Motivated attack on SBI IT was set up to find ways to recover or reduce the mounting bad debts of banks but it ended up by asking for the immediate sale of four well-run banks, including the mighty SBI.

India’s IT march
IF the government makes a claim, very few will believe it. But if the claim is supported by a study conducted by a group of independent professionals, there is no room for doubt.

LIBERALISATION WITH A HUMAN FACE
Socially just order a must
by Hari Jaisingh
PRIME Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee has once again talked about evolving consensus on economic reforms. He has also reconstituted the Reforms Implementation Review Committee under Finance Minister Yashwant Sinha. What this committee will achieve is anyone’s guess. For, follow-up action has been a major problem in this country’s free-wheeling governance.

Clinton the culprit for WTO debacle
by R.A. Singh
AS is now well-known, the third ministerial meeting of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) in Seattle ground to a halt on December 5 with no agreement on any trade issue.

End of Russia-US honeymoon?
By M.S.N. Menon
“YESTERDAY, Clinton permitted himself to exert pressure on Russia. It seems, for a few seconds, he forgot what Russia is. Russia possesses a whole arsenal of nuclear weapons”. “I want to tell Clinton: He should not forget in which world he is living. It never was, and will never be, that he could dictate to the people (of Russia) how they should live, work or enjoy.”

Goodbye, 1999
by Ramesh Luthra
SEEMS only yesterday we were agog at the birth of the year to usher the millennium. The young and the old danced crazily till the zero hour to welcome you. Lo! The clock struck the much-awaited hour and the ringing of the bells announced your grand arrival. Discotheques, eateries, homes as well as streets resounded with “Happy New Year”.

75 Years Ago

December 17, 1924
Gandhi tunics: Paris fashion
GANDHI tunics have made their bow to the world in the Paris salons where winter styles are being shown. Blouses of India print, handblocked on wood from Kashmir, are another of the offerings.

Motivated attack on SBI

IT was set up to find ways to recover or reduce the mounting bad debts of banks but it ended up by asking for the immediate sale of four well-run banks, including the mighty SBI. Is it then a case of over-enthusiasm or calculated armtwisting of the government? One stray remark offers a clue. Mr K.V.Kamath, the chairman of the ambitiously named National Task Force on non-performing assets (in plain words loans that cannot be recovered), said the privatisation of the SBI would send the right signal to the international financial community. The world would know that weak and slothful banks would not be saved but even profit-earning ones with a nationwide network would be offered for sale. He did not, however, spell out how such a message would benefit the country. Flowing from his statement is the clear assumption that the SBI will be bought over by one or more foreign institutions in the same line of business. No Indian individual or institution has the resources to take over the giant either singly or in a group. Is it then the message to the international community : come and walk away with the country most prized bank? The surprise is that the task force was set by the CII, whose current president Rahul Bajaj is a tireless champion of providing a level playing field for the Indian companies, which is another way of demanding a degree of protection. He was additionally a member of the task force. Yet it has come out with what suspiciously looks like a call for handing over the SBI to foreigners. The Kamath Committee, for good measure, has also marked out the Oriental Bank of Commerce, Bank of Baroda and Corporation Bank for sale. It has asked the government to close down the three chronically crisis-ridden banks — the Indian Bank, the United Commercial (Uco) Bank and the United Bank of India. This proposal is questionable although not so controversial as the one on the SBI. The Verma Committee, which submitted its report to the government on the day it assumed office, has pointed out that these “weak banks” have to be kept afloat to avoid needless sufferings to depositors and borrowers whose business may suffer grievously if the lending institution is closed down. Interestingly, it has emphasised that the private sector does not have resources (about Rs 9000 crore) to take over these institutions and turn them around. The Kamath Committee report is silent on this point.

There is a danger that a section of the Central Government may warmly welcome the report, not as a daring reform measure of the financial sector but as a means of raising revenue to tide over the deficit. The SBI is an attractive asset and foreign financial institutions, which are sitting on billions of dollars in ready cash, will be tempted to seize the offer. Indian banks have so far collectively stood up to the challenge posed by private banks and the inspiration has mostly come from the SBI. Having spent time and energy on the sale of banks, the Kamath Committee did not have much to say on its original task: to suggest ways to tackle the intractable problem of bad debts. There is a casual suggestion to amend the Debt Recovery Tribunal Act not to punish unreliable debtors but to enforce the “contractual obligations”, meaning to see whether the original conditions of lending money are in place or not. Then there is this escape route: credit becomes bad both through bonafide and malafide actions. In the first case, the policy of banks must be to “stand alone” and in the second case, there should be group action. Obviously it is glamorous to propose the sale of the SBI but distasteful to press for stringest steps to recover bad debts collectively estimated at slightly less than Rs 50,000 crore!

India’s IT march

IF the government makes a claim, very few will believe it. But if the claim is supported by a study conducted by a group of independent professionals, there is no room for doubt. Thus one cannot take it as an exaggeration Information Technology Minister Pramod Mahajan’s assessment that by the year 2008 India will be exporting IT products worth at least $ 50 billion. Surprisingly, the same projection of India’s IT march has been made by McKinsey, the world’s most reliable and top group of consultants. McKinsey has come out with a study, commissioned by Nasscom, that the size of the country’s IT business will swell to $ 87 billion by 2008 and of this, $50 billion will come from software exports. What McKinsey has said is more significant in the sense that it is the only study of its kind undertaken for a business house. The first study of the IT industry in India was done by the Department of Electronics with funds provided by the World Bank and that too as early as 1991. If the future of the software industry is so bright it obviously requires special attention. To be fair to the government, it does not appear to be ignoring the opportunity knocking at the country’s doors. Besides creating an independent ministry to deal with the problems of the industry, it has set apart a Rs 100 crore venture capital for the promotion of information technology. Mr Mahajan has suggested that with a view to reducing bureaucratic delays in taking up matters concerning the IT industry, the Ministries of Information Technology, Telecommunications, Commerce and Information and Broadcasting should constitute one group. This, the minister has claimed, will facilitate faster growth of this particular industry. How far the proposal is justified is for the experts to say. But if the suggested exercise is found to be capable of producing the desired results, something must be done so that IT industry-related projects or programmes are cleared as quickly as possible.

However, McKinsey’s advice appears to be more meaningful. It wants the Government of India to work on a seven-point strategy to realise the full potential of the country. One, India should create a “source” of supply of the world’s best knowledge workers. Two, efforts should be made for creating an ideal regulatory environment. Three, India should help in the birth of “anchor” indigenous MNCs in the IT sector. Four, telecom infrastructure in the country should be of global standards. Five, there should be Indian “incubation engines”. Six, India should be known by its own brand. Seven, steps should be taken to ensure the availability of new opportunities in various target markets. The IT services area needs to be given extra care as its contribution is going to be the maximum — nearly $ 38.5 billion. The government must do as much as it can to speed up the country’s march towards attaining the software superpower status. It is only with the help of this sector that India can increase substantially its share of the world’s total exports, which is negligible at the moment.

LIBERALISATION WITH A HUMAN FACE
Socially just order a must

by Hari Jaisingh

PRIME Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee has once again talked about evolving consensus on economic reforms. He has also reconstituted the Reforms Implementation Review Committee under Finance Minister Yashwant Sinha. What this committee will achieve is anyone’s guess. For, follow-up action has been a major problem in this country’s free-wheeling governance.

Similarly, one has to keep one’s fingers crossed with regard to the outcome of deliberations of special groups on eight new economic themes. The themes are: good governance of the private sector, policy for private investment in education and health, strategy for a reconvened WTO meeting, disinvestment, freeing industry from the controls and pitfalls of globalisation, power reforms and policy to attract wealth and talent of NRIs.

The saving grace about these special groups is the involvement of Indian entrepreneurs. They know harsh realities from the other side of the bureaucratic fence. There are several areas which directly hit the growth of the Indian economy because of faulty policies, poor follow-up and wrong moves by the ruling elite at all levels. India, in fact, is an over-governed country with poor results. The people have paid a heavy price for a mismanaged polity.

The sins of omission and commission actually flow directly from top to bottom. What is the nature of faults in the system and beyond is an open secret.

As a veteran leader and an outstanding parliamentarian, Mr Vajpayee himself should be familiar with the distortions prevailing in the system. But who cares? The ruling elite habitually tends to buy time and postpone hard decisions by setting up committees and sub-committees. Habits die hard. The present government carries the same mindset in governance.

The ills of the system have, of course, been examined by various groups from time to time. A number of outstanding experts and retired civil servants have dwelt at length on this theme, but their recommendations have been gathering dust in official files in the absence of political will to view matters objectively and in totality.

Equally important here is to remember certain earlier initiatives which have helped the country become self-reliant in key areas of the economy. We may pooh-pooh some of Jawaharlal Nehru’s socialist concepts of the fifties and the sixties. But the fact remains that the stress on self-reliance did help the country to withstand undue pressures from global powers in times of crisis. Some of the old concepts may no longer hold good. But the spirit behind them is still relevant in critical areas of economics and defence.

What is disquieting is the growing tendency within the ruling elite to discard vital national interests for a few crumbs for self, friends and allies. The loot mentality, for that matter, has no colour. It is part of trans-border political culture.

It is rather puzzling that the BJP seems to have lost its swadeshi voice which it had been raising while in the Opposition. Of late, even the Swadeshi Manch has lost its fire. Not that swadeshi has to be the sole mantra in today’s changed global setting. All the same, as a proud nation we cannot afford to overlook certain historical facts which did make a difference between our successes and failures in the past.

Liberalisation and globalisation need not prompt us to surrender our vital national interests in the economic arena. What is necessary is to draw a Lakshman rekha to help us identify the areas which should be open to direct foreign investment and the areas which should be out of the reach of multinationals (MNCs). Here we should ensure total transparency and accountability from those who negotiate terms of investment with outside agencies. What is regrettable is that while pursuing certain policies and goals we do not bother to look at their long-term implications on the health of the economy.

Of course, foreign direct investment (FDI) in infrastructure and related sectors has to be welcome and encouraged wholeheartedly. But while opening new areas for FDI, the authorities must ensure that we do not create an atmosphere of drift to the disadvantage of Indian entrepreneurs. Anything which kills the spirit of swadeshi entrepreneurship has to be resisted. Certain disturbing trends are already visible which seem to be giving wrong signals to indigenous entrepreneurs.

Take the case of the print media. The authorities apparently do not seem to realise the serious implications of the reported moves to open up the area of print media to foreign investors. This does not happen even in advanced democratic countries. Then how should a section of the saffron establishment even be thinking on this line? As it is, a lot of damage has been done in the realm of electronic media. Once the sanctity of the print media is threatened, we will certainly be in serious trouble.

In view of the limited role of the government today and the limited influence it commands, the government must concentrate its resources on fewer objectives. The BJP leaders have already expressed their preferences and priorities. They have given priority to agriculture and food security above all. This is as it should be. For, there is need to double agricultural production if India is to meet the needs of its growing population. Of course, the objective of export is also to be met.

Interestingly, Mr L.K. Advani has been giving great emphasis to education and health care. These have been neglected areas. Today, there is almost unanimity on the fact that there can be no economic development without social development. Prof Amartya Sen is the most outstanding exponent of this view. The rest of the available resources must go into areas in which India has a natural advantage. For example, in information technology (IT).

In another 20 years or so, India is expected to be a super power in IT. But this will not happen unless the government provides active backup without interfering in its natural growth and the spirit of entrepreneurship. An IT revolution is, however, not possible without revolutions in telecommunications and broadcasting.

India has a glut of software personnel. Unfortunately, the brain-drain continues. Today, Indian talent is being lured by the multinationals. Unless this drain is blocked by the process of debureaucratisation and throwing up opportunities at home, the dream of making India an IT superpower might be hijacked by some other country.

That in all these 52 years the country has failed to even provide potable water to large sections of the population is a serious matter. It is time to undo this failure.

The magnitude of the resource problem can be gauged from the following facts: India needs an annual addition of 15000 MW of power. To build up the capacity of this size will require at least 15 billion dollars. This is a big challenge. We cannot move fast in this critical sector without foreign investment.

The country looks to the Vajpayee regime to concentrate its energy in the areas neglected by earlier regimes. For example, the environment. The environment in which we live has become such an outrage that the Supreme Court had to intervene on a number of occasions. Why can’t the executive do its duty? It must perform in a responsive and responsible manner.

India is supposed to have moved to the second stage of economic reforms with the adoption of the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority Bill. But has the government had the time to go into the whole gamut of problems raised by the reforms? I am afraid that is not the case.

In fact, the outcome of the first stage of reforms itself has been just the opposite of what was anticipated. The lot of the poor has not improved. The gap between the rich and the poor has widened. The cost of living has gone up steeply. And there is no improvement in employment generation or reduction in the number of people below the poverty line. In the circumstances, what sort of India do we wish to launch in the next century? It is time we began to look within and around and thought of evolving a new blend to establish a new social and economic order for a just and fair society.

It is not yet too late to realise that social progress, individual freedom, cultural and spiritual fulfilment and faster economic growth are all interdependent. A modern India and a medieval India cannot co-exist for long without serious social tension. The only way out is to concretise a vision of another India where fair opportunities are available for creative energies of millions so that social and economic advancement does not remain a reality just for a few and a mirage for large segments of the population.

Goodbye, 1999
by Ramesh Luthra

SEEMS only yesterday we were agog at the birth of the year to usher the millennium. The young and the old danced crazily till the zero hour to welcome you. Lo! The clock struck the much-awaited hour and the ringing of the bells announced your grand arrival. Discotheques, eateries, homes as well as streets resounded with “Happy New Year”. Fireworks illuminated the sky with myriads of rainbow coloured sparks flashing in all directions. Thus we rang out the 1998 and rang you 1999 in.

Your first sunrise brought new aspirations and dreams. Your spring was surcharged with an unusual fragrance and splendour of reconciliation and friendliness towards our immediate neighbour. One with whom we had strained relations for decades together. Old barriers were broken when the Bus to Lahore crossed the Wagah border. “A defining moment” not less significant than Richard Nixon’s visit to China.

But your casket of events did not contain all roses. Following doggedly at the heels of this rosy picture came a hoard of events causing unheard of political events. A single vote defeating the government! You created history. Claims to form an alternative government failed miserably. Hence another elections! On a nation too poor to afford. Uncertainty hung in the air.

We were in for another surprise from you. The euphoria of the historic bus journey was rudely shattered by our unpredictable neighbour who betrayed our faith. Kargil War! overnight the mood turned defiant. With the electronic media bringing war right to our TV rooms, very successfully you created an unprecedented solidarity and unity among the countrymen. You taught Indians a bitter lesson — not to trust the enemy.

Hardly had the wounds of Kargil war healed when you plunged us headlong into general elections. Election fever gripped the nation. A coalition government you brought forth putting an end to political uncertainty and instability at last.

As if it wasn’t enough. Like the mighty gods sitting on MT Olympus you hurled the supercyclone in Orissa. Heavens poured and the wind howling at 250 kmph competed for destruction. You made the mighty waves vent their fury and leave behind a trail of death and destruction.

Total deluge! Total chaos too! Virtually death’s dance to prove its might! As if Lord Shiva was breaking his own record of “tandav”.

The calamity exposed us — a sick society with no feeling. Come the festive season. The supreme sacrifice of our brave men and the appalling misery of the cyclone victims was washed off our memory. So you clever 1999 proved how debase and self-centered human nature is. We celebrated Divali with usual fervour unmindful of the hurt it had caused to the bereaved ones.

Now that death is to swallow you up you have made us millennium crazy. Y2K bug has made us jittery. Fear of scarcity of currency! panic buying! Peculiar phenomena indeed.

Despite the blot of Charan Shah on your fair name you won us honour — Mahatma Gandhi and Indira Gandhi declared as the man and woman of the millennium, respectively! We are standing on the threshold of new millennium and seized with welcoming January 1, 2000. Hence goodbye 1999.

Clinton the culprit for WTO debacle
by R.A. Singh

AS is now well-known, the third ministerial meeting of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) in Seattle ground to a halt on December 5 with no agreement on any trade issue. In fact, the 135 participating nations could not even agree on the wording of a final communique, and the meeting ended, despite much burning of midnight oil and last minute patch-up efforts, in a total fiasco.

All that, of course, is now history, but a factor that is inadequately understood is that the USA and President Clinton in particular, must accept most of the blame for the unravelling of the Seattle meeting. Far from being an effort to shape a global free trade agreement that would become a flood raising all boats, the Seattle meeting was derailed by America’s attempt to exploit it for its own economic benefit, and President Clinton’s bid to make partisan political capital out of it.

The USA, from President Clinton down to US Trade Representative Charlene Barshefsky — the WTO host in Seattle — released a lot of rhetoric about how America’s concept of free-trade would raise living standards throughout the world, especially in the developing countries. But there was a problem: when it came to the crunch, Washington was not willing to practice what it preached.

Instead of pledging to lower US trade barriers to demonstrate its seriousness about promoting free trade, the USA gave every indication that it intended to retain its quota system on textile imports, even as it insisted that other countries reduced their trade barriers. Another bone of contention, which riled the developing world, was the adamant US refusal to discuss its anti-dumping laws at Seattle. Under the laws, the USA can unilaterally decide that an exporting nation was “dumping” its products on the USA — selling it below cost. Developing nations, which could sell items in the USA at prices that American producers could not match, felt aggrieved that the anti-dumping laws were only intended to cut out “cheap” imports in order to protect non-competitive domestic industries. That hardly constituted “free trade”.

Another roadblock on the path of a global agreement was the US compulsion to bring in environmental and labour issues to the Seattle agenda, under pressure from domestic political interests. The Third World understandably preferred to leave such issues to the UN Environmental Programme and the International Labour Organisation respectively. They are, after all, the entities specifically set up to tackle these very problems. Starting a free-for-all on these issues at Seattle would only have harmed the cause of free trade, without in any way advancing environmental or labour needs.

However, all of the varying agendas notwithstanding, a degree of positive dialogue could have ensued at the WTO ministerial meeting, but for a disastrous gaffe by President Clinton. On November 30, with the conclave about to commence, Mr Clinton gave an interview to the Seattle Post-Intelligencer and talked about the need for the WTO to formulate labour standards and make them enforceable, if necessary, by sanctions.

The Third World, led by India, Brazil and Egypt, was immediately up in arms, clearly recognising the threat inherent in such a proposal. If an international regimen mandated that developing countries should pay wages at the same rate as the industrial nations, the one sure advantage of the former — a low cost of production — would evaporate. Besides, such a ruling would endow a multilateral forum for trade liberalisation with the authority to dictate national priorities. Sovereignty would become the first victim. It was no wonder that developing nations refused even to consider a panel to study the labour issue.

What the USA chose conveniently to ignore was the fact that the best way to help the poor nations was to offer them open access to markets. And the best way to hobble their development is to impose environmental, labour or other standards they cannot possibly meet. Under Mr Clinton’s concept of sanctions, the poor nations would be twice punished: first, because they are unable to adhere to the same standard of wages and environmental purity that developed nations enjoy; and secondly, when they are faced with sanctions for such a failure.

Mr Clinton’s stances at Seattle had a great deal to do with the fact that Vice-President Al Gore, the new torch-bearer of the Democratic White House bid, is desperately dependent on electoral support from environmental and labour groups. But the failure of the WTO meeting has ensured that no global trade agreement can be reached in the foreseeable future, and certainly not until after the US Presidential elections in November, 2000. That is a safe prediction, given the fact that opposition to the US proposals exists not only in the Third World but also in Japan and among members of the European Union, who are enraged by American attempts to have them get rid of agricultural subsidies so that American farmers can reap rich benefits.

There is another fallout from the setback in Seattle. Apart from the fact that the failure to incorporate labour standards in the WTO agenda might prompt sections of organised unions to withhold support to the Gore candidacy, there is also the potential danger from union leaders’ threat to do their utmost to oppose Congressional approval of the hard-won trade agreement with China — which was to have been a keystone of a Clinton legacy.

While on the subject, reference must also be made to the sudden spurt of sympathy on the part of major American labour unions for the poor conditions that their breathren in the developing world have to bear. The plain fact is that their bleeding hearts are not triggered by altruism, but by unadulterated self-interest. American labour wants the Third World nations to raise wage rates and benefits only to ensure that the resulting higher labour costs will price the developing nations’ manufacturers out of the US market. It is just a ploy to protect American domestic jobs by shuttting out cheaper imports and discouraging the flight of capital in search of lower wages. Here, as elsewhere, charity begins at home!

(The writer is based in Washington).

End of Russia-US honeymoon?
By M.S.N. Menon

“YESTERDAY, Clinton permitted himself to exert pressure on Russia. It seems, for a few seconds, he forgot what Russia is. Russia possesses a whole arsenal of nuclear weapons”.

“I want to tell Clinton: He should not forget in which world he is living. It never was, and will never be, that he could dictate to the people (of Russia) how they should live, work or enjoy.”

Very strong words for a country which is still highly dependent on America! And, strong words for a man — Yeltsin — who was principally responsible for creating this dependence!

So, is the US-Russian honeymoon over? Not yet. But there can be no going back to “as you were.”

The provocation was no doubt grave. You will “pay a heavy price” for your offensive against Chechnya, Clinton had warned. In fact, there was even insinuation that Russia was committing genocide.

And yet it will be recalled that Clinton defied world public opinion when he resorted to a blitzkrieg for days against Yugoslavia!

The case against Russia is that it is violating human rights in Chechnya. But who is to judge? Is the USA a world genderme? These are not simple matters. Sovereignty of nations is still a reality. Ethnic groups cannot be allowed to break up traditional nations. More so, with the backing of international terrorists and mercenaries. America has no right to pre-judge these issues.

America is a country born of secessionism. Hence its natural sympathy for secessionists. But what if tomorrow the blacks of the USA ask for secession? How would the Anglo-Saxons react if Russia took the side of the blacks?

In supporting Chechnyan secession, Washington has three main objectives: First, it wants to convey a message to the Muslims that America is their friend. But, why? Because Muslims of West Asia and Central Asia control most of the oil and gas resources of the world. It means billions of dollars of profit to US oil cartels. It means life in easy street for most Americans in the next century.

Second: To break up the “Soviet empire” is an old dream of Washington. It has not given it up. And the best way to bring this about is to support secessionism.

Third: America wants to gain entry into the Caucusus region, which is rich in oil and gas. Already, an agreement has been concluded between Turkey, Azerbaijan and Georgia, under US pressure, to build a pipeline to transport Caspian gas, skirting Russian territory. Russia is opposed to this. Moscow has characterised it as an encroachment on its sphere of influence.

One of the basic strategies of America is to mobilise the social forces of the world to achieve its ends. Thus, during the cold war years, Washington supported dictatorships and monarchies. Today, it supports fundamentalists and terrorists. These are new, but very destructive forces. They have shown what they can do in Afghanistan and Kashmir.

Moscow has evidence that most of the Arab religious organisations are engaged in funding the Chechnyan secession. (Earlier, the Sheikhs were funding the cold war). But is it not amazing that the world is yet to wake up to the dangers of instigating ethnic nationalism?

Thus, funds come from the Wahabbis, arms and men from countries like Pakistan and training is imparted mostly in Afghanistan. The Turkey-based Chechen diaspora and Grey Wolves (a terrorist outfit) have sent 1500 mercenaries to Chechnya. Egyptian terrorists are said to have had a hand in the explosions that took place in Moscow.

The rebels, however, have not found much favour with the Muslim authorities. Russia’s Mufti Council Chairman Ravil Gainutdin has supported Moscow’s actions in Chechnya. The Secretary-General of the OIC has said that military action in Chechnya is a domestic affair of Russia. Mufti Akhmed Kadyrov, the spiritual leader of Chechnya, has risked his life to oppose the rebels.

America was indifferent to these growing outrages of the terrorists. Only when they struck at New York, Washington woke up to the need to combat terror. But America will not join forces in an international effort to stamp out terrorists. I have explained why.

For whom and for what are these rebels fighting? To establish an Islamic paradise? In 1989 Chechnya-Ingushetia had a population of 1,270,000, of which 25 per cent (317,500) were Russians. Today, the population of Chechnya is no more than 320,000, of which 20,000 are Russians. The rest are either dead or they have fled the country. During 1994-96, the peak years of the struggle, about 80,000 were reported dead. Of them, 21,000 were Russians. This is ethnic cleansing. Is this the paradise they want to create?

Now that the honeymoon is over, Moscow has much to discard before it can have meaningful and coherent world outlook. First, it must ask: Where does it belong? To East or West? This is an old dilemma. It must resolve it. The world is still divided. We must recognise it.

It was wrong on the part of Moscow to allow a unipolar world to emerge. It was wrong on the part of Russia to embrace American style capitalism. It was wrong to allow globalisation to take roots. And it is wrong to allow America to stamp out the cultural diversity of the world.

About Indo-Russian relations, Moscow had said: “We view India as our strategic partner and a key pole in the future multipolar world.” Surely, this is not possible with an India armed with knives and rifles. India has to be nuclear armed if it is to count for anything.

We must work for the coming together of Russia, China and India. It is absolutely necessary. Not as a military alliance, but as a factor in shaping the destiny of the world. Isn’t it interesting that both the Republican candidates for the US presidency, George W. Bush and John McCain, have denounced Russia’s military offensive against Chechnya and promised a tougher policy against China on human rights issues? Both have promised a formidable anti-missile defence system.

China is naturally worried about the US game plan in Asia. US efforts to strengthen the US-Japan security arrangements, US plan to deploy Theatre Missile Defence Systems in East Asia, covering Taiwan, and US supply of sophisticated weapons to Taiwan have all caused grave concern to Beijing.

This explains why Beijing is moving closer to Moscow, and why it wants to patch up relations with India. India must care for the reading on the wall. But is has not said a word in support of Russia on the Chechnya issue!

What happened to Yugoslavia was an eye-opener to Moscow and Beijing. But both had a hand in creating the present unipolar world — Beijing, because of its selfish policies and Moscow, because of its gross immaturity.

Moscow might be tempted to answer that it got more than $ 150 billion in the form of loans because of its pro-West policies. True. But it is also a fact that about $ 400 billion have been taken out of the country by the mafia and others. And half a million of the top scientists have deserted their motherland. Moscow has paid in many other ways.

One can understand the Chinese support to Moscow in Russia’s fight against terrorism and fundamentalism. But this was inevitable, for China has ethnic problems in Tibet, Sinkiang and even Taiwan. Apart from this, China is increasingly worried about the growing US antipathy to China.

Fundamentalism and terrorism — these are the new scourges of our times. We cannot allow this periodic madness of men to overwhelm us. Nor can we allow the ambitious men and nations to exploit this madness to their advantage.

75 YEARS AGO

December 17, 1924
Gandhi tunics: Paris fashion

GANDHI tunics have made their bow to the world in the Paris salons where winter styles are being shown. Blouses of India print, handblocked on wood from Kashmir, are another of the offerings.

India prints fit right in with the winter colour scheme of rich brown, red, blue and green favoured in a score of Paris dress-making establishments.

The fashion-makers suddenly have switched over from tucked in blouses, familiarly called “tuck-ins”, to “tuck-outs” or tunics, which are worn outside the skirts. The Gandhi tunics reach 12 to 18 inches below the waistline and follow the lines of an ordinary blouse.