Editorial: It’s Only Getting Better

By M H Ahssan

Perception of rising global violence has no basis in reality

Yet another terrorist attack, and the feeling that South Asia as a whole is standing on the edge of a precipice has been strengthened. Lahore has reverberated not just in Pakistan but also through every country in the region; a line long thought sacrosanct has been crossed. Inevitably, the frisson of unease that has been growing since the string of terrorist attacks across India, fuelled by happenings in Pakistan and Afghanistan, will deepen. The perception of increasing global violence and instability, on the rise since 9/11 and strengthened by the latest Israeli misadventure in the Gaza Strip, will go up another notch. And that is why it becomes necessary to step back, gain perspective and consider the possibility that the reality might be entirely different from perception.

With the sharp decline of interstate conflicts since the collapse of the Soviet Union, there has been thought to be a concurrent rise of a more insidious threat. Starting with Afghanistan’s civil war and the breakup of the erstwhile Yugoslavia, analysts and the media have perpetuated the idea of ethno-religious conflict and its offshoots as the new scourge of global order. Much has been made of the intra-state conflicts that have seemed to dominate the international arena since, with the Balkans, Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia all providing adequate fodder to bolster this world view. Not surprisingly, it has gained a fair amount of currency. This model of conflict is, after all, the oldest transnational threat in existence today.

But now consider the truth. Between 1991 and 2001, 43 conflicts revolving around selfdetermination were contained or stopped while only 28 started or restarted. The number of armed secessionist conflicts in 2004 was the lowest since 1976 and the number of genocides globally fell by 80 per cent between 1988 and 2001. The paucity of reliable data means that it is more difficult to gain an exact picture of matters as they stand today, but extrapolation is not difficult. Iraq and the Afghanistan/ Pakistan morass are the only new major conflicts to have flared up in the intervening years. The general trend is one of increasing human security and peace. And the pity is that this has gone largely unnoticed. The old paradigm of proxy conflict fuelled by superpower rivalry has given way to the rhetoric of internationalism with peacemaking and conflict resolution as its currency. Not even George W Bush could alter this in any fundamental way as the global response to his successor has shown.

Yet, myths abound. Grave-faced talking heads periodically conclude that civilised society is teetering on the brink of an extremism-fuelled conflagration, that wars are getting deadlier and genocide is rife. International organisations, NGOs and governments reiterate it, either due to a lack of data or because of their political agendas. And the public accepts it because it dovetails neatly with common assumptions, and then reinforces them.

The fundamental shift for the better in the international order goes beyond the old definition of human security as an absence of conflict. The UN has increasingly defined the concept in a positive sense, looking at enabling factors. And economic trends reflect the improvement here as well. Caveats about increasing income inequality aside — the issue at stake is human well-being which may not always be concurrent with wealth — the decrease in conflict and the growth of the globalisation process mean that the average person today is exponentially better off than he was a few decades ago. Infant mortality rates, child labour and malnutrition have all shown an uninterrupted decline since the middle of the 20th century while life expectancy and education levels have been on the rise. And eventually, these tie into secondary indicators like the rule of law and political freedom that govern conflict trends.

Neither is there cause for pessimism if one looks to the future. The peace that has existed between the major powers since the end of the Second World War is the longest uninterrupted stretch in several centuries. This is not likely to change. For all the crystal-gazing about a clash between the champion of the old world order, the US, and the emerging power, China, few analysts lend much credence to the possibility of open conflict. Once seen merely as an adjunct to the democratic peace paradigm, the economic interdependence theory is coming into its own. The incremental rapprochement between China and Taiwan bears testament to this as, in a perverse way, does the global financial crisis.

From the religious wars of Europe to colonial exploitation; from the games of power triggered by the Treaty of Westphalia to their inevitable culmination in the World Wars; from independence to partition and through the horrors of 1969, 1984, 1993 and 2002, global and Indian society have charted a bloody course. But it has been one that would have disappointed Clausewitz, increasingly moving away from conflict as a legitimate means of policy and political expression. Problems remain. Terrorism, that South Asian bugbear, is enjoying a resurgence of sorts. But it is difficult to believe that the trends of six decades and more can be reversed when, at last, we are moving towards a global consensus on the issue. Perhaps it is time to consider the possibility that we might not, after all, be locked in a circle of violence.

WORLD HEALTH DAY 2009

By M H Ahssan

World Health Day 2009 focuses on the safety of health facilities and the readiness of health workers who treat those affected by emergencies. Health centres and staff are critical lifelines for vulnerable people in disasters - treating injuries, preventing illnesses and caring for people's health needs.

They are cornerstones for primary health care in communities – meeting everyday needs, such as safe childbirth services, immunizations and chronic disease care that must continue in emergencies. Often, already fragile health systems are unable to keep functioning through a disaster, with immediate and future public health consequences.

This year, WHO and international partners are underscoring the importance of investing in health infrastructure that can withstand hazards and serve people in immediate need. They are also urging health facilities to implement systems to respond to internal emergencies, such as fires, and ensure the continuity of care.

Emergencies: global and local impact
Wars, cyclones, earthquakes, tsunamis, disease outbreaks, famine, radiological incidents and chemical spills – all are emergencies that, invariably, impact heavily on public health. Internal emergencies in health facilities – such as fires and loss of power or water – can damage buildings and equipment and affect staff and patients. In conflicts, reasons for hospital breakdowns include staff being forced to leave due to insecurity and the looting of equipment and drugs.

In 2008, 321 natural disasters killed 235 816 people – a death toll that was almost four times higher than the average annual total for the seven previous years. This increase was due to just two events. Cyclone Nargis left 138 366 people dead or missing in Myanmar, and a major earthquake in south-western China's Sichuan province killed 87 476 people, according to the United Nations’ International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (UNISDR). Asia, the worst-affected continent, was home to nine of the world’s top 10 countries for disaster-related deaths. Along with other weather-related events, floods remained one of the most frequent disasters last year, according to UNISDR. Conflicts around the globe have also led to great human suffering and have stretched health care services to the extreme.

Disasters also exact a devastating economic toll. In 2008, disasters cost an estimated US$ 181 billion – more than twice the US$ 81 billion annual average for 2000–2007. The Sichuan earthquake was estimated to cost some US$ 85 billion in damages, and Hurricane Ike in the United States cost some US$ 30 billion.

"The dramatic increase in human and economic losses from disasters in 2008 is alarming. Sadly, these losses could have been substantially reduced if buildings in China, particularly schools and hospitals, had been built to be more earthquake-resilient. An effective early warning system with good community preparedness could have also saved many lives in Myanmar if it had been implemented before Cyclone Nargis," said Salvano Briceno, the director of UNISDR.

Although only 11% of the people exposed to natural hazards live in developing countries, they account for more than 53% of global deaths due to natural disasters. The differences in impact suggest there is great potential to reduce the human death toll caused by natural disasters in developing countries – and that the key ingredient in these tragedies is human inaction.

This is only one part of the picture. There are many smaller-scale events that inflict an even greater toll in terms of human suffering, such as in the case of vehicle accidents and fires. Road traffic crashes kill 1.2 million people annually, or more than 3200 people a day, while a further 20–50 million people are injured or disabled every year. At least 90% of road and fire fatalities occur in low- and middle-income countries. There are also 300 000 deaths each year from fires alone.

Outbreaks of communicable diseases can spark emergencies that cause widespread death and suffering. In the 12 months up to 31 May 2008, WHO verified 162 outbreaks of infectious disease in 75 countries worldwide. More than a third of the outbreaks occurred in Africa. They included cholera, other diarrhoeal diseases, measles, haemorrhagic fevers and other severe emerging diseases.

"The risk for outbreaks is often presumed to be very high in the chaos that follows natural disasters, a fear likely derived from a perceived association between dead bodies and epidemics. However, the risk factors for outbreaks after disasters are associated primarily with population displacement (commonly linked to conflict)." Even a few cases of a given disease can give rise to the perception that the public faces a grave health risk, which can lead to major political, social and economic consequences.

Infectious diseases are major causes of death and illness in children in conflict settings, especially among refugees and the internally displaced.

How emergencies threaten health facilities and delivery of care?
Apart from their effects on people, emergencies can pose huge threats to hospitals, clinics and other health facilities. Structural and infrastructural damage may be devastating exactly at the time when health facilities are most needed. Health workers have been killed in collapsing hospitals. The number of other deaths and injuries is compounded when a hospital is destroyed or can function only partially. Health facilities should be the focus for assistance when disaster strikes but, if they are damaged or put out of action, the sick and injured have nowhere to get help.

The 2003 Algerian earthquake rendered 50% of health facilities in the affected region non-functional due to damage. In Pakistan's most-affected areas during the 2005 earthquake, 49% of health facilities were completely destroyed, from sophisticated hospitals to rural clinics and drug dispensaries. The December 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami affected national and local health systems that provided health services for millions of people. In Indonesia's northern Aceh province 61% of health facilities were damaged.

Despite international laws, health facilities continue to be targeted or used for military operations in conflicts. Health facilities in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Somalia, the Central African Republic and the Gaza Strip are among those that have been caught in the line of fire.

An emergency may be limited to the health facility infrastructure – for example, fire damage, power cut or loss of water supply. Chemical and radiological emergencies in or near a health facility can also disrupt the delivery of care. In addition, emergencies threaten health staff – the doctors, nurses, ambulance drivers and other staff working to save lives. When a hospital collapses, or an artillery shell destroys a ward or an ambulance, health staff are killed or injured. When staff are incapacitated and cannot do their work, health care is further interrupted.

Even if health facilities themselves are not affected during disease outbreaks and epidemics, their services and provision of safe care may be. Increased demands for services and a decreased workforce can impact on health care by disrupting communications, supplies and transport. Continuity of care is then in turn disrupted, including for chronic diseases like HIV and tuberculosis.

If measures to prevent and control infection are not effective, health-care facilities may act as "amplifiers" of outbreaks, generating cases of the disease among other patients or health-care workers and further decreasing the capacity to provide services.

Power cuts linked to disasters may disrupt water treatment and supply plants, thereby increasing the risk of waterborne diseases and affecting proper hospital functioning, including preserving the vaccine cold chain. A massive power outage in New York in 2003 was followed by an increase in diarrhoeal illness.

Why keep health facilities safe?
Safe health facilities in emergencies are a collective responsibility
Hospitals are more than just buildings. They are a vital asset at the heart of a community, the place where often life starts and ends. Due to the central role played by hospitals in our communities, we all share the responsibility of making sure they are resilient in the face of emergencies. Below are three reasons as to why we must make hospitals safe in emergencies.

1. Save lives, protect health
As they are occupied 24 hours a day, hospitals cannot be evacuated easily. They must remain working if their occupants – especially the most vulnerable such as newborn babies and patients in intensive care – are to survive. When the work of hospitals and other health facilities is disrupted or their buildings are damaged, both urgent and routine health care is interrupted and may be halted altogether – leaving the sick and injured without the care that they need.

Health "systems" rely on a range of public, private and nongovernmental facilities to work together to serve the community. In times of emergency, this is even more important. Hospitals, primary health care centres, laboratories, pharmacies and blood banks work with other non-health sectors, including energy, roads and transport, and the police to ensure the continuity of health services.

Health facilities are safe havens for people during an emergency. Hospitals and their staff must be regarded by all parties – particularly combatants during conflicts – as neutral and must not be subjected to any form of violence. Sadly, the provisions of international humanitarian law in this regard are often not respected. During emergencies, health facilities play a vital role. They:

provide emergency care to the injured (e.g. surgery and blood transfusions) and to the critically ill – as in outbreaks of communicable disease;
- collect and analyse data on illness and deaths in order to detect and prevent potential communicable disease outbreaks;
- deliver longer-term health care before and after an emergency. People need long-term nursing and medical care, maternal and child health services, rehabilitation of injuries, management of chronic diseases, and psychosocial support long after the emergency is over;
- provide immunization services to prevent outbreaks of communicable diseases such as measles that lead to the needless deaths of more children; and
provide other critical services – including laboratories, blood banks, ambulances, rehabilitation facilities, aged care facilities, and pharmacies.

2. Protect investment
The most costly health facility is the one that fails. Hospitals and health facilities are enormous investments for any country and their destruction or damage imposes major economic burdens. In some countries, up to 80% of the health budget is spent on hospitals and other health facilities. Rebuilding a hospital that has been destroyed virtually doubles the initial cost of the facility.

3. Safeguard social stability
Public morale can falter and political discord be ignited if health and emergency services fail during emergencies. Conversely, an effective emergency response and functional health service can reinforce social stability and cohesion. Hospitals are a haven for the public during conflicts and other emergencies due to their neutrality, impartiality and ability to protect a community's social and health capital.

Global efforts to make hospitals safe from disasters
Much has been done to ensure that health facilities can better cope with emergencies and to increase awareness of the vital role that health facilities play in emergencies. “Hospitals Safe from Disasters” is the theme of the 2008–2009 World Disaster Reduction Campaign, which focuses on natural disasters and the damage they can cause to hospitals in particular. The United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (ISDR), the World Bank and WHO are jointly involved in this campaign. WHO’s regional and country offices have been instrumental not only in helping to share best practices in health facility preparedness for emergencies but also in implementing such guidance and making hospitals and clinics more resilient and functional.

While much work has been done to raise the issue of emergency preparedness for health facilities and to build a "community" of people and parties dedicated to the cause, efforts remain sporadic and are neither sufficiently integrated into government development and emergency response plans nor properly harmonized with other sectors.

WHO's partners, including WHO's regional and country offices and ministries of health, are also leading the way in advocating how best to safeguard health facilities and their personnel and patients. The International Committee of the Red Cross, which advocates for the protection of health personnel and services in conflict settings, and its sister organization, the International Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, which works with communities on emergency preparedness at community level in natural disasters, play critical roles in making hospitals safe from disasters. Donors and financial institutions – including the World Bank, USAID and DIPECHO – have answered the call by offering funding to make health facilities safer.

WHO is devoting World Health Day 2009 to the theme of health facilities in emergencies – “Save lives. Make hospitals safe in emergencies” – to further strengthen the imperative that health facilities must be prepared to withstand emergencies so that they can treat patients both during crises and afterwards. The World Health Day campaign builds on the "Hospitals Safe from Disasters" campaign and calls for hospitals to be safer in all types of emergencies, including natural disasters, conflicts and outbreaks of communicable diseases.

World Health Day is more than just a one-day event. WHO, from its country and regional offices and headquarters, is continuously working with international and national partners to assist countries in preparing their health facilities and staff for emergencies. What 7 April 2009 marks is the launch of the next step of a campaign to build resilience into our health systems so that hospitals, clinics and staff can withstand the next crisis, whatever it may be, and provide the health care that their communities need in times of emergency.

Democratic Set-Up and Democracy

By Pramod Khilery

If it is democracy it has to be only sane; prone to headache, fault lines and fits but capable of raising the bar and achieving the highest standards possible, being in sound health and rearing greatest disquisition provided measures to this effect are in place. A democratic system never guarantees an absolute Right; for that to happen we will have to revert back to righteous monarchy but makes sure that every crepuscular Wrongs is set right to the maximum push-able degree. Hence a democratic setup aims to have an ideal happy society at its core even at the expanse of a very successful one in riches.

When looked at from this view democracy paves the way for the concepts of equity and equality. This equality further can have myriad aspects to be explored but the rudimentary seeds when watered with the civil justness give rise to the tree of highest possible esteem having branches touching every section of the society.

The trunk of this tree is rooted in the capital of the nation and hence the soil of the capital will have crucial bearings on the health of the tree. More healthy and green will it be better the all encompassing shadow. This esteem is nothing but a link between the democracy and those who are being democratized by an official decree that in all senses is also a granting of consent on the part of its subjects. But still even as pious and righteous a system as democracy may be, like any other system of governance democracy too does cleave society into two parts.

The sanctity of the democracy can be gauged by which one comes first and which second. If people think they come first not their representatives then it is assertive democracy which is good but not great. A large measure of this democracy is contingent upon the intellectual level of people which broadly and quite curiously is nothing but a reflection of their representatives. Thereby much more than this assertiveness which works as a healthy dose for any democracy to grow it is the nature of assertion that determines the direction the democracy will venture into. If representatives position themselves after people it is nothing short of a utopia though along with its own share of fault lines. At the most any society can hope for bouts of these utopian moments for it is not easy to fill the lacunas and chinks in an democracy owing to its being so open and at the same time hostage to the world economic and social order. In third case if people are too acquiescent and toady and representatives too royal and dominant than democracy appears making way for another system which wears the same clothes but gives account of a different disposition. This is psephocracy.

Every feature that marks up a democratic set-up will belong to this new system also but these are the elections and their results, not the service and the satisfaction and the plum posts and perks, not the sense of achievement that seek to gain the center stage in this system. This system hovers around highfalutin celebrations but seeks to devour the reasons for these celebrations. Even with celebrations fast on our heels a large swathe of population remains indifferent and skeptical of the outcome.

Every humanized democracy paces ahead with its head aloft with dignity and eyes warm and anchored in vision deriving its power from the sturdiness of spine of election and vim of legs of sense of service and power of motivation. The two hands of justice and equality wave only in tandem with the pace of legs. So while spine carries the whole body together, individually these are the different limbs that do the quotidian work and help the body live its full existence to leverage its very being and ambiance it happens to be in. The idea of equality, especially economic one is a chimera but civil equality i.e. the societal deference for every work and modus vivendi that fits in the ethical framework of liberal intellectual minds ranging from past to present is achievable.

Now imagine we have a body with only spine and no limbs. Democracy too looks same when elections and alliances come to become the be all and end all of a democratic set-up. To get finer perspective we can also equate this state of democracy with the mental setup of a student aiming to crack an entrance examination on account of whatever he could cram in a fortnight before the exam. His buoying through the exam is bound to be proved disastrous in the long run for both candidate himself and the environment he will inhabit. Invariably conflicts will arise thanks to lack of loyalty and dedication to the environment. These very innocuous looking conflicts take on dire consequences when the desire to have a sense of purpose slips in one’s life. This conflict when engendered in political arena which even empirically is all about social service exerts undue influence on entire nation and more importantly on the very definition of service. Every so Often we see the manifestations of these conflicts when we bear witness to a politician utterly naked in his avariciousness. It is not the welfare of the society which forms the crux of a polity outwardly steeped in democracy but the greed that drives his actions and deeds. Corruption which like a waterfall falls forms top to bottom not other way round is nothing but just one offshoot of this conflict. When the conflicting position of a candidate whose cramming planted him at the wrong place in the system leads to uncharitable ways then the challenges another candidate who sought to cheat his way into the superficial but personally favorable result poses to the idea of democracy can easily be imagined.

This report by Vijay Simha, published in “Caravan”, journal of politics and culture, March 1-15, 2009, drives home at least one side of this elections dominated democracy. During a meeting of senior BJP leaders held sometime in November 2008 to choose nominees for vacant seats in the Rajya Sabha when L.K. Advani proposed the name of former prime minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee to one of these seats adducing his ill health (was he giving the suggestion that an unwell person could easily be accommodated in Rajya Sabha?), Rajnath Singh, the current BJP president pointed out that if Vajpayee could step out and file his nomination to the Rajya Sabha he could do the same for Lok Sabha even and easily win the election without even campaigning given the popularity and esteem among people.

This meeting is a perfect epitome of how some political leaders do their calculations and does Rajnath Singh’s idea of democracy revolve around only filing nominations and winning elections? Didn’t his political experience make him think that winning an election from a constituency is also about taking care of it? Will Vajpayee, one of the only few statesmen among our living politicians, be able to serve his constituency deeming the health problems he is running into. The act of reducing a leader like Vajpayee into one more number in the total tally speaks not only poorly of his own party but also of the democracy which seems to have been incarcerated inside the walls of elections. Unfortunately this is just one case of many that exemplifies the ills that psephocracy brings.

Marxist revolutionary, Che Guevara had once said, “Democracy cannot consist solely of elections that are nearly always fictitious and managed by rich landowners and professional politicians.”

If we contrast this verily quote with what Aristotle had to say we will find how far the intents and ideals of democracy have moved from their original interpretations. When Aristotle said, “in democracies the poor are more powerful than the rich, because there are more of them and whatever is decided by the majority is sovereign”

did he have in mind the virtuosity of rulers or the power of awareness of people? Don’t we miss both? In most of the democratic set-ups today technically at least owing to either gerrymandering or number of candidates or parties the triumph may come even with less than one third of the total ballots cast.

What Che Guevara had said stands true today. This truth takes on even more dangerous form when a large percentage of voters happen to be either illiterate or semi literate. Because democracy allows every single citizen to have his say it all boils down to the characteristics of the majority. If majority is quiescent and inert then democracy will be nothing but a passive one. The choice of the representatives will not be governed by work done by the candidates in the interest of the society, ideological leanings, and election manifestoes but by personal factors. This results in whetting up those very ills which a democratic society in all its fairness stands to fight. Largely in our country a large percentage of election outcomes is held hostage either to anti incumbency factor or even more prevalent caste factor and religion factor thanks to BJP.

Election manifestoes are something neither we read nor our parties do take seriously. Even if they do take trouble to write one mostly it is nothing but a rehash of whatever had been written there once upon a time. In 2007 BSP leader Mayawati secured a huge majority in UP assembly elections not only without any manifesto delineating her party’s programs, policies and vision but even after publicly ridiculing the very concept of writing manifestoes. If her rustic approach and electoral calculations struck a chord with voters shall we admire her political acumen or accuse her of exploiting the weaknesses of democracy?

This weakness also have lead to criminalization of politics or as often people say politicization of criminals thanks to their election winning abilities. If a person convicted in any case other than political wins an election then it points to huge chinks in our democratic structure that needs to be dealt with greatest immediacy. A politician who in any democracy could have been a bulwark against societal ills becomes the fountain and patron of these ills instead. Worse still not only does he nurture ills and diseases but like a virus also resists the attempts at every medication and often, unfortunately even defeats them. That leaves democracy with the plight of a tamed animal tied to the peg of election rather than the liberty of a human being bound to his roots but free to roam, learn and serve.

For a democracy to be true to its definition and purpose not only do we need only party manifestoes but also strong ideological divide in the society instead of class or caste or religious divide. While caste divide abets regionalization and deigns the administration it is lopsided class divide that results in huge gaps in earnings and as we have often seen in the history it leads to frustration and even revolutions. The sad truth about revolutions that sometimes they are nothing but just a divergence leading to a path seedier than the prevailing stands even today.

So far as religious divide’s ramifications are to be said not only distant but even very recent history has evinced the venom they can spill into the vessel of the society and ghettoisations they can lead to. An ideological divide, on the other hand, often ends up as a precursor to the constructive debate in the society. That brings us to the gospel truth that debates are the leashes which a democracy should use to prevent its cart from running astray and ride smooth.

Quite sadly though any discussion of democracy involves ramblings about civic sense but somewhere the talk of ethics and morals values remains untouched. We can’t have a stronger paradox than that. It is not that toleration of other’s views and deference toward other societies is not nestled in the spirit of democracy but a skewed picture of democracy does give ample room for such discrepancies to creep in.

Here I am not talking about the religious intolerance, terrorism or self styled gurus and mullahs of ethics and moral values which we all know not only stand on the other side of democracy but even leer at it. But in contrast, think, if a software engineer of the new emerging India can kill his four year old daughter allegedly for as absurd a reason as her coming in the way of his spending quality time with his wife or a CEO of a TV channel beheads his wife or a political leader chops his wife into pieces etc then what sort of societal values are we venturing into?

If people belonging to educated or even elite class can indulge in such medieval and barbarian acts with what hope we expect people living in the recesses of poverty, gloom and darkness of illiteracy to give account of moralistic values. Isn’t it incumbent upon all of us that we call into question our own comportments and those who helm our democratic set-up? Some might want to dismiss these incidents as stray and aberrations but when acutely observed over a period of time only the thinly reported incidents even from the metros are enough to sicken us let alone digging deeper into the dark lanes of hinterland where often law faces the scimitar on the altar of ignorance or insularity.

Not only our politicians but we all stand guilty of reducing a system passed onto us by our forefathers to a mere formality. If we and especially those whose job entails this don’t squirm at the sight of a bare feet emaciated boy walking in the excruciating heat or shivering cold or a women splashing contaminated water off her body in the public or a child in an English medium public school using cuss words and expletives at the age of eight then it is not the slow pace of lumbering democracy but the fast pace of the vehicles of governors of democracy and a lack of community-hood that stands reprehensible.

Democracy may be just a political system of governance but it is humanity that propelled it to come into being. Without humanity democracy is just a body shaking but not moving and alive but not growing. It is imperative on our part that if we pretend to care for democracy we should also care for what I hold as nothing short of temple: primary schools among other things. Unfortunately the primary schools which give the child the first embrace of his life outside his mother are too clumsy and repulsive. The beginning gets as worse as it could get. It goes without saying that often it is none but democracy that bears the burnt of an adulthood grown out of uncomfortable or absent embraces.

This all having been said still we have some reasons to take pride in whatever muddling we have done through last six decades. Not only have we succeeded in preventing the fabric of democracy from ripping apart completely but have a system which needs overhauling, rectification and makeover but is indispensable. As the elections for 15th Lok Sabha draw near once again we will get to see this festival of democracy being celebrated across the India. I hope soon we will realize that election is a question fundamentally tied to the spirit of democracy asking us the basic tenets of a democracy. That is how it reminds us of the answers we have to look for. Though answer of the ballot will determine only the fate of the symbol that represents the question it is the debate about what could or should have been the answer or who the answerer is or what does the symbol represent and more importantly what our answer is will determine the flowering or wilting of democratic values.

India tackles non-state actors

By M H Ahssan

In South Asia's volatile geopolitical scenario - with political unrest seething in two of India's immediate neighboring countries (Bangladesh and Pakistan) - it is not enough for the country to safeguard its borders from hostile armies. India also needs to cobble together an urgent plan to grapple with a new villain - the non-state actor - which has emerged as an indisputable threat to security.

When Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari told the global media last year that "Pakistan is not threatened by nations, but by non-state actors”, he could well have been talking about India. India has also faced persistent threats from non-state elements, such as Afghanistan's Taliban, the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam in Sri Lanka or those burrowed in Pakistan like Lashkar-e-Taiba - over the past few years.

These disruptive groups have succeeded in unleashing terror across India, killing and maiming thousands, apart from causing grievous harm to the economy and tourism. The biggest of such recent attacks made global headlines last November when jihadi terrorists, armed with sophisticated weapons, laid siege to Mumbai for four days, killing nearly 200 people and destroying property worth millions of dollars.

In this context, Lieutenant General Aditya Singh, commander-in-chief of the army's Southern Command, stated that the Indian military was always fit to meet "conventional challenges" on the border, however, the real causes of worry were "the lurking sub-conventional threats that come from divisive forces and non-state personnel".

Not that Singh's is a lone voice of concern on the issue. The persistent and underlying fear posed by non-state actors to India's security resulted last year in the constitution of the high-powered Transformation Committee by India's Chief of Army Staff General Deepak Kapoor. This is an unprecedented development as the Indian army has formed such a panel for the first time to examine multifarious issues, including ways to tackle conflicts with non-state elements.

The committee - which is also comprised of the general officer commanding Eastern Command Lieutenant General V K Singh - is currently analyzing, among other things, the requirements to fight fourth-generation wars, conflicts with non-state actors and the logistics of training the Indian army in that environment. If need be, the committee's recommendations - to be submitted this year - may even initiate a major revamp in the Indian army's profile.

"Unlike traditional warfare where a country has to grapple with a tangible enemy, India's new security environment warrants a radically different approach," said a member of the Transformation Committee. "It requires the country to prepare itself to fight an invisible force. So the pressure is as much psychological as physical."

The committee will thus make recommendations about a new modus operandi the army will need to adopt to tackle such types of terrorism. It will also probe the urgent need for the army's various wings to work cohesively in the future. Another suggestion being considered by the committee is further delegations of power and the empowerment of the junior ranks of the army. This is aimed primarily at setting in motion a much-needed decentralization process. The panel is also studying operations in India's neighboring countries, besides United Nations' peacekeeping and stabilization operations.

Indian defense experts feel that preparing troops in the contemporary geopolitical environment is akin to fighting a "proxy war" with an enemy that exists but isn't all that visible, unlike the full-fledged army of a hostile country. The newly constituted committee will thus also examine the need to strengthen the junior ranks of the army - right down to the platoon level - so that they too can be a part of the overall strategy to fight this new fear factor.

The role of the committee - and the changes that will likely get ushered in through its findings - will be all the more significant considering that India's political environment has deteriorated significantly over the years. Communalism, sectarianism and regional parochialism are rearing their ugly heads like never before. There is also a growing criminalization of politics and politicization of the bureaucracy.

Infrastructure development by China along India's border and Beijing's burgeoning military ties with all of India's South Asian neighbors - Bangladesh, Myanmar, Nepal, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and even the Maldives - has also exacerbated New Delhi's insecurity. So unless these evils are overcome, India's internal security environment may well turn out to be extremely unhealthy.

In such a sensitive scenario, defense experts feel the Indian army and defense forces need to develop synergy and work in concert rather than function as independent, disconnected entities. According to a senior defense official, the army has traditionally been manpower intensive, which is an anachronism. "It needs to shed manpower and replace it with high-end technologies. This hasn't happened due to inadequate resource allotment," said the official.

In his report "Indian Army: 2020" - a blueprint for the army of the future - General S Padmanabhan wrote that it is threats from non-state groups armed with weapons of mass destruction (WMD) that India needs to watch out for. "These elements could be acting on their own initiative or, at the behest of a sponsor nation," he said. "This dimension of WMD would warrant a war-like response from us."

In any case, at present there's an intense debate within the Indian military and the rest of the strategic community concerning the shape of future warfare, and the type of army required by India to meet the threats. The abiding query is: will a traditional conventional army be adequate to handle all kinds of threats when they occur?

"The biggest challenge for the Indian army," opined retired colonel S K Veer, "is how to retain the basic configuration of a conventional battle force yet not lose its essence through radical reformation." In this context, Veer recommended that funds allotted to the armed forces should be sustained at a level of 3% of India's gross domestic product for at least a decade to ensure the requisite modernization and to plug existing shortfalls.

In other words, India needs to create an integrated force that works with seamless communication, possesses integral multi-tasking capabilities across the entire spectrum of conflict, whether nuclear or conventional. This is a vital requirement for India's safety and security in today's heightened environment of terror.

Focus: Is Bihar Moving Back To Era Of Bloody Caste Wars?

By Manoj Kumar / Patna

After nearly a decade of shift of emphasis to development, growth, good governance and social harmony, Bihar is returning fast to the vicious cycle of violent caste conflicts. In the south-central region of the state, a hotbed of Maoist-Ranvir Sena conflicts decades ago, the trend of revenge and retribution killings looks set for a comeback. 

Last week, seven upper caste Bhumihar villagers were killed by suspected Maoists – the first such attack in over decade. The victims were returning to their village in south Bihar’s Aurangabad district in a vehicle when the rebels triggered a powerful landmine blast using an Improvised Explosive Device (IED). All the victims were killed on the spot. 

Film Review: New Zanjeer Murder Amitabh-Jaya’s Classic

By Niloufer Khan / Mumbai

Let's not get carried away. Every time a remake comes along, we get gooey-eyed and nostalgic about the original. The 'Zanjeer' remake gets it right. Dead right.

Unlike Ram Gopal Varma's remake of 'Sholay', which was purely misguided, and Karan Malhotra's 'Agneepath', which was unnecessarily brutal, 'Zanjeer' is just what a remake should be. It's respectful to the original material which, let me hasten to add, was no masterpiece, and suspiciously similar to a 1967 film called 'Death Rides A Horse'.

Salman Khan: 'In A Star Of His Own' - (VIDEO)

Salman Khan is more than just an actor. The man is a phenomenon. In India, he is a cultural force, with many trying – and failing – to emulate his style. There are always people swarming around his Mumbai home, with the hope of catching a glimpse of the Bollywood star. His latest film – “Mental", "Kick,” in which he plays quite different roles – are set for release soon.

In an interview with INN, Salman Khan spoke of his script-writing ambitions, being directed by his brother and celebrating the heartland of India. Edited excerpts.

INN: After the success of “Dabangg2”, your films have been back-to-back hits. Would you say this is the most exciting – and perhaps best – phase of your career?

Salman Khan: It certainly is. In fact this is the best phase in everybody’s career. The industry is going through a very good phase. And there is an economic reason for it. It is not that it has just happened and nobody could see it coming. The number of screens in the country is increasing by the day and the distributors are tapping into newer markets. People are patronizing the theatres with renewed enthusiasm – there is an entire picnic-like attitude when families go out to see movies, which is a very good sign. They want to see larger-than-life characters on the big screen and not just watch movies on television or on DVDs.

The sequel to Dabangg has seen a change in director. Dabangg 2 is directed by your brother, Arbaaz Khan, and not by Abhinav Kashyap. How has it affected brand Dabangg?

No, I don’t feel that Dabangg has been affected in any manner because it is not like that Arbaaz is a totally new entity in the film. He was the producer of the first one, and, for him, it was the next logical step to enter direction. We were keen on having Abhinav Kashyap, but he didn’t want to do it. So Arbaaz stepped in and, I must say, I was surprised with the amount of control Arbaaz has shown here. He has done an absolutely fabulous job and has made the sequel exceptionally large in terms of scale.

Were you always aware that your brother had directorial ambitions? If so, did you have any apprehensions about his competence?

Yes, we always knew that Arbaaz wanted to direct. But I only became aware that he had such a great talent when he actually directed the film. Part of the reason is that Dabangg 2 marks his debut as a director. This will be the first time you will be seeing him in the capacity of a director, and I can assure you that it is something that will take you by surprise. He’s got a great knack for story-telling.

As brothers, is it easier or harder to resolve creative conflicts?

It is easy. Being brothers, there is a sense of comfort that I cannot find with anybody else. We have grown up together, so both of us understand exactly what the other is thinking. I believe this very thing is of paramount importance especially in a creative field like filmmaking. The intention is very clear: everything is for the betterment of the film on which both of our careers depend. So we did have very healthy, work-related discussions.

But was it difficult to separate Arbaaz Khan the brother from Arbaaz Khan the director?

No, it wasn’t as complex as you make it sound. It took not more than two minutes for us to realize who was right and who was wrong. We didn’t face any stardom-related conflicts, and this is true not only during filming but in general. It is simple logic: we have to convince each other, keeping the best interests in mind.

Do you ever feel that by doing pulpy, formulaic films like a Dabangg, “Ready,” “Bodyguard” or “Ek Tha Tiger” you are fueling mediocrity, the kind of mediocrity that is in conflict with the intellectual class of the country?

No, I don’t feel that for a minute. I think it is very difficult to successfully pull off this kind of genre. People do not get these kinds of films in abundance. Cinema should always be in touch with the soil of the country. My films celebrate the heartland of India. Any film is about heroism: the triumph of good over evil. If you look back at my films, you will see that as a recurring theme.

One theory is that Salman Khan makes the masses feel like themselves: they wear clothes like yours, they style themselves like you, and they try to talk and walk the way you do. So is it a conscious decision on your part to portray yourself in a way that many people find accessible?

Not at all. I have been like this for the longest time. It is just something that defines me, and not something that I try to be in order to generate mass hysteria.

You have written a script, “Veer” (2010), which didn’t do well at the box-office. You also wrote another film called “Baaghi” (1990), a long time back. Is script-writing something that you would love to pursue once you quit acting?

As of now, there aren’t any plans to quit acting because I’m having too much fun and it is working out extremely well, not only for me but a whole lot of other people involved. But script-writing is something that gives me a lot of pleasure. I love writing my scripts and it is surely something I will do once I’m done acting.

How long do you think this kind of stardom can last?

As long as I can sustain it. After that, it will be a logical step to step-down. Right now, the producers are making a lot of money and fans are having a great time watching my films. The day the producers aren’t minting money, or the fans are done with me and, most of all, I as a person get bored of acting, I will stop and pursue my other interests. There is a lot to do: painting, writing, direction.

Your father, Salim Khan, is a noted scriptwriter. Do you consult him before going about a project?

Only if I am very confused do I go to him. And yes, it has never happened that I became more confused after a conversation with him. He always sorts me out.

You repeatedly say that if you want to spread a social message, you’d talk about it, maybe say something on Twitter, but not make a film about it. Do you think cinema as a medium cannot bring about social change?

No, I don’t believe that cinema is incapable of bringing social change. And it is not even that we ignore it totally. Take the example of Dabangg. The film has a number of scenes that spread out a lot of socially relevant messages, but in a very entertaining way. Like the one where Chulbul talks about the necessity of taking polio drops to a character who has been infected. If you look for such instances, there are plenty, but let us only look at Chulbul Pandey. If you want to follow a character, follow him. He is a very good guy who is crazy about his mother, fond of his girlfriend, takes a strong stand and has shades of Robin Hood as well. So, for me, the idea is to blend social messages with the mainstream because it is the best way to ensure that the message reaches a good number of people. Even if it does so on a sub-conscious level – and it will, because polio or alcoholism is not the primary focus of our story but deliberately added segments – then half the battle is won.

You had a painful disorder:  trigeminal neuralgia. How badly did it affect your work?

It was a nightmare of a pain, and it lasted for a long while. But right now, I am fine as it has been treated. It affected me severely but what can one do? I am an actor and I cannot give excuses to my fans for under-performing. I cannot ask my producers to understand my problem and run a disclaimer under an action-heavy scene claiming: “The actor suffers a painful disorder so bear with the body-double”. Can we do that? People are paying so that you look your best on-screen despite your personal pains and aches. If you cannot manage that, you have no right to be an actor.

Will you say that today you are less temperamental as a person and more at peace with yourself?

I was never temperamental and never will be temperamental at any point in my life. There are just some things that are wrong that I don’t like. I have and will continue to take stand against things that I feel strongly about. I cannot help it if the media likes to project me in a certain way. I have not changed as a person. I’m the same as you saw me in “Maine Pyaar Kiya” and “Hum Aapke Hai Kaun.” Just that with each passing day, like you, I am growing as a person.

Is there a possibility that we may see you portray a dark and disturbing character, or maybe in an Anurag Kashyap film?

It is very, very unlikely. I don’t have that thing in me at all. Perhaps if I experience it first-hand, I may be able to do it. But I seriously doubt that would happen.

The amount of money that you make per film must be humongous. Do you ever get that feeling that top-stars are overpaid?

Not really. I genuinely believe that we get what we deserve. Look at the kind of business our films are doing. Having said that, I believe I deserve twice the amount of money that I am currently paid. The industry loses out on a lot of revenue due to the tickets sold in black, film-piracy and other issues. In fact, the government also loses out. If all of it were taken care of and accounted for, we would be paid much more. You must remember this: if the prices of the stars are going up, prices of other commodities also are also shooting up.

Sallu-mania, Salmaniacs, Bhaitards: are you aware that there’s an entire sub-culture that religiously follows everything that Salman Khan does? What do all these terms –  and by extension, people – mean to you?

I am very much aware of that kind of craze. To put it simply, it feels very good. I honestly don’t know why or when it happened and how all of this came about. I have been here for almost 25 years now, and the fan following has been grown by leaps and bounds. It is very humbling.

But the actresses you worked with faded away. Take Madhuri Dixit, who you quite successfully romanced on-screen. She’s now a judge on a reality show, while you are busy promoting your next blockbuster. Is there sexism in the Hindi film industry?

Well, not really. Madhuri had a great career. She got married and is doing well for herself. Everybody has their own time. Today, there are a slew of talented and hard-working girls who have come, and the industry has also evolved. The shelf-life of the heroine has improved than what it was at one point in time. Preity Zinta and Rani Mukherji started a few years after me and they are still around. So I don’t feel that the industry has treated anyone badly.

SALMAN KHAN'S RECENT ON 'TIMES NOW'

MIGRANTS AND REFUGEES: A GROWING, NEGLECTED CRISIS

INN News Desk

The plight of about 214 million migrants and refugees around the world is becoming gloomier in the absence of global action, a human rights watchdog warned.

Amnesty International (AI) said in its annual report, which was released in London, that the world is increasingly becoming a “dangerous place” for refugees and migrants.

“Refugees, asylum-seekers and migrants are amongst the most vulnerable people in the world and yet they are being failed by a mix of global inaction on human rights and political opportunism,” Salil Shetty, secretary-general of Amnesty International said.

Research: How Politics Fuelled India-Pakistan Wars?

By Arshad Mahmood (Guest Writer)

This is an attempt to present the historical view of one-sided research of India and Pakistan relationship from inception. The historical evidences may throw some light on the long-pending and unsolved issue of two countries. 

Immanuel Kant - the 18th century German political philosopher from liberal school of thought is known for his achievements in area of ethics and epistemology. Kant was the first thinker to foreshadow the liberal peace theory - in his essay "Perpetual Peace" written in 1795 - claiming that if all nations were democratic, it would end war.

THE SIEGE WITHIN - When political friends become opponents

By M J Akbar

The first pattern of this general election has emerged: the really fierce contest is not between traditional foes, but between yesterday’s friends, particularly where they shared power. The BJP’s sense of betrayal in Orissa is palpable. The more decisive story is within the UPA, where shifting mindsets have ignited a splinter-explosion.

In 2004, the Congress had a single aim: to defeat the BJP. This time, its objectives have doubled. Its parallel purpose in 2009 is to expand its base. Where this expansion is sought at the cost of the BJP there is only minor confusion, created by large-scale intrusions by Mayawati or more modest forays by Mulayam Singh Yadav. The contradiction within the UPA lies in the fact that the Congress space in the Gangetic belt and Maharashtra has been usurped by its allies. The Congress clarified its intentions when it decided that it would not fight the 2009 elections as part of an UPA alliance, but seek partial adjustments as suited its purpose. It has prioritised its opponents from the list of allies.

At the top of the Congress hitlist is the Left, which opposed its heavy strategic tilt towards America. The Congress accepted a humiliating seat-sharing arrangement with Mamata Banerjee in order to maximise the damage to the principal Left citadel. In practical terms, this alliance will not help the Congress very much: it would have retained its six seats even without Trinamool. But the Congress vote could help Mamata Banerjee to poll vault from one seat to 10 or even more.

Curiously, the Congress walked away from similar electoral terms in Bihar, giving a lifeline to the BJP and the NDA. Lalu Yadav and Ram Vilas Paswan offered the Congress what it had, three seats. The Congress could even lose all three seats, because it is contesting alone. It accepted a double jeopardy in Bihar in order to begin the process of revival.

Ditto in Uttar Pradesh. Mulayam was more generous than Lalu. The Congress had nine seats; it was being offered 17. A Mulayam-Congress deal would have pressurised Mayawati, squeezed the BJP and taken Congress from nine seats into double digits. Double jeopardy again: BSP and BJP will increase their tally now. The collapse of the Jharkhand pact with JMM will be even more beneficial to the BJP. Is there an explanation?

The Congress stuck with Sharad Pawar only because it did not want its chief minister to resign before the Assembly elections in autumn. But Sharad Pawar is also dispensable in the large scheme of things; he blocks Congress growth in the second largest state, just as Mulayam and Mayawati choke it in the largest. In Tamil Nadu, Karunanidhi retained his alliance with the Congress only by increasing the latter’s seat share to 14 out of 39.

Congress has calculated that when the tears dry and the numbers are counted, the cost will not amount to loss of power in Delhi. It believes it will still emerge as the largest single party, and then be able to cajole or bully the very allies it has damaged by whipping up a ‘Stop BJP At Any Cost’ campaign.

They would not be politicians if Pawar, the Yadavs and Ram Vilas did not instinctively recognise the dangers of this squeeze. They have responded by squeezing back. Pawar has pre-empted the post-election bullying with a question of his own: if the Congress is so anxious to stop the BJP, why doesn’t the Congress support a Third Front government from outside, or even inside, instead of demanding primacy of power in any coalition? In 2004, he and the others were caught flat-footed. This time they have begun a dance to a tune of their composition. Pawar has made it clear that he considers himself a better future prime minister than Dr Manmohan Singh or Rahul Gandhi.

Prakash Karat, who has no debts to pay the Congress and feels betrayed, is categorical that the Left will not support a Congressled government in 2009. If UPA is the modern coalition in Indian politics, the Marxists are saying that they are all post-modernists now.

Conflicts of regional interest have added a Fourth Front to the Third, but these parties will rearrange themselves after the results. Where conflicts are incompatible, parties like BSP and SP will be in different camps, depending on who has reached where first. Do not imagine that all ‘Front’ parties have closed the backdoor to the NDA. Indian politicians love the freedom of a two-way street, and some of them are dexterous enough to negotiate any roundabout.

But both the walk and the talk will start only on the afternoon of May 16. Professional politicians pay for opinion polls, and then dismiss those they don’t like. This may occasionally reflect an inability to face the unpleasant; but they also know that polls are not necessarily the truth. An opinion poll is what it says it is: an opinion. The fact of the matter is that only facts matter. Till then, ignore the spin, enjoy a rest, but do wake up to vote.

Will India Ever Mount An Operation To Capture Dawood?

By Anas Abbas (Guest Writer)

Ten years ago on a balmy, sunny day in Karachi, my father asked me to accompany him to a great seth’s house. People in Karachi sometimes gather at houses of major industrialists’ to see their impressive sacrificial animals, purchased for Bakra Eid.

I was only too eager to go to one such grand place which turned out to be at a distance of just two kilometres from my house. When we arrived, we found crowds of people gawking at expensive animals. As I took in the sights and sounds, the owner of the house came out, flanked by his guards and kids.

Editor's Byte: Is India Still A 'Great Power'?

The Economist, in two recent lead articles titled "India as a Great Power" and "Can India become a Great Power?", has severely faulted India for its striking lack of a strategic culture. Both articles strongly argue that India's aspirations towards becoming a "Great Power" are undermined by the unwillingness of its politicians and civilian bureaucrats to have anything to do with the idea of "grand strategy". 

The articles caution that with Pakistan in a dangerous internal web of jihadist violence, radicalization of its military and possession of nuclear weapons; China, an ever increasing threat from across the Himalayas and the Indian Ocean, harboring covert plans of arming Pakistan with nuclear weapons, puts India on a tight spot. 

To my mind, strategic culture is just how elites perceive threats and opportunities, and both The Economist authors more or less perceive what that fundamental Indian strategic culture is: they appear just not to like it - and hence the recommendation in one of the articles that India should join Western-backed security alliances in order to realize its Great Power ambitions. 

To be even more precise, what I understand by strategic culture is an ideational milieu by which the members of the national strategic community form their strategic preferences with regard to the use and efficacy of military power in response to the threat environment. Each country has its own way to interpret, analyze and react to external opportunities and threats. 

As a member of the Indian strategic community, let me assure you that we do have a strategic culture where we closely assess the external environment and debate on the efficacy of the use of military power in addressing external threats. That India tends to give priority to dialogue over the use of military power in foreign policy does not mean that it does not have a strategic culture; it just means that the strategic preferences are different from the normal understanding of how Great Powers behave. 

India may lack a plan explicit enough to satisfy these observers ... or complain that its strategy is not what they want - the reality is that India has in fact already shed its non-alignment - but the new alignments are contingent and based on shared interests, and can never be total alignments of the "Cold War" variety. 

What the authors of The Economist articles are more likely saying is not that India lacks a strategic culture, but rather that it lacks a culture of strategic planning ... of identifying desirable future goals, and plotting a series of sequential steps to reach them versus just pursuing an opportunistic policy of what appears preferable in the moment without a clearly defined end in mind. 

This interpretation may have been true in the past, but the authors should be aware of the evolution that is taking place in the Indian strategic community today. 

In the past three years, India's External Affairs Ministry and the Defence Research and Development Organization (DRDO) have sponsored future-oriented strategic assessments in order to understand threats and opportunities, especially in India's immediate neighborhood through studies like Imagining Asia in 2030, the DRDO 2050 project, the India Neighbourhood 2030 project, in order to craft an explicit and compelling national security strategy. I have been a consultant on these projects. 

As to what is Indian strategic culture, there are broadly two major interpretations. One is what I call "hardcore realism" for which the projection of military power beyond India's borders will improve India's international influence and secure its borders vis-a-vis China and Pakistan. 

Realists view the instability in Pakistan, the rising power of China and the unresolved border issue, as serious external threats mitigated by broadcasting efficient and effective military power at the border with Pakistan and China, and projecting Indian naval power in the Indian Ocean. Realists support increased defense spending, which by The Economist's own admission poises India to become the fourth largest military power in the world by 2020. 

The other ideational base of Indian strategic culture is the Nehruvian commitment to use military power only as a last resort, not until the last diplomatic note has been written. 

Nehruvians firmly believe that dialogue rather than military force is the best way to resolve conflicts with either Pakistan or China. They have faith in the ability of international organizations to mitigate international conflict and are wary of security alliances outside of the UN. Nehruvians are against India joining security alliances of any nature that could potentially create conflicts and undermine world peace. Military power projection, for them, is purely an act of self defense as under Article 51 of the UN Charter. Aligning with other states for the purpose of a common broadcasting of military strength is not supported by Nehruvians; hence their commitment to non-alignment and aversion to militarized western security groupings. 

Given the overlap of these two ideational influences on India's strategic culture, a complex structure is thereby superimposed on Indian strategic preferences, influenced by realist aspirations for Great Power status based on military power projection but tempered by Nehruvian ethos of dialogue and international cooperation, with a growing inward looking focus on building India's economy. 

India could move closer to some of the other recommendations made in The Economist articles of what India should do to become a Great Power but on its way it will also disappoint as it will appropriately give preference to tackle internal poverty and development, a greater concern to Indian citizens and politicians, which will be the true springboard for its enduring greatness. 

INDIA-CHINA WAR DELAYED BY TECHNOLOGY

By Mohan Guruswamy (Guest Writer)

The nature of war is directly related to the technology of the times and the resources available. But how we can fight and how long we might fight increasingly depends on the willingness of the world as a whole to allow it. 

War between countries and particularly war between major powers will not be without consequences to the ever increasingly inter-dependent world and hence international pressure to terminate conflicts before they expand and/or spiral out of control is only to be expected, especially when the nations in conflict are armed with nuclear weapons.

Survey: Socio-Economic Profile Of Muslims in Maharashtra

By Vibhuti Patel (Guest Writer)

A socio-economic profi le of Muslims in Maharashtra commissioned by the Maharashtra State Minority Commission indicates dismal conditions on the social, economic and educational fronts as also poor representation in the legislature and the Indian Administrative Service and Indian Police Service cadres.

Muslims have contributed richly to Maharashtra’s multicultural milieu. However, the Rajinder Sachar Committee Report of 2006 pointed out that the condition of Muslims here is such that it needs the special attention of the state’s adminsitration.

Is It Time To Stamp A Date Of Expiry On Aam Aadmi Party?

By M H Ahssan | INN Live

Is it time we stamped an expiry date on the AAP? Admitted, it’s rather uncivilized to bring up the question when the fledging party is still enjoying its honeymoon days - the media are still not done with gushing over its spectacular success, intellectuals of all shades are joining the party across the country and, yes, the masses too are looking impressed with the new kid on the political block. But the question needs to be asked. It is because the future of the party looks hazy after the initial euphoria wears off.

India's diamond trade under fire

By M H Ahssan

A passage through India is giving Africa's blood diamonds a respectable polish. According to reports, blood diamonds are being smuggled into the city of Surat, where they are cut and polished, then sold to respectable firms which go on to easing these illegal stones into the legitimate diamond supply chain.

Surat is the center of the world's diamond cutting and polishing industry. Ninety-two percent of the world's diamonds are crafted here. Located 250 kilometers north of Mumbai, the city earned India US$11 billion in exports last year. According to media reports, a sizeable number of rough diamonds entering Surat for cutting and polishing might in fact be blood diamonds.

Blood diamonds or conflict diamonds are those mined in war-torn African countries such as Liberia, the Ivory Coast, Sierra Leone and the Republic of Congo by warlords and rebels to finance arms purchases and other illegal activities.

Blood diamonds account for a small fraction of the diamond trade. At the height of the problem in the mid-1990s, about 4% of the global diamond trade was blood diamonds, according to the diamond industry. Global Witness, an international non-governmental organization that has drawn attention to human-rights abuse in resource-linked conflicts, puts the figure at 15%.

The role of blood diamonds in funding and prolonging wars and in devastating communities in west and southwest Africa has been immense. An international campaign highlighting this prompted the United Nations to pass a resolution calling for the creation of an international certification scheme to break the link between the illicit trade in rough diamonds and mass human-rights abuses associated with armed conflict.

This put pressure on the international community and the diamond industry to act. The Kimberly Process Certification Scheme was put in place in 2003 to regulate the trade in rough diamonds, that is, to prevent trade in blood diamonds while protecting the legitimate trade in diamonds. It is aimed at assuring buyers of diamonds that their stones have not contributed to bloodshed. It involves monitoring of diamonds at every point of the diamond pipeline, from mining through to retail, to ensure that diamonds from areas that the UN calls "conflict zones" do not slip into the legitimate supply chain.

The diamond industry maintains that the Kimberley process has solved the problem and that less than 1% of the diamonds in the market today are from conflict zones. However, a 2006 UN report drew attention to blood diamonds from rebel-held areas in the Ivory Coast skirting a UN diamond embargo and being smuggled out through neighboring Ghana and Mali.

According to investigative media reports, blood diamonds are smuggled into Surat in fishing boats. These are cut and polished in the diamond bazaars of this town, sold to reputed firms who then export the stones with a certification that they were not imported from conflict areas.

Officials of the Surat Diamond Association, an industry organization which has about 3,000 diamond establishments in Surat as its members, insist that the industry is scrupulously observing international norms and respects the ban on dealing with blood diamonds.

"We are aware of the implications [of dealing in blood diamonds] internationally and we are very careful," insists Umesh Shah of the Mumbai-based Shrenuj and Company, a leading diamond and jewelry manufacturer and exporter.

"Our customers in the US and Europe compel us to follow the processes, and we in turn ensure that the rough diamonds that we get are 100% conflict-free," points out Sohil Kothari, director, Fine Jewelry (India) Pvt Ltd, a leading exporter of diamond studded jewelry.

But a diamond exporter from Surat who spoke on condition of anonymity told Asia Times Online that there might be a handful of diamond merchants who are dealing in conflict diamonds. These are mainly owners of smaller diamond establishments. "The larger establishments are wary of tarnishing their reputation and reliability," he pointed out.

Indian intelligence officials say that blood diamonds will have to be identified before they enter Surat as once a rough diamond is polished it is impossible to trace its place of origin. "If we have to catch blood diamonds it has to be at the very point of their entry, that is, at the airports and seaports," says an official of the Department of Revenue Intelligence (DRI).

DRI officials say that the diamond cutting establishments are under their scanner and that they are keeping an eye on them. But they are wary of acting without adequate evidence, given the impact it will have on the industry. Diamond polishing is a major foreign exchange earner. It consists of about 6,000 small and large diamond cutting and polishing units and employs over 700,000 people.

The officials insist that if evidence is found, they will act because the stain of dealing with blood diamonds will damage the industry's reputation.

A diamond exporter from Mumbai described the allegations against Surat's diamond dealings as "a motivated campaign" by competitors in the international arena. The growth of India's diamond industry has been "phenomenal", he said, and has triggered envy among communities that have traditionally dominated the business, and this might be behind their "disinformation campaign", he said.

Indians account for about 65% of the $26 billion in diamond trade revenues, up from about 25% two decades ago. The share of Jewish businessmen has apparently fallen from 70% to 25% in the same period as Indian businessmen make inroads into the traditional Jewish-dominated hub of Antwerp in Belgium and Tel Aviv.

Indian merchants say that given the fierce competition overseas they are anxious to ensure that their credibility and image remain good; hence they are keen that the "government cracks down on those dealing in blood diamonds, if there are any".