Story Teller...

A pretension called journalism

2012-01-11T23:38:00.002+05:30

We type in the facts. I speak to a party spokesperson and you take the byte from the opposition leader. And we file the story. The journalistic principle of getting the facts right and incorporating the views of all the parties concerned is duly followed- and the next day we share a by-line. This is what we do in the name of journalism.

We do human interest stories too. I take out a data of the number of atrocities committed on the Dalits in Uttar Pradesh-compare it with the crimes committed under the last government. I speak to the NHRC spokesperson, a couple of NGO and the state Home minister- and the next day I have a by-line. All in the name of journalism. One more achievement in hand.

Really? Is this what journalism is?

I remember the time when a story was filed from Kalahandi on the starvation death in Orissa and the next day when the paper was published, the then Prime minister of India rushed to the state with food and supplies. Remember the last time when such thing happened?

“Journalism hasn't remained the same”, Bela, the beautiful German shepherd at my home tells me. And I tend to agree with her most of the time.

I have not been educated to be a journalist. I did not attend a school of journalism. My former girl friend did and so did many of my friends. And they tell me that they are told that are the doyen of justice for the oppressed class of the society. They are told that once they will pass out they will be writing stories to paint the story of the poor and the less privileged.

But as the classroom changes to newsroom-the lust to change what we see around us as wrong , forget the whole world, is strangulated once the glamour of media touches our ‘not-so-gullible’ mind.

How many P.Sainath you know of ?Only one if my memory serves me right. Are not there people who are writing at the district levels? Speaking for the fews? There are. But who gives a damn to them.

The ‘journalists’ continue to tell themselves and boast to the others that they are doing what a journalist should do. But then a two minute introspection is all that is required to clear the mist of misunderstanding that we all so proudly express.

Many of us are living under the false pretence that we are doing a service to the society.

Come to think of it- most of us want to join a news channel so we become an overnight celebrity. Those who foray into the print have other things in mind, a position of Bureau chief, among others. A post that brings accessibility to minister, industrialist and the benefits associated.

Like the politicians we love to hate and the bureaucrats we so readily shift the blame to, we too stand with them and most of the time we love to be in their company. The only difference is that there is someone ( who else but the patrakar) who points finger towards a Neta and a Lalbati wala- but who scrutinizes a Jhola wala?

------------------------------------------------

To continue with the status quo is easy: to neglect thoughts of upholding the journalistic principle as being a juvenile thought of mind much more easier. The sad part is that there is no hard choice to choose from.

Journalist for many was never about journalism and for those whom it is; they simply are outnumbered.

For those who love getting married

2011-12-12T01:21:00.004+05:30

Times have suddenly becomes strange as many friends of mine who were just months ago trying to fall in love with different girls at the same time are now being attracted towards falling into the bliss of marriage, just like a colorful,confident,tiny insect falls into waiting arms of a beautiful Venus fly trap pant.

In the span of less than 8 months we (me and my friends) have lost many bachelors who have very bravely, smilingly embraced the culmination of their youthful days.

The poignancy of the whole situation becomes more visible when someone from among is sitting on the stage, exchanging smiles with the not so curious onlookers who have deliberately assembled in the marriage venue to celebrate the imposing of tons of responsibility and the taking away of a much rejoiced freedom of a young man.

Many friends of mine have already taken this walk which ends with they being transported to the other world. A world where suddenly the expectations of acting in a more mature way increases. A guy who just few weeks back would become 'high as a sky' in a pub and do all kinds of eyeball grabbing activity, is forced to assume the serenity of Buddha once he gets married. And on top of it he dismisses the change in his behaviour with an embarrassing grin. "Yaar Shaadi ho gayee hai ab".

The demise of a young restless wandering soul comes quickly and swiftly.

And this is not a stray incident. It has been happening since ages but one doesn’t realize the enormity of the whole issue until someone who is close starts preparing for marriage.

And make no mistake, this is equally true for both love and arrange marriage.

The boy in some cases and his parents in most of the cases decide that the time has come when the boy should turn into a 'man'. And the next thing that you hear is music coming from a Shahnai- the long bugles that reminds you "Boss you are getting married", just in case you have still not understood the reason for the sudden increase of Hullaballoo near you.

One fine morning you cell phone rings and you realize that it’s your Lucknow wale "Mama' calling. “Abhee tak soey huey ho. Aisa kaise chalega, shaadi honey waali hai and you are still continuing with your 'bad' habits.”

Now who can make the Mamaji realize that this habit has been always there and will be there? Just because of an immediate marriage one cannot reasonably expect the sleeping pattern to change.

And the indications of the looming handmade self invited ‘disaster’ comes from different quarters.

You step out of the house and a smiling maid greets you and confides to her friend “Inhi bhaiya ki shaadi hai agle mahine". Your chest swells with pride and you give her an arrogantly timid smile and walk away. Only to realize later that you have never seen the maid before. Then you are struck by a more important realization- Why was she smiling? Was it a smile that comes with pity? Or it was a smile that a butcher gives to a goat who is going to meet its surreal ending.

But then the bombardment of SMS congratulating you on your new endeavour, the attention that is showered by the so called 'friends' who had promised to be with you in bad times and the attentiveness of the tailor who measures your body for that perfect wedding suit, makes you forget the ‘tragic’ end that is still some days away.

The white Ghodee ( The one with a twitching tail who will take the groom to the final alter, a place of no return), the intoxicated high on Govinda Baraat and the colourfully decorated guests all play their role in keeping you distracted from realizing what you are going to lose.

You are going to lose what someone like Mel Gibson had shouted out loud when he was put to death in the movie Brave heart-- FREEDOMMMM!!!!!!! But obviously no one thinks about Brave heart during these times for the mind is making future plans, wandering across ocean and drawing caricatures in the sand of a beach in Maldives or rowing a boat in the canals of Venice.

Many do realize this colossal lose when they still have time and they try to savour those very last moments of their independent existence with a conglomeration called Bachelors party, which interestingly and ironically celebrates the very fact that a bachelor is going to lose away his status of being a bachelor.

How discouraging it can get more? But then one can take heart from the fact that this travel into the other word is rather inevitable, something which everyone however mighty will undertake at one point or the other, including yours truly.

I am sure the bride too goes through her own pre-marriage 'happiness' but to comment on that would be like writing on LOIKNSOAA- which frankly put is something that I do not have much expertise on and neither does the god, Google.

-----To marriages made in heaven and to those who gave it a human touch on earth.

How they define youths in Uttar Pradesh

2011-11-23T01:33:00.003+05:30

The impending Uttar Pradesh State Assembly elections have livened up the otherwise monotonous bureau room of newspaper around Delhi. When you have election in a state where there is a presence of political heavy weights like Mayawati, Mulayam Singh Yadav, Varun Gandhi, Digvijay Singh and him-who-cannot-be-named then one can be assured of interesting times ahead.

Every political party in Uttar Pradesh is trying to prove to the other that they are really promoting the Youths by way of giving them more representation.

While doing a story on this very issue I came across some very exciting narrations and intriguing individuals.

A Member of Parliament, involved in the selection of candidates very proudly told me that his party has given tickets to seventy odd youths for the upcoming UP state election.

I was impressed . After all seventy is a seize-able number when you consider that the total seat in the state assembly in 403. Logically my next question was that was the profile of these young candidates.

The reply that I got was something that I had never expected.

“We have given tickets to more than 50 candidates who are around 40 years of age. If you take 50 as the upper age, then we have more than 70 candidates who are contesting the elections on our party ticket.

The party in question was Samajwadi party, who for some inexplicable reason believes that a Fourty year person is a young candidate. I didn’t question him as to what was his criteria for selecting these 'young' candidates for I was not sure whether I would be able to comprehend his reply.

Moving ahead, I spoke to a young member of parliament of a national party from Uttar Pradesh on the same issue and he came out as someone who was more in touch with the reality.

He told me that the talk of youth being given more representation is just a lip service. “ Abhee bhee wohee 75-80 saal ke bujurg ticket distribution kar rahe hain,” he rued.

When I asked him about a recent statement of a senior leader of his party in which he had said that they were focusing on the youth, the parliamentarian replied that the said leader was in a way saying the truth as his 35 year old son was being given the party ticket.

I too could do nothing but nod my head in agreement. After all being a son of a politician doesn’t rob your opportunity to claim of being a youth.

This poet-parliamentarian though was quick to admit that this is the last time that they ‘Oldies‘ will be running the show for he has been assured by the party president that when the next assembly elections comes, he will be over seeing the whole election process.

As we ended our conversation, I thought of telling him that the ‘next’ election is still more than five years away. But then I realized that politics strives on hope and who was I to raise a question mark on his hopes.

This was not the end, as a more classic case of how the word ‘Youth’ is being misused in Uttar Pradesh was in store for me.

If you remember some days back a person was beaten by one of our honourable Union Ministers at an election rally in Uttar Pradesh in Phulphur after he displayed black flags to him-who-cannot-be-named.

This guy Abhishek Yadav who is a student of Allahabad University is not more than 24 years old. He told me that he too was a contender for an assembly ticket from one of the assembly constituencies of Phulpur parliamentary seat in Allahabad but was denied because a more ‘mature’ candidate was available ( Neither he clarified nor I asked him that how can a 24 year old possibly and legally contest election. But then maybe in UP anything is possible).

I couldn’t help but notice the dejection and sarcasm in his voice as he said that his party has done a good job for they have given opportunity to the ‘youth’.

Though he didn’t say it explicitly but he made it very clear that he was not happy with his party’s definition of youth which is someone who has seen 40 years of life and is still young.

Every party be it the Congress,BJP or the SP has its own criteria for deciding who a youth is. For some it is someone who is more than Fourty years old and for some it is someone who is a political inheritor.

Leaders are not born but made; but strangely the situation in our country has always been the opposite.

For all of us.

For Keenan & Reuben

2011-11-03T23:16:00.007+05:30

Will the brutal killing of two guys in Mumbai make us stand up and realize that how weak and indifferent we have become to things that is happening around us?

Keenan Santos and Reuben Fernandes, the two boys were stabbed to death because they reacted in a way that the majority of us would not.

Those who killed them have been arrested and I am sure the law, because of the relentless media pressure will surely take its due-course and punish them.

But what about the hundred others who acted deaf and blind when they were being stabbed?

Look around. On the streets we walk, on the bus we travel or to the railway station that we go. Time present us with innumerable instance where one or the other 'wrong' is taking place and even after having a realization that a wrong is happening we act as if nothing is happening.

One needs not to be 'Uber righteous' to realize what wrong is happening around. Some wrongs are always wrong whatever our 'perception' or our 'upbringing', unless we are 'honest' hypocrites.

A woman while travelling in the Delhi Metro pleads to a man asking him to vacate the seat that is reserved for ladies. But nothing happens. Absolutely nothing. Her requests are ignored and her voice is also neglected by the other passengers who are travelling in the same coach. Try to remember how many times we have come across such situation. And more importantly what have we done in such a situation. Did we really 'do' something?

Maybe we can shift the blame to our mind,which has made us a habitual 'ignorer'; for we have accepted these incidences as a normal natural phenomenon, something that happens just like the frisking by the CISF guy and the swapping of the metro card at the entrance

We ignore the slap a poor rickshaw puller receives from a police constable just because he is waiting for passengers at no-parking zone. We look the other way when a girl is being undressed by the stares of the 'men' while she is waiting for bus. And so on. Think of one and suddenly you will realize that you can remember hundreds.

When these two boys in Mumbai were being assaulted in full public view no one stepped in to defend them or ask the other people around them to interfere.

Those who are questioning the people of Mumbai, should first ask themselves whether have they ever raised their voice when similar incident occurred in front of their eyes?

About four months back a man in Coiambatore was stabbed to death on a busy traffic square. His assailants stabbed him, smashed his head with a stone,stomped on life less body and walked away. All this happened when the traffic light was red and numerous bikes and cars were waiting. No one did anything, as all were waiting for the light to go green. This all was recorded on the traffic CCTV camera.

That man's death too was viewed by hundred eyes, just like in Mumbai.

In 2001, I along with my school mates was involved in a road accident when our car was hit head-on by a truck.

We laid unconsciousness on a busy national highway and no one was stopping to help us. My friend, who was driving the car was still stuck in the car and had slipped into coma.

We were in that situation for for more than 15 minutes and people and cars were just maneuvering around us and moving ahead. Then a gentleman who was coming from the opposite side on a motorbike stopped. He waved at a car and shifted my friend who was seriously injured into that car.

And soon enough we had many helping hands.In less than five minutes we were on our way to different hospitals.

The point is that it only takes one voice of defiance, encouragement and help that makes the difference.

Those two boys who are now sleeping in peace have probably jolted us enough to introspect into what we have turned into. Are we alive? or we are already dead.

For all of us.

How will the BJP use Modi

2011-09-20T20:42:00.004+05:30

The three day Sadhbhavna fast under taken by the Gujarat CM, Narendra Modi has finally managed to push him on to the national stage from where he will look to play a more pan-India role.

The decision of Modi to abstain from food for three days to promote unity in the state came at a time when the octogenarian and the BJP PM in waiting since time immemorial, LK Advani had just announced his decision to go on an all India Rath yatra to highlight corruption in the country .

This much televised and massively twitterized fast of Modi has managed to take the away the hype and the buzz that the announcement of Advani had generated.

Political commentators feel that the decision of RSS to support Modis fast rather than Advanis yatra has made it clear as to how much clout does Modi enjoys in the RSS circles.

Lk Advani who was the face of the BJP in the last general election failed miserably in countering Rahul Gandhi and Sonia Gandhi. And it is unlikely that the BJP will be repeating the same mistake. The BJP needs to bring Modi to the national screen, because like Rahul Gandhi, Modi too has a charisma which attracts either love or hatred but it becomes very hard to ignore him completely.

Ever since Modi, riding on his image of a pro-development leader won the assembly election in Gujarat for the second time in row, the call for giving him a larger role has increased.

One of the reason for this is the fact that Gujarat has set an impressive example of how good governance can usher in prosperity spanning all religion.

Its been nine years since the riots took place but Modi is yet to accept that it was a failure on the part of his government to stop the riots and asked for forgiveness, as alleged by many inside and outside Gujarat who see him as a fundamentalist monster.

Similarly his criticizers are also yet to accept the fact that governance and development has considerably healed the wounds of 2002.

The predicament with Modi is that he is not sure as to how things will unfold if he accepts that he failed in his duty when Gujarat burnt in 2002, as alleged by his detractors,who are quite sizable in number and constitute social activists,journalists and jurists apart from the ubiquitous politicians.

If he accepts his act of turning a blind eye to the riots then the opposition party will pounce on him and say that he is a Hitler who was trying to be a Gandhi all these years. Secondly and more importantly, Modi would not have forgotten as to what happened to LK Advani when he praised Jinnah in Pakistan.

But if Modi aspires to don a bigger role he will have to walk the difficult path and accept that things would have been different if he would have acted in a way that was expected from the Chief Minister of the state.

Modi’s image in public is that of someone who will walk the talk, someone who is not afraid to take the hard decisions and someone who will stick his neck out in the times of crisis rather than being bowed down by it. If he accepts his shortcomings during 2002, this image of his will grow more brighter and larger and prove more beneficial in the long run.

But he will have to be careful in choosing his partners who he wants to take along in the journey to 2014.

Even though 2014 is still three years away, yet it seems difficult to believe that the NDA will be able to arrive on a consensus candidate for a PM by then. Specially when one we take the views of JD(U), a critical ally of NDA into account.

The JD(U) has categorically said that they are against projecting Narendra Modi as the Prime ministerial candidate.

Nitish Kumar, the Bihar chief minister, on any given day is a more ‘Politically’ acceptable PM because of his image of being a ‘Moderate’. His role in pulling Bihar from the nadir to a much better position now is well known and if it comes to governance mark- sheet he can easily say that he has done much more than what Modi has done, simply because Bihar was in a much more weaker position as compared to Gujarat when Nitish kumar took over as the CM.

The BJP and the JD(U) are running a coalition government in Bihar and even though the BJP performed stupendously in the previous assembly elections, it will be a bit too hard for the saffron party to repeat the same magic in the general elections if it decides to go alone.

The senior BJP party leaders have to realize that many of their party candidates won the election in Bihar because people wanted to see Nitish Kumar again. Even Muslim dominated areas saw the victory of BJP candidates because the electorates were keen on giving Nitish a second inning and not because they wanted the Lotus to bloom.

The fact that Narendra Modi has been cozying up with Raj Thackeray and his MNS will definitely alienate the BJP vote bank in the state of Bihar,Jharkhand and UP. More so if the RJD,SP,BSP and the Congress decides to politicize this, which they will surely do.

The BJP may be able to weaken Shiv Sena in Maharastra by forming an alliance with the MNS but to think that the electorates in the North India state will ignore this and forget the hooliganism that MNS resorted to on ground of regionalism would be expecting too much.

Though its been three years since Raj Thackeray launched his anti-north Indian tirade yet those senseless violence are still fresh in the minds of the people and seeing Modi and Thackeray hugging each other is sure to reopen the old wounds.

The BJP will have to act smartly in deciding as to how much risk it can expose itself to by going with the MNS and thereby alienating the considerable population of North Indians in Maharashtra itself and the other states of North India. But how to deal with Raj Thackrey issue is a minor headache.

The bigger issue for them right now is how to use the Modi-mania. Perhaps, the answer to this question is something that only the time will tell.

For all of us.

Least Shehla becomes another Sarla

2011-09-11T21:24:00.002+05:30

The broad day light murder of Shehla Masood in Bhopal has many known andnumerous hidden facades that probably will be uncovered layer by layer as theinvestigation in the case progresses.

Ms.Masood was shot dead in front of her home at point blank range on 16^thAugust while she was about to drive away to a protest march organized by her insupport of Anna Hazare’s anti- corruption movement.

The fact that she was an active RTI ‘activist’ has attracted even morespotlight to the otherwise peaceful and calm city of Bhopal.

According to local reporters, there was some wisp of embezzlement thatMasood had discovered relating to purchasing of large acres of land by the MPtourism for developing resort near Madai in Hoshangabad district. This resortwas being developed in a partnership between local BJP leaders, a member of theerstwhile Royal family from Chhattisgarh and a prominent builder from Bhopalwho enjoys a clout that even out-matches that of the Chief minister himself.

Ever since the BJP has come into power in the state for the second timeunder Shivraj Singh Chauhan, allegations of large scale corruption has surfacedtime and again. Speculations that Masood penchant for using RTI to expose the unholy nexus between property-politicians led to her untimely death, are doing the round.

In an interview with a national magazine sometimes back, Masood had madeno secret of the fact that she was cultivating enemies both in the executiveand the legislature because of the trouble they were facing because of her RTIqueries.

She had taken the name of the present CM and judges of MP high court andaccused them of indulging in corruption. She had also accused BJP Rajya SabhaMP fom Madhya Pradesh, Anil Dave of patronizing corrupt police officers.

But the fact that she was a close acquaintance to another MP of the sameparty, Tarun Vijay, something which Tarun Vijay has himself accepted has giventhe whole incident a new meaning.

Masood, through her RTI applications was ‘pestering’ Dave by accessing factsabout his business activities. She had filed an RTI asking for details aboutNarmada Samagraha, an NGO backed by the BJP Rajya Sabha MP. She also had filed applicationswith the Rajya Sabha Secretariat asking for details about BJP MPs from MadhyaPradesh.

But the twist in the tale is that Masoodherself was organising events for the RSS backed Shyama Prasad Mukherjee Trust. And it has become hard for Tarun Vijay, thehonorary Director of the said trust to deny the fact that he was aware of thefact that Masood was filing RTIs against his own party members.

Was she filing these RTIs on behest of Tarun Vijay is something that none of the BJP members have either accepted or denied.

Call records accessed by the investigatingagencies have proved that the two used to talk for hours. Infact they hadtalked for more than half an hour, a day before she was shot dead.

Shockingly this combination of politics andmurder is not new to this state. In February 1997, Sarla Mishra, a youth Congress worker diedunder mysterious circumstances due to burn injuries , allegedly for her liaisonwith a senior colleagues. And still 14 years later, there has been no answer tothe question that who killed her.

Whether Masood was killed her RTIs or forsomething is that time will perhaps tell. Was she being used as a tool tosettle political scores or had she become too ‘active’ for her mentors will hopefullycome out in the open soon.

But what no one can deny is the fact is theinvolvement of the BJP leaders in the whole unfortunate incident.

I had met Ms.Mishra when I was in class 8^th as she had cometo my home along-with her colleagues and many years later I had the chance ofgetting acquainted to Ms.Masood when she had commented on my article which was carriedout by a news-site.

I hope that the investigation into Masood’s death doesn’t turn into an unsolvedmystery, just like it happened fourteen years ago.

For all of us.

A CVC who never applied for the post : Pradeep Kumar

2011-09-03T10:46:00.005+05:30

Pradeep Kumar, the newly appointed Central Vigilance Commissioner, who was the Defense secretary earlier, had not applied for the job of CVC. His name was neither sponsored, nor nominated by any authority, according to information received under the Right to Information Act from the Union ministry of Personnel and Training.

Interestingly he is not the only one who was singled out for this graceful act. Two other candidates, Naresh Dayal, former health secretary and RP Agarwal, former secretary, Higher education also did not apply for the post. Their names were, however, were included in the panel of names considered by the committee for the post of CVC.

It’s worthwhile to mention that the Union personnel and training Secretary, Ms. Alka Sirohi, in a circular on April 5, 2011 had sought names of the persons for consideration for appointment as CVC. This was necessitated after the Supreme Court had quashed the appointment of P J Thomas, the then CVC because of his involvement in the Palmolein import case.

The circular had quoted the judgement of the Supreme Court on March 3,2011 in writ petitions no 348 and 355 and had called for names of suitable persons which should be forwarded with notes containing reasons why in the opinion of the forwarding/sponsoring authority the persons is considered suitable for appointment as CVC.

But the names of Pradeep Kumar and some others were considered even without any forwarding or sponsoring.

While some of the applicants applied by self, the name of many others were forwarded by their respective departmental heads and some names were also nominated by the state government.

One name was recommended by the Vice-President secretariat too. According to the list, there were 40 candidates in all.

Some names came with a high profile sponsorship including support from Union ministers. Name of Vijay Sharma, a 1974 batch IAS was recommended by P L Punia, chairman of National Commission of Scheduled Castes. Dr Leo Rebello, a social worker was recommended by the Vice-President's Secretariat.

Direct applications from group A officers without nominations or vigilance clearance were received from P N Vittal Das,IRS and Chander Shekhar IPS.

The list included secretaries of various union ministries. Prabhat Kumar Chaturvedi, Secretary, labour and employment name was sponsored by the Union minister for labour, Satyanarayan Dash, secretary in department of heavy industries name was received from the Cabinet secretariat.

Noor Mohammad, IAS (UP,1977), Sudhir Kumar,IAS ( Karnataka,1977), Anil Bhushan Prasad,IAS(Bihar1976),Brahamn Dutt ,IAS(Karnataka 1973) ,KS Ramasubham, IAS(West Bengal 1976) and Sujit Banerjee, Secretary ,National Authority on chemicals weapons conventions had sent their applications for the post on their own.

Bijay Chatterjee, Secretary of department of chemicals and petro-chemicals, APVN Sharma, Secretary, Shipping applied through the Minister of Shippin. While C Balakrishnan, secretary of Coal applied through the Coal Minister.

Names of Sundaram Krishna and Shekhar Agarwal were sent by the department of Defence while S Krishnan applied through the department of Fertiliser.

The former union home secretary, G K Pillai and the present Chief Secretary of Bihar, Anup Mukherjee, too had applied for the post and had sent their applications through secretary, Border management.

B K Sinha, Secretary in the rural development sent his applications through secretary of Youth Affairs department.

Ms. K Sujatha Rao, sent her papers through the ministry of health and family welfare. Ms. Usha Mathur, Secretary of Parliamentary affairs got her application forwarded by the minister of her department.

V K Bhashin, Secretary of legislative department's application was forwarded by the minister of law and justice .Ms Rekha Gupta, deputy controller and auditor general's application was recommended by the department of expenditure,

Anupam Kulshehtra, deputy CG too applied through his department like his another colleague Sunil Verma, another deputy CAG.

Ms Vijaylakshmi Gupta, Secretary in defence finance got her papers forwarded by the ministry of defence.

S M Jharwal, chairman of National Pharmaceutical Pricing Authority was also an applicant for the post and his name was forwarded by the department of economic affairs.

AP Mishra, member of Railway Board applied through the chairman of the Board. Ajay Chowdhury, who is the founder of HCL too had applied through the secretary in department of information technology, but later withdrew his application.

Name of Pancham Lal, principal secretary of Bihar was recommended by the Bihar chief minister, Nitish Kumar.

But, in case of Pradeep Kumar, R P Agarwal and Naresh Dayal, there was no application, according to the information received under RTI. Their names were found as annexure to the proceedings of the committee for making recommendations for appointment of CVC, the information said.

Maybe if asked that how Mr.Pradeep Kumar was selected even though he had never applied for the post, the government may reply that the forty odd applications received for the said post from senior IAS officers were not considered eligible enough for the top post.

But then that argument will raise questions on the whole process of calling for applications and also questions the value of the Ministries that sponsored those candidates who eventually were not selected even though they were recommended in comparison to someone who did not apply nor was recommended.

Without casting any questions on the integrity of any person, one cannot help but feel that political consideration and the impression of how much a bureaucrat is close to the political leader does play a part in such a high post appointment.

For all of us.

Is the Booker prize winner right this time?

2011-08-31T15:39:00.004+05:30

Yesterday I was reading excerpt of what Arundhati Roy spoke on a talk show where she was elaborating on her article that was published in the Hindu in which she had severely criticised Anna Hazare for holding the parliament to ransom during the recent anti-corruption activism at Ram Lila ground.

I had first met her as a curious teenager in Bhopal at the British library in somewhere 2001-02 when she was there to promote her book.

And then as I became a part of a law school my gray cells started working and with time I became critical of her views. The prime reason for this was her views on Kashmir and on naxalism.

Till yesterday I have never been impressed by her arguments and writings.

And I would not have probably been writing this if I would not have read the transcripts of what she said on the talk show yesterday.

One thing that caught my mind was her assertion that two very key members of Anna Hazare movement, Arvind Kejriwal and Manish Sisodia had received 400000 pounds from the Ford foundation. She then goes on to say that NGOs run by Arvind Kejriwal and Manish Sisodia are indirectly funded by the World Bank.

Now if this came from someone else and was directed against Arundhati Roy we would have quickly pounced on her and termed as a stooge of the world bank.

But since this was said by her, majority of us including me have taken it as one of the many barbs of a "pseudo-intellect' mind.

But this time she has raised logical objections which need to be addressed.

The Bretton woods twins , World bank and the IMF are no saints in their own right. Even though they are helping out stagnating economies develop and developing economies move up the ladder, the accusation of they being a face and hand of the West particularly USA and Britain is not new.

In the era of globalization, they act as a financial arm of the west which comes before the military might when the situation is ripe for arm twisting.

Critics would contend that there are thousands of NGOs who are surviving on the grants of World Bank. That is not an issue.

The issue is whether, the IAC team is in some way playing in the hands of these institutions. It will be a bit hard to think otherwise, especially when one takes into account the huge grant that comes bundled when you are dealing with the World bank and like.

The role that the NGOs plays, especially in a developing country like ours is unimaginable. The stakes that they have to deal in India is enormous, so it is but natural that like any other logical business model they too will seek ways to protect and multiply their assets.

In this context the fact that the Janlokpal bill covers only government funded NGOs and exclude privately funded NGOs assumes a serious and interesting proposition.

IAC supporters say that bringing in all the NGOs under Lokpal will lead to arm twisting of the NGOs by the government. Isn’t that a silly argument?

If we go by that logic then the same should apply to the executives too. Won't their arm be twisted?

Doesn't the Janlokpal bill calls for a strict redressal method to sort out any illegal 'arm twisting’? Since it does, then naturally the NGOs who will be covered under the Janlokpal too can use the same option to seek redressal.

It’s no secret that NGOs that number in lakhs are a safe haven for embezzling funds. There are thousands of NGOS that exist on paper only and act as a bank account for many private and government officials. And not all of them seek government funds.

What Roy has said this time needs to be looked at seriously. Even a broken clock is correct twice a day. Arundhati Roy, I concur with you. Only this time.

For all of us.

To the critics and to the supporters of Anna

2011-08-21T18:05:00.013+05:30

I,along with thousands of others, was present at India gate in Delhi on 17^th August as we heeded the call of Anna Hazare and marched to Jantar mantar sweating under the merciless sun to show solidarity with fight against corruption and discontent with the leaders.

We were the same people who had elected these very parliamentarians and now we were marching to express our resentment against them. There were Congress supporters and there were the Saffron sympathizers and all were walking in unison.

There were youths, small children and aged people. And almost all of them had one thing in common; no one was there for Rs.150 or a piece of samosa as it generally happens in a political rally. Nor they belonged to a particular stratum of the society or caste and class.

Equally true was that majority of them who were present there were not aware of the nuances of the Jan Lok pal bill. The only underlying sentiment that had brought them together was the common feeling of helplessness against Corruption. Period.

If it was not Anna Hazare and if it was Abdul Kalam, the former Indian president, then too people would have come out in the same numbers. It’s not about the individual as much it’s for the cause.

Anna Hazare in this 'movement' which is an expression of sentiments that resonates across crores of hearts, has emerged as someone whom the common mass can look up to in their struggle against corruption, a struggle that was always there in their life, but was not vocal enough, as it has become now under Hazare.

Cynics, spokespersons etc have said that team Anna, as they prefer to call them, have no mandate to present a bill on the part of the common mass. The mandate lies with the parliamentarians who are sitting in the parliament to represent the mass who have elected them.

It should be well understood that this is not for the first time that a bill relating to corruption has been presented in the parliament. It has been presented ten times since 1968 when it was introduced by Shanti Bhushan but for reasons different, it was never passed.

Corruption has been a part of this country ever since time immemorial. The only new change that it has undergone is that it has started coming out more in the open. The common Indian had to face corruption even before India became a market economy post 1990 and he has to face corruption even now.

Corruption has become a part of life. The other day I was interacting with a senior political functionary of a national party at his office. He told me that his party was very severe against corruption and never tolerates corruption of any form.

I being a resident of a state where his party is in power, tried too clear away his genuine misconceptions and told him a couple of names of senior bureaucrats and ministers who demanded bribe for their official work as if it was part of their salary. And I told him that I am not the only one who is privy to this fact. It’s a well known secret.

This gentleman smiled and replied. “You cannot expect every politicians and bureaucrats to be clean. There is always someone who is a cheat'.

He conveyed to me that corruption was acceptable, unless and until it doesn’t assume gigantic proportion.

And that pretty well sums up the whole political mood that flows as an undercurrent in support of corruption.

Coming back to Anna Hazare, or rather more towards his critics who feel that team Anna is converting itself into an extra-constitutional monster. They need to understand that Hazare is not drawing his strength from any political ideology. He is being supported by the mass because he is trying to remove the biggest challenge to their well being, Corruption.

And however deeply, this critics may feel, the public is not a fool. It is a bit hard for their intellect conditioned mind to digest, but that’s the truth. The day the public realizes that Anna Hazare and his team is veering of the path and losing their objectivity, they will stop supporting him.

If Anna Hazare is moved out of the whole picture, no amount of legal expertise of the Bhushans, the heroics of Ms.Kiran Bedi or the calmness of Mr.Arvind Kejriwal will be able to cajole the mass to come out on street.

The mass relates to Anna in a way they use to relate to Gandhi. And he can never become a hundred headed monsters who enjoys the love of the mass and whose backbone is the mass.

The fast unto death is not blackmail as its being made out. It’s the last resort. Before resorting to this, The IAC petitioned the MPs, wrote to the PM, and brought out Op-ed for bringing a strong Jan lok pall bill. But since Anna at that time was not the Anna he is now, no one bothered to listen to him.

The Jan lok pal bill is on the public domain and so is the version of the government. And it doesn't require a scientific mind to understand which of the two will be more effective in curbing corruption.

Surely better logical-rational sense did not prevail upon the government when it drafted a Lokpal bill that excludes all other public servants except group A, a bill that says that any inquiry into a complaint against Lokpal will be done by the Lokpal itself, a bill that offers no protection to the whistle blowers and a bill that only calls for looking into ‘higher-level’ corruption.

The reasoning behind Lokpal

The attempt by the government to present such a weak bill is a slap on the face of the public sentiments. Especially when one considers the fact that we have so notable lawyers in the cabinet and the unearthing of scams that have caused colossal lose to the national exchequer.

As for whether the PM should be under the Lokpal, I personally believe that Anna Hazare should consider keeping the PM out of the purview of this bill until he is the PM. He can be held accountable once he vacates his chair.

If a strong anti-corruption bill is there which fixes accountability and responsibility, then even a PM would think twice before acting in a way that is detrimental to his post prime minister period.

As for the judiciary it’s better not to bring the Supreme Court under its purview.

The High court and the lower court is the place where the maximum corruption takes place. Once they are made more accountable, the rare black sheep that are in the Supreme Court will have to naturally fall in place. The media scrutiny at the SC is something that also acts as an additional check and balance.

Corruption cannot be tackled easily. There are many things at stake here. And changes are always resisted. Majority of the political class have reached at their places after surviving this very society that is a maze of corrupt practises.

To contest from a small constituency of Rewa in Madhya Pradesh, one of my acquaintances, who is not yet 'corrupted' had to dole out more than Rs.50 lakhs. And he lost. Much of his funding came from corporate houses and other small leaders who were supporting him.

If he had won, then the corporate house would have expected from him favours for which he would have had to subvert the law. Similarly he would have to oblige the leaders who helped him contest the elections.

This is how the vicious circle starts.

One of the basic steps to curb corruption is to bring political and electoral reforms and implement them vigorously.

The bottom line for the critics of Anna is that he is not fighting any individual nor he is trying to become a super Indian. He is standing against something that requires a super human effort.

I am sure that future will present us many opportunities to show our cynical abilities but this is not the time to be one right now.

We always have two sides to every things. Love-hate, pro-Anna -anti Anna but when it comes to corruption there is no choice to make. And there should not be.

Anna is India and India is Anna may not be the popular sentiment but Corruption in India and India against Corruption surely is.

For all of us.

http://www.leagueofindia.com/blog/critics-and-supporters-anna

Kyoto Protocol- a History and its present relevance

2011-08-11T13:56:00.002+05:30

What is Kyoto Protocol ? Where are we going in the future with the Kyoto Protocol? How has the international politics bogged down this concept which was a step much required for the safe keeping of future of this planet.

It’s important to understand where we are going on this process and we also have to see where we came from. To understand this, we have to understand that there is a science-based problem—namely climate change—that was identified in the mid-1980s and led to the first fundamental process, the 1992 Rio Convention, which produced the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change [UNFCCC].

That Convention gave a general outlook of what should be done to address climate change, but it did not give any specific tools on how to tackle it. So the 189 countries that were parties to the Convention decided that there should be a stronger tool to address climate change. At that point, the architecture of what we now call the Kyoto Protocol was decided. It’s important to understand that this was, fundamentally, a partial architecture, which agreed that industrialized countries would have to take the lead to reduce their emissions before the rest of the world, the developing countries, would take on commitments.

The question was: how should we reduce the emissions?

This was the subject of a huge debate in 1994-95, when discussions were made on fundamental architecture. One position held that there should be only domestic policies and measures. Another position, shared by Canada, held that we should have also flexibility in trying to find the lowest marginal cost for reductions, bearing in mind that the problem is not really the emissions in any particular country, but rather the accumulation of greenhouse gas emissions globally. And this debate gave us, in 1997, the Kyoto Protocol.

The Kyoto Protocol gave us a precise blueprint for giving industrialized countries general targets, and left out developing countries. For example, it was agreed, that countries would collectively reduce our emissions levels -5.2% from 1990 levels. But this gave a very broad “portfolio” of reductions through the system. For example, Canada committed to -6% in reductions, and the United States to -7%, while some countries, like Iceland, went to a plus 10%. But overall, countries would collectively reduce their emissions.

This is where the process becomes interesting.

What would the content of these emissions be?

At that point in time, the question was: how can emissions actually be reduced in developing countries to a process called a clean development mechanism and actually get those emissions reduced in developing countries and then repatriate the emissions to the countries that have commitments?

This question started the famous debate on what to include as acceptable types of projects under the joint implementation—which are the projects you do in other countries that have commitments and the projects you do in countries in which you don’t have commitments. So there were negotiations, which started in 1997 and extended to 2001. It was only last November that finally terminated one part of the negotiations, the part surrounding the rules in which would implement the Kyoto Protocol.

But in parallel with this process, negotiations continued and the implementation of the original 1992 Convention. This part of these two pillars—the ones linked with the original Convention and the ones linked with the new “son” or “daughter” of the original Convention, called the Kyoto Protocol—came forward in 2001. It meant, on one side, that we now have a deal that allows us to actually move forward on the Kyoto side and eventually ratify it (for ratifying we need a certain number of countries actually agreeing to implement the Protocol). But it also means that in parallel we will continue the process. This process, of the UNFCCC is the one that deals essentially with everything linked with developing countries fundamentally. It is a package through which we will try to improve the capacity of developing countries that eventually take on commitments in the future.

Where does nuclear fit into this?

There is a perception that nuclear was excluded from the Kyoto Protocol and that it’s the end of the line for nuclear in this process. This is not the case.

First, nuclear energy is part of the inventory for domestic reductions, which means any nuclear process that is done in a country that is under the Kyoto Protocol that has obligations domestically is still counted in the inventory. So any new plants that would be created, such as the one approved recently in Finland, would have to be calculated against the that country’s levels of emission. In addition, it’s important to remember that although we were not successful (and Canada fought very hard on this) to have the parties agree that the nuclear projects would be capable of generating international credits, parties don’t have outright rejection of nuclear but a refrain-from-use for the first commitment period.

It means that the process under Kyoto is not finished. Negotiations have to be started for the second commitment period, which will start in 2013 for the following five years. To get to this new agreement, which is called “Kyoto 2,” By 2005, which is the official start of the second period of negotiations, there has to be a new architecture for future consideration. Those will go on until 2008, by which time all negotiations shall be completed for the second commitment period, which will lead us in the future. All this means that there is still some opportunity to restart our discussions about the role of nuclear.

So fundamentally, there are two tracks. The first track will pursue the UNFCCC process, and so forth. The second track will lead to ratification of the Kyoto Protocol, for which we need 55 countries, representing 55% of emissions of developed countries. This process is already under way. The European Union has made commitments to ratify by June. The other developed countries are now studying the Protocol to see if they can meet the commitments under the new Kyoto rule. Hopefully, by the time of the Johannesburg Summit next September, there will be a clear notion of whether or not we can actually enter the Kyoto Protocol into force, in order to continue the process of emissions reductions.

We are now in a process of trying to define a new strategy that will allow all developed countries to begin to define their positions. There have been three years of conceptual discussions on the future architecture of the process. So the process is far from finished. In fact, the process will probably continue for the next 50 years or so, because the Convention itself is an evolving document. This is why it’s called a Framework Convention. It is not a finished product; it is a product that has to evolve as we go along and as science gives us more background on what we are actually dealing with in climate change. Nuclear has perhaps had a slight setback for one part of the equation, which is for patriating projects in developing countries, but it is by no means the end of the road for these discussions. In the meantime, the process is still fully open for national projects.

THE KYOTO PROTOCOL

The FCCC expressly contemplates that the COP may adopt protocols at any ordinary session of the COP.[1] At the third session of the COP (called COP-3), held in Kyoto (Japan) in December 1997, the parties adopted the Kyoto Protocol to the FCCC.[2] The most important provision of the Protocol is Article 3.1, which requires Annex I parties to reduce their emissions of greenhouse gases. Specifically, it provides:

The Parties included in Annex I shall, individually or jointly, ensure that their aggregate anthropogenic carbon dioxide equivalent emissions of the greenhouse gases listed in Annex A do not exceed their assigned amounts, calculated pursuant to their quantified emission limitation and reduction commitments inscribed in Annex B and in accordance with the provisions of this Article, with a view to reducing their overall emissions of such gases by at least 5 per cent below 1990 levels in the commitment period 2008 to 2012.

Several of the terms in this provision may not be immediately clear. The Parties included in Annex I refers to Annex I to the FCCC, which, as noted above, includes the developed countries and the "countries in transition." Neither this provision nor any other in the Kyoto Protocol requires developing countries to reduce their emissions.[3]

The greenhouse gases listed in Annex A are carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydro-fluorocarbons, per-fluorocarbons, and sulphur hexafluoride. Carbon dioxide accounts for most warming - over 80% in 1990. The latter three gases are used for industrial purposes and as yet exist in relatively tiny amounts, but on a unit-by-unit basis they have a far greater warming effect than carbon dioxide.[4]

The assigned amounts, calculated pursuant to their quantified emission limitation and reduction commitments are set forth in Annex B as a percentage of the base year. For most Annex I parties and most greenhouse gases, the base year is 1990.[5] But countries in transition can use as a base year 1988 or 1989 - years in which their emissions were higher than they were in 1990.[6] And any Annex I party can use 1995 as its base year for the three industrial gases.[7] Since the levels of use of those gases were much higher in 1995 than in 1990, the effect is again to raise the amount allowed to be emitted.

The commitments vary from country to country, from a low of 92% to a high of 110%. The commitment assigned to the United States is 93% - in other words, the commitment is to decrease greenhouse gas emissions by 7% from the base year level. The commitment assigned to Japan is 94% (a 6% reduction), and the commitment assigned to the European Union as a whole is 92% (an 8% reduction).

The period during which the commitment is to be met is 2008-2012.[8] The requirement is that each party's level of emissions during that period average its commitment amount. For example, Japan would be required to emit 94% of its base-year greenhouse gases as an average from 2008-2012. It would not be required to emit 94% in 2008, or in any other specific year in the commitment period. Even if it were still well above 94% in 2008, for example, it could argue that it would be premature to accuse it of failing to meet its commitment until and unless it had failed at the end of 2012 to maintain an average of 94% of its base-year levels over the five-year period.[9]

The language expressing a "view to reducing their overall emissions of such gases by at least 5 per cent below 1990 levels" is aspirational. Studies have estimated that if all of the Annex I parties met the commitments set out in Annex B, their total emissions would decrease by about 5.2%.[10]

Article 3.1 is silent on how Annex I parties should or must meet their commitments. The negotiators rejected EU proposals to mandate specific types of emission-reducing actions. But the negotiators were unable to agree on exactly how the Annex I parties could take sinks and various forms of joint action (such as emissions trading) into account in meeting their commitment targets.[11]

Status of the agreement

At the treaty's implementation in February 2005, the agreement had been ratified by 141 countries, representing over 61% of emissions[12]. Countries do not need to sign the protocol in order to ratify it: signing is a symbolic act only. An up-to-date list of those who have ratified is available [13].

According to the terms of the protocol, it enters into force "on the ninetieth day after the date on which not less than 55 Parties to the Convention, incorporating Parties included in Annex I which accounted in total for at least 55 per cent of the total carbon dioxide emissions for 1990 of the Parties included in Annex I, have deposited their instruments of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession.". Of the two conditions, the "55 parties" clause was reached on May 23, 2002 when Iceland ratified. The ratification by Russia on November 18, 2004 satisfied the "55 percent" clause and brought the treaty into force, effective February 16, 2005

Revisions

The protocol left several issues open, to be decided later by the Conference of Parties (COP). COP6 attempted to resolve these issues at its meeting in the Hague in late 2000, but was unable to reach an agreement due to disputes between the European Union on the one hand (which favoured a tougher agreement) and the United States, Canada, Japan and Australia on the other (which wanted the agreement to be less demanding and more flexible).

In 2001, a continuation of the previous meeting (COP6bis) was held in Bonn where the required decisions were adopted. After some concessions, the supporters of the protocol (led by the European Union) managed to get Japan and Russia in as well by allowing more use of carbon dioxide sinks.

COP7 was held from 29 October 2001 – 9 November 2001 in Marrakech to establish the final details of the protocol.

Sinks

With respect to sinks, the parties were strongly divided in the negotiations. Sinks refers to those natural processes, which absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.[14] The most important natural sinks are plants and oceans, which reabsorb much of the carbon dioxide, emitted every year. There are well known practical difficulties with relying on Sinks to offset emissions from industrial sources, including the difficulty of measuring the actual Carbon Dioxide absorbed by the Sink accurately and the fact that forest Sinks can easily become the sources of Carbon Dioxide due to deforestation, disease and so on.[15]

Countries such as the United States, Canada, and Russia, which have large forests, would benefit from a rule allowing their forests to count as a credit toward their commitment target. On the other hand, many countries in Europe and Asia lack such sinks and were reluctant to allow credit for them. In the end, the negotiators agreed to allow Annex I parties to take credit for certain types of anthropogenic sinks - "aforestation, reforestation, and deforestation since 1990" - and left open the possibility that "additional human-induced activities" could be included if the meeting of the parties to the Protocol so decided.[16] The Protocol did not state what percentage of the commitment could be reached through forestry or other activities, which later proved to be a contentious issue.

Emission Trading and Joint Implementation

The negotiations were particularly difficult with respect to joint action, with some countries, such as the United States, strongly arguing that mechanisms such as emissions trading had to be included, and others, including many developing countries, resisting. In the end, the negotiators included four joint-action mechanisms in the Protocol, but left almost all of the details concerning their implementation to later negotiations.[17]

First, the Protocol allows Annex I parties to fulfill their Article 3 commitments jointly, provided that their total combined emissions do not exceed the amounts assigned to them in Annex B.[18] Although this provision is open to any group of countries, only the EU is expected to take advantage of it, and this is known as the "EU bubble."[19] EU countries have agreed on a division of responsibility that includes a wide variation in countries' target emissions, from -28% for Luxembourg and -21% for Denmark and Germany, to +25% for Greece, and +27% for Portugal.

Second, the Protocol provides for emissions trading among Annex I parties that have undertaken commitments pursuant to Article 3, effectively allowing any two parties to trade part of their emission commitment.[20] The Protocol says next to nothing, however, about how emission trading is to be implemented. Moreover, it states that "any such trading shall be supplemental to domestic actions" for the purpose of meeting Article 3 commitments, which leaves ambiguous the degree to which countries may meet their commitment through purchasing emissions rights from other parties.

Third, the Protocol provides for "joint implementation" at the project level between Annex I parties. Specifically, it allows any Annex I party to transfer to or acquire from any other Annex I party "emission reduction units resulting from projects aimed at reducing anthropogenic emissions by sources or enhancing anthropogenic removals by sinks of greenhouse gases," provided that the project's benefit with respect to greenhouse gases "is additional to any that would otherwise occur" and that certain other requirements are met.[21] This was the least controversial of the "joint-action" mechanisms.[22]

Much more controversial was the proposal that Annex I parties be able to obtain similar "emission reduction units" from developing countries. This idea of global joint implementation was strongly pushed by the United States and some other developed countries, and opposed during much of the negotiations by the EU and many developing countries. In the end, the Kyoto Protocol provides for global joint implementation under the name of a "clean development mechanism."[23] Specifically, the Protocol allows Annex I parties to use emission reductions accruing from projects in developing countries, "as determined by the Conference of the [FCCC] Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to this Protocol." In other words, the degree to which Annex I parties can actually use these emissions reductions to meet their commitment is up to the Kyoto parties to decide. Moreover, the Protocol says that the reductions must be "certified" by "operational entities" to be named by the first meeting of the parties to the Protocol. The first meeting of the parties to the Protocol was also charged with working out the "modalities and procedures" of the clean development mechanism.[24]

The Problem of Compliance

Another difficult issue facing the negotiators was how to ensure compliance by the parties with Kyoto's requirements. The Protocol requires Annex I parties to report annually on its implementation of the agreement and contemplates that the first meeting of the parties to the Protocol will adopt guidelines specifying what the reports must include.[25] The Protocol also subjects these reports to review by experts nominated by the parties and coordinated by the secretariat, who are required to "provide a thorough and comprehensive technical assessment of all aspects of the implementation by a Party of this Protocol."[26] The expert review teams are to report to the meeting of the parties to the Protocol," assessing the implementation of the commitments of the Party and identifying any potential problems in, and factors influencing, the fulfillment of commitments."[27] More generally, the COP, acting as the meeting of the parties to the Protocol, is charged with regularly reviewing the implementation of the Protocol "and the extent to which progress towards the objective of the Convention [i.e., stabilization of greenhouse gases at a safe level] is being achieved."[28] This review could conceivably result in an agreement among developing countries to commit to greenhouse gas reductions, but nothing in the Protocol explicitly says so. In contrast, the COP is required to begin considering commitments for Annex I parties for subsequent periods - that is, after the 2008-2012 commitment period - no later than 2005.[29]

In contrast to the Protocol's relatively strong and clear provisions on reporting and assessing Annex I parties' implementation of their commitments, its provisions on enforcement are weak. Article 18 charges the first meeting of the parties to the Protocol with approving "appropriate and effective procedures and mechanisms to determine and to address cases of non-compliance with the provisions of this Protocol." And Article 19 states that FCCC Article 14, the toothless dispute-resolution provision described above, will also apply to the Protocol.

Entry Into Force

The final important point about the Protocol is its requirement for entry into force. Article 25 provides that it will enter into force 90 days after at least 55 countries, including Annex I parties that account for at least 55% of the total carbon dioxide emissions in 1990 of Annex I countries, have formally ratified it. The 55-country mark has been relatively easy to reach, since ratifications by developing countries count towards it. As of late 2003, more than 100 countries had ratified the Protocol. The 55% requirement is much more difficult. The United States emitted about 36% of all Annex I carbon dioxide emissions in 1990; therefore, entry into force without the United States requires participation by virtually all other major Annex I countries.[30]

Support for Kyoto

The governments of all of the countries whose parliaments have ratified the Protocol are supporting it.

Advocates of the Kyoto Protocol claim that reducing these emissions is crucially important; carbon dioxide, they believe, is causing the earth's atmosphere to heat up. This is supported by attribution analysis.

Most prominent among advocates of Kyoto have been the European Union and many environmentalist organizations. The United Nations and some individual nations' scientific advisory bodies have also issued reports favoring the Kyoto Protocol.

In the USA, there is at least one student group Kyoto Now! which aims to use student interest to support pressure towards Kyoto Protocol compliance.

As of November 15, 2004, nine Northeastern US states are involved in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI)[31], which is a state level emissions capping and trading program. It is believed that the state-level program will apply pressure on the federal government to support Kyoto Protocol.

Participating states: Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Delaware.

Observer states and regions: Pennsylvania, Maryland, District of Columbia, Eastern Canadian Provinces, New Brunswick.

Opposition to Kyoto

The two major countries opposed to the treaty are the USA and Australia, based on the public statements of their governments. Some public policy experts who are skeptical of the global warming hypothesis see Kyoto as a scheme to either retard the growth of the world's industrial democracies or to transfer wealth to the third world in what they claim is a global socialism initiative.

Some critics say there are problems with the underlying science. For example, Russia's influential Academy of Sciences (RAN) said the government's decision to approve the Kyoto Protocol was "purely political," and that it had "no scientific justification." [32] The Russian experts told president Putin that Kyoto was scientifically unfounded nonsense.[33] Andrei Illarionov, Putin's economic policy advisor, compared the Kyoto Protocol to fascism. [34]

The 1997 Leipzig Declaration called the Kyoto Protocol "dangerously simplistic, quite ineffective, and economically destructive to jobs and standards-of-living". However, most of the signers of the Leipzig Declaration were non-scientists or lacked credentials in the specific field of climate research.

Some argue that the protocol does not go far enough to curb greenhouse emissions (Niue, The Cook Islands, and Nauru added notes to this effect when signing the protocol[35]), and the standards it sets would be ineffective at curbing or slowing climate change. In addition, there have been recent scientific challenges to the idea of carbon credits, planting "Kyoto forests" or plantations to reduce total carbon dioxide output. Recent evidence shows that this may in fact increase carbon dioxide emissions for the first 10 years, due to the growth pattern of young forests and the effect it has on soil-trapped carbon dioxide. Several industrial countries have made carbon credits an important part of their strategies for reducing their net greenhouse gas outputs, further calling into question the effectiveness of the protocols.

To evaluate the effectiveness of the Kyoto protocol, it is necessary to compare global warming with and without the agreement. Several independent authors agree that the impact of the Kyoto protocol on global warming is likely to be very small. Even some defenders of the Kyoto Protocol agree that the impact of it is small, but they view it as a first step with more political than practical importance, for future reductions, perhaps of up to 70%. The UNEP says the effectiveness of Kyoto really depends on whether it lays a good foundation for the climate convention process, which might lead to greater reductions later[36]. The Kyoto Protocol can also be evaluated by comparing costs and gains. Several economic analyses were made that show that the Kyoto Protocol is more expensive than the global warming that it avoids. Defenders of the Kyoto Protocol argue however that while the initial greenhouse gas cuts may have little effect, they set the political precedent for bigger (and more effective) cuts in the future. Also, they demonstrate commitment to the precautionary principle.

Beyond other arguments some theorists predict that even if the world's leading industrial nations agree to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions as mandated by the Kyoto Protocol, it is likely that there would be no net change in emissions worldwide. If the industrialized countries cut their demand for fossil fuels to meet the emission reduction responsibilties, the law of supply and demand would tend to cause the world prices of coal, oil and gas go down, making fuel use more affordable for poorer nations. These theorists predict increased fuel use (primarily coal) in the "non-Annex I" countries, tending to offset the reductions of the "Annex I" countries.

Conclusion

Like everything in this world, opinion for Kyoto is also divided. Those who are against this protocol argue that the protocol does not have teeth to curb greenhouse emissions. The 1997 Leipzing declearation, a conclave of some so called earth friendly business houses called the Kyoto Protocol "dangerously simplistic, quite ineffective, and economically destructive to jobs and standards-of-living".

Some critics are of the view that the protocol will prevent or damage economic growth. Its not surprising to see that influential economic powers of the first world calling Kyoto as a scheme to either retard the growth of the world's industrial democracies or to transfer wealth to the third world in what they claim is a global socialsim initiative.

The supporters of Kyoto protocol are of the opinion that to evaluate the effectiveness of the Kyoto protocol, it is necessary to compare global warming with and without the agreement. They say that the time is slipping fast out of hand, because for ages the human population has exploited the nature so much so that, if nothing substantial is done soon, the flora, the fauna and the environment; everything will vanish, never to be born again.

Defenders of the Kyoto Protocol argue that while the initial greenhouse gas cuts may have little effect, but it will set the political precedent for bigger (and more effective) cuts in the future. Another important view of several independent authors is, that the impact of the Kyoto protocol on global warming is likely to be very small. Though crusaders of the Kyoto Protocol agree that the impact of it may be small, but they view it as a first step with more political than practical importance. Here is where the crux lies, for if this protocol is even remotely successful in its objectives it will pave a way for future conceiving of earth saving conventions and protocols, and god forbidding if it fails then, the result will not be less than a catastrophe.

The importance of kyoto can be summarized in the words of UNEP, which says that the effectiveness of Kyoto really depends on whether it lays a good foundation for the climate convention process, which might lead to greater reductions

P.S-This paper was a joint effort of me and my colleague Mr.Prateek Sharma.

[1] http://unfccc.int/resource/conv/ratlist.pdf Art. 17.

[2] Kyoto Protocol to the Framework Convention on Climate Change, Dec. 10, 1997, 37 I.L.M. 22 (1998).

[3] SARAH R. HAMILTON, COMMENT: Developments in Climate Change, 2003 COLO. J. INT'L ENVTL. L. & POL'Y 37

[4] JOHN H. KNOX, INTRODUCTION: The International Legal Framework for Addressing Climate Change, 12 Penn St. Envtl. L. Rev. 135.

[5]Kyoto Protocol to the Framework Convention on Climate Change, Dec. 10, 1997, 37 I.L.M. 22 (1998).

[6] Id. Art. 3.5.

[7] Id. Art. 3.8.

[8] Id. Art. 3.7.

[9] Supra note 3.

[10] Id.

[11] Supra note 4.

[12] (http://unfccc.int/resource/kpstats.pdf).

[13] (http://www.climnet.org/EUenergy/ratification/calendar.htm).

[14] Greenpeace Guide to the Kyoto Protocol, at www.greenpeace.org/~climate/politics/reports/kppop.pdf

[15] Id.

[16] Kyoto Protocol to the Framework Convention on Climate Change, Dec. 10, 1997, 37 I.L.M. 22 (1998)., Art. 3.4

[17] JOHN H. KNOX, INTRODUCTION: The International Legal Framework for Addressing Climate Change, 12 Penn St. Envtl. L. Rev. 135.

[18] Supra note 16, Art. 4.1.

[19] Supra note 17.

[20] Supra note 16, Art. 17.

[21] Id. Art. 6.1.

[22] Supra note 17.

[23] Supra note 16, Art. 12.

[24] SCOTT BARRETT, International Environmental Agreements: Compliance And Enforcement: International Cooperation And The International Commons, 10 Duke Env L & Pol'y F 131.

[25] Supra note 16, Art. 7.

[26] Id. Art. 8.

[27] Id. Art. 8.3.

[28] Id. Art. 13.

[29] Id. Art. 3.9.

[30] PAUL KEVIN WATERMAN, SYMPOSIUM: EXPORT OF THE RULE OF LAW: STUDENT NOTE: From Kyoto to ANWR: Critiquing the Bush Administration's Withdrawal from the Kyoto Protocol to the Framework Convention on Climate Change, 13 Transnat'l L. & Contemp. Probs. 749

[31] (http://www.rggi.org/).

[32] (http://putinru.com/news/item/31072.html)

[33] (http://www.mosnews.com/money/2004/09/30/kyotoapproved.shtml)

[34] (http://www.mosnews.com/money/2004/09/27/illarionovkyoto.shtml)

[35] (http://unfccc.int/resource/kpstats.pdf)

[36] (http://climatechange.unep.net/jcm/doc/emit/kyoto.html).

Why Congress won't lose 2014

2011-07-17T10:48:00.004+05:30

When Mumbai was attacked in 2008 even the most loyal of Congress supporters would have felt that it was the last nail on the coffin for the beleaguered UPA-1. That was not the first time such a hair-raising misadventure had happened and most of the political pundits said that the next general election that were just months away would see the demise of the Oldest party of India.

They had every right grounds to arrive on such an assessment.

October 2005 brought death of 66 people in Delhi when three serial blast shook the capital out of the festive mood of Diwali, March 2006 saw attack on Sankat Mochan Mandir in Varanasi, Malegaon happened in September followed by Samjhauta in March 2007. May 2007 went red with blast in mosque in Hyderabad, July witnessed serial blasts in Jaipur, Gujarat and Bangalore. It did not end here. In September 2008 Delhi was struck again resulting in death of 18 civilians and then the mother of all, 26/11 Mumbai happened.

This ' carpet bombing' of sort in no way substantiates a claim about a country that prides in being a resurgent, emerging,torch bearer and what not for the rest of the whole world.

But 2009 election gave a new mandate to Congress, even better than what it had got in 2004. Congress was riding high. No one can definitely say as to why India voted for a party that had let them down in the previous 5 years.

Were we still evolving as electorates , easily vulnerable to the rhetoric,sweet talks and the goodies of the smiling Neta?

Did we voted on caste,creed and religious pattern. Did we saw terror as something that only can be eradicated by the grand old party of India. Didn't we read the stormy blogs,the inspiring editorials castigating UPA in English dailies, what happened to the power of internet, was not bandwidth screaming DOWN with UPA whenever we read and wrote anything online.

We all saw and read about the realities of UPAs in-competencies. But the issue is how many constitute "we" here. In 2009, according to varied estimate India had 50 million internet users which roughly constitute 5.1 percent of the whole population. The educated and the resourceful 5.1. And even that 5.1 finds it hard to come out and vote because of various factors.

Even though internet made us believe that the 'whole' of India and 'every' Indian was angry with UPA but the real thing was that the world 'whole' and 'every' were wrongly understood. The difference between Netizens and Citizens was forgotten.

Where there in no reach of internet like in the majority of rural India it is the other medium of media that work. Doordarshan,Vividh Bharti, Amar Ujala, Dainik Jagran may hold little value for us but they are the idea builders and conscience shapers of the mass. High end intellectualism does not cut much ice here, but simple statement does.

For farmers, rickshaw pullers, laborers,domestic helps the party is best that helps them financially. And Congress is an expert at that by way of doling out social schemes oriented towards the struggling class. These social class of people who are more in number than the educated class first seek to satisfy their primary needs of food and shelter. The rest of the desires like respect, a good way of life are too far up in the hierarchy.

For them BPL card is more important than NIA. And AADHAR is more dear than Agni. 2G doesnt make as much noise as MNREGA does.

It was a case of Shining India and Struggling India. And Struggling India triumphed.

Until and unless the social class that still struggles for two square of meal is given empowerment by way of basic needs being easily fulfilled one cannot expect them participating in the dance of democracy that is scheduled for 2014 in a rational way.

Congress may continue to to Harakiri by allowing Digvijay Singh to speak in the most Hitler'ous way or it get down to business by focusing on the job of coming down hard on corruption and terrorism.

Absolving responsibility by accusing Judiciary of indulging in over-reach may be one way of doing the job but its certainly not the right way and same holds true for the way it clamped down on Baba Ramdev.

Till the farmers in India are smiling Congress will continue to dance. And keep in mind that for some Congress leaders Vidharbha does not constitute India. Or else the farmers there would not have been dying.

What happened in Bihar or Gujarat may not be repeated at the national level. So to expect a clean sweep of NDA and a downfall of the UPA will be too much as of now.

And until and unless the opposition is able to reach out to the mass that resides in rural India and make them believe that they are a better option than Congress, it is Congress that will form UPA-III in 2014. Whether you like it or not.

The netizens have already made up their mind to vote out UPA but to make the citizens realize the benefits of voting in NDA is a herculean task.

For all of us.

http://theviewspaper.net/why-congress-won%E2%80%99t-lose-2014/

Of temples and and their wealthy gods

2011-07-10T00:01:00.008+05:30

India and Indians have this pleasant habit of always making news and depending on whether you are an optimist or of the other genre, you can cite scores of examples to elucidate this tendency of ours to make headlines worldwide.

Recently we forced the globe to stand up and take notice of us when scores of scam were unearthed and as economist, sociologist and political pundits were burning their midnight oil to analyse the multi-faceted impact of corruption, we assembled at Jantar mantar and the Ramlila ground to raise our voice against the vicious fangs of corruption which like rain drops spares no one.

An indigenous Jasmine revolution of sort was playing out on the on the streets of Delhi as the whole nation joined the call of ending Corruption once and for all.

But no one in their wildest dream would have thought that it would be God himself who would steal the show by showing his brilliance as he announced his arrival to the scene in an ultra-extravagant way. A most pompous debut of sort was witnessed as wealth amounting to more than 1 lakh crore was unearthed at the Sree Padmanabhaswamy temple in Kerala.

Such is the quantity of this huge amount that it takes some time to make a sense as to what wealth we are referring to here.

One can agree with questions relating to the source of this huge wealth which was collected under the guardianship of the the Travancore royal family who were the early custodians of this temple.And one can do nothing but be amazed for the sacred belief that prompted devotees to donate so generously to this temple. And it becomes hard to disagree when someone says that the money shows the cultural richness of India.

But it becomes hard to comprehend observations and assertions by people who say that the wealth that has been unearthed should be kept as it is as it belongs to the God himself and no living man has any right over it.

The 1 lakh crore rupees that has been discovered has the potential to change the picture of Kerala in no small way if utilized in the same sacred way. I am of no doubt that if the God was himself called to write his opinion he would have gladly said the same. Maybe he would also have cited the utmost sacred principle of demcoracy 'of people-by people-for people' to drive home his point.

Those who have lost their belief in the administrative system of India, and rightly so, feel that the amount if used for public purpose will first have to come into the economic system and as soon it becomes a part of the system it will be like a dessert for Indian corruption Inc. But this argument is devoid of practical reasoning as going by this very cynicism the government should stop the huge expenses on numerous government policy that are being implemented all over the country and which have played their part in alleviating poverty.

BJP state president of Kerala warned against any attempt to 'usurp' this wealth of god and very politely said that they would launch an agitation if this wealth is used by the governent for public purpose. This is the general undercurrent among the most of the people which owes its birth to the religious values that we believe in. But a hunger stricken, scantily clad man on the street only believes in something that will help him fill the emptiness of his stomach. And for him anyone that can help him get rid of his hunger is God. And 55 percent of India is still poor. And one of the reason for this is because we feel that its better to donate to god rather than to feed someone.

Gods for us reside in deities and someone who has been condemned to live out a painful, regretful life on the streets and slums is not worthy of compassion which a god commands because for us God has power to relieve of our sorrows and help us in his own ways and not that vagrant who is dying on the street.

The same BJP leader however, would not blink an eyelid and would be more than happy to launch an even bigger agitation if the State would have refused to take control of the wealth in case if this wealth was found in a Mosque. Religion for some is not about the well being of his own god but about the weakening of the other one.And sadly for most of us respect for a god depends on his own religion.

This is time to set precedents which will act as an inspiring one for the other rich religious bodies spread across many religions. The stake holders in the Sree Padmanabhaswamy temple should work on the lines of setting up a trust which should be accountable to every paisa and work for the social- upliftment of the poor that are more important to us rather than the god himself.

India has no dearth of people who are still accountable and who still live and die for everything except money and who can be appointed to make sure that the Godly wealth reaches their intended place and uplifts the intended people.

Even he would have said the same. If only Vishnu would have taken another incarnation and speak out his wish.

For all of us.

Of a Yogi and a Prime minister

2011-06-06T23:02:00.013+05:30

What possibly could Baba Ramdev have in mind when he decided to stage a fast at Ram Lila ground to express his displeasure against corruption and black money that is stashed away in tax haven countries?

Was he scared of the present government which forced him to take this noble initiative and attack the government before it victimised him? Does he have anything to gain monetarily and financially? Does he crave followers, attention and reach at places where it matters? Did the RSS/VHP/BJP combine take him to a hideout and brain-washed his mind to open a front against the UPA which has been crowned the most corrupt government India has seen since independence.

Or was it a simple desire to speak against corruption, which all of us might have felt at one point or the other. The only difference between him and us being that he decided to convert his thoughts into visible actions.

We need to look at all these possibilities and let our mind decide on how right or wrong Baba Ramdev has been, but do not view them through the eyes of a Congress guy or a BJP worker or a pseudo-liberal-intellectual-Leftist but as a common Indian. And as for those who are chronically cynical; do not waste your priceless time here.

He has been speaking against corruption for the past many years and if the present UPA government was scared of him and saw him as a serious issue they would already have let loose the various government agencies against him long time back. But presumably they were under the impression that he is among the many empty vessels that are making noises about corruption and shouldn't be given much weight-age. Also before the 5th June incident, Baba Ramdev never said that he was being hounded by the government watchdogs. So the possibility that the 'terror' factor on either side was an issue can be safely discarded.

What about financial possibilities? Did Baba Ramdev wanted to use his reach among the mass to join the bandwagons of the species called the politicians so he could mint money politically. No, that’s perhaps the most wishful reasoning.

Baba Ramdev is a multi-millionaire and he has more money than he will ever need if he wants to build a career in politics which he has earned through the functioning of his various trusts and donation. And do not forget that if he had money in mind he wouldn't have organised a protest on such a large scale against the state establishment thereby earning the wrath of the government, No sane businessman would do it.

His reach and accessibility among the highs and the mighty is well documented and reported, and for all money, he is one guy who doesn’t need to do a protest of any sort to seek attention, he easily is the most popular yoga teacher of India. Before starting his fast he had many present Union ministers as his disciple. His reach is spread amongst the mass and the mighty. And he sure knew that he would be rubbing the wrong feathers when he would drum-up the issue of corruption. So we can safely keep out that possibility too.

As for the 'communal colour' that has been painted on this canvass by the Congress, nothing can be written to deny it. And why should it be denied? If the various other political parties are supporting his protest then are they committing any crime? If BJP says that they are with him then how does it takes off the color of credibility of Baba Ramdev or his campaign? Was not BJP with Anna Hazare and IAC when they launched their movement against corruption?

When a mass movement is launched the opposition parties invariably have to become a part of it, for the simple reason that the members of the party are from the very society that has launched the movement. But the mere fact that a political party is supporting the movement cannot take away the true essence of any movement.

When the JP movement was launched against Indira Gandhi, it was the general mass that was at the foreground ably supported by the political entities’, but did it take away the legibility of the movement? At that time the protestors were branded with all kinds of name and treated as criminals and thrown away to prison but the fact was their protest, similar to now, was a genuine protest against an incompetent and corrupt government. India was not Indira then and India is not Indira or Sonia now.

Diplomats who have worked abroad will tell names of national and regional leaders who have invested in real estates in those countries. And the names of these politicians cut across all the political parties. A senior Congress leader has a multi storey hotel in Hong Kong, while two national leaders from my native state of Bihar have huge investment in and around London. The same goes true for the politician who is seen as the lights of the millions of oppressed dalits and who is from UP. The list is long and the names are well known. And when you are working on bringing back the corrupt money of these individuals who are powerful and rich, then surely the troubles that you will face is unimaginable. I am sure Baba Ramdev has realised this by now.

Baba Ramdev's stand against corruption comes from the fact that he like many us realizes that corruption needs to be exterminated from our society and it needs to be done away quickly. We have been suffering from the ills of corruption from the time before we got independence.

If a yoga teacher says that he will fight against corruption then what wrong is he doing? Does the mere fact that he is a yoga teacher prohibit him from being a crusader against corruption?

The events that took place at RamLila ground in Delhi will not and should not be forgotten. It was one of the saddest day for the Indian democracy. The brutal attack on unarmed, sleeping protestors which had children and women members shows the extent to which the present bunch of ministers at the Centre can go to stave off any serious efforts to speak out against corruption.

They defended their move on the ground that Delhi was being held to ransom by the protestors. I have many friends and relatives in Delhi and not even one of them told me that they faced any inconvenience whatsoever because of the protestors.

Right to dissent peacefully is not something that the BJP or the Congress party made up and pasted it into the constitution. It has been one of the most cherished and most delicate parts of the constitution which was included by our constitutional forefathers at the time of Independence so as to give the mass an opportunity, a space, and a realm where they can express their voice of dissent.

The lack of compassion on the part of Manmohan Singh who chose to remain mum on the atrocities committed at RamLila, speaks volumes of the hypocrisy that has engulfed our learned Prime Minister, who recently admitted to losing his sleep when a man was jailed in Australia. Does he needs to be reminded that he is heading a government that has been elected by the democracy and is not running an Arab autocracy that can be governed by the wishes and desires of few of his party leader.

When the time comes His tenure as a Prime Minister will go down in history as one of the lowest and the darkest time for the chair of Prime minister-ship that India had to go through.

Our Prime Minister will perhaps never realize as how gross wrong he has committed by allowing the police action at Ram Lila ground. And by the time his conscience wakes up; he will have very few takers.

Baba Ramdev and Anna Hazare are not two individuals but the faces of the Indians who have experienced corruption first hand and are now tired of it. The government at the Centre will realise this sooner or later.

The fight against Corruption is not a wildfire that has started with a spark, one which will die away soon. This is a consequence of the many years of discontent and maybe its fierceness may decrease temporarily because of the ruthless and brutal force used by the government yet it will emerge stronger when the time to burn down the corrupt and their institution comes.

For all of us.

An occasion to Commend UPA-II

2011-05-23T13:42:00.005+05:30

The second anniversary of UPA-II just went by. And to celebrate the momentous occasion the government had a quiet coalition anniversary dinner on Sunday. It was also celebrated at Tihar in a more subdued manner where the other ‘stalwarts’ associated with the present UPA had their dinner.

And this pretty well sums up the overall scenario. Governance and corruption have always been complementary to Indian political system but never have we seen their public display of affection as openly as we see it now.

When Manmohan Singh took oath on May 22,2009 as the head of UPA –II one would have expected that he would go all out on improving governance because this time he didn’t have to deal with the tantrums of the Leftist. The more than comfortable majority that they UPA got was seen as the kind of political platform that government needed to further its political, social and economic policy.

Did they achieve those goals?

What they achieved in this two year and would that count as a respect to the political mandate that they got from the mass is something that I leave upon the readers to decide.

Remember the gruesome attack on Mumbai? Many political pundits and amateurs analyst said that this was the last nail on the coffin for the Manmohan Singh led UPA-I and it should forget the general election of 2009 and instead focus on 2014. The fact that the Maharashtra Congress Chief Minister and the Union Home Minister managed to cling on to their chair for long even after the bloody slap on the face of ‘rising India’ didn’t help the image of UPA.

But the ever unpredictable ‘Janta-Janaradhan’ had other ideas as it voted Congress back into power. And Manmohan Singh was back at helms. And back was Vilas Rao Deshmukh, who was promoted as a Union Minister and also rewarded was Shivraj Patil by way of being appointed Punjab governor.

And what did we see next? Let’s say in between May 2009 and May 2011?

In a nutshell we saw, Shashi Tharoor resigning from MEA over the IPL controversy, Maharashtra Chief minister Ashok Chavan resigning over the Adarsh Housing scam, India making news internationally thanks to Common Wealth scam and the bearded Suresh Kalmadi, the ‘discovery’ of the 2G scam leading to A.Raja and Kanimozhi going for a walk at Tihar, the more than amicable Antrix-Devas S-band deal, the high profile P.J Thomas fiasco, the government love for the black money hoarders and the subsequent spanking by the SC .

And please keep in mind when I use the word ‘resign’ that doesn't mean they took up the moral responsibility and resigned but they were forced to resign, not by their political bosses but because of the pressure built up by the mass and the media.

So it won't be an exaggeration to say that we were treated to a spectacular display of UPAs love for the Corrupt and Corruption.

To top it all we were also privileged to see the government’s discomforts in India rising against Corruption.

And all this happened in two years time.

But then surely UPA might have done some good for the country, after all even the East India Company did some good for the native ‘India’.

Political scientists and economist have said that the performance of the government should be judged on three aspects: one is governance, the other is economic liberalization, and the third is inclusive growth.

When we say governance, we should thank the UPA-II for appointing someone like P.J Thomas as CVC, because he had seen and experienced corruption personally and up-close, it’s a different matter that the learned Supreme Court chose to ignore this qualification. The UPA also did well to propose the name of Binayak Sen as a member of the Planning Commission's steering committee on health for he has seen what the ‘the oppressed and the weak (naxalites) need. We should also thank the UPA that your or my name was not in the list of India’s most wanted that was handed over to Pakistan or I would have been sitting in some dingy jail of Karachi rather than writing this and you would have been sitting with some Pathan police guy at an outpost in Rawalpindi.

Now let’s talk about economic liberalization. UPA’s policy did manage to economically liberate the few that it considered meritorious. The names of A Raja, Suresh Kalmadi, Karunanidhi comes to mind.

It allowed these ‘oppressed’ section of the society to get freedom from the clutches of poverty that had hindered their growth.

And as for inclusive growth, the least said the better.

This term has got a new definition and a new population segment in these two years. Now when we talk about inclusive growth we need to discuss it through a complete perspective.

Inclusive growth in the schemes of the present government has now been limited to the few rich and prosperous. For the likes of Raja and Kalmadi.

They have been spared the 'comforts' of paying for the high petrol and domestic gas prices and they have also been kept out of the sting of what the economist call ‘inflation’.These ‘comforts’, the eye catching double digit inflation have been kept aside exclusively for the working class. It’s exclusively for the middle class.

But for all these comforting 'truths' we need to thanks our prime minister, Manmohan Singh. For he is doing all this for the “Aam Aadmi’.

After all it’s not every day we have a PM who has been a governor of the RBI. Sure he understands the intricacies of economic better than you and me.

Open your eyes and keep everything else aside as the magic of UPA-II has just begun, the three years ahead will bring such spectacles.

Time to introspect,we disappointed Rahul Gandhi

2011-05-13T23:57:00.004+05:30

The ‘hope’ of India, Rahul Gandhi did a superman act today as riding pillion on a bike he managed to sneak into Bhatta Parsaul village of Uttar Pradesh where an intense battle of sort happened between farmers and police personnel a couple of days back.

Defying the imposition of section 144 he sprung a surprise and walked into the village at 5 AM in the morning and it’s been more than 14 hours and still he is sitting on a ‘Dharna’ with the villagers who are demanding better compensation for their land that has been acquired by the government.

That he has little regard for law as he exhibited by ignoring section 144 is something that need not be talked about, that is a minor issue in this whole political game that’s being played in the rural area of Uttar Pradesh.

But what needs to be discussed is his Lack of foresightedness and traces of political immaturity because if he actually wanted to help the farmers then he has surely failed. Media OB vans and reporters with mikes are no measure of the involvement of 'genuine' intention, if any. Though if he had come their for political and TV mileage, he would be now happy like a child in a candy store.

Can anyone from the Congress party come out and say that this sudden early morning move has nothing to do with the assembly elections that are stated to be held in Uttar Pradesh the next year?

Or was it a genuine concern for the farmers that prompted the Gandhi scion to pay a visit to Bhatta Parsaul?

Bhatta Parsaul was ’the’ news that the whole of India was watching for the last two days. We saw the pitched battle between the police personnel and the villagers, we saw the DM being shot and rushed to Akash hospital and we saw how the male members of the village had run away to escape the police.

We also had TV discussions and articles on how the farmer that are protesting in Bhatta were compensated in the early years of 2000 when their land was purchased and they had at that time very happily given away their land. And we also read how, now, after coming to know that the price being offered to the neighbouring villages where land was being acquired at a much higher amount, the natural ‘greed’ for a higher compensation forced the villagers of Bhatta Parsaulto start a fresh yet illegitimate demand when the actual time to transfer the land to the government arrived.

This all was till yesterday. Focus was on farmers and how to tackle this situation that has cropped up in every state where land has been acquired by the state government for infrastructural purpose, be it Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra or Bihar.

But as soon as the man in ‘Safed kurta’ arrived the focus was shifted on him. A farmer-government issue was suddenly transformed into a political playground.

And now as we all are privy to, the question is not what will happen to the farmers or the police men who lost their lives but is has become a question of how and when will Rahul Gandhi and the eternally media 'friendly' Digvijay Singh will break their ‘dharna’.

The real issue has gone for a toss and by the time this all will end Bhatta will be just another village of rural Uttar Pradesh.

If this high voltage drama was not enough, the future ‘PM’ of India dropped a bombshell as he announced that after seeing what has happened in Bhatta Parsaul he “was ashamed of being an Indian”.

Depending on the perspective this statement of his can either be ignored and read as something that was said in the spur of the moment or if taken seriously it spells out many things about someone who is expected to lead the country to new heights in the near future.

The feeling of being ashamed took a long time to materialize for the young Gandhi. He deliberately or unknowingly didn’t realize this feeling when he got many much more graver opportunities in the past.

A good time to give this ‘being ashamed’ statement was when Mumbai was attacked and the Congress Chief Minister and the Indian Home minister decided to cling on to the chair ignoring their professional incompetency.

When North Indians were being targeted by the goons of MNS right under the nose of the Congress CM , Rahul Gandhi should have voiced this feeling of being ashamed.

He should have felt this ‘ashamed’ tingling when the whole of India was expecting him to join the anti-corruption brigade at Jantar Mantar but which he chose to ignore.

Rahul Gandhi, the hopes of millions need to stand up and look around for he will see many reasons where he will feel ashamed of being Indian.

But then the games the politicians play is something that needs not be judged on the scale of righteousness and logical sense. They have the 'divine' liberty to choose which issues can hurt their consciousness and make them feel ashamed.

They may time and again fail ‘us’ but we don’t have that liberty to feel ashamed of their deeds; it’s a trait that is reserved for the class that call itself ‘the politicians’.

For all of us.

A case for a ‘Dalit’ in the higher echelon of the society

2011-05-10T13:50:00.007+05:30

The Varna system that has plagued India for millennium still continues to rule roost in the country which is often hailed as the role model for emerging democracy in the world. We talk about a society for all, a compound where everyone despite and in-spite of his caste and creed gets an equal opportunity to rise and shine. But have we truly been able to break the chains of the Varna system that shackles our minds?

The Brahmins, the Khatriyas,the Vaishyas and the Shudras are the four pillars of our society, rather the demarcation that still exist and continues to divide the society into four parts on the basis of birth. And it’s not that nothing has been done to dilute this demarcation.

The Constitutional forefathers tried hard to remove this demarcation by providing for reservations for the mass that had the misfortune to be born in this ‘low-caste’,a term that was defined many centuries ago by those who were in the higher pedestal of the caste system.

Whether this reservation policy has worked for the 166,635,700 persons, Scheduled Castes population, constituting 16.2 per cent of the country’s total population can be argued upon for hours and yet when the talks will end there will be no concrete conclusion. And the same holds true for the merits of providing reservation, it’s hundred times harder to arrive upon a conclusion when it comes to the merits of reservation.

Reservation is something that tries to make the playground equal and fair for those who because of their birth have been deprived of quality living and education.

The question is whether providing for reservation enough? Is the policy of providing for empowerment at the bottom of the strata so that it can gradually gain strength and social acceptance as as it grows effective enough? Is this affirmative action not required at the higher level?

Reservation is provided in colleges, in jobs but as once reaches the top level it is done away with.

Who would provide for a more positive impact and an inspiration on the dalit population in specific and the whole society as a whole? A dalit Prime minister or say a dalit corp-orator?

Inspiration like a waterfall flows and from a higher point to the lower. I may have sympathy for someone who is pulling a rickshaw than someone who is holding a constitutional authority at the center but if it comes to it I be more positively affected by someone who has reached the highest heights in-spite the tough circumstances rather than someone who is still toiling in the streets.

If I had to make a choice of constitutional heads like the PM, Presidents or CVC and I had a list of candidates to choose from, all equally good and each one being in the list on their professional merit ,I would select someone who comes from the suppressed background, a dalit officer or a leader would be my first choice, everything being same.

Why would be the next logical question? After all at the top the only deciding factor should be merit and professional integrity.

My answer to that is empowerment comes from power. Let us for some time focus on the caste issue and keep questions of integrity out of the equation.

Mayawati becoming the CM, has given a psychological empowerment to the oppressed SCs of the rural Uttar Pradesh. Similarly when Ajit Jogi was the Chief minister of Chhattisgarh the tribal’s felt more at home. They had this feeling of being a part of a society that’s equal and just and a democracy that has provided opportunities where someone from amongst them can become the head of the state. When Lalu Prasad Yadav was the chief minister of Bihar, thesocial and economic conditions of the backward class improved and this improvement is something that is hard to express in numbers and stats but one which can be felt when you interact with them.

We need to look beyond reservations and we have to shelve off the resentment towards this ‘supposed unfair’ advantage. Reservation sooner rather than later will be done away with, but the perennial problem of the oppression of the Schedule castes and tribes is something that needs a more mature understanding and requires a multi-pronged strategy.

Empowerment implies rising up from the lowest strata and being able to stand equally shoulder to shoulder with the other members of the society.

The faceless dalit needs to become a part of the emerging India and for that they need faces that go beyond Bhim Rao Ambedkar and Jyotirao Phule. Their ability and capability needs to be rewarded and precedents set for the young generation to follow.

The word ‘Dalit’ should not be limited to the political playing fields of Uttar Pradesh, Bihar or Maharashtra. They need to be pushed to places where they are given opportunity and responsibility from where they can act and come out as a beacon for the country as a whole.

The social equality that we talk about can only be achieved if we have a dalit who is heading institutions rather than following orders somewhere down in the hierarchy.

We need a society where a dalit doesn’t have to hide his identity and a society where the oppressed class can do away with the tag of being dalit. A tag that means ‘shattered’ and ‘crushed’ among many other different connotations.

Barring current Lok Sabha speaker, Meira Kumar and former president KR Narayan, we haven’t seen a single dalit leader who has been given any noteworthy constitutional opportunity to work at the higher echelon of our democracy.

We don’t just need a dalit CM, but a dalit Prime Minister, a dalit CVC and an India that doesn’t discriminates, gets angry or looks down at a dalit when he is standing tall.

For all of us.

हमारी और हमारे भोपाल की कहानी कुछ ऐसी है

2011-04-24T01:05:00.009+05:30

एक शहर से प्यार होना थोडा कठिन है. पर हमे वो हुआ, और काफी जोरों से हुआ.

सन १९९५ , फ़रवरी का महीना था वो शायद. हम ने पहली बार हबीबगंज रेलवे स्टेशन देखा.उस समय वो काफी अकेला सा था. एक छोटी सा स्टेशन था वो और एक्का दुक्का ट्रेन ही वहाँ रूकती थी. उस समय हमने पहली बार भोपाल को देखा था और देखते रह गए.

फ़र्ज़ कीजिए फ़रवरी की ठंडी सुबह जो हलकी सी धुँध से नहाई हुई है और उस ठंढ़ में आप एक छोटे से स्टेशन पे उतरे जहाँ ५-१० लोगो कि ही भीड़ हो. कुछ ऐसा ही दृष्य था उस समय. अभी भी याद करते हैं तो रोएं खड़े हो जाते हैं.

वो था हमारा पहला पल जब हमे भोपाल से प्यार हुआ. या यूँ कहिये कि हबीबगंज से प्यार हुआ. जो समय के साथ और गहरा होता चला गया.

जब उतरे हबीबगंज पे तो यह नहीं पता था कि वो शहर इतना सुन्दर है. पता तो तब चला जब हमे रहने के लिए भोपाल ने एक जगह दी जिसका नाम शिवाजी नगर है, जो ५ नो स्टॉप के पास है.

इ १००/१ एक सरकारी मकान था, काफी बड़ा और उतना ही हरा भरा. पीछे घर के आँगन मै बड़े बड़े पेड़ थे, आम के, कटहल के, अनार के. और उन पेडों पे सेकडों घोसले थे, जिन की हर एक डाल पे कोई न कोई पंछी परिवार बसता था.

हमारे घर के सामने एक छोटा सा स्कूल भी था, सरस्वती शिशु मंदिर स्कूल. और हमारी सुबह सुबह नीदं तभी खुलती थी जब वहाँ की घंटी बजती थी.

बच्चो की मीठी आवाज़ में "तमसो माँ ज्योतिर्गमय' पढ़ना", और तुतलाती हुई आवाज़ मै राष्ट्र गान गाना दिल को छु जाता था. वैसी सुबह के लिए आज भी दिल तरसता है.

वो घर सिर्फ पेड पोधो के लिए ही नहीं हमे लुभाता था, वहां पे जो भी लोग काम करते थे वो भी दिल के करीब थे. और उनमे से एक थे पांडे जी, रेवा के रहने वाले थे. वो खाना बनते थे और पेड पोधो की सेवा करते थे. बड़े ही सीधे सादे स्वाभाव के थे पांडे जी .

अब उनको याद करते है तो लगता है कि हमने उनको कितना परेसान किया.जब भी मन करता तब उनके साथ कुत्तें के पिल्लो को ढूडने निकल जाते थे, कभी उनको जबरदस्ती ५ नंबर के तालाब पे केकड़े पकड़ने ले जाते यह कभी उनको जेहेंगिराबाद के जानवर के मेले भेज देते जहाँ से वो हमारे लिए चूहा,खरगोश,मुर्गी के चूजे,कबूतर ले आते.

हमने उनको इतना परेसान किया पर उन्होंने ने कभी भी हमे डांटा नहीं और अभी भी जब कभी मिलते है तो "भैया भैया" कह के आँखों को नम कर लेते और देते हैं.

प्यार अलग अलग जगह से अलग अलग तरीके से मिलता है. और हमे भोपाल ने प्यार कभी इ १००/१ के माध्यम से या कभी पांडेयजी के स्नेह के माध्यम से दीया. और इन्ही कारणों से हमारा भोपाल के प्रति प्यार और बढ़ता चला गया.

बाद में भोपाल ने हमे पढ़ने के लिए एक स्कूल भी दे दीया. जवाहर लाल नेहरु स्कूल. बहुत कुछ जो भी हमने जीवन में सीखा हमने वहीँ सीखा. पढ़ना, लिखना, लड़ना, दोस्ती करना, और हाँ प्यार करना भी. जब २००१ मै हमने उसे अलविदा कहा तो बरसात हुई थी और आखो से भी आंसू गिरे थे.

जवाहर से हमारा एक ऐसा रिश्ता जुड गया, जो शायद कभी भी नहीं टूटेगा. आज भी हमे कोई जवाहर का बच्चा दीखता है तो हम उसको "जय जवाहर" बिना बोले नहीं रह पाते हैं. जब हम वहाँ पढते थे तब से हमे पता था कि जो दिन हमने वहाँ बिताएंगे वो कभी लोट के नहीं आयेंगे, और इसीलिए शायद समय निकलता गया और जवाहर के लिए हमारा प्यार और बढ़ता चला गया.

और यह बात भोपाल के लिए भी उतनी ही सच है.

फिर हम गए नेशनल लव इंस्टिट्यूट, जो केरवा कि सुंदरता के बीच मै बसा हुआ है. पढाई तो हमने शायद ही कि वहां कभी. पांच साल का समय, हमने यह तो केरवा के जंगलो मैं बिताया, यह कलियासोत कि नदियों मै. वहां के हर जर्रे से कुछ ऐसा लगाव हुआ कि उसका दामन छोडे हुए १० साल हो गए, फिर भी उसकी याद है कि दिल से जाती नहीं. जब भी कभी बारिश होती है तो येही लगता है कि केरवा में होते तो कैसा होता.

भोपाल हमे अपना प्यार देता चला गया, और हम उसे खुले हाथो से समेटेते चले गए.

२००६ मै हमने क़तर जाते समय भोपाल को अलविदा कह दीया. पर उसने हमे एक प्रेयसी की तरह धोखा नहीं दीया और कभी अभिव्यक्ति डंडिया तो कभी दोस्त की शादी के बहाने हमे हर साल वापस बुलाता रहा.

वो बुलाता रहा और हम जाते रहे.

१० नंबर स्टॉप का वो साइकिल-सूप वाला , अरेरा की अनजानी भीड , रायसेन रोड की वो लंबी सड़क, साकेत का वो सूनापन, न्यू मार्केट का हनुमान मंदिर, झील का एहसास, सब ने कुछ न कुछ दीया है. कभी अन्सल्स और श्यामला हिल्स मै अपने आप को घुमता हुए पाया तो कभी रात के २ बजे भोपाल रेलवे स्टेशन पे चाय कि चुस्कियो मै खोया पाया.

कुछ खोया भी हमने भोपाल मै , पर इतना कुछ पा लिया था वहां पे कि उस खोने के एहसास मै भी अपने आप को हसता हुआ पाया.

हमारी और हमारे भोपाल की कहानी कुछ ऐसी है.

The liberal retardism that they think we suffer from

2011-04-14T14:11:00.015+05:30

I could not go to Jantar Mantar to be a part of the crowd that had gathered to support Anna Hazare in his stand against corruption because I was not in Delhi. Many of us who could not be present there had different reasons but Harsh Mander has come out with the most mind-boggling of all the reasons.

In todays Hindustan Times he writes that he didn’t go there because he was disturbed by the presence of pictures of Bharat Mata on the stage and in the hands of the supporters which he thinks naturally points to the presence of RSS and the likes.

Secondly he was perturbed by the presence of godman like Baba Ramdev and Sri Sri RaviShankar during the whole movement. And then he goes on to say, as if he has got the bulls eye, that his presence of the saffron element in the whole movement was confirmed after Anna Hazare praised Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi declaring him a model chief minister.

Harsh Mandher is a very well known face of the civil society of India. A man who represents or claims to represent the down trodden. He is regarded as someone who has enough knowledge and intellect to become a member of a government appointed body (NAC) that works on providing policy and legislative inputs to Government with special focus on social policy and the rights of the disadvantaged groups.

Perse Mandher or for that matter any one who is a member of NAC is expected to be impartial, unbiased and more liberal in the truest sense and its correct to assume that he possess the ability to look at a picture not through a narrow outlook but with a broader understanding.

But his recent writing doesn’t denote that or any of these qualities.

It fails my logical aptitude that how can a Picture of Bharat Mata denote right wing Hinduism.

A picture of ‘Bharat mata’ taken in the most generic sense is used to convey the message of being 'Indian' rather than Saffron politics.I have seen pictures of Bharat Mata kept in Dhabas and autos that are owned by people practicing Islam. So if I go by Mandher’s logic then they too are a part of right wing fundamentalism.

Bharat Mata or Mother India is used as a national personification of India, as a mother goddess and is depicted as a woman clad in an orange or saffron sari holding a flag, and sometimes accompanied by a lion. The image of Bharat Mata being used to invoke patriotism dates back to the times of the Indian independence movement of the late 19th century. In 1936, a Bharat Mata temple was built in Benaras which was inaugurated by Mohandas Gandhi. And he said that the temple would serve as a cosmopolitan platform for people of all religions, castes, and creeds including Harijans and go a great way in promoting religious unity, peace, and love in the country.

Gandhi, regarded by many as the most secular of all Indians couldn't find any fundamentalism in the picture of Mother India but Harsh Mandher did.

Why did this happen? Did the picture of India changed its meaning with time? Yes. For the illuminated liberals it did. As years passed they shifted their focus to the color 'saffron'. For them the mere presence of saffron color became a tell-tale sign of Right wing fundamentalism.

But in reality its Harsh Mander’s own ‘fundamentalist’ approach that he suffers from that makes him view the picture depicting India as a symbol of Hindu right wing politics.

He represents a class that has only two parameter to judge anything and that is either Hindu fundamentalism or Indian. They earn their bread and butter by propagating this very distinction.

Ramdev and Sri Sri Ravishankar have followers that cut across religions. And it would be absurd to say that of all people Sri Sri Ravishankar is a Hindu fakir who preaches Hinduism. Both of them have Hindu as well as Muslim followers. And I haven't heard any one saying that they are a Pro-RSS preachers.

Its important to remember that Baba Ramdev has been crying out loud against Corruption which has caused much heartburn to the establishment that has made Mandher a member of NAC. So his tirade against these godman is well founded.

By branding these two ‘godmen’ a messenger of Hindu fundamentalism Mandher has once again in the space of few lines shown his narrow and skewed understanding of the civil society that he feels that he represents.

Mandher is visibly very delighted as he writes that how his doubts that the whole movement is a platform to spread saffron politics are proved true when Hazare praises Narendra Modi.

Mandher needs to be reminded that Hazare also took the name of Nitish Kumar in the same breath when he praised Modi. But of-course these civil society crusaders have a very opportunistic memory so I cannot blame him for remembering Modi while erasing out Nitish Kumar.

Whether its Mandher or Malika Sarabhai, members of the intellectual retards have used this praise of Modi by Hazare to paint Anna Hazare as someone who in a way has supported the riots that happened post Godhra.

But it doesn't need an Oxford educated brain that Hazare was referring to Modi’s and Nitish Kumar’s governance and good development efforts when he took their name.

Mandher and the other members of the ‘enlightened Indians’ needs to understand that what they write and what they speak is not for the blind and the deaf. Maybe there are people out their who are as intellectually retarded as them and who will go gaga over their liberal thoughts but then they also needs to be reminded that the rest of the people do not suffer from the same liberal-retardism.

For all of us.

It's about us... not about them

2011-04-07T19:15:00.004+05:30

Corruption has always been an issue. It was before you and I were born and it was present when our forefathers took admission in schools. And we have always wished that it should disappear, but never have we felt this feeling as strong as we feel now that corruption has to go this time.

There is no next moment or another movement for this.

The fast unto death taken up by Anna Hazare has moved the entire nation that has been sulking under the numerous scams that have happened at a amazing periodicity both at the micro and macro level.

This has been a year of revolution and movements. Egypt,Libiya,Tunisia and many other countries have or are experiencing the evolution of thoughts that have transformed into actions. The unifying factor in each of this country is that the issues that have forced the mass to come on the street are issues that are basic to the daily life of a common man.

Unemployment, price rise, nepotism has ignited the fire inside the man that walks on the street to take notice of the condition around him. Conditions that were always present but were ignored and then neglected and allowed to fester.

Recently when asked whether any such revolution can happen in India, our Prime Minister replied in the negative and said that we are a democratic country where we have the means to redress our problems. And he was so right.

This very redressal syndrome has forced us to ignore problems. We chose to ignore small issues because we feel that we have the tools to deal with it if the problem assumes gigantic proportion. We ignore when we are asked for small bribe of Rs 100 because we know that if needed we can shout at the person in our polished law college learnt English and write a complaint against him filled with legal dictum and see to it that he faces the music.

If we know that we are capable to stand against them we tend to ignore small things. That’s our nature. And that’s our problem.

We grow up in this corrupted surroundings, we start adapting according to it and learn to either stand against them or ignore them as per our comfort level.

But we have to change that now. And if we chose to ignore it even now then we must also understand that this pan- India feeling of standing against corruption won’t happen again.

You can bleed blue every morning for the next four years and continue to chant Sachin is god and Cricket is my religion but this still colorless, secular and devoided of any god movement will not happen again and if it is not given the strength that it needs now then it won’t stand up again.

Forget A. Raja or S. Kalmadi and don’t even think that it’s about standing up against the politicians.

It’s about you, me and the likes who work in midst of the endless materialistic possibilities for a good Roti , comforting Kapda and a love filled Makan.

Give at-least one try in whatever way you can. Contact your city coordinator and volunteer for the fast. Spread the word. Don’t let it die. Don't just stand up, make your presence felt.

If the government says that this whole debate has become more of Them ( Government) Versus Us ( The common man) then so be it. It's not about standing up against the democratic structure as Kapil Sibal is saying rather its about seeing to it that, that very structure keeps standing rather than wilting down under the overburdening weight of corrupt men and women who are the protectors of this structure.

There will be voices who will discourage the whole movement with numerous arguments and there will be voices that will say that this is one of the many futile movements that start with a candle light march and then are lost in the oblivion.

Do not hear what the other say. Listen to your heart and think about yourself not them.We are in a middle of something very big and the fate of the Country is at stake.

सागर कि ख़ामोशी से यह न समझो

कि लहरों मैं रवानी नहीं है

जब भी उठेंगे तूफ़ान बन के उठेंगे

शुक्र मना कि हमने अभी उठने कि ठानी नहीं है ...

A/S/L

2011-04-01T13:13:00.008+05:30

18/male/Bhopal here. Looking for a good clean chat.

This was the time of 1999-2001. The time when the internet connection at home was still a big-ask. The only player providing internet connection being Satyam with packages of Rs. 3000 for 3 Gb download.

Me and my friends would go to one of the many a internet cafes and pay anything between Rs.60 per hour to Rs. 80 per hour to log into the world of the mythical internet. At that time having an email address was nothing less than owning a Blackberry today. Rediff was a rage then and so was 123india.com. Yahoo was still a rank outsider and most people were more content with having a desi address in indiatimes.com.

And there were many of my classmates who wrote their email address while filling out the slam books and which as it turned out, didn't exist. And the majority of these true-liars of email address were girls.

It was said that the internet was the path to have a fairytale girlfriend.

A prospective girl friend was waiting for everyone who could afford the Rs.60 per hour internet charge. One with flowing jet black hair, tinkling eyes, sweet voice and an Einstein brain. Every Sabrina_alone, Bedika_lovely were prospective girlfriends. Of course no we all have realized that no such girl exists. It didn’t exist then and it doesn’t breathe now. Katrina, Diane Kruger, Eva Mendes and the like being exceptions.

Yahoo chat rooms used to be much more crowded than the Mohali. And it used to take a herculean effort to sneak into those rooms of love. And even harder was to gain attention of email address like Salma_luvs_salman or Cute_gal_bpl. So there were people like Pagal_aashiq and Jungle_it_took_my_love_away who had graciously accepted defeat and would frequent chat rooms just to offer advice to novices like us.

Time travelling too caught imaginations as guys interacting with ‘foreign Indian girls’ would say that they are residing in Mumbai and in some extreme situations, they would give their address as 31-Bridget street , Maldives or Hussainhara Khatun marg, Dubai.

But in reality they were more commonly seen in the streets of Indrapuri and Shakti Nagar or the lanes of Arera in Bhopal. Horses for courses became the order of the day. Interacting with an NRI girl required an international address.

And then there were people who were so much burdened by the obnoxiously high internet charges that they would start avoiding the café for months. And then the internet café dude had to send ’muscle-boys’ to their house to force them to part with the credit amount.

There was no Facebook or Orkut and no way you could show and impress the fairer sex with your charming smile or your deep intellect biography until and unless you could start a conversation with the girl. And not many would succeed. And those who would were rare. But then there were some. And they did go on a ‘date’. Some went to Charimli, some went to Top N town near Jyoti Talkies and some went as far as Guwahati.

And to say that it would all start with a smile and a simple A/S/L...

The failing of the Mahatma

2011-03-24T01:15:00.002+05:30

Why is Mohandas Karam Chand Gandhi a taboo subject to write on , especially if you are not supporting whatever he did. Critically evaluating his actions have never been a favourite subjects of commentators alike.

For me he has always been a leader, maybe a leader who was above his contemporaries but still a leader never the less. And he was no god, but a human being.

The more and more I read about him the more my feeling that he has been given a status of demigod gets strengthened. Whether it was bestowed on him or he actually demanded is something that I cannot comment on. But I am forced to believed that we have ignored his fallings whenever we have thought about our Father of Nation.

As I have aged, my image of Mahatma Gandhi has also changed. First he was the Father of nation, someone who is immune to any wrong doings and as I write now I look at him as someone who was a mortal man who was swayed by his desires and carried his share of bias. He too like us was prone to love and hate and to success and failure.

I feel that his actions during the time period of 1915 when he jumped into the Indian National Movement and to his subsequent death should be studied with an open mind. Not with a preconceived notion that we are looking into someone who was always a god or as it turned out eventually, the father of the Nation.

To bestow on him the title of Father of the nation is asking something too much from him. It’s best if he was not bracketed but left in the history for the coming generations to judge his actions and his success. Perhaps if he was alive he would never have agreed to his such a supreme position. More so when he would have been confronted with his repeated failings which he continued to ignore.

Mahatama Gandhi was a late entrant to India’s political struggle against the British occupation. And by the time he came to India in 1915 from South Africa he had already attained political maturity and experience as well developed his philosophy of Satyagarha which he used to address the issues of the minorities in South Africa.

Among the many tools that constituted Satyagraha that included violation of laws, mass courting of arrests, hartals, marches the most important of them was protest through Non violent ways. According to him indulging in violence was a sin. But he nevertheless would concede that violence should be the preferred way when it came to surrender before an injustice.

So what was so good about non-violent that Gandhi found so attractive?

Gandhi was mature, in other words he was using his thinking cap when he advocated non-violence. He knew that non-violence would appeal to rich business class and the landless farmer alike. That’s human philosophy or shall we say Indian philosophy which finds comforts in being a part of the non-violent culture. So when Gandhi talked about non-violence as a political tool he was not being an apostle or a god sent messiah who had given a new way of protest.

He was acting more as an astute politician. What he did was to catch the nerve that would appeal the most, a nerve that had been subdued and one which has been habitual to be governed by a rule of law.

It is interesting to note that for Gandhi the real enemy was not the British domination but the modern industrial civilization itself. This he expressed in his writings in Hind Sawaraj. According to him the modern industrial advancement was alienating the peasants. It was creating a Modern world that was of discriminatory nature.

This sentiment of his too struck a chord with the majority rural India who saw industrialization as a devil who was sucking life out of them. But this was resented by the relatively small number of urban India who had seen the benefits of advancements. This bias of Gandhi against Industrial advancement continued till the time he died.

Gandhians would say that he was right in voicing opinion against industrial advancement as the majority of India was still rural and poor. But then they would have to answer that was not promoting industrialization the answer to eradication of poverty? Something that was eventually taken up once the Nehruvian model failed after India got independence?

Gandhiji for me was wrong at many places and he took stands on many issues which did more harm to India in the long run. Opposing industrialization was the first.

II

During his first year of arrival to India Gandhi restrained himself from wearing a political robe and decided to take a pan India tour to gauge what problems and issues the country was facing.

His first three political moves took place in Champaran in Bihar and then subsequently to Kheda and Ahmedabad in Gujarat.

Peasants in Champaran since long time were being forced by the planters to grow Indigo and sell it to them at a fixed nominal price. This was causing lot of hardships for them. So Gandhi was asked to intervene by the peasants.

And for me this is the point where has was equated with a god. Gandhiji gave the grievance of the peasants an all India publicity due to which an inquiry was constituted by government which was convinced by Gandhiji that the Tinkathia system practiced in Champaran was wrong and should be abolished. The psychological impact of this was much more powerful than the achievement of the agitation itself. Gandhi was hailed as a god, a holyman who had answers to all pain. A title and a stature which has not left him even till now.

In Kheda, Gandhis undertook his first true kind of Satyagraha in India. He asked the peasants to withhold revenue from the tyrannical government and to fight it with their life. To counter this and break the resistance the government secretly issued instructions that the revenues should only be recovered from those who are in a position to pay.

This came as a relief for the villagers as they were now exhausted in their fight and Gandhi too who was looking for a safe and graceful exist couldn’t ask for more. The movement was withdrawn, not because the Government relented but because the movement was fizzling out.

Gandhi was not able to achieve anything spectacular here.

In 1918 Gandhi intervened in Ahmedabad to resolve an internal conflict between the workers and the mill owners. It’s notable because it was here that he used his tool of Hunger strike. Soon enough the mill owners relented and accepted the workers demand.

The Ahmedabad incident was of a very small scale when compared to Kheda. Here no government machinery was involved. And one of the main supporters of Gandhji in Ahmedabad was a sister of another textile magnate of Ahmedabad.

Looking retrospectively, what if Gandhiji had not made his mark as he ultimately did, what if he was another leader of pre-independent India. Then would have the historians recorded Ahmedabad mill strike the way it has been recorded? Presumably not. It was a normal strike, one of the many that took place at that time. And

it has only been given a so remarkable place because of Gandhi.

III

Gandhiji only made his full fledged jump into the all India political matters in February 1919, to revolt against the Rowlatt act. In that sense he was a newcomer to the India political since which had stalwarts like Nehru,Bose, Rajendra Prasad etc. And when he died in 1948, he in the relatively short span of 29 years left all of them in their capacity of humans whereas he climbed to the divine position.

Rowlatt act was passed by the Britishers as their policy of offering carrot and stick to the Indians. To counter this Gandhiji and the leaders suggested a pan India movement, an all India hartal. Gandhiji by then had developed close relations with the Muslim leaders and he was unanimously elected as a de-facto of this movement. Someone who would act as a bridge between the Hindu and the Muslim leaders.

The very fact that Gandhi had arrived at a very latter stage of Indian national movement helped him in being portrayed as someone who was unbiased and still untouched by the fundamentalism. This made him a perfect candidate to act as a link between the Hindu leaders and the Muslim leaders.

This Satyagraha movement as we know all ended after the Jallianwala Bagh incident. Gandhi withdrew the movement calling it a Himalayan blunder and acknowledged that he had jumped into the movement without adequate preparation and organizational readiness.

This was sign of Gandhiji characteristic of being ‘weak’. As we will see he comes out as some who always negotiated with a feared mind. His prudence would go into the background in situations which would go out of his hand.

When we talk about a pan India movement which involves defying the state, it is well established and expected that things would not go exactly by the text book or has been originally envisioned. But Gandhi never thought this way.

His first movement failed because he was not willing to sacrifice anything for a larger gain.

In September 1920 the Congress under Gandhiji passed a special resolution on non-cooperation. Gandhi promised there that if this boycott was fully implemented “Swaraj would be ushered with a year”. But as we all know, it never arrived. Not in one year, not in two.

Another thing that emerges out of Gandhjis reading is that he seldom travelled alone. Yet the History has always sidelined the other leaders when it came to a factual success of the movement that they were a part of.

During the 1920-21 when the non-cooperation movement was at its peak several other local movements were also taking place in different places, which had nothing to do with Gandhiji’s call of non –cooperation.

In Punjab the Sikhs were seeking to wrest control from the corrupt mahants, in Assam the tea plantation laborers went on a strike, in UP a peasant movement was taking place, in Andhra people were revolting against the forest laws. This all had nothing to do with the non-cooperation movement; they didn’t take any notice of Gandhi or Congress call for Non-cooperation and Infact they in some sense suffered because the Non-cooperation movement pushed their local problems into the background.

To break the movement the government in December 1921, arrested all the important leaders except Gandhi and imprisoned them. And as pages of history will tell that this will not be the first time that He would be spared the jail and many see this as the British policy of using Gandhi as a medium to placate people and to use his as a medium to act as someone who could be talked and molded into their own demand. They also saw him as someone who was flexible and convenient to talk to.

To oppose this repressive move Gandhi wrote a letter to the viceroy and asked him to lift the ban on civil rights and which were rejected outwardly. As a result Gandhi announced that a mass civil disobedience movement will begin from Bardoli in Surat. But before that could start, the Chauri Chaura incident took place, leading to Gandhi calling off the whole movement before it could even be started.

His weakness had again overtaken him. And this was felt by the other leaders too. They too were now disheartened yet because it was decided by Gandhi they could do nothing.

Historians say that the mass movement started in 1920 had left Gandhi in a fix as it had never taken the pan-India shape and design that he intended for and the Chauri-Chaura incident gave him as safe way to retreat with full honour.

Again hardly a sign of a great leader. He retreated many times during his political life which psychologically played a negative role in the minds of the common mass and like him , they too started to believe that they were not ready for a political movement which required sacrifice.

In November 1922, the common mass of Turkey rose under Mustafa Kemal and broke the Khilafat moment. Its repercussions were felt in India too as the much vaunted Hindu-Muslim unity that owed its birth to Gandhi was broken. And as can be construed the Khilafat movement leaders in India used Gandhi to forward their objective and when the movement failed they left Gandhi and his illusion that he was the uniting force behind the Hindu and Muslims in lurch. He was being manipulated all this while yet he chose to turn a blind eye to it.

Riots continued in India after that and Gandhi could do nothing to stop it and in 1925 Muhammad Ali of Khilafat movement finally split from Gandhi.

The Muslim-Hindu unity took a more severe and pronounced beating when in the Lahore session of Muslim league in 1924 Jinnah raised a demand for a separate state. A demand that finally took shape in 1947.

Gandhi was well aware of the sentiments and the resolve behind the separate state demand and it was not something that came out of nowhere in 1947. He knew that it was imminent. So his stand on being adamant on non-partition until the last moment can be questioned as to whether wasn’t it more practical that he used his ‘latent’ flexible approach here too.

He should have worked on a path that would have made the partition a more acceptable truth in the minds of leaders and Indians. Wouldn’t have that stopped much bloodshed that eventually happened during the partition in 1947 and whose hatred still continues to poison both the countries.

Jawahar lal Nehru became the president of the Lahore session of the Congress inspite the fact that he got the

lowest vote.It was at Gandhi’s insistence that the Congress made him the president. Questions are bound to arise for this un-leader like behavior from Gandhi.

But the answer to this is that he was a weak man, and would have preferred to deal with someone like Nehru who was more close to his thinking and more ‘flexible’ rather than someone like Patel who was always riding a different boat. Gandhi knew that if Nehru became the president he would act as a mask for Gandhi, something which Patel would have never done. He in a way gave his silent assent to the policy of ‘dynasty politics’ where Jawaharlal replaced his father Motilal, thereby starting a trend which continues even till now.

In 1930 Gandhi decided to call for the civil disobedience movement to protest against Lord Irwins policies. The movement was soon engulfed in violence as Gandhi’s theory of non-violence found few takers. And in sharp contrast to Chauri Chaura, Gandhi this time didn’t call off the movement. This movement is seen by many as the first major step of women participation in Indian political scene. But this was after social activist Kamala Devi Chattopadhyaya had persuaded Gandhi to let women also be a part of this movement.

Gandhi time and again comes out as some who is not sure of how his conduct in a given situation. Violence which for him was a sin didn’t stop him from calling off civil disobedience movement this time even though people were being killed.

In February 17, 1931 Irvin invited Gandhi for talks to end this movement. And it was then that the famous Irvin-Gandhi pact was signed. And it was here that Gandhi failed miserably. Maybe knowingly too. For he failed to commute to death sentence of Bhagat Singh who was sent to death.

The nation was left fuming as the three men were sent to gallows and if Gandhi had refused to sign the pact on this question they would have been spared. In days to come Gandhi was shown black flags by the very mass that he thought he was representing. To accentuate the hypocrisy the Congress passed a resolution which was drafted by Gandhi himself that read “ while disassociating itself from and disapproving of political violence in any shape and form, we admire the bravery and sacrifice of the three martyrs”.

Many say that Gandhi was concerned by the growing mass appeal of the three young revolutionaries and felt that they were better dead than alive.

The pact was also seen as a betrayal of Congress’s call for ‘fight to finish”. It is cited as Gandhi’s fear that the mass movement will take a radical turn. Another instance where Gandhi negotiated out of fear, another instance of his weakness taking the center stage.

By the end of 1932 the civil disobedience movement that Gandhi had resumed, after large scale repressive measure were taking place in India, had started fizzling out and Gandhi was looking for an honorable exit because the government was not talking to him. So he directed his interest towards another subject which brought him laurels from world over; Harijans. Harijans upliftment became his primary concern.

Gandhi though condemned untouchability but till the early 1940s he continued to uphold the values of Caste system. He differed on his opinion with Ambedkar as Ambedkar took a political solution to eradicate un-touchability while Gandhi himself preferred a religious approach. Later in his life Ambedkar charged Gandhi and Congress of using the harijans for their own political gain.

In 1939, Subhash Chandra Bose was elected as the president of the Congress. Something which made Gandhi uneasy. Though Gandhi had ceased to be a primary member of the Congress in 1934, maybe to escape responsibility, he was widely seen as the hand that controlled Congress. Bose opposed India’s participation in the Second world war and he said that this was a right time to pressurize Britain to grant freedom to India.

This infuriated Gandhi who said that India should help Britain in times of crisis and as result of which Britain will grant freedom to India after the war was over. Bose’s idea of promoting industrialization also angered Gandhi whose opposition to this modernism I have already documented above.

Gandhi saw this as a personal prestige issue and decided to remove Bose as the Congress president On August 11, 1939 , Bose was removed from the post of President and barred from holding any Congress office for three years.

On June 1,1940 when Britain was on the brink of a Nazi occupation, Gandhi famously wrote to Churchill “We do not seek our independence from British ruin”. But as expected the war ended and Britain refused to grant independence to India thereby leaving Gandhi to do nothing but regret.

On 8,August 1942,the Quit India movement was passed and the country saw itself in a mass struggle. Historians agree that apart from the British atrocities the most important fuel for this movement was inflation, black marketing and hoarding. Purely economic reasons.

Gandhi’s call for Quit India was just a headline that summed up a story. And that headline owed its existence to the story rather then being the other way round. By then end of 1942, though the Britishers had managed to quell the movement yet they had realized that the time of granting of Freedom to India was near.

In the 1945-46 central and provincial legislatures election, established that the Muslim league was well entrenched and was the only mouth piece of the Muslims. Their demand of separate nation was now more strong.

The World war had ended. The anti-imperialist wave coupled with a weary army and a war ravaged economy Britishers had no other choice but to retreat.

And finally India was granted Freedom.

VII

Gandhi, as we turn the pages of history, comes out as something different from what he is made out to be. He made weak decisions, made decisions that were taken out of fear and made decisions that were based on his personal opinion rather than the interest of the nation.

He promoted Nehru for his own reason, and saw to it that Patel always stayed in the background. On issue of Bose he made sure that he was thrown out of the Congress party. When he could have saved the life of Bhagat Singh,Rajguru and Sukhdev he backed out. Because of the fear that he won’t be able to contain their rise this according to him was harmful for him, Congress and the Couuntry, in that order. He never promoted Industrialization and only took to the welfare of Harijans as a new interest to divert his failures.

He failed many times. Notably the most when he could have stopped the blood bath during the partition. Not by stopping the partition, that was a foregone conclusion but by not resisting it.

He started movements and then stopped them on his personal wish. He time and again illustrated the fact that his ego was something that acted as his shield to hide his weakness.

He was just another leader who knowingly or unknowingly overshadowed the others to emerge as the synonym of the Indian national movement. And continues to enjoy this stature of a god and the Father of the nation.

Gandhi was not a Mahatama, but Mohandas, a human being.

Kalmadi and Raja reunited

2011-03-18T11:43:00.007+05:30

New Delhi : Suresh Kalmadi and Andimuthu Raja are long lost brothers who got separated at childhood when they were running away from a BSNL linesman after they had stolen copper wires from him and if it was not for their respective embezzlement in 2G and Common wealth they would not have been reunited again, a ‘We-leak’ cable has revealed .

A cable no 01010101 dated 20.01.2010 from Joginder Clinton, Field Director, India CIA ( Corruption India Accentuated ) to Shri.Lalu Yadav ( State Head, CIA, Bihar) has revealed that Kalmadi and Raja were brothers who got separated while trying to hide reel of telephone cables that they had taken from a BSNL linesman when he had come in their locality to repair a minor fault.

The linesman, whose name is Sardar Mohan Singh, after discovering the embezzlement, gave the brothers a chase as a result of which Raja took a train to South and Kalmadi landed in Pune, all at the tender age of seven years. Surprisingly though the CIA was aware of this fact for the last few years yet it chose to remain a mute spectator to this meteoric rise and fall of the brothers rather than acting as a guardian.

According to sources if it was not for a loose mouthed ED officer who was a part of the team that conducted raid on Kalmadi’s house, both the brothers would have never met.

It was during this raid that the officer who goes by a single name of Sanghviwrites told Kalmadi that his modus operandi matches that of another clean soul who goes by the name of King ( Raja) and who to is a well known businessman specializing in selling airwaves for money.

Later the supporters of Kalmadi, got into a back office diplomacy to make ground for the two brothers to unite.Phone calls were made between Kalmadi and Raja,currencies exchanged and also discussed were small notes on how to fool CBI. The final result of these efforts culminated in a tearful reunion during the swearing in ceremony at the time of UPA II .

When we spoke to Kalmadi, he said that if it was not for the Common wealth games and the subsequent financial calamity which got him international fame he would not have known the whereabout of his cute innocent brother.

Not-surprisingly Raja too sang the same note and said that if it was not the Spectrum sale he wouldn’t have got the publicity and he would have been lost in the oblivion without being reunited with his brother.

Gabbar Moily, the law minister though is not amused and has taken a very serious note of this leakage of confidential information and has asked the Law ministry to take a suo moto cognizance of the blabbering by Sanghviwrites and book him for sedition. According to A. Raman of We Protect India, a think tank that works in the field of Corruption, this new age allying of the two brothers may bring more laurels for India and more money for the Swiss bank.

This Ram-Bharat milan has attracted Southern Leaders like DaruaNidhi who have also already started their parley to woo the ‘Rajamadi’ brothers to counter the Bellary brothers.

According to C.Raadia from Radi PR firm the partnership between the two is sure to kick up many a gale as Raja is synonym for bringing many storms as his name suggest and he will be ably supported by Kalmadi, who can play many a games with equal ease,

It will be interesting to see what the two brothers have in mind now. Suhel Bohat bolta hai Seth taking a jibe at the tearful reunion observed “If I was any of the two brothers I would have selected the forthcoming General elections or the T-20 world cup scheduled for 2016.”.

And as we write this report, a PIL is reportedly being filed in the SC to preserve the DNA of the Rajamadi brothers so as to make sure that their legacy is not lost in case of a mass uprising like one that happened in Tunisia and Egypt.

Its noteworthy to mention that this PIL was filed by a group calling themselves the Black Chadi campaigners immediately after a separate PIL was filed by Madhu Koda for the biased treatment meted out to him by the UPA government by not giving him a plum ministry inspite the fact he had a much larger largesse to show than the two brothers combined. According to him the natural justice of law has been violated and this neglect shows the condition of an Aam Aadmi under the present government.

Meanwhile in a separate yet similar incident the SC has dismissed a petition filed by "Harried Worried Swamy" to ask Anand Sharma and Suresh Kalmadi to go for a DNA test so as to establish whether they were fraternal twins. The Supreme court said that this was a case of common sense and any man of a normal vision will be able to make out whether any relationship exist between the two or not and there was no need for a DNA test for this trivial question.

Summing up the whole incident, Kalmadi expressed his gratitude to the media for covering his Commonwealth endeavor and said that it’s a sheer case of divine intervention that what started from stealing of cables has finally ended because of cables.

of Shaadma and her tale

2011-03-17T14:02:00.003+05:30

It was 1.30 AM in the night and the craving for tea forced me to ask the driver to stop at a Dhaba on NH3 about 65 kms before Jalgaon in Maharastra. I had a train to catch the next morning from Jalgaon and had more than ample time to do some badly needed stretching and catch up on some food and some tea and fag.

We, me and my driver had been driving for a couple of hours and had left Nashik long back. The dhaba was built in midst of a picturesque landscape. It was on NH 3 surrounded by tall mountains of black rocks and tree.

I didn’t ask for the menu and simply told the waiter to bring Dal Tadka and Roti. And the driver too gave his silent assent to the choice of menu with a discreet smile. If you are at a Indian dhaba and you prefer vegetarian than rest assured the best meal that you can have is Dal Tadka and Tandoori Roti. With time I have developed a strong reason to believe that The taste of Dal Tadka is virtually the same at every Dhaba, be it in Bastar, Koderma,Nangloi,Meerut, Vindhyachal or Solapur. It’s the best bet you can play without caring for how it will taste. The hardness and the elasticity of the Tandoori may differ but the Tadka in dal will always remain the same.

And Like many of us, I too have a kind of liking to sit on the charpai when having dinner at a Dhaba. And this Dhaba had nothing but charpai strewn all over, where one could sit with your legs folded or lie down and gaze at the stars which were shining like small moons on a clear March night.

Even though there were not many hungry travellers yet the food was taking time and my driver had lied down on his own charpai not too far away from where I was resting. And soon enough I went into a carlag induced sleep.

My moments of half slumber was broken by the sound of a truck that had halted at the dhaba and I looked at the truck and saw three people getting out. Two male and one female. I am sure that the two men don’t warrant a description. They were just like the regular driver and cleaner that travel with a goods truck.

They were tired, wore minimal clothes that decency called for and were looking for some food and more sleep.

Their truck too more or less deserved the same description. Tired, savaged and looking for rest. It was bearing the registration number of Indore and had a tagline of “ Kabhie dil mai,kabhie mandir mai rehtey hain, kismat he aisee payi ki har waqt safar mai rehtehy hain”.

The woman though was much better dressed. And the one thing catching about her was the absence of any sense of vulnerability which one seems to associate with a woman who has just got down at a road side dhaba in the middle of night from a truck. The truck driver and his cleaner after ordering the same dal tadka and roti settled themselves on a different charpai while the woman after not much deliberation rested herself on a different bed. Not too far from where I was sitting.

Ten minutes later,my Dal and Roti arrived. And it as I had thought , it didn’t fail my expectations. The same taste that I had hoped for. It was gratifying. Post a satisfied appetite , I lighted a smoke and with a hot glass of steaming tea in my other hand I went for a lazy stroll.

The passing of speeding trucks and the strange calmness pushed me into what we call times when we are cutoff from the happenings around you. My not so deep thoughts accentuated by the caffeine and nicotine were broken by the voice of the woman and as I turned back to see who it was, I saw the same woman who had alighted from the truck.

She in a barely audible voiced asked for what the time was to which I replied as I chose to ignore the fact that she too was wearing a handwatch. And as I was somewhat expecting, the next question that came from her was whether I can give her ‘some money’. She said that she was going to Bhopal and it would be two days before she reaches there and for that she required money.

As she uttered Bhopal, the curiosity inside me came out and that’s how I came to know that how ‘Shaadma’ reached Mumbai and why she was going back to Bhopal.

She was a student of a local college in Bhopal living in Noor Mahal area of old Bhopal, one of the many wards that was declared affected by the gas tragedy of December 1984 .During her first year of graduation she and her beloved eloped and went to Malegaon in Maharashtra. This happened more than one year back.

There he worked as a tailor for more than six months and she took up the job of a faithful house wife. Later they decided to go to Mumbai for a better living .Some months later she got pregnant but suffered a miscarriage and that was the time when things started going wrong. One month after the miscarriage, her husband left her didn’t return home .And after some days she found that he had gone back to Itarsi to his family from where he originally belonged.

She waited for him for a couple of months and when things became worse and it became untenable to reside in Mumbai , she took the last option she had. To go back to Bhopal.

She knew no one in Mumbai, and had no idea on how to reach Bhopal. So she went to Dadar station, took a train which she was told that would take her to Bhopal. But she was forced to alight at Nashik station after the TTE discovered that she had no ticket. At Nashik she stayed at the platform before she took lift on this Indore bound truck for which she had to give Rs.70.

I had many reasons to believe her story and I had many past experiences to not to trust her.

---------------------------------------------------

I, Aruna Shanbaug

2011-03-07T12:10:00.011+05:30

I was a nurse at a hospital in Mumbai, full of life just like a 24 year old girl. I had many dreams, countless aspirations just like all. I was about to get married to a handsome doctor. And then everything fell apart.

On the night of 23 November, 1973 I was sexually assaulted by a boy who was working in the same hospital where I was. And I lost my power to speak , I was paralysed and slowly I slipped into a vegetative state. That was 37 years ago. With time everyone left me, my family, my fiancé, my friends and my death too.

A vegetative state is a condition which arises after a patient suffers from severe brain damage. It’s a state of coma. In the vegetative state patients can open their eyelids occasionally and demonstrate sleep-wake cycles, but completely lack cognitive function. I have been in this state for the past 37 years. This was before India won the world cup in 1983, or before the calendar turned 2000. I don’t know who is Sachin Tendulkar or who is Shahrukh Khan.

I don’t know whether I can think or not and I am not sure that the people who are caring for me can understand my pain, which I cannot express through gestures but through my eyes.

I don’t know whether they know what I feel every moment. Have they tried to think as to what I must be thinking lying in the bed for all these years? Do they understand that how it feels to be alive and yet die every moment? No, they don't.

I have experienced these moment countless times for the past 37 years. I am helpless. The epitome of helpless, who can neither live nor am I allowed to die. I suffer silently , not because I chose to but because I cannot tell you how much painful it is to be me. If I could have told you about my pain then you wouldn't have let me live.

It’s not a very happy thought when you realize that when you will open your eyes again in the morning you will do the same thing that you have been doing for the last 37 years. Just lying in the bed. Not feeling anything, not being to say anything, not being able to cry or to smile. I even don’t know what the people are thinking about me. I cannot figure out why don’t they keep themselves in my place and then realize what I go through. Is it that difficult to imagine the suffering that I feel?

If I could speak I would have told you about the intense pain that you ignore.

Life is beyond words. And surely beyond laws. Just because there has been no law enacted that doesn’t take away my right to die in a dignified way.That came to me the moment I was born.

I have died every moment that I have been alive for the thirty seven years that I have been confined to this place. I have suffered every time I have opened my eyes and I have died many times when I have closed them.

The Supreme Court today decided that I had no right to die. But they forgot that I died many years back.

I, Aruna Shanbaug died today, again.

Still nationalist at heart

2011-02-09T12:23:00.008+05:30

A letter to Sagarika Ghose in reply to her fear of the death of the liberal democracy

Dear author of ‘bloody mary’

I will be very honest to the extent of being brutal here as I write this to you. I have very occasionally read your column before. If my memory serves me right I read it some months back because you had written a piece on another idiot of the Thackeray clan, Aditya Thackeray. And I appreciated it, just like many others might have.

I have not put any effort to decipher why I don’t like reading what you write. Perhaps I am not attracted by the subject matter on which you write but one thing that I am sure of is the fact that I like your way of writing, the use of poets and poems etc. But that's where the appreciation ends.

Your recent write-up “Still old at heart” is something that I decided to read because I thought that it was something that was fresh and different from your too repetitive ranting for a ‘liberal’ Indian. And guess what, you proved me wrong. But then if only I had started from the last paragraph I would have been spared being ‘enlightened’ by your delightful thoughts.

What for you is a ‘political right’?

For you and the others liberals, ‘political right' is a demon that was born during and after the Godhra incident and the subsequent Gujarat riot. Nothing else. For you it is an ideology that took shape during those horrendous days.

But are you being true? Not to yourself but to the readers that you expect to read you? Is political right just about Gujarat?

Is being a ‘political right’ confined to the RSS,BJP or the VHP? And does being a Rightist mean someone who will take to the street with swords on the slightest pretext? Someone who will burn the whole city down if a Hindu goddess is painted in nude? Is that what you feel?

Cannot someone be on the Right side of the political weigh without being violent? Are all the political entities that have rightist leaning extremist and fanatics? Why have you people turned being a rightist into a disease? I leave this to you to decide.

Another feature of the ‘liberals’ that you have been so promoting, maybe because you too consider yourself as one, is that they still go maudlin when it comes to the ‘Left”.

Tell me what has the Left achieved? What did it achieve in West Bengal and what did it do when it was a constituent of the UPA? They are the best example of a how to be a hypocrites. They have all the money in the world just like any other politicians yet they expect that the whole of India to believe that they are the what they appear, a simple grass root leader in sandals and kurtas.

I pity their charming intellect when they speak words of wisdom which is never transformed into actions.

You and the other feel that the educated Indian should embrace the Left because its working for those who have no voice? Do you think that we believe then when they say that its a Marxian war that they are still fighting? No we don’t believe that. Simple and period. And no amount of articles and words will change it.

You have rightly said that we scorn on ‘pseudo-seculars’. And may I also suggest that you can also use the term ‘libtarted’ which is a abbreviated form of ‘liberally-retarded’ when you are referring to these ‘pseudo-seculars’.

This section of the society believes that every other section of the mass that is not on their side should pay heed to whatever comes out of their sparkling mouth. But then again, We will not believe them.

Secularism is not about promoting one and demoting the other, please understand it. It’s about being impartial and being ‘right’, no pun intended.

The new age liberalist believes that its an occasion to celebrate when a god or goddess is painted in nude, it’s a moment to raise a ‘bloody mary’ when some demented writer calls Kashmir a non-integral part of India.

The neo-liberals have a double standard for every thing under the sun. According to you the Judiciary failed Binayak Sen but then according to me the same did not fail S A R Geelani or did it failed?

At one point of time the media found The Talwars guilty and now the same Talwars are an apostle of innocence. Hypocrisy is the key word here, something thats being said in a very subtle tone.

You feel that the judiciary should follow your commands and strictures. If you feel that Geelani is innocent then he should be set free and if Binayak is an angel then he should be treated like one. And if the judiciary fails to follow your words you lambaste them. And you criticize the whole country- Banana republic has become such a rage these days, thanks to you.

You conduct a survey and come out with an observation that the youths have degenerated because they are no more 'liberal'. A survey based on random participants who are living in normal times will not give you an accurate picture that whether they will converge on the streets if they feel that the time has come.

No survey could have predicted about the self-immolation of Rajeev Goswami and no could gauge the strength of the youth when they came out on the street against the reservation policy.

Nationalism is not just about being liberal and secular in the loose terms; it’s something that comes from inside and which is not dependent on someone outside. I hope I have spelled out what nationalism means for me.

Best wishes

Abhinandan Mishra

As guilty as Rupam Pathak

2011-01-05T20:15:00.007+05:30

The murder of BJP MLA Rajkishore Keshari by a school principal Rupam Pathak has brought back Bihar in news, albeit for a wrong reason.

The popular MLA was stabbed in full view by the lady when Kishore was receiving visitors at his home in Purnea. According to her, the MLA along with his associate had raped her earlier.

During the election campaign in the state earlier, she had filed an FIR against the MLA but later withdrawn her complaint saying that she had registered her complaint under the influence of political pressure from opponents of Kishore .

This crime in itself cannot be termed or seen as just another murder. For two reasons.

Firstly for a forty three old educated lady to kill someone that too in public without giving a damn to her life which she knew would be at perils once the supporters of the MLA catch her in itself speaks about the mental stress and pressure that she might be experiencing for a long period of time which finally burst out in open through the killing of Keshari. What prompted such a drastic step?

Secondly and perhaps the most important issue is the reaction that immediately came from the state government.

Senior BJP leader and the Deputy CM, Sushil Modi along with CP Thakur, the state BJP chief in a joint press conference that was held immediately after the incident virtually tied the noose around the killer when they announced that Rupam Pathak was blackmailing Kishore and when he resisted she killed him. The verdict was out even before the police could start its investigation.

While announcing their verdict the BJP leaders have already told the investigative agency what they want from the investigation. Modi said that the lady acting on behalf of the political enemies of the MLA had earlier too filed a police complaint against Kishore but later withdrawn it. There by casting a question on her integrity and character.

The deputy CM failed to presume that what if in reality atrocity was committed on the women by his party leader? He also failed to understand that by calling her a criminal he has pressurise the state police to act in a premeditated way which would curve the outcome of the investigation on a particular line. He couldn’t comprehend that how difficult it would have been for an educated, a mother and someone who is a principal of a school to think of killing of such a popular leader that too in full view. No, I don’t think that she acted because of any political opponent of Kishore cajoled her to use the sixteen inch knife and neither I believe that since he refused to give the money she killed her.

It was a situation where the human mind was cornered from all sides and the only way it could have come out was through the killing of Kishore.

I am not in any way protecting Rupam Pathak nor I am saying that she shouldn’t be punished. She should be punished with the severest law of the land. But what I am questioning is the conduct of the state administration when they pronounced Pathak guilty of moral turpitude. She is guilty of murder but does that crime robs her of her integrity and character?

With a common woman taking the proverbial ‘law in her own hand’ we need to question that has the criminal system of our country failed so much that now every second day a Rang De Basanti scenario will be played on the streets? The answer is Yes.

As people’s confidence and belief in law will decrease the ambit of of lawlessness will increase.

As Nitish Kumar bask in the glory of good governance and the pride of being declared the Indian of the year it is very essential that he doesn’t ignore this incident as one of the many murders that happens all over India daily. Way back in 1994 when the “pride of Bihar” Lalu Prasad Yadav was in power a similar incident had occurred when a Janata Dal MLA Yogendra Narayan Sardar raped a 16 year-old dalit girl. The MLA was later arrested and the then state government contrary to what the present NDA has done provided the victim girl a government job.

The judiciary will take its own course is this brutal murder which in all probability will end with the conviction of Rupam Pathak. But why was she was forced to take such a drastic step will linger in our mind for a long period of time. Equally painful will be the conduct of the state administration which condemned a woman guilty of moral indecency just because the man who died was one of their own party member.

Binayak Sen – we a nation of hypocrites

2010-12-27T23:28:00.007+05:30

The conviction of Dr.Binayak Sen for life by a Chhattisgarh court for supporting the naxalites has drawn expression of anger and sadness from many quarters. Which I dare to say was expected.

Sen was arrested by the the Chhattisgarh police in 2007 for allegedly acting as a courier between a jailed naxal leader and a businessman.

The reactions that have come from various sides of the globe have blasted the Indian judiciary, the Indian governing system and alike to all corners. Activists have till now organized many a rallies in support of the doctor. One such rally was organized in the heart of Delhi where the great “Arundhati Roy” too made her presence felt. Online petitions have already flooded emails of many an enlightened Indians asking them to register their protest. Amnesty too has joined in.

The charade of the 'intellectuals' is at full swing for the world to see and to mock the Indian democracy which according to them is trembling in fear of a doctor.

The conviction is being projected as an indication of the increasing intolerance level of the Indian state. Comparison are being draw by respected media sites like “the Hoot” where it has displayed instances of how the use of the word ‘sedition’ is increasingly being used by the state to put human right activists and crusaders for poor behind the bars.

All the major newspapers through their editorials have also followed the same path and have called for the release of Dr.Sen. The electronic media too have more or less convinced themselves that Dr.Sen in innocent.

In short we are witnessing a propaganda where the mass is being exposed to a truth that actually may not be true. And the propaganda is working on the lines of projecting Dr.Sen as someone who has been wrongly put behind the bars.

And the propaganda seems to be working as more and more people are jumping into the bandwagon. For Propaganda is to democracy what violence is to totalitarianism as Chomsky said. By the way Chomsky himself too is on the long elite list of those who have called for the release of Dr.Sen.

But we are missing the small picture as we go berserk in our efforts to reaffirm our values in our ever revered and yet the most misused sets of right which we call ‘human rights’.

Dr.Sen did a crime and for that he was convicted by the court. A court which followed the duly laid out procedure. A case in which the accused was provided to the best of legal minds and unlimited resources of every kinds from every quarters.

He had the media with him and he had a huge chunk of the intellectuals supporting him. What else was missing? Nothing I presume.

Dr.Sen was convicted after the prosecution was able to convince the judge that Dr.Sen was doing what has been alleged in the charge sheet, and that was to help the naxalites. His supporters though say that he is a doctor who has been working with the under privileged tribals in the dense forest of Chhattisgarh where the state has failed to make its presence felt. They cite the various recognitions that he has been endowed with, both nationally and international. His association with the well known PUCL is also a defense in itself.

Agreed that everything that is being stated in defence are accepted and well documented and proved "but"- and mind you it’s a big but- ‘Is this illustrated past more than enough to absolve him of any wrong doing that he has been convicted of’? Does the above fact dilute the offence that he has committed?

He has such a meritorious past and he is a human right activist and the fact that he is what can be called someone who decided to leave an illustrious life to work for the down trodden but does that make him immune to law?

Why is it that every right-left-centrist activist considers himself to be above the law just because he is working for the human rights of the others?

Why is it a sin to book Arundhati Roy and alike under the offence they deserve.

Why are we such a scared nation that even if a figure is pointed on these human activists that we start feeling a fear that our rights are going to be trampled? And we conveniently forget the same fact that we so proudly use in discussions that “No one is above law”.

How can someone say nonsense like that since A Raja and S Kalmadi are roaming free, Dr.Sen should not be put behind bars. Did they forgot that Sen was booked in 2007 while the misdeeds of the others have just surfaced.

And if they are drawing comparison then they should also compare the Parliament attack case where Geelani , an educated elite, was set free by the same system of judiciary that has convicted Sen now.

After Dr.Sen was convicted, Ramachandra Guha in an op-ed somewhere,compared him with the slain union leader Shankar Guha Niyogi. Drawing parallels between Dr.Sen and Niyogi can best be termed an act of fantasy arrived upon after losing all sense of logical sanity .

People out there are all but ready to turn Dr.Sen into a martyr. And in the process they have disregarded the judiciary which for them in just another tool of the state to oppress the unrepresented.

Dr.Sen will be filing an appeal against the order and maybe he will get bail from the higher court or maybe the sentence will stay, that is not the question.

The question is when do we realize the fact that no one is above law. Maybe that truth will arise to us when we accept the fact that we are a nation of hypocrites who love to be governed by the educated elite bunch among all the hypocrites. As the current example of raising hue and cry over Dr.Sen proves.

Media unbiased- A 'mythical shit'

2010-12-23T13:01:00.014+05:30

The spotlight has never been as intensely focused on the media itself as it is now as the respected Fourth pillar find itself being subjected to the same questions that it showered all these years on the other three pillars of a vibrant democracy.

One after the other, incidents,leaks,expose have come out in the public sphere bringing out in open the dirt that was always present in the media but was very subtly swept under the carpet.

Journalism is about truth and spreading the information. But rare are periods where it was confined under these limits. Ethical and moral limits in journalism are loosely codified and very rarely followed.

Politics,Police,Paisa which ostensibly amounts to ‘power’ have always been a part of the media. And when these three walk with you side by side you are bound to enjoy the rise associated with them and equally share their disgraced fall.

When the recorded conversation between a lobbyist and people from different sphere, some of them from media, came into spotlight the reactions was as expected. Editorials, talk shows, anchors, politicians, actors all joined in to create a hullabaloo on the lines of ostracizing the people who were involved in the conversation.

Many celebrated and not so celebrated journalist from media houses like NDTV,Times of India, Hindustan Times, PTI were heard on the tape discussing many things, which for some, automatically transformed into a showmanship of ‘power broking’.

Discussed was who should be made the minster, who should be allotted which portfolio, why should the business war between two brothers sorted out and how. In short, if Radia was interacting with a politician she spoke their language and if she was talking with a journalist she was working on how to use their ability for her and for her clients gain. What she was doing was her job, which was to lobby. But whether the journalist whom she interacted with also doing their job is the question that needs to dwelt on, a question that has some very difficult answers.

As soon as the tapes were out critics too were out with sharpened swords and pointed pen as articles after articles flew. One of the journalist who was till then a star reporter for many became the ‘butt’ of the severest criticism.

The merits of the criticism and whether she deserved the criticism though is a different matter all together , article on which I have already written previously.

But what this particular expose has achieved is that it has brought the revered Fourth estate to more reasonable deserving heights. It now stands on a pedestal where it shares space with its three cousins. The judiciary, the executive and the legislature. And no one can claim to be Ceaser's wife here.

There was a time when the editor of Times of India was considered as the second most important man after the Prime Minister. There were moments when a Chief Minister would literally run after the bureau chiefs of national dailies so he could get audience with the journalist. And seldom would he succeed. That was before the journalist got into this tempting habit of fiddling into the working of a state.

They forgot that their job was to report what is happening and not to decide how it should happen.

With influx of corporate culture came the time when money became the primary aim of the publishers. For them it was all about bringing in government ads and generating revenue through corporate houses. And as is the rule of nature, if you need something, you have to dish out many things.

So for the sake of government ad from a particular state, the concerned bureau chief was asked to meet the CM. Generally the chief minister would happily oblige and in turn the journalist was now one of the CMs men. That was how it turned, the table that is. Negative truth about governance and alike stopped coming out from the state. Even if a journalist would do such a story the management would refuse the run it, least it offends the CM. And in the end it was the journalist who got the flak from both the sides.

Gradually it spread to the other areas. You cannot run a newspaper on the basis of your readership alone; you need huge amount of money. And for that you need to have a good rapport with the business houses and the politicians. It all turned into a game of obligation. You help me in your way, I will help you the monetary way.

In states like Madhya Pradesh ,Journalism is a much more coveted profession than being a civil servant. The power a journalist enjoys are tremendous and not going into the finer details, I was amused when I saw journalists from Bhopal going all out against Barkha Dutt for her ‘misdemeanour’ .

They tweeted all sorts of things, which primarily was related to the moral and professional ethics of journalism. And the reason for me being surprised was that the same people who themselves had allowed politicians, bureaucrats and businessman to oblige them in so many ways were now spitting venom against Barkha for bringing a bad name to journalism.

Was it irony? or was it hypocrisy or just a pale attempt to come out good.

No organization is unbiased. Every one of them has to look after its client. And there is no exception to it. Exceptions are individuals who are working for these organizations. These individuals have not been bought by any of the politicians and business houses because they cannot be bought as for them journalism still remains a duty towards the society.

But sadly like exceptions, these cadre of journalists are very few in number.

And people still believe the myth that we have an unbiased and free media. Bull shit.

What the Radia-gate has done is that it has torn off the transparent cloth that was covering the much rampant ill practises of journalism. And now the truth is out there, naked, shivering to be seen and adjudged by those very people that were themselves subjected to the same scrutiny by the media.

The meetings at press club of India in Delhi condemning the individuals exposed in Radia gates or participating in protest march to raise voice against the corruption in media are all token gestures. They will be forgotten the next day but the hard fact will remain that the media too is playing in the same dirt which it has all through these years accused the others of.

Media needs to be reformed but the question is how and who would do it. My answer is simple. It has to do only that part which it has been allotted to do. And that is to report the ‘Truth’. Not the manufactured one but the real one.

Candle light- Mumbai's only way out

2010-11-25T23:28:00.005+05:30

It will be exactly two years, two hours from now when the insanity that is called Jihad played havoc in Mumbai . And as we remember the innocent death due to the countless senseless bullets I am sure many of us will light candles at the busy squares of our cities.

Last year this lighting of candles happened in every city be it Mumbai,Delhi,Patna or Bhopal. At that time I was in Bhopal and I saw two radio jockeys standing under a pandal as they distributed candles to the curious guys that had gathered around them.

And like everyone I too noticed that the reason that so many candles were burning to death was not because of the cause but because of the girls who were distributing them.

I don’t have issues with it- lighting of candle nor I find forming of human chains a very senseless act of displaying oneness. But what troubles me is that why do we stop at such symbolic gestures. Why do we have this feeling of contentment and satisfaction after a hard night work of lighting candles.

Lighting of candle became an important sacrosanct of any protest march after Rang De Basanti became a cult. It was like a new age bible for many a protests and the numerous protestors.

And whenever travesty of justice is seen anywhere it’s the candles that are first to come out on the streets. It was on the streets in case of Ruchika, Priyadarshini Matto and it became a beacon of light for the kins of Jessica Lal.

And we would argue that lighting of candle is a symbol of our resolve to fight the darkness. But converting that resolve into action is a very different thing. Never has a litigant won a case with a candle in his hand as he argues in front of the judge. And no government or a state will or has erased or changed something that we have perceived as wrong. Just because the state is being confronted by 200 hands that are waving candles in front of the secretariat or squatting at a busy square. The light coming from hundred candles doesn’t cast a duty on the state to act more prudentially.

The lighting of candle is nothing more than a fake truth to satisfy our ego and the say that “Yes I did my part- Now the rest is upto the others and the state”. If you want to increase the forest cover, taking out candle light protest march won’t serve any purpose. For that you will have to purchase a tree , plant it and take care of it for the initial few months. Similarly if you think that Ruchika didn’t receive justice you have to write to the lawyers, the judges, the MPs. And you have to trust yourself that the words of protest will have a more deeper and long-term impact than lighting candles

The CM in Maharastra was not removed because ten thousand people came on street and drew a graffiti which had “ sponsored by Videocon-Reliance” written all over it. Admit i , in the end it turned into another media extravaganza, a page three protest in some sense. The lighting of candle was turned into a glamorised way of showing dissent for those who are less concerned. And for those who are more serious it’s an easy way out to prove that they care.

No one forces any of us to protest, its one of the thing that is born inside of us and that too not always. So burning candles to show that we are angry when we know that in reality what we are doing it just to become a part of a crowd that too is lost for reason like us is “pseudo-protesting”.

People will argue that lighting of candles is a way to show anger at the 'system'. But think honestly does it helps in any way? Does it achieve the end result for the very purpose that you or I were on the street?

You are the one who will perhaps light a candle tomorrow. Light it purposefully.