Salman Khurshid gives "peaceful" chit to China

Salman Khurshid, External Affairs Minister in the UPA govt of Dr Manmohan Singh, seems to have a tendency to be economical with truth; he also acts as colour-blind: If the colour is grey or has a touch of black, he tends to regard it nearly white! His another characteristic is to stick his neck out for the sake of loyalty and sycophancy vis-a-vis the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty. He has been castigated and rebuffed by Anna Hazare and the Central Election Commission for his indiscretions and improprieties. Clearly, he seems insensitive and thick-skinned to several aberrations from dignified conduct but he seems to get away with them, perhaps because he is seemingly intellectually smart, foreign-educated, lawyer by profession, a member of the minority community with Congress loyalist father and grand father who occupied the the top-most post.

Khurshid's latest statement made in an interview with the Indian Express, on way back from Burma(Mynamar), takes the cake. He gives a clean chit to China as a "peaceful" neighbour, asserting that "China's rise hasn't created problems for India...There has not been any major specific problem between us and China". He deliberately forgot the 1962 invasion of Mao's China on the North-East Frontier Agency(NEFA), now Arunachal Pradesh, that has been the most disastrous and humiliating defeat of the Indian army under the Congress' first Prime Minister of independent India, Jawaharlal Nehru who had emerged as the self-appointed champion of Communist China. India recently marked the 50th anniversary of that debacle-the most painful chapter of our post-indpendence history.

There have been so many occasions when our big, powerful neighbour has been intimidating us with repeated hostile expansionist claims on Arunachal Pradesh and parts of Ladakh. Also, its denial to visas to Indian citizens resident in Arunchal and J&K. Recently, it stamped visas with a map reiterating the territorial claims. It has also started warning India to keep off the South China Sea. Yet, our new Foreign Minister Salman Khurshid has no hesitation in claiming that China is "peaceful" and its rise poses no problems to us!    

Indian Express editor's views on Babri demolition

I read Ms Seema Chisti's article:"Remains of the day" in the Indian Express of December 5, on the 20th anniversary of the demolition of the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya, with deep dismay. It seems to have been written not by a sensitive, understanding Indian commentator; it was a piece appeared to have been driven by parochialism and one-sidedness of a Muslim communalist. She refused to accept despite the tell-tale evidence that the structure was super-imposed  on a Hindu temple by a foreign Muslim invader to humiliate Hindus. All attempts to persuade the Muslim  leadership to respect the majority Hindu sentiment in regard to the shrine to their epic icon Ram and his wife Sita(Sita ki Rasoi-Sita's kitchen) and make a brotherly gesture to hand over the structure to the Hindu community, failed. Instead, there was a display of aggressive posture of confrontation by its bigoted Islamic leadership.

Even with this background, kar sewaks who assembled at the venue on December 6, 1992, were not expected to take the law into their hands and undertake the demolition. However, a group of kar sewaks' act appalled and deeply saddened the movement leaders like LK Advani who along with his associates were opposed to the unilateral destruction of the disputed structure. But, looking at the dispute in hindsight, one cannot avoid the unhelpful attitude of the minority leadership in the stalemate that unfortunately led to the tragic denounement. With mutual accommodation and understanding, a temple could have been built as also a new mosque some distance away as a symbolic manifestation of inter-community harmony. Even a High Court verdict accommodating both sides' viewpoints was looked down upon.

Ms Chisti's strong plea is not to forget the event of the demolition. Even at the distance of twenty years of the tragic happenings, she does not see the need for the leaders of the two communities to jointly, peacefully come to an agreement to forget the past and built a temple on the iconic spot and a Muslim place of worship nearby. There are several examples of the majority gestures, for instance, Gandhiji's support for the Khilafat movement. Ayodhya was one case when the minority generosity and broadmindedness could have done wonders. Given the right attitude, it can still happen.   

Facebook girls question Mumbai shutdown

It is reported in the media that two young women-21-year-old Shaheen Dhada and her friend Renu Srinivas were arrested by the local police at Palghar in Thane district for posting a comment on the Facebook against the Mumbai shutdown over Bal Thackeray's death. There is a widespread condemnation of the police's highhandedness, in the public and the media. Even the State govt has not been spared over the "fascist"act of its police against freedom of expression.

However, while one cannot condone the police's clearly excessive action against the Facebook ladies, one cannot overlook their utter insensitivity, irresponsibility and thoughtlessness on the issue of the shutdown. Looking at massive crowds accompanying the funeral procession on the way to the cremation venue at the Shivaji Park on November 18, covered live on TV news channels, even a Balasaheb Thackeray critic would acknowledge the spontaenity of the sea of humanity peacefully walking in mourning. Mumbaikars had shut their shops and other businesses on their own to join the congregation to express grief over their beloved leader's death. Hence, to question their personal choice to do so without any appeal or direction from the Shiv Sena leadership, amounts to adding insult to injury. It is a height of juvenile delinquency and apaty to other people's sorrow.

Freedom of expression is not unrestricted and absolute. One's freedom of expression stops where other person's freedom begins. The Facebook women should have been mature, understanding and considerate. They are too young to know that when Gandhiji died, not only Delhi but many parts of India were shutdown in mourning. Could any one, claiming the right to free expression, have been so callous and stupid to criticise the shutdown? Bal Thackeray may not be comparable to Gandhiji but for millions of Maharashtrians he was their father figure. How could Shaheen and his friend be unaware of this?

New Yorker's long piece on Times of India

The Times of India, the leading daily simultaneously published from several centres, that was originally set up by a British company during colonial days, to promote their agenda, underwent a transformation after independence when its ownership came into Indian hands. Over the years, it became a premier newspaper institution under strong, thinking editors and commentators who inspired awe in the government of the day. They were keenly watchful of the govt's acts of commission and omission, voicing public sentiments without fear or favour.Their main focus was on national interest and not their own commercial and advertising objectives.

With the passing away of such powerful, highly respected, influential editor-writers-the last one being Girilal Jain, the Times of India was taken over by younger generation-great-grand children of RK Dalmia-the original Indian owner-businessman, and grand children of Shantilal Jain. They clearly hated intellectually, professionally and morally strong editors who until then had guided and shaped the newspaper. For the new young bosses, advertising revenue had the highest priority. The Editor of the TOI, under their charge, became a non-entity, an ingnificant individual as they held all the levers in their hands.

An extensive, well-researched write-up in the New Yorker journal of October 10,2012, carries stunningly revealing details of how two Jain brothers have turned the Times of India group into a higly money-spinning venture where reporters write laudatory pieces-called "advertorials"-on Bollywood stars and corporate honchos, in their local pictorial supplements. The thinking was that why should a leading newspaper like the Times of India give them free publicity through their valuable space with photographs and write-ups? They were asked to pay for this coverage which was obviously and readily agreed to. This seems to have the beginning of the phenomenon of "paid news". According to the New Yorker article, "the walls between the advertising and editorial sections were broken down" for a close coordination between the two, the emphasis being on "advertorials"-a great money-making source.

Interestingly, Times of India is now more a news-paper, rather than an opinion paper; its news stories are short. Letters to Editor column is thrown into a small corner, has only two short letters, and not more. In other words, views of readers are not really so important.   

Robert Vadra's dubious real estate deals

Mrs Sonia Gandhi's only Son-in-Law, Robert Vadra, married to her daughter Priyanka, seems prone to adverse publicity, off and on. His latest episode concerns his dubious real estate deals. The fact that top guns of the Congress and the government, in a sick and disgusting display of sycophancy, came out hastily to defend their supreme leader's son-in-law, calling him innocent of any wrong-doing. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, his Finance Minister P.Chidambaram and other senior colleagues, could not explain how an ordinary businessman with a small capital of his own amounting to some lakhs, became a multi-millionare-accumulating reportedly 300 crores of rupees within 3-4 years. Thus, in the eyes of the people, it was an undisputed manifestation of moral degradation of the ruling Congress party. The party line was that Vadra was a pivate businessman and individual. If so, why was a powerful battery of spokespersons aggressively appearing in TV studios to rescue Vadra from his critics' onslaught regarding his shady transactions? Why Vadra himself chose silence, instead of publicly explaining the whole affair with honesty. Instead, he mocked the aam admi as "mango" man and the Indian State a "banana republic"!

Looking back at the history of the Congress which, although set up by a British colonial bureaucrat, in 1884, was shaped and guided by freedom struggle stalwarts like Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi and other dedicated leaders, with self-sacrifice, high values of morality, propriety and inner-party democracy. All this changed with the passing away of Jawaharlal Nehru, Sardar Patel and Lal Bahadur Shastri when the next generation led by Mrs Indira Gandhi, Nehru's daughter, took over the reins of the party and the govt. The rot began. Sycophancy and loyalty to the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty was the key element. The family under Mrs Sonia Gandhi, Mrs Indira Gandhi's daughter-in-law and the elder son Rajiv Gandhi's wife, could do no wrong. Two Ministers in the vanguard of Robert Vadra's defence, publicly swore that they would defend their leader Mrs Sonia Gandhi to their last breath.

But the tragedy is that these small-minded faithfuls cannot see to what terrible state they have sunk the grand old party with their mindless, morally unsound, shenanigans. No wonder, the country is in the grip of  unprecedented corruption, degeneration, despondency and cynicism.       

FDI in retail-No to Walmart

The most notable thing about our silence-loving, indecisive, laissez faire Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is that he suddenly becomes pro-active when it comes to helping a special friend, the USA. In the UPA-I, the PM went out of his way, exhibiting uncharacteristic determination-and defiance of the then allies-the Left-CPM,CPI, RSP and the Forward Bloc-to push the Indo-US nuclear deal through, as promised to President Bush. The key argument and justification was that India needed nuclear power most urgently. But, in the four years since the deal, there is no sign of even one megawatt of nuclear power on the horizon.

And, now, despite all the nation-wide uproar and anger over corruption scandals revealed by the constitutional body-the Comptroller and Auditor General(CAG), the opposition and the media, resulting in the washout of the monsoon session of the Parliament, as well as the sky-rocketing prices of essential commodities, Dr Singh, shockingly, watched the worsening situation in his usual silent mode, without communicating with the Indian people. Instead, he rubbed the salt on their wounds by hiking the price of diesel by Rs 5, limiting LPG cylinders to six in a year, per a house-hold and notifying the implementation of the FDI in multi-brand retail to please his friend in the White House-President Obama as also his foreign media critics who had earlier criticised him as "under-achiever", "a tragic figure" and "Sonia's poodle". It seemed Dr Singh was unconcerned about the cascading impact of the diesel hike on the deteriorating and uncontrolled inflation the common people were witnessing. Walmart seemed the greatest beneficiary of the FDI decision.

It needed a nationalistic, knowledgeable economic commentator like S.Gurumurthy to tell the innocent-or more appropriately, deliberately unaware, Prime Minister Singh, in an article in a national daily, that on the day-Friday, September 14, he was rolling out red carpet to Walmart, the New York City "shut down Walmart", complaining about the giant MNC "displacing nearby businesses". In Washington DC, hundreds of protestors shouted:"Say No to Walmart". Similarly, in Los Angeles, 10,000 marchers screamed:"Walmart=Poverty".     

US short film leads to widespread violence

A senseless American, misusing his democratic right of free expression, made a documentary film:"Innocence of Muslims" wherein he reportedly insulted the followers of Islam and the Prophet. Within days of its exhibition, even more senselss groups of Muslims went on a spree of killing, bombing and burning US targets in several Muslim countries. In Libya, Muslim terrorists assassinated the US ambassador, among others. We had angry protests even in India, particularly in Srinagar, the capital of J&K, a Muslim majority State in the Indian Union. Thankfully, the protests have been peaceful, so far.

One recent report from Paris said that a French cartoon weekly had published a few cartoons depicting the Prophet in bad light. The French govt has promptly condemned it to discourage any bloody reaction from the fanatics. The US authorities had similarly denounced the anti-Islam documentary but, unfortunately, it did not deter the zealots from taking the law into their own hands.

However, the question arises on the legitimacy and acceptability of widespread violent reaction of sections of Muslims unleashing their murderous anger on innocent non-Muslims. Muslims all over the world proudly proclaim that their superior faith-Islam is most peaceful; its name means peace and submission to the will of Allah. If it is so, then why a large number of Muslims from Iran to Libya, to Egypt, to Pakistan, Afghanistan,  India, and elsewhere, appear so intolerant and violently hypersensitive when it comes to dealing with some clearly mindless, uncivilised remarks of individuals against Islam and the Prophet? Does their extremist and fanatical response not amount to conniving with their critics to get huge publicity derogatory to Islam? Why can't the Ummah show great wisdom and large-heartedness by taking criticism in its stride and ignoring it? A ruthless, violent reprisal attacking innocents only underlines the terrible touchiness of the Islamic faithfuls.

We had a recent replay of this Muslim volatility and a short fuse when a bogus claim that some torn pages of the Quran were thrown from a fast moving express train in Masuri(Ghaziabad) and were found lying on a rail track. How could torn pages from any book thrown from a fast train collect in a neat pile instead of flying off in different directions in the wind? But, the fanatics had enough pretext to go amuck, assaulting  innocent people and indulge in arson. Is the Quran so fragile or the Prophet so vulnerable that a mad, brainless individual can destroy their credibility? Did the Prophet himself not acknowledge that he was a human being(Messenger) with all human imperfections? Then, these barbaric killings and bombings of innocents in their name?     

Washington Post story-Soli Sorabjee's comment

In his latest column in the Indian Express(Delhi edition), Soli J. Sorabjee has rightly questioned the wisdom of I&B Minister Ambika Soni's "hypersensitive reaction" to the Washington Post critique on Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. However, while urging to take the US daily's report "in our stride", Sorabjee calls it "ill-founded", suggesting strong "rebuttal". Is it a sound, suitable advice? Does it not contradict his own approach outlined above? The PM's Information Adviser has issued a "strong rebuttal". Does it sound wise, convincing and sensible? Incidentally, every Indian newspaper readers knows that what Simon Denyer, the New Delhi-based correspondent of the Washington Post has written about the PM is something he-she has been reading and seeing in the Indian media for a long time. It is nothing new or surprising.
  __________________________________________________________________________________

2)     Indian President Pranab Mukherjee, who was recently elevated to the Rashtrapati Bhawan-the presidential palace-from the post of the Finance Minister in Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's cabinet, spoke to the Madras Chamber of Commerce and Industry on September 8. It was sad to read a PTI report on the address in the press the next day in which Mukherjee denounced the "Cassandras of doom" for criticising the slow pace of the Indian economy. It seemed a clear defence of his own less than great performance as the Finance Minister as the situation was causing considerable concern at the time he left. One had hoped that the newly-appointed President would snap his connection with the previous role and the ruling party and examine the views of the critics dispassionately without accusing them of being agents of doom. Unfortunately, Pranab Mukherjee's rhetoric was highly disappointing and ill-advised. He was expected to write a new chapter on a clean slate.  

Washington Post report raises furore in Congress

The latest despatch of New Delhi-based correpondent of the Washington Post Simon Denyer, calling Prime Minister Manmohan Singh a "failure", has severely shaken chamchas and apologists of the PM in the Congress party and the government. The PM's Office claimed that the Post had already apologised for its report; this has been promptly denied by the US daily and its New Delhi representative. An angry Information & Broadcasting Minister Mrs Ambika Soni asserted that the Indian Embassy would take up the matter with the Washington Post for an apology.

An apology for what? Whatever Denyer has reported is not original or something new, unheard or unwritten earlier. He was only doing his professional job by reflecting the despondent, disenchanted mood of the Indian people, the intelligentia and the media, over the pathetic silence, indecision and inaction by the head of govt. to stem the rot of rampant corruption. These facts were available to Delhi-based foreign reporters virtually on a platter. Denyer has quoted the PM's Indian critics, including Indian historian Ramchandra Guha and Sanjay Baru, a one-time Press Advisor to Dr Manmohan Singh and now back in journalism.

Prime Minister Singh's "fall from grace" was not dramatic.Truthfully speaking, he was essentially a "yes Minister" bureaucrat where he started. His role as an "architect" of 1991 economic reforms ending the socialistic strangle-hold of "licence and permit raj" was thrust on him by the terrible economic plight of the country at that time. In fact, these reforms were virtually dictated by the IMF-World Bank as a precondition for massive financial assistance to the bankrupt Indian govt headed by PV Narsimha Rao. If, indeed, Dr Singh, an economist, was the real father of these much-needed reforms to galvanise the moribund Indian economy and liberate the Indian people and entrepreneurs from the socialistic shackles imposed by the ruling Congress, why did he not pursue them with any vigour, in the susbequent years when he himself became the Prime Minister, courtesy Mrs Sonia Gandhi, his supreme leader?  The Denyer despatch has also hinted at this fact.

All in all, the Washington Post has reported on the stark failure of Prime Minister Singh is what an average Indian newspaper reader like myself has been reading every day for so many months. This government has been hurtling from one scandal after another-one crisis after another-for long. And what was Dr Manmohan Singh's therapy: Silence, indecision, inaction which amounted to quiet acceptance of the loot of the public excheqeur. What an enormous shame for some one reputed to be morally upright and honest! Is it not a right time for him to say good bye and go home at the ripe old age?          

Coal mine allocation scandal

Even a lay Indian like myself who has looked at our political scene during his life-time, cannot recall a government that has hurtled into one grave scam after another, involving billions of public money, and then lie through its teeth, asserting its innocence, in a short period of eight years. That unprecedented discredit and notoriety go to the Congress-ruled UPA govt, headed by a self-acclaimed Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh. In fact, he is in office but not in power, as the Economist weekly of London, commented on it six years ago. The super Prime Minister is Mrs Sonia Gandhi who as the Congress Party President and the Chairperson of the United Progressive Alliance(UPA), appointed him as Prime Minister in 2004 and reappointed him in 2009, after the general elections. Manmohan Singh fought one Lok Sabha election from New Delhi but lost it to a BJP candidate. Thus, both in 2004 and 2009, he became Prime Minister, courtesy Mrs Sonia Gandhi, the head of the ruling Nehru-Gandhi dynasty, not as a popularly elected Member of  the Lok Sabha, the House of People, as conventionally required, but as a member of the Rajya Sabha, an indirect election. Hence, even as the Prime Minister he is not the Head of the House and he cannot vote in the Lok Sabha. He can only vote in the Rajya Sabha to which he belongs. Thus, the guilt of alleged corruption taints both of them, though, formally, since Dr Singh is constitutionally the head of the government, his accountability and culpability is the foremost.

The current political drama that is being enacted in the both Houses of the Parliament is quite familiar. The Opposition, led by the BJP, is insisting that the latest scandal-called the Coalgate after the late US President Nixon's Watergate scandal of 1960s-is the responsibility of the Prime Minister since he was holding the charge of that ministry in that period when this scandalous, arbitrary allocation of 142 coal mining blocks took place under his signature. It has been claimed by the Constitutional body-the Comptroller and Auditor General of India(CAG) that is responsible for scanning the finances of the central govt and report to the Parliament annually, that arbitrary distribution of  the valuable blocks of national resources like coal(black gold) by the Screening Committee of the govt.at dirt cheap rates and not auctioning them, has resulted in the loss of 1.86 lack crores to the public exchequer. The opposition has demanded the guitly Minister who happens to be the PM at present, to resign, taking moral responsibility of the huge national loss. They are asserting that until he resigns they will not allow the Parliament to function.

Their contention is that during the earlier scam-known as 2G telecom spectrum allocation-the UPA govt all along rejected demands of action against the Minister concerned-A.Raja. Only after a prolonged stalemate and the judicial intervention the Minister was removed and later arrested. The opposition wants a similar action against the wrongdoing of Dr Singh. It is clear that a parliamentary debate will only absolve the guilty Minister of any adverse action and the scam would be buried.        

Pak participants in Indian TV debates

Indian English TV news channels' fondness for Pakistani participants in their discussion programmes on Indo-Pak issues, seems sickening. Not that the idea to invite them is basically flawed; the problem is that most of these Pakistani commentators are either retired military officers or diplomats-working or retired. Thus, their views reflect the official Pakistani propagandist line. Hence, it is a wild goose chase for Indian anchors to pin Pakistanis down on an issue such as their government's aid and abetment to Pakistani terrorists to target India, its security forces and even ordinary citizens.

For example, in his recent disclosures, Abu Jundal, an Indian terrorist, recruited and trained in Pakistan to carry out bombing and other violent acts in our coountry with the guidance and brainwashing by Pakistani state agencies and anti-Indian elements, who was deported from Saudi Arabia and arrested, highlighted the Pakistani gameplan to create havoc in India. When the Indian news anchors confronted this vast body of evidence, confirming Pakistani involvement in gruesome acts of jehadi terror, Pakistani participants instantly repudiated these grave facts as baseless and Indian propaganda.

There is this familiar display of Pakistani mindset-very predictable, which is permanently in denial. Their new litany is that Pakistan is itself a greater victim of terrorism that has killed tens of thousands of their people. In one recent discussion programme on Abu Jundal's revelations, when an Indian co-panelist reminded the Pakistani panelists that these Pakistani fatalities were the fruits of their own misdoings-the fostering of the Taliban-type terrorists by their own secret state agencies like the ISI, they had no satisfactory reply. Hence, one feels that it is futile and thoughtless to invite Pakistani commentators with closed minds to Indian TV debates because they will never come out with an objective, honest, fearless analysis of their govt's acts of commission and omission.

Pranab Mukherjee's nomination for President

The UPA-2 Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee should be thankful to his estranged Bengali 'sister' Mamata Bannerjee, the head of the Trinamool Congress and West Bengal's Chief Minister, for being intrumental in hastening the process of his nomination as the ruling Congress party's candidate for the Indian President's office. The whole drama of disgusting speculations in the media and elsewhere did no credit to Indian politics and its politicians. The ruling party was the biggest culprit. In the eyes of the media and the average Congressperson, Mukherjee seemed the most suitable candidate. But, the party supremo, Mrs Sonia Gandhi did not appear keen on him. She knew that Mukherjee, 77, cannot occupy the PM's post; He had missed the bus a few times. Why? Perhaps, because she was not too sure of his full loyalty. That could have also been her reservation about Mukherjee's elevation to the President's post. Hence, all these weeks from April onwards, Sonia dilly-dallied. As late as 8-10 days ago, when Mamata met Sonia to discuss a possible Congress nominee, the former was given two names-Vice-President Hameed Ansari and Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee, and, mind you, not just one name of Pranab. It was, thus, clear that Sonia was still wavering.

Therefore, looking back, one has no doubt that if Mamata had not spilled the beans in public about Sonia's thinking and, simultaneously, not announced the two names of the Congress and three names of her own-Abdul Kalam, Dr Manmohan Singh and Somnath Chatterjee-in the company of Mulayam Singh Yadav, Sonia might have continued her dilly-dallying for some more time. Mamata's public pronouncement clearly stunned Sonia and forced her to act fast before greater damage to her and the party's image. To save her faithful and favourite underling Manmohan Singh a further embarrassment, she wasted no time to close the nomination chapter fortwith. Despite Mukherjee's long-held feeling of having been overlooked of the PM's post on a few previous occasions irrespective of his seniority and long experience in the party and the govt, he is deeply grateful to Sonia for elevating him to the Rashtrapati Bhawan at the fag-end of his political career.

Several critics are recalling Mukherjee's dubious record during the Emergency as well as in the portfolios of External Affairs, Defence, etc he had handled in the UPA, ending with Finance which, on most expert rating, has been a disaster. On only hopes that in this top-most office he will redeem himself as an independent, non-partisan Head of State who will not demean and disgrace himself and his august office by being a chamcha and a rubber stamp of the party and its President.

UPA 2-third anniversary celebration

May 21, 2012, marked the completion of the third year of the United Progressive Alliance(UPA-2). Although this makes it the beginning of the Congress-ruled coalition's ninth year in government, but, if you look back to assess its achievements and moments of glory, the story is sad and depressing. Major terrorist attacks have taken place with some intervals despite the govt assertions of zero tolerance; the most gruesome massacre happened on November 26, 2008 in Mumbai when ten Pakistani murderers came through the sea at the docks opposite the Taj Mahal Hotel-the metropolitan's leading landmark. Thus, the internal security situation is as vulnerable as ever.

Then, we have had several corruption scandals, including 2G spectrum allocation, Commonwealth Games, etc., involving thousands of crores of public money in which UPA Ministers, other Congress leaders and bureaucrats were allegedly guilty. Initially, the govt defended them, but, thanks to the opposition and the media uproar, Anna  Hazare's anti-corruption movement and the Supreme Court intervention, the Telecom Minister A. Raja and the CWG chief Suresh Kalmadi were arrested and jailed for over a year. They have just been released on bail.

In other words, the UPA govt led by an economist-bureaucrat-turned politician, Dr Manmohan Singh who, in effect, was really acting as a deputy to the supreme leader, Mrs Sonia Gandhi, head of the UPA as well as the Congress party, hurtled the country from one crisis to another. By all accounts, we are in an economic mess and political chaos. The rupee has plunged to its lowest rate against the dollar: Rs.55. Consequently, the price rise at a unbearably high point, will worsen as imported goods and essential components will become costlier.Thanks to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's well-known silence, subservience, indecision, inaction, non-communicative and laissez faire attitude, his key constitutional office as the govt's chief executive head, has been compromised and diminished as never before. He is bound to go down in India's history as the weakest Prime Minister who was in office but not in power.

NCERT cartoon controversy

We witnessed a sickening drama in the Indian Parliament recently when excepting one or two MPs, including Mr Jaswant Singh, a senior BJP leader, members representing different parties-left, right and centre, condemned a political cartoon depicting Mr BR Ambedkar and Mr Jawaharlal Nehru that was published in a XI class text book of the NCERT, a govt body authorised to prescribe text books for the schools. The cartoon was done by Mr Shankar Pillai, a legendary and pioneering cartoonist, in 1949. He was highly regarded by the politicians of that time, including the then Prime Minister Nehru and Mr Ambedkar, the key player in the Constitution-making as the chairman of the drafting committee. The offending cartoon that had appeared in magazines and cartoon collections, had never come under any adverse notice or objection all these sixty-odd years. It seemed innocuously comic. New text books authors and advisors, obviously keen to introduce a humourous element to political science reading to make the subject more interesting, used political cartoons by well-known professionals, in the NCERT books. The said cartoon was published in 2006.

Hell broke loose when recently some dalit MPs happened to see the Ambedkar cartoon in the said text book. The Parliament proceedings were disrupted; all other important issues waiting to be discussed were sidelined and express the both Houses' sense of outrage at the "insult" of the Dalit icon-Mr BR Ambedkar. The cartoon showed Mr Ambedkar sitting on a snail with a rein and a whip in his hand and Mr Nehru at his back also with a whip. Most who viewed the cartoon dispassionately felt that the head of the Constitution-making body(Mr A) and the head of the govt(Mr N) were trying to egg on the snail with a faster pace.( Perhaps, there was a feeling in the country that the process of making the constitution was slow. Hence, the symbol of the snail. But, unfortunately, Dalit activists thought that Mr Nehru with his whip was threatening Mr Ambedkar to move fast. This was clearly ridiculous, knowing Mr Nehru's respect for Mr Ambedkar and his role. But bigoted Dalit ideologues and activists will have none of it. It was a convenient handle to malign non-dalits. It was a really shameful display of vote-bank politics at its worst.

SC amicus curiae's anti-Modi views

A controversy has arisen over a recent report of Raju Ramchandran, an amicus curiae appointed by the Supreme Court to assist it in the Gujarat riot cases. The report the extracts of which were reproduced in a section of the press, seemed anti-Narendra Modi(Gujarat Chief Minister). Another curious character of the report is that it disregards a comprehensive investigative report on the riots submitted by the Supreme Court-appointed Special Investigative Team(SIT), particularly its rejection of the suspended IPS officer of Gujarat-Sanjiv Bhatt's charges against Chief Minister Modi as "unbelievable". Here is "a friend of the court"-amicus curiae-who is acting more as a "friend" of  a discredited Police Officer who is currently facing multiple charges himself in the local courts and is under suspension. An amazing-and bewildering fact is that Raju Ramchandran, in his report, conceded that Bhatt's "statement" against Modi "has not been that of a detached police officer...I am left with no doubt that he(Bhatt) is actively 'strategising' and is in touch with those who would benefit or gain mileage"-a clear reference to anti-Modi elements, namely, the Congress party, Teesta Setalvad, Mukul Sinha, etc. Yet, Ramchandran insisted that "these factors cannot be grounds for ignoring it". Does it not sound incredible and clearly biassed that while recognising the motivated mindset of a leading player in the anti-Modi campaign-with conspiratorial undertones-Bhatt-and his political backers and anti-Modi compulsive bashers, the apex court-appointed lawyer-Raju Ramchandran, supposed to assist the court, is creating more complications, and, in the process, discrediting himself, instead of following a logical course of damning Bhatt's case?    

Spat between Govt and General

AK Antony, Union Defence Minister, is now facing a controversy regarding his inaction in the bribery case that was brought to his notice by his Army Chief Gen VK Singh, over a year ago. In his statement to the Parliament, a few day ago, in response to the public and opposition uproar, Antony acknowledged that the Army Chief had, indeed, told him about the bribery offer, but he did not act because the General did not want to pursue the matter. Instead of pressing his subordinate-the Chief of the Army Staff, Gen Singh, to follow it up, he left it at that. How could the Defence Minister, known for "honesty" and "incorruptability", adopt an attitude of indifference and inaction in a serious matter of corruption at higher levels? How could he accept the Army Chief's reported reluctance to probe the case further and not himself initiate an enquiry?

However, when one looks deep into the Antony mindset, one is not surprised. This approach of laissez-faire, silence, indecision, general reluctance to promptly grapple with grave problems of governance and morality seems a trade-mark of this UPA govt. headed by Dr Manmohan Singh, a master, silent bureaucrat-turned politician and comprising senior members like Antony. No wonder, the country is hurtling from one cisis to another caused by a series of scams.

The unpleasantness between the Army Chief and the govt, particularly his boss, the Defence Minister, began with the controversy of the former's birth year. It has now worsened on the issues of the bribe offer that the General had conveyed to Antony and followed by his leaked letter to the PM about the inadequate preparedness of the armed forces due to insufficient weaponry, ammunition, etc. The ruling politicians and their supporters are raising hell about the grave leak, but do not display similar concern about the more disastrous state of our defence forces, thanks to the sensitivity and seriousness of the leadership.      

President Pratibha Patil's record wanderlust

A few days ago, one was shocked to read a Press Trust of India(PTI) report in the press about the Indian lady President, Mrs Pratibha Patil's fondness for foreign trips alongwith a huge group of her family and officials, at the cost of public exchequer. In response to a Right to Information(RTI) enquiry, it was revealed that Mrs Patil has set up a record of "jet-setting", making 12 trips to 22 countries in 4 continents, at the massive cost of Rs.205 crores! Her five-year tenure is about to end in July, 2012, but clearly her "wanderlust" at the expense of public funds, is yet not fully satisfied; it is reported that the lady President is getting ready to make her last official journey to South Africa before she demits her office within four months!

Right-thinking and concerned Indians were distressed when this undistinguished, provinicial politician was suddenly chosen by her party leadership to occupy the august office of the Head of the State-that too as the first woman President in the history of independent India. One hoped that, perhaps, the highest office might bring the best in the humble lady and she would leave behind a great legacy which the Indian people would remember fondly. But, alas, this was not to be. On the top of it, we have her penchant for expensive "wanderlust". The people at large cannot forget how the lady President has been a convenient tool of her party and government leadership to excessively delay the Supreme Court ordered execution of the Parliament attack convict(Afzal Guru) till this day. She has served as "your most obedient master" in her tenure!

It is a sad reflection on our democracy that there is hardly any accountability of the office-holder of the top-most office. At least, in the case of another constitutional office-holder-Mayawati, she had to pay a large price of losing her chief ministership for a colossal misuse of her office and public money. In contrast, Mrs Patil will go home quietly.  

Congress party's flippant spokespersons

It is a bitter truth that most controversies currently confronting the Congress party can be attributed to its own folly:confusion and incompetence. It is unfortunate that when it needs able, dignified and well-informed spokespersons the most, to defend it in TV news channel debates on topical matters on daily basis, it puts forward flippant, crude ones like Mrs Renuka Chaudhry who only compound its misery.

Watching her performance on several occasions in recent weeks, particularly the one on February 27 on NDTV, I really felt sorry for the party's improper and unwise choice to project Mrs Chaudhry. The lady has a bad habit of giggling at and taunting opponents during serious discussions, and this was in full flow on the Feb.27 night debate on the PM's accusation against some NGOs allegedly misusing foreign contributions to "instigate" local people to agitate against the Kudankulam nuclear power facility. Renuka indulged in a running commentary, ridiculing  another panelist, BS Udaykumar's assertion that he had not received any money from foreign sources for his NGO-National Movement Against Nuclear Energy. He added that he raised his money in small amounts from local people-farmers,etc. Mrs Chaudhry was interrupting him, implicitly saying that Kumar was lying. At that point, one more panelist-Mrs Kiran Bedi remarked that the lady anchor was not controlling the discussions, indirectly accusing Renuka of hijacking the debate with needless interjections. All in all, Renuka Chaudhry's conduct was totally undignified that did no credit to her party.

Muslim quota controversy

The Muslim quota controversy that has been fuelled by Congress leaders like Salman Khurshid and Beni Prasad Verma-both UPA Cabinet Ministers-as well as SP leader Mulayam Singh Yadav and the BSP Chief Minister of UP Ms Mayawati, in their election campaign in the State, is now echoing in the media. It was the topic of discussion in the NDTV's popular Sunday, prime-time, programme:"We, The People"(Feb 19). One can understand vote-bank-oriented parties-Congress and the Samajwadi Party championing the religion-based quota for one community-Indian Muslims, through  their respective leaders, namely, Mrs Rita Bahuguna Joshi and Shahid Siddiqi, in the TV debate, during the election time in UP, in violation of the spirit and the letter of the Constitution. Siddiqi who is a typical party-hopper who moved from the Congress, then the BSP to the SP, was quite confused and pathetic in his arguments in favour of the Muslim quota. In fact, all those exponents of Muslim quota have no real valid argument to oppose economic criterion as the basis of reservation of the depressed classes. But they think that Muslim quota advocacy will bring them electoral gains in the crucial election. Siddiqi seemed even critical of the Constitution-makers for providing reservations for the Hindu Scheduled castes, and not others, namely, Muslims who were similarly situated. In other words, he admitted that Islam had failed to absorb the SC converts, unable to offer them equal treatment!

What was most astonishing and incomprehensible in the TV debate, was the pro-quota posture of highly placed Muslims like the film-maker Muzzaffar Ali and a former IAS member and Vice-Chancellor Ansari. Having achieved a distinctive, elitist status in the society due to their hard work and talent, how could they join the ranks of habitual Muslim whiners, complaining about discrimination and backwardness allegedly faced by their community? Is itn't a myth-in fact, falsehood, to accuse the Indian State and the society(read Hindu dominated), for the socalled miserable plight of the Indian Muslims? How is it that Bollywood is dominated by Muslims even when all key levers-finance, direction, production, exhibition and distribution are mostly in the hands of Hindus? As an ordinary Indian, I know of so many cases of Muslim boys from very poor families achieving success through hard work and basic talent in their chosen field like tennis. You see so many young Muslim men and women in the print and electronic media doing well.

How can we forget the way our poor illiterate brethren-Hindus and Muslims, from the boondocks of UP, Bihar and Rajasthan, were taken to the far off lands-in the Caribbean-Trinidad and Guyana, Fiji and Mauritius, in the 19th century and later, to work in the sugar plantations as indentured labourers? They had to work in terrible, snake-infested conditions. And see how they have transformed their lives, becoming most prosperous and politically powerful, in less than a century, through sheer hard work and emphasis on education. Also, look at the refugees from West Pakistan and Sindh after partition. They came penniless, leaving everything behind. Again through sheer relentless efforts, self-sacrifice and hard work they have successfully rebuilt their lives. One has heard many stories of poor women doing manual work to send their children to school and college. Hence, it is disgusting to hear Ansaris, Siddiqis, Khurshids and Beni Vermas  talk of quotas. In fact, it is time to end all quotas; even, initially, they were meant for a decad or so. Let the State help weaker ones with affirmative action without the crutch of quotas.

SC-appointed amicus curiae-Is it useful?

Judging from press reports in regard to the Supreme Court-appointed amicus curiae(friend of the court), Raju Ramchandran, in two recent cases, one wonders whether this specific appointment is really serving any useful purpose in objectively and impartially assisting the court. The two cases are:The SC-appointed SIT's findings on Narendra Modi and his Gujarat govt's alleged involvement in the 2002 riots and the November 2008 Mumbai terrorist carnage in which the lone surviving convict Ajmal Kasab is facing death sentence. The role of the amicus curiae-Raju Ramchandran, appears quite dubious. It seems more like performance of a defence lawyer rather than that of a "friend of the court". In the Modi case, the gentleman cast doubts on the SIT report to the metropolitan court, reportedly exonerating Modi and his govt; instead, he seemed to favour the Modi-accusers like the IPS officer MS Bhatt, himself facing charges and is under suspension; he also reportedly pleaded in favour of criminal Kasab, describing him as a minor terror accomplice deserving mercy!

Given the above facts, shouldn't the apex court look into the necessity and utility of the institutional appointment of an amicus curiae?  

Supreme Court verdict on 2G scam indicts UPA

When one looks at the terrible saga of scandals that have pock-marked the Congress-led UPA govt., the pathetic roles of the Congress president Mrs Sonia Gandhi, her nominated Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and her spokesmen like Kapil Sibal, stand out. The pre-eminent characteristic of the two top leaders is their long, unbroken silence and inexplicable reluctance to communicate with the Indian people who are desperately and angrily seeking answers to their questions and doubts in regard to their rulers' incompetence and cynical indifference to corruption. The arrogant and sanctimonious behaviour of the team of party lawyer spokesmen headed by Sibal, is hard to believe. They have done immense damage to the Congress image that was already badly dented.

In their earlier phase when likes of Kapil Sibal, Manish Tewari and Abhishek Manu Singhvi were trying to malign and destroy Anna Hazare's anti-corruption movement, the popular outrage against them was so great that the party leadership discreetly chose to keep them out of the press briefing circuit. Habits die hard. In the wake of the Supreme Court's February 2 verdict cancelling 122 2G licenses illegally allotted by the then Telecom Minister A.Raja, Kapil Sibal was arrogance and cyncism personified. When most observers and media commentators called the apex court judgement "a historic indictment" of the Manmohan Singh govt., Sibal was insisting that the PM had been "vindicated"! Curiously, Sibal did not seem to realise that he was, in fact, implicitly indicting Manmohan Singh and the then Finance Minister P.Chidambaram by claiming that A.Raja was not listening to their advice in favour of the auction of the spectrum. If that was the case, were both of them-Singh and Chidambaram, not guilty of the abdication of their responsibility to stop their junior colleague from going ahead with a clearly "fraudulent" and "illegal" decision to give the 2G spectrum to "friendly" companies at the 2001 price at a huge loss to the public exchequer? Does this not amount to connivance-a silent acceptance of a criminal act?  

MP Owaisi's communal rantings

Asaduddin Owaisi, the chief of the Majlis Ittehade Muslimeen(MIM) of Hyderabad (Andhra Pradesh), is a Member of the Indian Parliament (Lok Sabha) who never tires of swearing by the Indian Constitution and the secular, multi-religious, multi-cultural character of India. But, if you probe him a little, you will find this England-educated, affluent Hyderabadi who speaks English fluently, as a most bigoted, inflexible, closed mind who is an arch-enemy of the right of freedom of expression of writers like Taslima Nasreen of Bangladesh and London-based, India-born, novelist Salman Rushdie whom he perceives as anti-Islam.

One can understand Owaisi's anger against Rushdie's work of fiction:The Satanic Verses which had unfairly treated Prophet Mohammed's wives by giving their names to some prostitutes in his book. Even I-a non-Muslim-was appalled on reading it. I understand that following a wide-spread protests in the Muslim world and Ayatollah Khomeini's fatwa of death on Rushdie, the author had apologised for his objectionable act. The fatwa was subsequently revoked following Khomeini's death. Recently, in a TV interview (NDTV), Rushdie disclosed that the Satanic Verses has been translated in at least three Muslim countries-Egypt, Turkey and now Libya.

But, Owaisi will have none of it. For him, Salman Rushdie is an anti-Islam devil, a blasphemer who cannot be forgiven although the opening verse of the Quran describes the Allah as "the most compassionate and merciful-ever forgiving"! Owaisi even does not like Rushdie's Booker Award winning work:The Midnight's Children". However, the most objectionable and undemocratic aspect of Owaisi's opposition to the writer, is his denial of the latter's right to travel to his mother country-India-on his PIO card which requires no visa. He was in the forefront in opposing Rushdie's participation in the Jaipur Literature Festival recently. From all accounts, Rushdie is proud of his Muslim faith, its humane and moderate face and not an Owaisi-style intolerant Islam. Owaisi, similarly, hates Taslima Nasreen. In her case, his younger brother Akbar Owaisi, an AP MLA, a few years ago, had physically attacked Nasreen during a book function in Hyderabad, along with a group of his followers. The MP Owaisi, who supposedly believes in non-violence, never expressed any regret; in fact, he reportedly defended his brother's violent assault on her. He reiterated his opposition to her recently when some Muslim fanatics scuttled her new book launch-a volume of her autobigraphical series, called "Nirbasan"(Exile), in Kolkata during the literary fair in the city.

In a TV debate on Times Now news channel, Owaisi justified his pernicious and illegal act when he was asked by the anchor how could he know about the contents of the book without reading it. His contention was that knowing Taslima's anti-Islamic bent of mind, he had the sense of what it would contain-a most ridiculous argument. Yet, Asaduddin Owaisi continues to remain an elected member of our august temple of democracy (Parliament) who is an ally of a secular, supposedly liberal Congress party that heads the UPA government! On his part, Owaisi may be relatively coy and reasonable inside the Lok Sabha to keep the pretence of democratic traditions, but, outside, he merrily spews his communal, Islamist venom in TV debates. His tone and postures are predictable but nontheless obnoxious and shocking, unworthy of a member of Indian Parliament.  
     

Sam Pitroda Congress's new OBC face

One did not expect that in the run-up to the UP elections, round the corner, the ruling Congress party and its heir-apparent-the prospective prime ministerial candidate-Rahu Gandhi, would stoop so low as to dig out the OBC caste of their favourite US-based NRI Sam Pitroda, a telecom professional who is currently working as an Adviser to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on "infrastructure, information and innovations", to try to cash it to woo OBC voters. Satyanarayan Gangaram Pitroda(Sam Pitroda) has been sharing his expertise with the Indian govt, off and on, for over two decades. No one knew his OBC background(carpenter caste), nor it was seemed necessary or relevant.

Yet, being familiar with the Nehru-Gandhi's penchant for exploiting the accursed and ugly aspects of our traditional past, in its pursuit of despicable vote-bank politics, Rahul Gandhi, supposedly a young, modern and progressive face of the party, highlighted Pitroda's caste details in an election rally in UP recently. No wonder, the party paraded Pitroda as the central figure along with a few leading Congress leaders like Kapil Sibal and Mrs Rita Bahuguna Joshi at the party's election manifesto release function in Lucknow yesterday, January 31.

Although press reports seem to suggest that Pitroda was enjoying the attention and playing along with a new OBC iconic identity, there was a lurking hint of some unease behind the facade. When asked about his caste, he said,"Today, my caste is science". Further asked if he liked the way he was being projected as an "OBC leader", his reply was:"That is Rahul Gandhi's(prerogative). I am not trying to fit into any caste and there is no question of being projected as a member of any community". Is it not a most undignified and cynical exploitation of a high-ranking professional to play casteist politics at his expense and clear embarrassment? Is it not a measure of the Congress desperation on the eve of the UP elections to pull out all stops in order to somehow win?  

Defence Minister and PM's role in Army Chief birth year controversy

The UPA government is headed by Manmohan Singh as Prime Minister and he has AK Anthony as one of his senior colleagues holding Defence portfolio. Both are known to be low profile individuals of impeccable integrity and honesty. But, unfortunately, both have a record of laissez faire and being slow in decision-making, often doing much damage to competent governance. The current controversy regarding the birth date of the Army Chief Gen. VK Singh is a classic example of that drift and letting key decisions to drag on excessively, resulting in an unprecedented situation of confrontation between civilian leadership and the army establishment in which the army chief is forced to approach the apex court for justice to protect his honour and integrity in the face of an insensitive and obdurate government. The issue of the birth year of of Gen. VK Singh has been pending for many months but the Defence Minister and the Prime Minister in their strange and inexplicable wisdom clearly let the defence bureaucrats mess up things, instead of looking at the facts as produced by the army chief about his correct birth year(1951 and not 1950) sympathetically and dispassionately. Thus, the issue has been allowed to be debated in the media for a long time making a laughing stock of our official functioning. What could and should have been sorted out quietly appeared as a matter of needless conflict and controversy causing immense heart-burning in the disciplined, dedicated, patriotic defence class.

One wonders what is good of top leaders of the government enjoying a reputation of honesty and incorruptability if they are not prompt, decisive and sensitive to do the right thing at the right time.    

China offends India yet again denying visa to Arunachal IAF officer

The latest episode in a series of offensive and clearly unfriendly acts of China vis-a-vis India is the recent denial of a visa to an Indian Air Force Group Captain from Arunachal Pradesh who was travelling to Beijing as a member of an official Defence delegation. An initial press report said that the Indian govt had called off the Defence visit in protest against the Chinese replay of an earlier hostile attitude on the visa issue concerning Indian citizens from that NE State of the Indian Union. But, unfortunately, a fresh report stated that the Defence delegation's visit to China was still on, only with reduced number, excluding the senior IAF officer from Arunachal who was refused visa by the hosts!

However, being familiar with the utterly timid and cringing behaviour of the UPA govt, one was not surprised. To add insult to the injury, our External Affairs Minister SM Krishna and the National Security Adviser reportedly went out of their way to publicly agree with the Chinese ambassador in New Delhi that some elements unhappy with Sino-Indian "strategic alliance" were deliberately trying to highlight minor incidents in order to project bilateral relations in a bad light. Some Indian observers raised questions about the nature of the socalled "strategic" relations the Minister was talking about!

Judging from China's persistent arrogant and cynical anti-Indian stance, it seems that our neighbour is suffering from a chronic and compulsive itch to hurt and needle India. In the past, in pursuit of its aggressive and expansionist posture, claiming Arunachal Pradesh as its own territory, China refused to recognise the State inhabitants as Indian citizens and denied them visas to visit China even as official Indian delegates. After nation-wide protests and bilateral negotiations, China resorted to a mischievous practice of stapled visas. In an expression of solidarity with its "all-weather" friend-Pakistan, China followed similar practice of stapled visas even for J&K Indian citizens! In the face of a storm of indignation in the media and the govt, the Chinese relented, giving up the stapled visas.

Obviously, old habits die hard. Recently, China's anti-Indian neurosis resurfaced when they humiliated an Indian consular diplomat in a Chinese court room where he had gone to help two Indian employees of a trading company who had been kidnapped and tortured by some Chinese traders. Again, a national outrage against the Chinese high-handedness, forced the UPA govt to act. Beijing regretted with suitable reassurances. Yet, within a few days of that incident, we have a repeat of the visa denial. How could a major country like China which should be grateful to us for what we did to help them in the initial years of the Communist regime's birth to get international recognition and assumption of the UN Seccurity Council membership even ahead of us, be so obnoxiously and relentlessly hostile to us?

Army Chief's birth year- a controversy and PM's address to Science Congress

The unseemly controversy on the Indian Army Chief, Gen VK Singh's birth year does no credit to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's government for its lack of sensitivity, wisdom and finesse to settle the matter quietly, away from the media and public gaze. Unfortunately, it has allowed the issue to drag on for long, giving it an appearance of an unprecedented confrontation between the civilian dispensation and the army establishment. It is amazing that this has happened in the ministership of a politician like AK Anthony who is known to be gentle and fair-minded. Whatever it is, it is most disturbing and distressing as it involves a highy disciplined wing of the govt. that has an admirable record of professionalism and respect for the civilian authority as required in a democracy.

By accepting the incumbent topmost General's contention about his birth date that was confirmed and registered in the army administration records with relevant documents, the government could have protected the honour and dignity of the Chief of Army Staff's high office. By rejecting his insistent claim, it was implicitly disgracing him as a liar! Was it a right approach?



PM compares India with China at the Indian Science Congress
--------------------------------------------------------------

Addressing the Indian Science Congress in Bhubaneshwar(Odissa), on January 3, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh bemoaned that China has "overtaken" India in the "world of science". It seemed a meaningless, needless acknowledgement because, in effect, he was condemning himself and his Congress government which has ruled this country for over five decades, for its unimpressive record of development in science and all other sectors of national activity, primarily because of poor budgetary allocations, misgovernance, bad planning and incompetence.

The historic humiliation of our brave soldiers on the heights of our Eastern border(now Arunachal Pradesh), in 1962 Chinese invasion, was a classic example of the utter neglect of our armed forces due to miserly defence allocations year after year that resulted in their fighting the well-equipped, well-prepared enemy in a wintry war with summer and ill-equipped gear! This sad phenomenon is still visible in several fields. Why merrily, casually refer to this huge lacuna when budget-makers and planners in the PM's team hardly bother? The PM himself cannot shirk his own responsibility as he has been holding this office for over seven years. They turn champions when it comes to allotting massive funds for populist programmes to attract votes of the poor, under the dictates of their supreme leader, Mrs Sonia Gandhi!