|
India Thinkers Net Archives Index
|
Subscribe
|
|
| << January04, 2006 - [India Thinkers Net]Register of deaths,Iraq situation... |
January09, 2006 - [India Thinkers Net] India...perhaps you did not know >> |
|
[1] From: Sukla Sen <suklasen@yahoo.com> Date: Sun Jan 8, 2006 Subject: Waiting for Godot? http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/010506G.shtml Waiting for Bush By J. Sri Raman t r u t h o u t | Perspective Thursday 05 January 2006 Can plans for a state visit serve as a pressure tactic? Yes, they can - and the George Bush administration of the USA is showing how. For over six months now, India's establishment has been excitedly waiting for the finalization of President Bush's proposal to visit this far-off country and put the final seal of approval on what is rapturously described as a "strategic partnership" in the making. The mandarins of New Delhi and their mentors in the media and elsewhere have been ready with the red carpet, but Washington won't let them roll it out just like that. They have been told, if in more diplomatic terms, that India has to deserve such a great distinction and honor first. There is no mistaking the message to them: the country has to complete its part of the nuclear bargain with the US for the best results from the Bush visit. The conditionality has been made clear repeatedly, and the few official denials of the stipulation have been far from strenuous. The Bush visit, originally expected this January, was first put off to February, and is now promised sometime between February and April. It was after striking the already infamous "nuclear deal" with Bush in Washington on July 18, 2005, that Prime Minister Manmohan Singh invited the President to visit India. By all accounts, however, the proposal originated in May at a dinner in Moscow to celebrate the D-Day. Bush then reportedly informed wife Laura that India had "a large number of Muslims but no al-Qaeda" and that therefore she need have "no fears" about visiting the country in his company. The President, obviously, lacked the information that India's Muslims, while no terrorists, were no supporters of his war on Iraq. Nor are the country's non-Muslims as a whole. However, Bush has had enthusiastic - even effusive - supporters in India's establishment. And what pleased them then was the point he was making about an alleged anti-terrorist basis to the US-India alliance. This has been their pet refrain too, even if they have failed to turn the alliance against Pakistan thus far. Under the nuclear deal, Bush promised to amend US laws in order to provide all assistance for India's civilian nuclear program, despite its refusal to sign the nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT) and its nuclear weapons test of 1998. India, in return, undertook the task of separating its civilian and military nuclear facilities and laying the former open to inspection by the International Atomic Energy Agency. Neither side has made serious progress on its accepted obligations. In India, the deal has elicited strong opposition not only from critics of the "strategic compact" with the Bush dispensation but also from political forces that had initiated the process. Former Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee, whose coalition government took the first steps towards the "partnership," came out against the deal because of the dire threat he saw it posing to India's nuclear weapons program. The Bush administration has, however, refused to budge. As the President's point man for the deal, Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Nicholas Burns, put it recently, Washington "believes it is better to wait before we ask Congress to consider any adjustments in law until India is further along in taking the necessary steps to fulfill our agreement." He said it was unlikely the Indians would have taken these steps before the first part of 2006. "It could be February or March or April," months which he also mentioned as possible months of the Presidential mission. To this, he has now added the teaser, "Of course, yes, very definitely he will visit India. It will be nice to have this initiative completed by the time of the President's visit, but it is not necessary." Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Robert Joseph has been more explicit. Said he: "We are going to continue and we have continued to work with India to get it to take additional nonproliferation measures. We've talked with them about joining the Proliferation Security Initiative, we've worked with them very closely in the context of the International Atomic Energy Agency actions on Iran. These are the kinds of actions that we would like to see just as a member of the nonproliferation community." New Delhi, as we have seen in these columns before, has demonstrated readiness to join the proliferation security initiative (PSI), which some concerned countries in Southeast Asia see as a major violation of international maritime law. The Singh government has also shamed India by voting with the US against Iran in the IAEA. All this, however, won't free India from its obligations under the nuke deal, as Bush and Burns have made loud and clear. The US pressure campaign has received powerful support from security think tanks that have proliferated along with nuclear weapons. Illustrative is a sermon on the importance of the "strategic partnership" by K. Subrahmanyam, chairman of the National Task Force on Strategic Development. He attributes the "partnership" to the US Administration's alleged perception that "India is a responsible nuclear power and valuable partner in fields vital to US interests." Another Bush-admiring security expert, C. Raja Mohan, asks the Prime Minister not to abandon "bold experimentation" in foreign policy. In a newspaper article, he says, "If the fear of entering uncharted waters extends to the implementation of the nuclear pact with the United States and making a choice in Vienna on Iran's nuclear proliferation at the end of this month, there won't be much intellectual excitement or credibility left in UPA's (the ruling United Progressive Alliance's) foreign policy." Those quivering with excitement at the prospect of the Bush visit may have to wait a while. For the others, the Singh government's foreign policy lost its credibility quite some time ago. A freelance journalist and a peace activist of India, J. Sri Raman is the author of Flashpoint (Common Courage Press, USA). He is a regular contributor to t r u t h o u t. -------------------------- [2] From: Mujeebulla Chemnad <kvchemnad@yahoo.com> Date: Sun Jan 8, 2006 Subject: War Without End War Without End By Robert Fisk 03 January, 2006 The Independent This was the year the "war on terror" - an obnoxious expression which we all parroted after 11 September 2001 - appeared to be almost as endless as George Bush once claimed it would be. And unsuccessful. For, after all the bombing of Afghanistan, the overthrow of the Taliban, the invasion of Iraq and its appallingly tragic aftermath, can anyone claim today that they feel safer than they did a year ago? We have gone on smashing away at the human rights we trumpeted at the Russians - and the Arabs - during the Cold War. We have perhaps fatally weakened all those provisions that were written into our treaties and conventions in the aftermath of the Second World War to make the world a safer place. http://www.countercurrents.org/fisk030106.htm --------------------------------------- [3] Let juvenile offenders get a fair deal' http://www.hindu.com/2006/01/09/stories/2006010902900200.htm NANDYAL: Member Magistrate of Juvenile Justice Board D. Narasimhacharlu called upon police officers to treat juvenile offenders as national assets. At an awareness camp on juvenile justice for police officers here on Sunday he said until an exclusive juvenile unit was constituted, police should treat the accused children as per provisions of Juvenile Justice (care and protection of Children) Act 2000. Hand-cuffing and keeping them in lock-up was prohibited by the Act. ----------------- [4] Courts have no power to intervene' K.V. Prasad No question of surrender on expulsion of MPs: Somnath http://www.hindu.com/2006/01/09/stories/2006010912800100.htm Somnath Chatterjee NEW DELHI: Lok Sabha Speaker Somnath Chatterjee on Sunday said the decision to expel 11 Members of Parliament following the "cash-for-query" scandal was "beyond the pale of judicial scrutiny." The December 23 decision of both Houses was the exclusive jurisdiction of Parliament, he told The Hindu. His remarks come in the wake of reports that some expelled members planned to approach the court. Mr. Chatterjee, who held discussions with a group of legal experts on Saturday, said all leading lawyers who responded to his request for a discussion on the issue told him that his views were correct. "There is no question of surrendering or submission to the jurisdiction of the judiciary in this matter. I have the highest respect for the judiciary but I have a duty to perform as Speaker of the Lok Sabha." Exclusive jurisdiction Parliament, he said, had exclusive jurisdiction to decide on the procedure and disciplinary matters in regard to its members. As per the Constitution, courts do not have the authority to punish a Member of Parliament or Legislature for his/her conduct as a legislator. Mr. Chatterjee said the expulsion decision was that of the House and not taken by him. Leaders of different political parties were associated with a process that culminated in the expulsion. They were given a chance to state their case before the Pawan Bansal Committee. Asked whether the principles of natural justice were applied, he said they were followed. The expelled members were heard by their peers. On taking legal help, Mr. Chatterjee, who is also an advocate, said it was for the committee to evolve its own procedure. On the Bharatiya Janata Party's contention that the case should have been referred to the Privileges Committee, he said any House committee ??” regular or ad-hoc ??” had the same powers. Ultimately, it was for the House to take a view on its report. Mr. Chatterjee said his office received hundreds of e-mails and letters congratulating him and Parliament for taking action against the MPs. During his recent travels, both in India and abroad, many people walked up to him to express their appreciation for what Parliament did in the case. ---------------------- |
|
| << January04, 2006 - [India Thinkers Net]Register of deaths,Iraq situation... |
January09, 2006 - [India Thinkers Net] India...perhaps you did not know >> |
|
India Thinkers Net Archives Index
|
Subscribe
|
|
|
Archives powered by Zinester's Mailing List Service
Details on India Thinkers Net |
Browse for more newsletters at Zinester's Ezine Directory
Managed by Zinester's Mailing List Management |