragic history, Jews tend to pay great reverence to the past. But the past, especially when not handled with care, can be the enemy of the future and distort our reading of the challenges of the present. This is certainly the case with the analogy that Israeli leaders insist on drawing between the destruction of European Jewry in the Holocaust and the threat posed to the Jewish state by a nuclear-armed Iran.

Holocaust Remembrance Day in Jerusalem this year again saw Israeli leaders competing with each other in feeding the gloom of the national psyche and public hysteria surrounding Iran's intentions.

President Shimon Peres, who, unlike Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, is skeptical of the utility of an attack on Iran's nuclear installations, spoke of the "threat of extermination" facing Israel. Even Defense Minister Ehud Barak, usually a coolly rational thinker, chose Yad Mordechai, a Kibbutz named after Mordechai Anilewitz, the leader of the Warsaw Ghetto uprising, to alert world opinion against "Holocaust deniers, first and foremost the

Iranian president, who calls for the destruction of the Jewish people."

Netanyahu, not surprisingly, was especially outspoken. To him, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is another Hitler, and the world is now facing the same challenges that it faced on the eve of Hitler's rise to power. Iran's race to develop nuclear weapons, Netanyahu warned, can be understood only in the context of its leaders' "repeated vows to wipe the Jewish state off the face of the earth." Supposedly, now, as then, the world is criminally indifferent.

Netanyahu's Holocaust analogy would have been a mere intellectual curiosity if he were not the person who would be responsible for taking the decision about whether to attack Iran's nuclear installations and thus drive the Middle East into an apocalyptic confrontation. The career of his political mentor, Menachem Begin, demonstrated that distorted analogies between past and present can inspire irresponsible policies.

In his disastrous 1982 invasion of Lebanon, Begin perceived himself as a God-sent vindicator of the legacy of the Holocaust. He chose to portray what was a cynical alliance of convenience between Israel and the Christian Phalange as a lesson to humanity and a rebuke of that hypocritical Christian Europe which had betrayed the Jews during the Holocaust. He would show them how the Jewish state, created by Holocaust survivors and now

led by one, would come to the rescue of a Christian minority threatened with destruction.

To Begin, Arafat in Beirut was Hitler in his Berlin bunker. Indeed, Abba Eban ridiculed Begin for behaving "as if Israel were a kind of disarmed Costa Rica and the PLO was Napoleon Bonaparte, Alexander the Great, and Attila the Hun all wrapped into one."

Begin was the best proof that Israel's critics needed that the Zionist revolution, although it created a state out of the ashes of the Holocaust, had failed to eradicate the collective self-image of the Jew and the Israeli as victim. Netanyahu seals the image of Israel as a nation totally incapable of breaking out of the prison of its past.

Israel is not wrong to cast serious doubts on the efficacy of the measures that the United States pretends to take in the hope of curtailing Iran's nuclear ambitions. Neither the planned sanctions nor the recently published U.S. Nuclear Posture Review, a far less revolutionary document than expected, will curb Iran's nuclear appetite. Instead of believing in its capacity to stop Iran's nuclear program, the world is preparing to live with a nuclear-armed Iran.

But this would not be Israel's problem alone. Such a resounding collapse of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty would pose a formidable challenge to the world community, particularly to the Middle East. Iran's viciously anti-Semitic rhetoric is a transparent attempt to deceive its terrified Arab neighbors by presenting its military might as the spearhead of an all-Muslim confrontation with Israel. In fact, a nuclear Iran would launch the entire region into nuclear anarchy. Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Turkey would all seek their own "Sunni" bomb to counter the threat of a Shia nuclear empire on their doorsteps.

When he did not feel the need to exploit the solemnity of Holocaust remembrance ceremonies, Barak conveyed the right message to the rising Iranian power. A year ago, knowing full well that Iran was irreversibly on its way to getting the bomb, he soberly challenged Netanuyahu's dangerous distortion of history.

"Israel is not European Jewry," Barak said at the time. "We are a strong country to which the whole world attributes nuclear capabilities, and in regional terms we are a superpower." He then expressed his dislike for comparing the Iranian threat to the Holocaust, "because it cheapens the Holocaust and stretches current challenges beyond their proper place. There is none that will dare to destroy Israel."

History has not come full circle. Israel needs to decide whether it is a regional superpower or a Jewish ghetto waiting for an imminent pogrom to begin. History in the hands of manipulative politicians and incorrigible ideologues can be either a dangerously inebriating weapon to mobilize the masses, or, as James Joyce put it in Ulysses, "a nightmare" from which it is difficult to wake.

By obsessively filtering their conflict through the nightmare of the Holocaust and the Nakbah, Israelis and Palestinians have doomed the chances of a peaceful settlement of their dispute. Viewing the current conflict between such formidable military powers as Israel and Iran through a similar lens can only breed untold catastrophe.

Shlomo Ben-Ami, a former Israeli foreign minister, is vice president of the Toledo International Center for Peace and author of "Scars of War, Wounds of Peace: The Israeli-Arab Tragedy." -- Ed.

( Project Syndicate)

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

THE KOREA HERALD

EDITORIAL

ELENA KAGAN AS SUPREME COURT NOMINEE

In choosing Solicitor General Elena Kagan as his second Supreme Court nominee, U.S. President Barack Obama -- barely -- has obliged supporters who wanted him to look outside one of several boxes in which recent appointments to the court have been made. Unlike all of her prospective colleagues at the time of their appointment, Kagan has never served as a judge.

But the selection of a solicitor general -- often referred to as "the 10th justice" because of the office's intimate relationship with the court -- is a much less dramatic departure than the appointment of a politician in the mold of Chief Justice Earl Warren or an experienced private practitioner such as Justice Lewis Powell would have been. If confirmed, Kagan would still have a lot in common with other members of the current court, including an Ivy League law degree, Washington experience and service as a Supreme Court law clerk. She may not be a member of the "judicial monastery," to borrow a term from Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick J. Leahy, Democrat-Vermont, but she's no stranger to its sacred precincts.

Yet if Kagan isn't a particularly surprising choice, she is still an impressive one. A former dean of Harvard Law School, she would have been a plausible candidate for the court even before her service as solicitor general. As lawyers would say, the prima facie case for her confirmation is strong. But, especially given her lack of judicial opinions, members of the Senate Judiciary Committee have a duty to engage her in a conversation about her views of the Constitution and the role of a judge -- an exchange in which she needn't take positions on particular matters that might come before her.

Like it or not, Kagan has provided an opening for such a dialogue. In a 1995 law review article, she called Supreme Court confirmation hearings "a vapid and hollow charade," complaining that "senators today do not insist that any nominee reveal what kind of justice she would make, by disclosing her views on important legal issues." Kagan should reread her article and strive as a nominee to exhibit the candor she called for as a scholar. In return, her questioners should approach the hearings with a similar commitment to intellectual honesty, which has been woefully missing from recent judicial confirmations.

So far, Republican lawmakers offer little to suggest that they are capable of that sort of statesmanship. Only one Republican member of the committee -- Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina -- voted to recommend the confirmation of Justice Sonia Sotomayor. The rest sought refuge in the absurd assertion that Sotomayor was outside the mainstream of legal thinking. The hearings on Kagan's nomination thus will be a test not just of the nominee but also of those who sit in judgment of her.

The Los Angeles Times, May 11

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

THE KOREA HERALD

EDITORIAL

WHO GETS REPORTERS' RIGHT TO SHIELD SOURCES?

The mythology of news puts outsized importance on confidential sources. The image of shadowy informants whispering forbidden truths is very cool, and deeply flattering to journalists. Reality is less romantic. Reporters spend a lot of time sifting contradictory and self-serving accounts from people who, far from dreading disclosure, are glad to be in the news.

Plus, confidential sources are rarely whistleblowers -- vulnerable neophytes handing over files of grave importance while choking back their fears. Usually they're savvy operators who want to remain off-screen and don't want to undermine the ploy they hope the reporter will advance.

But source confidentiality has mythic importance anyway because it epitomizes something fundamental about the role journalists like to think they play -- and the role the rest of society needs them to play.

That has to do with the press as sanctuary, a freestanding institution that people can turn to for protection and support. Just as the priest and the lawyer are entitled -- indeed, obligated -- to honor the secrets they're entrusted by people who seek their help, the journalist claims a similar privilege. Each serves institutions that have important work to do and need to stand independently and withstand outside compulsion to do it right.

That's the idea, anyway. And it's a good one, which is why as new media arise in the emerging news industry, their advocates are keenly sensitive to any hint that when it comes to source protection the upstarts don't deserve the same privilege as their established rivals.

So to the ruling last month by a New Jersey appeals court denying a blogger protection under the state's reporter shield law. The law, like those of 35 other states, authorizes journalists to resist court demands to disclose confidential sources. Here, the blogger, an ex-Microsoft employee named Shellee Hale, is being sued for defaming a tech company and won't identify sources she says she used in posting her assertions.

The ruling is only the second time a U.S. appellate court has decided whether shield laws apply to bloggers, according to the New Jersey Law Journal, and it was widely denounced online as a blanket repudiation of the blogosphere. BigJournalism.com's Jim Lakely called it a "backward looking, snobbish decision" and offered a litany of scoops bloggers unaffiliated with established news organizations had produced.

Bloggers were rightly dismayed by elements of the ruling. At times, the court skated uncomfortably close to basing its decision on Hale's lack of affiliation with a recognized news outfit and failure to follow what the judges regarded as customary journalistic procedures, which they seem to think include fact-checking and getting comment from all parties. That's really none of their business.

But the gist of the 48-page ruling, as Colleen Brondou wrote on findingdulcinea.com, "should provide comfort to bloggers." That's because it was a thoughtful attempt to answer the central question: On what basis should certain people have the extraordinary right to say no to a court, to refuse to give evidence that any other citizen would be required to produce.

This court's answer was to reaffirm the importance of news, of enabling people to do the work of gathering and preparing significant information for a mass audience. If that's what Hale had been doing, the court said, she'd have been shielded. Instead, when she denounced an Internet technology company for its "illegal and unethical use of technology," she was doing nothing more than posting the equivalent to a letter to the editor -- not practicing journalism.

Now, I think the court was unduly dismissive of evidence that Hale was engaged in a serious and sustained effort to unearth wrongdoing in the online porn business, an effort that sounded like journalism to me.

But the need to draw just these kinds of ragged distinctions is an unavoidable problem at a time when millions of people are posting, tweeting, friending and commenting online, and when even private comments have a limitless potential to go viral and reach vast audiences -- when, in short, everyone can claim, with some justice, to be offering up much the same publicly accessible narrative and commentary on contemporary realities that not long ago was the exclusive work of salaried journalists.

To assert a reporter's privilege for them all would emasculate the courts, yet denying the burgeoning population of journalistic irregulars the ability to keep their word to sources would shrink their journalism -- and consign the honorable tradition of press sanctuary to ever smaller havens.

Edward Wasserman is Knight professor of journalism ethics at Washington and Lee University. -- Ed.

(McClatchy-Tribune Information Services)　

By Edward Wasserman

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

THE KOREA HERALD

EDITORIAL

CARRIERS STILL CRUCIAL TO PROJECTING U.S. POWER

Defense Secretary Robert Gates asked a simple question last week. Do we really need 11 aircraft carrier task groups patrolling the oceans for an additional 30 years?

Boy, did that raise eyebrows in military circles.

Gates spoke before an audience of naval officers and defense contractors, many of whom no doubt viewed his remarks as heresy.

But he made some telling points, namely that as anti-ship weapons have become more sophisticated and precise, our fleet of gigantic floating bases has become increasingly vulnerable. Does it make sense to tie up so many scarce defense dollars in assets that might be overwhelmed by anti-ship missiles or submarines?

In other words, are we headed for a moment like Pearl Harbor, when we suddenly learned that we had invested too much in battleships and relied on them for too long, ignoring their vulnerability to relatively cheap airplanes carrying torpedoes?

Since man began forming armies, a debate has raged. Which is best, heavy and expensive or light and agile? It depends: The two are in perpetual tension. In the Middle Ages, heavy and defensive ruled; some fortresses were effectively impregnable. But at Pearl Harbor, light and agile won the day.

Gates was saying that current conditions tend to favor forces that are widely dispersed and highly maneuverable -- yet lethal, thanks to advances in weaponry. It's time we put fewer eggs in the carrier task force basket and more in dispersed, maneuverable forces of our own -- meaning smaller ships, perhaps with stealth capability, that can work closer to shore.

All of which is fine, as far as it goes. But Gates went much further. How many carrier task forces are enough? He didn't propose a specific number, but he suggested a profoundly troubling measuring stick for deciding: The relative power of other seafaring nations.

"Do we really need 11 carrier strike groups ... when no other country has more than one?" he asked.

Robert Haddick, a former Marine officer who writes at the Small Wars Journal site, noted that the answer to that question could be found in part on Okinawa, where residents are demanding closure of a major U.S. air base. Once that happens, Haddick wrote, a "big strategic hole" will open up in America's western Pacific defense plans, and we will need our carriers even more to project force and deter aggression.

Okinawa isn't the only problem. It's becoming increasingly difficult to maintain bases in several other countries. Yet we have vital interests in far-flung regions such as the Persian Gulf, the Korean Peninsula and the Taiwan Strait.

"The fact that no other country, today at least, operates anything like a (U.S. Navy) carrier strike group says nothing about their utility," Haddick wrote. "I am surprised that Gates said this, especially to an audience of naval officers."

The carrier force has been the primary instrument by which America maintains freedom of the seas. The importance of this benefit was highlighted more than a century ago by Alfred Thayer Mahan, in his pathbreaking "The Influence of Sea Power Upon History."

Mahan's basic point was encapsulated in his introduction.

At one time or another, many of us read stories of the wars between Rome and Carthage, illustrated by pictures of Hannibal crossing the Alps with his elephants.

What was he doing in the Alps, anyway? Why didn't he go by sea? It turns out the Romans controlled it, forcing Hannibal to go overland -- a trek that cost him more than half his army. Those losses could be credited directly to the Roman navy.

U.S. control of the sea is a benefit largely conferred by the existence of a powerful fleet of carriers, able to project awesome power virtually anywhere on short notice or help in disaster aid when the need arises.

No one knows the "right" number of carrier task groups. Gates is surely right to suggest that it's time to throw more money at lighter, cheaper, more maneuverable ships.

But the standard he suggested -- the relative power of other navies -- hints at something other than a measured adjustment. What Gates could have in mind is a radical cut in the carrier force, and that would surely be a big strategic mistake.

E. Thomas McClanahan is a member of the Kansas City Star editorial board. -- Ed.

(McClatchy-Tribune Information Services)　

By E. Thomas McClanahan

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

THE KOREA HERALD

EDITORIAL

MAKE BP PAY ITS FAIR SHARE OF THE OIL SPILL

It took the 1989 massive Exxon Valdez oil spill in Alaska to nudge Congress into passing the Oil Pollution Act in 1990, which made oil companies responsible for paying all spill cleanup costs. The law set a liability cap for oil companies at $75 million for economic damage claims caused by a spill.

Clearly, that was being too kind to oil producers, as the ongoing massive spill in the Gulf of Mexico makes painfully clear. Fishing fleets remain grounded. Shrimpers' boats have been converted into makeshift cleanup crafts to reckon with the 5,000 barrels of crude that's widening the oil slick daily. Beach resorts are seeing bookings drop as tourists shy away from visions of oil-soaked beaches.

Now lawmakers from coastal states -- including Sen. Bill Nelson and Rep. Kendrick Meek -- are pushing to raise that cap to make sure BP and other oil companies in future spills are liable for damages incurred by such disasters.

Bills in the House and Senate would raise the liability cap to $10 billion and make it retroactive to cover this ongoing spill. Congress should approve the bills, and do it quickly.

If this seems steep, think again. In the first quarter of 2010, BP saw its profits rise to $6.1 billion from $2.6 billion a year earlier. BP can afford to pay the claims of the fishermen, the shrimpers, the hoteliers seeing their livelihoods sink under the sludge.

BP also should pay the mitigation costs for environmental damages, which could take years to fully assess.

If this seems unfair, it's not. While most attempts to make new laws retroactive would skirt constitutionality because they deal with something already done, the spill is still a catastrophe in progress. That's why Congress should act now.

In 1990, Congress also created the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund to pay damage claims above the $75 million cap. The fund comes from an 8 cent tax on every barrel of oil produced or imported into the United States. There's a catch, however. Congress also put a $1 billion per incident cap on payouts from the fund.

The new bills would eliminate the cap. They would also allow local responders to tap the fund for preparation and mitigation up front, rather than waiting for reimbursement. Another change would allow claimants to collect from future revenues of the fund, with interest, if damage exceeds the amount in the trust, currently $1.6 billion.

Equally important, the proposed law would also eliminate an existing $500 million cap on natural resource damages. The health of the bayous, bays and sugar-white beaches of the Gulf are priceless in their value to millions of people.

Unlike Exxon, which tried every maneuver possible to slither out of its obligations for the Alaskan spill, BP has been front and center on taking responsibility. It set up a $25 million fund for states to use to combat the slick. But it has also repeatedly said it will pay only for "legitimate" damages, whatever that means.

Sounds too much like wiggle words. Congress should make sure BP is as responsible for all damages as it keeps promising to be.

The Miami Herald, May 9　

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

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

CHINA DAILY

EDITORIAL

HARVESTING RAINWATER

Water shortages plague most Chinese cities; even so, rainwater is inadequately harvested or not at all. Rainwater goes down the drain serving no useful purpose. Recent rainstorms that affected a number of cities in South China have sparked debates on rainwater conservation efforts in urban areas. One can take a leaf out of the German pavilion at the ongoing Shanghai Expo, which is showcasing Berlin's rainwater harvesting system which not only makes good use of rainwater but also keeps the city's waterways uncontaminated.

Chinese cities, for instance, received as much as 260 billion cubic meters of rain in 2004, according to latest available data. Properly conserved, this rainwater would help ease chronic water shortages in these cities. Yet, few cities adopt facilities to collect rainwater. Beijing's water management authorities say most of the rain the capital gets is unutilized, finding its way instead into the city's waterways.

True, funds needed for rainwater conservation, such as building tanks to collect and store rainwater, are by no means modest. Still, if the money can be rustled up, as the rainwater harvesting system in Berlin shows, it will go a long way in combating water scarcity. Moreover, expenditure on cleaning up urban waterways can be better utilized elsewhere.

Furthermore, if such a rainwater collection system is able to effectively prevent urban areas from being inundated during rainstorms, incalculable economic losses may be avoided.

Allowing more rainwater to seep into the ground and recharge underground aquifers is another way to beat the shortage. This is imperative for sustainable development.

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

CHINA DAILY

EDITORIAL

NOT AN EASY EXIT

The steadfast plunge of the Chinese stock market shows how heavily worries over climbing inflationary pressures weigh on local investors.

Together with the changing global growth prospect, such market panic will add to the complexity and difficulty of China's stimulus withdrawal. Policymakers need to pay close attention to these concerns. But more important, they should keep pressing ahead with efforts to prevent asset bubbles and economic overheating.

Even as global stocks surged on the about $1-trillion emergency rescue fund to end Europe's debt crisis, the benchmark Shanghai Composite Index closed at a nearly one-year low on May 11 as latest statistics indicated that price pressures have been building throughout the economy. China's consumer prices rose 2.8 percent in April from a year earlier, the fastest pace in 18 months, while property prices jumped 12.8 percent following a record increase by 11.7 percent just a month ago. Such accelerated inflation does justify investor worries because it might invite more tightening measures that can choke off growth.

That explains why the stock market has shrugged off news that the audacious bailout to stanch the European debt crisis might make another global slump less likely for the moment.

However, while rising inflationary pressures are strengthening the case for higher interest rates and more tightening measures, policymakers also have to take into account the consequences of an overdone correction in the domestic stock market as well as the risk of underestimating the impact of a darkening global growth outlook on the domestic economy.

The complicated economic situation means that China's exit from stimulus measures has to be more circumspect.

Any rash policy change may risk derailing the country's strong economic rebound. Yet, the rising inflationary pressures also require policymakers to come up with more well-targeted measures to squeeze out looming asset bubbles.

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

CHINA DAILY

EDITORIAL

MIXED SIGNALS FROM KIM'S VISIT

BY ZHANG LIANGUI (CHINA DAILY)

DPRK leader's trip raises hopes about resumption of Six-Party Talks even as its timing leaves many guessing

The top leader of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) Kim Jong-il's five-day trip to China was officially made known by state media on both sides only after he had wrapped up the visit.

The nature of the visit had aroused keen speculation even as the global media gave detailed reports about every stop in Kim's tour itinerary.

In fact, the visit from May 3 to 7 turned out to be an open secret. In February, China officially invited Kim Jong-il, the chairman of the National Defense Commission of the DPRK, to visit the nation again at his convenience.

This indicated that Beijing did not want the visit to be seen as veiled in secrecy. It also showed that China had prepared well in advance to receive Kim at any time.

From the perspective of international relations, Pyongyang showed high political wisdom in the timing of this unofficial visit.

First, the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Review Conference was taking place at the United Nation's (UN) headquarters in New York on May 3, the same day that Kim began his tour of China.

The conference was represented by more than 140 countries and regions jointly upholding the authority of, and strengthening the NPT framework.

This conference, together with the first nuclear safety summit held last month in Washington, which saw participation by 47 heads of state and international organizations, indicates that the international community has realized that issues concerning nuclear proliferation and nuclear safety have become real threats to human survival

As a state that once acceded to the NPT and later withdrew from it, the DPRK is facing tremendous pressure. So amid such a backdrop, its leader's China trip left the international community guessing. Pyongyang had played a tactical card.

Second, the sinking of a Republic of Korea (ROK) warship in March, which killed 46 sailors, shocked Seoul as well as the global community.

Although the results of the investigation have not yet been officially announced, Seoul gave strong indications that it believed the DPRK was involved in the incident.

The ROK will take up the matter with the UN once the probe concludes. Then, as a permanent member of the UN Security Council, China's stance would become critical.

When he was here for the opening ceremony of the Shanghai World Expo on April 30, ROK President Lee Myung-bak held talks with President Hu Jintao on several important regional issues including the "Cheonan" investigation.

Kim Jong-il arrived in China soon after Lee left. The timing and the courteous reception Kim received agitated some in the ROK, as it appeared (to them) that China had taken the side of the DPRK in the inter-Korean confrontation.

On May 3, ROK's First Vice-Foreign Minister Sin Kak-soo summoned Zhang Xinsen, the Chinese ambassador to the ROK, to express Seoul's position on Kim's China trip.

Summoning the Chinese ambassador over a specific case was a rare gesture by the ROK government.

It is understandable that Seoul felt uncomfortable over the timing of the DPRK leader's trip to Beijing.

Even so, such a strong reaction reflects Seoul's misunderstanding of China's role in the Korean Peninsula dispute. The fact is, China has long been striving for peace and stability in the peninsula.

Third, the DPRK wants to be an "economic power

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

CHINA DAILY

EDITORIAL

PEOPLE AT HEART OF ADMINISTRATIVE REFORM

BY GRAYSON CLARKE (CHINA DAILY)

The Chinese government is stepping up efforts to modernize public services and the institutions that help them do that.

High quality, efficient and accountable public services are essential to the government's vision of creating a fair and harmonious society. As China's wealth grows, the public's expectations of what they get from their taxes and social insurance contributions will rise with it - and each generation will have successively higher expectations than the last.

Administrative reform is fundamentally a major exercise in change management - changing the way services are delivered, how institutions account to their citizens and most fundamental of all, the way officials deal with the public. In Europe these days, apart from our Prime Minister we look at citizens as clients and customers. Fundamental to any change program are the people who deliver the change and those that will champion it; which brings us to China's civil servants

Civil servants get a pretty poor press in China (as they do elsewhere). They are seen as cosseted, privileged, and "on the make".

For sure there are plenty of instances of waste, corruption and misuse of power. But from personal experience and from the very fact that public services do operate in China and in some cases very well and not least from the superb response to its recent disasters, I think China's public servants are an unfairly maligned bunch.

But change is needed. If a society wants its public servants to perform, it has to reward them well.

Current civil service pay levels are very low and an invitation to 'rent seeking' behavior. The current benefit package also represents a fundamental barrier to attracting people from the private sector into the civil service or to getting civil servants to move into the private sector, especially after they have passed the mid-career point.

So, the government has to steadily increase pay across the board but also relate those pay levels to the skills needed for each job and the performance achieved. In Singapore for example all civil servant salaries and even those of ministers are benchmarked against private sector equivalents.

At the same time it also needs to reduce and monetize non-salary benefits. The recent decision of Beijing Municipality to bring its public servants into the basic medical insurance scheme is a welcome development; as is the interest shown in bringing civil servants into the basic enterprise pension scheme.

But pay and conditions is only one ingredient of change. The civil service also needs to be made more professional. This means a change that we in the UK tackled 20 years ago when we realized that simply having highly educated generalists was not enough. They helped to create good policy but weren't up to implementing it. We needed to have professionally qualified specialists - engineers, accountants, project managers - working in government and we had to overhaul pay, recruitment and career paths to achieve it.

Let me give one example that shows the gulf in professional expertise between the two countries. China has a social insurance system that is rapidly expanding to meet the needs of its now ageing population.

The financial implications of expansion and ageing are potentially huge. Yet, to understand its financial implications the government has just three (very able) people located in its actuarial department in the Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security and a smattering of people across the provincial bureaus, only two of which have actuarial departments. By contrast, the UK has an actuarial department (for a much more mature and established system) of 130 people, 55 of whom are qualified chartered actuaries.

The absence of any formal organization recognition or structures causes another problem - and that is the phenomenon of job rotation. Job rotation is a key feature of civil service management and is used to combat corruption on the one hand and help civil servants gain promotion on the other. They are laudable objectives but unfortunately they also undermine the development of professional expertise.

Two months ago our EU-China Social Security Reform Cooperation project ran what was intended as refresher training for trainees from our previous actuarial courses held in 2007 and 2008. In the event, only half the trainees had attended before because the other half had been rotated into new jobs and the value of the training they received will largely be lost.

Training is another key aspect of improving performance and yet still most government agencies are reluctant to put much money into it. For most departments there seems to be a complete lack of structured training for entry level, mid-career and senior managers and a general attitude that staff can pick up the skills required on the job.

Chinese people themselves are very prepared to invest in their own development - 18,000 students alone are taking the examinations of the Chartered Financial Analysts Institute one month from now - but I doubt outside the sovereign wealth funds and the independent financial regulators, who have their own salary scales, very few will ever the join the civil service or the local governments who manage billions of RMB of public funds.

The civil service is still seen as an attractive and stable career and many young graduates want to join it. But the government must resist the temptation to believe that intensive graduate entry competition will alone translate into great performance and higher productivity on the job.

On the contrary, if the gap between civil service and the private sector on pay training and professional development continues to grow, the greater the risk that the civil service will become the home of time servers, and the corrupt. The government needs to sell the idea that a 21st century China needs a 21st Century civil service expected to perform and given the wherewithal to do it.

The author is an international consultant with the EU-China Social Security Reform Cooperation Project.

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

CHINA DAILY

EDITORIAL

HOW DRAGON AND KANGAROO CAN FLY TOGETHER

BY YANG DANZHI (CHINA DAILY)

The relationship between China and Australia has been strained because of a series of bilateral frictions such as the Rio Tinto business espionage case, the Dalai Lama issue and Australia's attitude toward Xinjiang separatist Rebiya Kadeer. This development has come as a surprise, especially because Sino-Australian ties had been progressing smoothly on the political, economic, cultural and educational fronts after the end of the Cold War.

Experts agree that Australia has benefited greatly from bilateral trade. Australia's official statistics show that during 2008-09, bilateral trade touched 83 billion A$ (about $76.1 billion). Australia's exports to China rose from 2008 to 2009, that is, during the height of the global financial crisis. To a large extent, the increase in exports to China has helped Australia weather the global financial storm and fueled its economic growth. And China has become Australia's largest trade partner and the largest export target.

China and Australia are important investment partners, too. Till 2008, Australians had invested $5.82 billion in 8,954 projects in China, and China's non-financial direct investment in Australia was about $3 billion.

But their trade relations have been marred by frictions, because of several factors. China's fast-paced economic growth is largely dependent on the effective supply of strategic resources. Since the demand for coal and iron ore in China is very high, some shortsighted Australian entrepreneurs, with the backing of some politicians, threaten to raise their prices not only to make more money, but also to thwart Beijing's fast-paced economic growth.

Recently, China and Australia agreed to negotiate iron ore prices in the first quarter of every year. But some Australians still believe the agreement between Chinalco and Rio Tinto could pose a threat to Australia's resource industries and national security.

China is thousands of miles away from Australia and, hence, does not pose a security threat to it (or any other country for that matter). But Australia supposes that regional safety is connected with the rise of China. It assumes, and wrongly so, that the rise of China as a military power will upset the regional power balance. Some Australians say China's rise may create a spillover effect and ultimately pose a danger to Australia.

The Australia Defense White Paper, released recently, specifically mentions China's development and regional position and says it is a potential reason why Australia should modernize its military. Since Australia is a big power in South Pacific Ocean, the growing relationship between China and other South Pacific island nations have unnecessarily raised Australia's worries, and helped the "China Threat" gain a foothold in Australia.

Although Australia is a country of immigrants and a pluralistic society in South Pacific, it is Western in its thought and action. Like Britain and the United States, it suffers from superiority complex when it comes to Asian countries. It shows great interest in human rights, freedom and democracy in China, but knows little about China's political and economic reform.Many Australian media outlets see China as a dictatorial, autocratic, adventurous and aggressive country. Australia's attitude toward the Dalai Lama and separatist activities in the Xinjiang Uygur autonomous region is ambiguous.

Sino-Australian ties have been strained partly because Australia has failed to find its right strategic position.

The problem with Australia is that it tries to play the "bridge" between East and West but feels confused with the rise of China. On one hand, it hopes China would become a strong pillar of regional stability. On the other, it is upset with China's rapid rise, and even worried that China could threaten its interests in the Asia-Pacific region. Australia wants to cooperate with East Asian countries and share the spoils, but it also wants to design its own blueprint for Asian regional cooperation.

As an Asia-Pacific power, Australia's competence is not compatible with its ambition. Therefore, it would be wise for it to cooperate with the rest of the world and avoid confrontation.

Strained relations, however, don't change the general cooperative situation between China and Australia. In fact, they should avoid turning their differences into structural contradictions. The two countries' leaders and governments should build strategic mutual trust to create a favorable situation and achieve long-term gains.

They have to take measures to encourage more academic exchanges between their scholars and members of their think tanks, and start track-two diplomacy to explore ways to improve bilateral ties. They should take effective measures to promote non-governmental communications in fields such as education, technology, culture and sport.

If the two countries take such a course, China's image in the Australian media will become more real and Australians will finally realize that China is an opportunity rather than a threat.

The author is a research fellow with the Institute of Asia-Pacific Studies under the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.

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

CHINA DAILY

EDITORIAL

WILL ASSET BUBBLE GO THE JAPAN WAY?

BY SYETARN HANSAKUL (CHINA DAILY)

Striking parallels between China today and Japan in the late 1980s suggest China faces similar risk as Japan did then. The risk of a sharp correction in China's asset markets when the economy slows down should not be overlooked, though it would not necessarily lead to a prolonged and deep economic recession as it did in Japan in the 1990s.

Bank loans are/were growing faster than nominal GDP growth in both the countries. In addition, lending decisions are/were not always based on creditworthiness. Although in the past there have been efforts in China to reduce State-directed bank lending, events in 2009 showed that State moral suasion remains influential in banks' lending decision. As in China today, strong loan growth to the real estate and construction sectors was observed in Japan in the late 1980s.

China's Shanghai A shares were trading 25 times and Shenzhen A shares 45 times their price/earnings (P/E) at the end of last month. The P/E of Japanese equities in 1990 was 50 times. In comparison, the S&P 500 P/E is currently about 17.5 times. Also, Japan's real estate prices rose 150 percent between mid-1986 and mid-1991. Prices of second-hand house prices in Shanghai rose by about 70 percent in 2004-09.

The excessive fixed investment rate is the result of heavy lending and high asset prices. The share of investment to GDP in Japan was 31 percent in 1988-1990. It is about 41 percent in China today.

But there are differences between Japan of the late 1980s and today's China. China is a much larger country in terms of territory and population, and more importantly, it has higher long-term GDP growth potential. The Chinese economy remains largely protected from sharp swings in portfolio investments, which reduces the risk of volatility from global financial markets.

Although the Japanese collapse in demand was largely a domestic problem, triggered by a domestic factor (as opposed to the 1997 Asian financial crisis, which was triggered by outflows of foreign hot money), the relatively sheltered nature of the Chinese economy makes it easier for Beijing to influence domestic market psychology. Moreover, Beijing has capital controls while Tokyo did not.

Greater disparity in China's urban-rural divide gives room for reallocation of resources. This gives the Chinese government more scope to make GDP growth smooth, i.e. steer resources away from the overheated sectors/areas to deficit sectors/areas, thus potentially reducing the risk of a hard landing.

Large foreign direct investment (FDI) and joint ventures (JV) in China mitigate risks. China has absorbed massive FDI inflows (a rough estimate of cumulative utilized FDI since 1992 would be $1 trillion), thus foreign direct investors & JV partners are big stakeholders in the Chinese economy, mitigating the risk that they would desert the country easily during a downturn. Besides, Japan's manufacturing sector was much more closed compared with China's today.

A valuable lesson learned from Japan is that imbalances cannot be corrected through macroeconomic measures alone. They have to be accompanied by microeconomic reforms. The fact that microeconomic reforms are being implemented in China for some time now gives the country a chance to avoid a Japan-style downturn.

Success depends on reallocation of resources to revitalize China's heartland. The game plan to rebalance the economy away from investment toward private consumption is important. As part of the urbanization policy, the vision is to develop key cities to function as regional growth engines. Among them are Tianjin (in the north), and Chengdu and Chongqing (in the west).

Plus, more funds will be allocated to education, healthcare and public housing, especially to help bridge the rural-urban divide and achieve the specific goal of quadrupling per capita income by the year 2020.

But China has to beware of the pitfalls. China's vulnerability could be heightened by a combination of unfavorable factors. Hypothetically speaking they include lower global demand, policy mistakes on the speed and sequence of reform, and failure to see through reform implementation at the micro-level.

Slower global growth could prompt Chinese firms to invest less and consumers to cut their spending. An economic slowdown, because of low global demand and continued tightening policies, may be relatively mild at first but could increase non-performing loans as firms' revenue drop and financing costs rise. There is a risk of a pull-back in lending activities if banks are under pressure to meet the capital adequacy requirement of 8 percent. If credit lines are pulled, it could potentially aggravate the correction in the asset and real estate markets.

The asset market, especially the stock market, will not be immune to correction as investors grow more sophisticated and pay more attention to valuation. The correction in the asset market could be triggered by an outflow of domestic savings for overseas investment (if and when the door is opened wider). This is why the Chinese authorities have proceeded very cautiously in liberalizing the capital account. They still need the large domestic savings pool to fund domestic investments, recapitalize banks and plug the unfunded pension liabilities gap.

A sharp correction in the asset market will not necessarily lead to a prolonged and deep economic recession as it did in Japan. The Chinese have been more proactive than their Japanese counterparts in implementing corporate and banking sector reform, although the process is far from over. Their cautious and gradual reform approach seems appropriate because, on average, risk management capacities are not yet fast enough. Overall, China's attractive long-term potential and its large market size still make a compelling case for investors.

The author is a senior economist at Deustche Bank.

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

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

DAILY MIRROR

EDITORIAL

BATTING FOR OTHERS

When a Cabinet Minister of India raps the Indian Home Ministry during a global event in Beijing saying it has imposed 'needless' restrictions on the Chinese investors and called it being 'paranoid', well that certainly comes as a big embarrassment for New Delhi.

Perhaps the only redeeming factor in the whole episode is the fact that the 'slip' came from a loose-mouth minister who has long been known for his gaffes.

After all this is the same minister who said last November that India deserves the Nobel Prize for being the

home to the dirtiest cities in the world. He was also pulled up by Manmohan Singh for vowing to get India to match China in carbon emission cuts.Still Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh's too patronizing comment over the Indian decision to ban the import of telecom equipment from a Chinese firm, for border areas, is a faux pas by any standard.

Manmohan Singh and Sonia Gandhi who had pulled up the minister no doubt must be livid and as expected the BJP is going to town about the episode questioning the government over its collective responsibility.

Finally the Congress led government had to get the Home Secretary to rubbish the reports of India having a negative bias against the Chinese following Ramesh's comments.

While one may claim that Ramesh was only being too naïve in his comments, it is no secret that there is a section of politicians in almost all the countries that tries to score brownie points by faulting one's own country over another, for perks or for other reasons. There's a school of thought that holds that it is too 'rustic' or 'mundane' to be patriotic and considers criticizing one's own country at international fora is the most 'fashionable' thing to do.

The BJP demands that Minister Ramesh should tender his resignation over the embarrassment caused. However the Congress government which saw the resignation of its State Minister of External Affairs Shashi Tharoor over the IPL controversy a few weeks ago is resisting the temptation of packing him home. Before he resigned Tharoor was embroiled in a series of controversies including one over his reference to economy class in trains as cattle class in his Twitter account and his favouration for the mysterious female owner of the Kochi team in the IPL.

Politicians certainly are the same everywhere.

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

DAILY MIRROR

EDITORIAL

WILL JAPAN'S DIPLOMACY SAVE SRI LANKA AT UN ?

The newspapers reported sometime ago that Japan's Yashashi Akashi who was the peace representative at the Sri Lanka's peace process has been proposed as a member of the panel of experts to be appointed by United Nations (UN) Gen. Secretary , Ban Ki-Moon in relation to Sri Lanka's (SL) war crimes.

When the spokesman for the UN Secretary General addressed a daily Press briefing , he was questioned by the media about this appointment , he did not at once reject it. He went on to state , when such appointments are being made and names proposed , these kinds of things occur. 'I am unable to tell anything further . When a panel of experts is being appointed , proposals and rejections are common in such instances'. Yet , according to sources close to the Government, Japan is taking measures by acting behind the scenes to mitigate the controversy and defuse the tension which has cropped up between the Sri Lanka Government and the UN Sec. General in the appointment of the panel of experts.

Japan's intervention is not something new. During the period of the Sri Lanka war and in its final phase when Western countries requested UN to intervene , Japan was not well disposed towards that request. When a formal discussion was to be held at the UN Security Council during the tail end of the war , Japan opposed it. Similarly on the 26th of May 2009, when the UN Human Rights Commission held a special sessions and discussed Sri Lanka's war crime scenario following the proposal made by the Western countries , Japan again resented it .

On the 13th of May 2009, there was a Press release expressing grave concern about Sri Lanka's war situation by the UN Security Council. In that instance too despite the fact that the Western countries via that press release were insistent that tough measures shall be taken , Japan soft pedaled the issue when the draft was being prepared. After this notification , it was Japan which was in the forefront to halt the UN Security Council from taking measures with regard to Sri Lanka's situation. Nevertheless, the Japanese media and its NGOs followed a course diametrically opposed to that of the Japanese Government. The Japan Times newspaper of 7th June 2009 clearly declared that investigations shall be instituted against Sri Lanka war crimes. It added, if the Sri Lankan Government . thinks it is not implicated in war crimes , it can always come forward and prove its innocence . It is imperative that there shall be an international investigation into the war crimes , the Japan Times underlined.

Later, not only the Japan Times , even the other media of Japan insisted that the investigation into Sri Lanka war crimes is essential. While the Japanese media were promoting this view ,the NGOs of Japan and those international NGOs affiliated to them announced that Japan's war crime policies pertaining to Sri Lanka need change, and Japan's policies are militating against investigations into Sri Lanka war crimes , they pointed out.

On January 29th 2010 , Japan's Foreign Minister said, though the war was over , Sri Lanka's issue has still not been resolved, and for this , a National reconciliation process is necessary .This statement is viewed as a sequel to the pressures brought to bear on the Japanese Govt. by the NGOs. The Japanese Government. began seeing the Sri Lanka war crimes in a new light and thought of changing its policies instead of obstructing the war crime investigations ,only after these pressures were intensified.

On the basis of Japan's new policy , Sri Lanka should fall in line with the UN and the Western countries in regard to the war crimes and the human rights violation charges levelled against it by them. What Japan told Sri Lanka was to become more flexible in this regard. Japan took an unpleasant attitude towards Sri Lanka's views pertaining to war crime charges and human rights violations. Japan does not approve of Sri Lankan Government's attitude in respect of the war crime charges hurled against it by the Western countries and the UN. Japan told Sri Lanka to become more flexible before these charges. Japan has an unsavory memory in regard to Sri Lanka over war crimes and human rights violation charges.

In 2006 , a Presidential Commission was appointed under the name of the 'International independent group of eminent persons' by the President of Sri Lanka to probe Sri Lanka's human rights violations.. India's former Chief Justice P N Bhagawathie headed this Commission. Professor Yoza Yokota was Japan's representative. But in May 2008, all members of the Commission decided to resign their posts explaining that they are being hampered and unable to function independently . Japan is fully aware of this and the problems which were confronted when trying to make the Sri Lankan Government to take a flexible stance in respect of war crime charges. Japan pinned great hopes on that Commission and told the UN and Western countries that Sri Lanka was acting in good faith towards facilitating the Commission to act independently . It reposed confidence in the Sri Lankan Government that it will honestly contribute towards this end. But the Sri Lankan Government did not live up to that confidence . However, Japan has still not abandoned its diligent efforts in this direction despite this unsavory and unseemly episode.

Some sources say , Ban Ki-Moon is postponing the appointment of the panel of experts because of Japan's intervention aimed at securing a flexible response from Sri Lanka relating to the war crime charges and human rights violations .

Immediately after the recent General elections were concluded, the release of journalist Tissainayagam , and the Government. taking steps to relax some of the emergency regulations while also appointing the National reconciliation Commission to inquire into the possible war crimes committed during the tail end of the war, according to reports are due to Japan's pressures on the Government..

Lynn Pascoe , a special representative of Ban Ki-Moon postponing his visit to Sri Lanka to survey the current position before the appointment of the Panel of experts maybe because Sri Lanka is seeking to become flexible under Japan's pressure.

It is possible that the Sri Lankan Government by taking these steps must be nursing the hope that it can ward off the appointment of the panel of experts by the UN . This is to a great extent hinged on whether the Sri Lankan Government can measure up to the confidence Japan has for the second time placed on Sri Lanka or whether it will let down Japan.

In case Sri Lanka lets down Japan , it will not be a matter for surprise if Japan takes the initiative to level the war crime charges against Sri Lanka , for , if Japan again let down , the embarrassment Japan will be confronted with before the UN and the western countries will be unendurable ,so much so that it will have no alternative except to take that course of action as a face saving exercise.

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

DAILY MIRROR

EDITORIAL

V-DAY MAY 18: RIGHT TO DO, BUT DO IT RIGHT

Opinion in and on Sri Lanka today is divisible into eight strands, streams or categories: those who agree that the war which was fought and won was basically a just war and those who do not; those who believe that what Sri Lanka now has or is headed for is a just peace and those who do not; those who hold that a just peace is desirable and imperative and those believe it is desirable but not imperative; those who believe that a just peace is possible and those who do not.

I believe that the war was basically just; that the peace is not or not yet; nor are current developments unambiguously in the direction of a just peace though there is space for one. I also believe that a just peace is desirable, possible and necessary.

Due to my support for both 'just war' and 'just peace', I believe that the holding of victory celebrations is legitimate. In fact I might have been the first to suggest it on the public record in an article carried on June 15th 2009, in these pages entitled 'May 19 should be V Day, 2009 the Year of Victory'. A just war deserves a victory celebration; a just peace requires a victory celebration of the right kind: a celebration of broadly inclusive 'nation-building' character, not a divisive, ethnocentric or ethno-religious one.

We owe an annual victory commemoration to our armed forces for their incredible sacrifices, bravery and brilliance. We owe it to our citizens who refused to be cowed by decades of terror bombings, refused to reward appeasement of fascism, and refused to accept anything less from their leaders than a commitment to definitive victory. We owe it to those who lost their lives, limbs and eyesight in the fight against the Tigers or because of Tiger bombings.

Victory celebrations are valid also because this was a high point in our long history; and it was a breakthrough achieved by our generations, in our lifetime – an example that must be handed down the years, decades and centuries. If a nation and a people do not celebrate their martial victories and honour their heroes, they lose something of their moral fibre.

The celebrations should either be multi-ethnicised or de-ethnicised; made multi-religious or non-religious. It should be the commemoration of the victory of the democratic Sri Lankan state and its armed forces and people, over fascism and secessionism, not a victory of the Sinhala Buddhists over the Tamil community or people. The victory celebrations must surely include Karuna – without whose rebellion, victory may have been far more difficult and taken far longer-- and Douglas Devananda, a symbol of Sri Lankan Tamil Stoicism that Prabhakaran's killers repeatedly failed to destroy.

The victory celebrations should not be devalued and made subject to criticism by attempting to rewrite history in such a manner as to erase the role of former army commander Gen Sarath Fonseka—just as Trotsky was erased from histories and photographs of the Russian revolution and Tukhachevsky from the history of the Red Army. While Gen Fonseka's role was not as enormous and exclusive as he attempts to depict, it was certainly not as small and insignificant as his political enemies attempt to portray. In any case it would be counterproductive, for as anyone acquainted with Freud knows, that which is repressed, returns. There are many interpretations as to why we won the war, and I prefer to attribute it to the coming together, finally, of Carl Von Clausewitz's 'strange trinity' (though arguably in re-shuffled order): 'the passions of the People, the free-ranging soul of the war Chief and the regulatory sovereignty of the political Chief'. A commemoration must honestly and honourably reflect all three factors of this trinity. A failure to do so and a falsification of history would not only detract from the valuable celebration and generate speculation as to whether the motivation for the celebration was more parochial politics than lofty patriotism, but also make the mistaken assumption of mass amnesia afflicting a resilient, passionate, heroic people.

Those who oppose the holding of victory celebrations use two arguments. One is that those who died were citizens of Sri Lanka. The other is that the Tamil people will be hurt because the defeated and dead Tigers were "our army" (that's from the TNA MP Sivagnanam Sritharan's irrational and imprudent maiden speech in parliament, a sharp contrast with the courageous yet responsible speech of Mr Sumanthiran). As for the first argument, I'm sorry, but the Tigers who died, did so precisely because they did not consider themselves Sri Lankan and considered themselves members of a separate state of Tamil Eelam which was inimical to Sri Lanka. That they weren't Sri Lankan citizens is an assertion they were willing to die for and proved by blowing themselves up. Let us grant that they've convinced most of us. Those Fascists who died in the Liberation of Europe were hardly from another planet. They were also citizens, but I do not see Europe mourning their passing or refraining from celebrating the great victory, simply because the fascists were citizens of their countries. This is also true closer home, of the Khmer Rouge: were they not fellow Cambodians? Does this mean that the Cambodian state and people are moved by pathos and poetic sensibility to mourn their passing as well as those of their victims? On the contrary, the memory of their atrocities is kept alive through the permanent memorial exhibition at the Tuol Sleng death camp! If at all, we should keep Prabhakaran's prisons and torture chambers as places for remembrance and hand them over to Tamil survivors from the other groups for recording the history of Tiger atrocities!

The reason for the universal practise of commemorating victory over fascisms and not collectively mourning fascists and their victims, is not only the sheer evil that fascism represented, but that greater moral-ethical value was placed on those anti-fascists in each society who were victims of fascism. Thus in celebrating the victory over fascism, we also salute antifascists. Similarly, non-commemoration of the victory over Tiger fascism would mean non-commemoration of those anti-fascist victims, Sinhala and Tamil, from President Premadasa and Gamini Dissanaike to Lakshman Kadirgamar and Kethesh Loganathan. At Nandikadal, a massive blood debt was repaid and justice finally served.

What of the argument that the Tamil people would feel hurt because this was their army, their boys. Well, either this is untrue and the Tigers were oppressing the Tamils as well – in which case there should be no problem with the commemoration, which should be welcomed – or it is true and the Tigers were their boys, in which case, this heartache is the price for backing fascist monsters. If the counterargument is that Prabhakaran was fighting for Tamil rights, the answer to that is that there were many others who were not evil, who did not murder Nehru's grandson, who also fought for Tamil rights, ranging from Sri Sabaratnam and K Pathmanabha to A Amirthalingam and Neelan Tiruchelvam. They could have been rallied around instead, and their murders could, even now, have generated mass revulsion against the Tigers and repudiation within the community. Did the option for Barabbas have no echo in the fate of Jerusalem and the Temple in AD 70?

It is faddish liberal chatter to oppose the razing of Tiger monuments. I have cautioned against and am opposed to the use of archaeological and religious claims as tool of Sinhala hegemony over the Tamil areas, and have read my committed antiracist and multi-culturalist friend Prof Sudharshan Seneviratne's rejection of these charges, while remaining unconvinced that there is no track 2 hegemonic agenda (that he is doubtless unaware of). That however is an argument about antiquity and different from the issue of Tiger monuments and memorials. Nazi memorials are not usually kept standing. Nazi regalia are banned. The only memorials to the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia are those of their victims! Why should it be different here in Sri Lanka? Shouldn't memorials be erected in the North and East, for those Tamil leaders and intellectuals murdered by the Tigers?After a Thirty Years War in which we lost some of our finest leaders (Sinhala and Tamil), hopes and prospects, who is to say that Tamil Eelam is undeserving of the fate of Carthage ("Carthago Delenda Est")?

The Tamil people today are divisible, albeit unequally, into three: those who understand that the war was unavoidable because of Prabhakaran's obduracy and had at least a liberating aspect which has opened space for them, those who simply do not see it that way and those (chiefly overseas) bitterly plotting the eventual success of secession. The first category of Tamils (a minority) must be our strategic partners and allies while the second will have to be our negotiating partners inasmuch as they have been elected by the people of those areas. We must cherish and strengthen the first and engage and convince the second.

As for the third category, the enemy in the Diaspora holding referenda for secession, we must (re?)build the institutional and intellectual capacity – 'smart power'--to compete with and defeat it in the battle for world opinion. The external Eelamist enemy cannot be defeated by capital punishment for 'sedition', the seeding of the North with religious statues and a model of economic development in which even retail commerce (a chain of tea boutiques) is run by a mono-ethnic military (see the critique by Dr. Muttukrishna Sarvanandan, economist, and outspoken critic of the Tigers and the CFA). Such moves will not stop the secessionist scenario but only hasten it by making us look an abnormal, closed country, an ethnocentric or ethno-religious garrison state, not a pluralist democracy with an open society. That will only isolate us on the global battlefield. If there is no just peace we shall not only fail abysmally to fulfil our potential as a country, we shall not only fail our future generations, we shall also face a new cycle of conflict in whichever form, with an accumulation of world opinion and external support for a new secessionist surge (the Georgia scenario).

A year after victory and with new, external threats on the horizon, we must be conscious that while we grew strong in some respects and won the war, we have also declined drastically in others, causing the brightest among our educated youngsters to vote with their feet, head for the exits, run away as soon as they can from the atmosphere in the country. We must reverse this trend, negate the New Claustrophobia by making our institutions, society, arts, culture and politics open, fair and attractive to the most intelligent and best performing of our youth, so that they voluntarily remain or return. In this 'globalised knowledge society' where 'information is power' and education the best investment, they are the indispensable vanguard, and this is the only way to win future wars and struggles, be they hot or cold.

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

DAILY MIRROR

EDITORIAL

PLUSES AND MINUSES OF THIRTEEN-PLUS AND MINUS

It is all about the glass being half full or half empty. Yet, critics of President Mahinda Rajapaksa who claim that the APRC has been given a 'safe burial' do not see the other half. It pertains to the possible revival of the post-war peace process through informal discourses on the Thirteenth Amendment and power-devolution.

Granting criticism that it was a let-down, the 'face-saving concession' to the APRC flowing from the interim report meant that the ruling SLFP endorsed the Thirteenth Amendment for the first time since it was enacted in 1987.True, an earlier SLFP President in Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga had walked further with her political package, but that does not have on record a 'majority Sinhala consensus' of the kind required. If anything, the UNP had torn the proposals to shreds in Parliament and Ranil Wickremesinghe as Prime Minister, when Chandraka was still President later, did not seek to revive the process, either.

Academic discourses, based on selective media leaks, have often ignored real politick. A political solution to the ethnic issue lies in the realm of politics.If the TNA, for instance, talked about a 'unitary State' and 're-merger' ahead of the parliamentary polls, it owed as much to politics as to sentiments. Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa's references then for banning all 'separatist parties' may have contributed in its own way to the consolidation of moderate Tamil voters in favour of the TNA just as it may have furthered the purported cause of 'Sinhala nationalism' in electoral terms – when it was not exactly required for the SLFP-UPFA, any more.

It was all about timing, and timing was also the essence of the overwhelming acceptance of the Chandrika Package-I by the larger Tamil community. They had similarly welcomed the India-Sri Lanka Accord. Later, it was so with the CFA.

Ill-timing of events that followed all three efforts put paid to the emergence of permanent peace. The LTTE was to blame, yes, but so were sections of the 'majority Sinhala' polity. The voices of the JVP and JHU might have been shriller , but it was the competitive 'Sinhala nationalist politics' of the 'Big Two' while out of power that torpedoed the peace process at every turn.

The India-Sri Lanka Accord was torpedoed from within the UNP, then headed by late President JRJ. The CFA did not take off beyond a point after political cohabitation at the highest levels gave way. As President, Chandrika K. did not give the kind of support that Ranil W. required as Prime Minister to make the CFA work better.

Today at the commencement of his second term, President Mahinda Rajapaksa is in a more comfortable position to see through the process than JRJ had when he piloted the India-Sri Lanka Accord, the Thirteenth Amendment and the Provincial Councils Act. JRJ was at the end of his mandatory upper-limit of a second term. Towards the end, JRJ's writ did not run in the party as Prime Minister Ranasinghe Premadasa and the rest would demonstrate time and again. It was his belief, yes, but it was part his political posturing that made Premadasa tick as presidential candidate. What he won thus, President Premadasa could not retain after coming to power – and he paid for his follies with his life.

The irony of the short-lived Premadasa presidency was that he was opposed to ethnic peace and was equally opposed to the JVP, which in turn was equally opposed to the same. If he had seen the LTTE and the JVP both as 'law and order' problems, he should not have struck unholy deals with the former. The LTTE proved that he was fatally wrong.

A confident President Rajapaksa should now walk that extra mile to acknowledge the Tamil aspirations as an idea and accommodate the real politick of moderate Tamil polity, with the self-assurance that he could still put matters straight if they sought to go out of hand. His post-poll initiatives pertaining to a 'Reconciliation Commission' and the dilution of emergency regulations, while welcome, should be made to work on the ground.

The Tamil community and polity should acknowledge the reality of the ground situation, with a full appreciation of the confidence that the war and electoral victories have conferred on President Rajapaksa, both as the Head of Government and as the contemporary architect of any settlement that could be achieved on the ethnic front.

Political negotiations are all about give and take, pluses and minuses. If re-merger is not possible at present, the Tamil polity must accept that they got it wrong when they chorused the LTTE while rejecting the Thirteenth Amendment. Both came as a package, and the Tamil polity could not have had a pick-and-choose at will.

This ability of theirs, they demonstrated when the Supreme Court ordered de-merger, by referring to the India-Sri Lanka Accord, et al, which they had otherwise rejected. They got their timing wrong once again when they did not read the message on the Sinhala walls across the country when presidential polls beckoned the incumbent to beckon them, in turn. If it is not re-merger, the rules of the game then dictate that the Tamil polity cannot go back home empty-handed. That is not what the spirit of any negotiated settlement should be. It is about what they would take back. The 'second chamber' could be one, but it is only an add-on. 'Police powers' could be the solution, if viewed in political perspective.

That way, the give-and-take could still revolve around the India-Sri Lanka Accord. Both sides should remember that timely implementation of the Accord and the local laws framed under it would have contributed to the evolution of a political conscience, constitutional scheme and administrative system capable of addressing contemporary issues and carried-forward concerns from the past.

There are enough provisions in the constitutional scheme of democracies with 'Police powers' for the Provinces/States that such provisions have never ever been forcibly put to test or strained, either. In multi-polar nations like India, the very same Police force that had served the incumbent masters would take orders with ease and equanimity whenever the Centre intervened. In Sri Lanka, too, change of political guard has not coloured the loyalties of the police force or the armed force, or other servants of the State.

The pluses and minuses to the Thirteenth Amendment is not about what is being crafted. It is more about what is being offered at negotiation tables. It is not a dogma but an idea, rather an ideal. Such an ideal situation would be required at the political level if the benefits of any peace process are to trickle down to the last man in individual communities, before they flood the nation as a whole.

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

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

Wednesday, May 12, 2010

EDITORIAL 12.05.10

No comments:

Post a Comment

Facebook Badge

Blog Archive

SAMARTH a-trust

Followers - EDITORIAL

About Me

Indiae

SAMARTH a-trust

EDITORIAL SAMARTH

Google Analytics

Wednesday, May 12, 2010

EDITORIAL 12.05.10

No comments:

Post a Comment

Facebook Badge

Blog Archive

Subscribe To EDITORIAL SAMARTH

SAMARTH a-trust

Followers - EDITORIAL

About Me

Indiae

SAMARTH a-trust