Not a failure, after all

THE global trade talks in Hong Kong have ended on a mixed note. They have neither succeeded in addressing the important concerns of all, especially those of the developing countries. Nor have they failed completely. The rich countries have once again succeeded in postponing the inevitable — abolishing agricultural subsidies — to 2013. The agreement on services too has been kept vague allowing the developed countries to continue to enjoy access to the markets of the developing countries without giving reciprocal access to the latter. Mercifully, an agreement has been reached on eliminating export subsidies. This means that in case the Doha Development Agenda becomes effective from 2007, a major part of the subsidies would be practically eliminated by 2010. In a welcome move, the rich countries have also agreed to eliminate quotas and tariffs by 2008 on 97 per cent of categories of goods from the world’s 50 poorest nations. The US currently does not impose tariffs and quotas on 83 per cent of categories, and Japan on 87 per cent.

The EU already exempts virtually all imports from tariffs and quotas if they come from the world’s poorest nations, but restricts these imports with stringent origin rules. Other provisions in the declaration include a broad agreement to ban fishing industry subsidies that contribute to overfishing, special help for impoverished cotton-growing countries in Africa, and a plan for the US, the EU and Japan to provide several billion dollars a year in aid to developing countries to help them compete in global trade. The agreement also requires industrialized countries to open their markets to goods from the world’s poorest nations. Mercifully, a window of opportunity has been opened for Pakistan in the final deal as the rich countries have agreed to do away with export subsidy on cotton by 2006 and have also limited the percentage of products exported from the least developed countries to the rich nations with duty-free and quota-free access. Pakistan will, indeed, be better placed now because its apparel and textile products will enjoy the same access as is allowed to countries like Bangladesh and Cambodia, particularly in the US market. It is now up to our private sector and the government policy planners to make the most of this opportunity.

Though the rich countries have agreed to do away with domestic agricultural subsidies in the next eight years, they seem still reluctant to take any meaningful steps towards its elimination. Instead, they have now started arguing that these subsidies were really helping the developing countries as well. The question is that if the US and EU withdrew subsidies on food and cash crops, those poor countries which are non-food and non-cash crop producers would suffer from increases in their world prices. Another argument being advanced against withdrawing these subsidies is the poor state of governance in the developing countries having potential to produce cash and food crops. It is argued that the bad transport system and a plethora of red tape in these countries make it impossible for them to meet the supply deadlines of the world markets. But one would like to believe that these are only lame excuses and that the rich world would realize soon that it would be mutually beneficial if it took the right steps at the right time to help the WTO liberalize the world trade in an equitable manner.

Action in Balochistan

THE government moved paramilitary forces in Balochistan’s Kohlu district over the weekend to weed out what it says are camps being run by subversive tribals responsible for rocket attacks in the area, including one during President Pervez Musharraf’s recent visit. Kohlu is a stronghold of the Marri tribe and last week in another incident the Frontier Corps commander suffered bullet injuries when a helicopter carrying him was fired at. While the Baloch have some valid grievances against the federal government, firing rockets and missiles and blowing up rail tracks or Sui gas installations cannot be condoned as legitimate forms of protest. However, beyond the immediate action, it would be in everyone’s interest if the government made a sincere effort in addressing the grievances of the people of Balochistan. Had not successive governments neglected the socio-economic development needs of the province, matters would not be where they are now.

A situation has now arisen where the chiefs — however feudal and backward they may be — provide leadership to the ordinary Baloch to stand up to what is seen as an interfering central government, interested only in a one-way relationship where it extracts maximum benefit out of the province’s vast natural resources. Notwithstanding Gwadar — which is recent and has had its own controversies regarding locals not being hired or outsiders buying land there — this cannot be disputed and regrettably the federal government continues to skirt around this key point. For example, if local Baloch cannot be hired because they lack educational or technical skills, then has the government tried to set up vocational and technical schools and centres in the province or has it done anything substantial to increase its extremely low literacy rate? The much-touted Wasim Sajjad committee, set up to suggest constitutional reforms to allay the apprehensions of the province, seems to have vanished while the Mushahid Hussain report’s implementation is also pending. The centre needs to understand that the history of injustice and discrimination against Balochistan is long and well-documented and that a sincere and meaningful engagement with the province and its people, formulating policies and taking decisions that take into account their grievances, is the only way that the growing cracks in the Baloch-centre relationship can be repaired.

Saudi women’s rights

WHETHER or not Saudi Arabian women are closer to achieving rights like being allowed to drive or even the right to vote in municipal elections can be gauged from King Abdullah’s statement on Sunday asking women “to be patient and reasonable in their demands”. This shows that the call to ease restrictions on Saudi women is gaining momentum and even King Abdullah is ready to recognize some harsh and awkward realities about how Saudi women are treated. In one of his first TV interviews to an American channel, he said a day would “eventually” come when Saudi women could drive — a bold statement given that religious orthodoxy is firmly against this innocuous idea. Many conservative Muslim countries once segregated their women supposedly for their own protection but soon realized that this was based on discrimination and prejudice. Saudis too have begun to raise their voices against discrimination and are demanding more civil and democratic rights. Recent steps like reviewing of press laws or the first municipal elections this year may have had little impact on Saudi women, but in a surprise development, two women were elected to the Jeddah chamber of commerce which could be indicative of the changes to come.

The debate on Saudi women’s rights should not remain confined to freedom to drive, for that is a small matter when compared to their legal rights, which are now limited and centre around a woman’s male guardian. These need to be debated by more enlightened groups of Islamic scholars within the country whose opinion on the issue should be sought. The monarchy can take a lead from neighbouring Gulf countries like Kuwait which has made significant headway by giving its women the right to vote.

Why can’t Ganguly be an MP?

HERE follows a solution to the most compelling and complex challenge facing contemporary India.

Suggestion No. 1: If Govinda can become a member of parliament, why can’t Sourav Ganguly? The Congress leaders of Bengal, defence minister Pranab Mukherjee and information and broadcasting minister Priya Ranjan Das Munshi have expressed the deepest concern over his fate and future.

The Congress has such a shortage of candidates that they put up the hapless Nafisa Ali from Kolkata, although the chances of any voter below 60 recalling that she was born in the city were as remote as the possibility of George Bush winning an election from Fallujah. While Govinda needed a Congress wave in Mumbai to defeat Ram Naik, Sourav Ganguly could generate a pretty strong tide between Narkeldanga and Garia on his own. After all, it is fear of alienating the young voter in Kolkata on the eve of the Bengal assembly elections that made Pranab Babu (whose knowledge of cricket, shall we say, is not quite up to selector-level) and Priya Da (whose knowledge of football has made India a 10th-rank world power in the game) identify themselves with the former captain of the Indian cricket team.

The logic is simple: if Ganguly has become a vote-getter, let him get the votes for the party that needs them desperately in Bengal. Ganguly certainly isn’t much of a run-getter anymore, and, on the field, more of a run-giver than a run-saver. It is obvious that Sourav Ganguly has reached his first midlife crisis, and requires both our total sympathy and what help we can provide. Since a sportsman’s working life is short, midlife also comes earlier. Ganguly is too famous to belong to the shadows. He needs limelight like a temperamental plant needs sunlight, or he will wither.

There is no better limelight for him than membership of parliament. In fact, after getting him elected (a Congress MP could always resign in the national interest to make way for Sourav), the Congress could turn the limelight into a spotlight by making him minister for sports. He could then use all the power and influence of office to get his friend and mentor Jagmohan Dalmiya re-elected as chief of the Board of Control for Cricket in India. The other advantage is that neither Shane Bond nor Shoaib Akhtar will ever get elected to the Lok Sabha, so Sourav should shine in the House.

Suggestion No. 2: The selection of the Indian cricket team, the only team that matters to India, should be done by the same process that is used to select Indian pop idols like the new Kashmiri role-model Qazi Tauqeer and the svelte Bengali girl Ruprekha Banerjee. We are a proud democracy, and once vox populi has spoken there can be no further argument.

The Voice of the People is the Voice of God. This would take reality TV into a new dimension and assuage the ravenous hunger of TV channels for ratings. In one stroke, all TV channels could become profitable. It would also appease the insatiable appetite of mobile phone companies, since the poll would, naturally, be conducted on SMS.

Any other form of polling would take time and have to be managed by the election commission. If the EC were involved, it would stagger voting into six phases over two months, and you don’t get that much time between matches.

So, my apologies to the election commission, but there it is: what is good for Bihar may not necessarily be good for Indian cricket. A television-SMS driven cricket selection process would have enormous beneficial side-effects. I have already mentioned that the channels would become profitable, but look at what it would do for politicians. TV channels would no longer need to hit under the belt of Nehru suits or under the folds of dhotis with hidden cameras to get the stings that drive up ratings.

They would have neither time nor interest in exposing politicians, for cricket polls would bring in far, far more revenue. Consider the ad rates for a 10-second spot just after the DJ (yes, sexily-dressed disc jockeys would run the show, not news anchors) announced, And the winner is...! But before we tell you the name, ek chota sa break...”

Since selection is already all about frenzy, imagine the frenzy generated by election. It would also be a well-funded election. All candidates would be backed by those industrial houses whose goods they sponsor.

We are talking multinational money here, my friends; not something siphoned off for asking questions in parliament. If Indian politicians think that their elections have become expensive, they should watch what happens when Hutch takes on Airtel in the cricket stakes.

I can see advertising agencies, direct marketing firms, opinion pollsters and public relations agencies sprouting up just to get their hands on the additional business. There will inevitably come a point when the BCCI charges a royalty of one rupee for every vote cast.

If there is money to be made, you are not going to be able to keep the BCCI out of the loot, no matter whether it is headed by Jagmohan Dalmiya or Sharad Pawar. Business is business. If things go well, and there is no reason why they should not, cricket-elections could add one per cent to India’s economic growth, thereby enabling the government to fund the rural guaranteed employment scheme and keep the interest rates for pension funds at 9.5 per cent.

This would immediately stabilize the coalition government of Dr Manmohan Singh, and ensure that a prime minister as clean as him remained in office till 2009. I can see nothing but the pervasive glow of good news in my scheme.

Suggestion No. 3: Ramanathan Krishnan should be brought back as captain of the Indian Davis Cup team, possibly along with Naresh Kumar and Akhtar Ali in the squad. The most persistent reason I have heard for retaining the “mahan kalakar”, as an MP described him, in the team, is that Ganguly was so brilliant.

Indeed he was. There are very few joys in my life as great as watching Ganguly and Sachin Tendulkar in partnership at their best. It was magic. I think it was Dravid who described him as a god on the off-side. Trust me, those of us who have seen Ganguly at his best find it double embarrassing when Shane Bond turns him into a jumping jack, and every bowler who can pitch the ball short gets an extra nip when he sees Ganguly at the crease. Any player should hate the thought of television highlighting his follies on the news. It is not a pretty sight.

It is also absolutely true that Ganguly was a great team leader once, and deserves every acknowledgment. I am very serious when I suggest that he must be honoured in some way for his talent and his contribution to modern Indian cricket. What he could not handle was decay, which is always slow, invisible to you but obvious to everyone else.

The rewards of sport are commensurate with its demands and dangers. The worst wound to a sportsman’s mind is the stab of fear. Once that lodges in your subconscious, it destroys you. Instead of dealing with the problem, Ganguly sought to prolong his sporting life with politics in the dressing room and the boardroom. Indian cricket has been jinxed with its captains. Kapil Dev hung around not for the good of the team but to beat a world record in a tussle between age and utility. Azharuddin needed a disgraceful scam to be thrown out, and brought shame to a game he had done much to glorify.

The Sachin Tendulkars who can leave the captaincy because it is hurting their contribution to the team are very rare. When Sachin’s time comes to go, he will not wait to be pushed. He will not surrender the aura around his name for that one series more in which you tip over into an abyss.

Even the most emotional of Ganguly’s supporters argues that he should have been treated better because he was so good. The “was” is subconscious but accurate.

No player is bigger than a national team. We have a team today that can over the next two seasons be knitted into a winner of the World Cup in the West Indies. Or we can shred it into pieces, as the West Indies did to their once-phenomenal side.

The writer is editor-in-chief of Asian Age, New Delhi.

A sane approach

SINCE 9/11, the fading fear of a nuclear war with Russia or China has been supplanted in many American minds by a new nightmare: what terrorists could do with a nuclear bomb. Now the winner of this year’s Nobel Peace Prize, Mohamed ElBaradei, has proposed a sane way to think about — and work to prevent — that unfathomable threat.

ElBaradei shared the prize with the group he heads, the International Atomic Energy Agency, the world’s chief nuclear watchdog. His speech, which managed to be both idealistic and pragmatic, deserves a wider audience.

ElBaradei began by noting that the five greatest threats to world peace are interrelated: poverty, infectious diseases and environmental degradation; armed conflict; organized crime; terrorism; and weapons of mass destruction. Injustice and inequalities of wealth and opportunity fuel not only wars, crime and terror, he said, but also the drive by poor and insecure nations to develop nuclear weapons to protect themselves or project their power.

—Los Angeles Times