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.
Monday, December 10, 2007
Friday, December 7, 2007
Media and medical ethics- some diatribes
Yesterday, we were ,those previleged few, who got a chance to attend the Bio-ethics conference, organised by NIMHANS. With an air of sophistication all around, we entered into the conference hall like meek viewers, who are always apprehensive of their knowledge in science not to talk about biology and what to talk about medical science. Perhaps, the medical fraternity was miffed with the Dr.Venugopal-Dr.Ramodoss row. They were all out for media bashing like-Media is planting stories only getting the input from one source, media is promoting corporate health care system, media is the culprit behind sensatationalism, for spreading panic within common man blah....., blah......, blah............. . And all we media students and media practioners were perhaps gleefully enjoying this drama. May be for the fact what we are taught in our first class in jounalism, i.e. to be thick skinned. with questions from every corner and also valuable suggestions from doc.s, it seemed that medicos were determined to settle some score, which were nurtured for days.
They blamed us till they satisfied themselves by sspitting of venom. but, with all venality, they forgot to mention somethings which we also faiked to remind. thanks to our first lessons in journalism i.e. to be thickskinned.
They blamed us till they satisfied themselves by sspitting of venom. but, with all venality, they forgot to mention somethings which we also faiked to remind. thanks to our first lessons in journalism i.e. to be thickskinned.
Wednesday, December 5, 2007
Economic diplomacy and Sudan crisis.
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.
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.
Friday, November 30, 2007
ME AND MUSHARAFF.
Atlast, Musharraf has to shed his military uniform under International pressure or put it specifically under the pressure of United states. But, still what is hidden for future is still unknown to most of the international observers. Now after the return of nawaz sharif from saudi arabia and with the presence of Benzir in the country, it's pretty a mess and too difficult to assume what's going on within Musharaff.Is it the intention of musharaff to save his face and show international community that all his preaching of democracy is not political debauchery or it's a desperate bid to show the world that the general elections will be credible. but, thinking of a polically accomodating arrangement with three players i.e. mushraff,benzir and nawaz seem like a next to impossible thing.
Brains of any political observer will spin thinking of an equitable space for these three players. when nawaz and benzir are diabolically opposite in their political ideology, they can hold the post of primeminister under Mush. at their own peril.
But, it seems that u.s. is pushing this issue very hard. May not be for the sake of democracy but sure for its so called war against terror. Hold on, let's stop here because whatever may be our perception of seeing this issue but atlast wishes of pentagon will prevail. so, why to lose our sleep over this issue.
so bye, my thoughts. i will come again to take you on a new ride.
Brains of any political observer will spin thinking of an equitable space for these three players. when nawaz and benzir are diabolically opposite in their political ideology, they can hold the post of primeminister under Mush. at their own peril.
But, it seems that u.s. is pushing this issue very hard. May not be for the sake of democracy but sure for its so called war against terror. Hold on, let's stop here because whatever may be our perception of seeing this issue but atlast wishes of pentagon will prevail. so, why to lose our sleep over this issue.
so bye, my thoughts. i will come again to take you on a new ride.
Amoral Debate
Uma khanna episode compelled the media to introspect into the way in which it conducts itself . This is especially true for the broadcast medium. Leaving the ethical debate involved in this issue , it can be safely presumed that broadcast media is under the trap of money-making and cheap sensationlism. Ofcourse when executive and legislature have been failures to rise to the expectation of the people , it’s the work of the media to come with the truth. But, on the hide of exposing the truth , media is not empowered to intrude into the personal space of the common man, alluring him to conduct in a manner , it desires . Exposing any scandal through investigation is nice but is it moral to allure a man to indulge in that scandal first, so that media can catch him red-handed ,showing the world(Read urban audience) that no matter how inefficient the system is, media is their to take care of them.Rembember,Mudra deal to Harsad Mehta scam has been broken out without the expert assistance of the hidden cameras, then where the media lose those weapons of investigative journalism. True, the cases like Cash-for –Query scam, Tehelka exposure, U.P. assmbley incident gave the proponents of this method an upper hand but have we ever imagined what if these investigation would have proved wrong in their assumptions.
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Some are just born great!
It doesn’t come as a surprise when Rahul Gandhi has been formally put into the party’s central committee in recently held All India Congress Committee meeting. But, Rahul Gandhi’s speech definitely creates some ripples among the political observers. This Gandhi- Nehru scion made a fervent speech to promote meritocracy in the party. Listening to a term like meritocracy from the mouth of rahul Gandhi is bit unusual. Because- he himself is projected as the future prime ministerial candidate only due to his inheritance without a proven track record of performance. Can anyone except Gandhi surname ever dream of being prime ministerial candidate from congress party? Of course, there are anomalies when P.V.Narsinghrao in 1991 and Manmohan Singh now, takes the rein of the country. But, P.V.Narasinghrao came to power just after Rajiv Gandhi’s assassination as Sonia Gandhi was reluctant to enter into politics, where as in Manmohan Singh’s case Sonia was compelled to step down seeing the political mileage that the saffron party was trying to cash of her foreign origin.
Salman Khursid, the revered Congressman tries to put it in this way in “Cogress Sandesh”, i.e. mouthpiece of Congress party. He tries to make the point by drawing the similarity with the sons and daughters of professionals like doctors, military personnel, film stars who follows the foot print of their parents and enter into the same profession. Does it fair to draw the comparison line in this manner? Does the post of prime minister come under the same fold as of a doctor, military personnel or of a film star? Can India in this 21st century afford to give the prime ministrial post to a person because of his family tree? Salman Khursid hides under the argument that people of India wants to see the Gandhis in the top post. If it’s the case then why Congress party was not able to get any headway in Uttar Pradesh elections despite Rahul Gandhi being the star campaigner. Salman also takes the pain to make a recollection of the fact that some people are just born great and with time they should be given their due. Don’t this argument have a feudalistic flavour? Further speaking, it contrasts the very concept of meritocracy, which is now so passionately preached by Rahul Gandhi.
If Congress feels that young blood should be incorporated into the party, then it’s a noble design. But why congress is finding that face in Rahul Gandhi only? Why can’t a face with genuine political credentials hold the top post? Further, Rahul Gandhi hasn’t shown a spectacular performance as a legislature. He spoke three times and asked two questions in parliament within these four years of his legislative span. He has never participated in any important discussion in the parliament. Indian mass hardly knows about his standpoint about major issues concerning India. Also, his credential as a political visionary is doubtful. Because, Rahul Gandhi, in recent times given statements which shows his political shallowness. In one of the election rally held in U.P., he asserted that if Gandhi family were in power in the center, then the Babri Masjid happenings might n’t be taken place. But, what he forgot to mention is that it’s Rajiv Gandhi who opened the lid of this controversy and Congress was in the center when the demolition happened. How can Rahul Gandhi disown the legacy of his own party, only resorting to Gandhi family’ legacy? Further, when he extolled 1971 war as his family credit, it created a diplomatic row between India, Pakistan and Bangaladesh. After this kind of (irresponsible) remarks, it is clear that he is the leader who is blindly driven by his media managers than his own perception of the things.
Let Congress shows some guts to go beyond the Gandhi family. Congress usually faces the criticism that it’s the party of high command where even “Sarpanch” appointment is referred to the high command in 10 Janpath. Will Congress party be ever able to shed this blot? Time can only unfold that whether Congress party, which led the fight for democracy in India, will able to set its own home right.
Salman Khursid, the revered Congressman tries to put it in this way in “Cogress Sandesh”, i.e. mouthpiece of Congress party. He tries to make the point by drawing the similarity with the sons and daughters of professionals like doctors, military personnel, film stars who follows the foot print of their parents and enter into the same profession. Does it fair to draw the comparison line in this manner? Does the post of prime minister come under the same fold as of a doctor, military personnel or of a film star? Can India in this 21st century afford to give the prime ministrial post to a person because of his family tree? Salman Khursid hides under the argument that people of India wants to see the Gandhis in the top post. If it’s the case then why Congress party was not able to get any headway in Uttar Pradesh elections despite Rahul Gandhi being the star campaigner. Salman also takes the pain to make a recollection of the fact that some people are just born great and with time they should be given their due. Don’t this argument have a feudalistic flavour? Further speaking, it contrasts the very concept of meritocracy, which is now so passionately preached by Rahul Gandhi.
If Congress feels that young blood should be incorporated into the party, then it’s a noble design. But why congress is finding that face in Rahul Gandhi only? Why can’t a face with genuine political credentials hold the top post? Further, Rahul Gandhi hasn’t shown a spectacular performance as a legislature. He spoke three times and asked two questions in parliament within these four years of his legislative span. He has never participated in any important discussion in the parliament. Indian mass hardly knows about his standpoint about major issues concerning India. Also, his credential as a political visionary is doubtful. Because, Rahul Gandhi, in recent times given statements which shows his political shallowness. In one of the election rally held in U.P., he asserted that if Gandhi family were in power in the center, then the Babri Masjid happenings might n’t be taken place. But, what he forgot to mention is that it’s Rajiv Gandhi who opened the lid of this controversy and Congress was in the center when the demolition happened. How can Rahul Gandhi disown the legacy of his own party, only resorting to Gandhi family’ legacy? Further, when he extolled 1971 war as his family credit, it created a diplomatic row between India, Pakistan and Bangaladesh. After this kind of (irresponsible) remarks, it is clear that he is the leader who is blindly driven by his media managers than his own perception of the things.
Let Congress shows some guts to go beyond the Gandhi family. Congress usually faces the criticism that it’s the party of high command where even “Sarpanch” appointment is referred to the high command in 10 Janpath. Will Congress party be ever able to shed this blot? Time can only unfold that whether Congress party, which led the fight for democracy in India, will able to set its own home right.
Pervez Mushraff's second coronation as the president of Pakistan speaks volume about the state of affairs of our neighbour. Perhaps most of we indians are gleefully watching these happenings from our tv sets barring some lines of concern seen on the face of our military establishment. As human beings, our concern for humanity is limited to the last border post of Rajstan or punjab or J&K . Also, see our newpaper editors' finely crafted analytical pieces on Pakistan, how they are busy penning down the arguments to prove upto what percentage Pakistan has increased as a failure state.
so much of apathy towards a nation which our grandparents had shared as one nation is really astounding. perhaps, we Indians are obsessed with our growth prospects and slightly complacent about our democratic sucesses. But, there are inherent risks attached to this i.e. if we don't evaluate our democratic governance from time to time then, there are chances of slipping towards a situation like Pakistan. Also, our non-intereference clause in diplomacy will hamper Pakistan's struggle for democracy. remember, India as a country is sorrounded by nations where military dictators rule the people.
The logic that you get neighbours not by choice but by chance has it's own limitations.because- no military government can rule the nation for ever. some time or other, people's voice
so much of apathy towards a nation which our grandparents had shared as one nation is really astounding. perhaps, we Indians are obsessed with our growth prospects and slightly complacent about our democratic sucesses. But, there are inherent risks attached to this i.e. if we don't evaluate our democratic governance from time to time then, there are chances of slipping towards a situation like Pakistan. Also, our non-intereference clause in diplomacy will hamper Pakistan's struggle for democracy. remember, India as a country is sorrounded by nations where military dictators rule the people.
The logic that you get neighbours not by choice but by chance has it's own limitations.because- no military government can rule the nation for ever. some time or other, people's voice
Friday, November 23, 2007
Inevitability and Iraq war
------------------------------------------------
Today, at the time of watching the movie"Brother in arms", I was wondering why we human beings ever fight with each other. Really what's the reason for wars? Can any logical reasoning to defend a war will ever suffice? Iraq invasion and the mayhem after the war shows how little we learn from the pages of history. who are the ultimate winner of this war? Are they the Iraqi people or the Bush administration or the shoddy arm dealers who ultimately benefit from the arm sell or those thriving scientific institutions who rack their brain to invent ultra modern weapons for the post-modern wars?
This is a moot point. Physchology accepts that aggression is part of human instinct. so, sociologically the world can't be free from conflicts. so, wars are those human made disasters which can't be avoided just like natural disasters. And some time wars are the only inescapable option for spreading peace. Remember, those famous lines of Mahabharat which Lord Krishna has uttered to krishna. Sometime, being idealistic doesn't clear the web of confusion.
Put this in the case of Iraqi war. Iraq was ruled by a ruthless dictator whose hands were blood stained, though he provided stability to this nation. Then U.S., without taking cognizance to the views of the world community intruded the country. We all know what happened after the invasion and what's happening now in that country. Iraq has turned literally into a rubble.
But let's go on a ride, where we will design these happenings according to our wishes. If Iraq hadn't been attacked by U.S. then the United Nation led force might have accomplished that task. From, every option, we come to the conclusion that war is the only viable option to dismantle Saddam's regime.
Wait, let's give dialogue a chance. It is debatable whether Saddam would have come to the negotiating table for transforming his country into a democratic nation.
Really, it's utter confusion which is creeping into my mind. I am deadly against the Iraq war but what was the viable option that was left to the world community except a war.
------------------------------------------------
Today, at the time of watching the movie"Brother in arms", I was wondering why we human beings ever fight with each other. Really what's the reason for wars? Can any logical reasoning to defend a war will ever suffice? Iraq invasion and the mayhem after the war shows how little we learn from the pages of history. who are the ultimate winner of this war? Are they the Iraqi people or the Bush administration or the shoddy arm dealers who ultimately benefit from the arm sell or those thriving scientific institutions who rack their brain to invent ultra modern weapons for the post-modern wars?
This is a moot point. Physchology accepts that aggression is part of human instinct. so, sociologically the world can't be free from conflicts. so, wars are those human made disasters which can't be avoided just like natural disasters. And some time wars are the only inescapable option for spreading peace. Remember, those famous lines of Mahabharat which Lord Krishna has uttered to krishna. Sometime, being idealistic doesn't clear the web of confusion.
Put this in the case of Iraqi war. Iraq was ruled by a ruthless dictator whose hands were blood stained, though he provided stability to this nation. Then U.S., without taking cognizance to the views of the world community intruded the country. We all know what happened after the invasion and what's happening now in that country. Iraq has turned literally into a rubble.
But let's go on a ride, where we will design these happenings according to our wishes. If Iraq hadn't been attacked by U.S. then the United Nation led force might have accomplished that task. From, every option, we come to the conclusion that war is the only viable option to dismantle Saddam's regime.
Wait, let's give dialogue a chance. It is debatable whether Saddam would have come to the negotiating table for transforming his country into a democratic nation.
Really, it's utter confusion which is creeping into my mind. I am deadly against the Iraq war but what was the viable option that was left to the world community except a war.
Sunday, November 18, 2007
An Agnostic
Why I do believe in God?
-------------------------------------
I believe in God because my family taught me to do so. Though I am still doubtful about my own belief system, still when I feel low, I always remember someone/ something (not sure of him being a human) that I name as God. Also, to score good marks in examinations, to escape from embarrassment and for million more things, which will keep me ahead in this rat race, I appeal to some extra-terrestrial object that I name as God. Basically, I believe in God for my own selfish reasons. Interestingly, I take pain to go to the places of his worship when I am in my blues.
Never have I tried to question his/her/its authority, because I watched all the episodes of Ramananda sagar made Ramayan and Mahabharat in my childhood. Today, I can endlessly talk about growing fanaticism in religion, without knowing anything about them(Including my religion). In reality, I am a God fearing organism, who believes more in destiny (I still can’t infer the meaning) than in his own effort.
Still, I am a firm believer of God; up to that extent that I have never dared to start this word with small cap (i.e ‘g’). I want to continue with this status, as it does not harm me in any way.
Perhaps I believe in God because this is something very personal to me, who can’t be shared with anybody. Who works as my mentor, who listens to my prayers (If I can call it), my faith that he will never dump me? This is the insecurity, which forces me to believe on my lord.
-------------------------------------
I believe in God because my family taught me to do so. Though I am still doubtful about my own belief system, still when I feel low, I always remember someone/ something (not sure of him being a human) that I name as God. Also, to score good marks in examinations, to escape from embarrassment and for million more things, which will keep me ahead in this rat race, I appeal to some extra-terrestrial object that I name as God. Basically, I believe in God for my own selfish reasons. Interestingly, I take pain to go to the places of his worship when I am in my blues.
Never have I tried to question his/her/its authority, because I watched all the episodes of Ramananda sagar made Ramayan and Mahabharat in my childhood. Today, I can endlessly talk about growing fanaticism in religion, without knowing anything about them(Including my religion). In reality, I am a God fearing organism, who believes more in destiny (I still can’t infer the meaning) than in his own effort.
Still, I am a firm believer of God; up to that extent that I have never dared to start this word with small cap (i.e ‘g’). I want to continue with this status, as it does not harm me in any way.
Perhaps I believe in God because this is something very personal to me, who can’t be shared with anybody. Who works as my mentor, who listens to my prayers (If I can call it), my faith that he will never dump me? This is the insecurity, which forces me to believe on my lord.
Thursday, August 30, 2007
Revolution to Evolution.
REVOLUTION TO EVOLUTION
-------------------------------------------------------
Revolution in April can bring Spring on a land scape and April revolution in Nepal has proved that. Also, Nepalese people vindicated the fact that , Marxist revolutionary concept isn’t only limited to academic discourse rather it has pratical implications. To start with , the 238 year old monarchy , under King Birendra in 90’s,decided to transform Nepal into a democratic state but mysterious murder of King and his family enabled King Gyanendra to sit on the throne, who behaved more like a dictator in the guise of democracy. As the reaction, Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) started an armed struggle against the Nepalese state to oust the imperialistic power which snowballed into a civil war , continued from 1996-2006 , taking 12,700 lives, 1.5 lakh ousted from their home land.The political parties vacillating between loyality and duty, never succeded to put a greater impact on the Nepalese politics, till the people came out of their home to join the strrets , defying the curfew and braving to face death. Nepalese revolution is definitely 21st century’s most significant event as “we the people” comes from the draft of the constitution to the road.
In 2002, when the peace negotiation failed it was felt that Nepal was going to be another Sudan. To content the maoist struggle U.S., EU, India gave their military and economic support to Nepalese monarchy. U.S. and EU have always their dogmatic inhibition to the term “Communism”. So, without international support Neapal boiled in the heat of insurgency.
Though , India is a major player in Nepal’s cultural , political and economic life, ther is in general an Anti-Indian sentiment against India’s BISTARBAD( EXPANSIONISM). And the reasons are quite logical i.e. India actively supported Nepal’s monarchy to thwart Naxal design of creating a red-corridor from Nepal to Andhra Pradesh. Further, when China and Pakistan took unusual interest in Nepalese issue, even assuring military support ; India succumbed to the pressure of King Gyanedra’s bargains. “Hindu angle “ further messed the dirty water when RSS took interest on this only “Hindu kingdom” of the world. But, as the equation unfolded , India supported the seven party alliance , forcing the the King to hand over power.
Shifting to Maoist angle, Prachanda as the chief has shown exemplary valour and character in continuation of the struggle, making the head-way to democracy. So, it can be inferred from this people’s movement that “May it be Gandhian principle or Marxist philosophy; people’s welfare is of primary concern and some time , a bloody struggle is an escapable option.”
-------------------------------------------------------
Revolution in April can bring Spring on a land scape and April revolution in Nepal has proved that. Also, Nepalese people vindicated the fact that , Marxist revolutionary concept isn’t only limited to academic discourse rather it has pratical implications. To start with , the 238 year old monarchy , under King Birendra in 90’s,decided to transform Nepal into a democratic state but mysterious murder of King and his family enabled King Gyanendra to sit on the throne, who behaved more like a dictator in the guise of democracy. As the reaction, Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) started an armed struggle against the Nepalese state to oust the imperialistic power which snowballed into a civil war , continued from 1996-2006 , taking 12,700 lives, 1.5 lakh ousted from their home land.The political parties vacillating between loyality and duty, never succeded to put a greater impact on the Nepalese politics, till the people came out of their home to join the strrets , defying the curfew and braving to face death. Nepalese revolution is definitely 21st century’s most significant event as “we the people” comes from the draft of the constitution to the road.
In 2002, when the peace negotiation failed it was felt that Nepal was going to be another Sudan. To content the maoist struggle U.S., EU, India gave their military and economic support to Nepalese monarchy. U.S. and EU have always their dogmatic inhibition to the term “Communism”. So, without international support Neapal boiled in the heat of insurgency.
Though , India is a major player in Nepal’s cultural , political and economic life, ther is in general an Anti-Indian sentiment against India’s BISTARBAD( EXPANSIONISM). And the reasons are quite logical i.e. India actively supported Nepal’s monarchy to thwart Naxal design of creating a red-corridor from Nepal to Andhra Pradesh. Further, when China and Pakistan took unusual interest in Nepalese issue, even assuring military support ; India succumbed to the pressure of King Gyanedra’s bargains. “Hindu angle “ further messed the dirty water when RSS took interest on this only “Hindu kingdom” of the world. But, as the equation unfolded , India supported the seven party alliance , forcing the the King to hand over power.
Shifting to Maoist angle, Prachanda as the chief has shown exemplary valour and character in continuation of the struggle, making the head-way to democracy. So, it can be inferred from this people’s movement that “May it be Gandhian principle or Marxist philosophy; people’s welfare is of primary concern and some time , a bloody struggle is an escapable option.”
Will the number work?
WILL THE NUMBER WORK ?
--------------------------------------------------------------
Emerging dynamics of Indian politics compel to shift our attention towards the ‘Third –front’ , which seem as an alternative to fill the void , if ever created due to Left’s withdrawl from UPA Government. This formula started from 1989 , when V.P.Singh was sworn as the prime minister with the backing of both BJP and Left, from outside. Resting the case on the weight of history, it can be safely presumed that these Govt.s were never stable, always busy squabbling to grab maxium power. However, the recent stalemate created in the light of Indo-U.S. civil nuclear deal and preceding it, the formation of united national progressive alliance (UNPA) during presedential election, have the chances for the repetition of history.
Though , the third front comprises of parties like – AIADMK, SP,AGP,TDP, INLD i.e. all loosing comrades club together for a collective identity , but it can never be predicted when UNPA will be fattened with regional parties to avert the impending election. After all, political equation unfold themselves with time . In this light, third front mayn’t be a distant possibility, for the simple reason i.e. no party in present scenario is ready to face the electorates , not only for the huge expenditure incurred in it, but also due to the absence of clear prediction what their fate is going to be. Secondly, as Indian economy is experiencing a robust growth , the all powerful corporate lobby will definitely intervene to defuse the political crisis to make the economy stable. Also, parties like NCP, LOKJANSHAKTI are searching for the platform where they can give vent to their dissension. Question comes, “Will Left parties after pulling out from UPA extend their crucial support to this front?” The answer is yes, because the verbal war going within the party hints that the party knows the health of the party in W.Bengal with full knowledge of infighting in Kerala; so by no means they are going to fetch the same number of MPs, if voting happens.
Then, How the magic no. ,approaching majority will be a possibility without the outside support of BJP? Will the BJP extend support to such a front? Again, the political situation favours third front . Closely observe BJP’s recent trend, you can come to the conclusion that , it is in shambles in the heartland of Hindi –speaking population. The dismal performance in UP elections have conveyed that BJP is loosing ground on its traditional base i.e. uppercaste hindu, small traders and city dwellers. Gujurat to M.P. , the party now is facing credible leadership crisis. Definitely , it will opt for third front , taking its own time to strengthen its fortess for 2009 election rather than plunging into electoral war. So , the statistics evolve can definitely reach the magic number. And if you are peeping into the ideological differences, never mind ; political parties have always verbal ideological base with “Kursi” in their heart (1989 experiment )..
But wait, Is the Left serious enough to pull-out itself from the UPA coalition ? Perhaps, time can tell. Till then, let’s engross in various possibilities. After all, Politics is all about Possibilities.
With Regards,
Debasis Mohapatra.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Emerging dynamics of Indian politics compel to shift our attention towards the ‘Third –front’ , which seem as an alternative to fill the void , if ever created due to Left’s withdrawl from UPA Government. This formula started from 1989 , when V.P.Singh was sworn as the prime minister with the backing of both BJP and Left, from outside. Resting the case on the weight of history, it can be safely presumed that these Govt.s were never stable, always busy squabbling to grab maxium power. However, the recent stalemate created in the light of Indo-U.S. civil nuclear deal and preceding it, the formation of united national progressive alliance (UNPA) during presedential election, have the chances for the repetition of history.
Though , the third front comprises of parties like – AIADMK, SP,AGP,TDP, INLD i.e. all loosing comrades club together for a collective identity , but it can never be predicted when UNPA will be fattened with regional parties to avert the impending election. After all, political equation unfold themselves with time . In this light, third front mayn’t be a distant possibility, for the simple reason i.e. no party in present scenario is ready to face the electorates , not only for the huge expenditure incurred in it, but also due to the absence of clear prediction what their fate is going to be. Secondly, as Indian economy is experiencing a robust growth , the all powerful corporate lobby will definitely intervene to defuse the political crisis to make the economy stable. Also, parties like NCP, LOKJANSHAKTI are searching for the platform where they can give vent to their dissension. Question comes, “Will Left parties after pulling out from UPA extend their crucial support to this front?” The answer is yes, because the verbal war going within the party hints that the party knows the health of the party in W.Bengal with full knowledge of infighting in Kerala; so by no means they are going to fetch the same number of MPs, if voting happens.
Then, How the magic no. ,approaching majority will be a possibility without the outside support of BJP? Will the BJP extend support to such a front? Again, the political situation favours third front . Closely observe BJP’s recent trend, you can come to the conclusion that , it is in shambles in the heartland of Hindi –speaking population. The dismal performance in UP elections have conveyed that BJP is loosing ground on its traditional base i.e. uppercaste hindu, small traders and city dwellers. Gujurat to M.P. , the party now is facing credible leadership crisis. Definitely , it will opt for third front , taking its own time to strengthen its fortess for 2009 election rather than plunging into electoral war. So , the statistics evolve can definitely reach the magic number. And if you are peeping into the ideological differences, never mind ; political parties have always verbal ideological base with “Kursi” in their heart (1989 experiment )..
But wait, Is the Left serious enough to pull-out itself from the UPA coalition ? Perhaps, time can tell. Till then, let’s engross in various possibilities. After all, Politics is all about Possibilities.
With Regards,
Debasis Mohapatra.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)