The Iran spy drone incident

As per recent news reports a US RQ-170 drone was captured by Iran. Iran wants to put this along with some other captured drones on display. This brings to mind the Gary Powers U-2 incident. The Wikipedia article in fact mentions the RQ-170 below the main article. The Soviet Union is history today. American animosity of late has been focused on Iran. An interesting insight is that Iran seems to have been used by the US for military purposes. This was before the Iranian revolution where the Shah was removed and the current Islamic regime came into place.

Another thing that caught my attention was this article. Indian market faces "risk" of losing trillion dollar tag? I think we have much more important things to worry about than crossing a number, that too not in our own currency. We have inflation and corruption to begin with. Let these be addressed first. One thing which worries me is that no one (in the government) seems to be talking about long-term measures. When the issue is inflation the RBI is asked to tighten rates. What about supply-side measures? We are talking about the Food Security Bill. Where will we get the foodgrains (okay, these might be sufficient) and the funds to support this bill? The government seems to be going in for knee-jerk reactions. Will it address long-term issues also please?

Lokpal reservation and Bharat Ratna

Trust the government to introduce some, well, politics into anything and everything. Just when the average citizen started hoping the Lokpal bill would be passed in this session of Parliament, there have been reports that the government wants to introduce reservation into the Lokpal. 50% of the seats would be reserved for people from the OBCs, and SC/ST. This is being done to placate the RJD and a few other parties. Is the government playing games? What does caste have to do with integrity? What is the need for this? Do the likes of the RJD believe that unless there is reservation "backward" classes would be targeted by the Lokpal? For all one should care the Lokpal can consist of only people from the backward castes, or none from these, the only criterion being that they should be people of integrity and capability. Why are extraneous considerations being brought in? The RJD is a non-entity today. It seems to be trying to come back into the limelight through measures like these.

Now I come to the topic of the Bharat Ratna. What I say now might be sacrilege to hundreds and thousands but I believe Sachin Tendulkar should not be awarded the Bharat Ratna, yet. This is an award, which I believe has already lost some of its value when it was awarded to Indira Gandhi (when she was still alive) and to Rajiv Gandhi. I am not sure how much these two deserved this award. Coming back to sports, the government has done the right thing by removing the ineligibility of sportspersons to receive this award. I believe any citizen of India (Mother Teresa and Nelson Mandela are the only two non-Indian citizens to have received this award till date) should be eligible to receive the award. However I believe there are other sportspersons who have made great contribution to sports before Tendulkar. Dhyanchand, as the Sports Minister, Ajay Maken pointed out is a good candidate. Also, in cricket-crazy India it would be nice, for a change for a non-cricketer to receive the award first. 

There has been much outrage against the reinstatement of SPS Rathore's pension. I believe this was suspended after he was convicted in a molestation case of Ruchika Girhotra. While what he has done cannot be condoned, I fail to see why his pension should be stopped. He did work for the government. If he is guilty he should be punished. But I do not see why the pension should be stopped. It is sad to see such a man let off with so little punishment, but this seems to be a shortcoming of our legal system.

Support FDI in retail!

As some may ask, why am I blogging instead of looking after work related to the marriage? Well, we have a ceremony which in Telugu is called pellikodukuni cheyyadam. It literally means making/preparing/getting ready the groom. Post this apparently I am not allowed to step out of the house. The reaction from one of my friends, a girl, was "caged for life". Maybe this internment is meant to be a preview of married life ;-)

Now moving on, whatever may be its other faults or merits I like the present government for its initiatives like MGNREGS, RTI and the bills mentioned in the previous post. I commend Manmohan Singh's government for having guts, at least in some aspects. The decision to deregulate fuel prices, his firm stand against the Left with respect to the 123 Agreement with the US, and now the decision to allow FDI in the retail sector.

I have been disenchanted with the right wingers for having been very sore losers since the time of UPA 1. They are still intent on disrupting proceedings in the Parliament. One good thing wrt the FDI in retail decision has been that the FDI limit is 51%.  Management control would be with the MNCs but Indian ownership would also be there. Now the government has to ensure this does not get diluted via things like cross holdings. For eg say Bharti has a tie up with Walmart. Now the government has to ensure that Walmart does not get any additional stake via a different company in the ownership structure. I do not know whether this is even possible, and if it is I am sure this is but one way of reducing Indian shareholding. Also another surprise has sprung up recently. Apparently there was a clause that 30% of sourcing has to be done from the SME segment. Many ministers in the central govt itself thought this referred to Indian SMEs. Now it has been clarified that these SMEs need not be Indian. I hope no further surprises like these spring up.

The Indian agricultural supply chain is in sore need of improvement. Every year huge quantities of produce go waste simply because there are not enough proper storage facilities available. In addition there are a large number of middle men between the producer and the consumer. Consider a very simplified illustration in the cases of pulses in a city like Kolkata. The produce is brought to a place (I think it is called Dal Patti) where some basic processing is involved (removing the husk, splitting the seed etc). Then this is sent to a wholesale market like Posta Bazaar. From here the pulses are bought by retailers who in turn sell them to the customers. In this simplified chain itself we see three layers between the producer and the consumer (processor, wholesaler and retailer). There are brokers at each level to facilitate meetings between the buyer  and the seller. Granted there are some good aspects. For e.g. the broker in addition to acting as an all-important source of contacts also acts as a guarantor for the quality of the material. However imagine the increase the price by the time the item reaches the consumer. Mega institutions can help cut this number down or at least integrate them into a more efficient supply chain (consider ITC's e-choupal for instance). This is what India needs today. We have crossed the billion figure in our own country and this number is only going to increase in the near future. As lots of people George Bush Jr, Manmohan Singh et al) have pointed out Indians are demanding more nutritious items as part of their diet to our increased purchasing capacity. The government has to seriously think about how to feed this population. For how long can the RBI address the demand side without the government doing enough on the supply side? The agriculture minister needs to get cricket out of his head, at least for some time. Money attracts politicians like honey for flies but we must remember that flies can cause some serious diseases.

Also why are we so insecure about our domestic players? I believe there were similar fears when India was opened up in 1991. I don't think we are today anywhere close to annihilation as feared by the critics then. In contrast we are looked upon as an emerging economy (or as Obama said as an emerged economy) of great potential. The street-end kiranawalla has the advantages of proximity and familiarity which a modern retail outlet does not have. I am pretty sure that our mom and pop stores can take care of themselves. Anyway in the US I believe these hypermarkets are located in the suburbs and people simply drive down there. This kind of culture is not that prevalent in India, at least today. Imagine a middle class housewife taking a vehicle (bus, two-wheeler whatever) to a hypermarket which is 20 kms from her home, standing in queue and lugging the luggage back all that distance. I am pretty sure she would prefer the local grocery store any day. In India if the hypermarket is to be located in a more accessible location there are property rates to be considered. This might make sense for a clothing store, but would not exactly for a grocery store.

The problem in India has been and still is that our implementation leaves one wishing for much more. Many schemes might be well intentioned but the beneficiaries do end up getting a raw deal, and not rarely (leakage in MNNREGS and the PDS for instance). This has to be kept in mind wrt the FDI in retail decision also.

An obituary for Indian democracy?

Just check the list below, this is with regard to the Indian Parliament

Bills slated for discussion in this session

1. Lokpal

2. Judicial Accountability

3. Food Security

4. Land Acquisition

5. Education

Sample what happened in the Lok Sabha today - the Rajya Sabha was adjourned after obituary references

1. Left - wants to corner the government over inflation

2. BJP/NDA - wants to corner the government on inflation, corruption (and black money)

3. TRS - raised the Telangana issue in Parliament today

4. Samajwadi Party - unhappy with the proposal to divide UP

5. Shiva Sena - trooped into the well, I don't know why

6. Team Anna - is prepared to re-start the agitation

This truly represents a government under siege from all directions. If the discussion entail voting the government is probably not sure whether or not it will win the motions. If I am not mistaken every hour of our legislature costs the government about INR (when will the Rupee symbol be incorporated into keyboards?) 2 lakhs. I am part of the hapless population that pays taxes. I don't want to finance these incidents (if I call them or especially the perpetrators anything rude, what I actually might want to, I might have a case against me, in spite of India being a country with "free speech").

The bills slated for discussion are historic to say the least. Corruption is a burning issue in India today. No one outside the judiciary probably completely knows how or why it functions the way it does. We are talking about providing subsidized food to a large part of our population (with money about which I have no idea as to where it is coming from). Vital projects have been stalled across the country due to land issues. Education is an urgent requirement of what is probably among the world's youngest nations. But are we doing anything useful? No! Why should we? 

Our politicians' "appraisal" comes only once in five years. Sufficient time for (at least some of) them to have amassed fortunes which will comfortably last a few generations. Why the hell am I working my ass off in a private sector job?

When will our democracy rise from its ashes (make no mistake, I believe it keeps dying regular deaths)?

On the institution of marriage

By now, I think I have told most if not all the people I know that I am getting married shortly. This topic was going through my mind and I decided to put pen on paper, or fingers on keyboard, to be more precise.

I happened to attend the wedding of two of my friends (as in the bride and groom both were my friends). This was a love marriage. On the day of the wedding the guy had a look of glee on his face while the bride had one of gloom. We (a few friends) who had attended were gesturing to the blue bride to smile! I unfortunately could not attend the wedding of another very good friend of mine, but she also told me that in the wedding her fiance was looking quite happy while she looked as if she could start bawling any moment. Both these couples were and are blissfully happy before and after their weddings (and may they continue to be that way). The gloomy expressions were reserved only for the day of the wedding.  Going by conventional wisdom, I believe the situation should be the other way round! Sample these -

1. Aadmi shaadi ke baad sher ban jaata hain, durga ma ke paas jo hota hain, wo! (After marriage a man becomes a lion, the one that Goddess Durga rides on, the wife being Durga here :D) - this gem from a senior of mine at work.

2. Marriage is an institution when a man loses his bachelor's degree and a woman gains her master's!

3. Shaadi (or Delhi, I am not sure) ke laddu khaane se bhi pachtaaoge, nahi khaane se bhi pachtaaoge (I am not totally sure I have understood the meaning of this till date).

What might be the explanation? Does the woman suddenly realize the change that will take place in her life? But in that case the same is the situation in the case of the guy. In the olden days the bride used to accompany her husband to his parents' place. However often this is not the case today. Owing to work pressures many children, whether guys or girls are already staying away from their parents. Maybe guys are wired to handle (or suppress) their emotions better? Maybe this is at the root of the entire issue?

Then we come to the issue of love vs arranged marriages. As we all know there are love marriages which have gone bad and there are arranged marriages which have thrived and vice versa. There can be some debate on whether or not, and if yes, for how long, a guy and a girl should get to know each other before the wedding. In the olden days there have been many instances when the two did not even see each other before the wedding! Today's generation is different. There are many who want to know the guy/girl for at least a few months before they say yes. Even though this reduces the chance of friction what is the guarantee that the friction would not occur. I have had the luck (privilege or whatever) of seeing many happy marriages. I know of some unhappy ones too, but I still believe in the institution and sanctity of marriage. I met someone recently in the line of my work. We were unwinding after work and the topic moved to marriages. This person has had quite a colourful life and has also seen some weird relationships. This has led to a fear of marriages in him, though his parents are currently on the lookout for a suitable match.

Further education and financial independence have opened up entirely new scenarios today. I heard of a case where the guys' parents got him married as there would be somebody to take care of him and cook for him (I am sure this was only one of the considerations). The girl then told him that she could either do house work or be employed but could not do both. A second income is always helpful and the guy wanted her to work. He asked her to and the end result was that he started cooking for his wife also! Then there are guys/girls today who are very determined about what they want in a partner and would like to continue their search till they find someone fitting that description.

I am nobody to say one way is right or the other wrong. In my opinion all that matters and should matter is whether the constituents of the couple are happy with each other, whether they are willing to compromise (note, I do not say settle) and understand each other to live happily together. How often have we not heard the saying that the husband and the wife are like the wheels of a chariot. If either one does not function the way it should the chariot (or the marriage) cannot progress. That, in my opinion is the key to everything.

Born privileged, will blunder!

Rahul Gandhi's advisors must surely be hoping they could turn back time. He launched his UP campaign on the birthday of his grandfather. However as has been highlighted by the media, two things have occurred which the Congress could have done without.

One was the kicking of the opposition workers who broke through Rahul's security cordon. Granted, he is under SPG protection and is a high profile target. However the intruders could have simply been pinned down and taken into custody. But we saw political leaders queuing up to kick the SP workers. Apparently an FIR has also been filed against these leaders.

The other was Rahul Gandhi's use of the term begging. Bihar and UP contribute a lot to the migrant labour force in the country. This is still no reason to call the people of UP beggars. There is such a thing called dignity of labour. The Congress might say the labourers would not be in that state if other opportunities were available. However is this true? Due to the MGNREGS there is a shortage of labour throughout the country. A farmer with small holdings might opt for menial work in construction, manufacturing etc during the off-season to sustain himself. However with the scheme in place he is assured of work for 100 days. If he is satisfied with his income there is no incentive for him to take up further work. 

Both incidents show a certain arrogance in the young(?) leader. He did not stop his over zealous party people from indulging in violence. The beggar remark shows the political immaturity of the Congress leader even though he has such qualified mentors and has spent so much time in the public eye. One can only wonder if this person is suitable to be the leader of this country, for it is a granted thing that unless he sacrifices the PM's post a la his mother he will become the PM of this country one day. Coming back to the title of this post - only Rahul Gandhi can probably commit such blunders and still escape unscathed, for it is the sycophancy of his party members that will sustain him throughout his political life.

Apparently the Government can Bribe

All of us have heard about police informers. I do not know whether these people can be considered to be "employed" by the police in the usual sense of the term. Apparently the income tax department also depends on informants to unearth information to conduct raids. Now this article says that some informants are disgruntled people. It clearly mentions that the funds used are secret and the IT department has to part with money to get information. Now the secrecy is justified. If I rat out a powerful real estate developer for tax evasion I do not want him to know that it was I who exposed him. 

However to my mind this entire practice seems suspiciously close to bribery. So is it ok if the government bribes its own citizens for a "good" cause? The irony is that these bribes are used for unearthing black money! So if these funds are secret, what are they, black or white? I am not saying what the government is doing is wrong. It is being pragmatic. However I just want to point out the irony. Also, the government keeps spouting Mahatma Gandhi's name often. I wonder what his take would have been on this classic case of the ends justifying the means.

This is entirely(?) unrelated, but what is Robert Vadra's name doing on the list of people exempt from frisking at airports? Does anyone know the logic?

A Nation of Apathy

Yet another incident shows how insensitive we are towards another man's suffering in our country. This comes after the Keenan-Reuben case where the two young men were killed because they came forward to protect their female friends from some inebriated goons. Related to this issue, the Supreme Court has also said that medical care is the first priority in an emergency. Till then there was a (justified?) fear that helping a person who was the victim of an accident or personal attack would lead to legal complications to the good samaritan. In spite of the Supreme Court's directive we see the situation continuing. In the article, the link of which is provided above we read that onlookers just well, looked on, as a man burnt, and that for quite some time.

We in India are taught from childhood to respect our elders. Probably as an extension to this and as an extension to our struggle under the Britishers we have come to fear powerful people and/or those in authority. In the cases mentioned above this would refer to the attacking goons. This and probably the fear of the legal process are what hold back people. I cannot think of any other logical reason. My mother was in fact rescued from such a situation via the kind act of a person, who alas I have not been able to meet. My mother met with an accident when I was in Intermediate. Till date, she does not know how that happened, and neither do we. We only know that luckily for her, a person who was working in a government hospital happened to pass by the crowd that had gathered after her accident and rushed her to the hospital. When asked, the crowd simply said it was a woman, and they did not want to get involved!

This probably is also an explanation of our tolerance for corruption or any other evils in our society today. We live under the impression that it has happened to "someone else" and not to us. Do I actually realize that to others, I am the "someone else"? One is reminded of the story where a person does not protest when Jews and people from other communities were targeted (it was either in Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia). He does not say anything as it was someone else being targeted. In the end the government comes for him and he finds no one left to defend him. I might be paraphrasing but this is the gist. 

So I think first of all the Supreme Court's directive needs to be widely publicized to assure people that they will not get into legal tangles by helping others. Further probably because of our population there are not many resources to pass around, and we tend to get close-fisted. Ironically we are the country that produced the tales of Shibi, Karna and Bali. Also, remember the story of the mongoose with golden fur from the Mahabharata (this will be my next blog post). So there also seems to be a need to inculcate the quality of sharing and helping others in our children via their families and their formal education also, for it is today's children that we hope will become tomorrow's dutiful citizens.

Saddam Hussain and bin Laden deja vu!

Muammar Gaddafi's death reminds of two deaths in the not-so-distant past - those of Saddam Hussain and Osama bin Laden. Why? Gaddafi was hounded by his own people the way Saddam was by the Americans. He fled the same way and was discovered in a similar way. Laden was alive when the Americans caught up with him. What ensued is probably not very clear. Now the US is demanding details of how Gaddafi died. I think it is a little too late in the day to take someone else to task over moral turpitude.

Now I come to the question, is this revenge? Does revenge truly bring happiness? I do not know, neither do I hope to find out. But now I come to the larger question. Can we kill a human being even if the, well, justification is to bring about justice? I was (probably) a supporter of the death penalty in the rarest of the rare cases. In fact I had written in one of my previous posts about the delay in Afzal Guru's hanging. However I also have to ask myself, life is not something that we have given to our fellow human beings, can we take it from someone? I believe this argument was in fact put forward by Gandhi. Why do we have laws? Because way back in antiquity man agreed to co-habit in society, and for this society to survive and flourish certain ground rules need to be followed. So anyone who lives in society and does not follow its rules should be punished. Now does this extend to taking a person's life also?

The anguish felt by a murdered person's dear ones can only be understood by them, but I would like to know, in cases where the killer has been hanged (or electrocuted or whatever) has the victim's family found peace? Do they believe this is the only way to obtain justice? There are occasional examples - Graham Staines' (the Christian missionary who was burnt alive in Odisha) wife forgave her husband's killers and did not want to see them hanged. Murugan and Nalini's daughter has asked for something similar from the Gandhi family.  Obviously I am not saying that if the family okays it every murderer' sentence should also be commuted. I have the luxury right now of taking the middle path and leaving the question open, so I choose to do it. I just wish to raise a question which everyone should ask oneself.

Moving on, I loved Hillary Clinton's recent statement in Pakistan - you cannot raise snakes in your backyard and expect they will bite only your neighbours. Once again, I would like to say, look who's talking, but I still love the statement. The US is making some very angry noises publicly about Pakistan's continued support to Afghan extremists. It remains to be seen how much of this (and American benevolence to Pakistan) will remain once the US completes its pullout from Afghanistan. During the Cold War the US needed Pakistan. India was proclaimedly non-aligned, and was also close to the Soviet Union. Pakistan was closer to Afghanistan and not very friendly with India, to say the least. Thus the US needed Pakistan to counter Soviet influence in the region. Today however, the Soviet Union is no more and India is seen as a strategic ally on many fronts. China is seen as an emerging (some would say emerged) rival on the world stage, and Pakistan has been historically close to China. So the Americans might not see any compelling reason to placate Pakistan. Now that bin Laden is dead and due to the fact that he was found in Pakistan, the US can make all sorts of complaining noises against Pakistan.

So what emerges? US foreign policy is strictly dictated by self interest. Hence it would be in India's long-term interest to ensure that no country treats it as a friend in hyphenation with any other country, for as Pakistan is finding out the hard way today, such friends do not last.

The Ramayana will lead to communalism!

I came across an article when I was browsing through Wikipedia. Apparently the hugely popular TV series, Ramayana was initially delayed because it was felt it would lead to communalism! Many a time one feels that the government or the powers-that-be are over cautious about people's reactions. We as a country seem to be very scared of ourselves. We pride ourselves on being a pluralistic society. However we reek of intolerance. The recent attack on Shanti Bhushan, after his Kashmir remarks are a case in point. I vehemently denounce his remarks, but after all, as a citizen of India, he is free to air his views. Remember the quote misattributed to Voltaire - "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." Secularism might be a term that is semantically new to India (considering its long history). However India has always been nothing but tolerant of other cultures and practices. The "religion" Hinduism itself gives everyone the choice to worship (or reject) a deity as s/he pleases. Where is this tolerance in India today? The right wing parties might be pilloried for intolerance, however the pillorying parties are guilty of appeasement themselves. Our culture of appeasement and our knowledge of our own intolerance are probably what prompt the authorities to ban what might be even slightly provocative.

There exists a "work of art" called Piss Christ. M F Hussain (intentionally or unintentionally) represented Bharat Mata and Sita in the nude and was hounded out of the country. I can only wonder what would have happened to the creator of the aforementioned photograph in India.

On the other hand, as I have argued before also, the hounded parties might not be totally innocent. M F Hussain used a term noor-un-ala-noor in a song (a beautiful qawwali by the way) in his film Meenaxi: A Tale of Three Cities. Following Muslim protests at apparent use of Quranic words in a song the artist withdrew the movie. I do not know if he has ever apologized to all the people whose sentiments might have been hurt because of his paintings. One is reminded of the following story. Once a woman was walking on a pavement, twirling an umbrella in her hand. A man walking behind her was finding it difficult to avoid her umbrella. He went up to her and said, "Madam, your freedom ends where my nose begins!"

Moving on, there has been a recent news article saying upper class fares might be increased. In India, as probably in most places, freight rates are a very important source of revenue and profit. Businesses suffer high freight rates which are kept high to minimize the increase in the passenger fares. The government probably feels raising sleeper and other lower class (to quote Shashi Tharoor, the cattle class, another incident which raised a huge hue and cry) fares might lead a to a wider outpouring of popular anger against the government. I would like to suggest a simple alternative - ensure people do buy tickets on all trains. I am very sure there are thousands of people who hitch a ride on local and route trains without a buying a ticket. In some places in Bihar and Jharkhand there are people who travel in reserved compartments without tickets. Probably policing these people will increase the railways' revenue and at least temporarily remove the need to increase any fares.

What's in a Number?

The Planning Commission (PC) recently said that a family which spends more than 32 rupees per day cannot be said to be below the poverty line. There has been a huge furore after that. The Deputy Chairman Montek Singh Ahluwalia was forced to clarify his remarks today. Unfortunately I do not think he has done a good job. He says the intention is not to understate poverty.

There is one thing which has to be realized. Let us take an example in the film Peepli Live. The government officials supply a pump but do not allot the funds to install it, nor do they get that done. The definition raises that danger. A government employee might very well tell a genuine beneficiary tomorrow that he would not get any benefits as technically he is not below the poverty line. We have been told that people above this limit will also be covered under government schemes. This begs the question - what was the intention behind giving this number in the first place? If this point has not been clarified the "clarification" given today does not hold much water.

The argument in fact seems self defeating. Mr. Ahluwalia says that this is the poverty line. That also does not make sense. Are we trying to artificially reduce our poverty figures and move up in international rankings? Does the government want to artificially reduce poverty and claim victory against it when it is hard pressed for some positive news amidst the pandemonium in the country today? I am not more learned than the members of the Planning Commission or the National Advisory Council (NAC), but common sense would suggest that to solve a problem you have to first identify it. To remove poverty we have to identify the factors and symptoms properly before recommending solutions. If this first step itself is skipped, it would seem as if we were trying to wish away poverty. This is dangerous in a country such as ours.

Moving on, I am left wondering as to why the government is not imposing ESMA in Hyderabad. The city has been suffering for about three weeks now. The government has not resolved the issue till now. If it is unable to do that it should at least try to get things back to normalcy. There might be multiple reasons for this. The same party is in power as at the centre. Further the Congress has not been the epitome of tolerance as suggested by the Ramdev and Anna Hazare episodes. It probably also anticipates a further deterioration in law and order. However this kind of logic was given to the Supreme Court once. The court then had asked the state government to quit if it could not maintain law and order as this was its duty. Only time will tell how things will develop now onwards.

De-politicise Sports - A Few Measures

I have written earlier about our politicians in sports, here, and here. My readers might have noticed that I rant a lot about our system. I realize that too. Hence from this post onwards I will also try to incorporate some suggestions instead of just complaining. It is always very easy to criticize, constructive work is difficult.

These are times Indian hockey fans will remember, for reasons good and bad. India beat Pakistan in China to clinch the Champions Trophy, while the International Hockey Federation (FIH) has chosen to move the 2011 Champions Trophy out of India to New Zealand owing to internal problems in India. We have two opposing bodies in India today for one hockey. This should come us a grim reminder for us to de-politicise sports and bring some rationality into our sports administration.

Another weird incident happened in London. At an ICC awards ceremony, where ironically Dhoni won an award for playing the game in its true spirit no one from the Indian cricket team attended. There are no prizes for guessing who did attend - Sharad Pawar and Rajiv Shukla - members of the BCCI and don't hold your breath, politicians. Our political class would do well to support Maken in his endeavour to de-politicise sports. But seeing that there is a conflict of interest in many politicians' cases, the question comes up, will this ever happen? Maken makes perfect sense.

1. Sports are played by young people, and for lack of a better word, by sportspersons. I believe one would be hard pressed to find many (active) sportspersons above the age of 40. Hence it makes no sense to have people who would very well fit the government's definition of senior citizens on our sports boards, both administering and selecting.

2. I believe the logic behind government servants getting transferred (frequently or occasionally) is that they do not develop any unwanted or unethical relationships with anybody by being posted in one location for a very long time. Further as time passes complacency creeps. This logic can be applied to sports boards also. So once again Maken's suggestion on the cap on the number of terms to two makes perfect sense.

3. Non-performing sportspersons are penalized by being dropped. One would like to know the measures applied to our boards in that sense also. There has been a huge hue and cry over selection proceedings being brought under the RTI Act. The way some governments declassify some files, is it not possible to make the meeting minutes public after some time elapses? Agreed, this gives people a chance to change the records, but at least this would probably be better than the current situation.

4. We occasionally hear people saying BCCI's funds should be used for other sports too. This is one option. There is another option. When boards like BCCI make hundreds of crores of revenue and profit how does it make sense to label them as charitable organizations? Bring it under the tax net, use that money for other sports. This way there is no charity involved. Obviously this would not be enough, this is where the government or the private sector can step in.

5. We are becoming a country of parrots today. We have students who get things by heart and spit them out in the exam. This is the definition of a good student. Many schools today do not have a proper playground. NDTV has a Marks for Sports Campaign. I am not saying that. But any new school that is set up today should mandatorily have a playground where children can play. Remember the saying, "all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy".

Was Fareed Zakaria Right?

Recently I saw an interview on CNN-IBN with Fareed Zakaria, the Editor-at-Large (funny name, generally I thought legal offenders were referred to be at large) of Time magazine. Fareed is in fact of Indian origin and is a naturalized US citizen. His credentials speak for themselves, both education and career-wise. He is today one of the most respected journalists in the world today. He was all praise for the way the US has dealt with terror, how al Qaeda has been dealt with. There were three points he mentioned (in response to the interview questions) as to how India can deal with terror. Unfortunately I do not remember them verbatim. But I remember the basic gist and would like to take a look at his points.

One was intelligence. In his opinion Indian agencies have never been famous for their efficiency. We in fact stand a better chance of infiltrating terror networks compared to the Americans due to similar looks and linguistic backgrounds and thus have an advantage in that aspect. This is definitely true. We had no idea when Kargil happened. 26/11 seems to show that might not have changed much.

A second point was the state of our police forces. In his opinion they are pathetic. Also unlike in the US where the police are in a way part of the community here that is not the case. One would be hard-pressed to disagree. Just look at the weapons our armed forces use. Most of the police forces uses ancient rifles if I am not mistaken. We hear of massacres of CRPF personnel in Maoist areas. The poor chaps (security personnel) stay miles away from civilization and live in deplorable conditions. These people might have to lay down their lives for our security then we (or more specifically the administration/government) treats them like this! There were some recent operations in Jharkhand where a large number of security personnel fell sick with malaria as the operations were held in the jungle in the monsoon. I heard recently that some boats which had been bought after 26/11 are lying unused as there is nobody trained to operate them. Also the munition and weapons used by our armed forces vary widely. There is no proper standardization. Where are bullet-proof vests for security personnel who operate on the frontlines (even if these frontlines are in the heart of our metropolises)? Also today unless I am wrong the police inspire fear more than the belief that they are there to help the citizens. One of our professors at IIFT used to poke fun at the Delhi Police slogan which translates to mean "with you, for you, always".

Another point was integration. External terror cannot find a firm foothold in India if there is no local support. He in fact pointed out that Gujarat is a sore point even today among Muslims. However I must point out, without trivializing the atrocities that happened, that Gujarat is today one of India's most progressive states, under the same Chief Minister. Further if the perpetrators of India's blasts are proved to be from Gujarat I think Zakaria's words would hold actual weight. That we have not been very successful at solving various terror-related cases and that communiques from terrorists regularly point to Gujarat are frank admissions that have to be made. Now Muslims in India are considered to be at a great disadvantage as far as development is concerned. India has generally been an inclusive society. So should we blame our rulers for the state Indian Muslims find themselves in today? Further integration is not as outright or a one-way street as Zakaria's statements might make it out to be. The government and people can reach out to Muslims and they have to. Muslims are as much a part of this country as a person from any other religion. However we must remember that for Muslims (in many cases) religion is a factor more important than nationality. Unrest in the global Muslim world at the way Palestinians are treated is a direct reminder. Further many of us must have heard of instances when celebrations erupted when Pakistan won a cricket match. So, integration is a two-way street. There will always be fringe elements. But Zakaria is right, we need to do more to integrate our Muslim brothers into our national fabric especially in terms of development.

Moving on, however, somehow Zakaria missed out mentioning Pakistan in his initial assessment of India's terror situation. The spark (may be Gujarat riots) might exist but there also has to be fuel to sustain the inferno. This is helpfully provided by our neighbour. Comparing India with US in anti-terror action is not justified. Why? The US is bordered by Canada (an extremely peaceful place) and Mexico. Now, Mexico has huge narcotics-related problems. However there are no governments or armies (official) actively opposed to the US in its vicinity. Further launching an attack on continental US has a lot of logistical complications. This is not the case with India. In the south till recently we had the LTTE who had assassinated our PM. In the west we obviously have Pakistan. Even if the borders with Pakistan and Bangladesh are fenced, our borders with Nepal and Bhutan are very porous. Further look at how the US addressed terror. It attacked Afghanistan and then Iraq (the latter on the basis of spurious allegations). It set up Camp X-ray at Guantanamo Bay so that US laws would not apply to detainees there. The captured fighters in the "War or Terror" are not brought under the Geneva Convention which deals with prisoners of war. It set up interrogation centres in foreign countries where coercive interrogation techniques and/or outright torture were applied. I am not saying India did not indulge in human rights violations. But to the US the ends definitely seem to justify the means. Imagine what would happen were India to launch a war against Pakistan. The US had the luxury of fighting opponents who were technologically greatly inferior and it still had a tough time. The number of people killed in the "War on Terror" is in large multiples of the 9/11 casualty number (about 3000). What does the US care as long as the casualties are non-US? For instance when a stray missile or bomb, or one guided by faulty intelligence kills civilians in Afghanistan the US just apologises and moves on. There is huge outcry however in the US when US soldier casualties mount. 

Mr. Zakaria is in love with his adopted nation. He says that today, in spite of all restrictions (frisking at airports, laws) an arrested civilian has the greatest chance of getting justice in the US than anywhere else in the world. Maybe he is right. But he has to remember that his adopted country is a nation that condones killing thousands internationally to justify securing "American lives".

Omar's Dangerous Precedent

The younger Abdullah is becoming quite well known for his tweets. However the latest one has caused quite some controversy, and justifiedly. I do not believe what the Tamil Nadu Assembly did in the first place was right. Requesting clemency for Tamilians in spite of their offence set the wrong precedent in the first place. Murugan's daughter might be justified in asking clemency for her father and mother, after all, she has never been able to enjoy her childhood fully.

Karunanidhi finds himself in a strange situation today. His daughter is in jail. So is the dalit face of his party. Remember that this is a state which has 70% reservation (if I am not mistaken). His family and party members have been hounded on the basis of various accusations like land grabbing. He has faced a whitewash in the last assembly elections. The senior citizen is grasping at straws to reclaim some political legitimacy in this situation. The political situation in Sri Lanka has always been an emotive issue in Sri Lanka due to their language affinity. It is sad that the government and in fact the entire state assembly decided to jump onto this populist bandwagon. Remember, whether or not the visionary or saint that he is made out to be by the Congress today, Rajiv Gandhi was in fact a former Prime Minister of our nation. So by supporting his killers is not a state government not going against the law of the land? Does this not show disrespect to the entire legal process and to the position of the President of the Union of India itself?

In Omar's case the situation is a little more complicated. He should remember that Sri Lanka as a nation was never anti-India (to my knowledge). However this seems to be the raison d'etre of Pakistan, or at least the military and/or political leadership. Note that I took the name of the military first. Why is this? Even when Nawaz Sharif was talking peace with A B Vajpayee his army chief, Musharraf was planning and conducting the Kargil war. Thus in Afzal Guru's case the issue is not about simply supporting a person of your religion, or your native land. It is about supporting a nation, an ideology that by its very essence is against our nation. It is sad that the Chief Minister of a state, and that too of a state that has been the bone of contention between India and Pakistan (irrespective of whatever our political class might admit publicly), says this. Apparently now the J & K Assembly will pass a resolution on Afzal Guru. Omar Abdullah and the entire state assembly should be ashamed of their conduct. Two wrongs do not make a right. We have a saying in Telugu - pulini choosi nakka vaatha pettukunnattu - which essentially means says that a fox wanted to look regal like a tiger, it wanted the stripes, so it ended up branding itself with a hot iron.

At the same time the entire issue brings into question the time our legal process of disseminating justice takes. Raiv Gandhi died in 1991. Twenty years later we have still not completed the process. I am not advocating that the condemned be hanged. I am just remarking about the time the process takes. The Bofors case which came out in the 80s was recently closed inconclusively. Afzal Guru was convicted in the Parliament attack case, the attack happened in 2001. The longer the legal process takes the greater is the chance for complications to arise.

I will tell Mommy!

Ajay Maken, our Sports Minister had a good thought. A lot of sports bodies receive crores of rupees, so why not get them under greater public scrutiny? Even though the BCCI does not receive government funding directly, it deals with hundreds of crores and as reported on the NDTV website, it is under investigation for foreign exchange violations during the IPL. The BCCI is a private organization but claims to select India's "national" cricket team. So it makes perfect sense to bring it under public scrutiny. Further logically speaking if there are no skeletons to hide the organization then there should ideally be no panic reaction to Maken's proposal.

Did the cabinet agree to this proposal? Well, there are no prizes for guessing the answer. Farooq Abdullah among others opposed an upper age limit clause. He said by that yardstick he should not have been a cabinet minister too (hmm, is that such a bad idea?). If the esteemed minister uses his good judgement it would be perfectly obvious that for a minister's post age can actually be advantageous because of the experience carried with it. For sports on the other hand, I do not think most would agree that the younger the administrator and the more related to that sport the administrator is the better it is.

Another clause seeks to restricts terms to 2. For as long as I remember, Kalmadi has been the head of the IOA. See where he is today (and where for that matter our Olympic performance is). Apparently a very significant portion of sports bodies are headed by politicians. This is not restricted to any one party, but is common across the political spectrum.

Thus in my humble opinion it makes perfect sense to have some government oversight on our sports bodies and to bring all of them under the RTI. However if members of the cabinet already hold positions on sports bodies does it make sense to expect the cabinet to come to an impartial and objective conclusion? Sharad Pawar, our Agriculture Minister actually asked the Prime Minister to reduce his work load so that he could spend more time on cricket! Is it any wonder that food inflation is so high and Indian agriculture is said to have stagnated in its growth? Now coming to the title. Sharad Pawar is reported to have said in the cabinet discussion that if the bill was approved by the cabinet he would take up the issue with Sonia Gandhi, the chairperson of the UPA. Keeping aside the practicality of this when she is supposed to be recovering from surgery, doesn't this sound childish? It is like two kids fighting, one kids hits the other, and the hurt kid bawls, "I am going to tell mummy!"

Dear people, this is the Indian government!

On the Cash-for-votes Turnaround and "Girl Marks"

The BJP which was trying to corner the government on the cash-for-votes scandal is in the dock now, a chargesheet having been filed against its own members. This decision by the Delhi Police however raises some questions.

First of all this chargesheet has been filed three years after the actual incident, and that too after the Supreme Court pulled up the DP for inaction. Further the government would like us to believe the DP is independent. This is evident from it trying to shift the blame onto DP for the recent arrest of Anna Hazare. Now the DP chargesheet does not name the Congress MPs. It is probably a classic case of the hunter becoming the hunted. Amar Singh has been named and the case against the BJP members seems to be one of entrapment. Now are we to believe that Amar Singh conspired with the BJP to discredit the Congress? If this is not true then what conceivable reason is there for Amar Singh to be a participant in this entire episode?

Moving on, the decision by the IIMs to award marks for being a girl are, in my humble opinion, blatantly unfair. Some of my closest friends are girls, however I'm sure they too would agree with me at least to some extent. Awarding extra marks to non-engineer candidates might still make some sense if it is restricted to the mathematical portion of evaluation. In today's world of equal rights this is a retrograde step. The combined faculty of these esteemed institutions could surely have come up with another solution to increase diversity. I'm pretty sure the male candidates are all for increased diversity, but not at their expense. This country seems to be increasingly becoming a difficult place for a "forward-category" male students.

The BJP which was trying to corner the government on the cash-for-votes scandal is in the dock now, a chargesheet having been filed against its own members. This decision by the Delhi Police however raises some questions.

First of all this chargesheet has been filed three years after the actual incident, and that too after the Supreme Court pulled up the DP for inaction. Further the government would like us to believe the DP is independent. This is evident from it trying to shift the blame onto DP for the recent arrest of Anna Hazare. Now the DP chargesheet does not name the Congress MPs. It is probably a classic case of the hunter becoming the hunted. Amar Singh has been named and the case against the BJP members seems to be one of entrapment. Now are we to believe that Amar Singh conspired with the BJP to discredit the Congress? If this is not true then what conceivable reason is there for Amar Singh to be a participant in this entire episode?

Moving on, the decision by the IIMs to award marks for being a girl are, in my humble opinion, blatantly unfair. Some of my closest friends are girls, however I'm sure they too would agree with me at least to some extent. Awarding extra marks to non-engineer candidates might still make some sense if it is restricted to the mathematical portion of evaluation. In today's world of equal rights this is a retrograde step. The combined faculty of these esteemed institutions could surely have come up with another solution to increase diversity. I'm pretty sure the male candidates are all for increased diversity, but not at their expense. This country seems to be increasingly becoming a difficult place for a "forward-category" male students.

First they ignore you...

How can I be the only one not to comment on the ongoing Lokpal agitation? :) So here's my two cents' worth.

There has been some discussion on the crowds that have been gathering at Ramlila Maidan (RM) with P K Bansal and Ashwani Kumar from the Congress commenting that anybody can draw large crowds. This has obviously led to some strong responses too. Now let us pause here for a moment. 

When I saw a movie called Tagore in Telugu, starring Chiranjeevi, I was taken aback at the crowds that gathered towards the climax of the movie. Probably it was crowds like these that encouraged Chiranjeevi to set up his party and contest elections. But he ended up losing from one of the two constituencies he had stood for election from. So the crowds do not seem to have necessarily translated into votes. 

So I think we can safely assume that the crowds that gather to see a filmstar politician are there more to see the filmstar than anything else. The non-beneficial crowd is especially true in political settings where people can be paid to attend. Another incident is the support that Jagan is garnering in Andhra Pradesh. This is somewhat surprising. Whether or not people believe he is corrupt I am sure many people would agree there is more than what meets the eye as far as Jagan's wealth is concerned. He has of late taken to sending bulk messages to Church Fathers asking them to pray on their behalf, pandering to the Christian community too. So is Jagan right as he draws such huge crowds (not to mention the margin by which he and his mother won their elections)?

Where the Jan Lokpal campaign is different, I would argue is with respect to the increasing and (inter)national participation it is drawing. Crowds for 1-2 days may have been dismissed. However the crowds are only increasing day-by-day. Further, people cutting across states (though I think the response has been quite muted in the south) and even continents are supporting the agitation. The response of the powers-that-be in a way betrays their panic at the response the movement has gathered. It is simply arrogant to dismiss the crowds that have gathered.

However the establishment is right to an extent in asking Anna's team to follow established democratic procedures. I say to an extent. This legislation has been pending for a very long time, further as everyone is aware new cases keep tumbling out on a regular basis today. So the citizens of the country cannot be blamed for a trust deficit. Anna's team has shown some flexibility during negotiations for the duration and venue of the present fast. If the same can be shown and if the government lets go of its arrogance we can hope for a better India. 

To end, I quote a line attributed to Anna's idol - First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win. Should the government note the pattern? Jai Hind!

Black Money at the Top?

Everyone must have heard about the arguments happening with respect to including the PM in the ambit of the Lokpal Bill. I recently came across an interesting article. This was in German and seems to be an article from 1991. What it seems to say is that Rajiv Gandhi had CHF 2.5 billion (Swiss Francs) in secret accounts. 

As per the current exchange rates this translates to more than INR 125 billion (12500 crores). Now I do not know if this is true or false. If it is true I wonder how Rajiv Gandhi was came to possess so much money. Rajiv Gandhi was our PM and hence this is about the prestige of the country too. If the report is untrue the Indian National Congress can probably think about filing a defamation case. 

Anyway, politics does not seem to be a bad career option at all!

On the Bhushan tapes

Shanti and Prashant Bhushan are in the news for the wrong reason of late. The elder Bhushan has been "caught" on tape saying his son can fix a case with a judge. Apparently different labs are giving conflicting reports. There are two questions that come to my mind.

1) The government was in the news, again for the wrong reason of tapping phones some time back. So does the CD contain voice samples that were somehow obtained by the government by surreptitious means?

2) I wonder if it is possible to fake the CD. First you splice the individual samples together giving the appearance of a continuous conversation. This can probably be detected by forensic labs. Now if you play this "conversation" via a high audio fidelity device and record it onto a different tape/CD can a forensic lab detect this?

The Moon and His Star

Once upon a time long long ago
and trust me, it happened so
a lovely star the moon beheld,
and felt he like a big oak felled

the star too was smitten by love,
for at work was cupid's bow
many an hour, together they spent
on that lovely night, deep and silent

soon the star saw the morning glow
and she let the moon's hand go
his glare frightens me, she said
and though in love, she fled

every night, although in vain
the moon did tell her of his pain
of no avail was his pleading
though both their hearts were bleeding

the sun will be back, all fire and show
said the star and kept lying low
but so would the moon all cool and nice
little, this did the star realize

Religion and Real Estate

Recently an apparently illegally constructed mosque was demolished in Delhi after which hundreds of people conducted prayers there led by the Shahi Imam of the Jama Masjid. There are multiple issues that came to my mind from this article. 

The Shahi Imam says two things - that the land was actually owned by the Wakf Board and that he was promised the land would be purchased and given to the Wakf Board to reconstruct the mosque. Who will pay for the land to be given to the Wakf Board? The mosque was demolished on the orders of a court. Is the promise not in contempt of the orders of the court? This raises a larger question. Forget religion, will a place of worship be allowed to hijack public convenience? Obviously, a structure cannot be demolished purely on the basis of public convenience, but a line should be drawn somewhere. The general citizens should also realize when vested interests are at play and when there is a genuine case.