Indo - US Nuclear Deal: America Gets New Ally in Asia

By MOHAN SAHAY


Critics of Indo – US nuclear deal when the draft bill of the agreement between the
two countries on relaxing laws to allow New Delhi greater access to nuclear supply and technologies has been passed overwhelmingly by the House of Representatives in Washington suffer from ‘myopia’. For, the real intention of the American administration is to see India as a new ally against less dependable nations like China, Russia and Pakistan in Asia.

The American purpose could be served only when India emerge as a strong power center - militarily as well as economically. That India has already developed nuclear strike capability is well known. Only important achievements yet to be made is in the field of fire power – long distance cruise missiles and a well fortified and protected nuclear arsenal. It may take another 5 to 10 years before New Delhi really can boast of acquiring sophisticated strike power to hit the enemy at shortest possible time and that too with precision.

Historically, India despite its less friendly relationship with Washington over the past five decades has never been a threat to America geographically speaking. While the reverse may be true.

People opposed to US nuclear concessions to India are demanding restrictions lest India abuses access to advanced scientific development in atomic power particularly in the field of developing arsenal. Other apprehension in the minds of the American opponents to the deal is India might assist clandestinely a third country in developing nuclear technology and for enrichment of Uranium.

Such assumptions are far fetched and removed from reality. Today, there is hardly any country in the world including our immediate neighbors whom we can call a true ally or friend. So, where is the question of India helping any third country become a nuclear power?

Americans lack true understanding of India.

Back home, noises being raised over the nuclear deal are unnecessary and at best nothing more than political gimmick.

India’s approach to the passage of the nuclear agreement between New Delhi and Washington by the US House of Representatives today has to be ‘pragmatic’. Mere criticism of the deal, particularly objections being raised in and out of Parliament by major political parties like the BJP and the Communists over the language of the draft bill as passed should not cause an alarm. One should not forget that the Bush administration while amending the US laws that would waive American restrictions on sharing of nuclear technologies with India besides ensuring enhanced supply of uranium – the nuclear fodder for power plants – despite India not being a signatory to the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty demands some strong riders. The riders are to pacify the hawks among the anti- India lobby in the US Congress.

The BJP which is the main Opposition party has gone a bit too far in opposing the deal on the ground that once the deal gets legal seal of approval, India would be forced to reduce its nuclear enrichment programme that in turn would reduce our country’s nuclear strike capability. In a situation when Pakistan, a country hostile to India is going ahead with expanding its nuclear programme, any reduction of India’s nuclear programme causes concern. But the nuclear deal will not put any ban or moratorium on India’s right to enrich uranium altogether.

Coming to the Communists, it is surprising that the Communists are crying hoarse over the deal. It is the same fellows, the leaders of the CPI ( M ) and the CPI who had raised storm when India carried its critical nuclear explosion in 1999. Mr. D Raja of the CPI is on record saying that India does not require any nuclear arsenal. Now what is the problem with these Communists? Even if one presumes that the deal with the US might impose restrictions on India’s nuclear enrichment plan, the Left would be happy to note that it is going to be the end of the road so far India developing its nuclear warheads is concerned. This is not going to happen.



The draft bill that has been passed by the US House of Representatives has to be endorsed by the Senate before it gets legitimacy. Still, there is time to tell Washington on some specific clauses to which India might have objection.
The deal with the US would ensure India receiving adequate supply of nuclear fuels not only from Washington but also from other nuclear powers like France and Australia. Increased supply of nuclear fuel for power stations would not only enhance our energy production but would also reduce our dependence on fossil fuel. The rising cost of generation of thermal power, the rising cost of oil in the international market coupled with our own ever growing demand of energy including petroleum materials would be offset largely if not wholly by increasing our share of nuclear energy.

Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh was right when he said today that he was in no position to influence the US Congress. At the same time India would not accept any nuclear package from Washington ignoring our national interest. This assurance should suffice and the Opposition should calm down on the issue.
There is always scope for safeguarding our national interest be it peaceful generation of energy or strengthening our nuclear strike power.

New Delhi
July 27, 2006

Ends




























































Indian opposition to the nuclear agreement between New Delhi and Washington is
largely due to the past track record of the United States vis a vis India. Even in fighting terrorism universally the Bush administration now and Bill Clinton earlier have been far from fair in containing Pakistan sponsored terror attack on India.

Diplomacy has to be flexible. Whereas, Indian leaders have a tendency

Devdas in Pakistani Frame: FILMS, LITERATURE & SHARAT CHANDRA

Devdas now in Pakistani frame: FILMS, LITERATURE & SHARAT CHANDRA
By MOHAN SAHAY

That Devdas – the legendary lover of Sharat Chandra’s novel by the same title is now being filmed in Pakistan is a tribute to the author. Why of all noted writers of Bengal, it is Sharat Chandra who still catches the imagination of the Hindi film industry? Not only that, even some all time great writers of Hindi literature including Munshi Premchand and his works failed to attract film makers compared to Sharat Chandra.

May be, susceptibility of Sharat Chandra’s writings is what that sustain interest in his works even among the non-Bangla readers or to be more precise among a vast majority of Hindi readers for over hundred years and so. If one considers who is best and vastly read non- Hindi writers, among the Hindi readers, I am afraid, even Tagore has not been read as much by Hindi speaking population as Sharat Chandra.

The success of Parineeta in its third film version made in 2005 tells all about the writer’s draw to his character and the work. Parineeta means vihahita in Hindi- that is a married woman. It is the author’s credit for carving out an image of woman that is captivating and the story woven around Parineeta is absorbing – a love story of course. The adaptation of Sharat Chandra’s novel as script of the film under the same title is a visual delight.

The writer’s description and presentation of Parineeta as a tender woman; full of love and charms is easy to capture the imagination of the reader. That the imagination of the girl becomes a reality - the visual effect makes the difference. And it is here that the filmmaker was able to successfully spot and exploit Vidya Balan in the lead role of Parineeta on the celluloid. May be the charms of Parineeta as described in the novel were too true to imagination that attracted viewers to theatres. Before going further on the film let us briefly take up what makes Parineeta so special and why Sharat Chandra’s works still attract film world.

Critics of Bangla literature never held Sharat Chandra as an acclaimed writer and novelist. Yet, his novels were popular and were great box office success on screen – Devdas, Parineeta and Biraj Bahu. Mind you, all these films on Sharat Chandra’s novels have been made and remade for second and third time that goes on to prove the index of his popularity.

Unlike the English speaking world, where novels and fictions both pulp and classic, are adapted in their screen versions giving some all time great films, Indian cinema in general and Hindi film world in particular have few parallels to Europe and America in chronicling great works of letters in the film cans. Few novels and works of Hindi literature have found place in film.


Some other Bangla writers like Bimal Mitra and Bankim Chandra Cbatterjee too found place in Hindi cinema but not to the extent of Sharat Chandra. For instance, Bankim Chandra’s Anand Math too was a successful film based on his novel. A black & white film on freedom movement was a trendsetter then on films with patriotic theme.

Guru Dutt adapted Sahib Bibi aur Ghulam – a classic of Bimal Mitra for his film under the same title in the backdrop of 19th century feudal Bengal. This film also was a big success.

However, great novel or a novelist who is read by thousands may not necessarily become a hit when his work is depicted in film. By all accounts, Munshi Premchand was and is an all time great Hindi writer. He had mass readership and drew rave applause from the literary world. Yet, some of his works adapted as films like Godan and Gaban failed to draw audiences to theatres. Noted film maker Satyajit Ray made Shatranj Ke Khiladi – a story of Munshi Prem Chand. Though the film was highly acclaimed by critics, it failed to draw audience in great number.

Premchand’s works reflected rural living conditions. The social themes were too strong; the socio economic milieu was grasping as it provided glimpses of the social order – that of the oppressors and the oppressed in rural India of the gangetic belt. The cruelty and oppression of Zamindars and the inherent ills of society that made poor people sharing the sufferings during the period when India was struggling for freedom.
Love and romance was not Premchand’s theme though subtleties were always there. His best social satire Kafan is a classic. The story tells the nadir of human behaviour - how low some people can stoop even in hour of death – that too of mother. It is a story of the son and the husband of a woman who dies. There is no money even to buy ‘kafan’. The two men collect money to buy the wrap for cremation. But on way to bazaar they stumble upon a pub and drink the money while the body awaited in the state of rest for cremation.
This story has no buyer in the film industry to make a film on the subject. (Over the past 15 – 20 years poor and middle class of Indian society have just vanished from the scripts and stories of films today as if this class does not exist in India now ).

Premchand is now a subject of research and his works not only in India but also in some prestigious universities and Seats of Learning world over. May be absence of love as a theme in Premchand’s works is a reason why people of new generation don’t read him. This does not undermine the greatness of the writer and his contributions to the Indian literature.

Diminishing interest in the works of Premchand and even Rabindra Nath Tagore today reflects shift in reading habits of the literate Indians who switched over to English literature and fiction.
Vast majority of the middle class who constitute the segment of Hindi and Bangla readership are bilingual and have the choice of selecting the subject and the language they prefer to read. This shift is more discernible among the Hindi readers than among the Bangla readers who still read Bangla works though in lesser volume and degree.
Coming back to Sharat Chandra, the writers popular novels always had a woman as central character. His works too had strong social message for the people of Bengal as his writings tell the evils of social order during 19th and 20th Century of pre independence days. Sharat Chand was a gifted writer who blended love with social order in a style that was lucid, the narrative simple yet absorbing. In Parineeta, for instance, the writer has woven a web around a tender girl who is ready to cast spell of her charms on anyone and everyone who meets her. Her love for the man and the man’s love for her are subtle and not pronounced till the two consummate their love after a dramatic marriage by exchanging garland in a bedroom.
Being rich and a zamindar meant abusing women in the land where shakti is worshipped. What the director Pradeep Sarkar has done in Parineeta is to give a visual and emotional appeal to the viewers that are haunting. May be more forceful than Bimal Roy’s Parineeta (1954) in which it was Meena Kumari who was cast in the title role.

Vinod Chopra, the producer of the film, and Pradeep Sarkar, the director of the film, who share the credit of rewriting the novel for the film’s script have changed the film’s backdrop to Calcutta of 1962 from the original period of Calcutta of early 20th century. The film is an a adaptation and not the original work of Sharat Chandra novel has not minimized the impact on the screen. On the contrary, Parineeta carries the imprint of the novelist when seen on the screen. In contrast,
Sanjay Leela Bhansali whose remake of Devdas four years ago not only distorted the theme and role of the main characters of the novel but gave a bad treatment to Devdas although Bhansali was lucky to pick up millions from the box office.
One hopes and expects that the Pakistani producer of Devdas would refrain from vandalizing the spirit of the legendary love story and the character of Devdas.

About Sharat Chandra, it must be kept in mind that the writer spent his early years of his life in Bihar that once formed part of the undivided Bengal then. It comes naturally to the writer to use certain nuances and names that are common and even typical to Bihar. Bhagalpur where the novelist spent his some early years has a long history of Bangla speaking people, home and heritage. In Parineeta, Grishbabu, the role played by Sanjay Dutt arrives on the scene from Bihar and not in London as shown in the film.

That apart, it is thematic love in Sharat Chandra’s novels that attracted readers and film makers to his works. His narratives are simple and devoid of cliches. With due apology to my Bangla speaking fellows, I must confess that I have not read the original works of Sharat Chandra Chattopadhyay in Bangla since I don’t know the language. Yet, this writer rate him as a great novelist for the simple reason that his works communicate in a language that goes into readers’ mind and heart.

New Delhi, July 25, 2006

Ends.

Musharraf excels in terror diplomacy: Shows India in poor light

Musharraf excels in terror diplomacy: Shows India in poor light

By MOHAN SAHAY in New Delhi, July 20 2006


It would be a journalistic coup of sorts if one finds out the secret behind Pakistan President Gen Parvez Musharraf’s excellence in ‘diplomatic communication. No doubt he is a master communicator that even George Bush would envy.

Musharraff’s address to the nation telecast live in Pakistan and India on the night of Thursday, the 20th of July 2006 on 7 / 11 serial bomb explosions in Mumbai shows New Delhi and the Indian Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh in poor light. Not that what Gen Musharraf said about his government resolve to fight terror groups operative in Pakistan and that he and his government has been seriously and sincerely fighting terrorism not only on his home turf but also on Afghanistan is a gospel truth. For sheer diplomatic nuances and choice of words {arvez Musharraff sounded convincing.

First, when he said inter alia “…. suspension of peace talks by India is a defeat at the hands of the terrorists who indeed want the bilateral peace talks to derail…”/

Secondly, his words sounded genuine when he chose to directly communicate ( address ) to the Indian citizens of Mumbai expressing his deep sense of sorrow and strong condemnation of the dastardly act of terror bomb blasts in Mumbai.

At the face of it, India appeared in haste in reacting to the Mumbai blasts by squarely blaming Pakistan for abetting the Mumbai train explosions without first having got any clinching evidence against the Pakistan government’s role directly or indirectly in the Mumbai blasts.

It was not a knee jerk reaction of New Delhi. On the contrary, the Indian Government propelled by its bureaucratic hegemony over the government decided as a matter of policy to blame Pakistan and the terrorists outfits like the Lashkar and the Jaish for triggering the blasts for the cover of the Indian government and its political leadership’s failure to give a befitting response to acts of terror and violence in the country. The NDA government led by A B Vajpayee being equally a passive onlooker to all those acts of violence including attack on Indian Parliament in 2001.

No wonder, the Indian Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh shortly before Musharraff’s address admitted in New Delhi that India’s response to terrorism was “ inadequate”.

Now for the other side of the story of Pakistan Gen Musharraff cannot plead ignorance about the role of his country’s Inter Services Intelligence, the role of Pakistan high commission in New Delhi and the role of the fugitive underworld kingpin Dawood Ibrahmi who is holed up in Pakistan enjoying covert patronage of the government officials and rulers of Pakistan.

Should Musharraff want so, he could smoke Ibrahim out of his hole and hand over the gangster to India – that he won’t do.

That the ring leaders of the Lashkar – e – Tyba and Jaishe – e – Mohammad over overtly operating in Pakistan as groups of terror modules against India is known to the Pakistani President. Again, in the name of the so called war of liberation or war for freedom in Jammu & Kashmir, the Pakistan government won’t act against the terror groups having India as their target. Albeit, Gen Musharraf is honest in telling his countrymen and to the world that Pakistan is sincere in uprooting terror groups being part of the ‘ coalition against terror’. True, Pakistan did cooperated with Washington in the hot pursuit of Md Bin Laden and his Al Qaida network in Afghanistan. Yet, the where about of Laden remains a mystery and Pakistan has not come helping to the US government.

Even 1 /10th of what Musharraff and his government did in forcing Laden and his men into the hiding was done in uprooting Hizbul Muzahedin, the Let , the JeM and the likes targeting only India from the soils of Pakistan, the terror heat would subside and may even end in India. Would you care Gen Musharraff ?
ends

TERRORISTS' FIELD DAY - INDIA IS A SOFT TARGET

by MOHAN SAHAY


India is fast losing its credence as a strong nation determined to fight terror on its own strength. It may serve political and diplomatic purpose by calling Pakistan the villain and asking Islamabad to close shutters on terror shops. But such rhetoric can hardly help India in taking on terrorists.

The country lacks a resolution on its fight against terror albeit India has joined hands with the US, UK, France and other countries to fight the terror menace. The latest serial bomb blasts in Mumbai on 11 July 2006 only shows the sleeves of the UPA Government. No wonder, we Indians have become soft target.

The Union Council of Ministers headed by Dr Manmohan Singh of the Indian National Congress is a divided house with many central ministers holding important position in the government extending patronage and defending the Muslim fundamentalists having links with the Laskhar-e-Tyba and Jaish-e-Mohammad.

The Congress being the leading partner in the government just cannot ask the dubious ministers to quit since any action against Union Ministers having links with underworld and Islamic fundamentalists would destablise the government. Mind you, all the Central ministers allegedly maintaining friendship with underworld dons and fundamentalists are Hindus and not Muslims.

That Pakistan is hostile nation is a well known fact. No matter how the peace talks move on or off the track between the two countries, words uttered by Zulfikar Ali Bhutto – the condemned Prime Minister of Pakistan that Pakistan would wage a 1000 year war against India has not lost its ground.

To be fair Pervez Musharraff , the President and the military ruler of Pakistan is in no position to end the terrorists breeding ground in his country since hardcore Islamic elements within the Pakistan Army, the hegemony of Inter Services Intelligence of Pakistan over the terror network particularly against India remains dominant.

Under the circumstances, India just cannot take cover under Pakistan’s hostility towards India. George Bush just can’t sit and talk about Al Qaida and Bin Laden all the time and do nothing to protect his country and its people against the terror.

It is significant that the President of India, Dr A P J Abdul Kalam, an apolitical man has taken interest in knowing the Manmohain Singh government’s position vis a vis India’s fight against terror.

Every time there is a terror attack in India be it in Jammu & Kashmir, in Indian Parliament, in Ayodhya or Varanasi, the government comes out with routine statement that the terrorists can’t lower India’s resolve to fight the menace; no matter the strikes are increasing killing more and more innocent people by the day.

Bihar, Uttar Pradesh and Maharashtra are the fast breeding ground of Islamic terrorism with many Indians extending logistic support to the terrorists who may or may not be from Pakistan. The government remains unmoved to stymie the ring leaders – who are politicians many being Members of different state assemblies and Members of Parliament. One such MP Md Shahabuddin of Bihar is in prison facing charges of buying sophisticated assault rifles from Pakistani terrorists and for being in possession of foreign currency. Lo and behold, his patron is none other than Union Railway Minister Lalu Yadav of Bihar since Shahabuddin is a right hand man of Yadav and belongs to his political party the RJD.

India’s security is has been compromised by none other than politicians is disturbing fact. L K Advani being the Home Minister and also being the Deputy Prime Minister in the NDA Government headed by Vajpayee had cleared the security clearance of a private airliner despite the government’s central agencies like the Intelligence Bureau and the Enforcement Directorate submitting in writing to the government that the promoter of the airline raised funds through underworld kingpin Dawood Ibrahim and the slush money of smugglers were used to float and expand the airliner. Advani ignored and rubbished the report. What kind of patriotism Advani boasts of having as the BJP leader. Mind you the BJP and the Shiv Sena are self proclaimed champions of the country’s security.

Days before the charges against Advani and the NDA government were renewed, the present Home Minister Mr Shivraj Patil cleared for the second time security bar to let the controversial airliner expand its net on international routes.

Money is the binding force of the BJP and the Congress.

ends

NEW DELHI, JULY 13 2006