US stand demands caution

THE editorial of June 17 counselling caution against any euphoria over the US stance on Kargil was most appropriate and timely. The interest shown by the USA and G-8 in the current military action near the LoC cannot be totally delinked from the possibility that the wider issue of Kashmir will be internationalised at a later stage, something that India has opposed all along.

The US action in calling upon Pakistan to withdraw its forces to its own side of the LoC has come almost simultaneously with a major step towards Sino-Indian cooperation. Against the backdrop of a much-talked about future Russia-China-India axis to counterbalance the power of NATO, the US action may well be a ploy to wean India away from China and thus to delay the emergence of a challenge to NATO's supremacy. If we fall for this ploy and further soften our already feeble opposition to NATO's bypassing the UN with regard to Kosovo, we may well find that China loses interest in our cooperation and the USA subsequently reverts to its old perception and policies towards South Asia.

It is imperative, therefore, that while welcoming the US stand on Kargil, we do not dilute the gains made during the recent visit of the Minister of External Affairs to China, and also do not inadvertently contribute to the efforts for the internationalisation of the Kashmir issue.

SATISH SHIRALI
Chandigarh

* * * *

Improving ties with China

Last year our relations with China had touched a new loss, thanks to our Defence Minister. Has our External Affairs Minister's visit to China corrected that image? I think it is too early to say anything on this subject except that the visit was overdue and a step in the right direction.

I agree with the view expressed in the June 17 editorial, "Better ties with China" that we shall have to be watchful and closely monitor Beijing's policies and postures vis-a-vis India and Pakistan. It was pointed out that as these days India's relations with Pakistan are under extra-strain and Pakistan is China's enduring friend, our foreign minister's visit may have helped to neutralise China's posture a little bit, but it is farfetched to say that it has resulted in restoring the old unstable equation. Where do we go from here? The major hurdle in the way of a meaningful India-China dialogue is the unresolved dispute over the Line of Actual Control. The two countries must, therefore, resolve their boundary-related differences on priority. It is, however, long-drawn process.

I may sound pessimist when I say that I agree with those who believe that we should not nurture hopes of any major realignment or big shift in Chinese policy towards us for sometime to come!!! We must, however, in touch with each other.

ONKAR CHOPRA
Ludhiana

* * * *

Charkha politics

I read with interest the editorial “Return of the Charkha” (June 12), throwing considerable critical light on the inaugural function organised by the National Congress Party (NCP) at Mumbai the other day. Well, I relished the crisp editorial for its forthright tone and tenor.

The return of the Charkha/Gandhi Topi — neo-Gandhians playing the inimitable Mahatma! What a tamasha, indeed!

Pertinently, one can not step into the same river twice, they say. Similar seems to be the case with the “River of history”. Did any of the historic symbols/insignias — Lord Rama’s Bow and Arrow, Lord Krishna’s Sudarshan Chakra, Maharana Pratap’s valorous sword etc — ever stage a comeback? There is hardly any reason to believe that the “Charkha”, with all its Gandhian glory, would ever make a re-appearance. Why befool the gullible masses?

No doubt, the NCP leadership seems to have betrayed “fuzzy thinking” in the matter, as the editorial bluntly observes.

TARA CHAND
Ambota (Una)

* * * *

Horrendous act

The systematic mutilation of the bodies of our soldiers by the intruders reminds us of those ancient Assyrians whose greed for territory knew no limits, and had plunged them in endless military adventures.

In his book, “Western Civilisations”, McNall Burns tells us about their barbaric acts:” Soldiers captured in battle, and even sometimes upon non-combatants as well, they inflicted unspeakable cruelties — skinning them alive, impaling them on stakes, cutting off ears, noses, and sex organs, and then exhibiting the mutilated victims in cages for the benefit of cities not yet surrendered. Accounts of these cruelties are not taken from atrocity stories circulated by their enemies;they come from the records of the Assyrians themselves.”

Those cruel intruders who have purposefully indulged in such horrendous acts for frightening our soldiers in Kargil have brought up this singular instance in the history of Indo-Pak armed conflicts. This calls for immediate action on the part of our government.

The Vajpayee government must see to it that these criminals are brought to book by the Pakistan government under international conventions prescribing the code of conduct vis-a-vis the captives in war.

MOAZZIZ ALI BEG
Yamunanagar

* * * *

PU film fee: clarification

I wrote a letter in response to the news item "PU students for refund of film fee" (June 16). What has disturbed me most is that The Tribune took so many days to publish the clarification, that too partially.

The clarification is silent about the following:

The statement attributed to me regarding the scarcity of funds and laxity on part of the university is absolutely baseless. I had told your correspondent that I was not concerned with the collection and utilisation of fees and asked him to speak to the Finance & Development Officer in this regard. I had said nothing on the issue of the film and medical fee as attributed to me by your correspondent.

Apart from other things, I had made it clear to the correspondent that the university authorities were responsive to the demands of the students community; that the Vice-Chancellor, in response to the demand of the students, had constituted a committee which deliberated and made recommendations to the satisfaction of the students; that there were facilities for the screening of films in different auditoria and provisions for auditoria were there in the new buildings. Why has no mention been made of these?

SANJIV TEWARI,
DPR, Panjab University
Chandigarh