Three-in-one success
ON Wednesday, an Indian Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle, PSLV-C2, successfully launched one Indian, one South Korean and one German satellite into a near-circular polar sunsynchronous orbit with copybook precision.

Sino-US war of words
IT all began with US-led NATO action against Yugoslavia over two months ago. China has been consistently opposing the move to find a military solution to the Balkan crisis.

NEW FACTORS IN POLITY
Lengthening shadow of bad politics
by Hari Jaisingh
THE exit of the rebel trio—Mr Sharad Pawar, Mr P. A. Sangma and Mr Tariq Anwar—from the Congress has introduced yet another factor in India’s already confused political scene.

Political realignments in Tamil Nadu
by A. Balu
HERE is an attempt to review the political scenario in Tamil Nadu in the wake of the fall of the Vajpayee coalition government and on the eve of the forthcoming general election due to take place in September.

USA has lost right to retain UN HQ
by M.S.N. Menon
THE USA has made it amply clear that it is no more in favour of the UN. It prefers to act on its own. But the UN is still the hope and anchor of the poor countries. It is time the UN is shifted from New York to Geneva — away from the diktat of the US Government.

Un(friendly) cricket match
by I.M. Soni
HERE are some of the highlights of a friendly cricket match played between the Officers and the Players. The latter team comprised players. The former was led by the Chief Secretary and latter by an office assistant.

75 Years Ago

Alleged rape of woman
A RAPE case by a Railway employee has been reported from the Delhi Railway Station. On Thursday night a Hindu woman arrived by train without ticket when Bhollen, a water-carrier of the G.I.P. Railway, induced her to go to a far off platform and from there forcibly took her to a carriage and committed rape on her.

Three-in-one success

ON Wednesday, an Indian Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle, PSLV-C2, successfully launched one Indian, one South Korean and one German satellite into a near-circular polar sunsynchronous orbit with copybook precision. In a way, the figure of three is symbolic, considering that this first multi-satellite launch from India signifies far-reaching progress in three different domains. For one, it is a harbinger of India's self-reliance in space technology. India's programme of designing and building state-of-the-art remote sensing technology satellites has been progressing satisfactorily for long. But when it came to the launching of the satellites, it had to take the help of other countries. Knowing its vulnerability, they had started quoting prohibitive rates for the launch. Even old friend Russia created all sorts of problems for India some time back. The country was subjected to unethical armtwisting by some countries which have never reconciled themselves to the strides it has made. As such, it had become imperative to make arrangements for the launch of the satellites from Indian soil itself. With this launch, India has sent a message loud and clear that it is now capable of taking care of its multifarious needs.

The second field where the importance of the launch lies is in the optimum utilisation of the IRS-P4 satellite, or Oceansat as it is called. This will help in better weather forecast, which is crucial for our predominantly agrarian society. It will also help fishermen identify the spots where they can expect the maximum catch. All this will be accomplished through the gathering of valuable information on ocean biological parameters, surface temperature, atmospheric vapour content and sea surface data. So far, the country had earned name and fame in collecting data from the landmass through the IRS satellites. It had proved so useful that agencies like NASA had been purchasing and using it extensively. The new satellite will mark the foray into the sea-related data, which has tremendous economic applications. If the initial results are any indicator, the quality of images should be very much in conformity with international standards.

But the biggest significance of the launch is that with this, India now enters the exclusive club of countries which can launch the satellites of other countries on a commercial basis. For launching the South Korean and German satellites, only "promotional rates" were charged but when the launch starts on a commercial basis, ISRO can earn considerable foreign currency. There is a stiff competition among the few nations offering this service but still the rates offered by India are some 30 per cent lower than those of others. The launch pie is getting bigger and bigger with the IT explosion and India can have a fairly large slice of it if it continues to be as meticulous and successful in its launches as it was on Wednesday. However, there is reason to be extremely cautious on that very count. As it is, there is no dearth of countries that have been trying to sabotage India's space programme for obvious reasons. Now that it has entered the field as a commercial competitor, there is even greater danger of cut-throat rivalry. The old bogey of military uses of the technology will come in handy to turn the screws. There is need for standing firm against such onslaughts. One hopes the bitter political rivalry prevalent in Delhi these days will not come in the way of safeguarding the larger interests of the country.

An important milestone that the launch no doubt is, there are many more that need to be crossed. In space technology, not even sky is the limit. The next stage is to enhance the payload volume of the PSLV. Only then will the full commercial benefits of the expertise flow to India. About $ 1 million which the agency earns by launching a 100 to 150 kg satellite is barely enough to cover the cost of a PSLV. Only the full PSLV load can earn around $ 15 million. Then comes the development of Geosynchronous Satellite Vehicles (GSLV). Obviously, there are miles to go. But as a Chinese philosopher had said, even the longest journey begins with one small step. India has taken not one but several of those small steps already. With every step, the journey gets that much shorter.

Sino-US war of words

IT all began with US-led NATO action against Yugoslavia over two months ago. China has been consistently opposing the move to find a military solution to the Balkan crisis. This approach has been at variance with the thinking in Western capitals, specially Washington. NATO ignored Chinese opinion, as also that of Russia and India, as being of no consequence and went ahead with its planned military campaign, not only to force Yugoslavia to submit to US dictates but also to terrorise the rest of the world that anyone failing to fall in line in the wake of pressure from the sole surviving super power will meet the fate of the beleaguered Balkan nation. But when in the course of the NATO bombardment the Chinese embassy in Belgrade was also hit, the USA faced the kind of protest it might not have expected. The Chinese reaction was as strong as it could be, not reflecting any kind of weakness. Short of jumping into what was happening in the Balkan area with all its military might, China made the Americans feel that it was a power to be reckoned with, or that it could not be treated like Russia, suffering from economic paralysis. The USA had to kneel down and President Bill Clinton had to publicly apologise for the damage caused to the Chinese embassy and the death of some of its staff members. Of course, the USA regretted what it officially described as a mistaken action, it did not leave the Chinese go unpunished for daring to question the American arbitrariness. The USA came out with what the world knows as the Christopher Cox report, prepared by a panel of the US House of Representatives, charging China with the theft of top-level American nuclear secrets. The alleged theft of neutron bomb technology and sattelite and rocket-related information, the report mentioned, had been continuing for over 20 years but it escalated in the nineties. Washington expressed its "worries" through the report as it feared that this could disturb the military balance between the super power and the communist giant, besides posing a serious threat to American interests in South-East Asia.

Perfection of a country's military machine involves a huge expenditure. China might have acquired the technological capability to pose a serious challenge to America's military superiority, but the big gap between the defence budgets of the two countries (China's $35 billion against the USA's $252.6 billion) makes one believe that the Asian giant has a long way to go to reach somewhere near the level of Washington's might. But looking at the situation from the regional angle, the exposure of the Chinese determination to become another super power, even if weaker than the USA, unfolds a quite disturbing scenario. It is a greatly alarming situation for India in view of the history of its relations with China, and Beijing's acceptance of Islamabad as its close ally. India will have to redouble its efforts to be in a position to safeguard its interests under all circumstances, irrespective of world opinion. There is every possibility that the USA has been silently working on a strategic axis with China but the plan has now gone haywire. Otherwise how could America remain unaware of a Chinese activity going on for 20 long years with the help of 3000 front business organisations? It seems the world has not been told the whole truth.

NEW FACTORS IN POLITY
Lengthening shadow of bad politics

by Hari Jaisingh

THE exit of the rebel trio—Mr Sharad Pawar, Mr P. A. Sangma and Mr Tariq Anwar—from the Congress has introduced yet another factor in India’s already confused political scene. With their expulsion and the certainty of the formation of a new party by them, the Congress leadership will hear voices of dissent from those who were once part of its outfit. Looking at the mood of the rebels, it is clear that they will speak in a language which will not be friendly. They have already raised several sensitive issues at public fora to the discomfiture of the Congress leadership. The question of the “foreign origin” of Mrs Sonia Gandhi is as much part of the BJP’s agenda as it is of the trio.

The rebels may not be a big force nationally, but they are sure to have considerable nuisance value for the Sonia loyalists in certain states.

Whether one likes him or not, it is a fact that Mr Sharad Pawar is a grassroots politician in Maharashtra. This may affect the electoral prospects of the Congress in that state, keeping in view the expected realignment of political forces before the elections.

It looks like an open game of politics now. Mr Pawar is an ambitious person. He is said to be one of the richest politicians in the country. But his real strength lies in his being a grassroots person. He is said to know Maharashtra’s district-level officers by name. Not many leaders can boast of such intimate contact. They tend to neglect their support base once they occupy the position of importance.

This has been the tragedy of Indian politics. If someone becomes an MP or MLA, he tends to concentrate more on factional politics or money-making operations than on the people and their problems. There are, of course, always some exceptions to this general trend.

Another grassroots politician who once belonged to the Congress is Ms Mamata Banerjee of West Bengal. The circumstances in which she left the party are well known. Her exit from the party has, however, not diminished her pulling power with the people. In fact, she is one person the Marxists are afraid of. A firebrand orator, she has a mind of her own and the position she takes publicly invariably reflects the mood of the people in her state. Her party is now very much part of the BJP-led coalition at the Centre. But who has benefited more in this arrangement—Ms Mamata Banerjee’s Trinamool Congress or the BJP?

In Indian politics, it is not easy to draw a balance-sheet. For all practical purposes, it is the politics of expediency which operates here and that is why we see an open bazaar for opportunists to “shop” freely. This bazaar has both wholesale and retail outlets. It has both short-term and long-term “sales” with attractive inducements.

In India’s freewheeling operations, no one can, of course, beat former Haryana Chief Minister Bhajan Lal in “Aya Rams, Gaya Rams” politics. He could make Haryana’s legislators change side on a wholesale basis. How can law on anti-defection help in this sort of a situation?

Indian politics these days is totally devoid of principles and ideology. This is true of the BJP also. The saffron party is ever-willing to discard even its basic faith and creed for the sake of retaining or capturing power. It no longer finds Hindutva a paying proposition, powerwise. The party’s real asset is Mr Atal Behari Vajpayee, whose personal image has wider nationwide appeal than the other BJP leaders put together. Ironically, this has exposed the party, and many of its sympathisers frown upon its double-talk and double-standard. Even a large number of educated middle class persons have shown disenchantment with the manner in which the party’s affairs are conducted.

The UP situation is a clear example of the party’s duplicity in power management. It has, during the past few years, admitted to its ranks a large number of undesirable persons. The current revolt by some party dissident MLAs in Lucknow has also exposed it as far as its claim of being a disciplined party is concerned.

All these issues are being raised to underline the extremely fluid situation prevailing in the polity. Every political party in this country is in a serious crisis today. This is very much true of the two largest parties—the Congress and the BJP. The Congress is, of course, an old sinner; but it has somehow managed to survive many a battle. But this time the challenge is of a different type. Apart from the challenge posed by the BJP and regional parties, it will have to fight it out with some of the erstwhile Congressmen who have left the organisation for various reasons. Thus, the challenge posed by the party’s opponents will be far more formidable than it had visualised earlier, notwithstanding Mrs Sonia Gandhi’s thundering rhetoric at the special AICC session in New Delhi on Tuesday.

To several hardcore Congressmen, Mr Pawar, Mr Sangma and Mr Anwar may appear to be “paper tigers”, but they are not. Each one has his own standing and following, howsoever limited. Take the case of Mr Sangma. He had caught the imagination of the educated middle class persons in the wake of his outstanding performance as the Speaker of the 11th Lok Sabha. At one stage, he was even seen as a potential prime ministerial candidate. He, of course, owes his exposure at the all-India level to the live telecast of parliamentary proceedings by Doordarshan on the national hook-up.

The electoral arithmetic for the coming poll will, however, unfold after seven or eight weeks. We shall then have a broad picture of the nature of realignments, the related matter of power-sharing and the possible public response.

Any exercise on the nature of the people’s verdict before the firming up of alliances will be premature. But as of today, the danger of a fragmented mandate looms large on the horizon. One thing, however, can be said straightaway: the Congress will have to work hard to re-establish its legitimacy among the people. Its credibility and legitimacy have suffered over the years, more so in recent weeks. The question here is not of the “foreign origin” of Mrs Sonia Gandhi, but that of the party’s response to the challenges posed by its political opponents.

It has to remember that a mass-based organisation cannot be rebuilt on sycophancy and coterie politics. The biggest threat to the party comes from a large brigade of sycophants and time-servers who have exploited the party by swearing by its leader without subscribing to the basic principles the Congress has symbolised right from the days of Independence.

Unfortunately, some of the Congress leaders are taken in by the so-called loyalists who only seek their own personal glorification and power. But the strength of the Congress once was its support from the general public. The strength of the Congress now is publicly orchestrated sycophancy and coterie politics. Some of the ugly incidents witnessed in recent days are not good signs of the party’s health.

It is for the sensible leaders of the party to inject some sobriety and discipline into “extra loyalists”. Crude sycophancy may please individual leaders but it can hardly add to the party’s credibility which is essential for garnering public support. Be that as it may. The country is caught in political currents, cross-currents and under-currents. And amidst varied wonders and blunders of political bosses of different shades and hues, the voter is equally bewildered.

The choice right now is not between “politics” and “no politics”, but between “good politics” and “bad politics”. As it is, political life is vitiated because our public spirit is weak. What seems to be most lacking in the country’s freewheeling politics is not the skill of manipulation and manoeuvring but sincerity, honesty and commitment to national cause.

Indeed, had Lewis Carrol (of “Alice in Wonderland” fame) and Jonathan Swift (of “Gulliver’s Travels”) lived to make an Indian journey in this age, they would have been stumped for words for some of the bizarre goings-on in the Indian polity.

Political realignments in Tamil Nadu
by A. Balu

HERE is an attempt to review the political scenario in Tamil Nadu in the wake of the fall of the Vajpayee coalition government and on the eve of the forthcoming general election due to take place in September. Even as political realignments were taking shape in the state, there have been some expected and some unexpected happenings that have influenced various political parties to change their known stance in the hope of deriving advantage in the electoral battle.

The major players are, of course, the two arch rivals — the DMK led by the Chief Minister, Mr M. Karunanidhi, and the AIADMK led by the volatile and unpredictable Ms Jayalalitha, who at the moment is adopting a low-key posture in contrast to the ebullient self in New Delhi a few weeks ago while being engaged in an abortive attempt to help in the formation of an alternative government. Since then Ms Jayalalitha has had more upsets, what with the Supreme Court’s ruling giving the go-ahead to the special courts set up by the state government to try the AIADMK leader on a series of corruption charges.

Even as she was engaged in striking an electoral alliance with the Congress, the intermediary, Mr Sharad Pawar, got involved in an open confrontation with the Congress president, Mrs Sonia Gandhi. The result was the electoral pact talks got derailed. They are unlikely to be resumed or to gather momentum until the Congress sets its own house in order in the aftermath of the expulsion from the party of Mr Pawar and two of his colleagues in the Congress Working Committee. Ms Jayalalitha and Mr Pawar were said to have established a rapport which may not be easy to obtain when the Congress high command sends another emissary to Chennai. It requires considerable negotiating skill and a thick skin for anyone to deal with Ms Jayalalitha, whose previous experience of an alliance with the Congress was not an unmitigated success. Her relations as Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu with the Narasimha Rao government became strained with accusations on her part that the Centre was trying to destabilise her government.

She had also complained to the Congress high command about personal attacks on her by local Congress leaders. It is difficult to envisage at this stage if and how the AIADMK and the Congress will be able to strike an alliance that will satisfy both sides. Each has a chink in its armour. With the green signal from the Supreme Court, Ms Jayalalitha’s trial by the special courts may pick up momentum on the eve of the general election. This prospect can put the Congress in the uncomfortable position of being seen in the company of a leader who is hard-pressed to clear the public perception about her former regime. On the other hand, the state Congress is in bad shape with its internal dissensions and with its also-ran record in recent electoral battles. In such a situation, the party may have to accept Ms Jayalalitha’s terms on seat-sharing in the coming general election to the Lok Sabha.

The options for both parties for finding alternative partners are limited, and this could be a factor to influence them to get into some kind of an electoral pact that will be workable. What can stall this possibility is the decision that the Tamil Maanila Congress (TMC), headed by Mr G.K. Moopanar, will eventually take on an electoral understanding with the Congress. Mr Moopanar, whose Congress gene cannot be wished away, is all in favour of Mrs Sonia Gandhi’s leadership of the Congress, and is in frequent touch with her. His anti-AIADMK stance could prompt Mrs Gandhi to think twice before throwing in her lot with Ms Jayalalitha. After all, Mrs Gandhi cannot forget that the AIADMK leader had, not long ago, questioned the propriety of the prospect of a person of foreign origin becoming the Prime Minister of India.

As far as the DMK is concerned, Mr Karunanidhi has baffled everyone with his decision to join the BJP club. With his one-point agenda of preventing at all costs the comeback of Ms Jayalalitha — although the state assembly elections are two years away — , Mr Karunanidhi has justified his party’s alliance with the BJP on the ground that corruption is more dangerous than communalism. He has gone a step further by declaring that the BJP’s communal image has undergone a change for the better. But his ally in the last elections, Mr Moopanar and Left parties are not convinced by Mr Karunanidhi’s explanations and clarifications.

These are still early days for realignment and readjustment, and as Mr Moopanar says, there is time for changes in the political scenario, necessitating a new polarisation and alignment of parties. The strange bed fellows may become even stranger in the coming weeks, causing confusion among the electorate.

Un(friendly) cricket match
by I.M. Soni

HERE are some of the highlights of a friendly cricket match played between the Officers and the Players. The latter team comprised players. The former was led by the Chief Secretary and latter by an office assistant.

A colourful “shamiana” was erected in the ground which served as a pavilion for the officers. Easy chairs were provided besides water, new jugs and glasses. Most officers, however, had brought their beer and wives with them. We, the players had taken our kit only.

The Chief Secretary, captain of the officers’ team, a paunchy fellow with a swagger, came out to open the innings along with his Home Secretary (not his wife).

Our captain opened the attack. He took a very long start, pawed the ground in a seemingly “killing” mood but I knew he was doing it only to mark his bowling run-up spot.

The delivery, a very fast one, was at least two feet outside the off stump. The CS raised his bat and let it go. Someone from the pavilion shouted: “Well left, sir.” The next one was a bouncer which went over the head of the CS. No pun is intended.

The third one was very cleverly pitched a little in but the CS shuffled across the wicket and left it go. Our captain pitched the next one on the stumps. The CS again raised his bat and let it go. His off-stump went reeling in the air. A hush fell on the ground which was broken by a burst of clapping from the pavilion as the umpire, the CS’s P.A., loudly called: “No ball.”

The Home Secretary played a maiden from the other side although the bowler was bowling at half his normal speed and most of his deliveries were wide off the stumps.

In the next over, unable to restrain himself, the Home Secretary swung at one outside his leg stump. We looked towards the leg region for the ball bulleting to the boundary. Instead we saw the bat flying in that direction!

Our wicket-keeper retrieved the bat. It was good fielding without a hit!

After a couple of overs in which the score moved up a few runs because of no-balls and wide balls declared by the rolly-polly umpire. Our captain consulted his deputy (this scribe). We decided to bring on a spinner. The CS succeeded in connecting one and lifted it high towards the leg side. The ball fell a few yards inside the boundary line. The fielder raised his arm indicating a boundary. But the umpire raised his arms and there was a round of lusty applause from the pavilion. It was declared a six!

Our captain reset the fielding. I was removed from silly point and posted at the fine leg fence.

The bowler spun one. The CS again hit a lofty shot. The ball looped up in the air in my direction, I got under it, cupped my hands, and to my utter horror, did not drop it.

The umpire looked at me. I showed him the ball. The batsman looked at the umpire who raised a limp finger.

As we were crossing over for the next over, the captain asked me to go out and send in the 12th man!

USA has lost right to retain UN HQ
by M.S.N. Menon

THE USA has made it amply clear that it is no more in favour of the UN. It prefers to act on its own. But the UN is still the hope and anchor of the poor countries. It is time the UN is shifted from New York to Geneva — away from the diktat of the US Government.

The main objective of the UN was to maintain peace and security, but it was also expected to promote the economic and cultural life of the world. Yet, over the years, the emphasis was shifted to peace and security at the expense of other objectives. It was the US contention that economic and cultural life should be free from state interference.

But what is the US record? It has interfered in economic development of the world through the IMF and World Bank, in world trade through the WTO, and in cultural life through its direct and indirect control of the information flow and the electronics industry. Never was a greater deception played on this gullible world! The more the USA wanted to control the world, the more it talked of a “free” world.

Be that as it may, the USA has been engaged in starving the UN and its agencies of funds, in the hope that it will drop its programmes for want of funds, especially those which are opposed by America. Thus, the USA forced cuts in UNESCO funds because it promoted a free press, in UNICEF because it promoted family planning, in WHO because it advocated a radical public health service.

Right now, the UN is going through a fiscal crisis, largely because the USA has refused to pay its dues amounting to over a billion dollars. But what we do not know is this: while the USA has been making the maximum use of the UN to advance its interests, it has been paying little or no money! Or shall we say, making others pay? Let me explain: contributions to the UN budget are based on the principle of a country’s “capacity to pay”. The USA being the richest nation, its contribution was assessed in 1946 at 39.89 per cent of the UN budget. However, in 1948, the General Assembly set a ceiling of 33 per cent. But the USA continued to press for a lower contribution. In fact, its real contribution was never more than 30-31 per cent till the seventies, when it was brought down to 25 per cent. Of course, contributions were now and then adjusted. Thus, the Soviet contribution was raised from 7.4 per cent in 1946 to 17.4 per cent in 1955, and the contribution of the poorest was pegged at 0.01 per cent.

Payment on the basis of the national income is difficult to apply. For example, should two countries with the same national income, but with widely different populations, pay the same amount? Should the OPEC countries, with high income and low populations, pay high amounts?

The oil crisis of the seventies made most nations debtors. They were in no position to pay more to the UN, but these were cold war years and Washington felt compelled to pay the UN dues.

Thus, in 1978-79, the five permanent members and 18 industrial nations together contributed 90 per cent of the UN budget and 127 poorer countries contributed the balance 10 per cent.

True, the burden appeared unfair to the rich. But was it? It was not. But few people understood it. Take, for example, this case: in 1978 the UN spent over a billion dollars on its upkeep. Of this, $ 700 million were spent on the city of New York. But what contribution did the USA make that year? A mere $ 100 million!

It is a well known fact that the UN spends two-thirds of its budget on staff, goods, services, housing, hotels, etc. In 1977, it spent $ 450 million on its staff and diplomats. Besides, it spent $ 220 million on goods and services. But the USA paid the UN no more than $ 90 million that year. Naturally, the question has been raised why should the USA not pay more for UN’s upkeep.

Of the $ 3.5 billion spent by the UN during 1997-98, half a billion was spent on US markets and a billion on New York city. All these explain why the US Government fiercely resists the shifting of the UN to another country.

Mr Ralph Cwerman, Vice-Chairman of the UN Association of the USA, says that at a time when the US Congress is seeking to reduce funding levels, little attention is paid to the money that flows back to the US economy. A guidebook on “How to do business with the UN” says that out of every dollar contributed by America,28 cents go back to the US economy.

Not only America, but also some other advanced countries benefit from UN funds. For example, Italy, Britain, Canada, Germany, Japan, France, Switzerland, Belgium and Australia. What about the developing countries? Almost none gets a share. India has been trying to get a share of the pie, but in vain.

The USA owes the UN about $ 1.3 billion (1998-99 figure). This is in spite of the fact that a 1998 public opinion poll showed overwhelming Americans’ support for UN activities!

If the USA refuses to pay the amount, it can trigger Article 19 of the UN Charter, which denies voting rights to defaulters. But no action is likely to be taken against the USA, still the largest contributor to the UN budget.

The US Congress has tried to impose conditions. No other nation does so. For example, Congress opposes expenses on family planning programmes, particularly abortion. However, 80 per cent of the Americans are opposed to such linkages.

In the meantime, a bipartisan group comprising former Secretaries of State sent a letter to Congressional leaders asking them to pay the outstanding dues. They included Dr Henry Kissinger, Mr Cyrus Vance, Gen Alexander Haig and Mr George Shultz. They warned that US leadership was at risk if the USA failed to pay up. They said that as Secretaries, they knew at first hand the importance of the UN and its agencies in promoting global peace.

In the meantime, facts collected have come like a revelation to the world. They show how US citizens enjoy preponderance in UN employment, how UN funds flow back into US coffers and how UN-backed development projects invariably go to the rich nations.

In view of US opposition to growing UN expenditure, the UN has already taken measures to curb the growth of its expenditure. From 1994 it has adopted a no growth principle.

The US President has been powerless in this game played by Congress. Last year, for example, the Senate approved a Bill to pay most of the debt. But the House of Representatives took on an anti-abortion clause to the Bill, which President Bill Clinton refused to accept. A second Bill was approved this year, in which the clause was watered down. Mr Clinton has threatened to veto this. In the meantime, the UN Secretary-General, Mr Kofi Annan, has moved US business and industry and opinion leaders.

Today, as we stand on the threshold of the new millennium, we seem to be more divided and confused than ever before. The multipolar world envisaged by the UN Charter became bipolar and now we have a unipolar world with the USA exercising arbitrary powers. The dismantling of the Soviet empire did not lead to a better world as we were told (the half a century of cold war was the greatest waste) and globalisation has led to greater inequalities and inequities. And, above everything, nations have lost their precious sovereignty, while unscrupulous corporations have gained greater power.

The poorer countries have a huge stake in the UN system, for only through it can they gain anything in the world. As individual nations, they are helpless.

The payment of UN dues is an obligation under the treaty. The USA cannot be allowed to hold the organisation to ransom. And there is need to shift the UN headquarters away from the USA to a place less subject to US influence.

75 YEARS AGO

Alleged rape of woman

A RAPE case by a Railway employee has been reported from the Delhi Railway Station. On Thursday night a Hindu woman arrived by train without ticket when Bhollen, a water-carrier of the G.I.P. Railway, induced her to go to a far off platform and from there forcibly took her to a carriage and committed rape on her.

When caught by a Sub-Inspector of the Railway Police, the accused made a clean confession of the whole story. He is kept in police custody.

Regarding another case of rape by a policeman reported to have been committed on the station premises and given wide publicity in the local vernacular papers, it has transpired that the parties had willingly done it and that no case of rape could be made out.

The general public of Delhi feel very indignant at this insecurity of the person and it is hoped that the authorities would take better precautionary measures.