The Indian and International politics on Anna Hazare

NOTE: This article was written on 9th September 2011. Thus some facts might not be correct. Any error is deeply regretted.

News channels do not seem to be tired of airing virtually the same content everyday. Every channel that you switch to, there are discussions by expert panellists on the future of JanLokpal and whether Mr. Hazare should be ending his fast. There seems to be a unanimous response for the latter with almost everybody saying that Mr. Hazare should end his fast. Some people rather critical of Mr. Hazare pass comments on how it is unconstitutional, which it is, while the others urge him to end it as the idea behind the fast has been accomplished.

What was the idea behind the fast and all that followed? The real idea behind the entire event seems to now be lost in the cacophony of theories of government conspiracies against the 'civil society', opinions on how this entire event is now turning into an anarchist display of anti-corruption façade and proposals of alternative bills. The people at the moment seem to be disconnected with the real idea. They have caught onto a definition of the event which is a work of minds angry at the lack of government action on issues of corruption, terrorism and other events.

Individuals are singing vande-mataram slogans at the moment while allowing themselves to be intoxicated by the talk of this being the second freedom struggle, which it certainly isn't. This struggle which started off as a journey by a single individual, Mr. Hazare, against the government's inaction on corruption now seems to have acquired definitions and thoughts which are miles away from any initiative to get the country rid of corruption and other such malpractices generally thought to be performed by public servants.

Yes, this entire event had been sparked by the anger of one person over the ever increasing corruption that India seems itself to be surrounded with. The individual in question, Mr. Hazare, went on a fast and it soon garnered public attention. What I feel is that where public is there, it is imperative that news channels be there for that is the only way that they will be able to establish a connection with the wider society. Thus media crews descended upon the site and soon there were high-TRP shows on every news channel that was on air.

As the coverage increased more and more people flocked to the place and to their television sets. Soon the government found itself in the midst of a storm and they tried their best to fight it. Arrangements and settlements had to be made and thus the government and the civil society came to an understanding and the movement for the time being ceased. A Drafting Committee was formed to look into the matter. However, there was no further concrete action by the government on the issue which resulted in Mr. Hazare once again threatening to go on a fast on the 16th of August this year if the bill wasn't passed till then.

In the meanwhile, Baba Ramdev also went on a hunger strike. He demanded that all the black money that was stashed abroad in tax havens by Indian citizens be brought back. Followers gathered at Ramlila Maidan, the location of his agitation. The crowd grew. Kapil Sibal, a cabinet minister, asked him to stop the agitation. However, Ramdev continued on and even hardened his stance. Till now, tremendous public awareness had been generated on the issue and even the youth started taking to their various forms of protesting be it online or forming groups and marching. 

Around midnight the Delhi Police entered the place and resorted to 'lathi' charge to disperse the mob. The government came under fire and the common man took the stage. There were mass-rallies against the government and it was said that the government was being autocratic, a charge which I find ridiculous when we look at the real situation.

The real situation was that, had the police not started the crackdown at Ramlila Maidan than in the morning the place would have been an anarchist's heaven for people gathered and aggressively pitched their anti-government stand. The very basic right to freedom of expression was being manipulated over here to suit the  anti-government supporters. There was simply no sense of sensibility in the people that night at Ramlila Maidan to put it frankly. 

Mr. Hazare was arrested on 16th August just before he was about to commence his fast. Neither the opposition party and nor his supporters took kindly to this decision and there were wide spread protests across the country and at places, people voluntarily courted arrest. Under heavy pressure the government released him. 

The protests continued and so did Mr. Hazare's hunger strike. The government and the civil society tried to negotiate over the text and other provisions of the bill but there were repeated break-downs in talks and later on the parliament passed a resolution agreeing to the demands of Mr. Hazare and decided to  reffer the matter to a standing committee. 

INDIA

I am disappointed looking at the manner in which the citizens of India have responded to this entire event. As per a survey done by a newspaper, only 2 out of 5 JanLokpal supporters were actually even aware of what the bill proposed. This apathy towards political institutions, be it the government or 'civil society' is saddening. Individuals came out with the national flags. Waving it as if with every thrust of it, they were proving their  patriotism which existed in their hearts for the country.

How is a person waving the national flag going to stop corruption in its track is a phenomena that is beyond the understanding of my rather practical mind. Yet the supporters of this media hyped campaign claimed that it was changing the mindset of the people. Sure it was, but how was it really going to manifest itself in the daily day to day happenings in the lives of these individuals?

While having my morning breakfast one day, my grandma raised an interesting point. She said that if everybody (almost the entire country as claimed by Mr. Hazare and Co.) in this campaign was not corrupt then, who was corrupt? It was quite interesting to note this point which I had seemed to have overlooked. Even as I pondered on this topic, I couldn't help but think about the real situation that was unfolding.

Groups of people were surrounding the houses of MPs (Members of Parliament) demanding that this bill be passed, without as much as even a proper discussion. This group consisted of people, half of whom I wouldn't like to see near my house. They were the simple common youth who had been simply brainwashed into believing that Mr. Hazare was the only individual against corruption and that the political and elite class would not be benefited if this bill were to pass. Thus the 'struggle of the common man', as the news channels had suggested, continued with a fierce boost.

According to me, these groups that were forming chains and surrounding the houses of the MPs were resorting to harassment. Had I been a MP then I would have gotten appropriate action taken against all of them because that is not the way of asking something from your elected representative. The individual is a representative and not a servant of the people. If people need to demand something from him, they should go through the appropriate mechanism of doing that. It would involve first taking an appointment with the representative and then addressing the issue at the appointment that you wish to make your representative aware of. At a point of time, there were even calls to surround the house of the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister? He is the most important person in the country. Terrorists could have easily taken advantage of such a situation and then assassinated him. What would the consequences have been? They would have been severe. Curfews and complete police control over activities.

Although such a thing did not happen while the government tried to unsuccessfully stop the protesters from surrounding the house of the PM by stopping the metro train services in nearby areas and by cordoning off the area. I think that there is no explanation whatsoever to justify such an activity that was carried on by supporters of Mr. Hazare. Common sense and normal practice says that these picketers should have been arrested on ground of disturbing peace and acting as a threat to the PMs security and should have been dealt with accordingly.

As these events were unfolding it was very much evident that the common man had simply lost his ability of reasoning and the anger over the government poor handling of situations involving corruption and terrorism was flowing down the pot and was acting as a boost to the already racing adrenalin. These situations arise very often in democracies and need to be dealt with in a manner that is neither harsh nor soft but sets a tone for the proceedings.

Thus even though Mr. Hazare like a true gentleman said that all the proceedings should happen in a non-violent manner, it is difficult to ensure that people's excitement won't get the better of them and that they won't turn violent. It needs to be noted that very many of these non-violent protests end up becoming violent when a single individual loses his control and attempts to act as the legal guardian of the law through ways that are not legal and a clear violation of the provisions of the constitution.

Hence, the lesson that the political class and the people should get from this entire event should be that of being legal in whatever they do. Of course many from the political class can find loopholes in the current slightly outdated legal structure but what they must keep in mind is that though they may get away for the time being without being caught but a time may come when they may find themselves in a corner and the anger of the people flowing towards them like molten lava. Thus, the political class must take the responsibility of acting in a manner that is clean and fair towards the country. There should be zero tolerance for unfair advantage which the politicians use to create a better lifestyle for themselves.

While at the same time, the people should also not be allowed to get away with any and every practice that they may follow. What they should do should be within the legal framework of the constitution and the UN Charter on Human Rights and should not be a manipulation of the duo. The people are the most important element of the state and thus it is essential that they follow the correct path for if they as much as even get slightly distracted from the correct path then there will be chaos, pandemonium and anarchy. The people cannot take everything into their hands. They need to utilise the correct provisions, procedures and mechanisms as provided to them by the legal bodies for the overall good.

PAKISTAN


Pakistan is an example of the path that one country should not head for. However, it is not in the hands of individuals to stop or change the direction of the route that they have taken. They can only manipulate it to either suit themselves (example Mr. Gaddafi's earlier practice used for suppressing rebellions, now rather unsuccessful) or the country. Pakistan has been in a state of chaos for a long time now. Every other day individuals opposed to the stringent laws that are established by a certain religion are killed, journalists investigating into the frauds of the government suffer the same fate and the people there are scared to openly criticize the government or the extremists. It's basically a no man's land.

However, there is no authority that can take over and try to control the situation and ease the stress. Here is where the Indian connection comes in. The country though has a human rights body but it is more or less like a body set up to ensure that the provisions of the constitution are maintained. Though it has no authority over the happening of the country and due to the extremist state of affairs that is prevalent in the country, there is a lot of fear.

Here, now a powerful body, something like what Mr. Hazare is proposing can be brought in. But what needs to be taken care of is that this body should be primarily for the Human Rights of the citizens as an all powerful body like the JanLokpal (as proposed by Mr. Hazare) can become autocratic in its functioning. Thus over here only the police force should be under this department and there should be no political interference in the matters it deals with. However to ensure that it does not become autocratic in nature, provisions, mechanisms and many loopholes would need to be worked on.

Such a body can easily function in matters related to Human Rights in Pakistan and once the people are not afraid then it is the government that would be afraid. In India due to the vast presence of Human Rights activists, the governments are scared to take steps which may be deemed as anti-human rights and try to avoid them as much as they can. But for a country like India an all powerful body to deal with matters related specifically to corruption would be like inviting a lion for a feast. The lion may enjoy the feast and become your best friend or you may become its feast with the chances of the latter being higher.

CHINA


China can be best described as a country that is still waiting for a spark. Thus it is no surprise that the party is trying to do everything that it can to improve its image that has taken a beating after the train accident which took place recently. Though however much the party tries to come across as a non-corrupt set up whose sole purpose is the betterment of human life in China. It is exactly the opposite that most people believe.

People in China have since long identified the party as corrupt at the grass root level. Senior leader in the party are thought off as non-corrupt and honest individuals but yet it is the grass root politics everywhere which influences the people. No revolution takes place because the country as a whole is doing bad but because every region as a whole is doing bad and a similar situation though however much exaggerated it may be by the Chinese critics is slowly but steadily developing in China.

People have started questioning the motives behind the party's continuous attempts to remain in power. Though the party may try to come across as working for the people but the question is that how long will the people be contend with this face that the party is showing. Soon there will be protests. Its a matter of time that some incident takes place and the entire country erupts. In this modern age of the internet, it is difficult to segregate a group of people by simply cutting off the internet connect and this is fairly evident from the situation that we can see in Libya.

However, what can the party do to improve its image? One of the suggestions that people give is set up an anti-corruption body with ultimate power but every where it is the same issue that ensures that talks fail. That issue is of the amount of power that can be allotted to this body. No government in its right mind would be favorable to giving unlimited power to such a body for the simple reason that the power of the government might become weak in front of it.

While at the same time, it is said that China has been funding these events that have been happening in India. However, there has been no proof of this theory yet it is a theory that dominates the discussions of the conspiracy theorists. If it were to be true, then though there won't be any major effects on the relationship that the two countries, India and China share but this will certainly act as a thorn.

India may not directly take any action against the Chinese for this reason but behind the doors a lot of action may happen such as India providing excess funding to groups hell bent on creating troubles for the party in China. However this is a very remote possibility since any such action by the Indians would have direct repercussions due to China's growing assertiveness.

Thus the Indians may just stop supporting China all the time on issues in the international sphere and may take positions at times which may not please the Chinese. Hence all in all this is a very complicated issue which for all one knows may not at all result in anything and might just end up being ignored by the Indian Government which is ever ready to promote peace and stability in the region.

USA


USA is considered to be the most successful democracies of all time and it is true. And hence it is only justifiable that the US would do things to help the democratic setup in other countries and we can see that it is doing work in Afghanistan and ensuring that the new Afghan set up continues to get the much needed oxygen. However there have been allegations by some members of the Indian National Congress (party in power) that the USA was indirectly funding the Anna Hazare movement.


So serious were the implications of this statement that the US came out with an official statement that it in no way was supporting Mr. Hazare. It is true that at the moment, the US cannot afford to have its ties with India strained, especially at a time when most of the middle-east takes an unfavorable view of the US, India is the only friend that the US has who has the ability to influence policy-makers in the middle-east.


Apart from that, Indian co-operation is something that India would soon need desperately in the UN and other International bodies as China starts to flex its muscle and counter the US and at the time being, India is the only counter balance that USA has to the mighty dragon. However, there is a major conflict of interests in this regard.


India and China are seen as the face of the developing world and that is a fact. In every major convention or event, the developing countries look up to these two giants for support so that their demands are looked at and seriously considered instead of being dropped and lost in the bureaucracy. And thus it is quite essential from point of the developing world that India and China continue to show the same co-operation that they had shown in Copenhagen.


While from the US point of view, it is essential that the US try to get India to tilt even if by just a few degrees to its side if it is to maintain its position in Asia and the Pacific.


Thus all in all, so great was the Anna Hazare episode that it promoted almost all the countries which share a special relation with India to respond or to act in a particular manner. Only time will tell how the world economy and the politics take shape as more and more countries slip into the euphoria of the Jasmine Revolution and demand greater freedoms.

Into the Theory of THE CIVIL SOCIETY

There has been a debate raging on the Lokpal issue for few months now and every time that the JanLokpal is questioned, its supporters start talking about what the civil society is doing against corruption and question the people who have taken a position against theirs. This statement of civil society et al has continued to amaze me for years. Who does the civil society comprise of? Who is allowed in it? What's the definition of it? Are there societies that are uncivil? If there exist such societies, then how are they surviving when their very existence is frowned upon by the remainder of the people? These are the many questions that have always found an adobe in my mind and however much I try to do, I am unable to shoo them away or to find an answer to them.

Thus quite recently, when I questioned a tweet that asked, what the civil society should do now that the government had sent the Lokpal that it had formulated to the Parliament, I was taken back into that part of my brain which had held this question for years and continues to hold. How is one to come up with an exact definition of the civil society? A fellow twitter user tried to answer that question of mine by tweeting to me that 'Everybody who works for public interest objectives, not national, not profit, academic, etc' forms that civil society. I was quite amazed by this answer. For many new questions had arisen in my mind by just looking at that one statement for under a minute and the questions were some that I had never thought needed answers.

One question was, Isn't public interest also a part of national interest? Another question that surprised me was that then are all the educated businessmen who work for profits and in turn provide employment to people and manufacture goods and services which are provided to millions at affordable rates, generally, part of the uncivil society? And what about the politicians who despite having vested interests at times work for the national well-being? Do they get an entry into this narrow definition of civil society? And what about the people who lack even a very basic education? Are they allowed to be included in this sphere of Civil Society that we have created for ourselves?

What about the people in countries like Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq and others which have been marked as the world terror hubs? Will they count as being civil? I don't know for the definition that my friend gave is extremely inadequate to smuggle these people into the boundaries of civil society. What about Anders Breivik who despite being a product of an advanced and developed society went on to kill over a hundred people in cold blood? Will he find a place into civil society? When questioned about this, people tend to label those engaging in activities like Terrorism or killing others as uncivil and criminal. My question to them is, what about the CIA, RAW and other such agencies that at times have to kill people for the greater good? Will one label them as agencies of the Civil Society? Wouldn't that be hypocrisy?

These questions are difficult to answer but some people define Civil Society as any society that follows a set of rules and regulations. A few questions that I would like to ask are, who makes these laws? And since there are different societies practising their own norms, rules and regulations as such, would one classify a society say for example, a society that is involved in stoning people for say adultery, would one classify them as uncivil? Who gives people the right to make this distinction between societies. Every society has its own culture which allows different practices to be followed. Thus it is not up to an individual to label societies as civil or uncivil.

And even as we talk about culture, I can't help but mention the culture of cannibalism which as gruesome and as cruel as it may be, it is still practised in some remote regions of the world and quite recently a few serial killers were also caught who practised it. Thus we may label these individuals as insane but the groups who practised it have been practising it for generations because that is what their culture is like. Hence would it be right of us to categorise them into a small category?

I personally am of the belief that there are only societies which cannot be further classified into smaller groups for the definition of these smaller groups would need to be absolutely accurate without any room for error for the subject political science of which this is a theory is not an exact science and thus any classification which is exact in nature would oppose the very basic theory of why political science is not regarded as an exact science.

The societies in turn may vary due to the various rules and regulations followed in each of them. However there is a common link in all of them, for the people in them and not societies themselves can be divided on the basis of different values, fields and areas like professions, religion, level of development etc. Thus these societies have a certain limit beyond which dividing them would only alter the definition of these various concepts.

Another noteworthy thing while the topic of civil society is being discussed is that though these groups which the people are divided into may be many but they are all inter-linked and at times even overlapping for example a working parent would not only be classified into a category which denotes his/her profession but also in a category which denotes parenthood. Furthermore, the category of parenthood can be further classified into that of mother/father, single parent and even the category of single parent can be further divided into single parent (mothers)/ single parent (fathers). Hence, as stated before, these categories are not absolute in nature and can be divided into as many as possible but within a definition that has some legal acceptance behind it. For example the definition of civil society is not clear like many other concepts in political science but the one issue that differentiates the concept of civil society from all the other concepts is the grey area. This grey area is very big and thus the legality of the definition comes into question. Thus it is no surprise that many political thinkers have refused to accept the concept of civil society.

Thus, the various definitions that are given to each concept in political science needs to have some level of similarity in them and must also discuss a topic that is of common interest. For no concept in political science has only one definition. And if there exists a definition which is absolute in nature then it challenges one of the very basic rules of political science i.e that political science is not an exact science. Hence as for me, I refuse to accept and recognise the concept of civil society due to its vagueness and big pockets of grey areas.

Violence Is Not Preached In Religion

Few days ago a politician wrote an article trying to analyse and finding a solution for Islamic Terrorism and it was published by a reputed newspaper which now I feel has lost that reputation at least in my eyes for the simple reason that even though people get angry at various situations and don't know what to do except just blame others but they engage in self-control and self-censorship for the fear that what they do might have repercussions in the future, for their country, for their kids or for people in general and that is what is humane. However neither this 'reputed' newspaper and nor this politician seem to be on the same page of the dictionary.

      It’s been happening ever since the twin tower attacks. Since then people have been linking a particular religion as a synonym of terrorism. This way of thinking is not at all rational. Recently Norway had its share of terrorism when a fundamentalist Christian bombed a building and massacred people with his gun in cold blood. I would like to know what this esteemed politician would want to say to that or what would he say when he is asked about the nuns in Odisha who were raped by people who supported their 'saffron' leaders. What would he say about those Sikhs who were killed by the mob just after Indira Gandhi was assassinated? There are no limits to the number of examples that I can give of barbarism that has been committed by people of nearly all religions. 

      Even Ashoka the king attacked and killed people but then he learnt of his folly. He looked in the eyes of the mothers whose sons he had killed, he looked at small children who played unaware that their father was being taken for cremation and how would a wife feel when she is to know that the man she loved for years has been killed in this fight for land. These question are relevant even today, it is only the reason behind this new 'war' that has changed everything else remains the same. Even now kids would be made orphaned; even now parents would just look on as the child who played on their laps is laid to rest before them. Earlier people fought over land and today they fight over god.

      It is strange how people think that only their religion is right and that it their birth right to ensure that others bow down to their way of thinking and follow their religion. Not many thankfully think like that. However there are elements whose ultimate objective is to simply kill of the opposition or ensure that they convert to their form of thinking. That is exactly what that article of this politician hinted at. 

      The sad part of this form of democracy in India is that, even thought people may fight for their rights and talk about more freedom and protest if the state as much as tries to clamp down on even a single right of theirs, the people in India are simply not ready for this form of multi-party democracy. And they won't be until and unless they stop voting on the basis of religion, caste, gender, region etc. This has to stop. How is a country to progress if the people themselves are divided on the basis of these small thing which at the end of the day won't even play a minor role in shaping my future?

      Everybody talks of progress and growth but when will the people themselves grow up and look at each other as humans and not as individuals from a different religion. Humans are supposed to evolve into intelligent life-forms. They are meant to make miracles happen. And miracles do not happen unless one does not think beyond himself/herself. They only happen when an entire community is to be benefited; for even if there is a god, he won't want only one of his kids to have his wish full-filled. He would want the wishes of the entire community's be full-filled. That child who was about to die of a disease survive thanks to a transplant. As the sun is about to set on his life when he is in his seventies, that same kid in him would ignite and he would look around him and ask, how has my existence helped those around me? And as he says this his eyes will first go to the picture of a dog whom he saved from coming under a car. He would look at his family and see that they are crying and he would know that in his life, he has done thing, good thing, for the grave of a bad man does not get any visitors, as Mr. Scrooge had dreamed.

      Thus similarly it is true that whatever religion you may follow you want to end up in heaven. And the gates to heaven do not open for people who have done bad things in their life.  A mother in a movie explains to her son when the son unknowingly talks about killing people of another religion, she says "There are two kinds of people in this world. One who do bad things and the other who do good things. It is up to you who you want to be." This line is absolutely true in life. I for one can never ever even think of killing another human let alone do it for ethnic cleansing. Its the way I have been brought up. My mother used to tell me the same thing that they said in the movie. I have decided who I want to be life. Now it is your chance to decide.

The Time After The Blast

A couple of days ago, a tragedy struck us. Three blasts rocked Mumbai and with it also the country. Nothing could be done about it. News channels aired their favourite 'Are you safe?' programs while papers came up with ridiculous headlines which instead of showing sympathy and support to the victims commercialised their agony. Ministers claimed that it wasn't a failure of intelligence, some questioned that claim while the others simple said that during their rule the number of such incidences were limited and advocated a zero tolerance policy for Terrorism. It didn't bother me what people had to say about the incident. What bothered me was what they did about it and how they helped the people in need.

      I am very happy to say that I wasn't disappointed as the human spirit awoke as the news about the blast spread and people offered their help to the stranded. Social networking sites were full of offers to people to give them a ride home, offering a place to stay and people even from the overseas tweeted to the stranded telling them that they would call the folks of the stranded due to the mobile network being down and all. Nothing more could have been done to show how united the people were. The terrorists only succeeded in revoking those sentiments of unity and sympathy which were not seen on the faces of news anchors as they went into commercial break after having had a chat with their correspondents on the death toll.

      The topic #mumbaiblasts became a worldwide trending topic on Twitter for a couple of hours while tags such as #offer2help came up as people tagged their offers of help and sent around a message to the masses. Some of the stranded responded to the tweets and they were taken care of. People took out their cars and drove up long distances only to help a person stranded at a temple reach home. This simple act of kindness gave me an absolutely strange feeling as I looked on in delight as offers to help flowed.

      The common Indian politics started soon after with many a people blaming certain communities for the tragedy that struck us all. This one thing infuriated me the most and I lashed out at those who were trying to incite communal hatred. Of course they had their own reasons which they childishly tried to prove right in front of us as me and a couple of my friends questioned the very logic behind each of them and proved them wrong. Many a friends of mine on Twitter asked me to not respond to them but then I couldn't help it and gave the irritants a piece of my mind. However trolling continued.

Source

      Even as the twitterati offered help, news channels went from celebrity to celebrity asking for their opinion on the blast. That according to me was very immature as no person with a rational mind set would support blasts aimed at civilians and true to rationality all condemned the blasts and offered their condolences and sympathy. One thing that did strike me was that the very next day, the city came to a halt quite to the delight of the terrorists whose aim of bringing the city to a stop had been fulfilled. Roads remained empty and offices, schools and colleges recorded the lowest attendance ever. However I did go to college.

      Even as I entered the college there was an eerie feeling. Two souls looked at me as I showed the watchmen my ID and entered the campus. The basketball court was deserted quite unlike normal days when it has people playing and at times talking to each other in groups. Rain poured down as I traced my steps to my lecture room. It seemed like silence had indeed invaded the place. A teacher replied, when asked why the college hadn't declared a holiday stating that the Principal thought that by declaring a holiday they would only be ensuring that the terrorists get what they want i.e. the ability to bring fear into our minds. I sat in my class and talked to five students out of a class of hundred who were present. Only one lecture took place that day.

      What my principle said was indeed true. These acts of bombings had always been meant to bring fear into the minds of the people. Even as leaders visited the victims and talked policy, the roads remained empty. The crows circled the sky as cops wearing raincoats stood at various points eyeing each and everyone who passed them. The terrorists would be caught shortly but what would happen? They would be given a 'free and fair' trial and then they would stay in prison courtesy the Government of India. Next day the city returned to normal as cars honked at each other and students responded with a 'present' to the attendance call. Nothing should ever break this spirit of our again like the way it was broken on that day for till we are here we must refuse to bow our heads to terrorism.

Master of Disguises

Source

      The critics have dubbed it a Failed State, the security agencies have named it a Terrorist State and the human rights activists have called it a Military State. So many names for one state of Pakistan. Well that is certainly the result of the many disguises that the Pakistani agencies work in. No need to say what half of them are. Yes they are some terrorist outfit plotting their attacks on innocent civilians from at times ISI safe houses. So what is it that has happened? Has Pakistan done too much for these terrorists for the terrorists to call Pakistan their home. Well so it seems. However I won't be talking about terrorism on this post. This article is dealt towards understanding the dual policy that Pakistan is following.

      Pakistan has warned the United States against any further drone strikes conducted within its borders and also any unilateral military action taken inside its territory. But is this a farcical show of strength? Is it just a statement issued by the weak civilian government to please the people and the army. The army would be more than happy with that statement because it would help them to get higher budget while at time same time show the public that they still exert influence on the government which it most desperately needs to show due to the rising criticism for them. Thus there are many different angles to this one play that is being stage on the world arena.

      If reports are to be believed than according to them, Pakistan had a pact with USA that if the US finds Bin Laden in Pakistan's territory than they shall be allowed to take unilateral action while Pakistan will be allowed to criticize them and give them warnings just to show the public that they are against such violations of their sovereignty. Now if that is true than I am not quite sure about Pakistan's future as a sovereign country. How can it be that an operation is carried out by another country within the territory of another country and that country doesn't even do anything about it? Because they simply can't. One must not forget the one very important that Pakistan needs at this time and that is 'AID'.

      Almost all the aid that Pakistan gets from the USA is spent on the military but some of it is utilized to keep the economy afloat. Yes, ladies and gentlemen, the Pakistan economy cannot survive long without continuous economic aid from the United States. The reason why the economy is in shambles is because of the negligence of the government. Pakistani Government never invested smartly for the country's future and if you come to think of it they got the most fertile land in the country after the partition.

      However there are certain sectors that are threatening to boycott the US aid but that may just turn out to be nothing but a publicity stunt being done by an extremist candidate up for elections. If the military is mum and not doing anything about it than there isn't much that can or will be done. And as time goes, the Pakistani people will forget about the incident but the extremists and the terrorist funded by the ISI will not. Thus the ongoing proxy war against the US planned and put into action by Pakistan will go on.

      So in short they can't do much except criticize the US and fund terrorist networks to increase attacks on Americans because after all money talks. So in short we will only be hearing statements made by the Pakistan leadership and acts of terrorism against the US and that is all that there is to it. After all statements can be forgotten but actions cannot and the US is one country that will never forget it if Pakistan does something against them. So in the end, it is the "you give me money, and I won't do anything 'publicly'."

The Concept of Clean Politics

Source

      Politics has always been a key element of our society. Without it, it would be hard to even establish whether a society even existed or not. Its a concept that is said to be as important to society as oxygen or water is to mankind. Everything that has ever defined us and the world that we live in has been influenced by this eight letter word. On the one hand it started two world wars and on the other insured the peaceful settlement of the Suez Canal dispute. So now that you come to see of it, politics is morally colourless i.e it can result in wars or solution of disputes peacefully.

     The concept of politics became famous thanks to Shakespeare and his play Caesar. I was taught the play in tenth standard and it was also my first brush with this concept. Since then the concept has fascinated me. It is so intriguing that you can achieve so many things with this one word and its careful usage. Its a tactician's dream. For ages people have planned and conspired against each other, no wonder the world is in shambles today. We have to deal with multiple threats like terrorism, rival countries and a relatively new concept known as rogue countries which I can use to describe the failed state of Pakistan which uses a dual policy. One that is anti-terrorism and the other pro. Of course it is a hide and seek game to prove the latter.

Source

      So has politics ever been clean or has it always involved those small dirty tricks that seem to be white on the outside and black like a kettle on the inside. It is confusing while at the same time we have the answer in front of us. It is like asking whether a man has ever lied in his life. Now we don't know about everyone but we can make the most likely assumption that every man has lied in their life at least once. And so it is. We take two possibilities and choose an option that is more likely and that is that politics had been a dirty business since the very start. And there is no better example to start with than that of Caesar himself.

      Caesar was murdered because he was becoming too big. He was overshadowing others and was starting to seem like a threat. Thus he had to be done with and so he was murdered, murdered by his most trusted comrades, Caesar's story went onto become epic. However there is one thing that is worth a mention here. As we see that as Caesar became powerful, the number of his enemies also increased and this is true to every individual who rises high and has a massive public support system. So he was murdered for political gains and thus it proves the fact that since ancient times politics has been a dirty business.

Source

      We are further convinced of this when we look at the recent examples of Libya and Syria. I have explored Libya in a previous post and thus I won't be discussing it and instead I would take Syria as an example. Syria has been a dictatorship for a long time and it's people have been denied their rights for a long time. Hence it was quite natural that a tipping point be reached and thus at this tipping point the public anger overflowed from the pot. Widespread stirs and agitations took place and they were put down. The authorities used every resource that they could to fight the very same people whom they were meant to help in their quest for progress. Its a tragedy if you look at it closely.

      So we have the answer that we wanted. Yes politics has always been a dirty business. Always some interests are involved. But does it mean that this black and white picture of politics can't be given a make over and turned colourful like the rainbow maybe. Well I would say that this black and white picture can't be turned into a rainbow-colourful but it certainly can be lightened. Colours can be added and the baggage attached to the word 'politics' can be lost. But it doesn't start just like that. No one individual can do it. It has to be a community's work. It is like a society garden. Everybody needs to plant the seeds, water them and take good care of them if flowers are to bloom and happiness to come.

      How can one do it? Well it is simple. Grab your paper and get your pen, and pen your worries on it. Just direct your feet to the sunny side of your mind. I took that line from a song but how does it matter, the message goes out loud and clear. It means that you should write what worries you. Put it down on a piece of paper while at the same time suggest things or steps that can be taken to improve the situation and that would be you doing your bit. So as I finish this article I look at my TV screen and see the farmer agitation and I hope that I can do something about it. With that hope I shall again take to my laptop and pen another article but till then this is me signing off and hoping that things come out well.

Justifying the crackdown at Ramlila Ground

      On June 4th as the clock ticked form 11:59 PM to 12:00 AM the Delhi Police stationed itself at the Ramlila Maidan. What was to follow was to be dubbed as one of the worst incidents ever to happen in a democracy like India. Allegations were made against the government. People warned that we were returning to the Emergency Era. The Delhi Police had raided the maidan, many protesters were injured and Baba Ramdev was taken to Dehradun. 

      The crackdown received criticism far and wide. BJP President Nitin Gadkari said, "Home Minister P Chidamabaram has replaced General Dyer who had massacred peaceful agitators in Jallianwala Bagh during the freedom struggle". LK Advani termed this police crackdown as "naked-fascism". Human Rights groups demanded answers from the government.

Source

      All in all the government was cornered but not even for a moment did anybody think about all of this from the government's point of view. Maybe it was the sudden excitement that people found themselves surrounded by or maybe it was the collective anger that people had for the government. Nobody was happy. Rising prices, corruption and what not. Something had to give. And thus the government found itself to be a lone woodcutter in the forest, surrounded by hyenas ready to tear apart the woodcutter. 

      I admit that the crackdown may have been a little too harsh but it was what was needed. I believe that the constitution grants the government the right to crackdown on such protests if it feels that it may disrupt civil peace or cause civil unrest. I feel what the government did was totally justified. If you come to think of it all, if any damage had been done to public property had the protest gone out of hand thenn who would have had to pay for it? We would have had to pay for it from our pockets. Our taxes would have been used to pay for it all and I for one refuse that my money be used to pay for damage caused because of a Baba whose total net worth is over a 1000crore Rupees. 

      Another argument that the people raise is that 'Women and children were harmed'. I find this argument to be the dumbest of them all. Doesn't everybody go about claiming that women and men are equal? So why this special reference to women alone. It's a bit strange now that I look at it carefully. And the children. It is unfortunate if any children were hurt but at the same time only the parents are to be blamed. I have to still meet a single parent who would take their child along to such a place when they know that the issue is going to get very political. Of course many would defend the parent's action by saying that the parents took the child because their future was at stake. OK fine if at all the future of their child was at stake even then I would say that not a single person I know would take their child to such a place. They would go themselves but not a single parent would allow any harm to come to their child.

      After the crackdown, we saw BJP protesting against it. A clip of Sushma Swaraj was being aired by news channels which showed her dancing to supposed patriotic tunes at Rajghat. She defended herself aggressively by asking whether it was a crime to dance and sing patriotic songs at a place like Rajghat where the father of our nation was cremated. Even if we allow patriotic songs but still dancing at a place like that is condemnable. That is a place where one should remain silent and show his respect for Bapu. And however much you claim that you were simply singing and dancing to songs in praise of the motherland, it does not explain why you had the urge to dance to whatever patriotic song that you were dancing to at Rajghat. There is a time and place for everything. I for one regard it as a clear cut insult to me and to every Indian because of the special place that Bapu holds in our society.

Source

      Many critics of the government compared the India under UPA to China. I for one find this comparison both silly and childish. It is strange that people are able to criticise the government like that and still say that they are living in China. I really doubt if in China people are even seen or heard of after they have made such a statement against the government. Comparing this incident to the Tienanmen Square protest or to the Tahrir Square protests is nothing but an insult to those protesters who bravely fought their regimes in the hopes of having a better tomorrow. I don't think that this crackdown evoked any feeling of being that helpless that one compares it to the those valiant protests that happened in China and Egypt respectively. People claimed that all the politicians had Swiss bank accounts. That statement too is dumb. Did they go and get the bank statement of those individuals? Why do people insult politicians just like that? Agreed that politicians are public servants but still you do not own them. Our democracy can be best described as a restaurant where the Prime Minister is the waiter and he has to come at one call as soon as he is summoned by any Tom, Dick and Harry. What the people do not understand is that he has got much more important things to attend to like administrating this huge country of ours.

      One of the many factors that makes me critical of Baba Ramdev's protest is the fact that the man travels in private jets even though he has taken sanyas. This one thing alone makes me not want to believe whatever he says. Besides, what is left of a fast after you have taken some honey and lemon juice? Also not to forget all this fasting was like holding the government to ransom. I for one wonder what would happen if an unstable person tomorrow undertakes a fast saying the government must bomb some country for all the atrocities that it is committing on India by means of terrorism. If the fast gets good publicity then many idiots would also join the protest. At that time a crackdown would be needed. We can't simply bomb a country and then hope that they won't nuke us.

      This fasting incident made my Grandma nostalgic. She told me that when she lived in West Bengal, almost every single day there would be a strike or a fasting by a group of workers wanting a rise in salary. They claimed that they were being made to work a lot and not being a paid a fair amount. What was the result? At times when the strike would go on, the company would go bankrupt and shut down. Hence all of them would lose their jobs while the Union Leaders were taken care of by political parties with vested interests. A similar thing is happening in India. Every single day somebody goes on a fast for some issue or the other. He is endorsed by celebrities who at times simply fail to understand the fact that adding their name to such a campaign would have a broad effect and many people would join in the fasting without actually being aware of what the core issue is.

      Thus all in all, promoting such things is not going to be beneficial to anybody despite whatever people may claim. I hope this article succeeded in telling you guys that if you want to protest against something then fasting is not the way to go. You can do rallies. Sit at the pavements and shout slogans, protest. But this thing of holding mass protest is not good. It won't do the country any good. Police forces would be diverted to ensure that these protests don't turn violent or to ensure the safety of the leaders from things like ensuring the security of the common man, terrorism and robberies. So even though the constitution grants us the right to protest but it is up to us to understand, be reasonable and to protests in a way that does not hurt the economy, administration or anything for that matter. If we are to all grow old together in this great country of ours then we must find ways to let out our anger against the government in respectable and acceptable ways.

Education...Nah! Tuitions...Yeah!

Guess who topped the twelfth grade exams?

1. The student who had his hand up with a well-thought intelligent answer in class! 
2. The student who was not seen or heard in class.

      You are forgiven for making the mistake selecting option 1 because we are talking about the Indian Education System. What should a developed education system lay emphasis on? The child's all round development but in India the education system is meant to lay emphasis on studies and studies alone. Studies are emphasized regardless of the fact whether the child is interested in the subject at hand or not.

      In the exams, the child who is always active in class, answers questions and is recognised by the teachers as a good student gets average marks while students who are not heard of manage to get excellent marks because the examiners give marks only to the answers which are good enough to be introduced in any guide. They do not see whether the child has understood the fact or simply mugged the answers.

      I am not ridiculing the entire tuition system. I understand that at times tuitions are needed for subjects like Maths and even for languages that you haven't learnt before like French or Russian but I don't understand the logic behind having tuitions for subjects like Political Science or Psychology. Is there a need? No student can be so dumb that they won't understand what is being taught in the class in the above subjects.

      What I don't stand for is that you go to college and then go for tuitions mug those huge answers that are given by your coaching classes and then just print them out on your examination sheet word to word and then end up topping the exams. I know many people who didn't take tuition and who got average marks and I also know people who took tuitions and got good marks. It is upto you to decide who to respect. I respect the one who didn't take tuitions and got average marks. They are the ones who will do well in abroad where there are is no tuition system. So for all those who didn't take tuitions, you did better than the rest.

Psychology of Views and Decisions

      What is the routine that you wake up every morning to follow? I bet it involves reading the newspapers. Sure it does. What are you nodding your head for? OK? So you open the papers and what is the first news that you read? Killings, rape and violence. In simpler words it is all the things that the world would be better without and also that you would be better without every morning. After all it is much better to wake up every morning to read happier things. But do the papers realise that? I don't think so.

Source

      Regularly they feature events that are not so pleasant to either the eye or the emotions on the front page and we like the silent people read them, go through them and the worse it is the better. At times it seems like we have been taken over by a sinister evil that wishes to see all the gory details so brilliantly highlighted in the newspapers. We do not have any control over it.

      But how did it grow so big in the first place that even our superior organs like the brain can't overcome him? Well it is simple now that you ask. It has grown. All the rubbish that we fed it acted like nutrients for it and it bloomed. There are few things in this world and life that we can do.

      And it is these things that we do that define us. Also there are those things that we don't do that define us. As such we are surrounded by options, options good or bad. However what we need to look at is: what is it that we have done and or will do and what would their consequences be? Can they be put into the 'good' circle or the 'bad' circle.

      Whatever we do may not have its effects immediately but it will in the future, you can be sure about that. Thus every time we do something or decide to do something just give it a second's thought and view all the paradigms attached to it. That is all you need to do to lead a good life. Once you have analysed everything, you will choose the right option automatically.

The Cyber Wars

Internet is now a national asset. It has helped in connecting people and also in a lot more things. But as they say, there is always another side to things. And yes indeed there is. Along with the pros of the internet come the cons. But these two elements are there in everything. In some cases the pros are more and in some it’s the other way round. But this here is a unique case.

Internet has had a lot more than its 15 minutes of fame and it is still on it. Internet here is a unique case of how something can be so good and yet so bad. The threat that comes with internet is something major. Something so major that it threatens the entire world as now a days many things are computerised if not all.

Recently the bill ‘Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset’ which was approved unanimously by the US Homeland Security Committee attracted some negative attention with people raising concerns over their privacy on the net. This bill will give the US president the authority to ‘kill the internet’. Some claim it to be the President’s ‘Internet Kill Switch’. This bill would be put to vote on the Senate floor shortly. But it has brought forth the major problems of the net to the public.

The problem is Hacking and identity thefts. These problems are a relatively new thing. Last year and even this year we read many news reports about the hackings that were taking place with the main source being China. Reports claimed that China had its own Cyber Hacking Army. I do not know whether I should believe it or not but the recent hacking carried out from the Chinese Territories gives me reason to believe so.

Many countries have built their own Cyber Army with the US and China leading the pack. But the thing to note is that this might result in the onset of new types of wars, the wars which will involve no bloodshed. They would be called ‘The Cyber Wars’ where one country would hack into the other country’s confidential database and take out information that is of interest or paralyse the entire internet facility within that country.

The worst of these attacks is called ‘A Fire sale’ wherein everything within a country is hacked and rendered useless or paralysed or even controlled. It is best shown in the movie Die Hard 4.0 where the cyber infrastructure of the United States is hacked and controlled by the terrorists. In such a situation, everything in the country that is computerised is controlled by the hackers. And that involved the Traffic Signals which are now days are controlled by computers. Furthermore the entire internet infrastructure can be paralysed which means that people will not have access to the internet.

Then the hackers can get on with damaging the economy as many of the economic activities are carried out via the internet. This may result in losses of over a Billion and more and at times might lead to the worst and that is another Great Depression. Another aspect is the mass media which is by far one of the most important. If they have control over the mass-media then they will have control over what we are seeing. The TV shows and all would be controlled by them. They will show us what they want to show and we will be seeing it.

Seeing the above scenarios it does not come as a big surprise if many more countries adopt laws which control or monitor the internet. But a problem with the internet being controlled or monitor would be the complete loss of privacy. The government would have the right to control the things that we do when on the net. In some of the less democratic countries it might lead to Government tyranny. The government would block access to sites which criticizes them or which it does not feel is appropriate for the internet community to view. And this has already happened in many countries example China and is happening in countries example Pakistan where sites like Facebook and YouTube were blocked for sometime as they were deemed to be immoral.

Thus there are two sides to everything. These two sides prevent us from coming to firm conclusions to such issues. At one hand is the security and on the other is privacy. Thus we are on the tip of a mountain and it would be are decision which would either lead us to a new world or to doom. But the thing to note is that both the decisions are sensible. I being a netizen prefer security but also being a blogger makes me want to choose the right to expression. But whatever is done should not be done to the extreme. As taking any decision and going to the extreme will cause both unhappiness and dissatisfaction.

Asian Union- A Dream

Countries coming together and forming unions is not a new thing. It has happened in Europe. European countries came together to form the European Union. The same happened with Asia in 2002 when the Asian Cooperation Dialogue was formed. It is seen as a precursor to an Asian Union. However the possibility of a full fledged Asian Union similar to the European Union look grim.

Membership and Expansion of the Asian Cooperation Dialogue

Countries might join hands and come together to form an Asian UN of sorts but forming a European Union is a little far fledged thought. In Europe many countries have the same common currency and that is the Euro. In Asia this might happen only after 2-3 years but it will happen sooner rather than later. The reason behind this might be the growing Indo-Chinese influence. These two countries will be in a fierce competition with the United States for international say within the next 2-3 years. It has already started.

The common currency may come into existence but it won't be taken to a higher level the way it was taken to in Europe. This common currency might just be a commonality between a couple or more countries. But even the Euro started out as a common currency between some countries and then later went on to be the common currency of more that 27 nations. This might happen many years later but it will surely happen.

The Asian Union will help increase the trade between world's largest markets and that will do the Asian countries a lot of good. Such common things are needed by all the countries in Asia to grow. These commonalities are often the one's that bring people closer. Globalisation brought people closer because people in country wanted a good that was produced in another country.

Unity is what is needed to establish a common base for all the countries. This unity is a little hard to achieve a result of the numerous wars that were fought within this region. But people will surely get united one day. They will realise that the people living on the other side of the border are just like them and also live like them. This realisation will herald a new era in world politics.

We are not Alone

For ages man has wondered whether he is alone in this vast universe which has over a billion stars. Numerous science-fiction movies have been made on small green men from mars. But that might be a reality sooner than later. Nasa has claimed of having found compelling evidence of life on mars.

          They have reportedly found a form of pond scum which is the building block of life. This could be a turning point in Human History. There are more than a billion possibilities at the moment and there a billion answers to the billion questions which are being raised about mars.

          If aliens are indeed found which will take some time, it would have a significant impact on the very foundations of Space Science. Aliens are a topic of controversy. It will be exciting to see the reaction of the people, if it is proved that there are aliens.

          We should be careful when dealing with aliens. If we ever find them, they might be an advanced species with capabilities which are still dreams for us. They might use them to conquer us. They might have special abilities. They can destroy us for all we know.

          They can also be friendly and may help us improve ourselves. They can help us in following the non-violent path by providing us with insight into how humans won't survive if there is no peace.

          We don't know who the aliens are nor do we know anything about their behaviour. But one thing is certain that, if aliens exist and they do give us a visit then every thing will change for the good or bad.