:: Wednesday, May 07, 2003 ::

National Security or Communitarian Development:

This story by the BBC covers some of the struggles faced over mineral resources which by cruel design seem to be invariably located in the sparsely populated tribal regions of the Country; which always tends to lead to a clash with chthonic local communities. In this case the presence of Uranium, with the potential application for National defence purposes will undoubtedly add now that India has decided to cross the Nuclear threshold to the pressures on the Central government to secure all domestic supplies. Whatever the outcome the history of such interactions in the past have taught us one thing: the state as can be seen from the depredations of mining operations by PSEs in Orissa and Jharkhand is very bad at ensuring local ecologies are left intact and that people's livelihoods are not jeopardised, all too often distant and unconnected with local conditions it only tends to listen when it encounters substantial resistance to its policies on the ground. Meghalaya's Khasis may decide to let the mining go ahead, but they are well advised to strengthen their bargaining position as much as possible before entering into negotiations with the government about the manner and conditions under which this can proceed.

:: Conrad Barwa 8:08 PM [Permanent Link] :: ::
..............

Mission Kashmir: A move for Peace or Status Quo by other means?

Well, this most recent move has caused a lot of ink and energy to be expended in deliberating about what the latest initiatives on the Kashmir imbroglio mean exactly. I am afraid on this I am firmly in the sceptical camp; neither side has really any desire as far as I can see at the moment for a genuine solution; The NDA government has moved from one foreign policy bungle to another and has spectacularly misjudged the issue by thinking that US mediation and involvement would endorse India’s stand on Kashmir. One would think that Indian policymakers would learn something from Nehru’s mistakes but no; as per usual unseemly (and increasingly hypocritical) moral high-handedness and wishful thinking act as substitutes for dispassionate analysis and critical thinking on the Indian side. And we have always suffered accordingly. The Pakistani problems with Kashmir are outlined below and nothing fundamental has changed: given the increased legitimacy that the Kashmir issue has acquired for Pakistani identity and over the dynamics of internal politics as well as its security. This is not to say that change cannot happen or that progress is not possible but it will require some changes on both sides: first and foremost it will mean having governments in place in Islamabad and New Delhi that are serious about peace and that are committed to seeing such a process through and can carry their electorates and sectional constituencies with them. This is not the case here however.

So what has really motivated the timing for this sudden eruption, Hossp at Dialognow has some thoughts on this:

And I would add to that Pakistan also does not have any thing to offer to India. Then why is this talk about some talks etc? Because the Expert in `Regime Change' wants this to happen and in today's world you do not ignore `Regime Change' artist.

This fresh round of talks is another farce as both parties are under pressure to talk and conditions in both countries do not exist that encourage any real solutions to problems between the two countries. Though I like the approach that talks should be held from mid to lower level of bureaucratic echelon rather shooting for the summit and creating another media circus. Both India and Pakistan would like these talks to last long to see where the current world order is headed. They would be better off to open travel, start some sports activities and play out for the gallery.Since in my opinion both parties do not wish to discuss any substantive issue, here is the list I have prepared for low-mid level bureaucrats to discuss and continue the façade of talks.

*Who Killed Laci Patterson?
*Scot Patterson did not do it, as he does not own any leather gloves.
*Who is a better comedian Govinda or Salman Khan?
*If Sachin is the best batsman, than why is he not captaining the Indian team?
*Was Kaifi Azmi a better poet than Faiz?
*Why people go thru a personality change after two shots only?
*Why is Pakistan TV so boring and Indian TV so entertaining?
*Is Shoaib Akhtar a cricket bowler or a baseball pitcher?

Go ahead and add more that can make agenda entertaining for the people sitting across each other

A little bit on the cruel side but essentially correct in tis thrust. More alarmingly is the over-reaction on the Indian side to the very fact that the Indian side has responded with positive rhetoric. Indeed, I was disturbed to hear one of my colleagues who really should have known better talk of the ‘Statesman’ like qualities of Vajpayee due to such a move. Excuse me!! 'Statesman', I wonder how this can be reconciled with Vajpayee’s past utterances on this issue (actually the very first blog entry by Vikash on Panchayat) I do not think someone who characterises Indian Muslims in such a manner can be accused of displaying statesmanship and it makes me more than wary of his sudden-found benign intent towards Pakistan. Of course within the Saffronist mindset Muslims can be dealt with much more charitably once they are on the outside rather than on the inside and the BJP does definitely prefer the Muslim to be a Pakistani; it is the Indian Muslim that creates a problem and a quandary for the Saffronist. It is a sad reflection of our tendency to excessive indulgence towards our leader of the day that inclines us towards such hyperbole; the same colleague did remark that we have become a “Land of Giants stalked by Pygmies”, now it seems to me we compound the error by selecting a pygmy to stand as a giant. Much talk is given over to Vajpayee having his ‘eye on history’ and being conscious of his imminent retirement; hmmm…alas, the policies of states and the interests of nations, contra to Alexandre Dumas does not rest on the private wishes of individual men and women, and it will take a lot more than one ageing politician’s desire for a place in the history books to reach a real breakthrough on this front. After all the last such foray during the much-hyped Lahore bus trip, backfired sensationally when it emerged that the Pakistani military was simultaneously infiltrating Kargil, while the politicians waffled about peace. Morality and issues of bad faith aside, this does not leave one with any confidence regarding the supposed ‘statesmanship’ qualities of the current administration or set of leaders. With the track record, pleas of “should I not have extended the hand of friendship” look suspiciously like weak-minded and illusion-based policymaking.

For the time being, we will be condemned to labour along the same path of discordant rhetoric with little change on the ground.

:: Conrad Barwa 11:47 AM [Permanent Link] :: ::
..............