American rejection

AMERICA’S rejection of Hamas’s talks offer runs counter to the Bush administration’s purported aim to “spread democracy” in the Middle East. On Monday, a US State Department spokesman rejected Hamas leader Ismail Haniya’s offer of talks to the international community by saying Hamas must first meet American conditions. Hamas must, of course, be realistic. Now that it has won the parliamentary elections and is likely to form a government, it has to show realism and accept the fact of Israel’s existence. However, America’s rejection of Hamas’s talks offer in no way helps matters when it comes to the two issues the US is most concerned about in the Middle East: to help solve the Arab-Israeli conflict and to advance the cause of democracy throughout the region. In fact, the avowed aim behind the war on Iraq was to depose a ruthless dictatorship and to give the rule of law and democracy to the Iraqi people. While what actually motivated Washington’s attack on Iraq and the hoax surrounding the weapons of mass destruction are not relevant here, the point is that the US still insists that it will continue to stay on in Iraq until the country has a stable, democratic government. Indeed, it can be said that the three electoral exercises in Iraq — one for a transitional assembly, another on a constitution and the third for a parliament — did serve to expose the Iraqis to the electoral process. But a similar respect for democracy seems to be absent from America’s policy on Palestine following the January elections.

Hamas is in a position to form a government because of its electoral victory. It is now offering talks to the international community, and this must be accepted if Hamas is to be persuaded to change its stance on Israel. The rejection of the talks’ offer by the US and Israel means a repudiation both of the democratic process and of the principle of conflict resolution through negotiations. The Israeli rejection of talks was coupled with some warnings — that Israel will act unilaterally, that it will draw up its own permanent borders, and that it will declare Hamas a terrorist movement. There is nothing new about Israel treating Hamas as terrorist organization which it did a long time ago and murdered two of its top leaders — Hamas founder Sheikh Ahmad Yassin and his successor, Abdel Aziz Rantissi. In any case, there is nothing unusual about a freedom movement being called terrorist. This was done in Algeria and Vietnam in the past and now in Kashmir and Palestine. As for acting unilaterally, Israel has been doing so since its creation. Some of its brazen-faced, unilateral acts in complete violation of UN resolutions include the annexation of the Golan Heights and Arab-Islamic city of Al Quds.

Like Israel, Hamas and its election victory are a fact, and America must accept this reality. The refusal to engage with Hamas will only encourage Israel in its avowed aim of annexing as much of the West Bank land as possible. The erection of the separation wall — a unilateral Israeli act which the International Court of Justice declared illegal last year — has enabled Israel to gobble up more Palestinian territory. If this goes on, America will only have to blame itself for letting Israel scuttle the Bush administration’s declared aim of working for a two-state solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict.

Loans that are a bane

AN important issue raised at a session of the World Social Forum in Karachi has a direct bearing on development work in Pakistan. This relates to the role of international funding agencies in the Third World. The speakers at the session were of the view that the donor agencies exploit the downtrodden who live in the Third World while their government functionaries misappropriate the money allocated for development projects. This is a common complaint in developing countries. It has been Pakistan’s experience too, for authorities obtain loans from foreign agencies for projects that are designed to meet the interests of the donors and not of the recipients. That would explain why many of the loans have conditions attached to them which are difficult to justify from the point of view of the countries that are supposed to benefit from them. This can prove to be a blessing for the consultants, experts and manufacturers of the donor countries even though many of the projects do not meet the needs of the people.

It is now known that Pakistan too took loans worth Rs 88.3 billion in 1976-2003 mainly for water, sanitation and transport projects. Yet we find that these sectors are the most underdeveloped. Not surprisingly, the inability of the government to provide potable water to the entire population and the poor state of sanitation in the towns and cities as well as in the rural areas prove the failure of these schemes which have led to a heavy debt burden for the country. The Asian Development Bank undertook a study in 1996 to evaluate the projects it had funded and found practically all of them to be unsuccessful. The tragedy of the situation is that all this would not have been possible without our government becoming a party to it. Although it is possible to evaluate the schemes that are on the anvil, it is not done to avoid any impression that on completion the projects will not benefit the people much. The keenness of the government to have funds flowing in is linked directly to the level of corruption that exists in the affected sector. By siphoning off funds through cuts and commissions, the authorities create a vested interest in the loans they obtain from the funding agencies.

Cement price hike

BESIDES oil and gas, where consumers are always made to pay for increases in the international price of crude but never passed on the benefit of a price reduction, the cement industry too has often exhibited cartel-like behaviour. This can be gauged from the fact that while the government reduced taxes on it in the last budget, the price of cement has steadily risen — in the past month alone by as much as Rs 50 per bag. Also, the prices of inputs like fuel have not changed during this time. The manufacturers are blaming the dealers saying that the latter are charging a higher margin. The dealers, on the other hand, say the manufacturers are responsible for the high price because they deliberately curtail cement production to keep its price high.

The truth lies somewhere in between. Supply is deliberately kept limited by manufacturers to keep prices high and a significant proportion of the cement produced is smuggled to Afghanistan and exported overseas. Taking a cue from this, cement retailers have increased their profit margins as well. The end result is that the consumer has to bear the brunt of this price-fixing practice. This can have two other negative effects. First, higher cement prices increase construction costs, which in any case happens to be on the high side. Second, construction has a considerable potential for generating employment but high cement prices by their dampening effect on construction activity could adversely affect this. For all these reasons, and for the simple fact that cartels are always going to exploit consumers, the cement industry needs to be more closely regulated. Unfortunately, by its inaction, the Monopoly Control Authority has shown itself to be toothless. The government should expedite its already announced plan to set up a more powerful commission to check the power of cartels and monopolies in the economy. Till that happens, administrative actions should be taken to bring down the price of cement.

Why this theatre of the absurd?

THE Great Indian National Crisis that can trace its origins to Allahabad, was brewed in Delhi and made ears tingle across the world, was sandwiched between two incidents. Entranced by the hype of the capital, no one had much time for Jharkhand or Orissa: starlit India can never really compete with neon-lit India.

The news from the dark states flitted through a few columns of newsprint and disappeared into that great cyberspace of indifference which India reserves for the unwanted. A friend who was in Brazil during the week of the seismic sacrifice was startled to discover that Sonia Gandhi’s resignation from the Lok Sabha was rubbing sleep out of his jet-lagged eyes in Rio de Janeiro.

Brazil’s media has even less international news than America’s, but 10 Janpath was staring at him from the television screen, Sonia Gandhi at the microphone and Rahul Gandhi waited literally in the deferential shadows. Since the information came without much context, my friend had no idea of either the reason or the consequences of the resignation.

He felt a bit flat therefore when I suggested that the truth was far less dramatic than the news. It begins in the shallow waters of personal animosity, and ends in the swamp of political trivia. This story has no legs.

The Congress wrote the first chapter when it used a much-ignored technicality to get Mrs Jaya Bachchan unseated from the Rajya Sabha. Power is the sibling of complacency and first cousin, arrogance. It must have been a combination of both that fooled the Congress into believing that there would be no second chapter. Mrs Sonia Gandhi’s name was written in the second chapter, since she too held an office of profit while being an MP.

In fact there emerged a third chapter, with smaller players tumbling out of safe cupboards and sending their resignations. And there might be a fourth chapter since there is at least one Congress minister from Andhra Pradesh who believes he can brazen out the turmoil if he keeps his mouth shut and his purse open. But of course all eyes are stuck on the second chapter.

A power behind the throne has a distinct advantage over the throne. A king must be always seated on the throne, because that is the demand of office, or risk being dethroned.

The power behind the throne can sit anywhere and remain as powerful. Whether Sonia Gandhi is inside the Lok Sabha or outside it makes no difference to the power structure of the Congress or the Congress-led coalition. She remains the primary decision-maker in the dispensation of political assignments and favours; the real dealer in any cabinet shuffle or reshuffle, with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in an advisory (or possibly cautionary) capacity.

Just to reinforce her supremacy the Congress puts on daily shows of breast-beating and has said that she will remain leader of the party in the Lok Sabha even though she has quit the House, and the vacancy she leaves behind in the National Advisory Council will not be filled.

The government was just being its normal obedient self when it adjourned the budget session in order to issue an ordinance to enable Mrs Sonia Gandhi to remain an MP. Such fidelity tends to make your eyes watery, so naturally no one could see what the future held.

Watery eyes are a slippery disease. You never know which misty mistake will suddenly cause the slippage that leads to a sudden general election. I am not suggesting it will happen. I am merely pointing out that it could happen. Certainly no one in Delhi, whether government or its many courtiers, had any time for the two events on either side of the Great Indian National Crisis.

On Monday March 13, the Maoist Communist Centre of India hijacked a train in the Latehar district of Jharkhand, the 628 Down from Barwadih to Mughalsarai, which had about 50 passengers on board. I call them troops because they were in uniform; they were wearing battle fatigues.

They stopped the train, took the radio communication systems from the guard and driver, detached the vacuum pipe between the bogies and the engine, locked the compartments from the inside and ordered the passengers to remain calm.

The railway authorities only realised that a train was missing when it did not reach Kumandi railway station, a distance of half an hour from the previous stop, despite seven hours having elapsed. Apparently anything less than that is still considered a “normal” delay. They did not even bother to investigate when the driver of a goods train informed them that he had seen a stationary train with its lights off.

The police eventually reached the spot. Details are hazy but the local administration has given out the story that the Maoists, or Naxalites, melted into the forest at the arrival of the police, which is now apparently launching a vigorous hunt. You may have heard tales of such vigour before.

The vigour was certainly on the other side in a town called Udaygiri in Orissa on Friday March 24. Some 80 Naxalites, including a contingent of women revolutionaries, launched a multiple offensive at dawn. The jail was their main target, from which they freed more than 40 prisoners; but they also attacked the police station, a camp of the Orissa Special Armed Police, the treasury office, the tehsildar’s office and a telecom tower.

The district collector, Binod Bihari Mohanty, lived to fight another day by taking shelter in his neighbour’s home. His official residence was presumably less safe. The police lost two men in a two-hour battle, and three Naxalites were apparently killed, but we cannot be sure since they took the bodies with them.

They also took, as live hostages, the officer in charge of the local police station, Ranjan Mallick, and the jailer, Rabinarayan Sethi. They also looted enough arms to sustain themselves in the future. The police, naturally, have launched yet another vigorous hunt, this time in the Gajapati forests.

Two completely different narratives are being played out in different worlds, over a common timeframe: the story in the neon lights has absolutely nothing to do with the story in starlight. Disparity has been a timeless part of Indian life, and has not disappeared in the shine of either Atal Behari Vajpayee or Manmohan Singh. But it is the duty of the politician to link the two worlds.

The bridge will be heavier on one side; but it will not break down as long as the other side is buoyed with hope: the hope that sheer and heartless poverty is not going to be a permanent fact of life. A democracy is designed to keep hope alive, but it needs democrats who understand that this is their fundamental responsibility.

If hope cedes ground, then the vacant space will be filled by violence. While Delhi contents itself with the theatre of the absurd (and sometimes the audience of courtiers is more hysterical than the principal actors), violence increases its domain across the breadth of India. It was once a thin belt, with occasional bulges, running through the middle of the country.

It is now a fat belly, spreading north and south, growing obese on despair. The drama of Delhi has no legs because it is running on empty: empty rhetoric, simulated slogans. There might be some forward movement if the law of unintended consequences takes over and drives mistakes that lead to accidents, which damage the relationships that keep an alliance together.

Why do I consider this forward movement rather than regression? Once, government was meant to bring the starlit world into the concern-structure of the neon-lit world. These days only a general election creates a meeting point between the two. The elite rule India. But the poor rule the ballot box.

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

A pandemic of fear

FEAR is a deeply rooted emotion — one that can serve as a lifesaving response to imminent danger. But because we humans often magnify risk, fear can also cause us to overreact to remote threats, such as bird flu.

According to a significant study published in the prestigious British journal Nature recently, the H5N1 bird flu virus is at least two large mutations and two small mutations away from being the next human pandemic virus. This virus attaches deep in the lungs of birds but cannot adhere to the upper respiratory tract of humans. Since we can’t transmit the virus to each other, it poses little immediate threat to us.

So why did the “flu hunter,” world-renowned Tennessee virologist Robert Webster, say of bird flu on ABC that there are “about even odds at this time for the virus to learn how to transmit human to human,” and that “society just can’t accept the idea that 50 per cent of the population could die . . . I’m sorry if I’m making people a little frightened, but I feel it’s my role.”

I’m sorry, Dr. Webster, but your role is to track influenza in the test tube, not to enter into broad speculation on national television. By your way of thinking, we should all be either building an escape rocket ship or killing every bird we see before it can kill us.

Fear causes the public to blur the distinction between birds and people, and so, as the H5N1 virus infects flocks of birds in Pakistan and Israel, nightly news watchers track the path to the United States. The poultry industry cringes as migratory birds that may be carrying H5N1 make their way closer to the northern shores of North America.

But though this bird flu appears to be quite deadly in many species of birds, killing 10 out of 10 chick embryos in test-tube conditions, we humans are a different matter. In 1997 in Hong Kong, for example, where there were 18 human cases of bird flu and six deaths, thousands of people were screened, and 16 percent developed antibodies but never got sick. There appears to be a spectrum of disease in humans, not nearly as deadly as many media reports have supposed.

Even if the H5N1 virus does mutate enough to spread easily among the upper breathing tracts of humans, there are multiple scenarios in which it would not cause the next massive pandemic. In fact, the Spanish flu of 1918 made the jump to humans before killing a large number of birds. Not only do we have vaccinations, antibiotics, antiviral drugs, public information networks, steroids and heart treatments that were lacking in 1918 to treat victims of the flu; in addition, the growing worldwide immunity to H5N1 may lessen the outbreak in humans even if the dreaded mutation does occur.

Even as the virus spreads in birds, the chances of a mutation occurring over time appear to be less likely. For every doomsayer who declares that “it’s not a matter of if, but when,” there is a sober scientist who says that H5N1 may well dead-end in animals and not be the next pandemic virus.

If H5N1 spreads in pigs (a soup of viruses) and exchanges genetic material with another human flu virus before passing to humans, the result is likely to be far less deadly. The swine flu fiasco of 1976 is an example of the damage that can be done by fear of a mutated virus that never quite lives up to 1918 expectations. About 1,000 cases of ascending paralysis occurred from a rushed vaccine given to more than 40 million people in response to a feared pandemic that never arrived.

Even the word “pandemic” scares us unnecessarily. The word simply means a new strain of a virus appearing in several areas of the world at one time and causing illness.

—The Washington Post