B.RAMAN
What one saw on the morning of April 9,2011, when social activist Anna Hazare broke his fast unto death after the Government of India accepted his demands relating to the enactment of legislation to set up an independent institutional mechanism to deal with corruption was the end of the initial tactical phase of this confrontation between the Government and a group of civil society activists and the beginning of the strategic phase.
2. The victory in the initial tactical skirmishes was with the civil society activists led by Anna Hazare. Confronted with a rapidly developing movement, which assumed the dimensions of a storm within four days of its start ---aided by widespread anger and disgust over the perceived foot-dragging by the Government on the issue of action against those allegedly involved in serious cases of corruption-- the Government of Dr.Manmohan Singh caved in and accepted all the demands in order to buy for itself time to recover from the surprise caused by the assertion of Youth Power on the issue and the emerging unity of action between social and student activists. This was a phenomenon that the Government had not anticipated.
3. The Government accepted the demands of the civil society coalition not because it was fully convinced that their demands are legitimate, but because it realised that having been taken totally by surprise, it had no other option but to concede their initial demands. It was a tactical concession to the view-point of the civil society coalition and not a strategic acceptance of it.
4. The Government's decision to concede a tactical victory to the civil society coalition was based on two apparent calculations. Firstly, the unexpected coalition between the social and students, activists may not be durable and may break asunder with the flux of time. Secondly, once the coalition demobilises its fighters after its tactical victory it may find it difficult to re-mobilise them if another confrontation develops and this could give the necessary time to the Government to prepare itself for the next round. Histories of people's movements often show that once they demobilise half-way, they find it difficult to re-mobilise. We are seeing this in Egypt now.
5. It would be unwise on the part of the Government to take advantage of the breather offered by the agreement on the setting-up of a joint committee of Government and civil society representatives in an attempt to create divisions within the civil society coalition. It could prove counter-productive and further weaken the credibility of the Government. The national movement against corruption spearheaded by Anna Hazare and the long chain of Government inactions on the issue of corruption that preceded it have clearly highlighted certain realities:
* Firstly, there is anger and disgust in all sections of urban societies over the Government's failure to act against corruption. Whether this anger has permeated to rural societies also would be seen from the results of the forthcoming elections in Tamil Nadu, the epi-centre of mega corruption, which did not see the kind of outpouring of support for the Anna Hazare movement that one saw in some other parts of India. One is likely to see an urban-rural divide in the fight against corruption. Can an urban movement alone succeed in the campaign against corruption if the rural masses do not support it? On the answer to this question would depend the future shape and direction of the movement.
* Secondly, large sections of society want not only action in individual cases of corruption, but also institutional changes to impart credibility and give teeth to the fight against corruption.Anna Hazare's movement was for institutional changes and not in connection with the recently exposed individual cases but it was fueled by the public anger relating to the individual cases. If this anger relating to individual cases was not there, it is doubtful whether his movement would have gathered such a rapid momentum on the Jan Lok Pal issue alone.
6. It is important for the Government to re-establish its credibility in the eyes of the civil society. This will be possible only if it takes simultaneous action on both fronts, namely, individual cases and the setting-up of an independent institutional mechanism. The interest taken by the Supreme Court in monitoring the investigation in the individual cases obviates the need for the civil society coalition to activate itself on this issue. The Government will be mistaken if it thinks that it can take advantage of the breather to frustrate the efforts of the civil society coalition for a strong and really independent institutional mechanism.
7. Instead of indulging in such an unwise exercise of delay and dilution, it should take the lead in facilitating the quick completion of its tasks by the joint committee and in ensuring an early implementation of the proposal. If it has the wisdom to do so, it may be able to recover some of the ground lost by it on this issue because of its hitherto lethargic approach. The Government and civil society representatives in the committee should identify areas of convergence and divergence and initially approve the points of convergence. The goodwill created by such an exercise would make the task of dealing with the points of divergence easier.
8. Even now, there are many laws and regulations having a bearing on anti-corruption. If they are effectively implemented instances of corruption in both the Government and the civil society will decline. As examples, one could mention laws and regulations relating to submission of declaration by public servants regarding acquisition of property of certain value, payment of income-tax, acquisition of disproportionate assets, prevention of money-laundering etc There has been an increase in instances of corruption in both the Government and the civil society due to a failure to enforce these laws and regulations and punish those guilty of violating them. The Government should see that violations are no longer tolerated.
9.Anna Hazare himself is a man of established integrity and unimpeacheable credentials. One cannot say the same thing about some in his entourage. Those of us who were in Government service in the 1970s would remember the students' agitation in a state over the alleged filing of a false declaration by one of those now close to Anna for getting admission to an issue in a central medical institution. The credibility of the movement would be enhanced further if such elements are identified and excluded.
10. It is important for the Government to work out a long-term strategy to reduce corruption. An exercise for this purpose can be initiated immediately by the Government on its own initiative without waiting for the joint committee to make progress in its work. Other civil society and students activists, who are not part of the Anna movement, should also be associated with it. The Government should maintain its leadership role in the fight against corruption. That is the only way of regaining its credibility. It is important for the Prime Minister to be more articulate on this subject and to interact frequently and vigorously with all sections of civil society and the media.
11.It would be difficult to quantify the extent of support received by the movement from the students. There was an orchestration of the coverage by all TV channels in order to create a dramatic impact on the minds of the viewers. They wittingly or unwittingly created an impression as if waves and waves of students were coming out to join the movement. Any careful viewer would have noticed that this was not so. It is important for the Government and the Congress (I) to interact more closely with those sections of the students who had kept away from the movement.
12. Co-operation with the civil society coalition headed by Anna Hazare in matters relating to the legislation and independent initiatives in other matters should be the over-all strategy of the Government. (10-4-11)
( 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 )
Saturday, April 9, 2011
Friday, April 8, 2011
DR.MANMOHAN SINGH BOWS TO STREET PRESSURE
B.RAMAN
If there is one individual who has to be blamed for the success of street power over State power as a consequence of the national movement against corruption launched by social activist Anna Hazare, that individual has to be our Prime Minister, Dr.Manmohan Singh.
2.His Government had been confronted with a series of serious allegations of corruption since the middle of last year---many of them true and some still under investigation. The relentless exposure of these instances of major corruption by the electronic media called for a leadership and communication skills of very high quality to reassure the public in a convincing manner that these allegations were being treated with all the seriousness they deserved and would be investigated thoroughly and action taken against those found guilty whatever be the position in public life occupied by them and whatever be the consequences to his continuance as the Prime Minister and to the stability and durability of the coalition Government headed by him.
3. Instead of doing so, he handled these allegations in a halting manner that seemed not serious to the public of the country. There was a suspected attempt to keep the investigation pro forma instead of thorough-going and act against the wrong-doers only when forced to do so by the public campaign on this issue. Instead of accepting responsibility for what had gone wrong with an expression of his determination to root out this cancer, he constantly tried to blame the constraints of coalition politics for what had happened and gave an impression to the public of being weak and helpless.
4. The nation desperately needed a cool and courageous captain who could control the ship of State after it had hit the iceberg of corruption. Instead what it had was a low-grade sailor who didn't seem to know how to steer the ship.
5. The public was totally bewildered. It did not know what was happening as serious allegations of corruption came out one after the other from the news channels. Instead of interacting with the public directly and through his policy advisers and media managers in order to keep it informed of the real facts of the cases and to restore its shattered confidence in his administration, he withdrew into the fortress of the Prime Minister's office and avoided as far as possible interactions with the public and the media. One would have expected him to address the public through the TV and the radio in order to restore its confidence in the State. One would have thought that he would interact more frequently, more vigorously and more transparently with the media in order to regain his credibility and that of his Government.
6. Instead, he avoided interactions with the media and left this important task to his ministers of varying shades of seniority and credibility. His media managers, instead of acting as the facilitators of interactions with the media, saw themselves as controllers of his interactions with the media. Instead of encouraging him to boldly face the media and the public on this subject, they protected him from any unnecessary and unwise exposure to the media and the public.
7. Dr.Manmohan Singh was never known as a good communicator ----either as a bureaucrat or as the Finance Minister or as the Prime Minister since he took over in 2004. His poor communication skills were repeatedly seen during the various terrorist strikes, during his handling of crisis situations in our relations with Pakistan and China, and during the controversy over allegations of widespread corruption in his Government. Ever since he took over as the Prime Minister, there was a gradual drying up of the communication channels between the public and the Prime Minister. The ordinary citizens of this country hardly had an opportunity of listening to their Prime Minister either directly at public meetings or indirectly through TV channels or the radio. We had a Prime Minister who was seen, but rarely heard or felt in flesh and blood.
8. The shockingly incompetent manner in which the question of the appointment of the Central Vigilance Commissioner was handled ultimately creating considerable embarrassment for him and his Government demonstrated to the public the ineptitude of the officers preferred by him as his close advisers to man the Prime Minister's Office and the Cabinet Secretariat. Instead of being seen as policy and action galvanisers, the public saw them as a pack of bunglers who mishandled important affairs of State and were as helpless as the Prime Minister in anticipating and handling important issues that could damage the credibility of the Prime Minister and his Government.
9. The cumulative effect of the cascading instances of corruption and incompetence was the weakening of the credibility of the Prime Minister, a widening trust deficit between the Government and the public and spreading anger and disgust over the unbridled corruption and the Prime Minister's perceived inability to deal with it.
10. Into this messy situation walked a group of non-Governmental activists led by Anna Hazare, who were hailed by growing sections of the public, particularly the youth, as the liberators of the people from the clutches of corruption and incompetence. They exploited the reluctance of successive Governments for over 40 years to initiate action for setting up an independent institutional mechanism for dealing with corruption to rally the people around their flag for achieving a single demand---the setting-up of the independent institutional mechanism. The action of Anna Hazare in going on a fast unto death electrified the youth of the country who came out in their hundreds into the streets to support the demand of Anna Hazare.
11. The Prime Minister and his advisers totally misread the situation. They were surprised by the support of all sections of the people for this demand. They were taken aback by the youth coming out into the streets all over the country to support Anna Hazare. They were without answer to the triumvirate of forces that had joined hands in the name of a people’s movement----the social activists led by Anna Hazare, self-motivated and angry students coming from different classes of society and the TV news channels.
12. Faced with this formidable non-governmental force, which came into existence within four days of Anna Hazare starting his fast unto death, the Government found itself with no other alternative but to concede the demand for setting up a joint committee consisting of five representatives nominated by the Government and five by Anna Hazare to prepare a draft Bill for setting up the independent institutional mechanism, with a commitment by the Government to have it enacted by the Parliament during the monsoon session.
13. There is nothing wrong with the joint committee. The setting up of an independent institutional mechanism to deal with corruption is a long overdue measure. The association of non-governmental experts with the process for drafting the required legislation is an idea to which nobody can object.
14. What is objectionable is not what the Government has conceded, but the manner in which it has conceded it. It was evident from as early as January 30,2011, that the movement of the social activists for the setting-up of the institutional mechanism was gaining momentum and that attempts were being made to persuade Anna Hazare to take over the leadership of the movement. Dr.Manmohan Singh had nearly three months at his disposal to assume the parentage of this idea and to have it implemented as a Government initiative. He did not do it. He and his adviser kept quiet hoping it will lose steam.
15. When it did not and when confronted with four dramatic days of agitation on this issue, the PM conceded all the demands. Instead of being seen as the product of a constructive initiative of the Government determined to root out corruption, it is now seen as the trophy of the street power as a result of its victory over State power.
16. Addressing the supporters of Anna Hazare before he broke his fast on the morning of April 9, Swami Agnivesh, an activist of the movement, said :” This is not the end of the battle. This is only the beginning of the battle.”
17. Ominous words. ( 9-4-11)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
If there is one individual who has to be blamed for the success of street power over State power as a consequence of the national movement against corruption launched by social activist Anna Hazare, that individual has to be our Prime Minister, Dr.Manmohan Singh.
2.His Government had been confronted with a series of serious allegations of corruption since the middle of last year---many of them true and some still under investigation. The relentless exposure of these instances of major corruption by the electronic media called for a leadership and communication skills of very high quality to reassure the public in a convincing manner that these allegations were being treated with all the seriousness they deserved and would be investigated thoroughly and action taken against those found guilty whatever be the position in public life occupied by them and whatever be the consequences to his continuance as the Prime Minister and to the stability and durability of the coalition Government headed by him.
3. Instead of doing so, he handled these allegations in a halting manner that seemed not serious to the public of the country. There was a suspected attempt to keep the investigation pro forma instead of thorough-going and act against the wrong-doers only when forced to do so by the public campaign on this issue. Instead of accepting responsibility for what had gone wrong with an expression of his determination to root out this cancer, he constantly tried to blame the constraints of coalition politics for what had happened and gave an impression to the public of being weak and helpless.
4. The nation desperately needed a cool and courageous captain who could control the ship of State after it had hit the iceberg of corruption. Instead what it had was a low-grade sailor who didn't seem to know how to steer the ship.
5. The public was totally bewildered. It did not know what was happening as serious allegations of corruption came out one after the other from the news channels. Instead of interacting with the public directly and through his policy advisers and media managers in order to keep it informed of the real facts of the cases and to restore its shattered confidence in his administration, he withdrew into the fortress of the Prime Minister's office and avoided as far as possible interactions with the public and the media. One would have expected him to address the public through the TV and the radio in order to restore its confidence in the State. One would have thought that he would interact more frequently, more vigorously and more transparently with the media in order to regain his credibility and that of his Government.
6. Instead, he avoided interactions with the media and left this important task to his ministers of varying shades of seniority and credibility. His media managers, instead of acting as the facilitators of interactions with the media, saw themselves as controllers of his interactions with the media. Instead of encouraging him to boldly face the media and the public on this subject, they protected him from any unnecessary and unwise exposure to the media and the public.
7. Dr.Manmohan Singh was never known as a good communicator ----either as a bureaucrat or as the Finance Minister or as the Prime Minister since he took over in 2004. His poor communication skills were repeatedly seen during the various terrorist strikes, during his handling of crisis situations in our relations with Pakistan and China, and during the controversy over allegations of widespread corruption in his Government. Ever since he took over as the Prime Minister, there was a gradual drying up of the communication channels between the public and the Prime Minister. The ordinary citizens of this country hardly had an opportunity of listening to their Prime Minister either directly at public meetings or indirectly through TV channels or the radio. We had a Prime Minister who was seen, but rarely heard or felt in flesh and blood.
8. The shockingly incompetent manner in which the question of the appointment of the Central Vigilance Commissioner was handled ultimately creating considerable embarrassment for him and his Government demonstrated to the public the ineptitude of the officers preferred by him as his close advisers to man the Prime Minister's Office and the Cabinet Secretariat. Instead of being seen as policy and action galvanisers, the public saw them as a pack of bunglers who mishandled important affairs of State and were as helpless as the Prime Minister in anticipating and handling important issues that could damage the credibility of the Prime Minister and his Government.
9. The cumulative effect of the cascading instances of corruption and incompetence was the weakening of the credibility of the Prime Minister, a widening trust deficit between the Government and the public and spreading anger and disgust over the unbridled corruption and the Prime Minister's perceived inability to deal with it.
10. Into this messy situation walked a group of non-Governmental activists led by Anna Hazare, who were hailed by growing sections of the public, particularly the youth, as the liberators of the people from the clutches of corruption and incompetence. They exploited the reluctance of successive Governments for over 40 years to initiate action for setting up an independent institutional mechanism for dealing with corruption to rally the people around their flag for achieving a single demand---the setting-up of the independent institutional mechanism. The action of Anna Hazare in going on a fast unto death electrified the youth of the country who came out in their hundreds into the streets to support the demand of Anna Hazare.
11. The Prime Minister and his advisers totally misread the situation. They were surprised by the support of all sections of the people for this demand. They were taken aback by the youth coming out into the streets all over the country to support Anna Hazare. They were without answer to the triumvirate of forces that had joined hands in the name of a people’s movement----the social activists led by Anna Hazare, self-motivated and angry students coming from different classes of society and the TV news channels.
12. Faced with this formidable non-governmental force, which came into existence within four days of Anna Hazare starting his fast unto death, the Government found itself with no other alternative but to concede the demand for setting up a joint committee consisting of five representatives nominated by the Government and five by Anna Hazare to prepare a draft Bill for setting up the independent institutional mechanism, with a commitment by the Government to have it enacted by the Parliament during the monsoon session.
13. There is nothing wrong with the joint committee. The setting up of an independent institutional mechanism to deal with corruption is a long overdue measure. The association of non-governmental experts with the process for drafting the required legislation is an idea to which nobody can object.
14. What is objectionable is not what the Government has conceded, but the manner in which it has conceded it. It was evident from as early as January 30,2011, that the movement of the social activists for the setting-up of the institutional mechanism was gaining momentum and that attempts were being made to persuade Anna Hazare to take over the leadership of the movement. Dr.Manmohan Singh had nearly three months at his disposal to assume the parentage of this idea and to have it implemented as a Government initiative. He did not do it. He and his adviser kept quiet hoping it will lose steam.
15. When it did not and when confronted with four dramatic days of agitation on this issue, the PM conceded all the demands. Instead of being seen as the product of a constructive initiative of the Government determined to root out corruption, it is now seen as the trophy of the street power as a result of its victory over State power.
16. Addressing the supporters of Anna Hazare before he broke his fast on the morning of April 9, Swami Agnivesh, an activist of the movement, said :” This is not the end of the battle. This is only the beginning of the battle.”
17. Ominous words. ( 9-4-11)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Thursday, April 7, 2011
AN ANTI-CORRUPTION AYATOLLAH
B.RAMAN
One has reasons to be gratified and at the same time concerned over the direction the national anti-corruption movement led and galvanised by social activist Anna Hazare has been taking since it was launched three days ago from Jantar Mantar in New Delhi.
2. It has shaken up the indifference of the Government on the issue of corruption and mobilised the urban youth across the country to come out into the streets in support of the demand voiced by Anna Hazare and his supporters for setting up an institutional mechanism to deal with corruption at all levels, with even the Prime Minister not exempt from its scrutiny and action.The way Indian youth in various urban centres and netizens have woken up from their slumber on this issue and risen to the colours of the Anna Hazare movement should be a matter of satisfaction to all right-thinking people in the country.
3. While we have noted with amazement the way the young people have bestirred themselves on this issue, none of us has been able to explain this phenomenon adequately. But we had seen this phenomenon repeatedly in different countries of the world since the Second World War. We saw it first in France in 1968 when Youth Power ultimately led to the exit of Gen.de Gaulle from power. We saw it in action the same year in the US where the anger of the American youth over the Vietnam war contributed to the decision of then President Lyndon Johnson not to seek re-election.
4. We saw it again on different occasions in Iran, Poland, South Korea, Myanmar (where it did not succeed) and more recently in Tunisia and Egypt.I have been criticised by many and ridiculed by some for comparing the phenomenon of youth in action now being seen in India to the phenomenon of youth in action that we saw in Egypt earlier this year. The main point of criticism is that India has strong traditions of democracy and hence cannot be compared to Egypt ruled by a discredited despot.
5 I have been comparing India to Egypt not because I am oblivious of the merits of our democracy, but because I feel unhappy over the state of our democracy which has stopped enthusing the people of the rest of the developing world because of the ills of corruption, nepotism and political insensitivity. I also compare India to Egypt because just as the assertion of the Youth Power in Egypt forced the powers that be in that country to at least make a pretense of action against the ills confronting the country, in India too, it is only the assertion of Youth Power that has forced the Government to come out of its shell of indifference and insensitivity.
6. Anna Hazare and his supporters have been agitating on the need for an effective institutional mechanism against corruption for years and have re-doubled their efforts since January last. The Government has suddenly bestirred itself on this issue not just because of the fast of Anna Hazare, but because it has been startled by the outpouring of empathy and support for him from the youth of the country. Even the TV channels of this country largely ignored this movement since January till it saw hundreds of youth coming out into the streets in support of Anna Hazare. Hence, I do feel my repeated compasrison to the assertion of Youth Power in Egypt is apt and cannot be lightly dismissed.
7.But there has been a major difference between the way the Youth In Action phenomenon worked itself out in Egypt and the way it has been working itself out in India. In Egypt, the youth kept the leadership and initiative in its hands and did not allow an Ayatollah of Democracy to emerge by taking advantage of the mobilisation of the youth and the assertion of its power, but in India the assertion of the Youth Power has been sought to be manipulated by some leaders of the Anna Hazare movement---- without his noticing and discouraging it--- to project him as the Ayatollah of Anti-Corruption, who has the monopoly of wisdom on this issue and hence whose wishes and stature in this movement have to be accepted implicitly by the Government without any questions being asked.
8. It is this self-assumed and over-projected moral superiority of Anna Hazare over the rest of us mere mortals which should explain the deadlock in their talks with the Government and their totally unwise demand that he should be made the head of the joint committee to be constituted for drafting the proposed legislation.
9. There are many of us who are fighting on this issue of corruption for years----each in his or her humble way. There are many non-governmental organisations across the country which have been creditably fighting on this issue. We are all grateful to Anna Hazare and his followers for the way they have galvanised the anti-corruption movement. But, at the same time, I am not prepared to accept that he has superior or a monop[oly of wisdom on this issue and that we can do nothing better than to accept whatever he says or demands without subjecting it to scrutiny.
10. We want effective action against corruption. At the same time, we do not want an Ayatollah of Anti-Corruption in our midst surrounded by subaltern Ayatollahs.
11.Finally, a humble appeal to the youth of the country. You have succeeded where we failed by directing the spotlight on the issue of corruption. The Government is showing signs of action thanks to you and because of you. It is more afraid of your power than of any other phenomenon.
12. Use that power wisely and imaginatively. Don't allow that power to be misappropriated and misused by fledgeling Ayatollahs of Anti-Corruption.
13. The Government is terribly confused in its response. All its efforts have been towards placating Anna Hazare and his followers. We have come to the present messy situation because of the indifference of successive Governments to the public anger and disgust over the issue of corruption and criminalisation of politics. It is also because of the failure of communications between the Government and the middle class and the absence of a far-seeing political leadership in the seats of power.
14. It is good that even at this late hour the Government has opened up its channels of communications with Anna Hazare and his followers. It should also simultaneously establish a dialogue on this subject with the other political parties and with the youth of the country. It should constitute a group of eminent personalities to come out with an alternative approach to the issue of corruption in general and to the institutional mechanism in particular. These initiatives should not wait till its talks with the leaders of the Anna Hazare movement succeed. ( 8-4-11)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
One has reasons to be gratified and at the same time concerned over the direction the national anti-corruption movement led and galvanised by social activist Anna Hazare has been taking since it was launched three days ago from Jantar Mantar in New Delhi.
2. It has shaken up the indifference of the Government on the issue of corruption and mobilised the urban youth across the country to come out into the streets in support of the demand voiced by Anna Hazare and his supporters for setting up an institutional mechanism to deal with corruption at all levels, with even the Prime Minister not exempt from its scrutiny and action.The way Indian youth in various urban centres and netizens have woken up from their slumber on this issue and risen to the colours of the Anna Hazare movement should be a matter of satisfaction to all right-thinking people in the country.
3. While we have noted with amazement the way the young people have bestirred themselves on this issue, none of us has been able to explain this phenomenon adequately. But we had seen this phenomenon repeatedly in different countries of the world since the Second World War. We saw it first in France in 1968 when Youth Power ultimately led to the exit of Gen.de Gaulle from power. We saw it in action the same year in the US where the anger of the American youth over the Vietnam war contributed to the decision of then President Lyndon Johnson not to seek re-election.
4. We saw it again on different occasions in Iran, Poland, South Korea, Myanmar (where it did not succeed) and more recently in Tunisia and Egypt.I have been criticised by many and ridiculed by some for comparing the phenomenon of youth in action now being seen in India to the phenomenon of youth in action that we saw in Egypt earlier this year. The main point of criticism is that India has strong traditions of democracy and hence cannot be compared to Egypt ruled by a discredited despot.
5 I have been comparing India to Egypt not because I am oblivious of the merits of our democracy, but because I feel unhappy over the state of our democracy which has stopped enthusing the people of the rest of the developing world because of the ills of corruption, nepotism and political insensitivity. I also compare India to Egypt because just as the assertion of the Youth Power in Egypt forced the powers that be in that country to at least make a pretense of action against the ills confronting the country, in India too, it is only the assertion of Youth Power that has forced the Government to come out of its shell of indifference and insensitivity.
6. Anna Hazare and his supporters have been agitating on the need for an effective institutional mechanism against corruption for years and have re-doubled their efforts since January last. The Government has suddenly bestirred itself on this issue not just because of the fast of Anna Hazare, but because it has been startled by the outpouring of empathy and support for him from the youth of the country. Even the TV channels of this country largely ignored this movement since January till it saw hundreds of youth coming out into the streets in support of Anna Hazare. Hence, I do feel my repeated compasrison to the assertion of Youth Power in Egypt is apt and cannot be lightly dismissed.
7.But there has been a major difference between the way the Youth In Action phenomenon worked itself out in Egypt and the way it has been working itself out in India. In Egypt, the youth kept the leadership and initiative in its hands and did not allow an Ayatollah of Democracy to emerge by taking advantage of the mobilisation of the youth and the assertion of its power, but in India the assertion of the Youth Power has been sought to be manipulated by some leaders of the Anna Hazare movement---- without his noticing and discouraging it--- to project him as the Ayatollah of Anti-Corruption, who has the monopoly of wisdom on this issue and hence whose wishes and stature in this movement have to be accepted implicitly by the Government without any questions being asked.
8. It is this self-assumed and over-projected moral superiority of Anna Hazare over the rest of us mere mortals which should explain the deadlock in their talks with the Government and their totally unwise demand that he should be made the head of the joint committee to be constituted for drafting the proposed legislation.
9. There are many of us who are fighting on this issue of corruption for years----each in his or her humble way. There are many non-governmental organisations across the country which have been creditably fighting on this issue. We are all grateful to Anna Hazare and his followers for the way they have galvanised the anti-corruption movement. But, at the same time, I am not prepared to accept that he has superior or a monop[oly of wisdom on this issue and that we can do nothing better than to accept whatever he says or demands without subjecting it to scrutiny.
10. We want effective action against corruption. At the same time, we do not want an Ayatollah of Anti-Corruption in our midst surrounded by subaltern Ayatollahs.
11.Finally, a humble appeal to the youth of the country. You have succeeded where we failed by directing the spotlight on the issue of corruption. The Government is showing signs of action thanks to you and because of you. It is more afraid of your power than of any other phenomenon.
12. Use that power wisely and imaginatively. Don't allow that power to be misappropriated and misused by fledgeling Ayatollahs of Anti-Corruption.
13. The Government is terribly confused in its response. All its efforts have been towards placating Anna Hazare and his followers. We have come to the present messy situation because of the indifference of successive Governments to the public anger and disgust over the issue of corruption and criminalisation of politics. It is also because of the failure of communications between the Government and the middle class and the absence of a far-seeing political leadership in the seats of power.
14. It is good that even at this late hour the Government has opened up its channels of communications with Anna Hazare and his followers. It should also simultaneously establish a dialogue on this subject with the other political parties and with the youth of the country. It should constitute a group of eminent personalities to come out with an alternative approach to the issue of corruption in general and to the institutional mechanism in particular. These initiatives should not wait till its talks with the leaders of the Anna Hazare movement succeed. ( 8-4-11)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Wednesday, April 6, 2011
ENOUGH
B.RAMAN
The anti-corruption movement launched from New Delhi by a hotch-potch of elements and groups under the leadership of Anna Hazare, a social activist of unquestioned integrity and unimpeacheable credentials, has to be taken seriously by the Government of Prime Minister Dr.Manmohan Singh.
2. Any attempt to have it discredited or to underestimate the genuine anger of growing sections of the public against widespread corruption at various levels of the political leadership and bureaucracy would be short-sighted and could lead to poltical instability and a disturbance of law and order. We might be faced with a Jasmine Revolution type situation with the Jantar Mantar in New Delhi from where the movement has been launched becoming India's Tahrir Square.
3. Not all those supporting the movement have noble objectives. The movement has been triggered by a mix of motives ---some noble and laudable marked by a desire to rid the country of corruption, some politically opportunistic and some politically partisan marked by a desire to take advantage of the immense popularity of Anna Hazare to have the Government further discredited and ride to power.
4. Despite the undoubted presence of opportunistic and partisan elements in the ranks and the leadership of the movement, one cannot deny that within two days of starting, the movement is threatening to spread far and wide across the country and has started attracting the support of growing sections of the youth, which had till now shown little interest in the campaign against corruption. This is due to a feeling of disgust over this cancer and the evident half-heartedness of the Government and the political class as a whole in dealing with this cancer.
5.Increasing numbers of non-governmental citizens, many of them the youth, have started feeling "Enough---Thus Far and No Further" and giving unmistakable signs of a growing conviction that unless they take matters in their own hands and come out in the streets, things are not going to change and that it would be futile to expect the political class to take effective action against corruption.
6. There are two aspects to the scenario confronting the country in the light of the demands being made by Anna Hazare and his supporters for the immediate creation of an institution called Lok Pal with wide powers and with the association of eminent persons of the society to take notice of corruption at all levels---including the Prime Minister---- and initiate action against it.
7. The first aspect is the feasibility of the creation of the institution in the form and in the manner demanded by them. This demand has been there since 1969 and no Government has so far taken it seriously. Misgivings that an institution of the type demanded by them could encourage frivolous complaints of corruption and frivolus actions paralysing the process of governance are not far-fetched. In the light of these misgivings, it was incumbent on the Government and the political class as a whole to come out with an alternative approach which could effectively reduce corruption without weakening the governmental machinery.
8. The failure of successive Governments to come out with such an alternative solution has given rise to widespread anger that the Government and the political class are not serious about addressing this cancerous problem. This anger is the second aspect of the scenario.
9. The Government and the political class do not seem to realise that any further procrastination in dealing with this cancer and attempts to ignore the demands and expectations of the people could damage the very roots of democracy in the country, thereby damaging one of the major assets this country has had since its independence.
10. It is important for the Government to address immediately the demand for a Lok Pal by coming out with alternative solutions which would be acceptable to the people behind the movement and to take note of the growing public anger over the issue of corruption in general and take action to address the causes of that anger. (6-4-11)
( 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 )
The anti-corruption movement launched from New Delhi by a hotch-potch of elements and groups under the leadership of Anna Hazare, a social activist of unquestioned integrity and unimpeacheable credentials, has to be taken seriously by the Government of Prime Minister Dr.Manmohan Singh.
2. Any attempt to have it discredited or to underestimate the genuine anger of growing sections of the public against widespread corruption at various levels of the political leadership and bureaucracy would be short-sighted and could lead to poltical instability and a disturbance of law and order. We might be faced with a Jasmine Revolution type situation with the Jantar Mantar in New Delhi from where the movement has been launched becoming India's Tahrir Square.
3. Not all those supporting the movement have noble objectives. The movement has been triggered by a mix of motives ---some noble and laudable marked by a desire to rid the country of corruption, some politically opportunistic and some politically partisan marked by a desire to take advantage of the immense popularity of Anna Hazare to have the Government further discredited and ride to power.
4. Despite the undoubted presence of opportunistic and partisan elements in the ranks and the leadership of the movement, one cannot deny that within two days of starting, the movement is threatening to spread far and wide across the country and has started attracting the support of growing sections of the youth, which had till now shown little interest in the campaign against corruption. This is due to a feeling of disgust over this cancer and the evident half-heartedness of the Government and the political class as a whole in dealing with this cancer.
5.Increasing numbers of non-governmental citizens, many of them the youth, have started feeling "Enough---Thus Far and No Further" and giving unmistakable signs of a growing conviction that unless they take matters in their own hands and come out in the streets, things are not going to change and that it would be futile to expect the political class to take effective action against corruption.
6. There are two aspects to the scenario confronting the country in the light of the demands being made by Anna Hazare and his supporters for the immediate creation of an institution called Lok Pal with wide powers and with the association of eminent persons of the society to take notice of corruption at all levels---including the Prime Minister---- and initiate action against it.
7. The first aspect is the feasibility of the creation of the institution in the form and in the manner demanded by them. This demand has been there since 1969 and no Government has so far taken it seriously. Misgivings that an institution of the type demanded by them could encourage frivolous complaints of corruption and frivolus actions paralysing the process of governance are not far-fetched. In the light of these misgivings, it was incumbent on the Government and the political class as a whole to come out with an alternative approach which could effectively reduce corruption without weakening the governmental machinery.
8. The failure of successive Governments to come out with such an alternative solution has given rise to widespread anger that the Government and the political class are not serious about addressing this cancerous problem. This anger is the second aspect of the scenario.
9. The Government and the political class do not seem to realise that any further procrastination in dealing with this cancer and attempts to ignore the demands and expectations of the people could damage the very roots of democracy in the country, thereby damaging one of the major assets this country has had since its independence.
10. It is important for the Government to address immediately the demand for a Lok Pal by coming out with alternative solutions which would be acceptable to the people behind the movement and to take note of the growing public anger over the issue of corruption in general and take action to address the causes of that anger. (6-4-11)
( 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 )
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
LIBYA: CLIMAX OR ANTI-CLIMAX?
B.RAMAN
( To be read in continuation of the following articles of mine:
(a).March 22 LIBYA: Increasing Confusion http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/%5Cpapers44%5Cpaper4392.html
(b).March 20,2011 Libya: Obama's Iraq http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/%5Cpapers44%5Cpaper4388.html
(c).March 19,2011 LIBYA: Options for India & Russia http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/%5Cpapers44%5Cpaper4387.html
(d).February 28,2011,Gaddafi’s Continuing Defiance http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/%5Cpapers44%5Cpaper4355.html )
The Western campaign ---- by exploiting the fig leaf cover of the UN Security Council Resolution 1973 for protecting civilians in Libya--- to work for a regime change in Libya has come face to face with three disturbing ground realities within a fortnight of the launching of the military campaign:
• Ground Reality No.1: The campaign has been exploited by Gaddafi to skillfully transform what was a civil war between his supporters and opponents into a war of national resistance against foreign invaders from the West, who are projected as the modern day crusaders. He has been able to successfully appeal to the sense of patriotism of the soldiers of his Army and para-military units. The results: His soldiers are fighting with greater skill and greater competence than those of the rebel armies. The initial gains made by the rebels under the air and missile cover provided by the US and other NATO countries have been reversed in many places. Desertions from the Libyan security forces, which were threatening to gather momentum before the Western military campaign, have practically stopped.
• Ground Reality No 2: US military commanders have started developing a feeling of disquiet that they have rushed to the help of a rebel army about which they know so little. The disquiet has been caused by a gnawing realization that some of the rebels had fought with Al Qaeda in Iraq and are Iraq returnees. There was never much love lost between Gaddafi and Osama bin Laden. They strongly disliked each other. Gaddafi saw to it that Al Qaeda did not develop roots in Libya. He prevented those Libyans who had gone to Iraq from coming back to Libya. The suspicion that some of these Libyans of Iraqi vintage have now come back to Libya and have joined the anti-Gaddafi groups has created fears that the Libyan misadventure might provide fresh oxygen to Al Qaeda. The good rebels vs the bad rebels syndrome has started haunting NATO military commanders.
• Ground Reality No 3: An unanticipated outcome has been the feeling in Iran and North Korea that Gaddafi was unwise in surrendering his nuclear option under Western pressure. While Iran has not publicly expressed this feeling, North Korea has not concealed it. It is being pointed out that if Gaddafi had retained Libya’s nuclear option, the West would not have dared to intervene. Gaddafi’s experience is being cited as an argument to justify North Korea’s resisting the US pressure to give up its nuclear option. The impact on the USA’s non-proliferation campaign is going to be negative. After what happened in Libya, Iran and North Korea would be even more determined than in the past to resist US pressure on this issue.
2. There are signs of a re-think in the West on the advisability of carrying on the campaign in its present form. The US has reportedly stopped firing Cruise and other missiles against Libyan Govt. positions. Air strikes have been reduced in intensity. So too, the anti-Gaddafi rhetoric. The US seems to be looking for a face-saving solution. Will Gaddafi provide a face-saving formula? Like Saddam Hussain, he is a defiant fighter who is prepared to fight till the bitter end if that becomes necessary. Unlike Saddam, he is amenable to compromise solutions which would safeguard his position, protect Libyan national interests and prevent an irreparable breach with the West. One saw these qualities in the way he handled the nuclear issue.
3. Is the Libyan imbroglio moving towards an interesting climax or anti-climax? ( 5-4-11)
( 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 )
( To be read in continuation of the following articles of mine:
(a).March 22 LIBYA: Increasing Confusion http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/%5Cpapers44%5Cpaper4392.html
(b).March 20,2011 Libya: Obama's Iraq http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/%5Cpapers44%5Cpaper4388.html
(c).March 19,2011 LIBYA: Options for India & Russia http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/%5Cpapers44%5Cpaper4387.html
(d).February 28,2011,Gaddafi’s Continuing Defiance http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/%5Cpapers44%5Cpaper4355.html )
The Western campaign ---- by exploiting the fig leaf cover of the UN Security Council Resolution 1973 for protecting civilians in Libya--- to work for a regime change in Libya has come face to face with three disturbing ground realities within a fortnight of the launching of the military campaign:
• Ground Reality No.1: The campaign has been exploited by Gaddafi to skillfully transform what was a civil war between his supporters and opponents into a war of national resistance against foreign invaders from the West, who are projected as the modern day crusaders. He has been able to successfully appeal to the sense of patriotism of the soldiers of his Army and para-military units. The results: His soldiers are fighting with greater skill and greater competence than those of the rebel armies. The initial gains made by the rebels under the air and missile cover provided by the US and other NATO countries have been reversed in many places. Desertions from the Libyan security forces, which were threatening to gather momentum before the Western military campaign, have practically stopped.
• Ground Reality No 2: US military commanders have started developing a feeling of disquiet that they have rushed to the help of a rebel army about which they know so little. The disquiet has been caused by a gnawing realization that some of the rebels had fought with Al Qaeda in Iraq and are Iraq returnees. There was never much love lost between Gaddafi and Osama bin Laden. They strongly disliked each other. Gaddafi saw to it that Al Qaeda did not develop roots in Libya. He prevented those Libyans who had gone to Iraq from coming back to Libya. The suspicion that some of these Libyans of Iraqi vintage have now come back to Libya and have joined the anti-Gaddafi groups has created fears that the Libyan misadventure might provide fresh oxygen to Al Qaeda. The good rebels vs the bad rebels syndrome has started haunting NATO military commanders.
• Ground Reality No 3: An unanticipated outcome has been the feeling in Iran and North Korea that Gaddafi was unwise in surrendering his nuclear option under Western pressure. While Iran has not publicly expressed this feeling, North Korea has not concealed it. It is being pointed out that if Gaddafi had retained Libya’s nuclear option, the West would not have dared to intervene. Gaddafi’s experience is being cited as an argument to justify North Korea’s resisting the US pressure to give up its nuclear option. The impact on the USA’s non-proliferation campaign is going to be negative. After what happened in Libya, Iran and North Korea would be even more determined than in the past to resist US pressure on this issue.
2. There are signs of a re-think in the West on the advisability of carrying on the campaign in its present form. The US has reportedly stopped firing Cruise and other missiles against Libyan Govt. positions. Air strikes have been reduced in intensity. So too, the anti-Gaddafi rhetoric. The US seems to be looking for a face-saving solution. Will Gaddafi provide a face-saving formula? Like Saddam Hussain, he is a defiant fighter who is prepared to fight till the bitter end if that becomes necessary. Unlike Saddam, he is amenable to compromise solutions which would safeguard his position, protect Libyan national interests and prevent an irreparable breach with the West. One saw these qualities in the way he handled the nuclear issue.
3. Is the Libyan imbroglio moving towards an interesting climax or anti-climax? ( 5-4-11)
( 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 )
Sunday, April 3, 2011
INDIA-PAKISTAN: CRICKET DIVIDES
B.RAMAN
The feel good atmosphere generated by the "wide-ranging conversations" between Prime Ministers Dr.Manmohan Singh and Mr.Yousef Raza Gilani at Mohali on the margins of the India-Pakistan World Cup Cricket semi-final on March 30 should not be allowed to be dissipated over the subsequent expression of hard feelings in Pakistan over what they consider as the obnoxious treatment amounting to mental torture meted out to the Pakistani team by large sections of the Indian media in the run up to the semi-final in an allegedly orchestrated attempt to break the morale of the Pakistani team.
2. The feelings of hurt in this regard are reflected in an article titled "On the debris of defeat" written by well-known columnist Syed Talat Hussain in the April 4 issue of the "Dawn" of Karachi. I am annexing the entire text of the article for easy reference. The "Dawn" had also carried on April 1 an interview with Shahid Afridi, the Pakistani captain, which was quite negative vis-a-vis India and the Indian people as compared with his positive comments at Mohali, which were praised by many, including myself. The interview is available at
http://www.dawn.com/2011/04/01/afridi-back-home.html . Afridi's negative comments in his latest interview would not invalidate our praise of him after the Mohali match.
3.In some of the interviews given by him to sections of the Pakistani media before Mohali, the feelings of hurt nursed by him and his team over the negative projection of the team's professional integrity and morality by sections of the Indian media were evident, but he had kept his feelings apparently under control and did not allow them to affect his interactions with our media at Mohali.
4.Hardly a few hours after the team returned to Pakistan, these feelings of hurt are coming out from columnists as well as the players. We can't just dismiss them as "sour grapes". Nor should we counter them by pointing out that sections of the Pakistani media were as nasty as sections of our own media.
5.I notice that the feelings of hurt in Pakistan are not only over the negative coverage by sections of the Indian media, but also over the way (according to them) India has sought to isolate and humiliate Pakistan in the field of international cricket. The following is a typical comment which I took from the "Readers' Comments" in the "Dawn" : "He (Afridi) is very right…look at Indian behaviour to Pakistanis in IPL. In champions league all countries teams are invited other than Pakistan. ICC management has been occupied by Indians mostly, and they are isolating Pakistan from International Cricket. We all know here in Pakistan. But we dont care, as our team is top team of cricket and can beat any team in world on the day."
6.More than any other comment, those of Afridi have received considerable attention in the Indian world of Twitters. Last night, I saw a mini-Tsunami of Tweets on Afridi's latest interview. Why this sudden metamorphosis in him? Is the real Afridi the one we are seeing now in Karachi and not the one we saw at Mohali? Is he recanting under pressure from the extremists? What would be the implications of this pressure on the exercise for a "re-engagement" and "re-connecting" set in motion at Mohali by the two Prime Ministers? These are some of the questions being furiously tweeted around.
7.I also noticed the following two comments by Susan Koshy from India in the "Dawn":
"It is very very very sad to (see) this video. First of all the interviewer is very aggressive and full of assumptions and asking leading questions based on her assumptions. Yes, it is true that the media in India are very jingoistic, loud and opinionated. But I have seen that on Pakistan TV too on my visits to Pakistan. There are also some parts of India that are more reasonable in their views. But I didnt think that the spirit of the game in Mohali was aggressive at all – in fact that is what Afridi said too immediately after the match. We enjoyed having Pakistani people, cricketers with us for the game. That was how we experienced the game. So it is really very very very sad to hear this interview. I wonder if this interviewer has ever been to India? Doesn’t seem like it from her horrible tone and arrogance."
"I hope the aggressive interviewer (almost doctored interview) reads the lovely article written by Maheen Sadiq on To Afridi with Love. That was the spirit of the match as we experienced it and not the really sad comments made in this video. I have visited Pakistan and experienced an obsessive media there too. I do get very angry media in India but I experienced something similar there too."
8.We must take note of the feelings of hurt and bitterness coming out of Pakistan. But we should not allow these to create self-doubts in our mind about the wisdom of the exercise set in motion at Mohali. Even if Afridi's negative comments are not under pressure that should not be allowed to vitiate the Mohali spirit
9.Meaningful and tension and bitterness free re-engagement between the two countries is not for tomorrow. It is going to be a long drawn-out process with ups and downs and zigs and zags. We should persist with this exercise for as long as we can without allowing the extremists to derail it.
10.Having said that, I will be dishonest if I do not say one thing in conclusion; I do hope Mr.Gilani and President Asif Ali Zardari will be able to resist any presuure from the extremists to abandon this exercise. Reading between the lines of the "Dawn" article, I get a disturbing feeling that Mr.Gilani was probably under pressure from the extremists not to honour the Pakistani team for having let down Pakistan.
11. I keep my fingers crossed.(4-4-11)
( 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 )
ANNEXURE ( Article carried by "Dawn" on April 4)
On the debris of defeat
By Syed Talat Hussain
THE ICC World Cup semi-final in Mohali offers us two important insights. The first is a wide-spectrum sample of public opinion trends in India about Pakistan. The second relates to our national attitude of complacency in the aftermath of defeat.
The run-up to the match showed the reality of the much-hyped Indian desire for peace with Pakistan. Here was a great opportunity for the Indian media to win the hearts and minds of friends from Pakistan by showing grace and courtesy. But what was served was nothing less than national-level sledging, lasting for days.
The host nation took special care of the Pakistani squad. Large sections of the media tore into the Pakistani team and its captain as if this was an invading army from another world. In the name of debate, targeted frenzy was worked up against the green-shirts.
Matters became particularly uncivilised as the semi-final approached. The campaign was nothing short of a psychological warfare zeroing in on Pakistan. With the use of selective data and controversial instances, derision was freely heaped on the team. Kapil Dev talked about ‘how little Pakistanis have to cheer about’. Ravi Shastri, who loses his reason when the Indian team gets even a slight drubbing, compared the visitors with a rickety rickshaw, while the Indian squad, in his opinion, was a BMW.
On local channels the attack was particularly poisonous. In several shows, where Indian film stars and music divas rooted for their team before large audiences, ridiculing Pakistan was the norm.
We know media nationalism can hijack objectivity. It can lead to distortions. It can generate propaganda. This happens in Pakistan all the time. In that context, some of the content that was broadcast or written by the Indians about Pakistan could perhaps pass off as tolerable. But the scope of this campaign, which continued well after the match, was too large and the focus too specific to be ignored as a momentary loss of balance caused by the raging passion to win against arch rivals.
More worryingly, even some among the seemingly most liberal segments of society, who generally scoff at anti-Pakistan hysteria in their own country, had nothing but barely hidden contempt when it came to discussing issues related to their neighbour. No other country, or team, was subjected to this torment — a point made by Shahid Afridi, the Pakistani captain, before the match.
It was almost as if the Mohali match had given the whole of India a season ticket to trash Pakistan. Cricket appeared to be an instrument to unleash collective contempt. This Mohali experience contrasts sharply with the popular narrative about the growing peace constituency in India that wants to treat Pakistan with respect and believes in the principle of parity of nations. At a critical time when convincing messages of brotherhood could have been packaged with courtesy and sent across the borders to Pakistan with love, the mail received from India contained little other than hate.
The second insight that the Mohali event offers is just as important as it calls for a serious revision of the way we have chosen to respond to our defeat. A fake legend of heroism is being pushed out of our pathetic performance. The central message of this campaign is that we should ‘ask no question, hear no criticism, and make no complaint’ against our team because ‘we love them’.
The mantra that is spamming inboxes is primarily led by commercial organisations that have big contracts with some of the players. After the match these organisations have a problem: the poster-boys who rope in customers have suddenly developed feet of clay. This is disastrous for marketing. Continued hero worship is therefore vital for the image of the brands the cricketers represent. And this can only happen if the nation is told that somehow the mess in Mohali is marvellous for Pakistan’s cricket.
But apart from this there is a disturbing national tendency to sweep failures under the carpet. So when Punjab Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif — in whose province thousands of doctors have been on strike for weeks demanding higher wages — offered cash to the players he was as much playing politics as he was endorsing this sorry trend.
Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani too wanted to fete the team for having reached the semi-final. Suddenly failure to make it to the finals has become a point of great pride, a matter of honour rather than cause for reflection and course correction.
But this is not surprising. We have consistently rewarded incompetence. We have a culture of complacency that simply lowers the bar of achievement instead of raising the game to the level where the best compete and win.
It is this criminal compromise with slackness and rank stupidity that has produced fake degree holders who flaunt their credentials with impunity and a band of corrupt-to-the-bone individuals who hold high offices. Mohali offers us a dozen points to ponder, about cricket, about the odds we face and the character we exhibit under pressure. But we will only face more Mohalis in every field of life if we, as a nation, stay proud as a peacock and prance around the debris of our defeat. We will be fooling no one except ourselves.
The feel good atmosphere generated by the "wide-ranging conversations" between Prime Ministers Dr.Manmohan Singh and Mr.Yousef Raza Gilani at Mohali on the margins of the India-Pakistan World Cup Cricket semi-final on March 30 should not be allowed to be dissipated over the subsequent expression of hard feelings in Pakistan over what they consider as the obnoxious treatment amounting to mental torture meted out to the Pakistani team by large sections of the Indian media in the run up to the semi-final in an allegedly orchestrated attempt to break the morale of the Pakistani team.
2. The feelings of hurt in this regard are reflected in an article titled "On the debris of defeat" written by well-known columnist Syed Talat Hussain in the April 4 issue of the "Dawn" of Karachi. I am annexing the entire text of the article for easy reference. The "Dawn" had also carried on April 1 an interview with Shahid Afridi, the Pakistani captain, which was quite negative vis-a-vis India and the Indian people as compared with his positive comments at Mohali, which were praised by many, including myself. The interview is available at
http://www.dawn.com/2011/04/01/afridi-back-home.html . Afridi's negative comments in his latest interview would not invalidate our praise of him after the Mohali match.
3.In some of the interviews given by him to sections of the Pakistani media before Mohali, the feelings of hurt nursed by him and his team over the negative projection of the team's professional integrity and morality by sections of the Indian media were evident, but he had kept his feelings apparently under control and did not allow them to affect his interactions with our media at Mohali.
4.Hardly a few hours after the team returned to Pakistan, these feelings of hurt are coming out from columnists as well as the players. We can't just dismiss them as "sour grapes". Nor should we counter them by pointing out that sections of the Pakistani media were as nasty as sections of our own media.
5.I notice that the feelings of hurt in Pakistan are not only over the negative coverage by sections of the Indian media, but also over the way (according to them) India has sought to isolate and humiliate Pakistan in the field of international cricket. The following is a typical comment which I took from the "Readers' Comments" in the "Dawn" : "He (Afridi) is very right…look at Indian behaviour to Pakistanis in IPL. In champions league all countries teams are invited other than Pakistan. ICC management has been occupied by Indians mostly, and they are isolating Pakistan from International Cricket. We all know here in Pakistan. But we dont care, as our team is top team of cricket and can beat any team in world on the day."
6.More than any other comment, those of Afridi have received considerable attention in the Indian world of Twitters. Last night, I saw a mini-Tsunami of Tweets on Afridi's latest interview. Why this sudden metamorphosis in him? Is the real Afridi the one we are seeing now in Karachi and not the one we saw at Mohali? Is he recanting under pressure from the extremists? What would be the implications of this pressure on the exercise for a "re-engagement" and "re-connecting" set in motion at Mohali by the two Prime Ministers? These are some of the questions being furiously tweeted around.
7.I also noticed the following two comments by Susan Koshy from India in the "Dawn":
"It is very very very sad to (see) this video. First of all the interviewer is very aggressive and full of assumptions and asking leading questions based on her assumptions. Yes, it is true that the media in India are very jingoistic, loud and opinionated. But I have seen that on Pakistan TV too on my visits to Pakistan. There are also some parts of India that are more reasonable in their views. But I didnt think that the spirit of the game in Mohali was aggressive at all – in fact that is what Afridi said too immediately after the match. We enjoyed having Pakistani people, cricketers with us for the game. That was how we experienced the game. So it is really very very very sad to hear this interview. I wonder if this interviewer has ever been to India? Doesn’t seem like it from her horrible tone and arrogance."
"I hope the aggressive interviewer (almost doctored interview) reads the lovely article written by Maheen Sadiq on To Afridi with Love. That was the spirit of the match as we experienced it and not the really sad comments made in this video. I have visited Pakistan and experienced an obsessive media there too. I do get very angry media in India but I experienced something similar there too."
8.We must take note of the feelings of hurt and bitterness coming out of Pakistan. But we should not allow these to create self-doubts in our mind about the wisdom of the exercise set in motion at Mohali. Even if Afridi's negative comments are not under pressure that should not be allowed to vitiate the Mohali spirit
9.Meaningful and tension and bitterness free re-engagement between the two countries is not for tomorrow. It is going to be a long drawn-out process with ups and downs and zigs and zags. We should persist with this exercise for as long as we can without allowing the extremists to derail it.
10.Having said that, I will be dishonest if I do not say one thing in conclusion; I do hope Mr.Gilani and President Asif Ali Zardari will be able to resist any presuure from the extremists to abandon this exercise. Reading between the lines of the "Dawn" article, I get a disturbing feeling that Mr.Gilani was probably under pressure from the extremists not to honour the Pakistani team for having let down Pakistan.
11. I keep my fingers crossed.(4-4-11)
( 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 )
ANNEXURE ( Article carried by "Dawn" on April 4)
On the debris of defeat
By Syed Talat Hussain
THE ICC World Cup semi-final in Mohali offers us two important insights. The first is a wide-spectrum sample of public opinion trends in India about Pakistan. The second relates to our national attitude of complacency in the aftermath of defeat.
The run-up to the match showed the reality of the much-hyped Indian desire for peace with Pakistan. Here was a great opportunity for the Indian media to win the hearts and minds of friends from Pakistan by showing grace and courtesy. But what was served was nothing less than national-level sledging, lasting for days.
The host nation took special care of the Pakistani squad. Large sections of the media tore into the Pakistani team and its captain as if this was an invading army from another world. In the name of debate, targeted frenzy was worked up against the green-shirts.
Matters became particularly uncivilised as the semi-final approached. The campaign was nothing short of a psychological warfare zeroing in on Pakistan. With the use of selective data and controversial instances, derision was freely heaped on the team. Kapil Dev talked about ‘how little Pakistanis have to cheer about’. Ravi Shastri, who loses his reason when the Indian team gets even a slight drubbing, compared the visitors with a rickety rickshaw, while the Indian squad, in his opinion, was a BMW.
On local channels the attack was particularly poisonous. In several shows, where Indian film stars and music divas rooted for their team before large audiences, ridiculing Pakistan was the norm.
We know media nationalism can hijack objectivity. It can lead to distortions. It can generate propaganda. This happens in Pakistan all the time. In that context, some of the content that was broadcast or written by the Indians about Pakistan could perhaps pass off as tolerable. But the scope of this campaign, which continued well after the match, was too large and the focus too specific to be ignored as a momentary loss of balance caused by the raging passion to win against arch rivals.
More worryingly, even some among the seemingly most liberal segments of society, who generally scoff at anti-Pakistan hysteria in their own country, had nothing but barely hidden contempt when it came to discussing issues related to their neighbour. No other country, or team, was subjected to this torment — a point made by Shahid Afridi, the Pakistani captain, before the match.
It was almost as if the Mohali match had given the whole of India a season ticket to trash Pakistan. Cricket appeared to be an instrument to unleash collective contempt. This Mohali experience contrasts sharply with the popular narrative about the growing peace constituency in India that wants to treat Pakistan with respect and believes in the principle of parity of nations. At a critical time when convincing messages of brotherhood could have been packaged with courtesy and sent across the borders to Pakistan with love, the mail received from India contained little other than hate.
The second insight that the Mohali event offers is just as important as it calls for a serious revision of the way we have chosen to respond to our defeat. A fake legend of heroism is being pushed out of our pathetic performance. The central message of this campaign is that we should ‘ask no question, hear no criticism, and make no complaint’ against our team because ‘we love them’.
The mantra that is spamming inboxes is primarily led by commercial organisations that have big contracts with some of the players. After the match these organisations have a problem: the poster-boys who rope in customers have suddenly developed feet of clay. This is disastrous for marketing. Continued hero worship is therefore vital for the image of the brands the cricketers represent. And this can only happen if the nation is told that somehow the mess in Mohali is marvellous for Pakistan’s cricket.
But apart from this there is a disturbing national tendency to sweep failures under the carpet. So when Punjab Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif — in whose province thousands of doctors have been on strike for weeks demanding higher wages — offered cash to the players he was as much playing politics as he was endorsing this sorry trend.
Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani too wanted to fete the team for having reached the semi-final. Suddenly failure to make it to the finals has become a point of great pride, a matter of honour rather than cause for reflection and course correction.
But this is not surprising. We have consistently rewarded incompetence. We have a culture of complacency that simply lowers the bar of achievement instead of raising the game to the level where the best compete and win.
It is this criminal compromise with slackness and rank stupidity that has produced fake degree holders who flaunt their credentials with impunity and a band of corrupt-to-the-bone individuals who hold high offices. Mohali offers us a dozen points to ponder, about cricket, about the odds we face and the character we exhibit under pressure. But we will only face more Mohalis in every field of life if we, as a nation, stay proud as a peacock and prance around the debris of our defeat. We will be fooling no one except ourselves.
Saturday, April 2, 2011
INTELLIGENCE & POLICE: KUDOS & CAUTION---THE OCTOPUS OF JIHADI EXTREMISM ALIVE & KICKING
B.RAMAN
The intelligence agencies and Police of India, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka deserve to be complimented for the effective and co-ordinated manner in which they managed to maintain security and thwart planned acts of terrorism during the nearly two-month period during which matches of the World Cup cricket tournament were being held in these countries. The terrorists based in the Af-Pak region were not without plans to disrupt the matches through terrorist strikes, but their plans were detected and neutralised in time by prompt intelligence and effective physical security. The role played by the intelligence agencies of the US and other countries in collecting whatever preventive intelligence they can and sharing it with the intelligence agencies of the three countries needs to be acknowledged and applauded.
2. The terrorists and other extremists were thwarted in carrying out their plans, but their capabilities and determination to spread death and destruction remain intact.The octopus of jihadi extremism and terrorism is not dead. It is alive and kicking and has started moving again. This should be evident from the assassinations of Salman Taseer, the Governor of Pakistani Punjab, and Shabaz Bhatti, Pakistani Minister for Minority Affairs, and the two unsuccessful attempts to kill Maulana Fazlur Rahman, the Amir of the Jamiat-ul-Ulema Islam Pakistan, Taseer and Bhatti were killed brutally because of their opposition to the blasphemy laws. Fazlur Rahman was believed to have been targeted for suggesting a re-look at the most obnoxious provisions of the obnoxious law.
3. The octopus has started moving in Afghanistan too. This became evident from the brutal murder of eight employees of a UN agency on April 1 by a violent mob protesting against a recent incident in the US in which a pastor allegedly burnt a copy of the Holy Koran. This has been followed by violent incidents in Kandahar over the same issue on April 2.
4. The feel-good atmosphere in India-Pakistan relations generated by the "conversations" of Prime Ministers Dr.Manmohan Singh and Mr.Yousef Raza Gilani at Mohali on March 30 should not blind us to the movements of the jihadi octopus. The anti-India and anti-Hindu poison being propagated by the jihadi organisations shows no signs of slackening. Their anti-India infrastructure is intact. The octopuses of terrorism have many hiding places in Pakistan from which they can strike at India. They are bound to strike at India sooner or later to convince their followers that the anti-India jihad has to be continued until final victory---- let Mohali be damned.
5. The post-World Cup euphoria is natural among the general populace, but it should not lead to a slackening of vigilance by the intelligence and security agencies, including the police. In fact, there is a need for even greater vigilance today than ever before.
6. How to keep the carefully-calibrated re-engagement process initiated by our Prime Minister moving forward without slackening our vigliance and determination to fight the jihadi terrorists operating from Pakistani territory? That is a question to be constantly addressed by the political leadership and the security bureaucracy.
7. The proposed re-engagement is with the State and the secular civil society of Pakistan, but not with its jihadi civil society. Our policy of eternal vigilance and confrontation against the jihadi octopuses has to continue unrelentingly till we win the final victory. ( 3-4-11)
( 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 )
The intelligence agencies and Police of India, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka deserve to be complimented for the effective and co-ordinated manner in which they managed to maintain security and thwart planned acts of terrorism during the nearly two-month period during which matches of the World Cup cricket tournament were being held in these countries. The terrorists based in the Af-Pak region were not without plans to disrupt the matches through terrorist strikes, but their plans were detected and neutralised in time by prompt intelligence and effective physical security. The role played by the intelligence agencies of the US and other countries in collecting whatever preventive intelligence they can and sharing it with the intelligence agencies of the three countries needs to be acknowledged and applauded.
2. The terrorists and other extremists were thwarted in carrying out their plans, but their capabilities and determination to spread death and destruction remain intact.The octopus of jihadi extremism and terrorism is not dead. It is alive and kicking and has started moving again. This should be evident from the assassinations of Salman Taseer, the Governor of Pakistani Punjab, and Shabaz Bhatti, Pakistani Minister for Minority Affairs, and the two unsuccessful attempts to kill Maulana Fazlur Rahman, the Amir of the Jamiat-ul-Ulema Islam Pakistan, Taseer and Bhatti were killed brutally because of their opposition to the blasphemy laws. Fazlur Rahman was believed to have been targeted for suggesting a re-look at the most obnoxious provisions of the obnoxious law.
3. The octopus has started moving in Afghanistan too. This became evident from the brutal murder of eight employees of a UN agency on April 1 by a violent mob protesting against a recent incident in the US in which a pastor allegedly burnt a copy of the Holy Koran. This has been followed by violent incidents in Kandahar over the same issue on April 2.
4. The feel-good atmosphere in India-Pakistan relations generated by the "conversations" of Prime Ministers Dr.Manmohan Singh and Mr.Yousef Raza Gilani at Mohali on March 30 should not blind us to the movements of the jihadi octopus. The anti-India and anti-Hindu poison being propagated by the jihadi organisations shows no signs of slackening. Their anti-India infrastructure is intact. The octopuses of terrorism have many hiding places in Pakistan from which they can strike at India. They are bound to strike at India sooner or later to convince their followers that the anti-India jihad has to be continued until final victory---- let Mohali be damned.
5. The post-World Cup euphoria is natural among the general populace, but it should not lead to a slackening of vigilance by the intelligence and security agencies, including the police. In fact, there is a need for even greater vigilance today than ever before.
6. How to keep the carefully-calibrated re-engagement process initiated by our Prime Minister moving forward without slackening our vigliance and determination to fight the jihadi terrorists operating from Pakistani territory? That is a question to be constantly addressed by the political leadership and the security bureaucracy.
7. The proposed re-engagement is with the State and the secular civil society of Pakistan, but not with its jihadi civil society. Our policy of eternal vigilance and confrontation against the jihadi octopuses has to continue unrelentingly till we win the final victory. ( 3-4-11)
( 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 )
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)