B.RAMAN
The Government of India must press ahead with its last-lap negotiations with Dassault Aviation of France for the finalisation of the definitive contract for the acquisition of 126 Rafale multi-role fighters.
2.Now that the decision of the Indian Air Force to go for Rafale has been announced, attempts will be made by others who failed in their bid to sell their aircraft to the IAF such as the European consortium producing the Typhoon to create confusion in the minds of the Indian political leadership and public opinion about the wisdom of the decision to choose the French aircraft.
3.Arms trade is a dirty business and often a Psywar is waged with no holds barred to create suspicions in the minds of the buyer about rival competitors. We had seen this dirty Psywar in the run-up to our decision to acquire a modern jet trainer aircraft. Both British and French arms dealers and their agents fought a bitter Psywar against each other by planting stories which were meant to create doubts in the mind of P.V.Narasimha Rao, the then Prime Minister.
4. I was in service at that time and had personal knowledge of the way stories---which ultimately turned out to be false--- were planted through politicians, bureaucrats and journalists to create doubts in the minds of the decision-makers about the integrity of those involved in the decision-making and of the decision-making process itself. As a result, there was inordinate delay in signing the final contract for the purchase of advance jet trainers.
5. The British particularly played a very dirty game by planting suspicions in the minds of Narasimha Rao through their contacts in the Indian intelligence community. It is quite likely that history may repeat itself and a similar Psywar may again start. The only way of pre-empting and preventing it is by pressing ahead with the negotiations with Dassault Aviation and signing the final contract quickly. The longer the delay, the dirtier will be the Psywar.
6. Analysts have already started discussing about possible strategic collateral benefits to India as a result of the IAF’s decision to go for Rafale. Two possible benefits have been highlighted---- a greater keenness on the part of the French to step-up their co-operation with India in the nuclear and space fields and a revival of the 1970s project for co-operation between the intelligence agencies of India and France to monitor developments in the Indian Ocean in the waters to the West of India.
7. The credit for giving a French orientation to India’s strategic thinking should go to Indira Gandhi. Her bitter experience with the USA’s Nixon Administration during the 1971 events that led to the birth of Bangladesh and the difficulties sought to be created by the US in the way of our nuclear and space programmes after the 1974 nuclear test made her turn to France for understanding and co-operation. At her instance, R.N.Kao, the then head of the Research & Analysis Wing (R&AW), our external intelligence agency, visited France in 1974 for meetings with Le Comte Alexandre de Marenches, the then head of the French external intelligence, Michel Poniatowski, the then French Interior Minister, and Giscard d’Estaing, the then French President.
8.Kao’s fruitful discussions in France facilitated the co-operation between the two countries in the nuclear and space fields and led to an agreement between the external intelligence agencies of the two countries for operational co-operation to monitor developments in the Indian Ocean. Their common targets were the fleets of the US and the Soviet navies.
9. The intelligence co-operation progressed in fits and starts till the assassination of Indira Gandhi in October,1984. After her death, the operational co-operation lost momentum, though intelligence-sharing continued. No other Indian political leader after Indira Gandhi and no other intelligence chief after Kao and no other intelligence chief of France after Le Comte evinced similar interest and enthusiasm for operational co-operation between the external intelligence agencies of the two countries.
10. The interests of both the intelligence agencies have changed since 1984. They no longer have common concerns over the activities of the US and Russian navies in the Indian Ocean. If operational co-operation----as distinguished from intelligence sharing---is to be revived in a meaningful manner, we have to identify new areas of common concern. Two such areas are the activities of the Somali pirates and the intentions, capabilities and activities of the Chinese Navy in the Indian Ocean.
11. There is already a mechanism for co-operation between the Navies of India and the NATO countries to counter piracy. Joint monitoring of the activities of the Chinese Navy is a subject of common concern for India and France that has not received adequate attention till now.
12. In the favourable strategic ambiance that is likely to follow the Rafael contract, we should revive and intensify the pre-1984 operational co-operation in the Indian Ocean ----with different targets this time. Such a project for Indo-French co-operation need not come in the way of our ongoing strategic co-operation with the US. It can supplement it. ( 2-2-12)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com Twitter : @SORBONNE75 )
Wednesday, February 1, 2012
PAKISTAN: BACK FROM THE BRINK
B.RAMAN
The war of nerves involving the elected Executive, the Army and the Judiciary in Pakistan over the so-called Memogate has noticeably subsided with all the three withdrawing from the brink for the present.
2. The main credit for the thaw should go to Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhury of the Supreme Court. who, heading a nine-member bench of the court, ordered the removal of the restrictions on the foreign travel of Hussain Haqqani, the former Pakistani Ambassador to the US, on January 30,2012.
3. The bench ordered the removal of the travel restrictions after it became apparent that Mansoor Ijaz, the US citizen of Pakistani origin, on whose allegations the Supreme Court ordered an enquiry by a judicial commission into the Memogate affair, was avoiding coming to Pakistan to testify before the Commission on the ground that there could be threats to his security if he came to Pakistan. He wanted his statement to be recorded in Europe, to which the Commission was not agreeable.
4. The evasion and the reluctance of Ijaz to come to Pakistan considerably weakened the case against Haqqani and the credibility of Ijaz, as the principal witness. While keeping the enquiry by the judicial commission going and giving a two-months extension to the Commission, the bench headed by the Chief Justice lifted the restrictions on the travel of Haqqani, who reportedly left for Dubai the next morning.
5. President Asif Ali Zardari as well as the US, with both of whom Haqqani had a good equation, have reasons to be gratified by the decision of the Bench. If Ijaz had testified before the Commission and if the Commission had concluded that Ijaz’s allegations were correct, Haqqani might have been found guilty of an act of treason for seeking US help against the Pakistan Army and this might have made Zardari’s position untenable.
6.This danger has now been averted as a result of the reluctance of Ijaz to come to Pakistan and testify before the judicial commission. Suspicion that Ijaz, who is a US citizen of Pakistani origin, avoided testifying after having made the initial allegations against Haqqani, under US pressure would remain strong.
7.The US would not have wanted either Haqqani or Zardari, with both of whom it has had close contacts since the days of Mrs.Benazir Bhutto, to suffer politically as a result of any adverse finding of the Commission. If Ijaz had gone ahead and helped the Army and the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) by testifying against Haqqani , he would have stood in danger of meeting the same fate as Gulam Nabi Fai, another US citizen of Pakistani origin, who is now facing trial in the US on a charge of having links with the ISI.
8.Chief Justice Chaudhury has come out creditably from the affair. There is no reason to believe that the decision to remove the curbs on Haqqani was taken by the bench under any external pressure. It appears to have been an independent decision taken after an objective evaluation of the case in the light of the evasion and reluctance of Ijaz. This would further strengthen the reputation of the Chief Justice as an independent-minded judge not amenable to any pressure either from the Executive or the Army.
9. The weakening of the credibility of Ijaz has also deprived the Army of any pretext for intervention on the ground that the Memogate could have endangered national security. This would give a breather to the Executive. During the entire war of nerves that lasted nearly two months, Zardari and Prime Minister Yousef Raza Gilani conducted themselves with self-assurance and dignity, without letting themselves be bulldozed into any hasty or panic reaction which might have led to a confrontation with the Army.
10. The loser in the entire affair will be Nawaz Sharif, the leader of the Pakistan Muslim League (PML), who was instrumental in getting a judicial enquiry initiated in preference to the enquiry by the National Security Committee of the Parliament, in the hope that an adverse finding by the Judicial Commission might make the position of Zardari untenable and set in motion a train of events leading to premature elections to the National Assembly. There is every reason to believe that his calculations have proved wrong.
11, While the Executive and the Judiciary have emerged with their reputation intact, if not enhanced, the Army and the opposition have suffered some embarrassment. This makes the chances of a classical coup by the Generals even less likely than before.
12. While the Memogate affair is in the process of being defused, there are indications that the differences between the Executive and the Army over relations with the US continue. According to reliable sources, while Zardari is keen that the time has come to end the confrontation with the US, the Army is still dragging its feet on the question of re-opening the NATO’s logistic supply routes to Afghanistan from the Karachi port and handing over to the US a Pakistani doctor, who had allegedly collaborated with the CIA in checking the identity of OBL before the Abbottabad raid. These two issues have defied a solution due to the sulking by the Pakistani Army over a US/NATO air attack on a Pakistani border post in November that led to the death of over 20 military/para-military personnel.
13.Gen.Ashfaq Pervez Kayani, the Chief of the Army Staff, looks upon these issues as purely within the competence of the Army. Zardari is not in a position to have the Executive’s will prevail in this matter.
14. While the lack of convergence between the Executive and the Army over relations with the US continues,there is so far no reason to fear that this could lead to a confrontation between the two. ( 1-2-12)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com Twitter : @SORBONNE75 )
The war of nerves involving the elected Executive, the Army and the Judiciary in Pakistan over the so-called Memogate has noticeably subsided with all the three withdrawing from the brink for the present.
2. The main credit for the thaw should go to Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhury of the Supreme Court. who, heading a nine-member bench of the court, ordered the removal of the restrictions on the foreign travel of Hussain Haqqani, the former Pakistani Ambassador to the US, on January 30,2012.
3. The bench ordered the removal of the travel restrictions after it became apparent that Mansoor Ijaz, the US citizen of Pakistani origin, on whose allegations the Supreme Court ordered an enquiry by a judicial commission into the Memogate affair, was avoiding coming to Pakistan to testify before the Commission on the ground that there could be threats to his security if he came to Pakistan. He wanted his statement to be recorded in Europe, to which the Commission was not agreeable.
4. The evasion and the reluctance of Ijaz to come to Pakistan considerably weakened the case against Haqqani and the credibility of Ijaz, as the principal witness. While keeping the enquiry by the judicial commission going and giving a two-months extension to the Commission, the bench headed by the Chief Justice lifted the restrictions on the travel of Haqqani, who reportedly left for Dubai the next morning.
5. President Asif Ali Zardari as well as the US, with both of whom Haqqani had a good equation, have reasons to be gratified by the decision of the Bench. If Ijaz had testified before the Commission and if the Commission had concluded that Ijaz’s allegations were correct, Haqqani might have been found guilty of an act of treason for seeking US help against the Pakistan Army and this might have made Zardari’s position untenable.
6.This danger has now been averted as a result of the reluctance of Ijaz to come to Pakistan and testify before the judicial commission. Suspicion that Ijaz, who is a US citizen of Pakistani origin, avoided testifying after having made the initial allegations against Haqqani, under US pressure would remain strong.
7.The US would not have wanted either Haqqani or Zardari, with both of whom it has had close contacts since the days of Mrs.Benazir Bhutto, to suffer politically as a result of any adverse finding of the Commission. If Ijaz had gone ahead and helped the Army and the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) by testifying against Haqqani , he would have stood in danger of meeting the same fate as Gulam Nabi Fai, another US citizen of Pakistani origin, who is now facing trial in the US on a charge of having links with the ISI.
8.Chief Justice Chaudhury has come out creditably from the affair. There is no reason to believe that the decision to remove the curbs on Haqqani was taken by the bench under any external pressure. It appears to have been an independent decision taken after an objective evaluation of the case in the light of the evasion and reluctance of Ijaz. This would further strengthen the reputation of the Chief Justice as an independent-minded judge not amenable to any pressure either from the Executive or the Army.
9. The weakening of the credibility of Ijaz has also deprived the Army of any pretext for intervention on the ground that the Memogate could have endangered national security. This would give a breather to the Executive. During the entire war of nerves that lasted nearly two months, Zardari and Prime Minister Yousef Raza Gilani conducted themselves with self-assurance and dignity, without letting themselves be bulldozed into any hasty or panic reaction which might have led to a confrontation with the Army.
10. The loser in the entire affair will be Nawaz Sharif, the leader of the Pakistan Muslim League (PML), who was instrumental in getting a judicial enquiry initiated in preference to the enquiry by the National Security Committee of the Parliament, in the hope that an adverse finding by the Judicial Commission might make the position of Zardari untenable and set in motion a train of events leading to premature elections to the National Assembly. There is every reason to believe that his calculations have proved wrong.
11, While the Executive and the Judiciary have emerged with their reputation intact, if not enhanced, the Army and the opposition have suffered some embarrassment. This makes the chances of a classical coup by the Generals even less likely than before.
12. While the Memogate affair is in the process of being defused, there are indications that the differences between the Executive and the Army over relations with the US continue. According to reliable sources, while Zardari is keen that the time has come to end the confrontation with the US, the Army is still dragging its feet on the question of re-opening the NATO’s logistic supply routes to Afghanistan from the Karachi port and handing over to the US a Pakistani doctor, who had allegedly collaborated with the CIA in checking the identity of OBL before the Abbottabad raid. These two issues have defied a solution due to the sulking by the Pakistani Army over a US/NATO air attack on a Pakistani border post in November that led to the death of over 20 military/para-military personnel.
13.Gen.Ashfaq Pervez Kayani, the Chief of the Army Staff, looks upon these issues as purely within the competence of the Army. Zardari is not in a position to have the Executive’s will prevail in this matter.
14. While the lack of convergence between the Executive and the Army over relations with the US continues,there is so far no reason to fear that this could lead to a confrontation between the two. ( 1-2-12)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com Twitter : @SORBONNE75 )
Tuesday, January 31, 2012
FINAL END OF BARKHA’S AGONY: SHAMELESS MEDIA McCARTHYISM BITES THE DUST
B.RAMAN
The Press Trust of India has reported as follows on January 31,2012:
“In a significant disclosure, the Union government today told the Supreme Court that the Radia tapes broadcast by media organisations were tampered with and the government agencies were not responsible for its leakage.
“Placing a confidential report in a sealed envelope before a bench headed by Justice G S Singhvi, the government said there were eight to ten agencies, including service providers, involved in the tapping of telephonic conversation of former corporate lobbyist Niira Radia.
“The bench went through a few initial pages of the report which stated there was tampering with the conversations which were released by media.
“The report says the starting and the end point of the conversation do not match with the original tapes, Justice Singhvi said referring to the report.
“He said the report also says that officers, who had conducted the probe, do not know who has leaked it.
"It is quite possible that someone else has done it," the bench said.
2.It is the final end of the agony sought to be inflicted on Barkha Dutt, the shining TV journalist, by some jealous members of Barkha’s journalistc fraternity and by some Hindutva elements which came together in an unholy alliance to damage her personal and professional reputation, demoralise her and drive her out of TV journalism.
3. Each had its own agenda for their determined pursuit of their attempt to destroy her reputation. If professional jealousy was the driving force of the Media McCarthyism unleashed against her by sections of the journalistic community, her consistent and courageous support to various causes dear to her --- whether in Jammu and Kashmir or Gujarat, whether relating to artist M.F.Hussain or writer Salman Rushdie, whether the human rights of the religious or ethnic minorities--- triggered the irrational rage of the Hindutva elements against her.
4. Even before the Government of India informed the court of its findings regarding the fabrication of the tapes, the insidious campaign against Barkha had failed. Her recent celebrated interviews with Oprah Winfrey, the US TV star, and Salman Rushdie showed---if additional proof was needed--- that her adversaries had miserably failed to tarnish her reputation and to damage her personal and professional morale, which has remained as high as ever.
5. She now has reasons to be gratified by the findings. Barkha, a true professional to her hard core, is not the person who will gloat in public over her personal and professional vindication, but if the members of this unholy alliance have even the slightest trace of decency in them, they at least owe her an apology in public even if she does not ask for it.
6.I am giving below extracts from what I had written about the insidious campaign against her since December 1,2010:
There is nothing inappropriate or unethical in Barkha's writings, reportage and actions. As regards her private conversations with Radia over phone she has explained the background and context and denied any malafide or unethical intention. Her explanation should be accepted instead of trying to fix her through an inquisition. ( 1-12-10)---From my article of December 1,2010, titled “Fixing Barkha Dutt” at http://ramanstrategicanalysis.blogspot.in/2010/11/fixing-barkha-dutt.html
I chose to defend Barkha because I strongly feel that her hard-earned reputation as a young, courageous and successful journalist, is sought to be besmirched----wittingly or unwittingly---- on the basis of an incomplete and motivated narrative. It is incomplete because only about three per cent of the total number of about 5800 intercepts has been made public. This clearly indicates that there has been a careful selection of the intercepts to be leaked to the press. Who made the selection? With what motive? Unless one has answers to these questions, there should be a big question mark over the narrative.—From my article of December 7,2010, titled IT'S DANGEROUS TO DEFEND BARKHA DUTT at http://ramanstrategicanalysis.blogspot.in/2010/12/its-dangerous-to-defend-barkha-dutt.html
Whatever may be the ultimate outcome of the investigation and other enquiries into the Radia tapes, one has strong reasons to believe that this shameful episode represented "Media McCarthyism" of the worst kind in order to tarnish the reputation of Barkha and ridicule and intimidate those supporting her. One would be entitled to expect that the media houses and journalists, who allegedly played a role in fanning this "Media McCarthyism" against Barkha, would now have the grace to apologise to her in public. From my article of April 19,2011, titled BARKHA DUTT : VICTIM OF MEDIA McCARTHYISM ? at http://ramanstrategicanalysis.blogspot.in/2011/04/barkha-dutt-victim-of-media-mccarthyism.html
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com Twitter : @SORBONNE75 )
The Press Trust of India has reported as follows on January 31,2012:
“In a significant disclosure, the Union government today told the Supreme Court that the Radia tapes broadcast by media organisations were tampered with and the government agencies were not responsible for its leakage.
“Placing a confidential report in a sealed envelope before a bench headed by Justice G S Singhvi, the government said there were eight to ten agencies, including service providers, involved in the tapping of telephonic conversation of former corporate lobbyist Niira Radia.
“The bench went through a few initial pages of the report which stated there was tampering with the conversations which were released by media.
“The report says the starting and the end point of the conversation do not match with the original tapes, Justice Singhvi said referring to the report.
“He said the report also says that officers, who had conducted the probe, do not know who has leaked it.
"It is quite possible that someone else has done it," the bench said.
2.It is the final end of the agony sought to be inflicted on Barkha Dutt, the shining TV journalist, by some jealous members of Barkha’s journalistc fraternity and by some Hindutva elements which came together in an unholy alliance to damage her personal and professional reputation, demoralise her and drive her out of TV journalism.
3. Each had its own agenda for their determined pursuit of their attempt to destroy her reputation. If professional jealousy was the driving force of the Media McCarthyism unleashed against her by sections of the journalistic community, her consistent and courageous support to various causes dear to her --- whether in Jammu and Kashmir or Gujarat, whether relating to artist M.F.Hussain or writer Salman Rushdie, whether the human rights of the religious or ethnic minorities--- triggered the irrational rage of the Hindutva elements against her.
4. Even before the Government of India informed the court of its findings regarding the fabrication of the tapes, the insidious campaign against Barkha had failed. Her recent celebrated interviews with Oprah Winfrey, the US TV star, and Salman Rushdie showed---if additional proof was needed--- that her adversaries had miserably failed to tarnish her reputation and to damage her personal and professional morale, which has remained as high as ever.
5. She now has reasons to be gratified by the findings. Barkha, a true professional to her hard core, is not the person who will gloat in public over her personal and professional vindication, but if the members of this unholy alliance have even the slightest trace of decency in them, they at least owe her an apology in public even if she does not ask for it.
6.I am giving below extracts from what I had written about the insidious campaign against her since December 1,2010:
There is nothing inappropriate or unethical in Barkha's writings, reportage and actions. As regards her private conversations with Radia over phone she has explained the background and context and denied any malafide or unethical intention. Her explanation should be accepted instead of trying to fix her through an inquisition. ( 1-12-10)---From my article of December 1,2010, titled “Fixing Barkha Dutt” at http://ramanstrategicanalysis.blogspot.in/2010/11/fixing-barkha-dutt.html
I chose to defend Barkha because I strongly feel that her hard-earned reputation as a young, courageous and successful journalist, is sought to be besmirched----wittingly or unwittingly---- on the basis of an incomplete and motivated narrative. It is incomplete because only about three per cent of the total number of about 5800 intercepts has been made public. This clearly indicates that there has been a careful selection of the intercepts to be leaked to the press. Who made the selection? With what motive? Unless one has answers to these questions, there should be a big question mark over the narrative.—From my article of December 7,2010, titled IT'S DANGEROUS TO DEFEND BARKHA DUTT at http://ramanstrategicanalysis.blogspot.in/2010/12/its-dangerous-to-defend-barkha-dutt.html
Whatever may be the ultimate outcome of the investigation and other enquiries into the Radia tapes, one has strong reasons to believe that this shameful episode represented "Media McCarthyism" of the worst kind in order to tarnish the reputation of Barkha and ridicule and intimidate those supporting her. One would be entitled to expect that the media houses and journalists, who allegedly played a role in fanning this "Media McCarthyism" against Barkha, would now have the grace to apologise to her in public. From my article of April 19,2011, titled BARKHA DUTT : VICTIM OF MEDIA McCARTHYISM ? at http://ramanstrategicanalysis.blogspot.in/2011/04/barkha-dutt-victim-of-media-mccarthyism.html
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com Twitter : @SORBONNE75 )
Friday, January 27, 2012
NEED FOR A TASK FORCE ON PM’S MEDIA STRATEGY
B.RAMAN
I have been a strong critic of the media shyness and media silence of the Prime Minister Dr.Manmohan Singh. I have written many articles on it and suggested a more activist media strategy marked by a more articulate MMS.
2. I have also been drawing attention to the technology lethargy of the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO), characterised by its hesitation to use the latest media technologies and particularly the social media outlets for interacting vigorously with our netizens.
3. I have been highlighting the unsatisfactory state of the PM’s interactions with citizens as well as netizens and comparing unfavourably his reticence with the more outgoing media policy of even the Chinese leadership, though China is not a democracy.
4. After discussions with a wide spectrum of political, bureaucratic and media observers and experts, I have realised the difficulties faced by the PM in working out a media strategy in his colours and to suit his image and interests.
5. These difficulties arise from the fact that Dr.MMS is not a PM in his own right. He owes the Prime Ministership to Mrs.Sonia Gandhi, the Congress (I) President, who renounced her right to be the Prime Minister after the 2004 elections and nominated DR.MMS to the PM’s chair.
6. This cramps his style of functioning whether in policy-making or public projection of himself either directly or through the media. All the time he has to be cautious to avoid any articulation or action that could be misread in the party as an attempt to outshine Mrs.Sonia Gandhi.
7. Dr.MMS is a shy, reticent person. His shyness and reticence are more pronounced when he is in India than when he is travelling abroad. The dangers of a misinterpretation of his articulation or action are more in India than when he is abroad.
8. This constraint will continue to inhibit and stunt his media strategy so long as he is in office without a political base and authority of his own. This has to be kept in mind while analysing his media strategy.
9. The best media strategy is through direct and frontal interactions with the media---whether print or TV or journos of the new media such as online publications. A direct and frontal projection of himself and his policies will increase the risks of misunderstanding with Mrs.Sonia Gandhi.
10. Despite this, Dr.MMS and his media advisers have to find ways of enabling him to indulge in such direct interactions without a clash of perceptions and personalities with Mrs.Sonia Gandhi. Unfortunately, there has been a reluctance even to discuss available options in the light of the political constraint faced by the Prime Minister.
11. Unless this exercise is taken up and a via media found which would enable the PM to enhance his media and public image without endangering the political authority of Mrs.Sonia Gandhi, I do not see the likelihood of any qualitative change in the PM’s media strategy.
12.The tweet-toeing of the PMO ---not the Prime Minister himself--- into the world of netizens shows a welcome realisation of the need to take advantage of the social media outlets for providing corrections to the PM’s public and media image.
13. Such corrections could be welcome, even if not total if the PM himself takes an active interest in his interactions with netizens. The apparent fact that his tweet connectivity will not be direct, but will be through his Principal Secretary, to be assisted by Shri Pankaj Pachauri, the new media adviser, will reduce the value of the attempted twitter connectivity of the PMO.
14.For a person holding the office of the Prime Minister, Twitter will not be totally shackle-free. As Shri Rajagopalan, the perceptive journalist pointed out in his intervention during a good debate anchored by Ms.Sunetra Choudhury of the NDTV on January 27, the Prime Minister has to be all the time careful to see that he does not step on the toes of the Parliament in his Twitter interactions, if there are any. Otherwise, he may unwittingly commit a breach of parliamentary privilege.
15. Making the Principal Secretary co-ordinate the Twitter strategy without the PM directly getting involved would provide a safety valve, but it would reduce any value-addition to the PM’s media strategy.
16. Instead of experimenting piecemeal as the PMO seems to be doing now, the PM should appoint a high-power task force headed by Dr.Sanjaya Baru, his first Media Adviser, to suggest a comprehensive media strategy, which would address all these factors. ( 28-1-12)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com Twitter : @SORBONNE75 )
I have been a strong critic of the media shyness and media silence of the Prime Minister Dr.Manmohan Singh. I have written many articles on it and suggested a more activist media strategy marked by a more articulate MMS.
2. I have also been drawing attention to the technology lethargy of the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO), characterised by its hesitation to use the latest media technologies and particularly the social media outlets for interacting vigorously with our netizens.
3. I have been highlighting the unsatisfactory state of the PM’s interactions with citizens as well as netizens and comparing unfavourably his reticence with the more outgoing media policy of even the Chinese leadership, though China is not a democracy.
4. After discussions with a wide spectrum of political, bureaucratic and media observers and experts, I have realised the difficulties faced by the PM in working out a media strategy in his colours and to suit his image and interests.
5. These difficulties arise from the fact that Dr.MMS is not a PM in his own right. He owes the Prime Ministership to Mrs.Sonia Gandhi, the Congress (I) President, who renounced her right to be the Prime Minister after the 2004 elections and nominated DR.MMS to the PM’s chair.
6. This cramps his style of functioning whether in policy-making or public projection of himself either directly or through the media. All the time he has to be cautious to avoid any articulation or action that could be misread in the party as an attempt to outshine Mrs.Sonia Gandhi.
7. Dr.MMS is a shy, reticent person. His shyness and reticence are more pronounced when he is in India than when he is travelling abroad. The dangers of a misinterpretation of his articulation or action are more in India than when he is abroad.
8. This constraint will continue to inhibit and stunt his media strategy so long as he is in office without a political base and authority of his own. This has to be kept in mind while analysing his media strategy.
9. The best media strategy is through direct and frontal interactions with the media---whether print or TV or journos of the new media such as online publications. A direct and frontal projection of himself and his policies will increase the risks of misunderstanding with Mrs.Sonia Gandhi.
10. Despite this, Dr.MMS and his media advisers have to find ways of enabling him to indulge in such direct interactions without a clash of perceptions and personalities with Mrs.Sonia Gandhi. Unfortunately, there has been a reluctance even to discuss available options in the light of the political constraint faced by the Prime Minister.
11. Unless this exercise is taken up and a via media found which would enable the PM to enhance his media and public image without endangering the political authority of Mrs.Sonia Gandhi, I do not see the likelihood of any qualitative change in the PM’s media strategy.
12.The tweet-toeing of the PMO ---not the Prime Minister himself--- into the world of netizens shows a welcome realisation of the need to take advantage of the social media outlets for providing corrections to the PM’s public and media image.
13. Such corrections could be welcome, even if not total if the PM himself takes an active interest in his interactions with netizens. The apparent fact that his tweet connectivity will not be direct, but will be through his Principal Secretary, to be assisted by Shri Pankaj Pachauri, the new media adviser, will reduce the value of the attempted twitter connectivity of the PMO.
14.For a person holding the office of the Prime Minister, Twitter will not be totally shackle-free. As Shri Rajagopalan, the perceptive journalist pointed out in his intervention during a good debate anchored by Ms.Sunetra Choudhury of the NDTV on January 27, the Prime Minister has to be all the time careful to see that he does not step on the toes of the Parliament in his Twitter interactions, if there are any. Otherwise, he may unwittingly commit a breach of parliamentary privilege.
15. Making the Principal Secretary co-ordinate the Twitter strategy without the PM directly getting involved would provide a safety valve, but it would reduce any value-addition to the PM’s media strategy.
16. Instead of experimenting piecemeal as the PMO seems to be doing now, the PM should appoint a high-power task force headed by Dr.Sanjaya Baru, his first Media Adviser, to suggest a comprehensive media strategy, which would address all these factors. ( 28-1-12)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com Twitter : @SORBONNE75 )
TIBETAN PROTESTS SPREAD IN WESTERN SICHUAN, POLICE FIRE AGAIN KILLING ONE MORE TIBETAN
B.RAMAN
Protests by Tibetans have spread in Western Sichuan, resulting in one more incident of firing by the local police causing the death of one more Tibetan.
2. According to my sources, there have been three incidents of Police firing since January 23,2012, resulting in the deaths of 12 Tibetans, but the Chinese authorities have admitted only three deaths in three incidents. They have strongly denied reports of larger fatalities.
3. The latest incident of police firing has been reported from the Barma township, where one Tibetan youth died on January 26 when the local police opened fire on protesting Tibetans. The Barma township is located in the Zamthang (in Chinese, Rangtang) county in Ngaba. The Tibetans were protesting against the arrest of Tharpa, another Tibetan, by the police for disseminating anti-Beijing leaflets along with the Tibetan youth (Ugyen), who was killed in the subsequent firing. The death of Ugyen led to nearly 10,000 Tibetans from the nearby areas of Dzitoe and Dzime rushing to Dzamthang to join the protest against the arrest of Tharpa and the death of Ugyen.
4.On January 26, there were also reports of protest and solidarity demonstrations by Tibetans of Qinghai’s Golog (in Chinese, Guoluo) Tibetan prefecture.
5.According to Radio Free Asia, funded by the US State Department, Chinese security forces have become more aggressive in containing the protests, with two Tibetans reported killed by official Chinese media in protests in the Kardze (in Chinese, Ganzi) Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture on Monday and Tuesday.
6.The Police have tightened security in Lhasa, the capital of the so-called Tibetan Autonomous Region, after one incident of anti-Beijing leaflet dissemination near the Jorkhang temple.
7.Chinese micro-bloggers have been reporting movement of trucks carrying police reinforcements to the affected areas in Western Sichuan and cancellation of the Chinese New Year leave of police personnel posted in the Tibetan areas of Western Sichuan. ( 28-1-12)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com Twitter : @SORBONNE75 )
Protests by Tibetans have spread in Western Sichuan, resulting in one more incident of firing by the local police causing the death of one more Tibetan.
2. According to my sources, there have been three incidents of Police firing since January 23,2012, resulting in the deaths of 12 Tibetans, but the Chinese authorities have admitted only three deaths in three incidents. They have strongly denied reports of larger fatalities.
3. The latest incident of police firing has been reported from the Barma township, where one Tibetan youth died on January 26 when the local police opened fire on protesting Tibetans. The Barma township is located in the Zamthang (in Chinese, Rangtang) county in Ngaba. The Tibetans were protesting against the arrest of Tharpa, another Tibetan, by the police for disseminating anti-Beijing leaflets along with the Tibetan youth (Ugyen), who was killed in the subsequent firing. The death of Ugyen led to nearly 10,000 Tibetans from the nearby areas of Dzitoe and Dzime rushing to Dzamthang to join the protest against the arrest of Tharpa and the death of Ugyen.
4.On January 26, there were also reports of protest and solidarity demonstrations by Tibetans of Qinghai’s Golog (in Chinese, Guoluo) Tibetan prefecture.
5.According to Radio Free Asia, funded by the US State Department, Chinese security forces have become more aggressive in containing the protests, with two Tibetans reported killed by official Chinese media in protests in the Kardze (in Chinese, Ganzi) Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture on Monday and Tuesday.
6.The Police have tightened security in Lhasa, the capital of the so-called Tibetan Autonomous Region, after one incident of anti-Beijing leaflet dissemination near the Jorkhang temple.
7.Chinese micro-bloggers have been reporting movement of trucks carrying police reinforcements to the affected areas in Western Sichuan and cancellation of the Chinese New Year leave of police personnel posted in the Tibetan areas of Western Sichuan. ( 28-1-12)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com Twitter : @SORBONNE75 )
Tuesday, January 24, 2012
CURFEW IN WESTERN SICHUAN: 11 TIBETANS DIE IN POLICE FIRING
B.RAMAN
A curfew has been imposed and a shoot-at-sight order has been given to the police following two days of violent protests by Tibetans in certain parts of Western Sichuan, which has seen 14 instances of self-immolation since March last year following the arrests of a large number of Tibetan monks of the well-known Kirti monastery and their forcible detention in a military camp.
2.The protests by the monks of the Kirti monastery started in support of His Holiness the Dalai Lama and in opposition to the suppression of the Tibetans by the Chinese authorities. It has since spread to the general population of the area in protest against the arrest and prosecution of many bystanders, who were present at the scenes of self-immolation, on charges of abetment of suicide.
3. The anger has been aggravated by the refusal of the Chinese authorities to hand over the bodies of those who committed self-immolation to their relatives for funeral ceremonies in accordance with Tibetan traditions and by the disposal of the dead bodies by the police without allowing the relatives to be present.
4.The protests, which were peaceful till December, have since assumed a violent form with at least two attacks on police stations where, the local residents suspected, the dead bodies were kept.
5.An outbreak of widespread violence involving about 6000 Tibetans was reported on January 23,2012, from the Draggo county in Sichuan province's Kardze prefecture . According to reliable sources, the local police opened fire on the protesting Tibetans, resulting in the death of five Tibetans and injuries to 40 others.
6. The news of deaths in the police firings led to the spread of the violence the next day to the Serthar (in Chinese Seda) area of the same prefecture. The police again opened fire resulting in six more deaths.
7. Reports of demonstrations have also been received from the Ngaba (in Chinese, Aba prefecture) area where several thousand Tibetans have reportedly blocked a local road. The police forcibly dispersed Tibetans who tried to hold a special prayer meeting in the Kirti monastery in homage to those who died in the police firings.
8.It is reliably learnt that the latest violence started when the police beat up and arrested Tibetans in the affected areas who refused to celebrate the Chinese New Year’s Day in protest against the Chinese suppression. They also observed the Chinese New Year’s Day as a day of mourning in memory of all those who have committed self-immolation since March last.
9. The US , which will be hosting China's Vice President Xi Jinping at the White House next month, has expressed grave concern over the latest violence, and called upon Beijing to review its "counterproductive policies" in Tibetan areas that have created tensions and threatened Tibetans' religious, cultural and linguistic identity.
10.A statement issued by Maria Otero, US Special Co-ordinator for Tibetan issues, said: “China should resume talks with the Dalai Lama or his representatives over Tibetan grievances. We urge Chinese security forces to exercise restraint, and we renew our call to allow access to Tibetan areas of China for journalists, diplomats and other observers." (25-1-12)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com Twitter : @SORBONNE75 )
A curfew has been imposed and a shoot-at-sight order has been given to the police following two days of violent protests by Tibetans in certain parts of Western Sichuan, which has seen 14 instances of self-immolation since March last year following the arrests of a large number of Tibetan monks of the well-known Kirti monastery and their forcible detention in a military camp.
2.The protests by the monks of the Kirti monastery started in support of His Holiness the Dalai Lama and in opposition to the suppression of the Tibetans by the Chinese authorities. It has since spread to the general population of the area in protest against the arrest and prosecution of many bystanders, who were present at the scenes of self-immolation, on charges of abetment of suicide.
3. The anger has been aggravated by the refusal of the Chinese authorities to hand over the bodies of those who committed self-immolation to their relatives for funeral ceremonies in accordance with Tibetan traditions and by the disposal of the dead bodies by the police without allowing the relatives to be present.
4.The protests, which were peaceful till December, have since assumed a violent form with at least two attacks on police stations where, the local residents suspected, the dead bodies were kept.
5.An outbreak of widespread violence involving about 6000 Tibetans was reported on January 23,2012, from the Draggo county in Sichuan province's Kardze prefecture . According to reliable sources, the local police opened fire on the protesting Tibetans, resulting in the death of five Tibetans and injuries to 40 others.
6. The news of deaths in the police firings led to the spread of the violence the next day to the Serthar (in Chinese Seda) area of the same prefecture. The police again opened fire resulting in six more deaths.
7. Reports of demonstrations have also been received from the Ngaba (in Chinese, Aba prefecture) area where several thousand Tibetans have reportedly blocked a local road. The police forcibly dispersed Tibetans who tried to hold a special prayer meeting in the Kirti monastery in homage to those who died in the police firings.
8.It is reliably learnt that the latest violence started when the police beat up and arrested Tibetans in the affected areas who refused to celebrate the Chinese New Year’s Day in protest against the Chinese suppression. They also observed the Chinese New Year’s Day as a day of mourning in memory of all those who have committed self-immolation since March last.
9. The US , which will be hosting China's Vice President Xi Jinping at the White House next month, has expressed grave concern over the latest violence, and called upon Beijing to review its "counterproductive policies" in Tibetan areas that have created tensions and threatened Tibetans' religious, cultural and linguistic identity.
10.A statement issued by Maria Otero, US Special Co-ordinator for Tibetan issues, said: “China should resume talks with the Dalai Lama or his representatives over Tibetan grievances. We urge Chinese security forces to exercise restraint, and we renew our call to allow access to Tibetan areas of China for journalists, diplomats and other observers." (25-1-12)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com Twitter : @SORBONNE75 )
SEQUEL TO L’AFFAIRE RUSHDIE
B.RAMAN
We haven’t heard the last of L’Affaire Rushdie. It will keep haunting us for some time. The following issues could have unpleasant repercussions:
(a) The act of cowardice by the Governments of India and Rajasthan in abdicating their responsibility to protect a well-known personality facing a threat to his life from some extremist Muslims. He could have been easily protected and any untoward incident in Jaipur avoided by restricting his engagements in Jaipur to the session to which he was invited by the organisers of the Jaipur Literary Festival (JLF) and requesting him to leave Jaipur as soon as that engagement was over. In view of the call by the Deobandis for demonstrations during his visit, he could not have been allowed to stay in Jaipur for the entire duration of the Festival. If the Government of India had wanted, such a restricted, sanitised visit could have been easily organised. This was not done apparently because the Congress Party did not want to displease the Muslim community even by allowing a restricted visit. The cowardice exhibited by the Government of India would encourage similar instances of intimidation in future when any community is opposed to the visits of any person whom it does not like.
(b) The action of the Rajasthan Police in allegedly fabricating intelligence reports indicating the likely possibility of an attempt being made to assassinate Rushdie if he visited Jaipur. The denials of the Rajasthan Police do not carry conviction. This will severely damage the credibility of the Indian Police and other counter-terrorism organisations in the eyes of the counter-terrorism agencies of the world. Even in the past, agencies of other countries suspected that the Indian agencies were not beyond such attempts at fabrication of source reports in order to corroborate their allegations. These suspicions would now be strengthened and the word of the Indian agencies would carry even less conviction in future. Fabricating a source report is considered a serious act of professional misconduct and many intelligence officers have suffered in their career for indulging in it. It is shocking that an agency as a whole---and not just individuals--- had indulged in this. There would be a strong presumption that such fabrications would not have been possible without a collusion or a nod of approval from the Government of India. Unless the Government of India acts strongly against those responsible for this fabrication, the suspicion of collusion by it would be strengthened. Intelligence agencies of other countries would be hesitant in future to act on the source reports of Indian agencies which call for follow-up action by them.
(c) The action of four writers in reading out extracts from the Satanic Verses by Salman Rushdie. This was an unwise and impulsive action. The Police may not be able to arrest and prosecute those who read out the extracts because there is no law banning it, but in the eyes of large sections of the Muslim community the Satanic Verses is a blasphemous book and reading out extracts from it is an act of blasphemy. Secret fatwas might have already been issued for carrying out Islamic punishments against these four persons and Barkha Dutt, who has interviewed Rushdie. They will have to be extra careful in future. What we see as a legitimate demand for freedom of expression from the artistic community, is seen by many in the Muslim community as a demand for freedom to indulge in an act of blasphemy against their religion. The extremist mindset of sections of the Muslim community---like the extremist mindset of sections of the Hindus and other religions--- is a harsh ground reality which is likely to continue for some years to come unless there is a better spread of education in the different communities and more enlightened leaderships emerge in them. Till then no amount of public debates and TV talk shows would eradicate this mindset. In the eyes of the Muslim community, the question is not Salman Rushdie’s right to write, but his right to write the Satanic Verses. No individual and particularly no Muslim can write a blasphemous book. By making Salman Rushdie the high point of the debate on freedom of expression, we will be adding to the strength of the extremist elements in our Muslim community and making it even more difficult to change their mind-set. The over-focus on the right to freedom of expression of Rushdie could further radicalise our Muslim community and aggravate the polarisation of the relations between Muslims and others. Rushdie’s argument in his interview to Barkha Dutt of NDTV regarding the absence of any ban on the Satanic Verses in Turkey, Egypt and Libya and other Muslim countries is misleading and irrelevant. In Muslim majority countries, the Governments do not have to be worried about the sensitivities and feelings of their majority Muslim population in the same way as we have to be worried about the feelings and sensitivities of our strong Muslim minority. The rights, feelings and emotions of our Muslim community are more important than those of Salman Rushdie who lives far away from India in the UK. In our over-anxiety to be seen as fair to Rushdie we should not end up by being seen as unfair to our Muslim community. ( 24-1-12)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com Twitter : @SORBONNE75 )
We haven’t heard the last of L’Affaire Rushdie. It will keep haunting us for some time. The following issues could have unpleasant repercussions:
(a) The act of cowardice by the Governments of India and Rajasthan in abdicating their responsibility to protect a well-known personality facing a threat to his life from some extremist Muslims. He could have been easily protected and any untoward incident in Jaipur avoided by restricting his engagements in Jaipur to the session to which he was invited by the organisers of the Jaipur Literary Festival (JLF) and requesting him to leave Jaipur as soon as that engagement was over. In view of the call by the Deobandis for demonstrations during his visit, he could not have been allowed to stay in Jaipur for the entire duration of the Festival. If the Government of India had wanted, such a restricted, sanitised visit could have been easily organised. This was not done apparently because the Congress Party did not want to displease the Muslim community even by allowing a restricted visit. The cowardice exhibited by the Government of India would encourage similar instances of intimidation in future when any community is opposed to the visits of any person whom it does not like.
(b) The action of the Rajasthan Police in allegedly fabricating intelligence reports indicating the likely possibility of an attempt being made to assassinate Rushdie if he visited Jaipur. The denials of the Rajasthan Police do not carry conviction. This will severely damage the credibility of the Indian Police and other counter-terrorism organisations in the eyes of the counter-terrorism agencies of the world. Even in the past, agencies of other countries suspected that the Indian agencies were not beyond such attempts at fabrication of source reports in order to corroborate their allegations. These suspicions would now be strengthened and the word of the Indian agencies would carry even less conviction in future. Fabricating a source report is considered a serious act of professional misconduct and many intelligence officers have suffered in their career for indulging in it. It is shocking that an agency as a whole---and not just individuals--- had indulged in this. There would be a strong presumption that such fabrications would not have been possible without a collusion or a nod of approval from the Government of India. Unless the Government of India acts strongly against those responsible for this fabrication, the suspicion of collusion by it would be strengthened. Intelligence agencies of other countries would be hesitant in future to act on the source reports of Indian agencies which call for follow-up action by them.
(c) The action of four writers in reading out extracts from the Satanic Verses by Salman Rushdie. This was an unwise and impulsive action. The Police may not be able to arrest and prosecute those who read out the extracts because there is no law banning it, but in the eyes of large sections of the Muslim community the Satanic Verses is a blasphemous book and reading out extracts from it is an act of blasphemy. Secret fatwas might have already been issued for carrying out Islamic punishments against these four persons and Barkha Dutt, who has interviewed Rushdie. They will have to be extra careful in future. What we see as a legitimate demand for freedom of expression from the artistic community, is seen by many in the Muslim community as a demand for freedom to indulge in an act of blasphemy against their religion. The extremist mindset of sections of the Muslim community---like the extremist mindset of sections of the Hindus and other religions--- is a harsh ground reality which is likely to continue for some years to come unless there is a better spread of education in the different communities and more enlightened leaderships emerge in them. Till then no amount of public debates and TV talk shows would eradicate this mindset. In the eyes of the Muslim community, the question is not Salman Rushdie’s right to write, but his right to write the Satanic Verses. No individual and particularly no Muslim can write a blasphemous book. By making Salman Rushdie the high point of the debate on freedom of expression, we will be adding to the strength of the extremist elements in our Muslim community and making it even more difficult to change their mind-set. The over-focus on the right to freedom of expression of Rushdie could further radicalise our Muslim community and aggravate the polarisation of the relations between Muslims and others. Rushdie’s argument in his interview to Barkha Dutt of NDTV regarding the absence of any ban on the Satanic Verses in Turkey, Egypt and Libya and other Muslim countries is misleading and irrelevant. In Muslim majority countries, the Governments do not have to be worried about the sensitivities and feelings of their majority Muslim population in the same way as we have to be worried about the feelings and sensitivities of our strong Muslim minority. The rights, feelings and emotions of our Muslim community are more important than those of Salman Rushdie who lives far away from India in the UK. In our over-anxiety to be seen as fair to Rushdie we should not end up by being seen as unfair to our Muslim community. ( 24-1-12)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com Twitter : @SORBONNE75 )
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
