Small is not beautiful
AS the rival camps are doggedly fighting it out inside the Lok Sabha, a long-known fact has crashed on to the centrestage with frightening clarity.

Global eco alert
THE Worldwide Fund for environment protection has once again expressed its concern over the rate of depletion of the forest cover across the globe.

Troubled times in Malaysia
THE first phase of the drama involving the sacked Malaysian Deputy Prime Minister Anwer Ibrahim has ended with the court verdict sending him to jail for six years on charges of corruption.

INDIA, CHINA, RUSSIA SYNDROME
by V. P. Dutt
EVER since Russian Prime Minister Yevgeny Primakov proposed a strategic equation between Russia, China and India, almost everyone has been talking about it except the Chinese.

Effect of oil gluton India
by R.N. Malik
THE most cheering news of 1998, which surprisingly remained unknown to the public at large in India, is the slump in the oil market. Now the crude oil is available at $11 per barrel against $19 per barrel two years ago.

Has the southern ‘empress’ sung too soon?
by Tavleen Singh
THIS is one of those weeks when writing a political column is like walking through a minefield. You don’t know what you might say that could end up exploding in your face.

DD: Ads at the cost of cricket commentary
by Amita Malik
THE talk of the town and, I suppose, of the country last week as far as television goes, was about the interviews with George Fernandes and Jayalalitha on DD and Star, respectively, both the public and private sectors having done their bit by politics. A

Phone(y)grams
by S. Raghunath
THE Department of Posts is engaged in an exercise to update and expand the standard list of phonogram greetings to cater to contemporary needs.

75 Years Ago

Mahatma Gandhi’s influence
WRITES Mr H.N. Brailsford in the “New Leader”: “I heard the other day from Sir J.C. Bose a story which helped me to realise what the influence of Mahatma Gandhi means in India.

Small is not beautiful

AS the rival camps are doggedly fighting it out inside the Lok Sabha, a long-known fact has crashed on to the centrestage with frightening clarity. The Indian political system is not just fractured; it is hopelessly fragmented. The splintered system was held up as the justification for rigging up coalitions, as a reverse process to bring together the factions that had drifted away from the parent body. What has actually happened is that the coalition experiment has encouraged more divisions and the number of political parties has shot up. As the ongoing manoeuvres for toting up the magical number of 272 votes show, the present ruling alliance comprises 18 parties and one independent (from Phillaur). Of these four are one-man parties! The Congress-led conglomerate, which hopes to assume power, is a bigger beast in this respect. Its components will number as high as 26, and 12 of them have only one member in the House. Managing such an assorted crowd of disciplined party men and indisciplined political entrepreneurs is an energy-sapping job. And to also administer the country which is in the grip of so many problems requires the skill of a chess player and the stamina of a heavyweight boxer. Prime Minister Vajpayee and his predecessors, Mr Deve Gowda and Mr I.K. Gujral, command the nation’s admiration for achieving this near impossible task for about a year or so. This also explains why some Congress leaders have been lukewarm to the idea of replacing the present government.

This is not the end of the splitting story though. The vigorous poaching game which party managers are playing in Delhi is likely to lead to more vivisection of even marginal parties. Even if half of the feared divisions take place, there will be a sharp rise in the number of political parties with representatives in the Lok Sabha. And to that extent the new dispensation with whichever party as the leader will be unstable. Recent experience shows that a multiplicity of parties automatically leads to a multiplicity of unfulfilled demands and consequently the ever filled well of the House and less legislative work. Of all the speeches made in the trust debate, one stood out for its urgency and common sense. Finance Minister Yashwant Sinha stressed the need to pass the budget and thus insulate the economy from the waywardness of politics. Naturally, no politician listened to him.

Global eco alert

THE Worldwide Fund (WWF) for environment protection has once again expressed its concern over the rate of depletion of the forest cover across the globe. The organisation spends over $ 200 million on conservation measures every year but without adequate support from government and voluntary agencies seems unable to reverse the trend. Nearly half of the world’s forests have already been lost because of the over use of timber as fuel and essential building material. According to the 1998 WWF “Living Planet Report” Russia, Canada and the Amazon and Congo Basin are the only regions where the forest tracts have escaped the greedy eyes of timber sharks. Among the continent Asia was likely to be the first to face the consequences of reckless clearing of forests. It has already lost 70 per cent of its forest cover without any sign of the trend being reversed. India’s contribution to the thinning of the forest cover is not insignificant because most of the reforestation projects remain on paper only. Every year official functions are held across the country for VVIPs to plant saplings on the occasion of Vanmahotsava. What happens to the saplings after the conclusion of the Vanmahotsava ceremonies is no one’s concern. There are any number of Central and State laws against the felling of trees and yet corrupt forest officials in cahoots with greedy timber merchants continue to plunder the country’s depleting forest wealth. For the record, forest officers do from time to time arrest timber smugglers and poachers who are usually found not guilty by courts for want of adequate evidence.

Dr Claude Martin, Director General of WWF, who was in India last month in connection with the Millennium Tiger Conference believes that the battle for increasing the green cover in critical regions can still be won by redrawing priorities. The organisation would continue to give the highest priority to reversing the march of the desert by assisting agencies to increase the forest cover by at least 10 per cent. Once the target of adding 10 per cent to the existing forest cover is achieved WWF would review its conservation policy and fix fresh targets for reforestation. Dr Martin disclosed that the WWF network plans to spend 80 per cent of the conservation budget on what can be called a common minimum programme of countries most under threat because of lack of funds for eco-revival projects. The WWF has set up a Forest Stewardship Council for sustainable forest management. Ten million hectares have already been brought under the FSC certification scheme. Timber products carrying FSC labels tell consumers that they have not been produced at the expense of forests. Similarly a Marine Stewardship Council certificate ensures that the fish product has not violated the prescribed norms for sustainability. However, as far as India is concerned these programmes can not work without adequate government-backing.

Troubled times in Malaysia

THE first phase of the drama involving the sacked Malaysian Deputy Prime Minister Anwer Ibrahim has ended with the court verdict sending him to jail for six years on charges of corruption. There is every likelihood that he will be a free man much before that period — the sentence is being described as harsh by most world leaders. The second phase which begins now will decide the future of politics in a country which has enjoyed stability with economic growth all these 18 years of rule by Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamed, whose poor health has led to speculations about his successor. Though it is Mr Mahathir who nurtured Mr Anwer to become what he was till he was sacked last September, and both guided Malaysian politics quite effectively by using the umbrella organisation UMNO, today history finds them in warring camps with a little more weight obviously on the side of the person in power. Mr Mahathir has lost much of his following within UMNO and among the public after he began his campaign against Mr Anwer following serious differences between the two mainly on economic issues. Mr Mahathir saw in Mr Anwer a threat to his position as the ruler of Malaysia. Younger followers of the ruling coalition have clearly demonstrated where their loyalties lie — they have held large-scale demonstrations in protest against Mr Anwer’s detention and the manner in which he has been treated by the police during this period.

London-based Amnesty International has aptly declared that the public debate on human rights and political freedoms that the Anwer Ibrahim case has generated will not end so long as the Malaysian drama continues. Despite the conviction of the former Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister on corruption charges, a large section of the public will continue to believe that the allegations were trumped up to punish a leader who had the courage to air his views on the political and economic situation in Malaysia though contrary to those of his boss, the Prime Minister. The growing popularity of the National Justice Party floated by Mr Anwer’s wife, Azizah Ismail, originally to expose human rights violations by the official machinery, provides enough proof of this. The organisation is getting stronger every day. One calculation is that UMNO dissidents may become part of the new organisation either now or when Mr Anwer is free from detention and relaunches his political career under the banner of the Justice Party. But that will be another sad development in the history of Malaysia, as this will strengthen the process of weakening of UMNO, a unique experiment to look after the interests of the three major social groups in the country — the Malays, the Chinese and the Indians.

INDIA, CHINA, RUSSIA SYNDROME
Is it illusion or reality?
by V. P. Dutt

EVER since Russian Prime Minister Yevgeny Primakov proposed a strategic equation between Russia, China and India, almost everyone has been talking about it except the Chinese. A great many Indians have reacted almost euphorically to the concept and even Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee has publicly blessed the idea. The Chinese have made just no comment on the proposal and whatever indirect comments they have made have thrown cold war on the proposal. So it seems to boil down to whether Hamlet can be played without the Prince of Denmark.

It should be immediately clarified that the proposal for an India-China-Russia alliances carries no military or even “strategic” overtones in the correct sense of the word, although the word strategic has been loosely bandied about in recent times. The Soviet Union and China have been having a “strategic” dialogue during the last three years. The Sino-US dialogue since Clinton’s visit last summer has been officially designated as a “strategic” dialogue. India’s discussions with the USA in the last two years have also been invested with the high-sounding honorific of “strategic” discussions. The word “strategic” has lost all its lustre.

But what Primakov was suggesting was far removed from the concept of a military alliance in which neither country (Russia, China, India) was interested. What apparently he had in mind was closer consultations and interaction between the three countries on important issues in the international arena so that one or two countries did not dominate the show. He was striving for greater political space for all the three. The Russian stance proceeded from the assumption that US dominance in the world order would be total unless there were some countervailing pressures that could be applied to moderate this dominance. In Moscow’s perception such pressure could only be generated through a more coordinated interaction between China, Russia and India.

Russia and China had already achieved a much higher level of cooperation than seemed possible five years ago. Seven summits have been held between Chinese and Russian leaders, alternatively in Beijing and Moscow between 1996 and 1999. The two countries have virtually settled their border problem and have set upon a course of widening economic and political relationship. Indeed, it was the Chinese and the Russians who first used the term “strategic partnership” for their ongoing relationship. When it was first used it created a stir in world politics. There was no doubt that the two countries were sending a message across that Russia and China would not only be expanding their mutual relations substantially but would also enhance their cooperation on various world issues of common interest. The objective obviously was to promote multipolarity in international affairs.

However, quite possibly, the Russians placed a more positive and optimistic interpretation on these formulations. They had hoped that this new understanding would enable them to lessen the harshness of the one superpower-dominated world. But the Chinese soon enough began to downplay any special significance of this relationship. The Chinese clarifications and explanations added up to a position that substantially diluted the original expectations.

The Chinese laid down six principles in their new relationship with the Russians. They stood for, as they said, strictly abiding by the principles of mutual respect, equality and trust, mutually beneficial cooperation and common development. They also clarified that the “strategic partnership” was neither an allied relationship nor was it directed against any other country. Third, Beijing advocated solving of historical problems fairly and logically in the spirit of mutual understanding and mutual concessions. Four, differing social systems should not interfere in the normal development of the countries’ relations. This they wanted to be the experience of their relationship with Russia and applicable to other countries as well. Fifth, the Chinese desired the strengthening of security through mutual reduction of forces on the borders between Russia and China. And finally the Chinese hoped for enhancing consultations in international affairs from this so-called strategic partnership with Russia.

This “maturer” Chinese understanding was quite a comedown from the earlier expectations of a new relationship emerging in international relations. Beijing apparently does not favour any multilateral dimension to its international relationships. It wishes to keep each relationship in a separate compartment. In a major speech at a seminar in New Delhi in March, the Chinese Ambassador to India, Mr Zhou Gang dwelt, at length on China’s foreign policy but kept a deafening silence on the main theme of the seminar: India, China and Russia. He spoke about China’s relations with Russia, the USA, Asean, Japan, South Asian countries, and with some other nations, but he had no comment to make on any India, China, Russia equation. It was only the Indians in the seminar who excelled in eloquence on the theme.

The hub of the problem is the waxing and waning of Sino-US relations and a continued flicker of hope in Beijing for a special relationship with the USA. It has yet to come to terms with the limits beyond which this relationship cannot go up, and of course there are limits below which the relationship would not go down. The visit of President Clinton to China last summer was a high watermark in the development of Sino-US relations. It raised visions in Beijing as well as in Washington of a special US-China relationship, of a possible duopoly in Asia. During this visit Mr Clinton came closest to distancing the USA from Taiwan.

Why blame the Chinese? Many Americans were equally euphoric. As the chief economist and director of global economics for Morgan Stanley Dean Witter, Stephen Roach wrote in the New York Times, “from now on the leader in East Asia is China, not Japan”. This was the message he believed that came from the Clinton visit. Many Japanese commentators dejectedly called the current era as the “US-China Era”. Such messages were reverberating throughout Asia. The Chinese authorities might themselves have been taken in by this rhetoric and saw the need to soft-pedal their other relationships.

Ironically, it did not take more than six months for the two countries to start drifting apart and for the relationship to slowly start unravelling. The afterglow of the summit was beginning to dim. The Chinese crackdown on dissidents, the Taiwan and the Tibet issue, the allegations about China’s secret funding of the Clinton presidential campaign and, more ominously, the accumulating evidence about the theft of secret US nuclear information by China, the burgeoning US trade deficit with China, the problems besetting China’s entry into the World Trade Organisation, all these and more were bringing Clinton’s policy of “comprehensive engagement” with China under increasing criticism. The current visit of the Chinese Prime Minister, Zu Rongji to the USA in a bid to prevent the unravelling of the relationship will expose the fault lines but will also lay bare the economic strengths in this relationship.

There is also a serious flaw in the third part of the Russia-China-India syndrome. The India-China relationship has just passed through a serious ocean storm in the aftermath of the Indian nuclear blasts and New Delhi’s pointing an accusatory finger at China as the chief threat to India’s security. After very considerable damage-control behind the scenes, India-China relations are just limping back to some normalcy. It is early to talk about a special relationship linking the three countries.

Yet, all said and done, the logic of the world situation should push them towards greater cooperation. The Chinese themselves have been talking a great deal about a multipolar world and warning against one superpower hegemony. If they mean what they say, and are serious about it, then they must also contribute to the evolving of greater multiplicity in the world. What could be more effective in promoting multipolarity than more intensive Indian-Chinese-Russian consultations and cooperation in international relations?

Already, the three countries have missed a golden opportunity of making a coordinated effort to halt aggression and help find a peaceful solution to the Kosovo issue. The NATO aggressive strikes on Yugoslavia are a blatant violation of the UN Charter. If the three countries had locked their efforts and together striven for a just solution, they would have made far greater impact on the end result than their present separate ineffectual statements.

This was the perspective of Premier Primakov’s proposal and it remains a valid perspective. The Chinese have yet to realise the shrewd understanding of the Russians behind the rationale of their proposal. Perhaps both Russia and India should make greater efforts to bring home to the Chinese the truth of the logic behind Primakov’s suggestion.

(The writer is former Pro-Vice-Chancellor, Delhi University)

Effect of oil gluton India
by R.N. Malik

THE most cheering news of 1998, which surprisingly remained unknown to the public at large in India, is the slump in the oil market. Now the crude oil is available at $11 per barrel against $19 per barrel two years ago. This news will become a matter of great rejoicing in the coming two years when, as the trends suggest, the price of oil may crash down to $5 a barrel. As a result, the economic scenario in underdeveloped countries like India will undergo a sea change. Already weak economies of developing countries were squeezed by the heavy import of oil products though per capita consumption was very meagre as compared to European countries. These countries passed through a virtual nightmare during these 23 years.

India has to import 3.6 million tonnes of crude oil from Arabs annually with a bill of Rs 20,000 crore in petrodollars. Annual consumption of oil in India is only 5.6 million tonnes (MT) against England’s 17 MT.

Now the world nations are afraid on two counts. OPEC countries may revive their moribund cartel, nationalise oil industry, reduce production and hike the prices. Second, as a result of price fall, the individual nations may increase the demand and restore the prices to original level. Both the possibilities are there. OPECs held a conference at Vienna on March 23 to chalk out a strategy to cut down production by 2 million barrels/day and jack up the prices. The next day, OPEC nations agreed to cut down the production by 3 per cent i.e. 2.11 million barrels per day. But even after this historic decision, the OPEC is yet to sit on a win-win position. Mathematically, 3 per cent cut should jack up the prices by 3 per cent only i.e. $ 11.33 per barrel. On the other hand the decision will not go well with Iraq and Russia. Iraq has to produce extra oil to guard against economic sanctions. It will not sit with OPECs as she has been isolated from the international mainstream. Likewise Russia is under tremendous domestic inflationary pressures to sell more and more oil to neighbouring countries. India will be purchasing one MT of oil from Russia in exchange of rice. These countries cannot earn adequate foreign exchange with reduced quota even on jacked up prices. Therefore chances of cartelesation are remote.

The second possibility of increase in prices due to increase in demand is equally remote. The main reason is that many countries like India have gone ahead with the construction of mega thermal power plants using coal as the fuel. Gas based power plants are also coming up gradually. Secondly the use of gas is becoming cheaper than oil fired chimneys. A time may come when cars start running on gas cylinders. The craze for small cars may further reduce the petrol consumption. Diesel engines of trains have already been replaced with electric locomotives. Recession in South East Asian countries is yet another factor to stabilise oil consumption.

The chance that oil may sell at $5 per barrel in next two years seems to be a case of overoptimism. But a stabilised price of $7 to $8 per barrel is a distinct possibility. The glut in oil market also dispels another fear of conservationists i.e. “proven reserves of extractable oil will not last beyond the prospective date of depletion i.e. around the year 2031”. The reserves in fact may last another 50 years. The prices of oil at petrol stations are minimum in the USA and people use it in a most profligate manner. If this country adopts conservative approach by increasing the price of vehicular fuel, the consumption of oil will not increase the present level even at reduced prices. What ultimately will clinch the issue are two factors. First introduction of small electric cars and cars running on petroleum gas to reduce fuel demand under the pressure of environmental consideration than the price competition.

Second, how soon the Arabs denationalise the oil industry and open it up to foreign companies. But in the ultimate analysis, even if the prices remain stabilised at $10 per barrel, the under developed countries should not ask for more to save their fragile economies from oil gangrene. India first reduced the price of diesel only by Re 1 per litre in December, 1998, and then increased by an equal amount in the budget proposal. Consequently, the country has been able to create a heavy oil pool of Rs 15,000 crore during the last two years. This amount can be effectively used for building infrastructures to ward off the danger of industrial recession. But the glut in oil market seems to be temporary because oil reserves in Venezuela, Russia, Mexico, Libya, China, Nigeria, Malaysia and Argentina put together are equivalent to that of Saudi Arabia alone. Therefore, the world will have to go back to Gulf countries after (say 10 years) when the reserves in these countries decline at the present rate of extraction. The price holiday may be over sooner than later.

Phone(y)grams
by S. Raghunath

THE Department of Posts is engaged in an exercise to update and expand the standard list of phonogram greetings to cater to contemporary needs.

I understand that the following phrases have been short-listed for inclusion in the revised list of standard phonogram greetings.

Hearty congratulations on beating the corruption, nepotism and favouritism rap.

May the Sub-Registrar shower his choicest blessings on the young, runaway couple.

Hearty congratulations on successfully defecting to the ruling party and calling it home-coming.

Best wishes on the occasion of giving your solemn poll promises a decent burial.

Heartiest congratulations on climbing aboard the winning bandwagon.

Best wishes on the occasion of staging a 24-hour dharna and hunger strike on the Boat Club lawns.

Hearty congratulations on threatening your examination invigilator with a machete and country bomb.

Best wishes for success in your efforts to grab prime urban land.

Hearty congratulations on cloaking crass opportunism as principled politics.

Best wishes on the occasion of jettisoning overboard your value-based politics.

Best wishes for treatment abroad for your ingrowing toenail.

Hearty congratulations on bagging arrack bottling and retail liquor vend licenses.

Hearty congratulations on securing admission to LKG.

Best wishes for success in your efforts to corner essential commodities.

Hearty congratulations on getting the 9138th instalment of dearness allowance.

Heartiest congratulations on making five-day week no-work week.

Best wishes on the occasion of gheraoing your employer.

Heartiest congratulations on the arrival of the triplets. Long live family planning.

Hearty congratulations on amassing wealth disproportionate to your known sources of income.

Heartiest congratulations on buying half a litre of kerosene in the open market.

Best wishes for your copying efforts in the ensuing examinations.

Hearty congratulations on continuing to be a pestilential nuisance on Bofors and Fairfax.

Best wishes on the occasion of stashing away your ill-gotten gains in secret, numbered Swiss bank accounts.

Best wishes for success in your efforts to make a healthy industry sick.

Best wishes for success in your efforts to inveigle close to the seat of power.

Hearty congratulations on being conferred an honorary doctorate in sycophancy.

Merry day of reckoning!

Has the southern ‘empress’ sung
too soon?

by Tavleen Singh

THIS is one of those weeks when writing a political column is like walking through a minefield. You don’t know what you might say that could end up exploding in your face. The result is a situation in which even the most confident political pundits in Delhi are busy ringing each other (and every political contact they have) to try and find out what is going to happen. And, the truth is that nobody knows for sure for the simple reason that things are changing more rapidly than we can deal with. So, whereas it looked at the beginning of last week as if the death knell of the Vajpayee Government was beginning to sound, by the end of the week it looked more like the death knell we were hearing was that of Jayalalitha. Could the lady have made the mistake of singing too soon?

It certainly seems that way. Even inside the BJP’s highest echelons there are two views on why she did what she did. According to one view, she has been acting according to a carefully planned strategy. This is why, they say, she was rude and arrogant at the Coordination Committee meeting that was held during the week of her famous tea parties. This is why she went out of her way to meet Sonia Gandhi and predict political earthquakes and this is why she had barely returned to Chennai when she ordered two of her party ministers to resign from the government.

The other view, which your columnist shares, is that she over-reacted as she has always done in her political career. So, when her remarks about political earthquakes caused Rangarajan Kumaramangalam to criticise her she responded by withdrawing her ministers. After this where was there for her to go but forward? Whatever doubts existed about her tactics and strategies in the world of political punditry nobody has been in any doubt that the resignation of her ministers was only the last step to withdrawing her party’s support to the government. The withdrawal last Wednesday surprised nobody.

Clearly, though, even she seemed uncertain whether she had moved too fast, sung too soon, because on her arrival in Delhi she said in her very first statement to the press that her party would be doing everything in its power to prevent a mid-term election. All she was doing, she clarified before television cameras, was trying to form an alternative government that would work better than the one she had “wasted” a year in supporting.

Meanwhile, from all accounts, her statements and her regal airs had thrown Congress strategies out of gear. The Congress had hoped, my sources tell me, to be able to form a government on its own with Sonia Gandhi as Prime Minister. This plan was based on the presumption that since nobody wanted a general election just yet, all our self-proclaimed secular parties would come together to lend Congress support.

When Mulayam Singh came out openly against blind support to the Congress, in Lucknow last Tuesday, and when it looked as if even some of the Left parties were wavering about blind support Sonia announced that she was prepared to reconsider her stand on coalition governments. Suddenly, she seemed to become aware of circumstances in which the Congress would need to be part of a coalition, instead of going it alone as originally planned.

Even as she was coming to this conclusion, news came from Tamil Nadu that the DMK (Dravidra Munnetra Kazhagam) would not be part of any alliance that included Jayalalitha. Tamil Nadu’s Chief Minister, K. Karunanidhi, explained that as far as the DMK was concerned Jayalalitha’s “corruption” was more dangerous than communalism. Things started looking even worse for Jayalalitha when Jyoti Basu, whom she had sent Subramanyam Swamy to woo, also said much the same thing as Karunanidhi.

By Wednesday, within a day of her arrival in Delhi, Jayalalitha was beginning to look increasingly isolated in her presidential suite at the Maurya Sheraton. So little happened by way of political activity on her first day that the “army” of reporters which waited all day in the hotel lobby for a chance to talk to ‘Madame’ had to resort to describing her flowers, linen and menu to make up for the absence of a good political story. She ate a croissant for breakfast, skipped lunch, slept in the afternoon then had grilled cheese sandwiches for tea. She asked for red flowers to fill her vast suite and insisted on using her own towels and sheets. For someone who had come to Delhi with the fanfare that usually greets momentous events this seems to have been a very dull first day. Some reporters mentioned, in passing, that not a single important political leader had called on Dr Jayaram Jayalalitha.

See what I mean by the lady having perhaps sung too soon? The Congress Party wants the BJP Government to fall. Of this there is no doubt whatsoever, but the problem is (as it has been since the day Mr Vajpayee became Prime Minister) that the numbers to form an alternative government have simply not been working out. Jayalalitha’s recent tantrums and airs have made things even more difficult since it is beginning to seem as if even the Congress Party is unsure about the wisdom of forming a government which includes an ally like her.

She also seems to have taken the Congress Party by surprise. Whatever its original strategy may have been the party was forced to change it when Laloo Prasad and Mulayam Singh Yadav indicated clearly that they were not at all happy with the idea of supporting a Congress government from outside. They wanted to be participants or nothing.

By the middle of last week Sonia Gandhi climbed down from her exalted perch and announced that she was not totally against coalition governments despite the stand that she had taken against them at the party’s meeting in Pachmarhi last year.

In short, everything changes every day in the current political situation and almost anything could happen. The government could well end up surviving; there could be another government in place by the end of this session of Parliament and there could also be a fresh general election. Nobody knows for sure. What does seem clear, though, is that Jayalalitha could already have become a political untouchable even if her new friends hesitate to admit this openly yet.

DD: Ads at the cost of cricket commentary

by Amita Malik

THE talk of the town and, I suppose, of the country last week as far as television goes, was about the interviews with George Fernandes and Jayalalitha on DD and Star, respectively, both the public and private sectors having done their bit by politics. As Pramod Mahajan has repeatedly assured us, his ministry never interferes with Prasar Bharati. So to break all precedents and get Karan Thapar to interview Fernandes for one and a half hours, and then to repeat the interview must have been the sudden inspiration of some enterprising junior TV executive heading for a promotion.

In television terms, it was high drama and rivetting at times. Karan, the inquisitor, had done his homework as usual, his questions were pin-pointed and based on solid research and he was relentless in his approach. But then, Fernandes is no mean adversary. He is also a first-class performer, no designer kurtas or carefully set hair, like some politicians we know, but a honest-to-goodness crumpled shirt, which establishes his democratic credentials straightway. He is also highly articulate and persuasive, as trade unions have realised down the years.

Fernandes matched Thapar’s accusations (people are saying or the newspapers are saying) with passionate fervour and with equal documentation. At times, one’s heart bled for the poor man, so sincere and even pained were some of his rebuttals. The whole show was a professional tour-de-force. But, alas, viewers also have access to newspapers, which have been doing a solid job on the Fernandes-Bhagwat case.

At the end of 90 minutes, niggling doubts remained in one’s mind. Was the government not using the media and giving it a very long leash to defend itself? In a democracy should not Bhagwat get equal time and the right of reply? A really bold channel would have brought Fernandes and Bhagwat face to face, perhaps with Karan Thapar as umpire. Several questions raised in the press were avoided. For this columnist, it was good TV but one was left unconvinced in political terms.

By a remarkable coincidence, Simi Garewal had a two-part rendezvous with Jayalalitha, the second of which came close on the heels of the Fernandes. Perfect timing. Now Jayalalitha is a professional actress and speaks beautifully too. If Fernandes was “the wronged man” Jayalalitha was “the wronged woman”, always misunderstood by the hostile media. Fernandes might have offered competition, but Jayalalitha left him miles behind.

At least two women I know, former Sonia addicts, have been solidly won over by Jayalalitha’s performance. One of them told me how, on a visit to Chennai a few weeks ago, her cab driver (and we travelling hacks all know that cab drivers are an infallible political index) told her how eve-teasing had increased since she left. “Amma may have been corrupt, they all are, but at least she controlled things”. Amma certainly controlled the interviews, which just shows the power of television.

Talking of power Mr Mahajan took over the commentary box for the cricket matches at both Mohali and Bangalore while he told us he does not play cricket but always stops the car and had has a peep when he sees a suburban cricket match in progress. Like Fernandes, he occupied the commentary box for one and a half hours chatting of this and that while Ravi Shastri, or whoever, sat it out.

Since Mr Mahajan is so interested in cricket, I have a suggestion to make. Why doesn’t he take over the TV control room, or whichever room controls the advertisements for cricket and other matches and tell us how he feels about the advertisements being slapped on when the last ball of the over has barely been hit?

Only DD could cut off Geoffrey Boycott in mid-sentence after he has started describing Jadeja’s dismissal. DD’s advertisement-wallahs, whether through spite or ignorance, or both, seem to think that commentaries are permitted only when the ball is struck and that no comments or analyses are permitted between overs — only ads.

In the event, Pramod Mahajan is lucky that he usurped the commentary box when the match was being covered by ESPN (one of his hated foreign channels). If DD had been covering it, he would not have been permitted to open his mouth, minister or no minister.

Because ads always come first with greedy, callous Doordarshan, and hang the viewer. Which is why its sports coverage is getting worse and more viewer-unfriendly every day.

75 YEARS AGO

Mahatma Gandhi’s influence

WRITES Mr H.N. Brailsford in the “New Leader”: “I heard the other day from Sir J.C. Bose a story which helped me to realise what the influence of Mahatma Gandhi means in India. He was travelling in the hill country inhabited by the Bhills, a depressed tribe of aborigines, who stand as outcaste beyond the pale of the Hindoo society. They have been from time immemorial a race which lives by hunting. Round a camp fire on the edge of the force, Sir J.C. Bose got into talk with them. They told him that they had abandoned hunting altogether. They had come to realise its cruelty, and were now trying to live by cultivating the soil. How had it happened? Their explanation was simple. The prophet had said, “Let the forest have peace”. That was all. They had never seen Gandhi. It was enough that the legend of his goodness and wisdom had reached them. He had uttered a precept, and they would obey. Not only this but they had gone farther with unflinching logic, and realised that they ought not to kill even domestic animals. At first, they tried to sell those they possessed. There was no one to buy and in the end they sacrificed all their wealth by letting these creatures go free. The modern world cherishes the memory of St Francis. As great a prophet lives under our flag today and only yesterday Lord Curzon was complaining because we have let him out of prison. It is fortunate that crucifixion is now an obsolete method of venerating saints.”