Nearly 200 countries took part in the negotiations to strike the first climate deal to commit all countries to cut emissions, which would come into being in 2020. A deal to attempt to limit the rise in global temperatures to less than 2C has been agreed at the climate change summit in Paris after two weeks of intense negotiations. The pact is the first to commit all countries to cut carbon emissions. The agreement is partly legally binding and partly voluntary. Earlier, key blocs, including the G77 group of developing countries, and nations such as China and India said they supported the proposals. President of the UN climate conference of parties (COP) and French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said: “I now invite the COP to adopt the decision entitled Paris Agreement outlined in the document. “Looking out to the room I see that the reaction is positive, I see no objections. The Paris agreement is adopted.” As he struck the gavel to signal the adoption of the deal, delegates rose to their feet cheering and applauding. US President Barack Obama has hailed the agreement as “ambitious” and “historic”, but also warned against complacency. “Together, we’ve shown what’s possible when the world stands as one,” he said. And although admitting that the deal was not “perfect”, he said it was “the best chance to save the one planet we have”. China’s chief negotiator Xie Zhenhua said the deal was not perfect. But he added that “this does not prevent us from marching historical steps forward”. The chairman of the group representing some of the world’s poorest countries called the deal historic, adding: “We are living in unprecedented times, which call for unprecedented measures. “It is the best outcome we could have hoped for, not just for the Least Developed Countries, but for all citizens of the world.”
The Agreement will not become binding on its member states until 55 parties who produce over 55% of the world’s greenhouse gas have ratified the Agreement. There is doubt whether some countries, especially the United States, will agree to do so, though the United States publicly committed, in a joint Presidential Statement with China, to joining the Agreement in 2016. Each country that ratifies the agreement will be required to set a target for emission reduction or limitation called a “nationally determined contribution,” or “NDC,” but the amount will be voluntary. There will be neither a mechanism to force a country to set a target by a specific date nor enforcement measures if a set target is not met. There will be only a “name and shame” system.
Some analysts have also observed that the stated objectives of the Paris Agreement are implicitly “predicated upon an assumption – that member states of the United Nations, including high polluters such as China, US, India, Canada, Russia, Indonesia and Australia, which generate more than half the world’s greenhouse gas emissions, will somehow drive down their carbon pollution voluntarily and assiduously without any binding enforcement mechanism to measure and control CO2 emissions at any level from the factory to state, and without any specific penalty gradation or fiscal pressure (for example a carbon tax) to discourage bad behaviour.”
—Prashant Tewari, Editor-in-Chief
India-Africa relations are enjoying an unprecedented renaissance, founded on shared economic interests and longstanding historical ties. Two-way trade has grown from $5.3 billion in 2001 to some $70 billion in 2013, though it still remains much below China’s trade with the continent (which stands at over $200 billion). Technical cooperation and training are set to further expand the ambit of shared interests. For the African Union (AU) and its 54 member states, the recent India-Africa Forum Summit (IAFS) in October 2015 was an important indicator of New Delhi’s commitment to continue to promote closer economic ties in ways that reflect the changing policies of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government and building on the development affinities between the two regions.
Surveying Modi’s foreign policy activities over the last eighteen months however provide somewhat sober reading for African interests. Modi’s travels abroad have highlighted the clear geo-economic prism through which he has prioritised his foreign engagements and those of his government. Running in parallel is his domestic agenda, although somewhat stalled, which aims to further unravel the License Raj, improve the business environment and grow India’s manufacturing sector. Indeed, since Modi’s electoral victory in May 2014, the world has witnessed an almost peripatetic foreign policy outreach by India in its region and beyond. India has been characterised as a swing state, being courted by the US, China and Japan, as geostrategic considerations accelerate on the Asian landmass. India has recognised the economic importance of its relations with China, notwithstanding the two countries’ areas of dispute around borders.
Modi’s major focus is economic diplomacy that advances Indian economic activity at home, encapsulated in the slogan ‘Make in India’. It is now a crucial programme designed to facilitate investment, foster innovation, enhance skill development, protect intellectual property and build best-in-class manufacturing infrastructure in India so that India can become part of the global supply chain. It covers a wide range of sectors from automobiles and components, electronic systems, and food processing to biotechnology, defense manufacturing, media and entertainment and space. The potential impact of such an initiative on Africa’s prioritisation of beneficiation (i.e., adding value to raw materials rather than exporting them to other countries to do that and re-importing such goods at higher prices) and industrialisation to reduce its commodity trade dependency is one that African states and the African Union need to take note of, for its potential impacts on such cooperation with India.
Trade, technology and training have characterised the Forum since its inception in 2009. These are all very important for African states that have benefited, for example, from the Pan-African e-network rolled out by India as part of the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (Nepal). This project is one of the biggest ever undertaken in Africa in distance education and telemedicine. It involves 47 countries in Africa, connecting states through a satellite and fibre-optic network to India and to each other to enable access to and sharing of expertise. The cost of the project, which was covered by a grant from the Indian government, was about $125 million. However, Modi’s geopolitical orientation and emphasis on the domestic economy raise questions about the India-Africa relationship’s priorities in the future.
—Prashant Tewari, Editor-in-Chief
US President Barack Obama sought to leave his domestic political woes behind and called on India to forge a new partnership with the United States, announcing that Washington would do its bit to help this by easing export controls across a range of high-tech sectors. Bhupendra Khansagra of India's Spice Jet, second right, U.S. Commerce Secretary Gary Locke, right, and Christopher Chadwick of Boeing are seated with U.S. President Barack Obama as he holds a roundtable discussion with business leaders in Mumbai on Saturday.
US President Barack Obama sought to leave his domestic political woes behind and called on India to forge a new partnership with the United States, announcing that Washington would do its bit to help this by easing export controls across a range of high-tech sectors.
Bhupendra Khansagra of India's Spice Jet, second right, U.S. Commerce Secretary Gary Locke, right, and Christopher Chadwick of Boeing are seat-ed with U.S. President Barack Obama as he holds a roundtable discussion with business leaders in Mumbai on Saturday.
Full of high praise for the energy of India's economic growth and the innovation of its entrepreneurs, Obama described the relationship between the two countries as a "defining and indispensable" partnership of the 21st Century even as companies from the two countries signed business deals worth $10 billion on the sidelines of his visit.
The 20 deals include GE aircraft engines and gas turbines and Boeing 737s bought by SpiceJet. They are expected to support 54,000 jobs back home in the United States, US officials said. And Obama himself lost no opportunity in pointing out that thousands of jobs would be created for every billion dollar the US exported, an issue that cost his Democratic party badly in mid-term elections last week.
Separately, the White House also announced Obama would support India's membership of four global non-proliferation organisations, a move that is expected to reassure New Delhi -- left out of these groups after the 1998 nuclear tests -- that Washington is recognising its global clout.
At the same time, the President put the onus on India to play its strong part as well, asking New Delhi to boost the country's infrastructure and lift barriers in sectors such as agriculture, infrastructure, retail and telecom, as they made it difficult to do business with India. And he also sought to sidestep his pet criticism of outsourcing and the fear Indian companies held for Americans by saying they were "old stereotypes and old concerns" that ignored the modern reality.
"There are many Americans whose only experience of trade and globalisation is a shuttered factory. Or jobs being shipped overseas. And there still exists a caricature of India as a land of call centres and back offices that cost American jobs. That's a real perception," the President said. "Here in India, there are many who see the arrival of American companies and products as a threat to shopkeepers and to India's ancient and proud culture. But these old stereo-types, these old concerns, ignore today's reality. In 2010 trade between our countries is not just a one-way street of American jobs and companies moving to India. It is a dynamic two-way relationship that is creating jobs, growth and higher liviing standards in both our countries. And that is the truth."
This, he said, had seen Americans having helped build India and Indians also having helped build America. "Today your country is one of the fastest growing economies in the world. While there are many amazing success stories and rapidly expanding markets in Asia, the sheer size and pace of India's progress in just two decades is one of the most stunning achievements in human history. This is a fact," Obama said.
"You are now a nation of rapid growth, rising incomes and massive investments in infrastructure, energy and education. In the coming decades you will be the world's most populous nation with the largest workforce and one of the largest economies in the world. Undoubtedly, that the two countries. Less than 10 per cent of Indian imports were from the United States and less than two per cent of US exports were to India. This, he said, was less than US trade with the Netherlands, "a country with a smaller population than the city of Mumbai", which made India only the 12th largest trading partner of the US. "I have no doubt we can do better than that, much better. There is no reason this nation cannot be one of our top trading partners. And that's why we want to work together, with you, to re-move the barriers, to increase trade and investment between our nations," Obama said.
Paying tribute to what he called the human spirit of people in Detroit as much as means the United States and India will engage in a healthy competition for markets and jobs and industries of the future. But it also offers the prospect of expanded commercial ties that strongly benefit both countries," he said.
"The United States sees Asia, and especially India, as a market of the future. We don't simply welcome your rise as a nation and a people. We ardently support it. We want to invest in it. And I am here because I believe in our interconnected world increased commerce between the United States and India can be and will be a win-win proposition for both nations," Obama said to cheers from an audience that included captains of Indian and US industry such as GE Chairman Jeffrey Immelt, Reliance Chairman Mukesh Ambani, Pepsico chief Indra Nooyi, HDFC Chairman Deepak Parekh and Mahindra & Mahindra Managing Director Anand Mahindra.
But Obama's 20-minute speech was not just all about hosannas for India. He said India and the United States had barely scratched the surface of trade between in Dharavi, Obama said he was confident that this spirit of optimism and determination would drive the future. "And that's why I am thrilled to be in India and with you today. And that's why I am confident that we can and will forge new economic partnerships and deliver the jobs and broadbased growth our peoples so richly deserve. And I am absolutely sure that the relationship between India and the United States is going to be one of the defining partnerships of the 21st century."
(Courtesy AIAI and Mumbai Bureau)
A common north Indian staple, the arhar or tur dal has touched Rs 180 per kg in the retail market. Across Delhi, price of most other dals too is well over Rs 100, having marked an increase of Rs 10-30 per kg since early September. Where tur is in the range of Rs 145-Rs 180 in packaged form, dhuli masoor is between Rs 124 and Rs 180 while rajma is available for Rs 180-200. The rates released by the department of consumer affairs shows that the rate of tur sold loose has risen from Rs 132 per kg on September 10 to Rs 157 on October 12. The rate of urad has gone up from Rs 112 to Rs 136. Moong, available in loose form at Rs 99 per kg a month back is now Rs 109 while masoor is up from Rs 96 per kg to Rs 101. A shortage of dal production this year has caused prices to skyrocket and officials in the food and civil supplies department of Delhi government say that no relief is expected before the end of December. In a review meeting held last week, the government has decided to wait for at least 10 days or so before looking at means of additional procurement.
The pulses production might not have grown that rapidly but India is the largest production of pulses at 19.5 million tonnes. The country is also the largest importer of pulses at 3.5 million tonnes. When this shortfall is not bridged prices skyrocket and political parties take advantage of it. In the case of pulses the problem is more complex. India is the only country which consumes huge quantity of pulses as it is perhaps the major source of cheap protein, particularly for vegetarians. Here the problem is there is no incentive for farmers to increase production of pulses unlike in rice and wheat where minimum support prices are increased substantially disproportionate to the increase in input costs. The agriculture ministry has decided to create a buffer of 50,000 tonnes of pulses using the market stablisation fund. The new pulses crop start coming into the market from January and government would create the buffer initially through imported pulses from. It will state in January with import of 10,000 tonnes.
This makes sense as when India imports huge quantity during shortage global prices of pulses soar as it happened recently. The prices of imported pulses, which was around $700 per tonne in August rose to $1900 a tonne in October when India imported huge quantity to meet the shortfall to stablise prices. Another problem with pulses is not many countries produce pulses apart from India. It is produced only in Myanmar and certain varieties like chikpea in Australia and Canada. As a permanent solution India needed to encourage Indian farmers to produce more pulses on a mission mode shifting some of the surplus rice and wheat production to pulses through incentives like higher MSP and so on. Also private Indian businessmen could buy huge quantity of land in Africa, particularly East Africa which is conducive for growing pulses. The quantity produced there could be brought to India to create much needed buffer bringing about price stability. President Pranab Mukherjee, gave some incentives for increasing pulses production in Eastern India when he was Finance Minister. That did help in marginally increasing pulses production in subsequent years but unfortunately that programme has apparently not been sustained and expanded. There is also scope for increasing yield of pulses in the country as it is usually grown only in arid region. If it is grown in irrigated area, the yield automatically increases, but farmers prefer to grow rice and wheat as they ensure remunerative prices. Government should therefore come out with some incentives to farmers to shift to pulses cultivation in irrigated land as well.
Crisil report noted that while food prices were the biggest contributor to the decline in the consumer price inflation (CPI), pulses inflation had seen the sharpest spike in a decade. The CPI and WPI inflation for pulses was 42.2 per cent and 53 per cent, respectively, in October. This statistics reveal more than what they hide. It is certainly a wake up call for the Government to act to deal with this problem, which is not insurmountable. But the question is will the Government have the political will as price manipulations benefits traders and political parties to the detriment of common man. Anyway Narendra Modi government has made a beginning by deciding to create a buffer of pulses and one only hopes it is carried forward to bring about price stability. It would augur well for common man, if onion problem too is tackled on a permanent basis.
—Prashant Tewari, Editor-in-Chief
Anti-India protest has erupted in the bordering town of Nepal after the Himalayan state accused India of enforcing a blockade on the transit of goods from India's side in support of the Madhesis who are protesting against the changes in Nepalese constitution. Nepal’s cable federation said it would suspend Indian television channels and protesters marched in Kathmandu carrying an effigy of India’s prime minister on Monday, accusing their neighbor of imposing an economic blockade and meddling in internal politics. The tension between the South Asian nations has spiked since Nepal adopted a new constitution last week, upsetting southern minority groups who fear being marginalized in a new federal structure. More than 40 people have been killed in protests in the Himalayan republic since August. Indian oil trucks stopped crossing into Nepal because of protests in the south, prompting authorities to try to limit the use of cars and save fuel. Nepal is almost totally dependent on India for overland supplies following earthquakes in the spring that killed nearly 9,000 people and blocked crossings from China. India has been critical of Kathmandu for rushing through the constitution, despite opposition from minorities living close to the Indian border.
However, over the years, despite the free movement of people, Indo-Nepal ties have gone through tumult, bitterness and trust deficits. Factors like the assertion of Nepali nationalism and India’s overt support for Madhesis, among others, have created strains and bitterness in their relations. Some political parties and groups in Nepal have tended to use their anti-India tirade to cultivate their own political constituencies and support base. India too seems to have taken its ties with Nepal for granted. The lack of high-level bilateral visits and meetings too has created elements of indifference, suspicion and doubt about their relationship. Thus not so much the federal constitution but the way it was implemented too became the reason for further bitterness between the two countries. Internal dynamics of Nepali politics like Maoist insurgency, Madheshi agitation, constitution-making and economic blockades etc. also influence India-Nepal relations. China’s growing influence is another factor that has a bearing on India-Nepal ties. Over the years, China’s footprint has grown dramatically in Nepal. China’s interest in Nepal is not merely to keep an eye on Tibetans but to entangle India in the region. Nepal has become a launch pad for China’s broader strategic alliance in South Asia. Nepal’s participation in the ‘One Belt, One Road’ project clearly measures up to such a policy goal. China has surpassed India as Nepal’s top aid donor and investor in Nepal. Both in terms of FDI and ODI, China has edged past India. China’s growing economic engagement with Nepal has given China instruments to change the security architecture of South Asia. China has become assertive in forging strong ties with India’s South Asian neighbours. Chinese aid and investment have the intended objective to hedge and reducing Nepal’s dependence on India. This is China’s way of getting Nepal’s support on sensitive issues such as Tibetan refugee protests within the country. In dealing with Nepal, India may have made strategic miscalculations during Nepal’s prolonged constitution-making, adoption of the federal constitution and economic blockade (even though India did not impose any blockade), or in its inability to tap investment potential. India continues to face what Ambassador Shyam Saran calls the ‘challenge of proximity.
Nepal is wrestling with the challenges of implementing the new constitution. It has long been a centralized country with the centuries-old feudal mindset of the past monarchy and oligarchy. The new constitution is a blend of mixed federal features under multiple parliamentary orders of governance. Nepal is dealing with the complexity of a new constitution and faces a number of pragmatic implementation challenges. These and other issues will be discussed in the day-long seminar. The thrust of the discussion will be the major challenges facing India-Nepal relations, the China factor and the internal dynamics of Nepal, particularly in implementing the new federal constitution.
—Prashant Tewari, Editor-in-Chief
During the days of struggle for independence, Pundit Jawaharlal Nehru was set in the heart of every Indian. However after he took over the administration, it was found that he was more of a dreamer than a realist. His concept of a socialistic pattern of society was utopian, and the realm of control and regulations that he introduced stifled the economic growth of the country. The situation got worse when Indira Gandhi and her stooges started using the controls for personal ends. The corruption that she gave vent to has been continually growing like cancer. It has crossed all bounds and we are now witnessing the politicians unashamedly accumulating property by indulging in large-scale corruption.
But corruption is not the only ailment of the country. The policy initiated by Nehru and perpetuated by the followers has given rise to various other ills that have been deeply affecting the social fabric. While pondering over the conditions prevailing at present I feel that India has been rushing toward catastrophe in economic, political and social spheres. Unless the engine is put in reverse gear, we are going to face devastation. I am therefore putting below some suggestions that can help in preventing it.
Our Parliamentary system of government was adopted because of our association with British rule. It was, however, overlooked that the system needs vigilant public opinion and the presence of two strong parties that can take over the administration. These conditions did not exist in India.
The problems arising from the absence of two capable parties did not come to the notice so long as there was one party strong enough to continue at the helm. The weakness of the system became evident after the fall of the congress party from the hegemony. Not only did that lead to unstable administrations, it also led to mismanagement and gave rise to large-scale corruption. Maintaining a majority at any cost has turned out to be the main job of the Prime Minister and Chief Ministers. Whenever they find that the majority is at stake, they have to go in for purchasing the required number of heads. Everyone knows the level of corruption indulged during the vote of confidence session of parliament last year.
Corruption is a cancer that cannot be rooted out so long as there are chances of getting corrupted. The only way to control it is to reduce the chances. Our Parliamentary system has been conducive to its growth. In order to avoid it we need to adopt the Presidential system under which the administration can be carried on by the President at the Center and Governors at the State levels elected to govern for five years irrespective of the majority. That would avert this constant struggle to maintain and pay for a majority headcount. Moreover, the scramble that we witness for getting elected as legislators prevails, because every legislator aspires to get a ministerial berth and use it for personal gain. Under the Presidential system, legislators would be ineligible to hold administrative positions. That will put an end to the undue craze for becoming a legislator. Only those who are really interested in working as legislators would then contest the election. The temptation for becoming a legislator would thus go down and that will curtail the chances of indulging in corruption.
Another aspect that gives rise to corruption is the regime of controls and regulations. Influenced by the Soviet model, Nehru was enthused to lead the country toward economic development by wielding State authority. He ignored the fact that the Soviet Union had failed to achieve any measurable degree of economic growth even while exercising total authority over the life of people. In a bid to metamorphose the country, Nehru created a maze of controls regulating every aspect of life. He failed to see that Government machinery is ill-suit-ed to exercise the controls in the public interest. The result is the large-scale corruption prevailing in implementing the controls.
With the inauguration of liberalization some controls have been removed and the rigors of some have been modified. What is, however, required is to do away with the controls to the extent possible. For instance, with the comfortable foreign exchange reserve, no control is necessary over foreign exchange and the rupee should be made fully convertible. Similarly, there is no need for measures like the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act and they should be repealed. Not only do such controls lead to corruption, they also tend to inhibit entrepreneurship. Their removal will reduce the chances of corruption. Moreover, it will give rise to healthy competition and will lead to sound economic growth.
The concept of preparing the annual budget was evolved with the intention to adjust expenditures to the level of revenue. If it was necessary to spend more than the estimated revenue, the budget would propose measures for raising more revenue. If, however, the shortfall is negligible, it could be left as an uncovered deficit. But that concept has been set aside and we are witnessing deficits to the extent of trillions of rupees.
Such deficits are bound to lead to inflation. Expansion of currency without adequate backing results in effective devaluation of the rupee, which becomes evident in the form of a rise in prices.
Though other factors like high prices of crude oil may play their part from time to time, deficit financing has been the main cause for continuing rise in prices. The biggest culprit for our budget deficit happens to be the Planning Commission. Nehru introduced planning with good intentions, and that worked well during the first two Plans. Thereafter the emphasis on planning has been shifted to spending. If the amount planned for a head is spent even without achieving a tangible result, the plan is considered as having fulfilled the target; while the effecting economy on a plan head is treated as the shortfall of the plan. In short, it has been a spending spree and the money gets diverted to the coffers of politicians and other unscrupulous people.
The Planning Commission has lost the plot and has been virtually planning for inflation without growth. Since it has ceased to serve its purpose, it is time to scrap it and put deficit financing to an end.
English language now occupies international status. Its importance can hardly be exaggerated when millions of our countrymen have been living abroad. Its importance for scientific studies also is indisputable. No wonder many families have been sending their children to English medium schools. The time for treating English as a foreign element has long been past.
The adoption of regional languages as the medium of State administration has given rise to all sorts of fissiparous tendencies. That needs to be put to an end to in the interest of unity in the country. It should also be noted that the people in the South have been clamoring for retaining English at the administrative level. Adopting English as the official language at the Center and State level would not only placate the South but will also provide an efficient medium for administration. Moreover, it will help in forging the sense of unity that was witnessed during British rule.
Though our constitution forbids discrimination on the ground of race, religion etc. we happen to have a Hindu Civil Code. Nehru had come out with the Hindu Code Bill because he was not willing to hurt the sentiments of conventional Muslims.
Hindus have long been feeling unhappy on account of the Civil Code being restricted to them and have been clamoring for a Civil Code applicable to all. Whatever Nehru's motive, there is no justification for restricting the provisions of the Civil Code to a particular sector of society. The Supreme Court also has directed the Government to approach it with a Common Civil Code. The administration has, however, ignored it in order to avert displeasing the Muslim voters.
In case, the leadership is too sensitive to Muslim sentiments, it can come out with a Common Civil Code together with the provision for an Islamic Code to be adopted by Muslims as an option. That Code should cover every provision in the Islamic canons inclusive of crude punishment for offenders, disavowal of interest on investment, etc. Muslims will think twice before opting for such a code. Since Islamic tradition heavily discriminates against women, the Code should provide for exercising the option jointly by husband and wife.
The reservations based on backwardness have created a rift within society.
There was justification for reservation in favor of scheduled castes because they were kept backward by society. No other community was so debarred; they have remained backward on their own. They can surely be encouraged to come forward by providing incentives in the form of scholarships etc. but reservations for them in administration or educational institutions can in no way be justified. The Government is not an employment exchange. Its machinery is expected to function in the interest of people. Integrity and efficiency are the essential requisites for it. Its employment policy should be based on those criteria. Providing reservation therein leads to inefficiency and loss of integrity. No one would have the incentive to function efficiently if his colleague or a subordinate is going to be his boss simply because he belongs to a particular community.
The reservations in educational institutions are leading to sub-standard outcomes. How could it be safe to have doctors of lower caliber treat the patients? It is hazardous. Similarly, an engineer with a sub-standard caliber cannot be expected to undertake reliable work. Indira Gandhi favored the policy of reservation in order to pursue her parochial ends. It is now the time to reconsider it in the overall interest of the country.
But the policy adopted so far has created well-entrenched privileged classes and the backward communities would oppose curtailment of the favors granted to them. They, however, need to understand that the reservations are meant to enable the back-ward people to come forward; continuing the same indefinitely amounts to perpetuating the backwardness. That fact can take some wind out of the sail of proponents of reservations.
The consensus should therefore be arrived at for reservations to lapse after a reasonable period. Thereby it would be possible to put an end to discrimination, which has created rift within society. The importance of forging unity would be particularly palatable at the present juncture. Enlightened people would wholeheartedly endorse such a move. It is hard to make out how the system has been perpetrated by the judiciary.
We have been facing a population explosion. The population has grown almost fourfold since the independence. The measures taken so far have failed to restrict growth because the majority of people refrain from adopting birth control measures. The growth in population sets at naught the progress in every other field. We should therefore be willing to adopt an effective policy for containing the population.
Such a policy should be deterrent enough to restrain the people from generating more children. Our people are very sensitive to the payment of taxes and would like to avoid them whenever possible. In order to take advantage of that sensitivity it is necessary to introduce a tax on people who have more than two children. Every couple producing a third child should be subject to pay tax at the rate of Rs.1000/- (subject to revision from time to time) per month for 10 years starting from the birth of the third child. The liability to pay the tax for that period should continue irrespective of the child's lifetime. Otherwise, there would be a tendency to put it to death. Moreover, during the said period of 10 years if the couple produces another child, not only would it have to pay the tax on both the children, it should also be subjected to a surcharge at the rate of 25 percent of the tax payable otherwise.
These provisions would induce people to adopt birth control in their own interest. It is obvious that most people will fail to pay the tax, and it would not be possible to put all such offenders in jail. It should therefore be provided within the Act that those failing to pay the child tax will be subject to mandatory sterilization. I strongly believe that if we start initiating the seven points mentioned above, India will be well on its way to assuming its place at the world’s top table.
(MANSUKHLAL (MANU) DOSHI was born in Mahuva (Saurastra), in December 1919, and moved to the US after retiring as the Assistant Commissioner of Industries, Gujarat. He is living in the USA now)
Starting in July 2015, the people of India’s Patidar community, seeking Other Backward Class (OBC) status, held public demonstrations across the Indian state of Gujarat. The largest demonstration was held in Ahmedabad on 25 August 2015, and was attended by thousands. Later, there were incidents of violence and arson across the state, resulting in a curfew in several cities and towns. Properties and vehicles worth crores of rupees were damaged and destroyed. The state returned to normalcy by 28 August. Despite talks with the government, the agitation recommenced and turned violent again on 19 September. The government announced a scheme that offered scholarships and subsidies to general category students on 24 September 2015 and a 10% quota of spaces reserved for economically backward classes in April 2016. The 10% reservation was quashed by the Gujarat High Court in August 2016.
Hardik Patel, who has been spearheading the Patidar quota agitation, has urged the community not to vote for the BJP even if his father is fielded by the party in the upcoming Assembly elections in the state, according to the Indian Express. During a three-day Sankalp yatra, which he launched to press the reservation demand, Patel said, “It is our duty to liberate our community which has been enslaved for the last 25 years. The post-Godhra riots of 2002 were between Hindus and Muslims. But as a matter of fact, 140 Patidars are serving life imprisonment even today… They (BJP) have only exploited our votes and notes (money) and given nothing in return.
Addressing the Patidar community at Ajab village in Keshod taluka of Junagadh district, he said, “The election is around the corner. They (BJP) will give you many lollipops. Some will even come to buy you. But don’t vote even for my father, Bharat Patel, if he fights election from Keshod as a BJP candidate,” according to IE. The 24-year-old leader said the agitation has been going on for the last two-and-a-half years and the BJP has threatened to file many cases. “But we have always maintained that we are ready if you want to fight legally, and also if you want to fight by gundagardi (hooliganism). Let us, we Patidars and other communities, get together and remove those who are behaving like dictators and goons,” he was quoted as saying by IE.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi in his first speech from Red Fort on Independence Day, announced that the government would replace the Planning Commission with a new body, bringing the curtains down on the 64-year-old institution founded on the former Soviet Union’s command-style development model. India’s first Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, inspired by the Gosplanaided industrialisation of the Soviet Union, set up the Planning Commission in 1950.
—Prashant Tewari, Editor-in-Chief
India’s 11th President APJ Abdul Kalam died on Monday evening at a hospital in Meghalaya, where he had gone to deliver a lecture. He was 83. His body was today flown by an Air Force helicopter to Guwahati in Assam from where it will be taken to Delhi. Prime Minister Narendra Modi will be present at the Delhi airport to receive his body. The former President, who was in office from 2002 to 2007, had collapsed during the lecture at the Indian Institute of Management, Shillong, around 6.30 pm. He was taken to the Bethany hospital. Doctors said he had suffered a massive cardiac arrest. “President Kalam was brought to the hospital at 7 pm. When he was brought in there was no sign of life. He was taken to ICU to try and revive him, which was futile,” hospital sources told NDTV. The government has declared seven-day national mourning as a mark of respect for the former President. Paying a special tribute to Dr. Kalam on Monday evening, PM Modi had said, “My mind is filled with so many memories, so many interactions with him, I always marveled at his intellect, learned so much from him.” Home Minister Rajnath Singh tweeted, “Deeply saddened at the sudden demise of the former president of India Dr. APJ Abdul Kalam. He was an inspiration to an entire generation.
Dr Abdul Kalam was an inspiration to many, especially the youth of the country wherein he was considered a demi-god and ideal role model to be followed. The following quotes are truly inspirational for all of us -
“If you fail, never give up because FAIL means
“First Attempt In Learning”.
“End is not the end, if fact END means “Effort Never Dies” - If you get No as an answer, remember NO means “Next Opportunity”. So Lets be positive.”
“Dream, dream, dream. Dreams transform into thoughts and thoughts result in action.”
“If you want to shine like a sun. First burn like a sun.”
Surely the country will miss the great personality and inspirational human being in the times to come. However, we must draw inspiration from the modest man who served the country till his last breath.
—Prashant Tewari, Editor-in-Chief
Parable of the Family with an Orphan: A large family takes in an orphan. The house is already crowded so the orphan must share an attic room with a child too weak to protest the intrusion. The parents give each of the two children half of the room but ask each child to share a beautiful cabinet, treasured by both. The parents take a long trip, leaving their strongest son in charge. When the parents leave, other children in the family attack the orphan and try to get him to leave. The weakest child, in particular, fights unfairly. He waits for the orphan to sleep and then attacks him. The orphan wakes up each time and hurts the weak child; he also takes over more of the room, including the beautiful cabinet.
As the orphan continues to take over more of the room, the weak child continues to take revenge. The strongest son tries to bring peace and sometimes succeeds for short periods. The basic problem, however, is that each child believes that he should have the entire attic room to himself. Finally, the parents return. They realize that they made a mistake by leaving home while there was such a difficult situation in the attic. They don't just ask the two children to stop fighting, however. Instead, they take immediate action.
The parents decide that the boys need temporary separation, something constructive to keep them busy, and careful supervision. The parents work with the two boys to build shelves and cabinets down the middle of the room, with private storage space for each boy on each side. They install plumbing so each side of the room has plenty of fresh water. Finally, when the crisis is over, the parents set up a way for the boys to share the beautiful cabinet.
The parents do more than just provide better space, however. They provide the love, kindness, and supervision that each child needs to do well. They also make sure that the other children support the solution. Each boy reverts to his old behavior a few times, but the parents remove his privileges each time and the old behaviors stop. Besides, each boy becomes too busy pursuing his own goals to be distracted by fighting. They lived happily ever after...with a few disagreements here and there.
The "large family" is the United Nations. The "orphan" is Israel. The "other children" are the Arab states. The "weakest son" is the Palestinian people. Attacking the orphan unfairly means "terrorist attacks." The "attic room" is the territory of Palestine before the United Nations carved Israel into it. The "beautiful cabinet" is Jerusalem.
The "strongest son" is the United States. Alas, there are no wise parents to supervise the boys. The UN Security Council has not been able to perform this essential role. The "strongest son," therefore, must work with the "other children" to implement peace. If the "strongest son" and the "other children" work together effectively, then peace will spread throughout the entire family.
Recently, this has not happened. Instead, extremist Palestinians have engaged in bombings when Israelis agreed to work on peace. Extremist Israelis have engaged in assassinations or other acts of aggression when Palestinians agreed to work on peace. Israelis are swiftly completing a wall between Israel and Palestinian territory, but the wall is not on the 1967 border. Rather, it snakes into Palestinian territory to unlawfully take land and water rights from 200,000 Palestinians. Extremists from both sides have destroyed the peace process.
The Palestinian people are allowing extremists to lead them. The Israeli people are allowing extremists to lead them. As the violence keeps increasing, wisdom from any quarter would be welcome
A SHORT HISTORY OF CONFLICT
After World War II, the United Nations gave land to the Jewish people so that they could live together in peace. This land, Israel, includes holy places for the Jewish religion and is surrounded by Muslim countries. Palestinian Muslims lived on the land at the time that the United Nations gave it to the Jewish people.
Portions of the land given to the Jewish people, or taken over by them when they won wars against Arab states, are also holy for Muslims. Certain portions of Jerusalem controlled by Israel, called "East Jerusalem," are very important to Muslims. For religious reasons, Palestinian Muslims believe that they must gain control of East Jerusalem as part of any lasting peace settlement.
Further, Palestinians view themselves as living in an occupied nation, where invaders (Israelis) have placed them under military rule. To fight back, Palestinians have built a terrorist network to attack innocent Israeli civilians. Israelis feel they must continue to control Palestinians with military force to protect themselves against more terrorist attacks.
Palestinian View: Palestinians feel that they are not a free people because Israeli soldiers stop them at checkpoints between cities. Many Palestinians, therefore, must get Israeli approval each day to go to work, return home, go to the hospital, get groceries, or visit their own families. After a terrorist attack, soldiers sometimes refuse to let Palestinians through the checkpoints to get to work or other essential places, infuriating Palestinians even more. Further, Israelis control much of the Palestinian water supply and give Palestinians less access to water than they need. Palestinians feel humiliated and abused by the Israelis.
Another issue causing Palestinians great anger is that Israelis have continued to build settlements in Palestinian territory, illegally converting even more Palestinian territory into Israeli territory. Palestinians see the settlements as a sign that Israelis do not want peace.
In March and April of 2002, Israeli soldiers attempted to destroy Palestinian terrorist networks and attacked several of the largest Palestinian cities. In addition to attacking the terrorists, the Israeli soldiers destroyed much of the Palestinian government, including records, equipment, buildings, electricity supplies, water supplies, roads, and more. Palestinians see the attack as an Israeli attempt to keep them from ever having an independent state. In addition, representatives of international relief agencies, as well as Palestinians, accuse Israel of committing war crimes during this attack.
Palestinian Demands: Palestinians want Israel to comply with international law and retreat to the borders that existed in 1967. Palestinians express this de-mand as four key conditions for peace, in-
Regarding control of East Jerusalem, Ehud Barak, former leader of Israel, offered to negotiate the control of East Jerusalem. This is something no other Israeli leader had offered and something the Israeli people did not want to offer. In fact, Barak was removed from power partly because of the offer and was replaced by Ariel Sharon.
Although Barak had offered to negotiate control of East Jerusalem and make other concessions, Palestinians were angry that all of the key conditions they considered essential for lasting peace had not been offered.
Israelis were angry because they were told that most of the key conditions for peace had been offered and that Arafat had refused to negotiate.
Regarding the third Palestinian condition for peace, ending the occupation of Palestinian territory, Israelis seem willing to do this--as long as Palestinian borders are redefined so that Israel can continue to control Palestinian movements through checkpoints between cities and other means.
In other words, Israelis are willing to end the appearance of occupation but they are not willing to reduce their control over the Palestinians.
Barak may have offered real independence to Palestinians, but Israelis and Palestinians disagree about what Barak actually offered. The specific offer of restoration of Palestinian land has remained secret, so it is difficult to determine which side is correct. Palestinians claim that Barak's offer to return Palestinian land was not sincere and would have continued Israeli control of land between major Palestinian cities. Israelis claim that the Barak offer did not break up the Palestinian land and that Arafat's refusal to negotiate the offer means that he will never accept peace. Much of the current conflict rests on the different views of what was offered. Additional information on the offer and disagreements is provided here.
At about the same time as Barak's offer, Sharon deliberately provoked Palestinians with an act viewed by Muslims as extreme disrespect to their religion. Terrorist attacks by the Palestinians started in large measures in response to Sharon's actions. Israelis were then angry by Arafat's refusal to negotiate in good faith and by the resumption of terrorist attacks.
In short, Israelis believe that Barak offered Palestinians their land back and that Palestinians then responded with extreme violence. Palestinians believe that Barak offered no real freedom and that Israelis deliberately insulted their religion (Sharon's visit) and killed Palestinian protesters during negotiations.
Palestinian Compromise: If Israel re-treats to 1967 borders and provides Palestinians with complete independence, will Palestinians stop terrorist attacks? As of March of 2006, the answer is "probably not." Although many Palestinians simply want an independent nation, others, such as the powerful Hamas organization, consider all of the territory called "Israel" to be part of Palestine. Hamas leaders have vowed to continue their terrorist campaign until their demands are met, including the destruction of Israel. Further, when Arafat failed to accept Barak's offer of a separate Palestinian state, many Israelis concluded that Arafat did not want peace.
Arafat did not make a serious effort to stop Palestinian terrorism against Israelis.
International law is on the side of those who advocate for two independent states sharing the land that was called "Palestine" before 1948. However, recent violence against each side has been so vicious that the majority of people may be more interested in revenge than negotiations.
Israeli View: Israelis view Palestinian militants as terrorists who will not compromise to gain peace. Palestinian extremists have, in fact, engaged in terrorist acts against Israeli civilians when peace negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians seemed (to the Israelis) to be moving forward fairly. Because Palestinian terrorists attacked at key times, moderate Israeli leaders have been replaced by more extreme Israeli leaders who do not want to compromise. Israeli leaders do not trust Palestinian leaders to negotiate peace. Israelis do not feel safe enough to reduce their control of Palestinian territories.
Israeli Demands: Israelis want the Palestinians to stop the terrorist attacks. Israelis have four key conditions for peace, including:
By comparing the Israeli demands with the Palestinian demands, one can see that the two sides are unlikely to find peace--the demands are completely contradictory. In addition, many Israelis believe that Israel is entitled to all of the Palestinian territories. Every time a compromise is reached, Israeli and Palestinian extremists work against it--often with violence.
Israeli Compromise: If Palestinians stop their terrorist attacks on Israelis, will Israelis retreat to 1967 borders and allow Palestinians complete independence? As of March of 2006, the answer is "definitely not." Although a majority of Israelis are willing to have their military leave the Palestinian territories, a powerful minority consider all of the territory currently called "Palestinian" to be part of Israel. They do not want to compromise or pull back. Instead, they want to keep expanding Israeli settlements into Palestinian territories.
Sharon, before entering a coma, began reducing the settlements. However, when Sharon talked about an independent state of Palestine, he meant a Palestinian state that is still under the control of Israel. Past proposals have, in fact, allowed Israel to maintain control over a new Palestinian state. Palestinians have not found such Israeli offers of "independence" acceptable. Now that Hamas won the last Palestinian election, Palestinians may be even less likely to compromise.
A Road to Peace: With hate so intense on both sides, and demands of each side so completely incompatible, peace will require very powerful outside intervention. The United States and Arab Nations, especially Saudi Arabia, need to join forces. Perhaps an international group, with the United States and Saudi Arabia as leaders, needs to negotiate where to put borders to ensure Israeli security and also Palestinian land integrity. Left to themselves, neither Israelis nor Palestinians can make a lasting agreement on borders. If an international group negotiates the borders, it will also need to determine how to separate the two sides. International forces will probably need to stand between Palestinians and Israelis for a long, long time. Israelis and Palestinians may even need a physical wall to separate them.
Israelis have destroyed much of the government and infrastructure of the Palestinians. The Palestinians will need a great deal of outside support to rebuild themselves into a separate nation. Without such support, the world will be facing "another Afghanistan" where anarchy will again breed terrorism.
Muslim nations will need to play a strong role in helping to build a new Palestine without terrorism. Muslim nations will need to help mentor new Palestinian leaders who do not support terrorism. Palestinians will need another type of leadership, other than Hamas, to build a new strategy for long-term peace.
The United States will need to use its influence to help Israel shape a new strategy also. Israel has had to mobilize for war, justifiably, since its beginning. It has had little peace. However, Israel elected a leader, Sharon, who was associated with a massacre of Palestinians in Lebanon. Electing a man known for brutality does not say much for the peace strategy of the Israeli people. If an international group insures Israel's security, Israel will need a different kind of leadership, as well as a new strategy for long-term peace. Acting Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmer is following Sharon's path and Sharon is unlikely to return to leadership.
An outside group will also have to determine how to allocate water rights fairly between the Palestinians and Israelis. Without outside intervention, water wars are likely to erupt, even if the land borders are settled peacefully.
What ideas do you have to move us toward lasting peace? It is very important to realize that the Muslim religion teaches peace and tolerance, not terrorism and war. In fact, the Muslim religion does not allow a person to commit suicide or hurt innocent people, even during the war.
Methods of Fighting: The Palestinian people, led by Yasser Arafat until his death in 2004, are outraged by the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories. The Israeli leadership is continuing to use military force against protesters. Israel has one of the most advanced military forces in the world and the Palestinians have very limited military capability. Most of those dying in the conflict have been Palestinians.
The method of fighting for each side is quite different. The Palestinians have no army and have used bombs against civilian men, women, and children to try to make the Israelis afraid for their personal safety. They expect the Israelis to respond to the bombings by attacking the Palestinian people. When Israel does this, Palestinians hope that other countries will then help the Palestinian people and protect them from the Israelis.
The Palestinian bombers almost always die in the attacks, so the Israeli military then kills Palestinians suspected of planning the attacks. The Israeli military has killed or seriously injured many Palestinian civilians while pursuing terrorists. In addition, Israelis have damaged a great deal of Palestinian property during chases.
In short, each side is responding to the other by killing civilians--men, women, and children who are not part of the military. Each side is killing for revenge, as well as to meet its own goals. Each side is trying to convince the rest of the world that it is acting with high morality. Each side is creating a climate of violence and terror for their own children and grandchildren.
This is not a matter of two nations at war, however, since the Palestinians do not yet have a separate state. Israelis have the ability to kill or drive away most of the Palestinians, while the Palestinians do not have that power against the Israelis. This unequal contest may turn out badly for all of us unless the USA and others intervene effectively. If Palestinians continue to use terrorism to try to achieve their goals, and if Israel continues to use military force against the Palestinian people to combat terrorism, many other nations may find themselves involved against each other regarding the conflict.
The Water Issue: A concern of the Israelis, Palestinians, and Arab nations in the region is the water issue. Mikhail Gorbachev (former Premier of the Soviet Union) and Shimon Peres (former Prime Minister of Israel) noted that "More than anywhere else, the Middle East exemplifies the perils and possibilities created by the water crisis."
"In the past 10 years, the various states in the Middle East have spent billions to acquire arms instead of building water pipelines or finding ways to conserve, clean and use water more efficiently on a shared, regional basis."
"We all know that deserts create poverty and that poverty often leads to war -- especially when everyone is armed to the teeth. But missiles in an armed desert can't carry water any more than mine-fields can stop pollution from crossing borders."
"The alternative to another round of conflict, this time over water instead of land, is cooperation. Desalinization or joint management is cheaper than launching wars for rivers."
A recommendation by Jad Isaac of the Applied Research Institute, Jerusalem, includes a confidence-building measure by the Israelis. He emphasizes that Gaza and West Bank Palestinians do not have sufficient access to water now and suggests that negotiations for peace include Israel making sufficient water available to the two areas.
Role of the USA: What is the role of the USA in this? Palestinians claim that the fighting has expanded partly because the USA has not influenced the Israeli government to use more restraint. The Israelis claim that the conflict has expanded because the Palestinian leadership has not stopped the terrorism.
A plan was developed by a group of experts, led by former U.S. Senator George Mitchell, to find a path to peace. The leaders of the Israelis, Palestinians, and the United States accepted the plan. The plan requires each side to stop attacking the other side and for each side to try to help the other side achieve what it wants most, one step at a time. However, both the Palestinians and Israelis have continued the fighting instead of actually following the plan.
Crown Prince Abdullah of Saudi Arabia then proposed a plan in April (2002) that has the support of neighboring Arab states and is consistent with the Mitchell plan. It has the interest of the United States, Israel, and the Palestinians. It includes full normalization of relationships with Israel by all Arab states and recognition of Israel as a state by all Arab states. In return, Israel must pull out of Palestinian territories, and back to the 1967 borders. It allows for compromise and negotiation on the return of Palestinian refugees to their homeland.
Both Israelis and Palestinians have asked the USA to help broker a peace process. Intervention by the USA did seem essential to gain a lasting peace, but now that the conflict has escalated, much more than the USA may be needed for effective intervention.
The Bush administration is focused on combating terrorism, a method of fighting associated with Arafat. Arafat has not been very convincing in trying to stop terrorism. Evidence suggests that instead of trying to stop it, he may have supported terrorism.
To complicate the situation even more, Israel has been accused of committing war crimes against Palestinians and will not let the United Nations investigate to see if the accusations are true. Allegations against Israel are being made by international humanitarian agencies who tried to render aid to wounded Palestinians.
The consensus seems to be growing that a slow, step-by-step process, such as recommended by the Mitchell plan, will no longer work. Trust between the Israelis and Palestinians has been destroyed and the Mitchell plan requires trust by both sides. Something quite different may be needed. See "A Road to Peace" above.
Why Do Palestinians Fight This Way? Why are Palestinians killing civilian Israeli men, women, and children when the Qur'an specifically prohibits killing non-combatants? Why are they doing this when they know that such deaths harden the hearts of the Israeli people and will make it unlikely for Palestinian children or grandchildren to ever have peace? Why are Palestinians planting the seeds of suffering for their own children and grandchildren?
The short answer is that the Palestinians are exhausted, desperate, and very angry because of the Israeli occupation of their land. They also lack a leader who is focused on long-term peace.
Why Do Israelis Fight This Way? Why are Israelis supporting military actions against civilians and occupying land that is not theirs? Why are Israelis allowing their armies to do this when they know that such actions harden the hearts of the Palestinian people and will make it unlikely for Israeli children or grandchildren to ever have peace?
The short answer is that the Israelis are exhausted, desperate, and very angry because of the terrorist attacks. They also lack a leader who is focused on long-term peace.
US and Isreal are the most trusted allies? A chronological look at the evidence
There is a big debate going on among Jews around the world, there is a striking convergence of opinion concerning the relationship between the US and Israel. The new US President and his administration are trying to balance both Isreal and Arab interests by keeping the channel of communications open to all players having an interest in the Middle East.
Supporters of the PLO – synonymous with "supporters of a Palestinian state", because the PLO will run any such state - are convinced that the US is an ally of Israel. Some believe the US employs Israel in order to expand the American empire, and others - echoing the claims of that infamous forgery, "The Protocols of Zion" - believe that history's greatest superpower, the US, is actually the pawn of tiny Israel. Either way, they agreed that the US and Israel are supposed 'a team.'
Supporters of Israel naturally disagree with supporters of the PLO about most things but not on this point, as they also believe that the US is a friend of Israel-perhaps its only real friend. Whereas those who are pro-PLO are especially infuriated by perceived US support for Israel, those who are pro-Israel are deliriously grateful for the same (especially so in the case of Zionist Jews).
Given that across the spectrum of those politically mobilized on this issue, from one pole to the other, everybody appears to have the same opinion on this, casual observers are naturally drawn into an agreement as well, creating a crushing consensus all over the world: the US is an ally of Israel.
But is it true?
Let us first ask: what is an ally? My dictionary defines 'ally' as "one who is associated with another as helper."
Everybody knows that the US says it supports Israel. But actions speak louder than words. What is the evidence of US actions? In this piece, I provide a chronological list of relevant US policies over the years.
I am hoping that this piece will begin a debate. It is not finished, and the research relevant to its claims is ongoing. I shall be updating the piece as I gather more data. But I have already assembled quite a lot, below, and what I have is certainly sufficient to challenge the common
View. I believe, in fact, that what I have presented below is already sufficient to refute the common view many times over, and the compilation of these documented facts came as a big eye-opener. Hopefully, this documentation will begin a serious debate on this question, rather than an automatic assumption based on official claims of US support for Israel - which claims are cheaply, and therefore easily, made.
It is important to remember that what is examined here is the behavior of the US foreign policy Establishment, which is secretive. The evidence, therefore, speaks to what is and has been, the true position of the US ruling elite with regard to Israel and the Jewish people. It does not speak to the position of the American people, many of whom, I believe, will be outraged to find that, as I document on the next pages, the US specializes in attacking Israel. In fact, the section on 1947-48 contains dramatic evidence that ordinary Americans tend not to favor the anti-Jewish policies of the US ruling elite.
The first International Day of Yoga was observed all over the world on 21 June 2015. The Ministry of AYUSH made the necessary arrangements in India. 35,985 people, including Narendra Modi and a large number of dignitaries from 84 nations, performed 21 yoga asanas (postures) for 35 minutes at Rajpath in New Delhi. The day devoted to yoga was observed by millions across the world. NCC cadets entered the Limca Book of Records for the “largest yoga performance simultaneously by a single uniformed youth organisation” by performing at multiple venues. The event at Rajpath established two Guinness world records awarded to the Ministry of AYUSH and received by AYUSH minister Shripad Yesso Naik. The two records were for the largest yoga class, featuring 35,985 people, and for the largest number of participating nationalities (84 nations On 11 December 2014, India’s Permanent Representative Ashok Mukherji introduced the draft resolution in UNGA.
The draft text received broad support from 177 Member States who sponsored the text, which was adopted without a vote. This initiative found support from many global leaders. A total of 177 nations cosponsored the resolution, which is the highest number of co-sponsors ever for any UNGA resolution of such nature. When proposing 21 June as the date, Modi said that the date was the longest day of the year in the northern hemisphere (shortest in the southern hemisphere), having special significance in many parts of the world. From the perspective of yoga, the summer solstice marks the transition to Dakshinayana. The first full moon after the summer solstice is known as Guru Poornima. Shiva, the first yogi (Adi Yogi), is said to have begun imparting the knowledge of yoga to the rest of mankind on this day, and became the first guru (Adi Guru). Dakshinayana is also considered a time when there is natural support for those pursuing spiritual practices. Following the adoption of the UN resolution, several leaders of the spiritual movement in India voiced their support for the initiative. The founder of Isha Foundation, Sadhguru, stated, “this could be a kind of a foundation stone to make scientific approach to the inner well-being of the human being, a worldwide thing... It’s a tremendous step for the world.” The founder of Art of Living, Ravi Shankar, lauded the efforts of Modi, saying, “It is very difficult for any philosophy, religion or culture to survive without state patronage. Yoga has existed so far almost like an orphan. Now, official recognition by the UN would further spread the benefit of yoga to the entire world.
An advanced version of yoga is meditation. The joy felt in meditation reveals the presence of Eternal joy spread over all creations. The light seen in meditation is the astral light from which our tangible creation is made - "Paramahansa Yogananda". Spirituality for a common man may best be termed as the science of the soul. It is reaching beyond all sciences. The soul keeps us alive and guides our lives on earth and is a part/reflection of the infinite consciousness pulsating through the whole creation, commonly understood as God. Knowledge of this science can help us lead happy, contented, joyful and purposeful lives on earth. The greatest help to spiritual life is meditation (Dhyana) – Meditation is an instrument of spirituality.
—Prashant Tewari, Editor-in-Chief
The Alliance de l'Avenir led by Dr Navin Ramgoolam has won the general elections by a comfortable majority. It secured 41 out of the 60 directly elected seats in the Assembly. This is a remarkable achievement in view of the strength that the Alliance du Coeur had been gathering during the past three weeks, aided in this by an aggressive campaign on its behalf by the pro-MMM press, namely the l'ex-press media group and Weekend.
The alliance that the Alliance Sociale contracted with the MSM did not directly contribute to raising the number of votes secured by the Alliance de l'Avenir if only for the fact that there is little differentiation between the voters of Labour and the MSM when both are aligned on
the same side. However, this alliance was of highly strategic importance, it is given that any alternative potential MMM-MSM alliance would have so considerably trimmed down the margins as to be able to upset the applecart. Had an MMM-MSM alliance materialised instead, it would have turned Labour's incumbency into a heavy liability and changed the outcome of voting unpredictably.
The election has shown if it was at all necessary, with what speed and effectiveness a vast propaganda machine can be mounted and launched by the opposing camp. It stopped short of nothing, including the whipping up of past communal reflexes. In that sense, despite the defeat of the MMM, the clock has been set back on the question of national unity. It was amazing how identity suddenly assumed overwhelming importance in the election.
It became so important that political parties including the Alliance de l'Avenir had to concede on some of the most opportunistic vindications made from a purely ethnic standpoint. Inroads were sought to be made even within individual communities in order to tribalise whole communities into sub-groups. It can only be hoped that the wounds inflicted by these ethnic tactics will not fester and arrest the nation's progress towards a more globalised outlook with feet firmly planted in a growing culture of sharing, understanding and meritocracy.
There have been times in the country's political history when ethnicity has been given a prime position against a poor economic background facing the country. It was easy to flog up ethnic feelings of apartness when unemployment was on the rise and economic prospects bleak as it was the case in the 1960s and the late 1970s.
However, this time on, the feeling was aroused despite much better prevailing economic conditions. It was perhaps the only plank that could have salvaged the quickly patched-up Alliance du Coeur to gather steam enough to make a brave showing in the elections for which it had been caught napping.
The results show that even this device was not enough to turn the tide in its favour. One hopes however that the virus of ethnic politics as we have just witnessed it is not here to stay, especially with the younger generation that is going to vote on an altogether different platform in 2015. Unfortunately, this factor has required that both major political alliances concentrate their campaign on objectives of immediate importance without attending too much broader issues of national importance. The sights have not been set on a choice of more long-lasting national goals; they have been focused on welfare spending.
There is one positive factor that has emerged from the 2010 elections, however. Abstracting from the ethnic factor which was infused during the past four weeks in the campaign, voters in several constituencies have clearly signalled to candidates that they will not tolerate candidates who appear only at the time of elections to solicit votes but are absent or inexistent during the bulk of the mandate from their constituencies. Many deputies would have learnt at their expense that a high price needs to be paid to compensate for such absences or inadequate identification with the circumstances of their local voters. The permanent proximity which politicians of yesterday rightly used to cultivate with their constituents has disappeared in the present set-up.
Voters have indicated quite clearly that they are not prepared to tolerate absentee deputies who come over on the eve of elections to give a semblance of involvement in their wards. In this sense, a committed presence translated into tangible progress made in each constituency will have a real effect during the next elections. This means that political parties may not be able to opportunistically designate candidates in the different constituencies at the last minute; they may well suffer defeat. Nor may political parties defer the execution of economic projects till the last minute as a demonstration of "work-in-progress" and thus hope to impress voters. Without the essential planning that makes for timely implementation of well-integrated, cost-saving and validly prioritised projects, political parties may not be so lucky the next time over. The age-configuration of voters and the tools they will employ to communicate will not yield to the assumption that personal charisma will be enough to win over. Next time over, voters cannot be taken for granted.
The Alliance de l'Avenir has won a mandate to govern the affairs of the country for the next 5 years. It should govern and not lose its way in internal bickering, as we have seen it happen so many times with different governments. While much credit goes to Navin Ramgoolam for having neutralised the recent irrational campaign based on ethnicity, he should take the opportunity to democratise the decision-making process within his alliance so that people are convinced that new and capable figures will emerge to take on the various challenges which will inevitably face the country in a world that is not really out of the economic woods. The elections of 2015 will be decided on a platform unlike those of 2005 and 2010 which bear a lot of resemblance to each other.
From local press...
The Alliance de l'Avenir, led by Prime Minister Dr Navin Ramgoolam, won a clear-cut victory at the general election which was held on May 5, with 41 seats out of 60. The MMM-led Alliance du Coeur won 18 seats and the big surprise came with the election of Cehl Meeah, who is now the head of the FSM (Front Solidarite Mauricienne). This is the first time a small party not belonging to a major alliance wins a seat at the general elections since independence.
All three leaders of the Labour-PMSD-MSM alliance topped the polls in their respective constituencies, Ramgoolam in Pamplemousses Triolet, Pravind Jugnauth in Quartier Militaire-Moka and Xavier Duval in Belle rose Quatres Bornes. The MMM leader also topped the list in his constituency of Stanley Rose Hill but several of his top team lost. His designated Deputy Prime Minister, Ashok Jugnauth lost in Quartier Militaire-Moka and his designated Finance minister, Vishnu Lutchmeenaraidoo lost in Riviere des Anguilles-Souillac.
At a press conference on May 6, the Prime Minister and leader of l'Alliance de l'Avenir Dr Navin Ramgoolam stated that he was fully satisfied that his alliance had rallied support from both the rural and urban areas and that all communities had voted for the Labour Party/ PMSD/ MSM alliance. " Together we will build the future," he promised. He added that all through the electoral campaign he has noticed that a majority of the population had adhered to the programme of the government of l'Alliance de l'Avenir, which he insisted has been prepared 100% by Mauritians.
"There has not only been adhesion to our programme but there has been enthusiasm. I received telephone messages, letters and emails from Mauritians disapproving of the demagogic campaign of our opponents."
"Whether in the villages or in the towns, the electorate has trusted us. Some try to insinuate that there has been a division but we have elected five candidates in the four constituencies of Port Louis. In Belle Rose/ Quatre
The more there is projected an image of cohesiveness and authentic team spirit of the new governing alliance, the less difficult it will be for Navin Ramgoolam to get on successfully to 2015. There is a dearth of talents the world over; Mauritius cannot be an exception to this condition. It would therefore not be appropriate to invite the tribalism that almost dismembered our society in the course of the last electoral campaign. We will inevitably have to inculcate new values that will match the ambitions of the younger generation which will form the core voter group the next time over. The new voters will need to be inspired to aim at higher goals in a spirit of solidarity, rather than being incited by some socio-cultural leaders and priests to believe falsely at each turn of the electoral process that some weird conspiracy would be hatching up against them or those belonging to their flock by some unidentified adversary. Tangible results will count as a demonstration of management capability in the social and economic affairs of the nation. For the present, a spirit of magnanimity will pull together the fabric that has just been unfairly torn apart putting at risk the social fabric. The work of confident re-construction can help save the situation.
(Writer is bureau chief in Mauritius & MD, OEMCL with inputs from local press)
FREE Download
OPINION EXPRESS MAGAZINE
Offer of the Month