Sharing the fruits of development

The traditional and utopian assumption is that the result of development must be shared with all the stake holders. Now the million dollar question arises, who are the stake holders ? Though it will be distinct and separate topic to discuss debate and arrive on a consensus on who are stake holders. Let’s take an example of state sponsored terror. The state acquires land for a private party under the pretext to foster the industry and drives out the original inhabitants. Thanks to the prevailing Illiteracy. Else the state may have to pay a lot of money to acquire the land because more the awareness to the subjects more the problem to the state. And they protest for their land at times peacefully and sometimes taking up arms for which the state is the only reason. Now in our case we have three stakeholders 1.State 2.the private party 3.original inhabitants/owners. In my opinion the true stake holders are original owners.

In stone age when man survived by hunting animals ie., even before the advent of the agriculture, he shared the gains with his community(not necessarily his own family).But in current case only the fittest survives. The Doctrine of survival of fittest applies. Darwin mentioned this taking in to account the animals of forest or wildlife. We are no beasts. Nehru always justified the suffering of a tribal of this country due to displacement. In political economy Land is an important aspect for business, without which the businesses may not flourish, but we need to know at what cost the development to be fostered. We have bill for this purpose in the anvil which promises a part of the revenue earned from the land to the original inhabitants. Hope this should help.

Irrespective of what type of government is formed in centre, I think there is no scope of change. So it is only the awareness of the people at the bottom could change the situation.

Unipolar World – The reason for Turbulence

The powerless has to obey the powerful; it has been in practice since time immemorial. May be the meaning might have been changed in the current days of being powerful. Those days (I am talking about Stone Age) being powerful means the physical strength to protect one and also the dependents, now it may be money and power. It is good to see that under the garb of democracy powerless have also acquired the bargaining power.

We are living in a world which is segmented and necessarily a multipolar. We have seen the unipolarity, bipolarity and now a new kind of environment. Power segmented in one area is surely a concern for all of us. In a world of competing interests if a country wants to boast itself it has to demonstrate its ability by which others can understand that it is really a super power. One important indicator is how strong and effective is its war machine, of course this is only possible if some one is economically strong.

I really don’t know if I can say the super power should take a fatherly role in guiding the underdeveloped or the thirldworld counties. And see what happens if more than one party competes for that role-super power. We know what happened between USSR and USA and what is happening with India and China. Ultimately for any one who is heading a nation state the interests of his own people are paramount. But once the interests are addressed what’s next?

The current fragmented state of this political world is a result of power struggle between the European rivals. Though their platform to fight was initially Europe later it spread out. Though the Imperial coterie ruled this world for many years what is that they have achieved, at last they have become victims of economic slump. It is asserted that to maintain the nuclear weapons in a ready state the super power spends millions of dollars daily.

The balance of power is perpetual and a never ending game. America thought by neutralizing the USSR it won the race and never expected that it again has to compete with China and of course India. Surely it cannot bomb china and India then claim the supremacy over the world. So Unipolarity is slowly becoming a thing of past. Arms race, wars, terrorism, uneven development, illiteracy, poverty, hunger all are result of Unipolar world.

If one country has to remain as a global rowdy (super power) it has to either grow or suppress others growth. And doing the later seems to be the most opted solution which creates divide. I aint no expert on United Nations but still agree with the majority which says there is no true representation in that body. It is a good news that in 21^st century we are seeing new power centers getting created, suddenly multi polarity seems to be all the more possible.

Lets abolish the UN and split (based on commonalities) the world on different zones and each zone would have an UN like institution and no zone would interfere with other except for consulting or co-ordination, then we don’t have to seek UN resolution to bomb some one. The only problem is how to deal with personal tyrannies. Otherwise in our generation I am sure that we all will experience the life in a multipolar world.

The Spark of Revolution

Revolution has really become a buzz word. When we utter this “R” word then our grey cells are forced to think about Karl Marx or French revolution. The source of current wave of upheaval in the Arab landscape seems to be a road side vendor. All this started when his vegetable cart was confiscated by the police and the reason cited is he did not have a license to run that business in Tunisia. This deprived him from his only source of income and subsequent persecution by the officialdom made him to self immolate. In a country where most of the people are languishing, the top brass stays unfazed and spends time in the most luxurious resorts. They ensured fruits of all business contracts or the MOU’s signed with other countries reached their kith and kin. seems to be worst of tyrannies. There were times it was thought that revolution is only a thing of the nascent days of industrial revolution or the early half of 20^th century, but what we see here is truly an example of dialectism what Karl Marx envisaged, may be a century ago. Most experts say that this is no one’s revolution but the one of a common man, meaning which no body did spearhead this, but the people on their own.  You name any dictator (some may under the garb of presidency) in the Maghreb or in the African continent most of them are perfect realists in its true Hobbesian sense. There will be genocides for money or power and also to establish the supremacy of the two great religions (Islam and Christianity) as is case of Sudan. Though the Tunisians were successful in showing the door to the malevolent dictator who ruled for decades, we need to see whether the other brothers of them would be successful from relieving themselves from the clutches of their arrogant dictators or aristocrats or monarchs.

As I right this already Egypt was successful in its revolution and many country’s leaders in Maghreb are in deep trouble, the case in point is Qadhaffi’s Libya.

The champions of democracy USA and select few European countries are known for their selective application of International principles and laws would definitely make sure that their permanent interests are not affected in the midst as Israel worried on Egypt’s liberation from Mubarak. The indigenous right wing tried to claim their share in the victory as Muslim Brotherhood did in Egypt by they were largely ignored. The revolution out of sheer frustration. Though it is broadly agreed that the law is the supreme command of a sovereign as per Austin, when leaders don’t respond and does not understand the needs of the populace this is deemed to happen. I know we cannot forget Charles Julius Guiteau who assassinated President James Garfield due to the frustration rose from the unemployment in the 19^th century in USA. As USA is a liberal  democrat they could meet the challenge through passing legislation there by abolishing the patronage system in the federal services. But the Arab world is different. Highly riddled by the religious fanatics, mass unemployment, and illiteracy are some of the problems to quote. 

Thanks to the liquid gold other wise I cant imagine living in these deserts. The realists who took the reigns of the power are not reasonable at all and continue to be unreasonable. Next to Tunisia and Egypt we have Jordan, Syria, Bahrain, Qatar and don’t forget Libya is waiting to be liberated. All this inspires the mortals of suppressed civilizations/societies to demand better lives and social justice and fundamental rights from their masters. Let this be in the extreme east or Africa or Maghreb.

 Can’t we have a revolution in India to relieve ourselves from the yoke of kleptocracy?

Killer Seas - On Indian Fishermen Killing

Recently I have watched the movie Hostel in which a bunch of sick people kill their fellow human beings to relieve from stress or as an act of hobby (This is a must watch movie). Killing Tamil fishermen by srilankan navy (as it is alleged) is an act similar to the sick people in Hostel movie. When we talk about genocides of our time we only think about Hitler’s massacre. Being right wing is not wrong, the Sinhalese might have their own reasons why they want to consider Tamils as sub-humans but we are living in a world which is a liberal democrat and we are expected to honor human rights. The British (for that matter even missionaries) played their card by playing the divisive politics to further their own agenda. Between Sinhalese and Tamils we have a strong genetic link as we are from the same part of sub-continent. There is a theory which confirms that Sinhalese only inhabitated Ceylon only 100 years before the Tamils have set their foot so tamils are not aliens in srilanka.Month on Month we have a significant number of people getting killed by the srilankan navy as a result governments(centre and state) in India cries foul and for some time there is a truce and again the killing resumes.

Historically Indian government’s response was really pathetic on instances of this kind. Jayalalitha former CM of TN commented that citizens of such a mighty country like India which has a powerful military are killed by a tiny country like Srilanka is really unacceptable and in these circumstances if the PM does not know what to do he should quit. Her demand is convincing. This time there seems to be sudden interest may be because it is an election time in TN and the centre wants to show that they are defending their country men by sending the foreign secretary to Colombo and taking few series of measures which would project that GOI (government of India) is serious. But no body knows about results of the actions and steps which were taken already when similar incidents happened in the past. It is a matter of envy to any sovereign country when China showed its strong protest with Japan as its citizen was arrested on Diaoyu Island issue. China went on to suspend the export of rare earth. Not surprisingly Srilanka denies its Navy’s involvement in the killing of Indian fishermen and says it has ordered for the enquiry and we hope the report is out before the state elections in TN or at least after the elections. In India especially in TN this is mostly seen as an election issue, which is a black spot on the Indian democracy. When a fisherman of srilankan origin runs in to Indian waters we never kill them but follow the internationally acceptable legal/diplomatic process like deporting to their home land and/or trying them in a court of law which never happens in Srilanka.

India through its mighty soft power should compel this tiny nation to follow these acceptable procedures instead of exhibiting its behavior which is akin to racism. Politicians in TN assert that giving away the Katchatheevu in Palk Strait is an act of foolishness and reclaiming this territory is one great step towards solving the problem of fishermen killing. All rhetoric will sound like babble unless concrete steps are taken to solve this problem.

We can constitute a joint force of both the navies and monitor the troubled waters and identify the root causes. Also appoint a tribunal to try these cases of excursions as this will instill confidence especially to the Indian populace. Above all the governments of centre and state must pursue Srilanka to take effective steps to end this barbarian act of killing people of another sovereign simply because they have unknowingly crossed the international maritime border while fishing.

Religious Conversions – The Real Purpose

The process of conversions could be traced back to time of Jesus Christ when he told his apostles to make disciples in all nations (Matthew 28:19-20). Jesus definitely would not have told some one to kill people if a mortal is resisted to convert (as in case of massacres in Cuba when it was colonized by Spaniards, where thousands of tribals were killed by the army sent by church).It has been in practice for many missionaries who decided to employ what ever means they want to convert people to one religion.

In Indian context right from the time of Muslim invaders forcible conversion was the order of time and later came the forcible conversions to Christianity. In his words of Sri Sathya Sai Baba (India’s spiritual leader) “I have not come to create another new religion, but to make a Muslim a better muslim,a Christian to a better Christian and a Hindu to a better Hindu”. Converting from bad to good and better character is important than converting to a new religion. We belong to a land where polytheism is a way of life. The unstable mind must be changed to stable instead of converting the religions. We know Muslim conversions were ruthless in the early days. We have examples like Nithiyanandan, and pedophiles in Europe. They are Hindus and Christians respectively then why they have committed this shameful act understandably with no remorse, simply because they are not better Hindus or better Christians. Now the matter is not with religion but with their character and the state of mind. If a human being cannot believes himself but a religion surely he is degenerating. The Indian subcontinent is predominantly a Hindu Rashtra. Who ever lives beyond the banks of Sindhu River are called Hindus (according to a theory). It is surely against the universal principles if outsiders are allowed to forcibly (or through any other means) convert the residual population to some other religion. The erstwhile church which ruled the whole Europe wanted to spread the Christianity for many reasons, one prominent reason is the tithe. One of the main reasons for the eruption of French revolution is the religion, when the common man had no bread to eat on one end and on the other church was extracting the tithe from the beleaguered population. It is only when the nation states were created in Europe the influence of church actually waned. Conversions made countries to secede (Sudan a case in point). We need to retrospect how poor Africans were forced to embrace Christianity. There are many examples to quote. Nigeria and Sudan is a case in point. While the polytheistic religion asserts that there are multiple ways of reaching god (i.e., attaining the salvation) but the religions with monotheistic inclinations propagates the contrary and that is the reason why we have crusaders and Jihadists. 

We may need more revolutions like the one happened in France(French revolution) in the 19^th century to defend the inherent culture and tradition from the alien and invading forces (I am talking about people who misunderstood Jesus and the great prophet).In regional sense few  state governments in India created laws which declares forcible religious conversions as an offensive act. But stealth of money power is terrifying. A tribal living in a remote village in Orissa does not really bother about any religion; he might be interested to convert if there is an assurance of material returns a chance which missionaries would not want to miss. And these hapless beings think that they could come out of the poverty yoke. A religion means a civilization and also a culture. It is only the power of culture which gave a stiff resistance to British occupation forces as they were stymied with this unprecedented strength which they have never come across in other continents. Imagine a hypothetical situation a Hindu organization (missionary) as invincible as a missionary of any other religion sent to Europe to convert people to Hindu religion, the European dwellers would definitely be unyielding and I think we in this sub-continent deserve to show the reaction to those who want to convert religions. The aliens and the invaders were able to find a place in this vast land only because our ancestors were truly non- xenophobic as in Persia or Maghreb for example. After all we live in a secular, democratic, republic set up and religious freedom is enshrined in our constitution, but forcible conversion is against this grain of the constitution. I think we should include a clause in the ninth schedule of the constitution or in IPC that forcible conversion is an act equal to disturbing the harmony of the society.

Telangana - A Dream Unfulfilled

The word Telangana still remains a buzz word in public discourse from the time centre announced that it wants to initiate the process which will culminate in creating a new state Telangana. The announcement was the reaction to the hunger strike carried out by the relatively powerful force TRS (Telangana Rashtria Samithi).It is true that we have digested exhaustive rhetoric for and against carving out Telangana from the existing state. We have to consider many after effects and also the effects if the Telangana is not carved out. Many aspects demand due consideration before we pass our judgments. It’s a common sense that we start our discussion from state re-organization commission. It is a known fact that our government is adept in creating committee’s and commissions. For our founding fathers it was an easy task to divide this subcontinent in to different states based on the linguistic lines which seems to be an obvious option. Our collective intelligence is evolved to a stage currently where we are demanding to form new states based on the development pattern and other social indices, truly we are improving.

The persecution of the Telangana people is not new but started from the time it came under Delhi sultanate rule in 14th century. We know that the ruler’s intention was never the welfare of people,any ways that is a thing of past now we are in the so called liberal democratic set up and listening to every one is important.40 percent of Andhra’s population lives in this region and significant number of this flock is understandably downtrodden. We have few theories which confirms that the primary reason of this area becoming a hot bed for naxalism is due to the indifference shown towards them by the elite ( political parties who ruled).Telangana contributes to the 70 % of the revenue of the state but relatively many social indices are alarmingly low.

Are there any risks?

Ideally there are no risks in carving out a new state but one which is water (But this should not become the reason for not carving out Telangana). In British parlance divide and conquer was/is an effective tool to govern people as long as there is a reasonable justification. Water disputes are well known between different Indian states – the most renown is apparently Cauvery river issue between Tamil nadu and Karnataka. We don’t seem to have lasting solution but it only helped different parties to score some political points at the time of elections. Within the state of Andhra Pradesh, 68.5% of the catchment area of the Krishna River and 69% of the catchment area of the Godavari River are in the Telangana region. Creating Telangana will result to be an act equal to sowing ambivalence and this will lead to vicious cycle of water war between people of the same state (India).Irrespective of whether the water tribunals which are existing for the purpose of arbitration in disputes between states pass reasonable judgments, the regional parties don’t waste time in terming them as judicial apathy possibly to appease the regionalists. One near example is recent award of KWDT-2 (Krishna Water Dispute Tribunal -2) and the parties involved are maharastra, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh. Right wing rhetoric says that behind the demand of a new state there is a hidden agenda of Evangelical Army (of course an allegation).When the recent spell of violence erupted after the denial of centre to initiate the resolution in the state and in the centre many untoward incidents occurred. One of them was the Telanganites demanded that residents of coastal Andhra and Rayalaseema must go from Telangana, this is uncalled for. After all the demand is to create a new state and we should not see this as if we are carving out Pakistan from India.

Should we create another one?

Why not another state, lets try and what is wrong in doing that. We split the whole Assam, we did it in Bihar, MadhyaPradesh.The only difference between the six point formula of 1973 which was an output of political settlement and the recent Sri Krishna commission’s report is clear, while the former did not make an explicit mention of creating a new state but the latter does. The bone of contention seems to be who gets Hyderabad. The Telangana proponents assert that they would settle for nothing less than a Telangana state with Hyderabad as capital. Statements like keeping Andhra united would sound hollow with out a strong rationale. The People of Andhra are capable of picking up another capital of their own. Expecting the birth of yet another new baby (Telangana) from mother India. We are looking for bold decisions either from Janpath or Race Course road as we know they are the epicenters of power.

After all the government is not facing the Nizam’s resistance of joining Indian union but Telanganites who want a separate state.