Journalist for some reasons.............

After completing nearly 7 months as a journalist, I do ask myself why Iam a journalist? Can be downplayed as a simple existential question which haunts a professional from time to time? Especially, in these days of economic recession where no one is sure when he is going to be driven out of the office? But, I feel, there is more to it.

After watching 59 hours continious coverage of Mumbai ordeal and reading saurav Mishra's write up as a survivor, I feel of course there is more to it.

Iam a journalist because from childhood, I have the nasty habit of poking into other's lives. I love society but always love to be preachy about all things. Change orientation is the vital factor which drives me into journalism but it's also the fact that I can't stick to one thing longer due to my fickleness.

I respect people for their work but also crave they should recognise how great Iam.

This may not be true for most of the journalists but very much the fact for rest of us.

How we made the bomb? By- Shekhar Gupta.

Hey, just awesome. From Shekhar Gupta's pen you always expect something masterly.
Read On and Enjoy.



If India ever decided to single out a date for marking some sort of an anniversary of its nuclear weaponisation, March 18, 1989 will be a pretty good choice, probably even more fitting than the two dates of May 1974 and 1998, Pokharan I and II respectively. Rajiv Gandhi was now in the last few months of his prime ministership. He had suffered a great deal of attrition from fighting both internal and external crises.
But on national security and foreign policy Rajiv had not lost the focus in the least. Some frantic searching of our nuclear basements and barsatis, whatever you call them, during the Brasstacks crisis had revealed that our deterrent was far from ready and the complacency that 1974 had created was dangerous. Also, by early 1989, it became evident that Pakistan was either very close to a deliverable weapon or had one already. Americans were already talking of Pakistan being a mere ‘last turn of the screw’ away from the bomb. Sure enough, 1989 was the last year the US administration gave Pakistan their annual certificate of nuclear virginity, even though they were desperate to save it from sanctions; the ‘good’ jihad in Afghanistan was at its peak.
It was in this setting that the IAF decided to hold a massive air power display at its firing ranges of Tilpat, on the south-eastern edge of Delhi. It seems Rajiv made up his mind in the course of that remarkable display by 129 aircraft, almost a third of the effective IAF order of battle then. He gestured to the then defence secretary, Naresh Chandra, to follow him into a tent, even shaking off a curious Rajesh Pilot. It is nearly impossible to reconstruct an authentic account of that momentous hour. But from what I have been hearing from various participants, direct and indirect, in what was to become the most spectacular and successful secret operation — also perhaps the longest — in India’s history, it seems that even with his power fading, Rajiv had decided that the time had come for India to give up all pretence of Peaceful Nukes and develop a full-fledged arsenal. That he put Naresh Chandra in charge of it is a fact I have confirmed with several members of the nuclear “core” group, as also successive prime ministers, although most are still shy of sharing any more details of the remarkable operation that unfolded subsequently.
The core group mandated to develop the nuclear arsenal included V.S. Arunachalam, the then head of DRDO, renowned nuclear scientists P.K. Iyengar, R. Chidambaram, Anil Kakodkar and K. ‘Santy’ Santhanam, and missile-man A.P.J. Abdul Kalam and Muthuswamy Balachandran of the Terminal Ballistic Research Lab, located not far from this newspaper’s office in Chandigarh, and some others. I am not sure if the number ever added up to a dozen, but this was a tough gang to handle. These were highly talented, motivated and in some cases individualistic men as scientists often tend to be. Rajiv probably chose Chandra to lead this group because he knew it would need an experienced, trustworthy and discreet civil servant to network the system and cut a few corners where needed.
A decision was taken to keep the whole operation totally secret, and ‘out of the system’. There will, therefore, be not a scrap of paper found either in the records of the PMO or the Cabinet. A novel, if irregular, way of providing funds for the programme was found which, to date, remains one of India’s very well-kept secrets, even though many who made it possible are still active within the establishment. As and when the scientists needed money, Chandra merely took a note directly to the finance secretary and the minister of the day who signed it without asking questions. The money was to come out of allocations provided in the annual union budgets under a nondescript ‘science and technology’ budget to the Planning Commission. Of course, the financial advisor at Yojana Bhavan, as well as the prying auditors of the CAG, had been “advised” not to get curious about where this money was going. The other side of this phenomenal operation was the acquisition, often from global markets, of materials required for the weapons as well as the missile programmes in spite of the sanctions.
It is still too early in our history for us to describe this in greater detail. But contemporary historians might ask what a brilliant if mercurial Santy was doing on a desk in RAW on a full-fledged tenure? Suffice it to say that you won’t have a scientist of his repute reading clips from Pakistani newspapers and writing analyses. It is also important to mention one more vital fact. In the course of this entire operation, that lasted from 1989 to 1998, not one Indian scientist, diplomat, spook was ever caught, or even reported for any irregular nuclear trade. These were years when Pakistani nuclear smugglers and thieves were leaving their fingerprints, footprints and calling cards all over the place. So it is only fair that I do not tell you any more details on this, because even journalists must accept the principle of keeping some facts time-barred.
But I can mention a few important points. One, that this operation spanned the tenure of seven prime ministers between Rajiv and Vajpayee. And not only did it remain intact, it acquired strength and momentum, and not one word about it ever leaked. Never. When Gowda sent Naresh Chandra as ambassador to Washington, he decided that his own trusted Karnataka cadre civil servant, Satish Chandran, would take over as the keeper of the family silver. And isn’t it remarkable that both, the family silver and the secrecy around it, were preserved even through periods of political instability and short-tenure governments? I can never forget a philosophical statement I.K. Gujral once made to me when he was prime minister. This was when India had decided to sign the Chemical Weapons Convention and, surprise of surprises, notified that it was destroying its chemical arsenal. This, when not much earlier, India had signed an agreement with Pakistan solemnly implying it had no such arsenal. Gujral took some of us senior editors into confidence and shared with us the nuances of this decision. And then he said, “Isn’t it remarkable how our country has been able to keep its secrets?” “You can understand great people like Nehru and the Gandhis being able to do so,” he went on, “but then so many ordinary men, like us, have been in these jobs lately, and yet nobody has found out what we did not want anybody finding out.”
That is the point of this series of articles. India’s march to Pokharan 1998 was long, complex and dangerous. It also involved hundreds of secret steps and actions. And even if one had been betrayed, the whole operation would have been compromised. These operations range from this completely novel funding in a system littered with auditors to repeated exercises with IAF Jaguars and then Mirage-2000s to test the bomb-devices and to develop tactics. From the nuclear core group to the pilots of these aircraft, scores of people shared this confidence. Nobody betrayed it. Or, Buddha would not have smiled a second time in May 1998. By talking loosely of a mole we do an incredible amount of injustice to the men who made this miracle of May 1998 possible. Of course the people who matter — Vajpayee, Brajesh Mishra, even Manmohan Singh (who, as Rao’s finance minister, readily signed those funds and countless sheets of paper authorising these) — know better. That they have chosen to stay above petty politics on this speaks about their sagacity and maturity, entirely in keeping with the character of this nine-year operation.
Postscript: While people have talked so casually of a mole, the one fact often overlooked is that in December 1995, the Americans had picked up direct satellite evidence of activity at Pokharan. The then ambassador, Frank Wisner, brought these pictures to Amar Nath Verma, then principal secretary to Prime Minister Rao. Verma, however, had never been in the nuclear loop and so did not even know what was going on. But apparently he asked if Wisner would leave the pictures behind for him to check with the prime minister. Wisner would do no such thing. It seems, according to the complexities of American law, materials obtained by their intelligence sources, particularly spy satellites, cannot be “left” on foreign soil, or even handed over notionally to a foreigner except, probably, NATO partners. So Wisner would no more than show the pictures to Verma, not even letting him touch them, and then placed them back in his pocket. This led to some interesting discussion in the nuclear “core” group: the US embassy can receive these pictures because it is, technically, US territory. But does the ambassador’s pocket also happen to be US territory? Academic, you might say. But interesting, in the rarefied world of high diplomacy.

Efficacy of India's reservation policy

Indian parliament may see many heated hours on two contentious issues in this winter session. One is long pending Women’s reservation bill (Thanks to Lalu Yadav and Mulayam Yadav for their support) and another one is Sachhar panel recommendations. In both the cases, reservation for women in parliament and muslims in educational institutions and public services are the moot points. Whatever may be the outcome, but one thing is definite i.e. Indian polity after 60years of independence sees reservation as a tool for social justice.Positive discrimination and preferential treatment on the basis of caste, gender, religion and domicile are part of the reservation policy in India, which is enshrined in its constitution. The logic behind such provision is to form an egalitarian society by empowering those who are victimized by accumulated disabilities and disadvantages for years. Reservation as a policy measure for creating an equitable society may not be fool proof but it is one of those vital measures whose importance can’t be underestimated. According to data collected from Indian Institute of Technology for the year 2003-04, though the stipulated slot for SC students is 15%, the total number of students joined under this quota was barely nine percent. The analysis of this trend shows that when the seats under stipulated quota couldn’t be filled up where the admissions criteria was lowered for the students, how can one expect that without quota, IITs will be ever filled up by any SC students.Also, there is no dispute about the fact that Scheduled Tribes are largely out of the main stream. It’s only due to the reservation policy, STs are getting the chance to be part of the policy making body. J.M.Lyngdoh, the former Chief Election Commissioner vindicates the success of this policy. Further, when backlog appointment drive is taken up by any public agency for filling up the ST candidates, it points that without reservation, how the diversity in the recruitment process can be maintained.When 73rd and 74th amendment has taken up a provision of 33% reservation for women, the critics argued that in a male chauvinistic society like India, men were going to rule from the shadow of the women. But as statistics reveal, women are making strides taking the complete benefit of the reservation. Even in some of the most underdeveloped Indian states like Madhya Pradesh, Rajstan and Bihar; women representatives have exceeded the percentage of their quota. It shows that the reservation policy in local governance has helped in political empowerment of women folks.Further, taking into account the reservation issue for OBC, it can be safely presumed that implementation of the Mandal Commission report has benefited the OBCs immensely. After 90’s, both in political and executive level, OBCs have taken the center stage.Nevertheless, reservation policy isn’t free from controversies. Critics argue that as a policy it is an abysmal failure in Indian set-up, which is increasingly used as a poll plank for garnering vote bank politics. They point towards the fact that when jobs in public sector were shrinking with every passing day, what’s the point of sticking to a policy, which hampered meritocracy in society.This debate can continue for indefinite period but India can freeze its policy of reservation at its own peril.

Goa and its never ending political crisis; some tips from Indian cricket

The current political crisis in Goa and “third world treatment” to the Indian cricket team in Australia have one similarity i.e. their connection with Mr. Sarad Power and both have been rescued by the present BCCI chief cum Agriculture minister cum NCP supremo in recent time. But the other imperceptible correlation between both of them is that like Indian cricket team’s frequent imbroglio with Australian players, Goa is also notoriously famous for plunging into political disasters too often. It always occupies disproportionate space in mainstream media compared to its size - of course due to wrong reasons.
In this perspective, The DNA writes, “marred by frequent by-elections caused by hung assembly verdicts and hunger for power, Goa has seen imposition of President's Rule twice and 16 Chief Ministers in the last twenty years.” Recent political instability will add to that list. The things started with the withdrawal of support of three NCP and one independent M.L.A from the present Congress led coalition government of the state. With all kind of conspiracy theories and negotiating efforts on work, the government was finally saved with the promise to accommodate the dissenting members. But, the larger question remains unsolved. Though coalition governments aren’t new to India after two decades of its practice, Goa is a unique enigma in Indian polity. Here in last five years, defection of MLAs, partisanship by Governor and nepotism are norms. N.Ram of The Hindu writes, “as MLAs of Goa who have only a small constituency to nurse, develops their political base independent of their party, defections become the norm. Often, denial of a ministerial berth is the reason for a member to withdraw support to the government causing instability.” Barring this geographical limitation, blatant misuse of constitutional prerogative is another reason for this volatility. Especially for the last few years; Governor, S.L.Jamir’s role has raised serious questions about the sanctity of this constitutional post. Even this time BJP alleges the Governor of playing to the tune of present incumbent Digambar Kamat’s government. The BJP has questioned the constitutional validity of the decision of Mr. Jamir to suddenly prorogue the State Legislative Assembly on the recommendation of the Digambar Kamat Cabinet ahead of the passage of an appropriation Bill, which is seen as a bailout tactics for buying more time to the Congress government. “For, the normal practice is to adjourn the House sine die and to prorogue it after a gap of several days. In his anxiety to buy the minority Kamat Government time, Jamir short-circuited the normal procedure and straight away prorogued the house. Which means Kamat is no longer obliged to summon another session of the assembly for several months”, writes The Free press Journal. Also the Anti-defection law passed by the parliament, which empowers the speaker of the house to decide on the disqualification issue, gives the leverage to the speakers of Goan assembly for its blatant misuse in recent time. As an example, when Pratapsinh Rane was in power in Goa in 2005, two defected BJP M.L.A.s were inducted as cabinet ministers in Rane’s government with a flagrant violation of Anti-defection law. Even the induction defied the 91st amendment act, which lays down specific provision for restricting floor crossing by legislatures. K.V.Prasad in The Hindu writes, “The decision of the Congress to reward two former Bharatiya Janata Party legislators with ministerial berths in Pratapsinh Rane Government in Goa is perhaps the first calculated move by a political party to circumvent the anti-defection law.” And an irony these political tricks aren’t restricted to a specific party but practiced across board.
Though the present political crisis in Goa has been solved for the time being, it will be naïve to think that it is subsided forever. Rather, it will continue taking inspiration from the Indian cricket team, which is now more in news for controversies than the game. But let’s hope just like the true cricketing spirit, one day Goan politician will follow ethical line in the name of true political spirit- though the probabilities seem to be too bleak.

CHINA AND INDIA’S ECONOMIC INTEREST IN SUDAN

With the advent of globalization, the nuances of diplomacy are determined more by trade relations than human values. This is illustratable by the relationship of countries like India and China with Sudan. Though the International community repeatedly accuses Sudan of gross human right violations, still it doesn’t deter China and India to reach for Sudan’s natural resources to feed their burgeoning energy need. Rather, both these countries are busy wooing Sudan for acquiring maximum share of its oil field.
China has distinct economic interest in Sudan as it imports seven percent of its crude oil from this country. More significantly, this oil constitutes 47% of total Sudanese productions. United Nations Commodity Trade Database (UNCOMTRADE) says that China represents 64% of Khartoum’s trade volume. Also, Chinese National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC) has invested $4 billon in Sudan’s different oil fields with 42% stake in Sudan’s major oil company i.e. Great Nile Petroleum Company. China’s economic interest is not limited to petroleum only, rather it eyes for other natural resources like natural gas, gold, silver, chrome, asbestos etc. With rising investment, China emerges as the largest foreign investor in Sudan.
China is pursuing “Trade for Aid” policy in Africa and Sudan is part of this diplomatic design. In a visit to Sudan, Chinese premier Hu Jintao waived debt amount of $80 million and sanctioned $13 million interest free loan for Sudan. These aid amounts are largely utilized in up gradation of oil blocks from which Chinese draws oil.
Barring oil, China sees Africa as a lucrative market for its arm trade and Sudan in particular provides greatest opportunity for its arms market. Sudan’s arm forces have the strongest Chinese colour in this region. Even Ken Bacon of ‘Refugees International’ spotted evidence of Chinese weapons in Darfur conflict. It is believed that, China sold $100 million arms to Sudan in between 1996 to 2003. Chinese made military trucks, t-62 light tanks, F-7 fighters, Y-8 transport aircrafts, FC-2 fighters are now part of Sudanese arsenal. With no sign of diffusion to Sudanese ethnic conflict, the prospects for Chinese arms trade will increase in near future.
When China is vigorously pursuing its trade relations with Sudan, India isn’t sitting idle; rather in accordance with its “Look Africa” policy, India is proactively wooing African nations not only for furthering its economic interests but also to get their crucial support for getting permanent seat in Security Council. From this perspective, Sudan is at the top of its agenda, which is fathomable by Indian president’s visit to Sudan in 2003. The agreements signed during this visits are bilateral agreement on the promotion and protection of investment, agreement on the avoidance of double taxation treaty and memorandum of understanding on communication and information technology. Barring this, India is concentrating on Sudanese oil blocks. ONGC Videsh ltd. has 25% stake in Sudan’s biggest oil consortium. Government of India has also decided to invest $750 million for expansion of refinery sector in Sudan.
Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FICCI) in its report states that the volume of trade with Sudan is around $120million in 2002, with a positive trade balance of $99million for India; making it the sixth largest exporter of commodities to Sudan. The statistics shows that there is 100% growth in bilateral trade between India and Sudan, which gives fillip to bilateral trade relationship. There is also a beeline of Indian companies like ITI, TCIL, and Konkan Railways, which are interested to exploit the Sudanese market. FICCI predicts that there is great potential for Indian industries to participate in areas such as railways, shipping, automobile, power generation, telecommunications, agricultural equipments, and pharmaceuticals and IT etc.
With India and China taking Economics as radar for determination of their foreign policy, Sudan will experience least international pressure to end the conflict from this part of the world.

A Deadly Dilemma: Pakistan after Benazir

“There is no law and certainly, no order in my country. What happened last week has shaken every Pakistani. Benzir Bhutto was no ordinary person; she served as prime minister twice and returned to Pakistan in an effort to restore democracy in our country. In her assassination, I have lost a friend and a partner in democracy.”

These are the words of Nawaz Sharif, president of PML(N) and Benazir’s arch political rival in Pakistan, which speaks volumes about the turmoil created in Pakistan following Benazir’s assassination last December. Benazir, for all her flaws, had always been seen as a liberal force with a democratic vision for her country. Undeterred by the security threats, her return to Pakistan showed her determination to move Pakistan towards a democratic future. Her assassination has created a vacuum that has made Pakistani politics murkier, more volatile and unpredictable. It undermines the credibility of President Musharraf, who faces widespread resentment over his recent imposition of emergency. It’s setback to the U.S. design of establishing a democratic government under Musharraf, which will lend some credibility to the present military regime. Above all, Benazir’s murder has implications for the unity of Pakistan.

The adulatory public response that greeted Benazir on her return had given the world community hope that exists in Pakistan a large constituency for the restoration of democracy. The U.S. had intended that she would become prime minister under Musharraf to create a military-backed popular political front to contain the growing fundamentalist forces in the country. Seeing the rising unpopularity of Musharraf, his confrontation with the judiciary, which finally led to the imposition of emergency, and the growing wave of anti-Americanism in Pakistan, the U.S. was desperate to put a democratic government in place. After Benazir’s assassination, these hopes have been dashed and Pakistan’s very future is at stake. But it’s the people of Pakistan who are the ultimate victims of these developments. They suffered the loss of a popular leader in 1977 when Zia-ul-Haq toppled Zulfikar Bhutto’s government, they witnessed another military coup in Musharraf’s takeover of power from Nawaz Sharif’s elected government, and they the real victims of Benazir’s murder.

With the death of Benazir, the people of Pakistan face renewed uncertainty. Her demise has created a leadership crisis in the Pakistan People’s Party, the country’s only pan-national party. While Asif Ali Zardari, Benazir’s widower who was nicknamed Mr. Ten percent for his alleged record of corruption while his wife was in office, doesn’t have the political muscle or moral stature to command public support, Benazir’s son Bilawal at 19 is too young and inexperienced to shoulder the responsibility. Though there is wide public support for PPP and the next election scheduled for February may see the party emerge victorious, it is questionable whether PPP can lay out a roadmap for full democracy in Pakistan in Benazir’s absence. According to reports, the U.S. finalized a deal to sell F-16 fighter planes with Musharraf just two days after Benazir’s death. It suggests that the US still sees Musharraf as its best bet in their war against terror. The
Americans have their own logic as they fear that in the absence of Musharraf and the military in control, Pakistan’s nuclear wealons may fall into the hands of Islmaic radicals.
The reasoning is not completely irrational. In the last six decades, Pakistan’s military is not only core component of the political and economic system but has grown into a state within a state. Dr. Ayesha Sidique, a military analyst describes in her book “Military Inc.” Pakistan military has permeated every aspect of the Pakistani economy. The military has a presence in the steel, sugar, cement, fertilizer and cereal industries with large stakes in the financial sector as well. It underscores the near impossibility of rooting the military out of economic and political power in Pakistan. In the circumstances, any hope of a Pakistan under complete civilian control can remain just that - a hope, particularly when the country has lost its most popular and charismatic leader.

With the demise of Benazir; Islamic fundamentalism will gather more force inside the country. With all kinds of conspiracy theories about the assassination doing the rounds, there is a strong likelihood that fundamentalist forces, who saw her as a potential threat to their designs, might have eliminated Benazir. They may now succeed in expanding their base in Sindh and Baluchistan, two provinces where people feel neglected due to the dominance of Punjab in Pakistani politics and the army. The murder of Benazir, who hailed from Sindh province, may add to this frustration, stoking the flames of Sindhi nationalism.

The uncertainties of Pakistani politics have expectedly impacted the economy. The Karachi stock market plummeted by nearly 5% on December 31 indicating investors fears over the possibility of a prolonged political impasse hurting Pakistan’s economic growth prospects. Pakistan registered 7.9% GDP growth in 2006-07, according to the government’s economic survey and the KSE has been one of Asia’st-performing stock markets in recent years. The widespread rioting that followed Benazir’s demise when cost the economy several billion dollars in property damage and lost business. But it is the poor, who will suffer the most. Battered by rising inflation (9.3% according to Asian Development Bank Report-2006), continued business uncertainty will only render their jobs, and livelihoods, ever more precarious.

Sadly, all these developments have revived fears that Pakistan could become a failed state. Its suspension from the Commonwealth, the presence of a foreign investigative agency to probe Benazir’s death and the constant fear of a spillover of the US campaign against the Taliban into its North West province all call into question the very sovereignty of the nation. As the destinies of the countries in South Asia are intertwined, Benazir’s assassination will have negative impact on the whole region. This is evident from the reactions of neighbouring India and Afganistan. AS the country plunges into a deeper crisis, Pakistan will find itself alienated from the international community, including from regional grouping like SAARC, OIC etc.

Pakistan’s predicament is the consequence of endemic corruption in public life, the cynicism and violence it breeds, the enduring power of the landowning elites, the repeated imposition of martial law to restore order, the use of non-state actors as instruments of foreign policy and the rise of armed Islamic militias who seek to impose their medieval vision of society as the solution to Pakistan’s myriad problems.

Pakistan could thus be on the brink of civil war. But, just like every cloud has a silver lining, there is still hope for Pakistan. This lies in the sustained struggle for democracy led by the middle class intelligentsia. Encouraged by judicial activism with former chief justice Iftikhar Choudhary in the vanguard, this movement has sustained itself through the country’s most difficult times. Led by the legal community, NGOs and human rights activists like Asma Jahangir, today’s struggle reflects the determination of ordinary Pakistani people to free themselves of this dangerous circle of violence. In the end it is democracy, the rule of law and economic policies that promote equitable growth that will break this deadly cycle. Despite her shabby record in office it was this vision of a better, more humane Pakistan that inspired Benazir to return from exile. Her violent death only underscores the urgency of that message.

who stands for Taslima?

A woman, ever chased by the muslim fundamentalists in her own country, with a fatwa on her head; came to India thinking of its secular credentials, thinking that it's the place where she can relate to her characters of fictions, assuming that this is the only nation where the freedom of expression is still jeously guarded, but to her utter dismay all her assumptions about India shattered with the recent goings in her host country. When a handful of hooligans indulged in rampage in the intellectual city of Kolkata holding the city into ransom, the so called saviour of secularism i.e. left front government of westbengal was quick to force taslima to fly Rajstan so that the violence can be diffused. The tale doesn't stop here. Rajstan government who was informed of Taslima's arrival at the last moment, showed their reluctance to play host to the writer for a long time. so, in a save facing operation, Taslima was taken to Delhi where after a short stay in Rajstan house, she was put in high security zone of NSG guest house. politics has the beauty of starting everything after the issue just like Indian cops. so, in a dramatic turn around, Narendra bhai, Gujurat C.M. came to the rescue of Taslima offering to play host for Taslima. Seeing, the situation slipping form the hand of left government, Buddhadeb babu said that he was never averse to the idea of the writer staying in the state, welcoming Taslima to the state. But, what is most astonishing is Pranab Mukherji's statement in the Parliament. He gave the statement that though the guests were allowed to live in India with tranquility, they should avoid expressing those sentiments which might hurt any specific community. So, literally he asked Taslima to shut up but up course in a nicer way. Now, under the pressure of fundamentalists and seeing that no credible source is coming forward to resuce her of this conundrum, she gave her assent to delete those lines of his book "Dwikhandita", which are supposed to be pinching the Muslim community. One can imagine what the kind of pain she must be undergoing when she has decided to delete few lines from her book. It's just like asking the mother to rip the body parts of her baby.
Whatever may be the happenings but it shows one thing i.e. the profoundness of Indian hypocrisy espcially of its polity and how come everything becomes a ploy for Indian politicians to take maximum political mileage. It goes beyond the very ideals on which Indian democracy stands . Gone are those days, when Dalai lama was not only greeted to stay in India but also given the freedom of venting his anguish. When India can afford to have bitter reltionship with China in the light of the consistent diatribes from the Buddhist monk, why it is so intolerant about Taslima case? How the two cases differ? Is that something more than India's committment to freedom of expression? this questions naturally poke into one's brain.
An indepth analysis points towards the fact that in this case politics overpowered democratic ideals. Firstly, when the issue of renewing Taslima's visa is not that grave in west bengal politics, why All India Minority Forum took out the protest rally at that particular juncture. Is there any relationship between the stand off between Left front and Congress in the centre over the civil nuclear deal? is this an act of provokation by Mamata or Congress to mess up the matter further after Nandigram controversy? no body knows. Further speaking, how come Left govt. who vehemently opposed any attack on freedom of expression beforehand like- ransacking M.F.Hussain's potrait by hindu zealots, Indore university issue; why not it took a different line up here? Also, watch out for Modi's reaction on the issue. It seems Modi is trying to further polarise the Gujurat society on the name of Muslim bashing. so, in this process, he is ready to accept anything which is anti-muslim or which muslims atleast oppose. othwise, whose human rights credentials are next to Shirin Abidi, how can he be the protector of anyone's freedom of expression. also, it's the land of gujurat, where Modi happily connived with the VHP workers to attack the student of Indore University for his paintings on Lord Shiva. Congress is no better than these two parties. When the central government is trying to discharge its constitutional duties, it doesn't also try to send any wrong signal to its Muslim voters. so Pranab Mukharjee's statement are on the expected line. When he vowed to protect the writer, at the same time perhaps he is against taslima's writing. So the inference is taslima will stay here but writing romances of Bollywood than to pen down anything about women issues.
India may boast itself as the largest democracy of the world but, it seems the holder of this democracy i.e. the political parties can dedicate everything for power may it be their own country one day.