P A G E
Wednesday, April 21, 1999
today's calendar
|
E D I T O R I A L P A G E |
Wednesday, April 21, 1999 |
| weather n
spotlight today's calendar |
||
|
Budget
made turmoil-proof
NARMADA
AND TEHRI |
 |
Agni test opens the way to ICBMs
“Love
me, love my dog”
Indian Colonies Committee |
||||||||
 |
|
Budget made turmoil-proof FOR the present the Union budget for the current financial year has been insulated from the utter political confusion engulfing the national Capital. This is a wholly welcome development, even if parliamentary purists frown on the procedure and even if small political minds give it a perverse twist. The all-party agreement to adopt the budget without any change and without any debate came in the Speaker’s chamber and at the instance of the President of India. Rashtrapati Bhavan first asked the outgoing Prime Minister to explore the possibility of hammering out a consensus so as to end uncertainty about fiscal policies. Mr Vajpayee was unhappy that the President had earlier directed him to first seek a confidence vote even while the budget was pending before the Lok Sabha. Now that he had lost the vote, he was unwilling to take any initiative. It was at this stage that the Speaker entered the picture, bracing himself to preside over bitter bargaining. Actually the happy decision came without any “debate”, each party saying that the needed changes could be introduced later. There were pressing compulsions before each party to adopt this ultra reasonable stance. The Congress, which is busy warding off criticism that it has brought down one more government, does not want to take the blame for any economic turmoil that a delayed approval of the budget will cause. It hopes to exploit its ready approval to project itself as a constructive opposition party. The Left parties, which clamour for large-scale amendments, are happy to wait, hoping to strike a better deal with the new dispensation. The other parties are too involved in government-making to think of the budget. The BJP’s attitude brings out the nature of the pressures the opposition was under. It bluntly refused to make any changes in the budget, even symbolic ones like renaming the various poverty alleviation programmes. It told the other parties, “Take it or leave it.” Faced with this stark choice, the others took it. Whatever may be the
individual motivations and political calculations, what
finally clinched the issue was the considerable moral
authority of the President. With politicians getting
devalued by the day, it will be suicidal for anyone to
give the impression of defying the President,
particularly on taxation and public spending to spur the
ongoing economic revival. Many experts see incipient
signs of a turnaround, and scrapping the budget would
have greatly harmed the process. Now that a precedent has
been set in building a consensus on a very vital economic
issue, why not extend it to other areas? All political
parties will realise that this type of give and take
would enhance their reputation for being people-friendly.
The voter understands that only a self-confident and
strong leader can gracefully make concessions and only a
weak and slippery leader drives a hard bargain. If the
various leaders are in an accommodating mood, here is a
short list of urgent legislative measures for them to
contend with. The insurance Bill, foreign exchange
management Bill, money laundering Bill, securities
contract Bill, and a clutch of economic measures to free
the system from the stranglehold of bureaucrats. MPs
should attack the stranglehold, not the system. |
Jethmalani’s bombshell WHEN you have an authentic maverick like Mr Ram Jethmalani in your ranks, you never know in which direction he will fire his verbal machinegun. His latest bombardment against Ms J. Jayalalitha is ostensibly to warn the Congress and other wooing parties about the poisoned chalice that her cape allegedly hides. But in the process, he has ended up tarring the Atal Behari Vajpayee government, of whom he himself has been a senior member, like few insiders have done earlier. He has accused the government of tinkering with the judicial system and subverting it by getting the cases against the AIADMK supremo transferred from regular courts to those favoured by the accused. Without naming her confidant and party member, the then Law Minister Thambidurai, he has claimed that the Centre's January notification transferring the cases against her from special courts to regular sessions courts was issued without taking the Union Cabinet into confidence. Quite expectedly, he has tried to portray himself as the knight in shining armour, saying that he had tendered his resignation on April 9 against this move but was persuaded by the Prime Minister not to compound the crisis faced by the government. Not just that, Mr Jethmalani has even issued a character certificate to Mr Vajpayee: he is an innocent man who is willing to accommodate anyone. But the impression he has ended up giving is that here was a government whose left hand did not know what the right hand was doing and that the Prime Minister was willing to compromise brazenly on matters of principles to stay in power. That Ms Jayalalitha was
twisting the tail of the government in order to wriggle
out of the legal problems is common knowledge. But the
confirmation in this regard from the Minister of Urban
Affairs and Employment adds an entirely new dimension to
the sordid saga. Had Mr Jethmalani actually resigned when
he said he did but was persuaded by the Prime Minister
not to do so, he would have won a martyr's cloak without
asking for it. But at this stage, his
"revelations" seem to be an attempt to wash his
hands off collective responsibility. In fact, he is as
much responsible as any other Minister for kowtowing to
the lady from Chennai. At that time, all of them clung to
power, what if that meant genuflecting to Ms Jayalalitha
by those handpicked to do so. Now everyone seems to be
turning holier than others. Not only that, they are now
sermonising to all those who will listen what a grave
mistake they will be making if they have anything to do
with Ms Jayalalitha. Still, whatever his motivation and
whatever the veracity of his version, the leaders wooing
Ms Jayalalitha must not ignore Mr Jethmalani's story.
They will indeed have to cope with her permanent
wish-list. Getting herself disentangled from the court
cases is indeed on top of her personal agenda for which
she seems willing to trigger political earthquakes
measuring 6.5 or more on the Richter Scale in future
also. Whichever party agrees to accept the support of her
band will be viewed with suspicion as to the promises
that it might have made to her as quid pro quo. AIADMK
leaders have exulted that whoever goes along with the DMK
is as good as doomed. The same may not be very wrong in
the case of their own party leader. |
Slum-dwellers’ rights IT is a welcome coincidence that the Punjab and Haryana High Court and the Delhi High Court on Monday issued virtually identical orders concerning the rights of slum-dwellers. In fact, it may not be wrong to give credit to judicial activism for giving muscle to the concept of social justice. On the specific issue of slum-clearance a correct analysis would show the political class as responsible for the creation of the mess which the judiciary is called upon to clear. Corrupt officials too make a substantial contribution to the growth of jhuggi-jhompri clusters on unoccupied government land. In the overall context it is an absurd situation. Countless poor Indians migrate to urban centres in search of work. They park themselves on vacant government land. Corrupt officials allow them to raise concrete structures and politicians turn them into vote-banks by championing their “rights” which they seem to acquire through continued illegal occupation of government land. When the bulldozers arrive to knock down the unauthorised structures the slum-dwellers petition the courts and obtain stay orders. While hearing the
petitions against the Haryana Urban Development Authority
by the jhuggi-dwellers of Panchkula, Faridabad and
Gurgaon the Punjab and Haryana High Court ruled that
continued occupation of government land for a period of
five years would give the slum-dwellers resettlement
rights at government expense. In a way, it is a fair
ruling since it seeks to penalise the administration for
waking up too late to the unauthorised occupation of
government land. The judiciary should take the concept a
little further and make the delinquent officials —
who fail to discharge their duty of protecting government
land being usurped by unauthorised persons — share
the cost of the resettlement of jhuggi-dwellers. Such a
ruling would discourage officials from allowing
encroachments on government land even at the behest of
politicians. In the case of Delhi the High Court had
asked for copies of the plan for the resettlement of
jhuggi-dwellers. How judicial intervention will help
clear the slum clusters in which nearly 20 lakh of the
city’s population lives remains to be seen. Has it
ever occurred to the administration that had it uprooted
the first jhuggi on government land there would have been
no slum-cluster for it to clear? |
NARMADA AND TEHRI TWO of India’s most controversial river-valley projects are in the news again. The Tehri dam controversy has been revived by the recent earthquake in Garhwal. As at the time of the earlier quake in 1991, questions have been raised about the advisability of constructing large dam projects in an area already badly threatened by earthquakes, a threat that can get worse by the phenomenon of “RIS” or reservoir-induced seismicity when large dams are constructed here. The Tehri dam is only one of a series of such projects planned in the Garhwal region. Similarly, Sardar Sarovar is only one of a series of large dam projects in the Narmada valley. The other projects include Narmada Sagar, Maheshwar and the Onkareshwar dam. Work on the Sardar Sarovar dam was continued recently after a long gap when the Supreme Court gave permission for raising the height by another five metres. Permission for further construction will involve convincing the Supreme Court about satisfactory rehabilitation of evictees and thus this issue is likely to be hotly debated for some time. These two dam debates have continued intensely for almost two decades, and currently these two are among the most debated projects not only in India but also abroad. The project authorities frequently blame social activists opposing dams (such as the Narmada Bachao Andolan — NBA — and the Tehri Dam Opposition Committee) for voicing criticism which has no firm basis and involves highly technical issues which are best left to experts. What this view ignores is that the case against these projects is not at all confined to the views of the social activists and/or project oustees, important though these are. Some of the top most experts in India and elsewhere in the world have expressed themselves clearly against these projects, not just in their independent capacity but also in their official capacity of specially being asked by the relevant authorities to give their opinion. Let us first look at the expert opinion on the Tehri dam project. This has been studied comprehensively by two teams of experts which included talent from various fields related to dam construction and its manifold impacts. The first was an expert working group constituted by the Department of Science and Technology in 1980 which submitted its final report in 1986. The second was the Environment Appraisal Committee (River Valley Projects) of the Ministry of the Environment and Forests which submitted its report in 1990. Now let us look at the findings and recommendations of these committees. The Working Group report of 1986 (WG Report) was accompanied by a letter written by the Chairman of the group which said, “I have from the outset held the view that work should be halted on the Tehri dam but lacked an adequate data base. Now I consider this is essential as it is clear that the extensive environmental recommendations will be largely ignored as they were in the case of those in the interim report many of which are repeated six years after they were listed, and there is enough data to support this view.” After considering WG report the Ministry of the Environment and Forests conveyed its unequivocal stand to abandon the project to the Prime Minister’s office in October, 1986. However, this recommendation was not accepted. In 1990 an even stronger stand was taken by the report of the Environment Appraisal Committee (EAC). This report said, “Taking note of the unacceptable risk involved, extremely poor status of readiness to deal with the hazards, and unprecedented damage in case of a breach or over-topping the committee reiterates its considered view that it would be irresponsible to clear the Tehri dam as currently proposed.” Elsewhere this report said, “the committee has no other option but to conclude that the construction of the Tehri dam, as proposed, involves totally unjustified risks.” Now let us examine the Sardar Sarovar Project (SSP). The displacement aspects of this project were studied in great detail by the Commissioner for the Scheduled Castes and Tribes, Dr B.D. Sharma, who wrote in a letter to the President (which accompanied the 29th report of the Commissioner). “In view of these facts (the various problems which he described in detail), the rehabilitation of the displaced people of the Narmada valley in the present situation is not possible notwithstanding the declared policies of the state and all sorts of promises made so far.” This constitutional authority went on to assert further, “Moreover in the present situation it will be necessary to assure that the execution of the Sardar Sarovar Project will be allowed to continue only after a satisfactory solution has been found with the consent of the people after considering all aspects of the problem. Until that time the entire work on this project shall remain suspended.” As is well known, in the early years the World Bank was an important donor for the SSP. So it is important also to look at the expert opinion from the side of the World Bank. In an important note written in August, 1989, this is what a senior member of a World Bank appraisal team wrote: “In summary, the resettlement and rehabilitation component of the SSP is unsatisfactory. I doubt the reversal of the unsatisfactory record for the majority of the project-affected people is possible. For that reason I recommend, with a sense of an opportunity tragically (since unnecessarily) lost, either permanent or temporary termination of the World Bank’s disbursements.” In June, 1991, the World Bank appointed an independent review of the measures taken to mitigate the human and environmental impacts of the SSP. The report of the independent review submitted in 1992 says, “We have discovered fundamental failures in the implementation of the Sardar Sarovar Project. We think the Sarovar Project as it stands is flawed, that resettlement and rehabilitation of all those displaced by the project is not possible under prevailing circumstances and that the environment impacts of the projects have not been properly considered or adequately addressed. Moreover, we believe that the bank shares the responsibility with the borrower for the situation that has developed.” One of the main concerns of the NBA and like-minded people has been that a much larger number of persons are adversely affected by the SSP than what is recognised by the authorities. The report of independent review has fully backed this view. It has identified several categories of people who are likely to be adversely affected. One, people living in the submergence zone numbering about a hundred thousand. Two, people whose land will be fully or partially claimed by the extensive canal network, numbering about 140 thousand. Three, people who will be isolated in island-like settlements after the submergence. Four, certain sections of people living in upstream areas, specially those likely to be affected by backwater floods. Five, people of the Kevadia Colony. Six, certain sections of people living in downstream areas such as those dependent on fisheries. Seven, at least some people even in the beneficiary areas, specially those whose land may have to bear the impact of waterlogging. Eight, indirectly affected people such as those living in sanctuary areas or in the areas that will have the resettled people in future. Some of these adversely affected sections identified by the report of independent reviews in 1992 have been more or less entirely ignored till today while even the people in the submergence zone are still very far from satisfactory rehabilitation. In fact, when some displaced persons have gone to the rehabilitation land meant for them they have found that some other poor peasants already depend on the land for their survival. Regardless of whether they have legal papers or not, the fact that they depend on this land for their livelihood implies that they will not leave this land easily, and sending the dam evictees to this land under the prevailing conditions amounts to creating conflicts between the two groups of poor people. Considerations such as
these as well as the opinion of various experts who have
spoken frankly about the hazards associated with these
projects will have to be kept in view before a final
decision is taken about these projects. The projects
involve the investment of a thousand crore of rupees, and
will affect millions of people. It is important to ensure
that such massive funds are not invested unwisely and it
is equally important to safeguard the livelihood of
people. So the projects have to be reviewed very
carefully and impartially, entirely free from the
influence of vested interests. |
Dark
clouds
over Asia-Pacific MORE than ever before, Asia-Pacific is riddled with dangerous flashpoints which might be easily ignited. We hear more and more of growing tensions in Sino-US relations. There is the much-publicised case of nuclear secrets obtained by Beijing through a Chinese-American spy working at the US Los Alamos atomic research site. This has enabled China to do a great leap forward in miniaturisation of its warheads for multiple targeting. And has brought Sino-US relations to a new low. The spy allegations (denied by Beijing) come in the midst of China’s protests over the development and eventual deployment of a Theatre Missile Defence (TMD) system for East Asia, and a national missile defence system for the USA. TMD will weaken China’s nuclear deterrence and attack capability by throwing a protective anti-missile defence ring around Japan, South Korea and Taiwan — the countries considered likely to join the defence system. Japan’s involvement with the USA in joint research and development of TMD is considered highly objectionable by China. Even more serious perhaps is Taiwan’s inclusion (considered most likely) in the protective zone, as and when the system becomes operational. China regards Taiwan as its “renegade” province. Washington would thus be interfering in its internal affairs, argues Beijing. Ms Madeleine Albright, US Secretary of State, dismissed Beijing’s objections (during her recent China visit), saying that the system was hypothetical at this stage. But, in any case, Beijing should stop targeting missiles at Taiwan, she told the Chinese leaders. Which brings us to Taiwan as a regional flashpoint. China was hoping that the lure of a strategic partnership will somehow persuade the USA to become a facilitator in Beijing’s goal of reunifying Taiwan. And they felt encouraged in this by the exchange of presidential visits between the two countries. There was apparently a fair bit of US political pressure on Taiwan to tone down its separatist identity. But because Beijing is in a hurry to annex the island, it tends to overdo its reunification theme with the threat to use force. Which inevitably brings the Taiwan-issue back to the burner, with Washington opposed to any use of force. The recent reports that China was increasing the number of missiles deployed against Taiwan have simply upped the ante. Therefore, Taiwan is a constant negative in Sino-US relations. About the same time, China’s growing military activity in the Spratly group of islands, and the South China Sea which surrounds them, has caused new concern. It has recently been highlighted by the Philippines, concerned over additional military structures China has built on Mischief Reef, an islet 1000 km from the near-most Hainan Island of China. Manila regards the reef as its own and, probably, has a better claim by virtue of its proximity to the Philippines (only 280 km from its island province of Palawan, and hence well within the 200 nautical miles or 320 km exclusive economic zone under the Convention on Law of the Sea). Indeed, the Spratlys are contested between China, Taiwan, Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia and Brunei. But, early in the nineties, Beijing declared its exclusive sovereignty (by adopting a national law) over the entire Spratly group and the territorial waters around it. Such unilateral declaration of sovereignty over important sea lanes, with potentially rich oil and mineral resources, and control of strategic islands, is bound to be tested sooner or later. According to one estimate, “some 15 per cent of world trade traverses the South China Sea including 75 per cent of Japan’s vital oil supplies from Middle East and 80 per cent of Asia-Pacific trade.” Obviously, with such high stakes, the issue is not just one of the Philippines versus China (or between China and other individual countries). By itself, the Philippines (which has raised the most recent alarm) is easily ignored, coerced or threatened. And Manila knows it. It has virtually no military power to confront China. Therefore, it is courting the USA to renew its old military ties. In the early nineties, in a pique of national pride, Manila had thrown out the USA from its vast naval and air bases in Subic Bay and Clark Airfield respectively. Though the two countries still have treaty relations, the closure of US bases in the Philippines has virtually brought into moribund their military ties. Manila is now keen to revive them. To this effect, it is working on a Visiting Forces Agreement which should renew joint military exercises between their armed forces and other forms of military cooperation. The USA obviously is not
willing to jump into the fray over Mischief Reef or the
question of sovereignty over the Spratlys in general.
According to a Pentagon spokesman, “We have not
taken a position on the sovereignty of the
Spratlys.” But Manila is now starting to couch the
issue in the larger context of a Chinese threat to the
region. |
“Love
me, love my dog” OWING to a mechanical lifestyle, which hardly allows two individuals some moments to share, a dog seems to have become the best companion of modern man. Everyday we come across a number of people who are rarely seen with anybody except their pets. Moreover, dressed in shorts ‘n’ sneakers, holding a chained dog and going for a long walk is trendy these days. Gone are the days when a dog used to be kept as a “watchdog”. Today, it needs to be watched over itself. Leaving one’s dog in a creche is the latest phenomenon. It is possessed as an ornamental piece, as one of the knick-knacks in the drawing room. People’s obsession for dog proves that love is blind. So much so that they turn a blind eye even to the injuries caused to them by their own pet. “So what? Our dog is like our son and moreover, it is fully vaccinated” feels the proud owner. “Who loves me will love my dog also”, to evaluate these lines of St. Bernard, pay a visit to a friend, who has a dog. A whole lot of do’s and don’ts will be uttered to you — “Don’t pick any object from the floor lest my Tipu should grab you” or “Don’t look scared, our Tiger is too smart and catches the body language.” “You can’t hug me in front of my Diana. She is so sensitive that she might feel jealous and harm you” — is another important warning. Let the tea time come and the pet of house will tantalisingly fix its eyes on the guest and a great amount of rage and rancour will be shown in case of not sharing your snacks with it. No matter how alergic you may be to a dog, nothing can save you from its licking and jumping over you until your host suggests: “Never mind. Simply pat its back and it will calm down at once”. Sounds like paying tax to save one’s bacon. And thus, the list of instructions goes on and on. If you object to this charter of rules, then be prepared to say goodbye to your friend because he would rather break off with you than to offend his dog. After all, no animal should be abandoned for they deserve love and respect more than any human being. There is a well-known adage, “Apni Gali Mein Kutta Bhi Sher Hota Hai”. So, it’s useless fighting with your neighbour when he takes his unchained Alsation out in the street and unfortunately you face a wild encounter. Isn’t it a direct encroachment on man’s fundamental right to move freely? If yes, then certainly, we humans too need to launch an organisation, in contrast to SPCA (Security and Protection against Cruelty to Animals) as early as possible, to safeguard our personal liberty. This counter organisation may well be named SPCMD (Security and Protection against Cruelty to Men from Dogs). The way people pamper their dogs, most of us feel envious about their lot. Guess what a five year old would crave for? No chocolates, no play. “I wish I were a dog....” is his greatest longing. “Boozo enjoys a majestic life — no school, no homework. All play and no work makes Boozo even more loveable and that is totally unfair.” The plight of many adults, especially the hubbies, is no less pitiable. Step into the shoes of a poor husband, whose better half showers upon the dog all her love that is laced with verbal seasonings like cootchie-coo, my darling or sweety pie etc. Allowing pets on to the beds beside them is yet another crazy act most of the pet lovers indulge in. But paradoxically, they are quite fussy about not letting their kids jump on the bed with slippers on. All said and done, I
believe such people belong to a class that upholds this
view “If you love somebody (read dog), show
it.” |
Security and strategy Agni
test opens the way to ICBMs ALL it took was 11 minutes and 2000 km of a successful flight of the Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile (IRBM) Agni II, to propel India, truly, and convincingly, into the exclusive global missile club. But, of course, more than Dr APJ Abdul Kalam and his team of scientists who engineered this two-stage solid-fuel IRBM, the country has to really thank AIADMK supremo J. Jayalalitha and her periodic government-destabilising antics, for this “state-of-the-art indigenous delivery system”, which will eventually carry piggy-back our proven nuclear weapon capability, demonstrated so comprehensively in the Shakti tests 11 months ago. Last year around about this time, the oft-quoted rationale for the Pokhran II tests was the nuclear threat from China, national security interests and Pakistan’s Ghauri missile. But another reason was the Vajpayee Government’s desire to do something spectacular, to tide over the simmering, domestic political unrest. This year again, it is not as if an overpowering security threat had suddenly emerged from China and/or Pakistan, or that the Jaswant Singh-Talbot talks had not produced any viable results, or even that the self-imposed post-Agni I moratorium from 1994 onwards was not providing India some very definitive gains from the USA and the West, but really the impending threat to the Vajpayee Government that has to a large degree spurred on the sudden demonstration of the nation’s punch and might. However, whatever be the reasons for the periodic shake-up of the country by Mr Vajpayee and his team, and irrespective of the nuclear arms race that the Agni II is bound to stir up in Russia, Iran, Pakistan, China, Saudi Arabia and the CIS, it has to be accepted that India is now well on the way to becoming a real nuclear power — a reality that even its worst detractors cannot easily wish away. The Agni II test will evoke a mixed response in knowledgeable defence and diplomatic circles. On the plus side, there is a good deal to be happy about. It is a giant step towards indegenisation and self-reliance, an opening up of more long-range IRBMs, and subsequently Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs) with a range of 12,000 to 20,000 km targeting the very heartland of China, mobile launch capability from rugged terrain, underground silos or railway carriage platforms. It will also herald a solid-fuelled surface launched capability which will eventually enable a submarine nuclear launch, and, the moral ascendancy that the country’s Integrated Guided Missile Development Programme (IGMDP) has generated in every Indian’s mind, are all strategic gains that we can proudly look up to. The Agni delivery system suitably armed with a 1000 kg nuclear payload (the payload could be reduced to 500 kg, thereby affording greater range in the region of 2200-2500 kms), provides India the first viable minimum nuclear deterrent to take on a two-front threat from China and Pakistan simultaneously. Till now, India’s nuclear deterrent was no more than a pie in the sky, in so far as China’s deep in-depth strategic targets in Tibet or the mainland were concerned. With the enhanced capability of the Agni, industrial and military complexes like Chengdu in Tibet now fall within striking range. As regards Pakistan, in case of a conflict, the Prithvi SS-250 with its 250-km reach could effectively target Islamabad and Lahore, nullifying the adversary’s HATF-2 with a range of 300 km, which would have to operate at extreme ranges to target, New Delhi. India’s large size provides it with an in-built geographic depth and to hit deep, Pakistan would have no choice but to upgrade its Ghauri delivery system, say to a Ghauri II, to cover 2000 km and beyond, as the Agni II has done. This has already been done by Pakistan with the launch of the Ghauri II on April 14 even as I sit down to write this column. Thus, whether we like to admit it or not, Agni II has kick-started a feverish nuclear arms development race in Asia, with a Shaheen II (longer range) or a Ghaznavi delivery system launch response, in all probability, coming to us in the next few months. All the gains notwithstanding, let us for a moment now examine the grey areas in our recent nuclear leap. Firstly and foremost, it must be understood that there is no such thing in this big wide world, known as a “defensive” missile, meant as our leaders often declare, purely for the plan and simple defence of a country. A nuke or conventionally armed missile when deployed, is invariably used at some stage or the other in war in the offensive role, cutting across territorial boundaries and international borders. It is the job of our boys in the diplomatic corps to take care of this newly acquired capability with its inherent fallout, and see to it that we are not branded as warmongers or aggressors. Secondly, the implications of having acquired a nuclear capability in the full sense of the word, means only one thing: that we have either already deployed on the ground the missile system, or are definitely in a position to do so within the shortest possible time. The geometrics of this unambiguous state, must be fully understood by every Indian, and more so the Foreign Office, whose task is to retain and win friends across the world, even when one is openly flexing one’s muscles. Today, India should be having a proven nuclear warhead arsenal, and it already possesses a long-range missile delivery system in Agni II. Now the acid test would be to how best to mount the miniaturised form of the former or the latter, with the end product then being put through a series of tests, preparatory to its operational deployment across the borders of China and Pakistan in a given contingency. All this will take some time, and also invite a hostile response from China, which has assured India that it has withdrawn its missiles directed this country, from its forward bases in Tibet. The Chinese could always relocate the missiles back in Tibet (they may have already done so after April 11) and augment further the missile threat to India from mainland China. Only a careful blend of astute diplomacy and a continuous strengthening and fine-tuning of our nuclear missile technology, will enable India to surmount the pro-active response that the China-Pakistan duo is likely to mount in the near future. It would be a sad day for the country’s defence if the ongoing political uncertainty at the Centre were to cast its shadow on the future of this nation. The infrastructure for the new strategic missile command and air defence the requirement of maintenance and the storage facilities for the missiles and warheads, and the formulation of a complete new doctrine for “punishment” and “denial” (two modes of nuclear warfare concerning the shorter range missiles), would all require considerable time and professionalism to fine-tune to some perfection. One hopes that the silly-willy political summer madness, now afflicting New Delhi, will not be allowed to adversely affect the country’s security. India is today surrounded by a large number of overt and covert nuclear-weapon powers, not many of them very amicable to its growing stature. It now forms an integral part of the nuclear club, and it must build up on this membership, with more tests of the Agni II missile in its full configuration as an integrated weapon system. In fact, given a stabler
New Delhi, some continuity and a free hand in the
Ministry of Defence, and a good monsoon this year, (for
after all the people cannot really eat a missile), the
country may well even receive tidings of an ICBM
reportedly named Surya, now said to be well beyond the
drawingboard stage. As they say, can Surya the sun, be
far behind Agni, the fire. |
NRI gives $ 500,000 to
universities TORONTO: A Montreal-based businessman of Indian origin has donated $ 500,000 to two Canadian universities which will be used to grant scholarships to South Asian and minority community students here. On the occasion of the Khalsa tercentenary, Mr Baljit Chadha donated the amount which will be used to establish two endowments of $ 150,000 each at the McGil and Concordia Universities. To begin with, 10 scholarships of $ 2,500 each will be granted out of these endowments to undergraduate South Asia students, minority community students and others. The scholarships will be awarded to deserving students and the selection will also be based on merit, said Mr Balbir Sawhney, a professor at Concordia University and spokesman for the Chadha Family Foundation that donated the money. The objective of these endowments “is to support Indo-Canadians, visible minorities and others in their pursuit of higher education,” Mr Sawhney said. Mr Sawhney told IANS that letters had already been exchanged between the Chadha Family Foundation and the two universities. The foundation wanted to start 50 such scholarships and extend it to the whole of Canada, he said. Other Canadian institutions would additional amounts, he said. “The Indo-Canadian community, having faced difficulties in the early years of its “continuous journey” has come to play an important role in the mainstream of Canadian society,” Mr Sawhney said. “Active participation in religious and cultural activities within and outside the Indo-Canadian community is well manifest in the multicultural mosaic of Canada,” he said. “With the establishment of the scholarship endowments, the community has launched a process of supporting students in their studies,” he noted. Mr Chadha is President of Balcrop, which has interests in the dry fruits business and trade. According to Mr Sawhney, the Chadha family has already donated large sums of money for community activities. — India
Abroad News Service |
Indian Colonies Committee THE Indian Colonies Committee sat for two hours at the India Office today and further discussed their instructions. Mr Hope Simpson was present and the only absentee was the Aga Khan, who is expected tomorrow. The committee’s secretariat has acquired a permanent room in the India Office. The first regular business meeting will probably be held on April 25. Lord Olivier has arranged to meet the committee this afternoon for the purpose of an official greeting. Mr J.H. Thomas will receive them. Mr Rangachariar, at the
invitation in the Indian Parliamentary Committee,
delivers an address on the Indian political situation on
April 19 prior to the debate Viscount Curzon is raising
in the House of Commons. |
 |
 |
| Nation
| Punjab | Haryana | Himachal Pradesh | Jammu & Kashmir | | Chandigarh | Business | Sport | | Mailbag | Spotlight | World | 50 years of Independence | Weather | | Search | Subscribe | Archive | Suggestion | Home | E-mail | |
