Events And Issues

New Delhi, 19 February 2007

World Social Forum

GLOBAL SPIRIT OF CHALLENGE MANIFEST IN NAIROBI

By Dhurjati Mukherjee

Though a ritual now, this year’s seventh World Social Forum, which was held from January 20 to 25 last at Nairobi evoked immense interest and enthusiasm, especially among the African nations. Social movements in all 53 countries of Africa jointly organized this year’s conference. Around 46,000 participants registered and there were others who participated in the numerous workshops. Significantly the African countries did not participate in the numbers in Porto Alegre or Mumbai, they did in Nairobi obviously because of financial constraints which was also the same reason for the rather reduced presence from Latin American and Asian countries.

There were hundreds of workshops and seminars on various issues affecting the Third World countries. At one such meeting about threats from a proposed green revolution --- a technology-led attempt to increase agricultural output – Indian activist, Dr. Vandana Shiva described how chemical-dependent and costly monocultures of so-called improved varieties of crops had left farmers in India dispossessed and in debt, causing frequent suicides.

The Rockefeller Foundation and Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation recently announced a $ 150 million joint project for a green revolution in Africa. But Shiva pointed out Africa’s risks repeating the Indian scenario and promoting genetically modified organisms or GMO seeds. She described the project as “strategies of dispossessing Africa of food sovereignty and biodiversity”.

The campaigners from the Global Campaign Against Poverty (GCAP) told the WSF that civil society pressure would have to increase if the millennium development goals (MDGs) had any chance of being met. They accused the Western governments of being short on substance and announced a series of action, culminating on the UN Day for the Eradication of Poverty on October 17 this year. Hellen Tombo, a Kenyan youth movement leader and the African representative on GCAP, said promises have been broken. “Our leaders have not been accountable, our leaders have not been transparent”. However, Sunil Shetty, Director of the UN’s Millennium Campaign said that the MDGs were still achievable if activists could persuade governments to stand up to their responsibilities.       

The presence of a large number of trade unions at Nairobi pointed to a possible warming of relations between the unions and NGOs. According to Claire Courteille, a senior policy advisor of the world’s most powerful organization, the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) “workers’ rights are a global problem but it manifests itself in different ways. In Africa, the lack of formal work is the real problem while in Asia it is more about what kind of conditions you are working in. In Europe, workers’ rights need to be protected as companies seek to find the cheapest sources of labour”.

Among the other issues that were debated were housing rights, international apartheid, debt-free world, labour, women, just trade etc. Eminent people not just from Africa but also from other countries of the Third World participated in the deliberations.

The Tax Justice Network, an international NGO, is voicing the loot of Africa’s resources as part of its development campaign. Speaking at the WSF, Kenyan coordinator, Alvin Mosioma, pointed out Africa resources were currently being siphoned off into tax havens and wealthy northern jurisdictions with the collusion of some of the world’s most powerful corporations and wealthy banks. He said research has shown that the continent was a net creditor to the rest of the world with about 30 per cent of Sub-Saharan Africa being moved offshore. 

According to Tax Justice Network, about 25 billion pounds flowed into Africa in aid and loans in the last decade while an estimated 200 billion pounds flowed in the opposite direction – to British and Northern banks through corruption, money laundering and other criminal means. London banks were said to hold $ 6 billion from Kenya and Nigeria alone.   

Vitus Azeem from the Network in Ghana observed that the Third World governments were often pressured by the international financial institutions to cut corporate tax for multinationals. He cited the case of Zambia, which had signed away mining rights for a paltry 0.06 per cent in royalties (the world average is 3 per cent), no social obligations and tax-free concessions.

It is significant to mention here that there were sessions that called for fundamental reform of international institutions in favour of “democratic governance of globalization” and “the promotion of more equitable development and respect for cultural, natural and gender diversity”. The call was made in the Manifesto of the World Campaign for in-depth Reform of the System of International Institutions. This has been supported by a group that included Danielle Mitterrand, a social activist and wife of the late French President, Federico Mayor, former UNESCO head, Samir Amin of the Forum du Tiers Monde, Kumi Naidoo, Secretary General of Civicus, Sara Longwe of the African Women’s Development and Communication Network and Hassen Lorgat of a South African NGO coalition. The campaign to reform international institutions, which began in 2006 and is to run till 2009 has the support of eminent intellectuals and academicians the world over, including Noam Chomsky and Boutros Boutros Ghali.    

The Nairobi WSF has projected the severe inequality existing in the world today, specially in Africa, in the process of globalization and the logic of terror and war that feeds it. Given that Africa has been neglected by the world economic system and the reigning powers, the Nairobi meet brought together social activists from all over the continent. The voices of activists venting grievances against the imperialist West gave one the feeling that an alternative strategy for development can definitely be formulated.

How soon the WSF would emerge as a strong instrument to formulate proposals for effective action, foreseen in the Porto Alegre Charter of 2000, remains to be seen. But the fact remains that the WSF was no doubt successful in renewing the dialogue among progressive social movements and intellectuals, formulating proposals for new strategies for revolutionary engagement with neo-liberal globalization, sharing experiences and evolving action plans aimed at crafting alternatives for social transformation. ---INFA

 (Copyright, India News and Feature Alliance)

Events And Issues

New Delhi, 5 February 2007

China’s Killer Satellite

REVIVING SPECTRE OF SPACE WAR

By Radhakrishna Rao

The successful killer satellite test by China last month has been as much a cause of concern for India as it is for the USA.  M. Natarajan, Adviser to the Indian Defence Minister has made it clear that India has reasons to worry over the seemingly innocuous Chinese move towards space weaponisation.

Natarajan, who also heads the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) is clear in his perception that India cannot afford to remain indifferent to the efforts aimed at reviving the “specter of space war”.  According him, “we too had simulated an enemy missile and intercepted it during a test. However, to intercept a satellite, you need to know its exact trajectory. If such missiles can intercept and disable a satellite and GPS or navigation system, it will be an issue of concern.

Natarajan also revealed that India too will be in a position to develop the technological know-how for targeting satellites over a period of time. Once we receive reports on the Chinese test, we will be able to comment and initiate appropriate action in that direction, quipped Natarajan. Meanwhile, reports in India’s print media spoke of the capability of the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) to perfect the killer satellite technology. 

The ISRO, which recently recovered a space capsule from orbit ---which performed two important micro-gravity experiments during its twelve day stay in space---and is looking at the possibility of an Indian manned mission sometime next decade has of course know-how and expertise to perfect the technique of killer satellite system. But for ISRO to proceed ahead on the matter, a clearance from the ruling alliance of the country is essential.

China’s guided ground-based missile has successfully knocked out an ageing weather satellite through the sheer force of collision. According to the American spy agencies, China used a ground-based medium range ballistic missile to destroy this weather satellite, located about 800 km above the earth’s surface. The missile guided from Xichaing spaceport destroyed the Feng Yun-IC meteorological satellite. Incidentally, China used the concept of a killer satellite to put out of commission its low earth orbiting spacecraft.

Meanwhile, in the wake of the Chinese anti-satellite test, the Indian Air Force (IAF) has decided to speed up the creation of an Indian aerospace command that would help bolster the fighting fitness and strategic capability of the IAF and also to protect the Indian air space with a greater degree of weather. 

Of course, as pointed out by the IAF Chief, Air Chief Marshal S.P. Tyagi, the proposed aerospace command, which is yet to receive clearance from the Government, would also seek the participation of ISRO and DRDO.  Moreover, this command will also have participation from the army and the Navy.  A core group has been set up to study various issues related to airport and air superiority.  This group will study all issues related to the structure and function of aerospace command, as existing in other countries.

Clearly and apparently, the Indian aerospace command, the formation of which has been long overdue, would make extensive use of satellite system put in place by the ISRO communications, weather watch, earth observation and surveillance, as well as navigation and reconnaissance. 

We have fought wars in air, water and land. But the way things are going, Star Wars will no longer be just a fiction, says Dr. V.K. Atre, former Chief of the DRDO. India, he says, “should adopt new technologies just as Russia and the USA are doing to safeguard their interest in this new age space war” and adds: “The USA has 110 military satellites, the Russians have 40 which clearly signals that the future wars will be fought in space.  It is necessary for us to develop satellite-based electronic systems to ensure that a valuable space asset does not become vulnerable.”

As it is, strategic drive home the point that space systems confer information dominance on friendly forces by providing real time information.  On a more practical plane, space assets make for a clear cut strategic advantage by its sheer ability to deny the adversaries the opportunity to fight the campaign of his choice. Surveillance and reconnaissance satellites along with ultra sensitive GPS spacecraft help identify the vulnerable targets and provide a regular monitoring of the activities deep inside the enemy territory.

Incidentally, the American space command functioning under the United States Air Force (USAF) continues to fund many space defence projects whose details are not made public. Today, the USAF describes itself as an “integrated aerospace power” and insists that its responsibilities stretches from the surface of the earth to far off orbital regions.

The long-term strategy of the American space command includes the plan to destroy the well-guarded space assets of the adversaries in one quick sweep. Incidentally, India and Russia are discussing the possibility of providing anti-missile shield to their satellites.

The proposed Indian aerospace command would provide an organizational credibility to the optimum utilization of Indian space assets and IAF’s capabilities in its varying dimensions. On another plane, an Indian aerospace command would also contribute in a big way to the perfection of the techniques for the netcentric warfare.

The US-led allied forces during their interventions in both Afghanistan and Iraq had made extensive use of a string of satellites and communications network with a “killer vigours. It was the Soviets who first laid the seeds of weaponizing outer space, in flagrant violation of UN treaties which prohibits the use of outer space for non civilian purposes, by initiating tests on “hunter killer satellites” in 1967.

In a series of experiments, Soviets made a “hinter killer” satellite and chase a target satellite in space and blow it up in mid air. The hunter killer satellite is a highly sophisticated device. Its apparatus functions at high speed, supported by computers, launching systems and jet propellers. During 1976-78, Soviets are said to have conducted nearly a score of “hunter killer” satellite tests behind the façade of the Cosmos research programme.

The thesis of the warfare experts is that since the success of military and strategic operations on ground depend on “alert birds in outer space” whoever knocks down the largest number of enemy satellites, stands to hold the strategic lead. Meteorological satellites predicting weather to facilitate bombing raids, navigation satellites guiding lethal arms to the desired points, reconnaissance satellites locating the exact geographic position of military targetrs, electronic ferret satellites gathering data on radar frequencies, communications satellites jamming the communication channels of hostile satellites and ocean watch satellite snooping on naval movement of adversaries have all become puppets on the chain of the modern day warfare strategy.

Significantly, both the erstwhile Soviet Union and the US had tried what is called the high energy beam weapon based on subatomic particles. Still in the realm of the theoretical possibility, this radical weapon, if made, could be used with far more frightening precision than laser devices. Interestingly, in early 1980s, the US Army had launched a programme called “Sippau”---the American Indian word for Fire---for developing a particle beam weapon for use as an anti-satellite device. However, like other space defence projects, this one too was abandoned. ---INFA

(Copyright, India News and Feature Alliance)

Events And Issues

New Delhi, 22 January 2007

Justice Through Conciliation

Towards Fast Track Rural Courts

By Radhakrishna Rao

The draft Bill on Nyaya Panchayat aimed at setting up fast track, people-oriented, easily accessible and highly affordable rural courts is under scanner, as a prelude to its introduction in Parliament. 

Describing the activities of Caste Panchayats and communal justice dispensation system as “illegal and unconstitutional”, the Union Panchayati Raj Minister Mani Shankar Aiyar, has stated that Nyaya Panchayat which would bring justice to the rural populace through “conciliation and compromise” rather than through “arguments and adjudication.” It would go down well with the psyche of the Indian rural community because it is not imposed from “outside and above”.

Indeed, the acceptance of Nyaya Panchayat by the rural community is based on the fact that they existed from time immemorial and formed an integral part of the India’s ageless cultural ethos. As pointed out by Avadesh Kaushal, Chairperson of the Dehra Dun-based Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra (RLEK), Nyaya Panchayat which embodies the rich heritage and tradition of moral values running into thousands of years is ideally suited to meet the aspirations or rural India. 

Indeed, Kaushal drives homes the point that dispensation of justice by local self-government functionaries is not new to the Indian genius.  For there is a long and old tradition in India of the encouragement of dispute resolution outside the formal legal system. Disputes are quite obviously settled by the intervention of elders or assemblies of learned men and other such bodies. Nyaya Panchayats at the grass root level were there even before the advent of British administration, observes Kaushal.

Kaushal, who has made original and significant contribution to the draft Bill on Nyaya Panchayat is clear in his perception that Nyaya Panchayat alone could provide speedy, transparent and cost effective justice to the rural communities in India. Indeed, way back in 1970s, the well-documented Bhagwati Committee report had made a strong pitch for invigorating Nyaya Panchayat.  But the lack of political commitment implied poor support for the recommendations of Bhagwati Committee.

Prior to that, in 1954, a report on Village Panchayat had this to say on Nyaya Panchayat: “Sitting on the Panchayat, the elders of the villages used to solve disputes, arising between the members of the village community. These elders used to live in the villages themselves and by virtue of their residence well-acquainted with local conditions and knew the habits, customs and practices of the people.  Almost all individuals of the villages were known.  In view of all these factors, they easily came to know reasons behind the dispute that arose.”

On his part, Kaushal points out that down the centuries, the system of Nyaya Panchayat has been nourishing the legal administration at the grassroot level in a highly democratic fashion by involving the community at all stages of decision making.

Says Kaushal: “With the prevailing system of judicial administration becoming cumbersome, costly and complex, a large section of our population has started shunning the courts of law for seeking legal redressal to their grievances. As such, Nyaya Panchayat which can easily be accessed by an ordinary rural citizen in a highly affordable manner, has become the crying need of the hour”.

The current system of administration of justice has failed to achieve its objectives. Indeed, a common perception amongst the rural masses is that access to justice is both complex and difficult and as a result they avoid seeking redress to their grievances through courts.

The reason for this attitude appears to be physical inaccessibility, inordinate delay in dispensing justice, expenditure involved, technicalities and rigid rules of procedures of the present legal system. The biggest crisis facing the conventional judicial system is the burden of a massive backlog, which, in recent years, has assumed insurmountable proportions, making access to justice to the people at large far delayed and long drawn out process.

More than 30 million cases are known to be pending before various courts spread across the country. During one of his moments of soul searching, the former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi had expressed his concern over the functioning of the judicial system with the statement that “if the justice is delayed, we cannot really claim that is justice is being delivered.  We have to look ahead and see how we can clean up these roadblocks, how we can expedite justice without diluting justice, without reducing it in its value.  We have to see how our people can get justice.  It is not a question of time. It is also a question of affording it. We have taken steps and we have shown that it can be done cheaply.  It is also a question of physical access”.

Obviously, over the years the legal ambit in its entirety has widened to encompass innovations in the legal process, for instance, cyber crimes, intellectual property rights violations and bio-terrorism etc..The instance of legal remedy sought by a grand father being passed on to his grandson are aplenty. In distinct contrast to the conventional judicial delivery system, a rural court will be less formal, simple and well equipped to deliver speedy and inexpensive justice to the rural masses of the country.

Further, these rural courts, guided as they are by local tradition, culture and behavioural pattern of the village community have the potential to instill confidence in the people towards the administration of justice.  A envisaged, the make up and composition of the rural courts would be quite simple. It would staffed by a professional judge and supported by two other judges who would be selected/nominated by a panel of district and sessions judges.  It will hold sessions in the full view of the local community and try to resolves disputes through persuasion and conciliation.

It is not for nothing that not long ago, the Indian Law Commission had observed inter alia, that the rural courts could lead to a transparency in the justice delivery system, with a stress on promoting justice on the basis of equal opportunity and without any type of discrimination.---INFA

(Copyright, India News and Feature Alliance)

Events And Issues

New Delhi, 8 January 2007

India-US N-Deal

UPA GOVERNMENT’S TRUST-US APPEAL

By T.D. Jagadesan

The new norm for governance? If there is no threat to our survival, it doesn’t matter what the people think about our Government. It was nowhere more apparent than in the two Houses of Parliament during the recent winter session, where member after member got up to voice his or her serious reservations about the India-US civilian nuclear deal. But instead of answering the specific issues, the Government merely turned around and said that it was going ahead with the deal, that Parliament should now wait to judge it over the bilateral 123 Agreement as and when it was ready after the negotiations that officially have still to begin, but unofficially are in an advanced stage.

It was clear to the Government even before the debate that the CPI (M) was not going to press the issue, and was quite willing to give the Government as much time as it required to complete the bilateral negotiations, even though the Hyde Act had violated every single assurance given by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to Parliament. The fact that there was no threat of an anti-vote in Parliament, brought out the belligerence in the Government that could barely defend the US legislation but, sought to buy approval by underlining its concerns for India.

A section of the media that always supports money spinning policy decisions and opposes pro-people measures like reservations, came out in full support, carrying editorials trashing the nuclear scientists, their new bogemen and defending the deal that carries a cash reward of US$100 billion from India. To give effect to cause, Prime Minister Singh has now had a happy conversation with the US President ostensibly to convey Indian concerns about the nuclear deal, but in reality to shake hands over the telephone and congratulate each other for a job well done.

New Delhi and Washington started to tango under the NDA Government, but have perfected the steps under the Government watched over by the Left parties.  For, everyone in Washington knows, as does Prime Minister Singh, that the nuclear deal is more than a contract for nuclear civilian energy. The agreement of July 18 that every one here is happy about, and even the Left has decided to accept for some strange reasons, carries the details.

It is part of a larger strategic goal that the conferences of the US Congress have pointed towards in their accompanying note to the Hyde Act.  It is not just a deal but a strategic deal that redefines US-India relations, with New Delhi clearly the junior partner in a larger policy initiative that makes a mockery of non-alignment.

What happened in Parliament? The Government said: Trust us, we are good guys, we will not let India down. Most of the others, even milder members like Jaya Bachchan and Rahul Bajaj, voiced apprehensions about the deal, and by the end of two days it was clear for those who were honest enough to see and hear, that the majority of members in Parliament were apprehensive about the deal and did not want the Government to proceed. But that they were not in a position to stop it, and for reasons best known to them, were not willing to force a vote at this state.

Everybody bought the “trust us” appeal, and now India will wait for the 123 Agreement that will be sold to the country as a “done deal.”  Everyone in Washington knows that everyone in Delhi appears to be denying the wording of the bilateral agreement is going to be mild and definitely not offensive, but the US part of the deal will be governed by the intrusive Hyde Act. A CPM MP pointed this out in Parliament but then went on to say that he was prepared to wait for the 123 Agreement. One really could not understand why.

There are moments in history when action is required to save the country from harm. One such moment has passed with the Opposition to the nuclear deal, with all its strategic implications for India, now only destined to get weaker and less effective.  Prime Minister Singh and the US are working together to get this agreement through, with the opposition and the media being handled with amazing expertise.

The carrot is the preferred option, although at time the whip too has paid some dividends. The only ones to withstand the tremendous pressure from this highly formidable establishment are the nuclear scientists, good men with a level of integrity that makes them impervious to both the carrot and the whip, with the result that they are being targeted by the unscrupulous supporters of the deal.

First they were dismissed as insignificant, when this did not work then attempts were made by the men at the top to win them over, and now the attack has started again when the scientists refused to compromise and insisted on having their honest say. The other day, a former diplomat attacked them on a television channel asking whether policy was now expected to be made by nuclear scientists. Who else then should influence policy dealing with India’s nuclear programme retired diplomats and compromised journalists?

This is for two reasons. One, Government today is highly insecure and avoids transparency. Two, in this case the nuclear agreement is a ‘done deal’ insofar as the two signatories are concerned, and the process now can be roughly described as “going through the motions” and managing the opposition.  The only real challenge remains at the level of the Nuclear Suppliers Group where there can be a level of unpredictability at the end of the day despite the US and Indian efforts to control all the members with assurances.

The rest is taken care of, and just has to be unfolded in a manner where Parliament restricts its intervention to nothing more than a debate and the Left continues to be persuaded that the Government is secular and democratic.  If it is true, as all the recent actions taken by the Government and its policy initiatives indicate, that there is a decided shift towards the United States, then is it not time that the Ministry of External Affairs and the Prime Minister’s office comes out with a declaration against India’s new foreign policy?.

Instead of allowing senior officials in Government to inform select journalists that non-alignments as a concept is dead, will it not be more honest for this Government to come out and say that it does not believe in an independent foreign policy?  And that it actually believes, as its officials keep saying off the record that alignment with the US is the preferred and only acceptable option now?

Let the Government, if it believes so avidly in the line it is pursing, stop the pathetic personal attacks and the media propaganda, but place a policy paper on the table justifying its stand.  Put it to debate in bold print, and then let the better argument win. This mean, snide manner of functioning where journalists are being manipulated with carrots and incomplete information.

In fact, it erodes and corrodes the foundation of democracy that had been built so painstakingly on political integrity, transparency and accountability. Prime Minister Singh and President Bush with their handful of advisers might have succeeded in pushing through a terrible legislation that had addressed to the US interests, but in the process India has lost as held by a school of thought.---INFA

 (Copyright, India News and Feature Alliance)