The Tribune, Chandigarh, India

GUEST COLUMN
POTO is a must to tackle terrorism
I. D.Swami

THE promulgation of the Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance (POTO) 2001 on October 24 has set off heated discussion in political circles. The views of the Opposition, the Congress in particular, made known through specious arguments of their spokespersons’ articles and discussions in television are disappointing.

The Congress enacted the Maintenance of Internal Security Act (MISA) when Indira Gandhi was the Prime Minister. TADA was enacted when Rajiv Gandhi was the Prime Minister. Unfortunately, it is the same party that lost both those leaders to the acts of terrorists. It suddenly realises that provisions of POTO are draconian. At least three States in India have enacted equally tough, if not tougher, legislation to deal with the menace. Two of them are the Congress-ruled states. (Maharashtra and Karnataka). The other is the TDP-ruled Andhra Pradesh. If this is not hypocrisy, what else is it? What other course is there for the government when threats to civil society acquire a virulent form beyond the control of the existing provisions of law?

The POTO is meant to fight terrorism more effectively. The Opposition parties’ objections are completely irrational, their arguments hardly convincing and their motives look absolutely doubtful. They should willingly consider POTO in the context of the background the multifarious challenges faced by the nation in the management of its internal security. Instead of trying to weaken the nation’s resolve to fight terrorism by adopting an obstructionist attitude, they should cooperate with the NDA government to see the ordinance into law. Terrorism has after all acquired catastrophic dimension.

India has been at the receiving end of terrorism for two decades. Not a single nation in the world has suffered even a fraction of what we have suffered. More than 50,000 lives had been lost to terrorists’ acts. The USA suffered the largest loss in a single day’s terrorist acts. Considering the seriousness of the situation created by the terrorists and also considering their ability to shock humanity, harsher laws to deal with them is more than justified.

The nation is committed to the UN Security Council to take measures to deal with terrorism. This is not legislation intended to secure petty partisan gains. It is a legislation brought in national interest. It will be most unfortunate if this falls through for want of support of the Opposition parties in Parliament. If that happens, they will have much to answer to succeeding generations. “The need of the hour is to face terrorism unitedly as the menace did not see any boundary, caste or creed and thrived on blood of innocent people” said Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee.

When extraordinary situations have been created by terrorists, extraordinary laws are needed to deal with them. TADA did not deal with the question relating to terrorist organizations. POTO has been precisely defined to deal with such extraordinary situations created by terrorists. Care has been taken to delete expression ‘or to alienate any section of the or to adversely affect the harmony amongst different sections of the people’ to avoid misuse as had happened in the case of TADA. The offence of ‘disruptive activity’ existing in erstwhile TADA has also been deleted. Under POTO, any person who commits an offence beyond India, which is punishable under this ordinance, was to be dealt with according to the provisions of this ordinance in the same manner as if such act had been committed in India.

The POTO provides that no accused under this Act shall be released on bail unless the court gives the public prosecutor an opportunity of being heard. Section 48(7) requires the Magistrate to satisfy himself only regarding the innocence of the accused before granting bail. For the first time it provides for punishment to the police in cases of wrongful arrests. It has safeguards against abuse of confession. If a chargesheet is not filed within a year, other relevant laws become applicable. Provisions of bail have become less stringent. Scope of appeal to High Court is also provided. In TADA, that was restricted to Supreme Court.

Why a separate law is necessary to combat terrorist activities? Civil societies that are normally not known to sacrifice civil liberties at any cost are today more than willing to sacrifice them on the altar of security. Societies that hated security profiling before September 11 today realise that civil liberties are not more important than life itself. The USA, the UK and Germany have enacted separate laws with much harsher clauses to deal with terrorism.

Will the new laws lead to more human rights violation? The fact is that not having this law will lead to greater loss of human lives. The greatest right is the right to live. What the terrorists want to take away is the very life of unsuspecting innocent people wanting to lead a peaceful life. This is a fight between those who ‘deny right to live to others’, and those who ‘defend their right to live’. Survival is the most important right of the people and to ensure that there is nothing that he cannot give up, civil liberties and rights included.

Is it wise to arm the police with awesome powers? Abuse of power is always a possibility and that applies to all in authorities. Almost all laws can be misused and the antidote for that is awarding stringent penalties for misuse. That has been adequately provided for in POTO. Even the existing laws have conferred tremendous powers in the policeman including the power to arrest and deprive personal liberties.

An essential and urgently required legislative measure cannot be delayed till we radically reform the police and make them not to succumb to the arrogance of power and temptations of corruption. Nevertheless, greater emphasis is laid today on police training for bringing radical transformation in the attitude of the policeman towards the common man. But to witness a sea change in his behaviour and for the public to perceive him to be a friend of the people will perhaps take generations. Can we delay legislative measures till then?

The Indian society will have to decide which of these two — ‘a bit of curtailed rights’ or ‘cut-short life’ — is preferable. We certainly can live with a bit of curtailed civil liberties and human rights. The USA, the UK and Germany have enacted laws with much harsher clauses to deal with terrorism. The new law does not guarantee end of terrorism but it will certainly impede motivation of terrorists to commit terror acts. The time has come for all political parties to take a clear stand against terrorism.

The fear of the journalists is that provisions in the new legislation will require them to disclose information. This is nothing new and they already exist under Section 39 of Cr.PC. The provision reads: “every person, aware of the Commission of or of the intention of any person to commit any offence…shall forthwith give information to the nearest Magistrate or police officer of such commission or intent”. Then, Section 187 of the Indian Penal Code makes it obligatory to “render or furnish assistance to any public servant in the execution of his public duty …of preventing the commission of an offence, or of suppressing a riot, or affray, or of apprehending a person charged with or guilty of an offence…”

The Indian media is by and large responsible, objective, free and fearless. A media that did not get gagged during emergency has no reason to fear some provisions of POTO. Even existing criminal laws have bestowed tremendous powers on the policeman including the power to arrest and deprive personal liberties. This government is fully committed to the freedom of the press and also acknowledges the fact that it is the press that creates a well-informed citizenry.

Another accusation hurled at the BJP is that the ordinance is brought in a hurry. Post September 11 and October 1 scenario demands that urgent measures are necessary. Other nations too have shown urgency in bringing new legislation to deal with terrorism. The US House of Representatives passed the anti-terrorism bill on October 24, 2001 with a vote of 357 to 66. Their Senate adopted the legislation the very next day with 98 to 1 votes. President Bush signed the legislation into law the following day. We have a UN Security Council mandate for adopting necessary legal instruments to fight terrorism urgently.

For six years, we have lived without an effective law to check terrorists. These six years have witnessed big spurt in terrorism and a bigger competence, coordination and precision in terrorist attacks. Lack of special powers creates a serious problem to tackle such terrorism. These days threat to big and militarily strong nations come not from ballistic missiles of big powers but from the suicide squads of small, impoverished and unpredictable regimes.

Hostility towards the NDA government as a way to prevent this necessary legislation is dangerous, if not cynical. The time has come to take a clear stand against terrorism. Adopting the attitude of the three wise monkeys — having eyes but not to see, having ears but not to hear and having tongue but not to speak — will not do.

The writer is the Union Minister of State for Home Affairs. The views expressed are his own.

SPECIAL FOCUS
Myanmar: The core of India’s ‘look east’ policy
M. L. Sondhi & Ashok Kapur

FOLLOWING its independence in 1948, Myanmar had a policy of neutralism and isolationism up to the 1980s but when the Myanmar military disallowed Sui Kyi to assume power following the 1990 elections, the country’s external stance changed. Shunned by the Western world and by India on grounds of human rights and democracy, China sensed Myanmar’s isolation and it filled the void by providing almost $ 2 billion worth of military goods and helped with road building and investments.

The international politics of isolating Yangoon enabled China to secure access to Myanmar’s naval facilities and its activities created the prospect that it could emerge as a gateway for the flow of China’s strategic power and political-economic influence into the Bay of Bengal as well as India’s northeast and Bangladesh.

The core of Indian policy during the 1980s and the 1990s remained fixated on the traditional China/Pakistan front where the flow of power and ideas was stalemated. While China was lulling Indians by talk about peaceful coexistence, she was quietly, proactively, building a new and a significant strategic gateway into the Bay of Bengal.

So the challenge to Indian power and prestige in the Indian Ocean area by China was threefold. The first, was to build Pakistan into a strategic gateway for the flow of Chinese influence into the Indian Ocean, the Middle East, Pakistan and Kashmir area. The second was to make Nepal into a buffer zone between India and China and to alter the internal complexion of Nepalese politics by influencing the politics of the Palace (the new king Gyanendra is pro-Chinese). In Chinese calculations, the Pakistan front is a major military and a diplomatic front against India, useful for bleeding India. The porous Nepal-India border could become an active military front against India. Developing Myanmar into a strategic gateway for China is the third leg of Beijing’s long range policy.

Chinese strategy may be described as one of ‘salami tactics’: cut a piece (i.e. make one move) at a time, watch the reaction, and if there is no response, make another move. Interpret silence as consent. The long range strategy and policy is masked by careful tactics. While it plays on Myanmar’s isolation, Beijing is careful enough to emphasise the history of Burmese nationalism and independence in the shadow of India and China. Still, China projects a special relationship with the Burmese. They are ‘brothers born of the same parents’. The subtle message is that Indians are not in the same category. So the strategic purpose is masked by a nice cultural pull.

Compared with the India-China border (a military and diplomatic stalemate), the India-Pakistan conflict system (a situation of manageable instability, with a prospect of a political breakthrough), and the Sino-Pakistani military supply relationship (where Chinese military and diplomatic injections to Pakistan can be countered by the Indian armed forces), the strategic Bay of Bengal-Myanmar-Bangladesh-Indian north eastern nexus is the critical area where new alignments will have an impact on Indian interests and regional and global geopolitics.

How? Internationally, if China’s presence consolidates in the naval sphere, Japan’s oil supply and commerce is threatened; this is why Japan closely follows Myanmar developments. The American interest is even bigger. It relates to the security of the sea-lanes from Japan to Israel through the Taiwan straits, South China seas, the Indonesian archipelago and the Indian Ocean including the Bay of Bengal and the Arabian Sea. Regionally, for India, the growth of China’s presence and prestige in any part of this nexus increases China’s attraction as a pole for tribal insurgencies, for the governments and peoples of Bangladesh, Nepal, Bhutan and Myanmar.

For India, this nexus is the critical centre of gravity in the 21st century, the point of constructive contact between American, Japanese, Australian, Indonesian, Myanmarese and Indian strategy. If this critical mass of Asian and international power is formed now it will not only undermine China’s strategic design in the area but also raise Indian authority in the north eastern part of the Indian Union and the Indian Ocean area. To achieve this, however, Indian practitioners need to form and project a new strategic culture and a new set of institutional arrangements which foster a political-military-affairs interface among Indian civilian and military professionals.

A new Indian strategic culture is needed which is not simply reactive in a crisis, but which indeed is pro-active before a crisis occurs, and seeks to deter hostile action and intent rather than to defend at a time and place of the enemy’s choosing. Also, there is a need to get outside the compartmentalised boxes of the various ministries and to seek interface and teamwork rather than turf protection. At present India’s administrative political culture favours compartmentalisation, turf protection and reactivity, and there are no medals for officials who are ahead of the curve.

Access to Myanmar’s 1930-km long coastline would enhance China’s access to the Indian Ocean, and create a wedge between South and Southeast Asia. If Chinese submarines can berth in Myanmar’s ports, if Chinese facilities can monitor Indian naval communications, and (this is a big if), if Chinese naval vessels can enter the Indian Ocean by establishing a sea-denial, sea-control capacity in the South China seas, China would become a menace to Indian naval communications. The Chinese navy has four targets: Japan, Taiwan, India and obviously the USA. Chinese military writings recognise the importance of sea power in dealing with regional threats — from Japan to India. American military writings too recognise this as a long term danger. The cracks should be filled now rather than let grow. There should be an awareness that if China establishes a clear edge in Myanmar as it has in Pakistan, and as it seeks in Nepal, India could lose its attractiveness to her regional neighbours. Prestige or attraction is a halo which revolves around the perception of power and the exercise of influence in practical circumstances. Its basis is psychological. It depends on ‘present power’, not on past experiences. In estimating Indian power and prestige in the Bay of Bengal-north eastern nexus or Southeast Asia, it matters somewhat that India is a military power and has economic strength or that it won in the 1971 war. Present power has to be established point by point as in a game of tennis. The last set is history, so the next point in Indian strategy should relate to the exertion of Indian influences in Myanmar.

Policy paradigms
(i) Drug trade: About 60 per cent of heroin used in the USA comes from the Golden Triangle in Southeast Asia which includes Myanmar production. Though the Taliban has apparently stopped poppy production in Afghanistan, the anti-drug war in South America continues.

(ii) The China factor: The target is the United Wa State army, which consists of about 5000 armed and motivated ethnic tribesmen in Shan state in Myanmar who have been given missiles by China. They help build roads that could give China land access to Myanmar ports and to the Indian Ocean for the first time through this area. Here the mix of concern about the drug trade, China’s arms supply to Myanmar and to ethnic tribals and concern with sea-lane security in the future is focusing the American mind on Myanmar. The issue is no longer about human rights and democracy, or it is less so. America is strengthening its alliance ties with Australia, Japan, South Korea and the ASEAN nations (its traditional allies) to engage China with a stronger diplomatic front.

(iii) The Russia factor: Now Russia is back in the Asian geo-political game and its policy includes a buildup of strategic ties with Yangoon. Moscow recently sold a dozen MIG 19s to modernise Myanmar’s decaying airforce which consists of Chinese MIG 21s and MIG 19s. Russia has tried since 1997 to build ties with Myanmar and it is now succeeding. A Myanmar presence is also meant to monitor Chinese activities in Southeast Asia. Moscow’s Myanmar contacts have been facilitated by Russia’s secret service and the cooperation, in addition to intelligence exchange, centres on anti-drugs policy, military cooperation and nuclear energy. For Myanmar, a Russia link is good insurance in the context of the China-India rivalry.

(iv) Indian northeast: India’s Myanmar policy must take into account the proximity of Indian north eastern states to the porous border with Myanmar. Insurgencies and separatist movements in the region involve about 50 groups. The issues involve illegal migration, tribal rivalries, fights over water and economic resources, alienation from Delhi and meddling by Chinese and Pakistani intelligence services. Several groups have found refuge in Myanmar because of a porous border and ethnic links across the border as well as sympathy for secessionist movements by the states in the region.

The future of Indian unity concerns not only Kashmir but more significantly it is inherent in the multifaceted complexity of the sources of instability in the northeast. The region has many players — the seven provinces in the Indian northeast with complex problems, three states in different state of alienation from Delhi (Bangladesh, Nepal and Bhutan), two with interventionist policies (China and Pakistan), one with an interventionist potential which is on a manageable scale (Myanmar).

There has to be an identification in the Indian mind about the constant connection between internal unity and democracy, between internal and international politics, and between economic and military security. There must also be an awareness that the Bay of Bengal and the associated region is the major front for India in the 21st century. The old fronts — Pakistan and the Himalayan area with China — are still important, but there the strategic imperative is to hold the line and seek a diplomatic breakthrough with Pakistan. (A China settlement is far away until Beijing has a worked through its current leaders who are haughty and subversive and play games with India).

The Bay of Bengal region is resource rich, and it is the point of contact between Indian, Chinese, American, Indonesian, Myanmarese, Bangladeshi, Australian and powers. Here lies a critical point of engagement and friction between many major and minor powers in the world today.

The Prime Minister needs to function as a coalition builder, a coalition statesman, who should take the lead with world leaders in building the Bay of Bengal area as a stable and developing community rather than as a centre of international tension. But the approach will need to be built on the principles of coercive diplomacy, not on empty peace slogans.

(v) Myanmar situation: The international debate about Myanmar has revolved around a single personality (Sui Kyi), and three issues: human rights, the lack of Burmese democracy, and the dominance of the military. However, the parameters of the debate should be revisited for a number of reasons.

Human rights and human security are important but so is national survival and national security. China, Pakistan, India, the USA all take a strategic view of human rights. The selective use of human rights — one standard for Kosovo and another for Rwanda — shows that human rights diplomacy is driven by considerations of national interests and not moral principles.

The other two issues — democracy and the role of the military — can also be reframed in the context of the USA’s attitude towards China and Pakistan. The USA has no problem in engaging China despite its authoritarianism and repressive policies and the lack of democracy as we understand the term. The reason, concrete economic and strategic interests are involved.

What India must do?: China has a significant presence in Myanmar but India has an opportunity to shape a policy that takes into account the core issues of the vitality of Burmese nationalism, Myanmar’s desire to build its India links in significant ways, and the danger of Chinese strategic ambitions particularly in the naval area. If Musharraf is a potential Indian strategic partner, so are members of the Burmese military. But to build a realistic and strong connection the following elements must be recognised and countered.

China has already provided $ 2 billion in military aid plus economic aid, factory construction and road building. China has considerable investments in Myanmar. Chinese immigration into Myanmar is extensive. However, Myanmar is not a Chinese satellite. A positive view of the thinking of the Burmese military is warranted. It is the core of Burmese nationalism and it has successfully met the challenge from Burmese communists. The military has also brought most dissident tribals inside the Burmese tent.

Russian MIG 29s will help modernise Myanmar’s forces and reduce dependence on China. The military is open to enhanced Indian trade, road building works.

The common denominator is that the Burmese military is not against India, it can act in a neutral and an independent way, and its China relationship will not be allowed to gain an anti-India character if India builds substantial ties with Myanmar. Myanmar turned to China because of the policy of isolating it in the late 1980s and this led to enhanced naval cooperation. Once it is no longer isolated the strength of Burmese nationalism could change its external relations.

If India wants to be taken seriously as an Asian force, it should actively pursue its various economic and strategic issues in the Bay of Bengal and Myanmar areas. They should become the intellectual and the geo-political core of India’s “look east” policy, and India needs to link the issue of unity in the northeast with the issue of stability and growth free from external hegemony in the area. To get its China policy right, Indians should recognise the difference between China and India.

India should make its sea power a tool of coercive diplomacy, deterrence and combat in war. The Andamans is already a major naval facility like Visakhapatnam and Mumbai. Make it a symbol of India’s commitment to develop the Bay of Bengal and the entire region as the new frontier of Indian strategy. In doing so, the look east policy would have a firm naval and intellectual anchor. Otherwise, if Chinese submarines freely enter the Bay of Bengal, this area will show as a big hole in the Indian strategy.

India needs to develop a consciousness about different diplomatic-military fronts in its strategic environment and the military missions in each case. In the Indo-Pakistan-Kashmir-China-Afghanistan front the nodal agencies are the Indian army and the airforce but in a war situation (1971 and Kargil) the navy has a responsibility to bottle up Karachi by deploying its missiles, and Indian tanks would have a role along the lines of Brasstacks exercise in Sind. (China and Pakistan are framing an answer by developing Gwador, and this too will require the application of Indian sea-power and knowledge about Chinese and Pakistani aims.) In the Himalayan area the Army and Airforce along with missile formations are the nodal services which are tasked to manage China’s strategic threat in a war situation.

In the Bay of Bengal, the Navy is the main nodal agency to deter and to fight if necessary. Indian political aims must, therefore, reflect the strategic requirements of a volatile region, where the language of geo-politics rather than peace and friendship makes sense. The language must acquire a strategic calculus.

This requires a sea change in the Indian mind — rejecting defence (fighting at a time and place of enemy choosing) and embracing deterrence where pro-activity is necessary. The pro-activity must be based, first, on Indian values and interests of which unity and nationalism are the core in Indian social and political thought; and secondly, on existing circumstances which favour coalition building between India, Myanmar, the USA and Japan. It needs a strong focus on the sea-lanes and on China.

Prof M. L. Sondhi is Co-Chairperson, Centre for the Study of National Security, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi and Prof Ashok Kapur is Chairman, Department of Political Science, Waterloo University, Canada.

KASHMIR DIARY
Car theft mafia
David Devadas

I had parked my car in a lane off the Boulevard along the Dal lake the other day. When I returned after a boat ride a couple of hours later, it was dark. The front doors of the car were both unlocked and the stereo missing. My Kashmir friends commisserated but told me I ought to be grateful that the car hadn’t be taken.

That’s when I began to discover just how deeply entrenched the car theft mafia is in Kashmir. The place has, amid the chaos of militancy, become the biggest market for stolen vehicles in this part of the world. There is plenty of unaccounted money floating around and some of it goes into the purchase of nearly new stolen cars, of course at a price far lower than the regular market. Some of the cars are stolen locally but far more, I’m told, find their way here from thieves in Delhi, Chandigarh and elsewhere in north India. Many police officers at the SHO and DSP level patronise the racket for a price. Some of them even use stolen vehicles themselves.

Some months ago, the Border Security Force got a list of stolen cars’ chassis numbers from their headquarters in Delhi. They were concerned because a few of the stolen cars are bought or obtained by militants and have even been used in suicide bombing attacks. In fact, around that time, a militant, Fayaz Afghani, was killed while driving a stolen vehicle. So, armed with the list from Delhi one day last February, the BSF stopped cars all over Srinagar and examined their chassis numbers. They found about 29 Santros, a score of Martuti Zens and more than 30 Maruti 800cc cars from their list. Among those driving one of the Santros was a rather senior police officer.

The BSF handed over the vehicles to the state police, some of whose officers can now be seen driving around in some of those vehicles — not one of which has yet been returned to persons outside the state from whom they might have been stolen.

These dealers have links in the transport office and, for a price, obtain not only a fresh registration number but also a No Objection Certificate for resale. The senior police officer caught with a stolen car had such a certificate and said he had had no idea the vehicle was stolen. All the papers were in order.

I’m told the car theft trade has an even murkier aspect. There are apparently people across India who willingly sell a brand new vehicle, duly insured, for as little as Rs 50,000 to agents in places like New Delhi. The driver who then undertakes to get the car to this state gets Rs 5,000 for the 600-km journey from Delhi to Jammu. It is then resold, either in Jammu or in the Kashmir valley. Those in the know say a Maruti Zen, which might cost Rs 3,20,000 in a regular showroom, goes for as little as Rs 1,50,000 in what is called the “do number (number two)” market here.
The person who originally purchased it claims the entire amount he paid as insurance, as long as he reports the loss within seven days of purchase, and gets to keep the Rs 50,000 the mafia paid — of course minus whatever he might use to bribe the insurance men.

In this context, the fire in the Regional Transport Office in Srinagar about three weeks ago sounds most suspicious. All the records of registration and of No Objection Certificates issued were burnt. Of course, no one will ever be able to establish whether it was deliberate arson or an accidental fire — just as, most often, no one who loses a car ever recovers it.

DELHI DURBAR

Mamata may finally make it to the Cabinet

YET another small but significant cabinet expansion seems to be on the cards. But it is unlikely to take place before the winter session of Parliament ends. Parliament session, starting from November 19, ends on December 20. This means that the angry young woman of Indian politics Mamata Bannerjee will have to cool her heels for well over a month.

The biggest problem confronting Bannerjee is the code of ethics informally promulgated by the ruling National Democratic Alliance (NDA) for reinduction of those allies who quit the alliance and then make a re-entry. Samata Party leader and Defence Minister George Fernandes had headed an internal committee of the NDA to thrash out a code of ethics for all allies and had come up with a recommendation that in case an ally walks out of the NDA fold and then makes a re-entry, its leaders should not be immediately inducted into the Union council of ministers. The Fernandes committee had suggested that a minimum “cooling off” period of four months should be enforced in such cases.

The next cabinet expansion, according to South Block grapevine, is expected shortly after December 20. Though nobody is certain of the date of expansion, it is sure that Bannerjee is not going to get back her old portfolio, Railways, for which she had specifically asked for last time. The present Railways Minister Nitish Kumar, who does not have any love lost for Bannerjee, has made it clear that he is not a political football and is not prepared to be kicked around. Perhaps Bannerjee may get Labour. Which means poor Sharad Yadav would have to be shifted yet again. Watch this space.

ELIGIBLE BACHELOR

Rahul Gandhi was in Delhi last week and the cricket match he and his brother-in-law Robert Vadra played with a team of Congress-covering journalists remained a topic of discussion in the Congress circles for quite a few days. For the journos who did not come for the match thinking that no senior leader would be there, it was a missed opportunity. “I would have certainly come had I known that Rahul was coming,” was the refrain of many a scribe. Rahul, who is working in the USA, impressed with the keenness he displayed on the field although he was playing cricket after almost ten years. Along with Congress president Sonia Gandhi his sister Priyanka, Rahul also attended the memorial service of eminent diplomat and administrator B. K. Nehru during his visit to Delhi. No questions were asked from the Congress leaders about any political undercurrent to Rahul’s visit as Mrs Sonia Gandhi had made it clear earlier that it was entirely the choice of her two children if they wished to join politics. Rahul’s presence on the cricket field, which was caught by a few photographers and TV channels, not only impressed his buddies in the two teams but quite a few TV watchers as well. The handsome, eligible bachelor set many a heart aflutter. Whether he joins politics in the near future or not, Rahul has created his own set of fans and followers.

NEW EQUATIONS

Politics makes strange bedfellows. It was only the other day that the BJP top brass was hurling abuses at the Tamil Nadu strongwoman J. Jayalalithaa for what she did to the Vajpayee Government in its second stint of 13 months. Overnight the equations have changed and the ruling party has become soft on the AIADMK. The reason: Jayalalithaa promptly supported the controversial Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance (POTO). Her nod in support of the ordinance was crucial as the BJP’s own ally, the DMK has not been forthcoming.

BJP insiders point out that the new equations have got something to do with the change in leadership in the party. With Jana Krishnamurthi becoming the party president, he has a better grip over the affairs in Tamil Nadu. Coinciding with his ascendancy, the party has appointed Sukumar Nambiar, an industrialist with close ties with the AIADMK, as the national treasurer. It is said that Nambiar was the link person between the BJP and the AIADMK during their brief honeymoon in New Delhi. The new found closeness between the friends-turned foes comes at a time when the DMK-BJP ties have not been very cosy. The DMK is unhappy that the Centre did not impose President’s rule to dismiss the Jayalalithaa Government after she abused her position to humuliate M. Karunanidhi. Will ‘Amma’ make a comeback to the capital is the question doing the rounds these days.

SOFT-SPOKEN PATIL

The Congress decision to make Mr Shivraj Patil its Deputy Leader in the Lok Sabha did not come as a surprise as he was seen a frontrunner for the post since the vacancy arose following the demise of Mr Madhavrao Scindia in a plane crash. Political circles believe that Mr Patil was chosen by Sonia Gandhi over other contenders including N. D. Tiwari, Priyaranjan Dasmunshi and Kamal Nath for the vast parliamentary experience he has had, first as a union minister and later as Lok Sabha Speaker.

Sauve and soft-spoken, Patil has been a frontline Congress leader in the Lok Sabha making learned contribution on various topics, specially those related to science and technology. Congress watchers would keenly observe how Patil would use his knowledge of parliamentary processes as an Opposition leader, where some aggression would be expected from him at times.

Contributed by Rajeev Sharma, Prashant Sood and T.V. Lakshminarayan.

PROFILE

Top specialist in biological weapons and defences
Harihar Swarup

BEFORE defecting to the USA, Dr Ken Alibek was the top biological weapon specialist in erstwhile Soviet Union. He is now an American citizen and busy developing broad respiratory resistance to biological weapons as anthrax scare grips the USA. A physician and a microbiologist, Dr. Alibek, while testifying before the law makers on Capitol Hill, had warned three years back against biological terrorism and called for concerted scientific and organisational preparations to fight the menace. Top guys in the USA, at that time, were more obsessed with missile defence systems and paid scant attention to the warning but now Dr. Alibek is much in demand.

“Use of antibiotics should be last resort”, he counsels his patients, apparently, alarmed at the mounting demand for Cipro pills as a treatment for anthrax afflicted persons. “If this craziness with Cipro continues, in about two years time we are going to have a large number of new bacteria with powerful resistance to antibiotics”, Dr. Alibek says, citing the example of his four children who avoid antibiotics, since they are far from endangered like the postal workers as they have close contact with terrorist mail. Asked in an interview how theoretically would a terrorist operative disperse a bio-agent in a large city as he does not have access to medium bombers or cruise missile technology, he replied the most probable situations include contamination of food in restaurants, infecting layer of air in metro-systems, shopping malls and administrative and commercial buildings.

He feels that the current level of preparedness to respond to an attack of weapons of mass destruction is rather low and suggests the need to start developing new therapeutic and preventive approaches on a broad spectrum protection. Vaccines need not necessarily be the most effective protection. Dr. Alibek has explained repeatedly in detail why vaccines are not answer for the protection of civilian population. In his words: “there are too many biological agents that could be used in biological weapons. It is impossible to imagine how to develop this number of vaccines, and moreover how to vaccinate the entire population against all these diseases. The best approach is to develop a broad spectrum medical defence. It is a long research and may take three to five years to complete the project but we are coming close to possible solutions. I am working in this area now and I hope I will succeed”.

Dr Alibek also advocates the need to develop a new handbook to train first responders in this area. It is possible to accumulate funding from different sources to have a contemporary and comprehensive manual for training first responders. He fears that former Soviet scientists, unpaid for many months and familiar with bio-weapon technology, may be working in the so-called “rogue states” like Iraq, Afghanistan, Sudan and some other countries of Africa.

Though in his early fifties, Dr. Alibek rose fast in his career. He spent much of his years in the Soviet army and was quickly promoted through the ranks of the “Biopreparat” (USSR’s institute for bio-war research) system during its rapid expansion in the 1980s. His desire as a youthful doctor was to practice medicine but his career was diverted to something, he never expected; he became a bio-weapon specialist. His original name was Kantjan Alibekov and he held the rank of first Deputy Chief of the secret Soviet germ warfare, known as “Biopreparat”, from 1988 to 1992. He then defected to the USA and has since spent his time briefing the American military, intelligence and medical officials about biological weapons and defences. He holds both MD and Phd degrees.

Dr Alibek has co-authored the best-selling book, “Biohazard” which thoroughly discusses the inside story of the development of bio-warfare agents in the former Soviet Union. The New York Times quoted a top U.S. government bio-war expert as saying that Dr. Alibek provided information that was critical to America’s understanding of the nuances of biological warfare.

The story of his life in USSR — his rise to power as a high-ranking officer , the moral interrogation to which he subjected himself and the institutions he helped create — are moving indeed. His autobiographical account reveals the personality of a complex man whose desire was to practice medicine, serve his country and achieve a measure of social and political authority but the fate willed something else for him. There was a time when he had to report to the KGB and military officials.

DIVERSITIES — DELHI LETTER

Chomsky speaks out his mind without fear
Humra Quraishi

MY meeting with Prof Noam Chomsky last weekend left me in a rather introspective mood. The new world order he outlined seemed so disturbing, and to top it all, we in the subcontinent seem to be falling prey to long term American designs. I know all of us cannot become Noam Chomskys but one aspect that we could try and learn from him is the quality of fearlessness. The man is not only critical of the policies of the USA (the country where he lives and works) but even of the Indian Government’s proposed Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance (POTO), India’s support to the USA in its attack against on Afghanistan and the policy vis-a-vis Kashmir.

I really don’t know what Defence Minister George Fernandes’ reactions were in the hour long meet he had with Chomsky later this week, for the man has the courage to speak his mind, without even one per cent fear. But even at the risk of sounding cliched, I must add here, that like all great men there is a strong woman behind him — his spouse Carol and the one person he seemed definitely scared of! I was amazed to witness a scene straight out of the spouse- scolding - the - husband series in the Ashoka hotel lounge where he had to give two interviews. As I was waiting for my turn, the first interview went beyond the set time and there was Carol storming in, rebuking the journalist for going much beyond the allotted time and then scolding Chomsky for skipping lunch. In fact, the man got so rattled that he ran towards the lift but then returned and smiled. Probably realising that she’d said it all in deep concern for it was nearing 5 pm and he hadn’t eaten since morning — addressing one lecture after another at the Delhi University.

DEBATE GOES ON

NDTV’s anchor Arnab Goswami’s book , “Combating Terrorism — The Legal Challenge” (Har Anand) was released here this week but the panel discussion that followed the launch seemed to overshadow it. For the focus shifted on POTO and the panelists — Union Law Minister Arun Jaitley, AICC spokesperson Jaipal Reddy, Rajya Sabha MP L.M.Singhvi, supercop K.P.S.Gill, CPM leader Sitaram Yechury, came up with their arguments, for and against. Obviously, space considerations wouldn’t allow me to go into details of their arguments but unfortunately none of them seemed to harp on the crucial whys — why more and more people are turning frustrated and are anti-establishment, whether in the North East or in the northern belt. And why hasn’t crime related to terrorist activities ebbed in Maharashtra where a similar Act is said to be already functioning.

ART SEMINAR

A week- long national seminar-cum-workshop (opening on November 12) organised by Delhi’s College of Art could provide some relief to the current tensions in the air. I think it’s for the very first time that senior students from the well known art colleges of the country have been invited to interact on different planes. At the lunch hosted by the Principal of College of Art, Prof M .Vijaymohan, (to introduce the concept and the proceedings of this seminar), the talks didn’t proceed beyond the most relaxed three-letter word — art. Really, after months one could sit and eat without politics being discussed in the backgound!

NO BETTER WAY!

Each time I see Dabur’s Vivek Burman walking in the Lodi Gardens his T-shirts definitely distract, or each one of them seem like advertisement for the company he runs. Either the company’s name is printed in big capitals or else names of the product range. And the man walks about so very confidently as other walkers get engrossed in trying to read whatever is embrossed across his shirts!