Azadi Ka Amrut Mahotsav

 

Teacher Education under Attack

According to the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE), there are 11880 recognized Teacher Education Institutions (TEIs) in India. NCTE is the nodal agency for recognizing, regulating and monitoring teacher education. It was constituted by an act of Parliament. There are several courses ranging from Diploma in Teacher Education (D.T.Ed) to Bachelor of Education (B.Ed) to Master of Education (M.Ed) to Master of Philosophy in Education (M.Phil) to Doctor of Philosophy in Education (Ph.D) under the ambit of NCTE. Diploma to Doctoral degree in Physical Education are also offered by NCTE recognized TEIs.  There are educational courses for special children offered by the NCTE. Currently there are over 10 lakh students enrolled in several courses offered by the NCTE recognized TEIs in the country.

NCTE is headquartered in New Delhi and its regional centres are in Jaipur, Bhopal, Bhubaneswar and Bengaluru. In a sudden stroke of pen, NCTE has made the regional centres null and void. From now on, the entire teacher education of India will be governed from the national headquarters. In the age of decentralized governance, NCTE opts for totally centralized governance. What an anti-development attitude of NCTE? There are reasons for making regional centres redundant. Corruption creeping to the grass root governance of NCTE regional centres has compelled the judiciary to direct the NCTE to clean up the system. Taking advantage of the Court directions, NCTE has completely centralized its job.

First of all, NCTE must introspect, why it created regional centres? Is it possible to monitor such a huge number of TEIs from the national capital? If corruption is the core issue then the NCTE headquarter must crack down corrupt elements in its regional centres through flying squads, anti-corruption bureaus and vigilance departments. It is popularly said now, instead of decentralized corruption now there will be a centralized corruption. If government and judiciary are keen on eliminating corruption then nobody can stop it. But the mere lip service on removal of corruption won’t remove corruption in the country especially in the NCTE and TEIs.

Apart from neutralizing regional centres, NCTE has outsourced its work to a private agency called Quality Council of India (QCI) for inspection and ranking TEIs. This will pay way for commercializing teacher education further. Earlier QCI was given the task of monitoring TEI websites for an annual payment of Rs.3000/- Even TEIs don’t spend this amount to create their websites. Just to monitor TEI websites, QCI was paid Rs.3000 by nearly 10000 TEIs. Why to collect Rs.3 crores for monitoring websites?

By pressurizing TEIs to either follow the overnight diktats or getting it shut down, NCTE has been killing the teacher education system very fast. After emboldened by this blackmailing technique, now NCTE has devised devastating rules.

One, TEIs should share the interests from the fixed deposit amount of Rs.15 lakhs with the NCTE. The fixed deposit amount belongs to the TEIs which has been put in the joint account with NCTE, so that the amount is not withdrawn abruptly. This safe route has been taken advantage by the NCTE and threatening to demand its cut from the interest income of fixed deposits of NCTE.

Two, NCTE has made QCI as the inspecting agency. A private agency with no academic expertise to check the quality of teacher education has been given this extraordinary work is really appalling. The inspection fee for each TEI is Rs.1.5 lakh. With nearly 12000 TEIs in the country the inspection fee alone will come Rs.200 crore per annum. What is the government intend to do? By commercializing the teacher education, government is sending wrong signals for the future growth of the country.

India’s steady progress is due to the education sector. Nobody should forget that our difficult education system has produced some wonderful minds for the world. Despite several bottlenecks, Indian education has been providing its service. If the Government wants to make it to the international standards it should help the private sector to offer high quality education at lower costs. A commercialized education setup will completely ruin the country. All the advantages India accumulated all these years with the education will vanish in the air in no time. NCTE must put down its habit of washing away its responsibility and handing over a major area of national development – teacher education to a private enterprise. It is now or never! 

Beware of PRICS and Act Immediately on it

Russia was an unflinching ally of India for nearly seven decades. When the United States of America did not pay heed to India’s wish to be its partner in the early fifties, Russia invited India to be its friend. This friendship continues for a very long time. It seems that there is an imminent threat to the long standing Indo Russian relationship. This threat comes from Russia’s feeling that India is abandoning it for the sake of United States of America.

In the game for global supremacy, India has been the worst victim. In the fifties, India was forced to join the Soviet Union side although it maintained non-alignment in paper. With the exit of Soviet Union and the presence of an influential Indian population in the USA, tables are turning. India wants to gain the friendship of USA once again and the response has been very positive and warmth.

There is a growing strength of support in USA in favour of India for many reasons. Not only the dominant Indian community and their success is a push factor but also the patronage to terrorists given by Pakistan. It was understood clandestinely that Pakistan is behind several anti-American terrorist activities. Americans understood the double game of Pakistanis. The discovery of Osama bin Laden, the mastermind of anti-Americanism in Abbotabad in Pakistan and his eventual elimination in 2011 made crystal clear to the world what Pakistan has been doing for ages.

On the one side, Pakistan is drawing heavy amount of money from USA to develop their economy, military and society and on the other side, Pakistan is sheltering anti-Americans on its soil. Not only sheltering them but also aiding and abetting anti-American and anti-Indian terrorists. This common victimhood naturally brought America and India together. The growing voice against Pakistan’s indirect patronage to anti-American terrorist group has finally paid dividends. The government of USA has cut down the civilian and military aid to Pakistan.  From $3.1 billion in 2011 to $1 billion dollars in 2016. 

American attitude and aid to Pakistan is changing drastically. Its approach towards India is also changing. Pakistan is facing negative actions while India is facing positive response from the USA. It seems that the bond between India and USA is getting stronger and stronger every day. This has created nervousness among many. Notably Russia, China and Pakistan.  

Can India ignore Russia for the sake of strategic partnership with USA? There is a little possibility for India to be friends with all. The reason is global supremacy requires two sides to show their dominance. In this game of global dominance muscle flexing, two sides gather members to their teams. India was forced to be on the Soviet side till the end of Cold War. Naturally this has forced America to accept Pakistan as its ally. After the end of Cold War and Pakistan’s blatant anti-Americanism, team members of the global game are reshuffled.

Although, the Cold War ended in perception after the fall of Soviet Union in the late nineties, reality of it continues in other forms. Russia is trying its best to regain the lost slot occupied by the Soviet Union. China is attempting to barge in. Already America is in the game although its status has come down heavily after the collapse of Twin Towers in 2001, lost economic clout and social disruptions.

Now there is a possibility of Pakistan, Russia, Israel, China and Saudi Arabia (PRICS) coalition. The reason is simple suspicion of one long term friend on the other long term friend fearing the long term friend is moving towards enemy. “Friendship 2016” between Russia and Pakistan is the most worrisome development. The saddest part of this story is the drill was to be in the Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (PoK). Given the long history of Pakistan’s negative credentials, Russia may not trust Pakistan so easily. But the faster developments in the Indo-USA relations are pressurizing Russians to act fast.

Russia feels that its long term friend India is moving towards USA. Israel is fearing that its long term friend USA is moving towards its arch rival Iran. The Israelis did not like Americans signing nuclear pact with the Iranians. There is a less possibility of Israel joining the coalition with Pakistan and Saudi Arabia because of the strong Islamic connections and their patronage to Palestine. But in the race for global supremacy nothing can be ruled out.  Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and China are already long-term friends.

India tops in supplying doctors to West LU

BNA KABLY,TNN | Sep 23, 2015, 10.55 PM IST

173

comments

6
inShare

Share More

A

A

Number of migrant doctors and nurses working in OECD countries has risen 60% over the past ten years.

 India continues to retain its position as the world's top supplier of expatriate doctors to 34 member countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), followed by China. Most new immigrants to OECD countries—taking migration statistics in totality—though, originated from China, with India occupying the fourth slot.

According to OECD's recent report on International Migration Outlook (2015), as many as 86,680 Indian expatriate doctors (statistics relate to 2010-11) worked in OECD countries, which include the US, EU countries and Switzerland, to name a few. The number of expatriate Indian doctors jumped from 56,000 in 2000-01 to nearly 87,000 in 2010-11, but the corresponding expatriation rates have risen only by one-half of a percentage point to 8.6%. The US employs 60% of the expatriate Indian doctors, with the UK being the second leading employer. China, with 26,583 expatriate doctors in 2010-11 occupied the second slot.

Philippines provided the most nurses—around 2.21 lakh—compared with India at 70,471. The number of expat nurses from India, though, has grown over the past ten years, which has seen India move to the second spot in 2010-11 from its sixth position earlier. Expat nurses from India are found primarily in the US (42%), the UK (28%) and Australia (9%).

In total, the number of migrant doctors and nurses working in OECD countries has risen 60% over the past ten years. Expat doctors and nurses constituted 23% and 14% of healthcare professionals in OECD countries.

"The trend mirrors the general increase in immigration to OECD countries, particularly that of skilled workers," states the report. The International Migration Outlook (2015) study points out that a number of OECD countries have fundamentally revised their migration legislation in the past few years. Most changes tend towards restriction. While skilled workers are still wanted, countries are picking them more selectively. Investors and entrepreneurs are sought after, but are increasingly scrutinized.

Several countries have cast a greater onus on the potential employer to ensure that only those expats with the right skills are granted employment—advertising for local employees, payment of a threshold salary for expat employees (to ensure that lower salaries don't become the sole ground for hiring expats) are measures adopted by various countries, especially the European Union (EU) countries.



The total foreign-born population in OECD countries stood at 11.7 crore people in 2013—3.5 crore more than in 2000. Preliminary 2014 data suggests that permanent migration flows to OECD countries reached 4.3 lakh—a 6% increase compared to 2013. In addition, most categories of temporary migration increased too.

Most new immigrants to OECD countries originated from China; it accounted for around one in ten migrants in 2013. Romania and Poland rank second and third with respectively 5.5% and 5.3% of overall inflows to OECD countries. This is largely attributed to intra-EU mobility.

Comparatively, India appeared in fourth position only 4.4% of immigrants to OECD countries were from India. (See graphic).

A country-wise analysis of the statistics drawn from this report shows that the US, Australia, Canada, the UK and Germany were favoured destinations for Indian migrants. In terms of absolute numbers, the largest number of migrants from India are to the US (68,500 in 2013). However, if one compares a period over 10 years, Australia has seen a significant percentage rise. (See graphic).

OECD countries have also seen an increase in the number of foreign students. In 2012, there were nearly 34 lakh foreign students in OECD countries—a slight rise of 3% compared with the previous year. Most international students in the area of higher education originated from Asia. China accounted for 22%, followed by 6% from India and 4% from Korea.

International students account for an average of 8% of the OECD tertiary-level student population. In Australia, the UK, Switzerland, New Zealand and Austria, one student in six at the university level is from abroad. In the US, though, where they are more numerous than anywhere else, they constitute barely a 3.5% share of university-level students
.

Menu of India for Barack Obama

American President Barack Obama will be landing in New Delhi in next few hours. This is a historic visit because for the first time in the history of American history, its President will be staying outdoor out of the American soil for more than two hours. It is also significant for the new bilateral trade, military, scientific and human development co-operation between the two nations. 

Although this trip of Obama is much hyped one needs to explore in deep and detail to describe the future relations between the two vital democracies of the world. Many analysts and self styled foreign policy experts may offer wide range of menu for the decision makers. But the following can be considered for the forward movement of India and USA.

1. Work out a genuine model of bilateral co-operation

2. Keep national and global interests in mind 

3. Stop issuing threats of kicking out Indian immigrants from USA

4. Ensure the ecological safety in framing development policies

5. Stop spying Indian government and citizens

6. Exchange the best of human resources

7. Help India to grow for the universal development

8. Agree to end terrorism

9. Rein in Pakistan to weed out terrorists from its soil. Take India along in this mission

10. Give the best of everything and take the best of India

Krishna Srivatsa writes in The Times of India on 23 January 2015

What happens when the world’s biggest democracy and the world’s most powerful democracy come together? Is the resultant embrace genuine bonhomie or the squeeze of death? As President Obama touches down on India there are several things Prime Minister Modi can ask for, and better still hope to get at least some of.

India’s overall strategy vis-a-vis the United States must change a little. India needs to get out of its British roots, where we believe if something is given to one country or one group, then another country or group becomes automatically eligible for it. The US instead is a tale of Washington’s fabled ‘K Street’, home to all the major lobbyists and advocacy groups of America whose complex interplay determines the final vector of forces.

Thus India needs to step up to the table and articulate what it wants, for that’s the way the US system responds. A potent example of that is how over the years Nasscom has engaged powerful lobbying firms to liaise with the US administration on visas and other issues, with reasonably good success till the recent immigration problems cropped up.

For business visitors from India, immigration queues in American airports are often a nightmare. The US has offered advance immigration facilities in Abu Dhabi and it would be convenient if the same can be extended to Mumbai and Bangalore — helping frequent flyers from the corporate and especially IT sectors a great deal. The US offered it to other countries such as Ireland in the past and India can easily seek and secure this benefit.

That apart establishment of a US consulate in Bangalore, India’s Silicon Valley, will be a good signal to an industry which sends thousands to the US every year.

Second, recent research by the Peterson Institute of International Economics argues that the economic value of Indian migrants in America is close to $50 billion per annum, significantly higher compared to US imports of services of $19 billion and goods of $41 billion. To leverage the complete value of Indian immigrants in America the proposed ‘totalisation agreement’ — which will essentially help those who spend their working lives across the two countries by protecting their benefits and removing legal obstacles from receiving them in another country — needs to be fast tracked.

Third, US goods and services trade with India touched $100 billion in 2013-14 with India being America’s 18th largest goods export market and 10th largest goods import market. Whereas the US is India’s second largest export market after EU. In general, the US has been less open than is believed and needs to liberalise its trade regime more.

Government of India statistics show that between 2000-13, US equity inflows were just 6% of $314,902 million total FDI inflow into India. While there is talk of bilateral investment and trade treaties what must be borne in mind is, if we go ahead, the US will almost certainly ask for opening up FDI in multi-brand retail (which India should agree to, although this comes with serious political implications), tougher environment and labour standards (which it would be ill-advised to agree to), elimination of various tariffs on consumer goods, stronger enforcement of intellectual property rights, foreign ownership of retail banks/professional services firms and so on.

India might not be ready to do all these just yet, perhaps these are still a few years away. It would be too premature to expect India to sign the kind of carbon emissions capping treaty that the US signed with China last year (though it might be realistic to expect India to support the proposed climate change deal, which the US has been pushing).

In which case, the moot question is should we be discussing new trade or investment treaties at all?

Fourth, Obama and Kerry have raised the ante significantly with their anti-offshoring rhetoric. Investment is as much a matter of sentiment as it is of economic fundamentals. Obama and Kerry can’t keep saying ‘We are getting Bangalore-d’ if US companies are to deepen economic ties with India. If Obama finds it difficult to approve of offshoring to India he should at least remain silent, instead of making it the new four-letter word in Indo-US economic relations.

The logic of markets should be allowed to dictate the decisions of individual US companies vis-a-vis India, not political or other artificial quotas buttressed by negative sentiment emanating out of America’s highest offices.

The two countries should also break the old impasse over Indian laws that makes equipment suppliers liable for accidents at nuclear plants. Globally the burden is usually on plant operators; the absence of this in India has negatively impacted US companies from entering the nuclear power sector despite landmark civil nuclear agreements signed a decade ago.

India and the US have been dating each other for some time now, despite irritants and alternate suitors. Two decades after economic reforms, India has now firmly put away its leanings towards Russia and the erstwhile socialist bloc. The time is ripe for a durable relationship between India and the US. Both sides need each other more than before. This embrace can’t be fatal but has to be friendly, for each side to benefit the other.

Chinese Threats and India's Bits

India's  tackling of the Chinese threats are in tits and bits. Like handling the Chinese fishing nets in Cochin, strategy spin masters of our national security are totally callous. From Sri Lanka to Somalia, from Pakistan to Peru, Chinese are stitching an international network against India. They know well that India is a big challenger to Chinese supremacy in the coming days. 

For India it is not enough knowing what the Chinese are up against it. But checkmating their moves and eliminating the collaborations in the early stage will steady India's growth.

If India fails to wake up to the growing Chinese interests around the world, it will have to pay heavily in the future. This is a very delicate issue to be managed. Pushing overt action against the Chinese and its new friends will permanently damage India's growth. For instance, over drive of relationship with USA will put India against Russia - the longest ally. Quickly they will turn to China. Imagine the situation where Russia, North Korea, Iran, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Maldives, Gulf countries, African nations in the Chinese kitty!

Time for real strategies and realisation of those strategies in quick time.

Nayan Chanda writes in The Times of India.

The Silk Road, a romantic name that evokes images of camel caravans laden with luxuries wending their way through picturesque mountains and steppes, is back in the news. In its latest avatar, the Silk Road is a Chinese strategic initiative comprising an infrastructure bank and a slew of road, high-speed rail, pipelines, ports and fibre-optic cables projects. Recently unveiled by President Xi Jinping, its ambition is to tie Central Asia and Europe with the Silk Road Economic Belt and expand its trade and strategic reach in the South China Sea and Indian Ocean all the way to East Africa with the help of Maritime Silk Road.

If the Chinese vision is realised it could transform the country’s relationship with its neighbours giving it an unassailable position in all of Asia including the Indian Ocean. Surprisingly India has signed up to be a co-founder of the infrastructure bank to fund the project. Before jumping on the ‘New’ Silk Road caravan, India would do well to examine where it is headed.

Despite the comfortingly familiar old name, what China is seeking to achieve with its 21st century version bears no resemblance to the historic connector. Some two millennia ago, road networks were used by foreign traders to buy items like silk, precious stones and sell Buddhist icons and paraphernalia to China. A subsequent seaborne trade route (dubbed the ‘Maritime Silk Road’) came to be the dominant connection between southern China and the Mediterranean, with a network of Southeast Asian and Indian ports in between.

Remarkably, while China supplied the goods, it was Central Asian traders, as well as Arabs, Persians, Indians and Malays, who played the central role in the old Silk Road. In the New Silk Road of Xi Jinping’s imagination, China will not only sell its domestically produced cornucopia but will also create pathways to move goods and even manufacture them in partner countries. Instead of the world coming to China as in the past, China will now be going out to the world, building naval and resupply facilities along the ocean route. Although strategic aspect of the proactive policy is never mentioned Chinese scholars in Beijing privately explained that the New Silk Road is China’s response to what it views as US-led encirclement effort through its ‘Asia pivot’ and Trans-Pacific Partnership project.

The proposed $40 billion Silk Road Fund will finance construction of railroads, pipelines and roadways that will link China with three continents over land and sea. A proposed canal across the Isthmus of Kra in Thailand could provide a faster link between South China Sea and Indian Ocean. A state-owned Chinese company is building a deep-water container port and industrial park in Malaysia. China has already taken over from India a $500-million airport development in Maldives, considered an integral part of the Maritime Silk Road. President Xi recently inaugurated one of the most ambitious of China’s recent projects — $1.4 billion Colombo port city.

Economic factors behind China’s plans for ambitious opening to the world are easy to understand. With its greying population making labour expensive and adding to social welfare costs, and with lacklustre demand from western markets, China’s economic growth has plateaued. Closer integration with regional neighbours would dramatically expand the mainland’s potential market for goods and services. Meanwhile, relocating China’s old, polluting and labour-intensive industries to neighbouring countries would allow it to invest its mounting dollar reserves in alternative energies and meet its emissions reduction targets.

Unmentioned in the Silk Road projects, but seemingly an integral part of the outward push, is setting up facilities for China’s power projection: a reported special transmission centre in southern Balochistan to communicate with submerged submarines; an aircraft maintenance facility near Chinese-aided Hambantota port in Sri Lanka. The recent appearance of Chinese submarines in Sri Lanka gave a peek into the steel that lies under the so-called Maritime Silk Road.

While promoting the New Silk Road China has not said what the rules of the road it envisages are. Given China’s refusal to accept the UN Convention on Law of the Sea to define its territorial claims in South China Sea, the maritime passages would likely be governed by Chinese law. One can expect the Chinese navy to take over responsibility for protecting the new maritime Silk Road, as the Mongol army did for the Central Asian Silk Road in the 14th century. China’s latest project is unlikely to be as smooth as its name might suggest.

Mysterious India

On the Republic Day, every Indian vows to builds his or her motherland firmly and fastly. While looking for ways and means for the mission, the most important agenda is to find out the current maladies. Unfortunately the maladies are many and the route for implementation is impossible. One step up and ten steps down is the day to day Indian move. It is not a country where everything is horrible and great. Half problematic and half promising nation. When can India minimises its minus and maximises its plus?

Shiv Viswanathan writes in The Deccan Chronicle on 26 January 2011

India is a strange country. We seem to be quarrelling all the time. We identify ourselves by the dislike we feel for other or smugness with which we say “we are not them”. Our identity is composed of divisions, of the memories of Partition, of linguistic re-ordering, of the populism of small states. Our national game is neither hockey nor cricket but factionalism. It adds to the perpetual instability of our system. Yet, long-range watchers studying this chaos wonder if our dividedness hides the logic of a different order. Is there a gene that prevents us from falling apart even as we quarrel with each other? What is the secret of unity which works beyond the magic of even Fevicol advertisements?

To say India is tied by identity and consensus would be naïve. Our differences are blatant. Yet in a way we are tied by our differences. Oddly, it is the logic of our difference that keeps us together. India is a country with the courage of its confusions.

Difference allows for varieties of behaviour. It allows for an interaction in the public domain but restricts communal ties or familial interaction. It is a different kind of wisdom, a different grammar.

We are a country of segmentary minds. Each segment is opposed to the other segment and the two segments confront together a third entity at a higher level. Checks and balances operate according to levels. Nukkad can fight nukkad but combine at a different level. Violence gets contained at the next level of unity. Beyond segmentariness, there is syncretism. Here difference is acknowledged and differences combine to reflect opposites. Sufism could combine Hindu/Muslim tenors, Sikhism, Hindu/Islam. Syrian Christianity uses the Hindu to sustain the Christian core. There is a transference taking place over time, where sharing is always possible over difference. It is almost as if taboos created around difference allow for playful reciprocities. Thirdly, difference in India does not always operate across hard territorialities. Boundaries are porous and choices do not have to be polarised. The People of India survey states that there are 300 communities in India that cannot be classified as primarily Muslim or Hindu. Our identities thrive on cross-connections.

There is a standard narrative of divisiveness that is invoked in every squabble. Indians love factionalism and factionalism seems to provide the dynamic of everyday power. There is the old adage that the English conquered us through a policy of divide and rule. But remember, Indian society like many other segmentary systems is easy to defeat but hard to conquer. In fact we expect the coloniser to be like us, settle down like one more caste and slowly merge into the system. Our news is all about squabbles. Party politics operates as factional politics. Everyone needs some one to differ with in order to be himself.

The Indian idea of unity is based on “I differ from you, therefore I am”, “I contradict myself, therefore I continue to be”. We are a society that believes that logic of some against others is better than the logic of all against one. We allow differences to create multiplicities rather than resort to extermism. Our self as a collection of contestations allows for tolerance and unity.

There are exceptions to the rule. The riots in 2002 in Gujarat are one example. Usually after a riot, there is a plethora of stories of how families of one ethnic group protected another. Stories of friendship, ethics, hospitability, solidarity create a compensatory universe which facilitates a return to normality. With Gujarat, one heard the language of exterminism, of wanting to eliminate a minority. Thankfully such a framework has not extended to other states. However, Kashmir was an example of a similar ruthlessness in another form as the Kashmiri pandits were driven from their homes to become refugees in their own land.

But the glue is not just structural idea of crosscutting differences. Accompanying this architectonic is the gum of folklore, the epidemic of dialects, the grammar of diversity. This unity exists in two forms. Firstly, it is civilisational, articulated as a sacred complex of spaces. The second is national. There is a sense that the flag and the constitution keep us together, providing a frame to negotiate differences. At a level of folklore, there is the cosmopolitanism of the common man, proud of our cultural hospitality, carrying with him a sense that India is a compost heap of differences. We constantly invent versions of unity from Vande Mataram, Jana gana mana to the unity songs of Bollywood from Raj Kapoor’s Mera Joota hai Japani and Made in India. There is a sanitised unity that creates sentiments of togetherness. Our myths always have places for the alien, the stranger, the marginal, the dwarf, and no matter how history sanitises myth, our minds carry the legends of hospitality and syncretism, making us cosmopolitan despite ourselves. We might quarrel with the local Bengali, but happily invite a million Bangladeshis to feel at home. The Tibetan senses our hospitality and Tibetans in turn add to our celebration of difference.

Bollywood captures the mindset of the difference. Bollywood, especially Bombay Talkies, was a miniature answer to the Partition, to the difference between Hindu and Muslim and their creative collaboration across differences. Bollywood has maintained that mindset, even sentimentally forging alliances between Hindu and Muslim at the moment of maximum collective rage. Only one other institution can match that sense of difference and unity — the Army. The Indian Army recognises the ethnicity of battalions — Jat, Sikh, Rajput, Gorkha and Maratha. Each has its own tradition and yet each adds to the collective unity of the Army. Bollywood and the Army are the stuff of legends and folklore. As institutions they provide the imaginative glue of a quarrelsome society proud of its diversity yet convinced there are logics beyond uniformity and homogeneity.

As long as our myths, our memories and our folklore rule the grammar of our lives, history can be as quarrelsome as it wants. If myths are elaborations of contradictions, our democracy is a resolution of the myth of difference.

China - World's Darling for Next Few Decades

China is world's darling for the time being and for next few decades. Its pre planned growth is paying well. From economy to external affairs, from poverty eradication to people control, from cultural expression to communication network, the dragon nation is speeding up well. One cannot expect it to be the unchallenged superpower forever from now. But as of now China is succeeding in its plans.

Vikram Sood writes in The Deccan Chronicle on 25 August 2010

For decades China pretended to be modest and Deng Xiaoping’s successors followed him as they couched their ambitions in soft idioms. The “sons of heaven”, as the Chinese traditionally consider themselves, also consider those on their periphery as rebellious barbarians who had to be tamed or conquered. So the discourse was: “Tao guang yang hui” — variously translated, but which essentially means “hide brightness, nourish obscurity”. The exhortation was to keep a low profile when in an adverse situation and wait for a suitable opportunity to reverse fortunes. The other advice was “yield on small issues with the long term in mind”. All this has begun to change as China’s influence began to rise and the United States was perceived to be in decline. The US policy predicaments in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iran and Western economic crises in contrast to China’s steady growth is probably the reason for this change in attitude. There is an exuberance and global self-confidence accompanied by a global outreach that was not visible earlier.

It is useful to go back to January 20, 2009 — the day Barack Obama was sworn in as US President. This was also the day that the Chinese released their White Paper on National Defence (2008). Perhaps a coincidence, perhaps not. The White Paper covers issues like Taiwan, Tibet, the defence budget, diplomatic outreach and gives some details about how China would use its nuclear force. It is important to refer to some portions of the paper which underline the new philosophy. The preface mentions that historic changes were taking place between contemporary China and the rest of the world, and the Chinese had become an important part of the international system. China, it said, “could not develop in isolation from the rest of the world, nor can the world enjoy prosperity and stability without China.” The intention was to portray China as a participatory nation with huge responsibilities and its own indispensability in the new global order.

China’s international behaviour has been a mix of defiance — such as at the Copenhagen climate summit, when it sent junior functionaries to discussions with heads of state, or its dealings on the Iran nuclear issue or the nuclear deal with Pakistan. China has been assertive with India on Arunachal Pradesh by blocking the ADB loan, has been provocative by issuing “plain paper” visas to Indians born in Jammu and Kashmir and routinely shrill about the Dalai Lama, while increased border violations have been noticed in Arunachal Pradesh — which Chinese commentators call “Southern Tibet”. Chinese activities in our neighbourhood, its plans to dam the Brahmaputra and extend the Tibet rail link into Nepal are other aspects of continuing Chinese assertiveness. The Chinese PLA had recently transported combat readiness material to PLA and Air Force units in Tibet by rail for the first time. This would further enhance the military transportation capacity, apart from the construction of more airports in Tibet.

While some American experts like Prof. David Shambaugh describe this Chinese attitude as a sign of defensive nationalism — assertive in form but reactive in essence, the fact is that since about the middle of 2009 the Chinese have talking more and more about their “core interests”. As D.S. Rajan, director of the Centre for China Studies, Chennai, points out, Chinese leader Dai Bingguo said in July 2009 that “the PRC’s first core interest is maintaining its fundamental system and state security, the second is state sovereignty and territorial integrity, and the third is the continued stable development of the economy and society”. Translated into specifics, it means protection of its interests in Tibet, Taiwan, Xinjiang, the South China Sea and its strategic resources and sea trade routes.

China’s assertiveness about the South China Sea, its umbrage at US secretary of state Hillary Clinton’s July 2010 remarks in Hanoi on creating an international mechanism to resolve this issue, has been particularly visible in the past few weeks. Dai Bingguo conveyed to Ms Clinton in May 2010 that China regarded its claims to the South China Sea as a core national interest. The Chinese have closely watched the growing US-Vietnamese ties, which includes an American offer of a civil nuclear deal to Vietnam on lines similar to the India deal. A triangular acrimony between the US, China and Vietnam has been growing for some time.

The Chinese carried out a live ammunition PLA Navy exercise in the South China Sea on July 26, followed by another exercise on August 3 along the Yellow Sea coast — the other area of contention. The Chinese conducted exercises there in April and June this year, and were now asserting that China opposed any foreign ships entering the sea or adjacent waters; they even vehemently opposed joint US-South Korean exercises there.

The message in these demarches to the US was in keeping with protecting China’s core interests in the adjacent seas and telling the US that the western Pacific was China’s sphere of interest and influence. It suggested a division of zones of influence between the Eastern and Western Pacific. The US and China have their own geostrategic rivalries to settle, and the Chinese may have assessed that their moment has come.

Yet China remains concerned with its intricate trade and financial links with the US, and also with the security of its trade and supply routes that transit the Malacca Straits. It has endeavoured to develop extensive land routes through Central Asia, but these are inadequate. It is a matter of time before China will make its presence more visible in the Indian Ocean. It has port facilities in Hambantota and Gwadar, and a presence in the Arabian Sea as it battles Somali pirates. China has expanded its contacts with Iran, more in competition with Russia than the US, it seeks mineral wealth in Afghanistan, its relations with Pakistan need no elucidation and it has developed strong ties with Burma. Thus while we may agonise over challenges across our land frontiers, we would be ignoring the new challenge in the Indian Ocean unless we plan countermeasures now.

Fatty Jail Birds

Indian criminal justice systems swing to the extremes. Either third grade tortures or too much sweet hospitality. In the latest swinger, Tamil Nadu jails report excess weight gain of its inmates. There is popular saying in Tamil - Mamiyar veedu. Jail means in-laws place where you get regular food. What was intended to reform the prisoners seem to be turning out to be a sensation creator. This does not augur well for the criminal justice system. Some of the prisoners are able to enjoy the clout with their money power. Look at Shahbuddin the serial killer from Bihar, Manu Sharma the rich brat, Annachi of the Saravana Bhavan. All of these super rich jail birds are making mockery of their jail terms. This must end at the earliest.

The Times of India writes on 23 November 2009


Steaming hot upma or pongal, sambhar rice with vegetables, boiled peanuts, dal with ghee and roasted chicken. This is not the menu card of a south Indian restaurant, but food served to inmates of various prisons in Tamil Nadu.

No wonder, a jail stint in the state leaves prisoners with an expanded waistline or even a pot-belly, contrary to the general perception that jailbirds look haggard or emaciated.

Nearly 90% of prisoners in the state who were freed during 2007-08 have gone home with increased weight, according to the latest data released by the Department of Statistics and Economics. Interestingly, not even a single prisoner lost weight during his/her stay in jail, going by the details given.

Of the 4,796 prisoners released, 4,231 people, including 241 women, had gained weight varying from 1 kg to 3 kg, while there was no change in the weight of the rest. Of the prisoners released during 2006-07, 115 had gained over 5 kg, the statistics revealed.

“What the prisoners in TN get is a balanced diet of the sort they may not get outside,’’ said V Kannadasan, special public prosecutor for the Human Rights Court. “They are served bed-time tea at 6 am, followed by upma or pongal or gruel for breakfast. At noon, they are served 650 gm of rice with sambhar, butter milk and vegetables, which is followed by boiled peanuts in the evening. Dinner consists of 550 gm of rice with sambhar. For those advised a wheat diet by doctors, chappatis and dal are served,’’ he added.

Sundays are special as the prisoners are served 150 gm of chicken. While those in ‘A’ class cells get to relish the non-vegetarian dish thrice a week, vegetarians are served dal with ghee.

Should the bulging waistline of prisoners be attributed to nutritious food or lack of physical activity? “We ensure that their diet has a proper mix of nutrition to meet calorific requirements. To improve the quality of commodities, we’ve dispensed with the contract system and started procuring food items from the public distribution system,’’ said R Natraj, DGP (fire and rescue services).

However, some activists disagree with the official theory, saying that the “obesity’’ of prisoners was due to a lack of physical activity. “The weight gain among prisoners does not indicate that they are being given nutritious food. People above 40 years are generally prone to gaining weight and hence it cannot be taken as an indicator of their well-being,’’ said lawyer-activist Sudha Ramalingam.

P Pugazhenthi, director, Prisoners Rights Forum, said unlike earlier times, prisoners were not being given physical work, which not only kept them fit but also fetched them remuneration.

Nuclear Controversy

Whether India's bomb exploded or not? This is the new controversy created by some of the eminent nuclear scientists. Although this kind of trouble brewed during the first nuclear tests. It is crucial to clear these doubts soon.


The Times of India writes (26 September 2009)


The controversy over whether the Pokhran tests of 1998 were a "fizzle" is nothing new. Prime Minister Morarji Desai reportedly asserted that Pokhran
I in 1974 was nothing more than a large explosion of conventional devices, while others asserted the yield then was less than that claimed by our scientists. The two most prominent scientists involved in the 1974 test were Raja Ramanna and P K Iyengar. Interestingly, Ramanna, who was associated as a member of the Atomic Energy Commission with the 1998 tests, validated claims about their success. Iyengar, however, expressed doubts about the claim that the second "boosted fission" device had a yield of 43 kilotonnes.

The only known comprehensive international study of Pokhran 1998 was based on data of 125 seismic stations across the world. This study, carried out by seismologist Roger Clark of the University of Leeds, validated the claims of Indian scientists associated with the test. The major implication of this controversy is that while there are very few demanding that India should immediately conduct further nuclear tests, the government will find it difficult to close options, by signing the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT).

Even as this controversy raged in India, the Federation of American Scientists (FAS) declared that Pakistan, which according to latest estimates possesses 70-90 nuclear weapons, is set to rapidly expand its arsenal, with work nearing completion on two large plutonium reactors. Pakistan could double its nuclear arsenal, with lighter plutonium warheads within a decade. The FAS study also revealed that Pakistan is ready to deploy the Chinese origin Shaheen II missile, capable of hitting urban centres in distant corners of India and cruise missiles to counter Indian missile defences. It is now well established that the reactors and reprocessing facilities for Pakistan's new generation of nuclear weapons and its ballistic and cruise missiles are all of Chinese origin. The instruction manuals of nuclear weapons designs given by A Q Khan to Libya were in the Mandarin language!

Pakistan's intention to rapidly expand its nuclear arsenal was clear when its ambassador to the UN Committee on Disarmament in Geneva recently blocked proposals for the early conclusion of a treaty banning the production of fissile materials for nuclear weapons (FMCT). This move came just after the US Military Academy at West Point published a report revealing that three nuclear weapons related facilities the Wah ordnance factory, the Kamra air base and the Sargodha weapons storage facility had been attacked by suspected jihadis. Why is it necessary for Pakistan to build such a huge and potentially unsafe arsenal when its Punjab and North West Frontier Province are vulnerable to attacks by jihadi groups?

The head of Pakistan's strategic forces command Lt Gen Khalid Kidwai has indicated that Pakistan's nuclear arsenal is "aimed solely at India" and will come into play only if an Indian attack either makes deep inroads into Pakistan's urban centres, or significantly degrades its army and air force. Since neither of these scenarios is plausible, why does Pakistan need such a large arsenal?

The rationale for Pakistan's quest for nuclear weapons was outlined by Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto after he decided on January 19, 1972 that Pakistan had to acquire nuclear weapons. Bhutto held that after the Bangladesh debacle in December 1971, it was imperative for Pakistan to acquire nuclear weapons to counter the conventional capabilities of a much larger India. Bhutto also noted that while the "Christian, Jewish and Hindu civilisations" had nuclear weapons capability, it was "Islamic civilisation" alone that did not possess nuclear weapons. Bhutto asserted that he would be remembered as the man who had provided the "Islamic civilisation" with "full nuclear capability". Libyan and Saudi Arabian funding of Bhutto's "nuclear vision" is well documented, as is Pakistan's supply of nuclear weapons know-how and equipment to Iran and Libya.

The Bush White House revealed that Pakistani nuclear scientists, Suleiman Asad and Al Mukhtar, had extensive discussions in Kandahar, on radiological dispersal devices, with Mullah Omar and Osama bin Laden. Two associates of A Q Khan, Sultan Bashiruddin Mehmood and Chaudhuri Abdul Majeed, were detained for clandestine contacts with the al-Qaeda and Taliban. Mehmood publicly advocated transfer of nuclear weapons to other Islamic countries and echoing Bhutto, described Pakistan's nuclear capability as the property of the whole "Ummah" (Muslim world).

While General Kidwai, who now controls Pakistan's nuclear arsenal, belongs to a generation of officers commissioned before the fundamentalist General Zia-ul Haq ushered in a new generation of more religiously oriented officers, the control of Pakistan's nuclear weapons will inevitably shift to military officers and scientists who tend to regard their nuclear arsenal as an asset of the Islamic world. Pakistan's nukes might fall not just into the hands of jihadis, but there is also the prospect of cash-strapped Pakistan transferring nuclear weapons, or providing nuclear guarantees to countries like Saudi Arabia, as it seeks more influence and leverage in an oil-rich Islamic world, which is engulfed by rivalry between Shia-dominated Iran and the Wahhabi-oriented Saudis.

The writer is a former high commissioner to Pakistan

Increasing Mental Disorders

There are various reasons for the increasing mental disorders. One of the major factors is the negative social attitude towards the mental patients. Generally people misbehave with the mentally ill patients. The hospitals meant for these patients do not give adequate sympathy, love and care. Most of the mental patients feel better outside the hospitals. They are treated like animals in the cages. While this is the sorry state of mental health treatment in the country there is fast rise in the number of patients. Due to the severe economic crisis and lack of social support mental ill health is becoming common nowadays. The government is preparing for the worst. It must be countered with all out efforts.

WHO estimates 30 crore people globally suffer from mental health disorders
In India 15-20 crore people suffer from some sort of mental illness, the commonest being depression and anxiety syndromes, stress and psychosomatic disorders, bipolar mood disorders, schizophrenia and dementia.
1.6 of them need institutional intervention
According to WHO, at lease 3 in 4 mental health patients in developing countries receive no treatment
75% of mentally ill patients in India are treated through traditional interventions and by tantriks
8.1% of all disabilities in India are due to mental illnesses, as against 5.8% due to cancer and 4.4% due to heart diseases
India needs 32,000 psychiatrists but has 3300 trained psychiatrists, 3000 of whom are in metros
By 2020, depression is expected to become the 2nd largest illness in the world
Most countries allocate less than 2% of their health budget to mental disorders
Suicide is one of the commonest manifestations of mental illness
In India, 1.2 lakh people end their lives every year by committing suicide
4 lakh attempt commit suicide
Globally, one million people die from suicide annually
The global mortality rate is 16/100,000, or one death every 40 seconds.
In the last 45 years, suicide rates have increased by 60% worldwide
Mental disorders, particularly depression and substance abuse, are associated with more than 90% of all cases of suicide
Asia accounts for 60% of the world’s suicides
India, China and Japan account for 40% of this number
Over 71% of suicides in India are by persons below the age of 44.

The Union health ministry is getting nervous over the alarming rate of mental patients in the country. A shocking number of 13 crore Indians suffering mental disorders have shaken the ministry from its slumber. It is going to circulate a cabinet note next week to handle the rising mental disorders. It has proposed to upgrade the existing eleven mental hospitals, increase of at least 44 post-graduate seats in psychiatry, 176 M.Phil seats in clinical psychology and 220 seats for psychiatric nursing each years. The ministry envisages that 616 qualified mental health professionals would be produced from these centres. One hopes for the better situation in the coming days.