FOR BETTER OR FOR WORSE - The quality of Muslim human resources must improve

S.L. RAO
The Telegraph, 9 April

India has very many poor and deprived people. There are large groups like small farmers, landless labourers, urban slum-dwellers and women (especially in low-income families), aborigines and other tribes, lower castes as scheduled in the Constitution and other backward classes among Hindus, Muslims, the indigent elderly, gypsies, and so on.

Deprivation is widespread and not a prerogative of a single community or group. However, on some indicators, Muslims are worse off than Hindus, who also suffer serious deprivation. India’s experience with subsidies, dual pricing and specific handouts is that they have not significantly improved the condition of many recipients. It may only have added to their dependence. Since the Nineties, a fast-growing economy has reduced the numbers of the very poor. We must recognize that economic well-being brings in its wake social well-being as well. The deprived must become better-off and for that they need opportunities and the building of their capability.

Governments must improve opportunities for the poor and deprived. Is reservation of jobs in governments, public enterprises, academia and the private sector the best way of improving opportunities? Such jobs are few in relation to the need and in recent years, are decreasing in numbers.

Few people from scheduled castes and tribes have benefited, perhaps owing to the lack of enough capable people. Tamil Nadu has offered, for the longest period, mid-day meal schemes to schoolchildren. Nutritious meals for pregnant and lactating mothers have helped the health of mothers and infants. Their beneficial effects on school attendance and on decline in fertility rates are known.

Unfortunately, social services delivery by many governments to the poor is inefficient and ineffective. Delivery of government services in health, education and subsidized supplies of essentials, is badly targeted and handled. They are not delivered at least cost and with minimum wastage, nor are they of uniformly high quality to those for whom they are meant.

It is the incompetence of the government delivery system of these services that has resulted in continued deprivation of almost every section of the economically backward in India, despite large expenditures since independence. Children of the very poor get little out of the schools they attend. The quality of delivery of government services must improve. No government has given this the priority it deserves.

In 1992, the National Council of Applied Economic Research commenced the study in detail of human development indicators in each state of India. The sample had a strong rural bias and would get comparable data for Hindus (particularly scheduled castes and tribes) as well as majority-minority religions in each state — for example, Muslims in Uttar Pradesh or Christians in Kerala. The rich data out of this study has been used by many researchers. A key finding was that Muslims were, on many indicators, as badly or well off as the scheduled castes, but the scheduled tribes were the worst off on most indicators. The Sachar committee report has established certain other kinds of deprivation of Muslims that can only be attributed to discrimination.

The Sachar report uses many other data sources, particularly the National Sample Survey and the National Health and Family Planning Survey, and other specially designed studies. Muslims are deprived. So are scheduled castes and tribes in relation to OBCs, uppercaste Hindus and all other minorities. The worst-off Muslims are those in Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and West Bengal, which together have 52 per cent of all Indian Muslims. The Sachar committee compares the status of deprivation between Muslims and Hindus (percentages below are in relation to total number of Hindus or Muslims).

In rural India, Muslims are much less represented in agriculture than Hindus and much more in non-agriculture. While 28 per cent of Hindus had no land, the number was 34 per cent for Muslims. Land holdings by Muslims are, on average, much smaller than those held by Hindus.

However, rural Muslims match rural Hindus in monthly per capita expenditures. Muslims, and especially women in rural areas, trail even farther behind Hindus on higher education.

In urban India, 53 per cent of Muslims are self-employed versus 39 per cent of Hindus. Muslims have much lower representation in regular wage or salaried employment than Hindus. The proportion of illiterates is somewhat higher among Muslim males, but illiteracy is rampant among Muslim females. The differences become much sharper at higher levels of education. Secondary school education was undertaken by 17 per cent of Hindus and 8 per cent Muslims; while graduates and above were 7.9 per cent Hindus and 0.8 per cent Muslims. Less women than men among Hindus, and even less Muslim women as compared to Hindu women went for higher education. In urban India, at household monthly per capita expenditures above Rs 110, there are 64 per cent Hindus versus 46 per cent Muslims, and below Rs 110 there are 53 per cent Muslims versus 36 per cent Hindus, that is, urban Muslims have much lower expenditures. With higher percentage of all Muslims living in urban areas, Muslims are expenditure-wise worse off.

Female work participation rates among both Muslim and Hindu urban women are low. In rural areas, the work participation of both is more than three times that in urban areas. The differences between Hindu and Muslim women on this indicator are small. On some social indicators, the Muslims do much better. Thus the Muslim sex ratio is better than the Hindu one, and except for Gujarat and Jammu and Kashmir, Muslims are at the same or higher levels than Hindus in every state. Muslims have more live births and higher surviving proportions than Hindus, and this is so at all levels of income. While contraceptive usage among Muslims is lower than among Hindus, the differences are not large in relation to their populations. Perhaps there may be less female foeticide and infanticide among Muslims, and better mother and child care.

Muslims are far fewer in government employment in relation to their population. In key states, Muslims had 6.3 per cent share in state government employment, 7.8 per cent in judiciary and 7.4 per cent in public enterprises, all less than half of their proportions in the population. The flow of benefits under various government schemes to Muslims is very low in almost every state. Habitations with large Muslim populations in the states with large Muslim populations (West Bengal, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and Assam) also suffer from government neglect in available facilities like schools, healthcare centres, post offices, bus stops and proper approach roads.

Muslims are better than their Hindu counterparts on monthly household per capita expenditures (in rural areas), female sex ratios, infant and maternal mortality, to name a few. The means that achieved these better outcomes must be identified and the community institutions that enabled them to happen must be nurtured.

Muslim deprivation appears to be owing to social mores (poor female education), possible discrimination (poor representation in higher education), and definite discrimination (poor services in predominantly Muslim habitations). Like the deprived among the Hindus, Muslims also require a better quality of school education. More and better-remunerated teachers, better teacher attendance at schools, more school facilities, outreach programmes to improve English and general knowledge, are some aspects that must improve in government schools. This improvement must happen for all communities.

Reservations will not help Muslims as they have not helped the SCs and STs. The quality of Muslim human resources must improve. Institutions that have helped achieve better results on some parameters could be used to improve on the poor parameters as well. New institutions must be developed to improve the delivery of social services from governments to Muslims. Muslim non-governmental groups must be formed to ensure that Muslims get their due share of government services and expenditures.

The author is former director-general, National Council for Applied Economic Research

"It's time we move towards conflict resolution"

Amit Baruah
The Hindu, 6 April

Pakistan's Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz speaks on a range of issues — from bilateral trade to Siachen to the suspension of his country's top judge. Excerpts from an exclusive interview in New Delhi on Wednesday:

This is your second visit to India as Prime Minister. Given your background as an international banker, how do you look at India — its growth and future trajectory?

The growth in India is impressive. All countries in South Asia have been doing well. As you know, Pakistan has been achieving very high rates of growth; so has India. This is a reflection of the policies pursued by respective governments.

I think the challenge we both face is making sure that the growth is equitable and shared by people at all levels. I cannot speak on the details of how this is working in India, but I can tell you about Pakistan. The reforms we have undertaken are based on a philosophy of liberalisation, deregulation, privatisation, transparency, and continuity of policy.

These are the hallmarks of our reform agenda and have allowed us to grow very rapidly. The per capita income of Pakistan is higher than many South Asian countries, including higher than India. It is now $846 per head and this is for the year ending June. We are looking at a $1,000 per capita within two years.

So, the people, naturally, are seeing a growing economy, a bigger pie. And, at the same time, their standard of living is improving. About 60 per cent of our population lives in rural areas. We are very conscious of the rural economy and have spent a lot of effort in improving the rural economy and that is producing results.

This year again, the rural part of the economy will grow handsomely and the best way to reduce poverty, at least in Pakistan, is to get rural incomes up. That's what we are trying to do.

India has achieved tremendous distance in areas like IT [information technology]. There, they are world class. I think this is one of the best practices that other countries can learn from.

By and large, the [Indian] economy is well positioned, investment is doing well and, your strength, as I see it, is the private sector. They have really driven the growth in the economy and the Government has created a policy paradigm that suits that. This will augur well for the future also.

Since April 2003, when the peace process between India and Pakistan began in earnest, what would you say have been the major gains for the two sides?

The peace process has been going on for a while. The major difference it has resulted in is more serious engagement at all levels between the two countries. This has also transcended governments. You had a change in government in India, and the process continued. It started with Mr. [Atal Bihari] Vajpayee and we are now dealing with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.

In both situations [countries], there is a growing awareness that peace in South Asia, dispute resolution between India and Pakistan, will allow the two countries to create an atmosphere which will promote development, growth — allow us to realise our full potential.

After all, for how long will we continue with disputes? It's time we move towards conflict resolution. That is the fundamental driver. President [Pervez] Musharraf has presented several proposals to [address], for example, the Kashmir dispute, which has been a major dispute between the two countries.

The Kashmir issue has to be addressed and resolved in line with the wishes and aspirations of the Kashmiri people and done in a way that any reason for tension between the two countries, as a result of this issue, is minimised.

If we develop trust, if we develop a closer relationship, where the success of one makes the other country happy, where the progress of one makes the other country progress. Today, as we live in a globalised world, the environment around you is as important as the environment in your own country.

If you have a source of destabilisation, or uncertainty around your neighbourhood, it will affect you. You cannot be immune from it. That is what makes SAARC [South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation] more important as a platform for regional issues, which can be discussed.

As we move ahead, there is a growing realisation that let's look at solving issues, let's lower the temperatures, let's create an environment so that we can move ahead and make sure it influences the whole region.

You look at Asean [Association of Southeast Asian Nations] today. Asean does not have a serious issue, Asean has not had any military action against each other. They have progressed — look where they were, look where they are.

We can do the same; we have to look at it [South Asia] as a region. No longer can any leader or country look at just their country and forget the neighbourhood.

Do you think the leaders of India and Pakistan are in a position to sell a compromise solution on Kashmir to their peoples?

I think the evolution of any solution must and will reflect saleability and acceptability by all stakeholders. Otherwise, naturally, it will not have traction. Whatever options you come up with must have traction so that when you move, you get people to say `yes this makes sense.'

You must have faith in the people who are negotiating and the leadership of both countries. Whatever evolves should be acceptable to the key stakeholders. Time will tell, of course. In many situations, there could be a series of options or solutions and these solutions can then be put out for discussion. Once we get the feedback, we can then crystallise it even further.

On a simpler issue like Siachen, do you think we are close to a deal?

On Siachen there are some technical details between the two armed forces. The Defence Secretaries are meeting in the next couple of days. Let's wait and see how their talks go. All issues, frankly, can be complicated or simple depending on where you're coming from.

On Siachen, we have discussed various aspects of the region, which people have called the mountain of peace. And, we want to make the mountain of peace a reality. It is very tough terrain, it is hostile in the sense of weather and logistics.

So, if we can find a solution, which can lower the temperature there, then it will be, clearly, a very tangible demonstration of the will and ability of two countries, where they had conflict, to solve it through dialogue and discussion.

Certainly, Pakistan feels this issue can be addressed through dialogue and both countries will have to be magnanimous, courageous, flexible, and show leadership.

It's very important for Siachen to be resolved because with global warming, with the environment changing, to protect our environment, we must have an early solution to the Siachen issue. Today, you have people living there, all sorts of activity, logistics and that is really affecting the environment negatively. So, there is an environmental aspect to Siachen, which is another reason for the issue to be resolved and resolved amicably.

The World Bank has said in a new report that trade between India and Pakistan would touch $9 billion if trade barriers were to be lifted. Do you think that's an underestimate?

May I say that World Bank reports are very useful, but they are a point of view. My own view is that this $9 billion figure may not be unrealistic. That doesn't mean it's a static number. Trade works when there is mutual benefit on both sides.

If a country exports more, and the other country imports willingly, that is, to us, a very successful relationship. The concept of trade balance, is frankly, an archaic concept because the very definition of trade is willing buyer, willing seller.

Pakistan is a free trade country. We have not opened total trade with India because the public opinion in Pakistan was that let's link it to progress on Kashmir. Having said that, we just added 300-plus items [to the positive list for trade with India].

On SAFTA (South Asian Free Trade Area), you'll agreed to a negative list applicable to all SAARC countries and then withdrew this for India. Is this because of the public opinion issue you referred to earlier?

No, no. We've been very clear from day one on SAFTA. SAFTA is a treaty, which allows the movement of goods, but as you know there is a restricted list of certain sensitive items.

Overriding SAFTA are local laws and regulations. The [Pakistani] Cabinet noted in its approval that all local regulations and laws would be followed.

Whenever there is, and this is international law, a difference between a treaty and domestic law, domestic statutes override everything. So, that is what we are doing. Having said that, I just mentioned to you we have added 300-plus items.

The reason we did go on a positive list — this is the only country [India] in the world with which we have a positive list — `why' you may ask the question... because of all the disputes, etc., we didn't want to go to a scenario and the laws and regulations we have address that.

As disputes are resolved, I think trade will be positively impacted. As regards facing the threat of competition from Indian industry, not an issue. We have a free trade agreement with China! So, we are very open as a destination for trade and also for investment.

What about Indian companies investing in Pakistan?

Not yet.

The tragic February 19 killing of mainly Pakistani passengers on the Samjhauta Express showed that terrorists have stopped making a distinction between Indians and Pakistanis. Who do you think could be behind such an incident?

I think we should ask your Government. We did discuss it [on Wednesday], the Prime Minister and I. The Samjhauta Express incident is a serious incident. Many Pakistani lives were lost and this is a matter of considerable concern to the people of Pakistan.

I mentioned [this] to the Prime Minister and he agreed to share with us on a continuous basis the progress of the investigation.

We look to the Government of India to investigate the matter, get to the bottom of it and get the culprits to book. We hope this will be completed in reasonable time so that such events, where so many innocent lives were lost, do not occur ever again.

According to reports, the Jaish-e-Muhammad was responsible for the twin attacks on Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf in December 2003. Yet its leader, Masood Azhar, remains a free man in Pakistan. How is that possible?

Well, I think, let's not discuss press reports as to who was responsible. If somebody is charged with an offence, then nobody can remain free unless, of course, they go underground.

I think you have to be careful as a responsible journalist not to just work on speculative stories. So, I don't want to comment on this situation, but what you've said may have been printed in papers.

When you are dealing with sensitive matters like attempts, etc., you must get to the bottom. The attempts on President Musharraf were Al-Qaeda motivated and many people have been caught and sentenced. So, all the relevant people have been taken to task. And, it was a very comprehensive investigation in both cases.

So, I would not like to, on-the-record, say anything.

We now have a formal, anti-terror mechanism between the two countries. But will all these decades of suspicion actually give way to intelligence sharing or cooperation? Do you think it's possible?

I would say it is definitely possible. Let's start somewhere. If we don't start, we will never remove the baggage of the past. So, in today's world, as we face common threats, intelligence sharing and security cooperation is absolutely essential.

And, if we start somewhere, gradually we will build a relationship, which will certainly be beneficial to both countries because terrorism knows no borders and all countries must engage with each other to find ways to contain it, control it, stop it.

Both General Musharraf and you had been able to put in place a fine balance between Parliament, judiciary, the press, and the Army. But, somehow, the suspension of Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry has disturbed that balance.

I think the issue that relates to the Chief Justice is based on a reference, which has been sent to the Supreme Judicial Council under Article 209 of our Constitution — it's very clear — that has been followed. Now, the honourable judges who are members of the Supreme Judicial Council have to conduct their proceedings and come up with a conclusion.

I think the overall functioning of the state and the stability of various arms of the Government is very much there. The country is moving ahead and this issue will be resolved through the Supreme Judicial Council in time — they have to go through their deliberations and hear all sides and hear all parties.

This is not something extra-constitutional or anything like that.

You wouldn't say it's a case of executive over-reach?

When the Supreme Judicial Council conducts its hearings and comes up with a judgment — let them decide. The matter is sub judice so I cannot comment on specifics, except to say that we have full faith in the Supreme Judicial Council to decide what is, in fact, their constitutional responsibility.

There's been a lot of talk about the President being re-elected by the existing Assemblies. Is that going to happen?

As you know, the Constitution of Pakistan is very clear that whenever a President election is held, the Assembly at that time constitutes the electoral college. And, that's true in India, too, as you know.

Since the electoral college includes State Assemblies and the Upper House and the Lower House — this is true in Pakistan too. In fact, there's case law here, in India, where there is no question that whichever Assembly is in session, is duly elected, or is functioning at the time, is the electoral college of the President.

That is what will happen in Pakistan, too, when the election happens. The Constitution requires the Assemblies to be there unless they are being elected at the time and they will constitute the electoral college of the President.

Not so long ago, your Foreign Office had called in the U.S. Ambassador in Islamabad because there had been some incidents in which Pakistani soldiers had been killed in your territory. Does this worry you?

(Turns to his officials to check the facts of the case). That can happen when you have troops deployed on either side. Naturally, we have NATO [North Atlantic Treaty Organisation] troops on the other side [in Afghanistan] and sometimes because the border is not marked everywhere and they may be engaging somebody and the firing may have crossed into our territory. It happens occasionally when you have active military activity on both sides.

But, we, naturally, like any country, are very conscious of our sovereignty and territorial integrity. So, if there is a violation, we do take notice and take the necessary action. But, when you have active operations near your border, these things occasionally can happen.

There is no intentional activity as far as we know.

There was some testimony by a U.S. State Department official relating to the sale of F-16 aircraft to Pakistan in July 2006. He spoke of a two-man rule in access to your aircraft. Is this the correct position? Are these the terms of the sale?

Whatever the terms are, are privileged information. I am not at liberty to discuss it with you. (Laughs)

A lot has been said about the Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline. Do you think that the situation in the region will permit the pipeline to go through?

I discussed the matter with Prime Minister Singh this morning and we both agreed that India and Pakistan will pursue this pipeline. It is in our national interest. We both are growing, we both have increasing energy needs. And, as such, we need to pursue this in our own national interest. We've publicly said so today. I think it's in the press release. I don't know if you've seen ours.

To us mein hamne clearly daal diya hai. Us pe badi detailed baat hui. (We've clearly put it in our press release. We had a very detailed conversation on the gas pipeline)

Do you think something will happen on the gas pipeline?

Dekhiye, hamaare interest mein hai naa. Hoga. Ho jayega. (Look, the pipeline is in our interest. It will happen).

Immigrants prop up U.S. cities

Suzanne Goldenberg

IMMIGRATION IS helping to keep America's big cities vibrant and alive, buffering major metropolitan areas from a slow drain in population as long-time residents move out, new data released on Thursday by the U.S. Census Bureau show. The trend also holds true for smaller centres.

"New York would certainly be declining in population, same with Los Angeles, and so they really are kind of propping up the population in a lot of big cities," said Mark Mather of the Population Reference Bureau. "In some places, like in the rust belt around Pittsburgh, where they are having real substantial population loss, immigrants are playing a vital role. They are coming in and filling needed jobs, and providing some of the tax base that is needed to help the economy." The area still lost 60,000 of its population between 2000 and last year, according to census data, but without immigration the decline would have been far worse.

By the middle of this century those patterns of movement — native-born Americans moving out, newcomers moving in — will put a very different face on the average city.

Emotional topic

In some of the fastest growing cities, such as the Dallas-Fort Worth area, immigrants accounted for nearly 80 per cent of population growth over the last six years. Such transformation, under way in cities including New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles and in towns such as Ames, Iowa, and Battle Creek, Michigan, comes at a time when immigration has emerged as the most emotionally charged topic of public debate in the U.S. after the Iraq war.

New York and its suburbs absorbed one million immigrants from 2000 to 2006, the census data show. Without them the region would have shrunk by nearly 600,000 people. Immigration to Los Angeles prevented an expected decline of 200,000. The Boston area took in 163,000 immigrants, saving it from negative population growth. For many native-born Americans, the issue of immigration is tangled up with frustration at the country's failure to seal off its borders. About a third of the 36 million immigrants to the U.S. are believed to be in the country illegally.

Last month the White House introduced a proposal for reforms that would allow millions to stay in the country as guest workers after paying substantial fines, but that would clamp down on illegal border crossings from Mexico. However, advocates for new immigrants argue that the latest data show that the newcomers are essential to keep American cities afloat.

— © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2007

The developmental challenge in rural India

Somnath Chatterjee
The Hindu, 4 April

This is essentially about helping the rural sector realise its own potential by using the gains of modern science and technology and industrial development.

INDIA IS emerging as a major power with the economy registering high growth rates and our cities and urban centres beginning to display marks of affluence. Yet, there is no uniform development, the rural hinterland not being able to march in tandem with urban India. More than 70 per cent of our people live in villages — 80 per cent of our poor also live in rural areas. The benefits of economic growth are not percolating to more than two-thirds of the people. The visible symbols of development should not make us forget the problems of the rural areas.

The Indian economy is the fourth largest in the world. But the growth pattern is not uniform. While the rate of growth for manufacturing, services, and communications sectors has substantially improved, in vital sectors such as agriculture, infrastructure development, and community and social services, and in rural development as a whole, our performance is not appreciable.

Without the development of rural people, the country can never claim to be developed. In recent years, agricultural growth has fallen and so have investment and profitability of agriculture, net sown area under crops, and the area under irrigation. According to the Economic Survey 2006-2007, low yield per unit area across almost all crops has become a regular feature.

Rural India is in crisis. As Dr. M.S. Swaminathan, the distinguished agricultural economist, said, "The agrarian crisis has its roots in the collapse of the rural economy... Unemployment leading to out-migration of the asset-less is growing. The minimum support price mechanism is not operating for most commodities. At every level of the livelihood security system, there is a tendency to make profit out of poverty. Something is terribly wrong in the countryside... "

Today, finding themselves helpless in the face of adversities of various kinds, the peasantry in parts of the country is resorting to extreme measures. Repeated crop failures due to unpredictable climatic variations, inability to meet the rising cost of cultivation, and the increasing debt burden are among the factors leading to frustration. In such a scenario, meeting the challenges of rural reconstruction becomes a formidable and priority task.

Agriculture being the mainstay of our economy, it is imperative that we have a comprehensive and time-bound programme to extricate the sector from stagnation, if not deceleration. Larger irrigation facilities, better seeds and agri-inputs, and fertilizer at reasonable costs will have to be provided to farmers, along with finance and infrastructural and marketing facilities. Agriculture must become an income generating activity and farmers should not be left to the vicissitudes of weather, financial resources, and markets.

To increase productivity and employment generation in the sector, there is a need to bring about structural changes, primarily based on land reforms, as support prices and provision of cheap credit do not help beyond a point. Experience has shown that providing the poor with access to land is not anti-growth. In the rural growth strategy, the dynamism of small family farms plays an important role. Here are some facts about the agricultural turnaround made by West Bengal, mainly due to the extensive land reforms measures undertaken by the State Government over the last three decades.

Land reforms in West Bengal have had two important components: tenancy reforms, known as Operation Barga (share croppers) and the redistribution of land. Operation Barga gave 1.5 million bargadars, or registered tenants, permanent and heritable right to cultivate leased land. Of them, over 30 per cent were Dalits and 12 per cent Adivasis.

Some 1.1 million acres of agricultural land has been re-distributed in West Bengal among 2.9 million landless and marginal farmer families, 55 per cent of whom are from the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. Apart from agricultural land, 6.8 lakh households below the poverty line have been given homestead land.

These institutional reforms in ownership of agricultural land unleashed the peasantry's productive forces, resulting in an increase in foodgrain production at the rate of 6 per cent per annum, making West Bengal the country's largest producer of rice and the second largest producer of potato. Its other positive impacts included increasing cropping intensity from 136 per cent in 1980 to 180 per cent today, the second highest in the country, contributing to a consistent share of 3.6 per cent for agriculture in the State's GDP, compared to the country's figure of 1.53 per cent.

Having the highest growth of per capita Net State Domestic Product during the 1990s resulted in a decline in the percentage of population below the poverty line from 60 per cent in 1977 to 21 per cent currently. This contributed to a rise in per capita calorie intake in rural Bengal by 9.6 per cent during 1983-84; nationally it decreased by 3 per cent during the period.

On the national scene, 87 per cent of our villages are in clusters of population of 2,000 or below. These provide small markets without efficient linkages and financing options for which the farmers have fallen prey to middlemen and moneylenders. In many cases, low quality agricultural inputs, sometimes even spurious products, affect productivity, and that tends to trap the farmer deeper in poverty.

We cannot afford to leave the agriculture sector to the vicissitudes of an imperfect market. Apart from ensuring short-term measures such as remunerative support prices and cheap agricultural credit, the state should make substantial long term investments in minor irrigation, water conservation, building rural roads and markets, electrifying villages, providing robust primary education and health facilities in the rural areas.

The efficacy and potential of the cooperative movement in addressing the problems of rural India stand proved. Since rural development essentially encompasses a multi-disciplinary approach, there must be an in-built mechanism to involve people's representation in the conceptualisation, planning, and management of any rural development programme, particularly relating to crop production, water conservation and minor irrigation. Self-help is the best help. Self-Health Groups are examples of the new "social economy" emerging in India. Collectively they represent a large network of grassroots entrepreneurs to generate incomes in rural areas. Today there are more than 25 lakh SHGs with nearly 75 lakh "swarojgaris". We must encourage them, for they can transform rural India by unleashing the entrepreneurial energies of ordinary Indians.

The developmental challenge in rural India is not about making a choice between the imperatives of industrial development and the compelling need for agricultural growth; it is essentially about helping the rural sector realise its own potential for development by using the gains of modern science and technology and industrial development as such. It does not make good economic or political sense to reduce the whole issue to one of a choice between one sector or the other. We have to strive for growth with a human face that is socially equitable and regionally balanced, where all the sectors and the entire population partake of the fruits of our growing economy.

Gross National Entitlement

We need to look at future progress with a new concept of Gross National Entitlement — where people, specially those from the vulnerable sections, will be entitled to earn their living, to have quality education, the right to access good healthcare, to obtain basic needs and indeed will be entitled to and actually have the freedom to live in dignity, instead of being forced to accept what is being doled out by the system.
This is not impossible or unrealistic. We have the examples of several countries, which by determined efforts have effectively addressed the problems of underdevelopment and inequity within very short span of time in recent decades. I recently visited Vietnam, leading a parliamentary delegation, and witnessed the incredible developments that country, which was exploited by long periods of colonialism and ravaged by imperialist wars, could achieve in a short period both in its urban and rural areas. All sections of our political spectrum should treat issues of rural India, where agriculture no doubt occupies the central position, as major national issues, transcending political and geographical barriers and partisan considerations so that the core of our national endeavour can be the speedy and comprehensive development of rural India. In this task the nation's primary duties will be to ensure quality education, adequate health care, sufficient infrastructure for development and for better and better standards of living. The future lies in the development of rural India and it cannot be subjected to partisan political confrontation.

We stand at a turning point that has the potential to bring rural India into the mainstream of economic development. No challenges come without opportunities. We have an unparalleled opportunity to harness the maturity in our economic system, the technological advancements brought about by the infotech revolution, and the potential of a global market to bring in a new dimension of development to rural India. There is an unmistakable realisation and emphatic acknowledgment not only in India but also abroad that if the 21st century is going to be the Asian century, then India will be playing a pivotal role in making that happen.

For that we have to carry on board our large rural populace as well to actualise the dream of developing the nation. The wheels of industry and commerce could rotate smoothly only with a strong agriculture and prosperous rural hinterland.

(Excerpted from Lok Sabha Speaker Somnath Chatterjee's address, on "Rural India: Developmental Challenges," at the 26th annual convocation of the Institute of Rural Management, Anand, Gujarat, on April 3.)

Santa Claus visits the Tatas - Freebies from a debt-ridden government

Ashok Mitra
The Telegraph, 30 March

The uproar over Nandigram — and Singur — in West Bengal will not die away soon. Competitive democracy has its own laws; those opposed to the party ruling in the state will try to squeeze the maximum advantage from the discomfiture it has brought upon itself.

Speculation continues on the riddle as to why, despite repeated assurances to the contrary, the state administration fell back on a colonial-type police offensive to re-assert its authority in Nandigram. The underlying reason, informed sources suggest, was a strong message from the Salim group, who were promised vast stretches of land in the area for their chemical hub project; they might move away elsewhere, the message said, if the land was not handed over to them within the next few weeks. That set the panic bell ringing; the sequel has been horrifying.

Nothing illustrates more glaringly the spell globalization has cast on the country, even on those whose ideology and praxis should have prepared them to cope with it in a better manner. Industrialization, the rationale of which few will dispute, is being taken to be synonymous with industrialization under private auspices. To talk of industrial growth in the state sector is assumed to be heresy. Questions such as whether a particular private project will actually lead to a net increase in employment or output are discouraged too. Fables are having a field day: the private sector means efficiency to the nth degree, public enterprise is the other name for sloth, incompetence and wastage. The stunning achievements of the National Thermal Corporation, Bharat Heavy Electricals, Nalco, the Oil and Natural Gas Commission, the Gas Authority of India or the Indian Oil Corporation in recent years are conveniently ignored. Also brushed aside is any reference to the huge resources at the command of public sector fiscal agencies such as the Life Insurance Corporation of India and the Unit Trust of India.

As in the other poorer countries, here too fiscal devices are introduced at the behest of US-led international financial institutions to compel ruling politicians to desist from taking new initiatives in the public sector. The Fiscal Responsibility and Budgetary Management Act is being applied to admonish both the Centre and state governments not to ‘fritter’ resources on public sector extravaganzas. There is, in consequence, a gradual maturing of the belief that industrial activities are a natural monopoly of private entities, foreign as well as domestic.

The Left Front in West Bengal is the product of a historical movement which had as its credo the expansion of public goods and industrial growth through the deus ex machina of the public sector. Those currently in charge of the Front government in the state have apparently convinced themselves that, in the era of globalization, ideological shibboleths are poison, development ipso facto is development sponsored by the private sector, the government has only the residuary obligations to acquire land, on behalf of private tycoons, on which industry is supposed to be set up, and, in addition, provide costly infrastructural facilities the private sector will not build on its own because of their low profitability.

Once development is defined in such constricted terms, maximizing the rate of return for private operators becomes the only criterion by which to judge success. The logic is simple: if private profit expands, capitalists feel good; if capitalists feel good, they will expand their activities and the economy will have growth. The state government does not dare to enquire whether activities undertaken by capitalists will be on the basis of any careful analysis of costs and benefits, or whether in deciding the technology for the investments undertaken, alternative choices will be considered. Fifty years ago, when official faith in economic planning was still extant in the country, any investment proposal would be examined, taking into account the expected rate of income growth, the expected rate of employment growth and the expected rate of surplus or profit. With the eclipse of the planning era, such elementary practices have gone the way of all flesh; the only desideratum regarded as relevant is the expected rate of generation of private profit.

This transformation is illustrated most luridly by the details the state administration in West Bengal has finally been forced to disclose concerning the agreement it has reached with the Tata group apropos the small car project at Singur. The Tatas are, of course, rolling in money. Only a couple of months ago, they invested a sum roughly the equivalent of Rs 50,000 crore to take command of a giant international steel complex. To persuade this fabulously rich group to start a modest-sized car factory here, the state government has already spent something around Rs 150 crore to acquire close to 1,000 acres of land. The least that was expected was that it would recoup this amount from the Tatas. Nothing of the sort. Instead, the Tatas have been handed over this entire tract of land on a ninety-year lease without any down payment at all. For the first five years of the lease, they will pay only one crore rupees; for the next twenty-five years, the payment will increase by 25 per cent at five-year intervals; for the next thirty years payment will be raised at five-year intervals by 33 per cent; for the final twenty years, the rent will be only Rs 20 crore per year.

The discounted present value of what the Tatas have agreed to pay, any respectable accountant will vouchsafe, will hardly exceed Rs 50 crore. Equally necessary to take into account here are the historical trends in the rate of inflation and the likely explosion of real estate values through the decades of the 21st century. The conclusion is incontrovertible: the government is, really and truly, making a free gift to the Tatas of the land in Singur.

That is, however, only a minor part of the story. The state government is, in addition, offering the Tata group a gift coupon in the way of a loan worth Rs 200 crore carrying a nominal interest of only 1 per cent (as against the rate currently charged by the banks of at least 10 per cent); the principal, one suspects, is never intended to be returned. Finally, in terms of the lease agreement, the entire proceeds for the first ten years of the value-added tax on the sale of this precious car in West Bengal are proposed to be handed back to the Tatas, again at a nominal interest of only 1 per cent. If 40,000 cars are sold every year in West Bengal — not an unreconcilable assumption — with a value- added tax at 12.5 cent, this particular act of magnanimity on the part of the state would ensure an extra bonanza of more than Rs 500 core for the Tatas.

All told, therefore, the group is being offered the allure of around Rs 850 crore by the state government, apart from their being spared the bother of acquiring the land through their own efforts. The deal does not though mention what the Tatas are, in exchange, offering West Bengal. There is not even a stray reference to the likely employment, direct or indirect, consequent to the setting up of the plant. Were the employment generated not to exceed 10,000, that would just about equal the number of share-croppers and landless farm workers displaced at Singur following the acquisition of land. The state’s outlay of Rs 850 crore would be for nothing.

Suspend the debate over the ideology of development. Also steer clear of the pastime of apportioning moral responsibility for the deaths and other incidents in Singur and Nandigram. Forget for the moment the dubious economics too. What about one’s sense of aesthetics though? Does it not appear obscene that a state government, carrying a burden of debt of more than Rs 150,000 crore and with a countless number of problems, would offer a freebie of Rs 850 crore to an industrial group which has made an outlay of over Rs 50,000 crore only the other day to satisfy their expansionary ego overseas?

And meanwhile in Vidharbha

P. Sainath
The Hindu, 29 March

There have been some 250 farm suicides in just the first three months of this year. Things could be a lot worse after June. And, as always, the farm suicides are a symptom of the crisis, not its cause.

FARM SUICIDES in Maharashtra rose by over 354 per cent between 1995 and 2003. That's if the data of the National Crime Records Bureau are anything to go by. Strictly speaking they are not, being gross under-estimates. They draw from local machinery, which from region to region leaves out thousands from the lists of farm suicides. Yet, they still present a clear trend — a painful one. Even these twisted numbers show that farm suicides went up from 1,083 in 1995 to 3,836 eight years later.

For one thing, these figures are for all of Maharashtra. Which means if we were looking at just Vidharbha or Marathwada, the rise would be more horrendous. For another, these regions saw their greatest spurt in farm suicides after 2003 — where the last available NCRB data stops. The government of Maharashtra admits to 1,447 farm suicides in 2006 alone. And that's in only six districts of Vidharbha. So just these six districts saw far more suicides in 2006 than the whole State did in 1995. That's if we give credence to official readings of the data.

Events on the ground confirm the trend, if not the accuracy of the data. Nine women turned widows on International Women's Day in Vidharbha. That's how many farmers took their lives on March 8. The highest on a single day in the region's recent history. Till two weeks later, when it happened again. There have been some 250 farm suicides in just the first three months of this year. Things could be a lot worse after June. And, as always, the farm suicides are a symptom of the crisis, not its cause. They are its outcome, not its engine.

Just months from now, Vidharbha could see its first 100 per cent Bt cotton season. Bt cotton accounted for over 60 per cent of acreage last season. As acreage under it rises, so do the risks taken by the farmer. The Maharashtra government admits Bt cotton has fared very poorly in rain-fed regions. And it's clear that the seed companies might market much less of hybrid varieties in the coming season, if they do that at all. Why sell hybrid when there's more money to be made in Bt cotton? So even as many, including the National Commission on Farmers, call for making Vidharbha "an organic farming zone," the reverse process is in full swing. Even apart from its report, the NCF chairperson, Dr. M.S. Swaminathan, pressed the government of Maharashtra on the notion of an organic zone. But the State's own seed corporation is a major distributor for Bt cotton.

This gets more worrying when you look at the record of the last few years. The government began the last season's harvest with boasts of a "record" 350 lakh quintal "bumper crop." The claim was made by the State's Minister of Marketing, Harshvardhan Patil. And this grand success was swiftly credited to Bt cotton in some media reports. As the run of events punctured these claims, the figure was scaled down more than once. This is further confirmed by how little of cotton the official agencies have procured. For all of them together, the figure has not crossed 70 lakh quintals. And private traders are believed to have picked up around 110 lakh quintals.

In short, less than 180 lakh quintals. And this in a time of distress when the numbers should have been much higher, when farmers would have been desperate to sell. It means production could not have topped 220 lakh quintals, and could well have been less. Consider that in the `non-Bt cotton year' of 2003, procurement alone was over 210 lakh quintals. Production was far higher, at close to 250 lakh quintals.

This equation shows how high the risks are in the coming season. Vidharbha did better in a `non-Bt cotton year' than during one in which more than 60 per cent of the acreage was under Bt cotton. The State government's own report informs us that in preceding seasons too, "In rain-fed conditions, Bt cotton has not paid good returns." And 97 per cent of cotton grown in Maharashtra is unirrigated. Here's the nub: a poor monsoon could make the earlier crisis seasons look like the good old times.

There's more irony to the vanished `bumper crop.' It has in fact been so hard to find that cotton prices are better than we've seen in a long time. In some places, they are as high as Rs.2,400 a quintal. At Rs.1,500 a quintal, soybean too is getting a better deal than before. Well, go easy on the cheers. It means that most farmers will go back to these crops again. The present prices, though still not good enough for cotton, will prove tempting. True, some people have turned to other crops. And it would be a good thing, further, if even cotton growers reserved an acre of their lands for jowar. That would give their families some security. But this is not happening on any large scale.

When they return to cotton months from now, it will be to a Bt cotton-saturated season. Input prices will be higher. And yes, they will still use lots of pesticides. And the credit crunch will be far worse. Farmers are already figuring out the high cost of low interest loans. To begin with, very few had access to these six per cent interest loans. Those not repaying their sums by March 31 are out of the loop. Since not more than 20 per cent of them can do that, it means that farmers will be facing the old, higher rates again, very soon.

Since there has been no loan waiver, most will be unable to access the credit they need from the banks. So it's back to the new loan sharks: the input dealers, the sellers of seed, the fake finance companies. The more this happens, the more the dealers will determine the inputs the farmers use. And, as an official report put it, for Bt cotton, "the yields have been unstable." ( The Hindu , November 25, 2006). "When farmers invest heavily in purchasing seeds and other inputs, the net return has often been negative."

What's more, there is nothing to suggest that the present cotton prices will rule next season. Not a step has been taken towards a price stabilisation fund. That would have made a big difference. But it's another NCF recce that bites the dust.

With things that serious, you'd expect a sense of urgency in the government. True, a handful of officers have on their own made efforts to study and measure the crisis. As a government — not a thing has changed. The Prime Minister's package is a shambles. The Chief Minister's efforts consist of contacting more Babas and Ammas for the spiritual salvation of the Vidharbha farmer. Salvation comes at a price. Which could translate into a number of these godmen being gifted prime pieces of real estate worth crores of rupees in due course. Their agents are already out scouting for the best locations, which they will then ask the government for. The business end of spirituality has always been deeply rooted in terra firma.

If anything in this mess occupies the government's mind at all, it is the mounting numbers of suicides. These do not constitute the crisis in itself. But they are a great tragedy and bad publicity. And a huge embarrassment to the extent this government can experience that emotion at all. So the state get ever more creative.
The number of suicides in six Vidharbha districts gets worse. So how do we bring them down? By upping the `rejection rate' of such suicides. Surely we are the only country in the world that has a category called `eligible suicides.' (As distinct, say, from eligible bachelors or the like.) This term refers to those cases the state deems are `real' farmers suicides. This means the affected families will get some compensation. It does not matter that the rest — the ineligible — are just as dead. Or that their families suffer no less.

One government report records that the "number of cases reported" in the six districts in 2002 was 105. In 2006, that number was 1,447. That's an increase in farm suicides of over 1,300 per cent in cases reported in five years. But while 69 per cent of the cases in 2002 were found `eligible' for compensation, just 40 per cent of last year's cases were found `eligible.' So more and more farmers are killing themselves. But fewer of these deaths will be counted as `farmers suicides.' In 2006, this rejection rate rose sharply almost every month of the year. For instance, 60 suicides were found `not eligible' in January last year. In October the same year, the rejected cases were 120. Ever growing numbers are rejected in this desperate bid to dilute the bad news.

Simply put, what's rising fastest in Maharashtra is self-delusion. We could see big trouble from May-June onwards. Which could be terrible by Diwali time if the monsoon emulates the State and Central governments in its functioning.

All this talk of multitasking

Alice Wignall

Does it make you a more effective worker? Hardly. It just means more work.

THERE ARE always articles being written (and who knows, even read) about how the office is changing and how soon everybody will be hot-desking and short-term contracting and building career portfolios and retraining every third minute.

"Trend predictors" (or "fortune tellers" to give them their original job title) never get sick of telling us about how, in a few years, we'll all be working part-time from a hammock in the Caribbean and video-conferencing with the lunar colony, and we had just better be ready for that.

And it sounds really great. But let's not forget that the brave new world of work will mean being able to do new things. This might be called "acquiring a differentiated skills set" and if I knew what that meant I could tell you for sure. But you'll need to learn how to balance your laptop and a mid-afternoon cocktail in your Caribbean hammock while keeping sand out of both, just for a start. And I bet that's not as easy as it looks.

Many of the necessary abilities have already been identified. These days, it's so much less about being nifty with an inkwell and quill pen, and so much more about communication and flexibility, and enabling individual proactivity within a dynamic group setting. And I can get on board with all of that, since basically what it boils down to is being able to have a nice chat with people in the office.

However, the jewel in the crown of any self-respecting modern worker is the ability to multitask. For years, I just accepted this, figured that the people who invented the concept knew what they were talking about. Recently, though, I have concluded that we're all being taken for a multitasking ride.

Does multitasking make you a more effective worker? Not in my experience. I'm doing a bit of multitasking while I write this, in actual fact. OK, the other task is listening to the radio, but let's not dwell on that. The point is: does it sharpen my mental faculties? Is it helping ideas crystallise before my eyes like frost on windowpanes? Is it allowing words to gush from my mind like a rushing stream after the thaw? Or have I just wasted 10 minutes wondering exactly what this infernal noise is and why anyone could possibly describe it as music?

How to work out that multitasking might not be a great key to success in the modern workplace? Nobody wants you to do it until you get a job. Your parents don't drag you down from your nice, quiet bedroom and insist you do your homework in front of the television while interrupting you every 10 minutes to ask your opinion on next week's shopping list. Librarians at your university didn't institute a "no silence" rule in their book-bound halls and wander around asking random people if they'd like to sit in on their staff meeting.

Of course, women are supposed to be excellent multitaskers — presumably because we have spent so many millennia juggling 13 children and some chicken, while working out how to create a Christmas feast from one turnip and a sprig of wild garlic that the ability to do so many things at once is now second nature.

Let me tell you what multitasking means: it's people being allowed to distract you whenever they like; it's suddenly having to be expert in things you're not interested in; it is, essentially, doing more work. No wonder the powers that be are keen to give it the hard-sell. So, for me, it's the end of multitasking. I am going to do one thing after the other and that is it.

And this will not put me at a disadvantage. For I have one skill that will shortly be in big demand. I am great at balancing things in a hammock. —
© Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006

CRIMSON CORRIDOR

The objective is to establish a “compact revolutionary zone” in the heart of India and use this zone for extending the Naxalite movement to the cities and ultimately to seize the power structure of the states.

JAGMOHAN
The Statesman, April 1

IN the last few days, four major events have occurred which show how gravely is India’s internal security imperilled by the rising tide of Naxal violence. On 15 March, about 56 policemen of Chhattishgarh were killed in an attack on a base-camp in the Bastar region. Rocket launchers, detonators and petrol bombs were extensively used. Clearly, the attack was carried out after meticulous planning and with military precision. A few days earlier, JMM Member of Parliament Sunil Kumar Mahato was murdered in broad daylight. In January-February this year, a month long ninth-party Congress was held in a “liberated zone” along the Jharkhand-Bihar border. About three months ago, a landmine explosion in Bokaro district caused the death of 13 police personnel. The tragic incidents of this nature would continue to happen, unless the basic structure of the current Naxal movement and the nature of the forces sustaining it are fully understood and accounted for in the government strategy.

The Naxalites are presently much better organised, much better led and much better motivated than in the 1960’s when they burst like a “spring thunder” in the Naxalbari area of West Bengal. At that time, they were over possessed by the romantic and revolutionary slogans of Maoism, such as “power flows from the barrel of the gun” and “a single spark can start a prairie fire”. They declared all landlords, big or small, and all bourgeoise, powerful or petty, as class enemies and worked for their elimination by violent means. They were led by a brilliant but impulsive leader, Charu Mazumdar, who was swept off his feet by a few successful adventures and accompanying publicity. He talked of a “great upsurge” and boasted that “every corner of India was becoming inflammable”. His domineering attitude alienated the senior members and led to faction-fighting. The movement soon petered out, particularly after Charu Majumdar’s death in 1972.

Now the position is different. Both in policy and strategy, the Naxal movement has undergone a shift. Since 1990s, it has been gaining strength. The most significant change, however, occurred in September 2004, when the major groups - Maoist Communist Centre and People’s War Group - which cover about 90 per cent of the activities engendered by the movement, merged to form a united outfit called CPI (Maoist). An armed wing, the Peoples’ Liberation Guerrilla Army, was also raised. Before their merger, there was a lot of violent infighting between these groups, and a number of their cadres were killed from both sides. This period is now called by the Naxalites as “the black chapter in the history of Indian revolution”.

The programme of the CPI (Maoist) has been christened as New Democratic Revolution. It underlines that the new strategy is one of protracted armed struggle whose objective is not seizure of land, crops or other immediate goals, but the seizure of the state power. Within this perspective, participation in elections and engagements with the prevailing bourgeoise democracy are rejected, and all efforts and attention are firmly focused on revolutionary activities to undermine the state and seize power. The struggle against “feudalism, imperialism and comprador bureaucratic capitalism” is reiterated in the programme which also make it clear that the party would support the struggle of nationalities for the self-determination, including the right to secession, and would pay special attention to mobilising and organising women as a mighty force of revolution. The unity of various groups, and the renewed enthusiasm of the leaders and their recognition of the damage done in the past by faction-fighting and group clashes have pushed the Naxalite movement in a stronger phase. A few other factors have also helped it to acquire a new impetus and a new sense of purpose.

There is a widespread impression amongst the rural poor that the economic policies, initiated in 1991 and enshrined in globalisation, marketisation and deregulation, are inimical to their interests and are basically hegemonic and imperialistic in nature. The newly acquired prosperity of their perceived enemies ~ landlords, bourgeois traders and bureaucrats ~ further annoys and frustrates them. And this helps the Naxalites to enlist more recruits for their movement. Secondly, whatever be the benefits of the Panchayati Raj in theory, the system, as it actually operates at the ground level, is placing more power in the hands of a comparatively well-to-do class of peasants, thereby further alienating the landless and the poor who then show little hesitation in moving to the fold of the Naxalites. Thirdly, the Naxalites have rapidly transformed themselves into a modern guerrilla force. They no longer depend upon country-made pistols. They now possess sophisticated communication system and weapons - AK 47, grenades, rocket launchers, land mines etc. They have a militia of about 25,000 persons - well-trained and well-motivated. All this has added immensely to the striking power of the Naxalites.

The increased strength of the movement should be evident from a series of serious incidents that have occurred recently. To give just one example, on 13 November 2005, about 1000 disciplined members of the Naxal cadre participated in a well-planned and well-conducted night attack on Jahanabad, which is barely 50 km from Patna, the state headquarters. They virtually established their rule in the city for several hours. They freed 340 prisoners from the jail, including their comrades and their leader, Ajay Kanu. They also killed two leaders of the Ranveer Sena, lodged in the same jail. The mass-support of the rural hinterland of Jahanabad to them was obvious, and there was hardly any resistance from the city, wherein the attacks on the jail, police lines and offices of the district administration were carried out simultaneously.

Earlier, on 6 February 2004. a group of 200 Naxalites swooped upon the district armoury at Koraput and took away 500 weapons. About 250 males and 50 females members of the Naxal cadre suddenly descended on the Karnataka police state camp on 11 February 2005 and killed six policemen and looted 10 rifles. In the same manner, about 300 Naxalites attacked Madhuban, Bihar, and shot dead five policemen and plundered arms as well as money from the post and a nationalised bank. In an another raid on the Home Guard Training Centre, Girdih, Jharkhand, about 200 weapons were looted. On 3 December 2006, 14 policemen of the Special Task Force were killed in a landmine blast. There have been many other incidents of similar nature, involving borders of Naxalites. Clearly, the new strategy is to pit the police against the masses who have, rightly or wrongly, been made to believe that they are victims of injustices and inequities. It also aims at frightening all those who, like Sunil Kumar Mahato and the members of the Salwa Judium, might dare to organise people against the movement.

No wonder, the movement has gained momentum. From 156 districts in 13 states in September 2004, the Naxal violence spread to 170 districts in 15 states in February 2005. According to reports of the Intelligence Bureau, Government of India, at present, about 40 per cent of the geographical area of the country and 35 per cent of its population is affected by the Naxal violence. The red corridor, extending from the jungles of North Bihar to Jharkhand, Orissa, Chhatisgarh, Andhra, Maharashtra and Karnataka, is fast emerging. This is what the ministry of home affairs’ annual report, 2004-05, acknowledges: “Despite strenuous efforts by the security forces, there has been no letup in the effectuation of CRZ with the gaps in North Bihar and North Chhattisgarh being steadily plugged by the Naxalite outfits to link up their strongholds in AP/ Dandakaranya with those in Bihar/ Jharkhand. Coupled with the steadily increasing Naxalite influence in North Orissa/ South East Jharkhand, it is apparent that the Naxalite group remain steadfast in their efforts to realise the CRZ.”

The objective is to establish a “compact revolutionary zone” in the heart of India and use this zone and the red corridor for extending the Naxalite movement to the cities and ultimately to seize the power structure of the states. The ultimate goal is the establishment of the Maoist state, no matter how many bones are broken and how much blood is spilled in the process.

The Politics Of The Vote-Bank Vis-a-vis The Naxalites

How could national security be safeguarded and the country spared of bloodshed and brutality? A number of measures could be suggested. On account of space-constraint, however, I would spell out here only two of these suggestions, one relating to politics and the other to economy. The state governments which are covered by the compact revolutionary zone and through which the red corridor passes must make an effective institutional arrangement to coordinate police action against the Naxalites. Intelligence should be shared and, wherever necessary, joint operations launched. Special squads of personnel trained to operate in forests and hilly areas and suitably equipped to counter guerrilla tactics should be raised by each of the affected states. Experience has shown that wherever special units have been set up and trained squads put in operation over a sufficiently long period of time, the outcome has been encouraging. Narrow political calculations, of course, have to be kept at bay. It is unfortunate that the excellent results achieved by Andhra Pradesh’s special units were frittered away on account of petty politics of the vote-bank.

New strategy

On the eve of elections to the state assembly and Parliament, with a view to securing the support of Naxalites, promises to declare a “cease-fire” and hold negotiations with them were made by a leading national party. After coming to power, both at the central and state levels, prolonged negotiations were held with the Naxal leaders who were allowed to keep their weapons and make even a show of them. All this infused new life in the movement. By the time the negotiations ended without any agreement or understanding, the Naxalites had regrouped and re-equipped themselves, gained fresh confidence and evolved a new strategy of action at the ground level.

The politics of the vote-bank vis-a-vis the Naxalites has not been played for the first time. In 1982, NT Rama Rao played it with consummate skill. He called the Naxalites true patriots who had been misunderstood by the ruling classes. By 1985, however, he was forced to take action against them. M Chenna Reddy, Congress chief minister, acted no differently. In 1989, he, too, declared that the Naxalites were patriots, When chief minister N Chandrababu Naidu adopted a firm approach against Naxalites, it was Rajasekhar Reddy’s turn to appease them. In other states, too, political parties and individual leaders have not hesitated to arrive at an understanding of mutual help with the Naxalites. This has enabled the latter to carve out an unhindered space for their activities, while the former have been getting electoral support of the Naxal cadre at the time of elections. This mutual understanding has been widely noticed in Bihar and Jharkhand.

It is, indeed, unfortunate that short-term political gains are often given precedence over the need for having a clear, consistent and firm line. An apolitical and coordinated approach of central and state governments concerned, their special police units and trained squads are absolutely necessary. Otherwise, the Naxalites would continue to believe that they are pursuing a “tottering foe”. On the economic front, an equally strong and sustained campaign needs to be launched to relieve the rural distress which, of late, has assumed serious proportions. A recent national survey has revealed that about 33 per cent of India’s population, that is, about 200 million ruralites, live on only Rs 12 a day. They spend as much as 70 per cent of their income on food and cannot afford to buy nutrition like green vegetables. About 36 million young people between the ages of 15 and 29 years are “usually unemployed”; on some days, as many as 58 million remain without work. Hundreds of peasants in debt are committing suicide and thousands of poor ruralites are also getting displaced consequent to their lands being taken for development projects. In these circumstances, anger and frustration of the poor and their attraction for a movement are understandable.

It speaks volumes about the failure of the Indian polity, Indian leaderships and Indian social and cultural values of the post-1947 period that a very large number of people in the country should still be grinded by hunger and haunted by unemployment every day, while millions of others get more and more affluent and are sucked into the orbit of consumerism. The Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme may provide some relief to the hungry and the unemployed. But a more fundamental, a more long-term plan, conceived with a new vision for future India, needs to be formulated and implemented.

A closer link needs to be established between urban, semi-urban and rural areas. A planned process of de-ruralisation and simultaneous urbanisation, industrialisation, and “service-isation” should be initiated. It should be ensured that those who are displaced from the rural areas consequent to the execution of the development projects are absorbed in those very projects and given pre-service and in-service training to acquire requisite skills and improve them further. The monetary compensation received by the claimants should be invested in the company in the form of shares with a guaranteed return equivalent to the amount of compensation. This would provide four-fold benefits. First, the risk of compensation-money being squandered would be eliminated. Secondly, the recipient, by virtue of his investment, would develop an interest in the advancement of the company. Thirdly, in the event of failure of the company, the rock-bottom amount would be available to the investors of this category. Fourthly, the erstwhile ruralite would become a skilled person, and if he seizes the opportunity to further upgrade his skills, a brighter future would be opened to him and his family.

Above all, it must be fully understood by the Indian society and the state that the Naxal movement is inherently dangerous and destructive. It can do no real good to any class of people. It can result in giving to India merely a blood-soaked grammar of anarchy. Its ideology is wholly imitative of the Chinese model of the thirties and forties of the last century and takes no account of the great many changes that have occurred all over the world in various spheres of life. It bewitches the poor by its catchy slogans and captures the impressionable minds by way of romantic and adventurous notions. It sets one class against another class, one caste against another caste, and often declares yesterday’s comrades as today’s police informers and traitors, deserving verbal trial and elimination.

The idea of India

Whatever may be professed in theory, in actual practice it has killed more poor “informers”, petty government officials and small businessmen and contractors. Equally nihilistic is the Naxalites’ attitude towards the idea of India, her underlying unity and her distinct culture. They advocate the right of the so-called nationalities of India to self-determination and secession, knowing full well that the exercise of such rights could only lead to unending divisions and discord and ultimate extinction of the Indian entity. Today, the Naxalite movement presents a huge challenge to India’s peace, security and overall well-being. The issues embedded in this challenge are many-sided and formidable. Nevertheless, they could be successfully tackled if the measures outlined above are taken in conjunction with the task of reforming the state and the society and the values underpinning them. But one thing that the governance machinery of India must fully grasp immediately is what Paul Wilkinson has underlined: “Rebellions do not generally fade away; they have to be put down, if normal life and business are to be restored.”

(The author is a former Governor of J & K and a former union minister)

Behind the events at Nandigram

Brinda Karat
The Hindu, 30 March

There is a larger political game plan being played out in West Bengal. The real agenda of the "resistance" is not protecting the interests of farmers and the rural poor or saving the land.

THE CHIEF Minister of West Bengal Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee and the CPI(M) have expressed their deep distress and regret at the police firings and violence in Nandigram on March 14 and solidarity with the families of the victims and those injured. The case before the Calcutta High Court is posted for hearing in three weeks. Surprisingly the very NGOs that had rushed to the court for its intervention are now saying a judicial probe should be ordered. This is what the State government would have liked to do but could not because of the court orders on their petition.

Well wishers of the CPI(M) have advised introspection as to why a Nandigram occurred under a Left Front government headed by the party. They should be assured of that process, which is an intrinsic part of the party's functioning at all levels. Appropriate lessons are drawn from the collective experience of critically analysing the party's work and policies with a view to addressing and removing weaknesses, lapses, and gaps whenever and wherever they exist.

There is a larger political game plan being played out in West Bengal. The first question is what is the "Nandigram resistance," hyped up to be a "great popular peaceful upsurge," about? The Bhumi Ucched Pratirodh Committee (BUPC), a platform consisting of political parties from the BJP, the Congress, and the SUCI to various naxal outfits and NGOs, led by the Trinamool Congress was set up in Nandigram with the stated aim of preventing land acquisition. The Chief Minister made a categorical commitment in January that there would be no chemical hub and therefore no land acquisition without the consent of the people. Normally when there is a struggle on a specific demand, in this case against land being taken over, if the demand is accepted it is claimed as a victory and the agitation is called off. In the huge farmers struggle in Rajasthan where the CPI(M) played an important role, police firing and violence under the BJP government between 2004 and 2006 took the lives of 17 farmers including one woman. In the first phase after the BJP government was forced to agree to the demands concerning water sharing, the agitation was called off. Later when the Government reneged on its promise the agitation resumed. In Nandigram it is because the interests of farmers and the rural poor or the issue of saving the land is not the real agenda of the "resistance" that the opposition boycotted the scores of meetings called by the district administration and ignored the Chief Minister's statement.

The second claim that the "resistance" is peaceful and democratic is far from the truth. Less known, their stories and tragedies ignored by the national media, around 3,000 men, women, and children of around 12 villages of Nandigram have been forcibly driven out of their homes and have been living in camps outside the area since January 3 because they are known members or sympathisers of the CPI(M). Who are these people? Like the victims of the police action, they too are agricultural workers, marginal peasants, artisans, almost all of them from the Scheduled Castes. Shockingly and sickeningly, the numerous reports of historians, human rights activists, and commentators have not mentioned their trauma at all, not even as a footnote, but on the contrary have almost celebrated their plight as "peoples anger" against the CPI(M). Houses of CPI(M) members or sympathisers were identified in an organised way and attacked. In one day — on January 3 — 34 homes were burnt, 41 houses were broken into and household goods smashed, 47 houses were looted.

Sobita Sumanta is one of the many displaced women who have come to meet the various authorities in Kolkata. Her husband Shankar Samanta was an elected gram panchayat member. He was burnt alive on January 7 by a group of armed people because he opposed their false campaign. Kanika Mandal is also among the displaced. On January 3, her husband and two young sons were forced to flee from their home in Sonachura. She and her younger daughter Sunita, a Class 9 student, continued to live in the village under constant threat. On February 10 at around noon mother and daughter were working in the fields when Sunita returned early to the house. When Kanika came home she found her daughter killed. The medical report confirmed rape. Kakoli Giri was driven out of her village of Kalcharanpur along with her husband and children. On March 3 she went back to check on her belongings. She was surrounded by a group of men who gangraped her. Her son found her lying unconscious and somehow brought her back to the camp. The medical report has confirmed rape. Earlier a policeman was lynched and his body thrown into the river. In spite of the evidence, there are no arrests in these cases because neither the police nor the State Women's Commission can enter the area. It has been barricaded, roads, bridges and culverts have been broken up, and the criminals have found shelter in the "peaceful resistance."

In the five affected gram panchayats, all political activity against the BUPC is literally banned with the force of arms. An illustration is what happened to families who defied the warning of the BUPC and attended a rally organised by the CPI(M) in a neighbouring area on January 29. The following day, 14 of such families were driven out and are now in the camps.

There is a close coordination between the Trinamool Congress and the group of NGOs functioning under different platforms, but united in the BUPC. They have provided a cover of impartiality to the reactionary political forces operating. In fact, it is they who have more or less taken over the public face of the anti-CPI(M) campaign. An example is the one-sided highly exaggerated reports circulated by them, in particular their account of the violence against children. None of them mentions the fact, confirmed by tape-recorded conversations played on Bengali TV channels, of the utterly cynical plans to use not only women but children as shields on March 14. But wild allegations are made against the police and CPI(M) men that they "abducted children, killed them, school uniforms were found in bushes ... children were torn apart by their two legs." Even ordinary citizens hearing such a report, leave alone such internationally recognised individuals, would have considered it their bounden duty to file complaints of "children being torn apart." Yet not a single missing child report has been filed with the police. The reports also mention "mass rapes and gang rapes of women." All complaints of rape must be investigated; if true, exemplary punishment must be meted out to those guilty. But to exaggerate and concoct reports undermines the hard struggle by women's organisations to give extra weightage to the statements of women victims where medical evidence is not available. If women are used as tools in a politically motivated campaign as in Nandigram it undermines the credibility of the demand. West Bengal remembers the unfortunate case of Champala Sardar who was used by the Trinamool Congress in a fabricated case of rape against CPI(M) men at the time of the 1993 panchayat elections. She was cruelly paraded by Trinamool Congress leaders as a symbol of CPI(M) criminality. The case was found to be false and all the men were acquitted. Champala herself was abandoned soon after the elections were over.

The strategy of the Trinamool Congress-led campaign is to continuously provoke incidents of violence in the name of saving the interests of farmers, the openly stated goal being the panchayat elections scheduled for May 2008. On March 17, the Maoists wrote a letter to Mamta Banerjee extending support to her struggle, which stated "We were in Singur, we are in Nandigram and we will stay." This should not be dismissed as political rhetoric. Already there are reports that the sea route through the Bay of Bengal is being used by the Maoists to come into Nandigram. The geographical location is crucial for the spread of the Maoists "liberated" belt to the east, in which West Bengal is the barrier. The lack of any administration or police in the area facilitates such a move.

The implications of the campaign against the CPI(M) are not limited to West Bengal. Nationally, the CPI(M) role in defence of the working classes and the rural poor is crucial, putting forward a set of alternative policies, to the consternation of the neo-liberalisers. Its role in mobilising secular forces against the BJP is a hindrance in the hoped for comeback trail of the communal forces. Nor is it coincidental that senior U.S. officials held a meeting with a leader involved in the mobilisations of the minority community in Nandigram. The categorical position of the CPI(M) against the strategic partnership with the U.S. is reason enough for support to anti-CPI(M) platforms. A widespread campaign is necessary to explain the context of the Nandigram developments and to meet the highly motivated campaign against the CPI(M) and the government it heads in West Bengal.

(Brinda Karat, M.P., is a member of the Polit Bureau of the CPI[M]

Poor Brinda! The picture she is attempting to draw in this article is exactly what her colleagues in West Bengal along with a few of their acolytes are trying to establish in view of CPI(M)'s damage-control. In fact, the entire initiative of damage-control by CPI(M) shows that they are completely ousted from their ground by those they had attempted eliminate through 14 March operation.- IP

The best chance ever for SAARC

Amit Baruah
The Hindu, 31 March

When South Asia's leaders meet in New Delhi on April 3, they must show the vision to abandon the beaten path. Their peoples have too much at stake.

SOUTH ASIAN leaders can no longer blame the regional environment for not being able to move their South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) forward at the 14th summit to be held in New Delhi next week. Nearly 22 years after it was formed, South Asian officials are now candid in admitting that SAARC has been stuck in the confabulation stage and it needs to move towards implementing concrete projects.
Given that SAARC has nothing really to show in terms of real achievements, this admission, which has taken its time coming, was inevitable. It is only a recognition of the ground reality in this part of the world. In its 22 years of existence, SAARC, after New Delhi this time, would have managed to hold just 14 summits despite the agreement to have annual meetings. Bilateral problems — essentially between India and Pakistan — have meant the regional grouping is still trying to find its feet. A reading of the 13 summit declarations so far shows them to be rich in intent, but low on follow-up action. Many of them are repetitive.
Let's look at today's South Asia. For long, SAARC has been hostage to negative trends in the India-Pakistan relationship. Since April 2003, this has been successfully reversed and, as a senior Pakistani leader put it recently, ties between the two countries have never been better. Gone are the days when India used to worry about the "noise" Pakistan may make on Kashmir at the SAARC summit. Often, pre-empting Pakistan was the chief occupation of Indian officials before such a regional meeting.
In fact, this been built into the rules of SAARC itself: no bilateral issues can be raised in the regional grouping. However, with Pakistan stuck with internal affairs, there's been no suggestion that anything embarrassing might be raised at the upcoming SAARC summit. The bilateral scene between India and Pakistan was very different when India last hosted SAARC summits — in New Delhi (1995) and Bangalore (1986). The two countries were at loggerheads at the time. Now, there's definitely a more relaxed approach to the relationship.
Other positive developments in the region, too, are not to be missed. There's a business-friendly government in power in Bangladesh, one that has promised to improve relations with India even as it safeguards its own interests. Bangladesh's Chief Adviser Fakhruddin Ahmed will be representing his country at the summit. His remarks and meetings will be watched closely, especially what the Chief Adviser might have to say in his first bilateral meeting with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.
Nepal, on its part, is plodding on towards a real democracy. King Gyanendra has been shown his place by the people of Nepal even as the Koirala Government and the Maoists are engaged in working out the modalities for power-sharing and genuine elections.
The "enlightened" monarchy in Bhutan has taken some steps towards more representative government even as Opposition forces in the Maldives continue to challenge the Gayoom presidency.
There's little doubt that the resumption of violence in Sri Lanka is not good news for the region, but the fact remains that Colombo has managed to make its economy grow despite the murderous attacks of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE). After a prolonged honeymoon in India-Sri Lanka relations, there seem to be new tensions between New Delhi and Colombo on the Rajapaksa Government's apparent belief that the LTTE can be defeated militarily. The sidelines of the SAARC summit will provide an opportunity for Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and President Mahinda Rajapaksa to talk about their differences, which are not yet in the public domain. However, the resentment in Colombo and the concern in New Delhi are more than evident.

New member

Troubled Afghanistan will formally join SAARC on April 3 as the eighth member. Not only is Afghanistan in internal turmoil, its relations with Pakistan are tense and the two nations have been trading charges on the forces responsible for fomenting terrorism in the region. Yet, rule-by-Afghans, peace, stability, and moderation remain the only viable options in this troubled nation, which has shown considerable interest in joining the ranks of South Asian nations. SAARC states should ensure that Kabul is not disappointed.
Notwithstanding some negatives, the fact remains that India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh remain central to moving SAARC forward. This does not, in any way, take away from the contribution of the other nations in working towards greater regional integration. Bilateral issues may not be taken up by SAARC, but since its formation in 1985 these have always crippled the grouping. Happily, that is no longer the case. Today, the leaderships of the principal nations in SAARC do not have any excuse from not giving the regional grouping a major push forward towards creating more jobs, increasing trade, and facilitating the movement of people and goods.
The fact is that national leaderships, collectively and individually, have failed to raise the standards of living of their peoples. South Asia remains one of the most under-developed parts of the world, where glaring poverty continues to haunt millions of people. Connectivity must become a real concept, not a high-sounding phrase that resonates in seminars and conferences across the region. For, physical connectivity has the potential of increasing trade between the eight SAARC neighbours. Not that SAARC nations have not visited this idea before.
At the 13th summit in Dhaka in November 2005, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh sounded truly pained at the fact that SAARC had achieved so little. And, connectivity, was clearly on his mind when he said, "... let us agree, at this summit, that all South Asian countries would provide to each other, reciprocally, transit facilities to third countries, not only connecting one another, but also connecting to the larger Asian neighbourhood, in the Gulf, Central Asia and in the South-East Asia. India, which borders each of the members of the South Asia, is willing to do so." Deafening silence from other SAARC leaders greeted this suggestion. Privately, many South Asian diplomats said Dr. Singh had made an excellent, forward-looking speech. However, there was no public response at least to the points made by the Indian Prime Minister.
While the time has come for India, as the largest country and economy in South Asia, to stop insisting on "reciprocity," other SAARC members need to see the value in Indian suggestions and stop looking at New Delhi's vested interests behind every proposal. For long, India has been seen as the big brother, out to dominate the region. Some Indian actions, like placing an embargo on the supply of fuel to landlocked Nepal in the 1980s, drew legitimate criticism from the rest of South Asia.
However, the current strategic scene in South Asia is vastly different. Indian economic success is now being seen as an opportunity for others in the region. Some "big brother" tendencies remain in New Delhi, but, overall, there have been some changes in the Indian bureaucratic mindset. More enlightened members of the bureaucracy now believe that India must share its economic opportunities with others in the immediate neighbourhood. At the same time, other SAARC members, too, must turn away from the India-as-a-favourite-whipping-boy theme in the internal politics of their countries. It is a theme that has the potential of winning elections, but has little to show for itself in the new strategic environment.
When South Asia's leaders meet in Vigyan Bhavan in New Delhi on April 3, they must show the vision to abandon the beaten path. SAARC, which is led by officials, must now be taken over by the leaders themselves. Their peoples have too much at stake. All eyes will be on the leaders. Will they be able to move SAARC and South Asia forward or will the 14th summit just be like the other 13 — words, promises, statements, and declarations? And, for the first time, there will be five others watching too — China, the United States, Japan, South Korea, and the European Union — in their new capacity as "observers."