SHOULD POLLUTED DELHI BE ALLOWED TO SLIP INTO COMA?

Here are some frightening facts on pollution. Air pollution kills more than 627,000 in India, according to the World

Health Organization. India has 13 of the 20 most polluted cities of the world. And our national capital New Delhi has the world’s dirtiest air, earning it the dubious distinction of the most polluted city of the world. In a city of 18 million people, we have 8.5 million vehicles, and still counting. And at least, if not more, 1,500 new vehicles are added to Delhi’s roads every day. New Delhi has the highest number of vehicles in the country, more than three other metros -- Mumbai, Kolkata, Chennai -- put together. Delhi accounts for more than 8 percent of the total registered vehicles in the country. In the last decade, vehicle numbers have increased by more than 100 percent. Is it an achievement that we should be proud of?

Vehicular emissions cause close to three-quarters of Delhi's air pollution. The WHO found that Delhi had an average of 153 micrograms of the smallest particles, known as PM2.5s, per cubic metre in its air. The international “safe” level for these particles is 6 micrograms per cubic metre. Is it not a scary scenario? There have been rising incidences of allergies, respiratory problems and birth anomalies, thanks to city’s toxic air.

Then why are we making such a hue and cry after the Delhi government came out with an odd-even car formula, that, too, on a trial basis for a fortnight, just because it will inconvenience us? There is no doubt that the proposal will lead to chaos, to begin with. Our daily routine will be badly disturbed. But is it not the time to press the panic button and bite the bullet? We are to be blamed for the mess that we find ourselves to be in. How do we explain that a small family of three or four people having an equal number of cars? It has become status symbol for many to park high-end cars outside their homes as coveted trophies, leaving little space for people to even walk. Over the years, roads of Delhi, one of the widest in the country, have shrunk with no space for pedestrians and cyclists. The pavements today appear to be extension of road as bikers use them unabashedly. One just can’t walk and cycle because it is fraught with dangers. A 2012 road accident data shows a person is either injured or killed in a road accident in Delhi every hour.

Today Delhi has become gas chamber. The air has become so polluted that we breathe toxic air when we take a stroll out in park in the morning. So what do we do? Should we not take corrective steps?

When the first car-free day was kicked off from Red Fort to Bhagwan Das Road on October 22 this year, studies found that there was a dramatic 60 percent drop in the amount of dangerous pollutants in comparison to the previous day. There is no doubt that if 30 to 40 percent cars are off Delhi roads, air will be much less pollutant.

Critics say Delhiites will puncture government’s good intention by buying another car or cars, as it happened in Mexico, defeating the purpose. Yes, we Delhiites are quite capable of doing that. But how many of us will be able to buy new cars? There is no doubt that car rationing is not the only solution. It will have to be accompanied with several harsh measures. The government should keep a tab on the people buying cars. Those found having more than two cars should be slapped with a heavy road tax. The monitoring agency should also ask the buyer whether he has parking lot for the vehicle. Those using the second lane of roads as parking lots should be fined.

Counterfeiting of number plates is another problem the authorities will have to grapple with as an English daily recently found out. Scheming people are already out with innovative ideas! It will be very difficult to differentiate between a genuine and a counterfeit number plate. 

Critics also point to Delhi’s inadequate public transport system which will not be able to take the load if 30 or 40 percent private vehicles are off roads. The government has promised to add more than 3,000 vehicles but it will have to procure much more if it wants the system to work. The government will also have to sort out the last mile problems if wants to get people to use more public transportation.

The National Green Tribunal should be lauded for suggesting a ban of all vehicles older than 15 years from the streets of Delhi beginning April next year. It will take off at least one-third of the total vehicles from the roads. Authorities should also test vehicles regularly for pollution levels. And those vehicles found emitting pollution more than the limits should be penalized.

Subsidies on diesel should end. Cheaper diesel fuel has led to people buying more diesel vehicles. Diesel car sales accounted just 4 percent in 2000. Today diesel cars are half of new car sales. According to WHO, diesel emissions have strong link with lung cancer.

There is a desperate need to create public awareness to switch off engines while waiting at traffic signals. An idling vehicle is likely to cause more pollution than the running vehicle.

Buses and minibuses should not be allowed to stop longer than necessary to pick up or put down passengers.

Buses should not be allowed to take more than two lanes of the left side of the road to avoid traffic jams. Traffic jams contribute heavily to pollute air.

And lastly, pollution is not the problem of Delhi government only. The Centre should also pitch in to make the programme a success. Timing of government offices should be staggered and the sarkari babus should work in shifts as it happens in corporate houses. Why everybody in government offices has to report at 9 in the morning and leave around 5 p.m.? If the timings are staggered by two hours beginning 8 a.m. in three shifts, considerable traffic will be off the roads at a particular time to beat congestion. Delhi's congestion has more than doubled in the last 10 years and the day is not far when the average speed of the vehicle will be five kiometres an hour. Until and unless road congestion is not improved, the war against pollution cannot be won. 

We have won this war before. When Sheila Dixit government moved polluting industries out of the city, closed down coal-based power plants and introduced cleaner CNG in public transport vehicles, the air quality improved significantly. But sadly we let the guard down. We can do it again. What we need is a will and self-discipline. We own Delhi and we won’t let it choke to die. It should be our New Year resolve.

DORMANT INDIA-PAKISTAN TIES NEED A JOLT

It was not a surprise stopover when Prime Minister Narendra Modi landed in Lahore from Afghanistan to meet and greet his Pakistani counterpart Nawaz Sharif on his 66^th birthday. It was the visit shrouded in secrecy. Since the PMO has taken over reigns of foreign affairs with National Security Advisor Ajit Doval at the helm, diplomacy has acquired a new meaning. Status quo has been replaced with unconventionality. It has its advantages as well as pitfalls. Indo-Pak relations have been mired in such deep mistrust that one needs to go beyond the run of the mill approach. It has been 68 years and the political establishments of both the countries view each other with suspicion. This is one reason why there has been very little progress on issues which bedevil bilateral ties.

Barely hours into the meeting of the two leaders, had hawks from both the countries started dwelling on mundane issues puncturing hopes of renewed bonhomie. Instead of concentrating on the high points of the visit, there was meaningless debate on who was more generous between the two or who took the first step? Or was it Modi who first expressed his desire to meet Sharif or the latter who invited him to drop by since he was in the region? Come on! Be a good sport and give them some time.

That the two leaders decided to meet, impromptu or under a well-crafted strategy, is immaterial. What matters is that it is a good beginning. What bureaucracy can’t achieve, sometimes a meeting between the two heads of the states can do wonders. Such meetings devoid of any agenda can break the ice and bridge the trust deficit. As long as the two countries view each other with suspicion it will be difficult to overcome roadblocks. Such meetings also give a new direction to the people involved in the decision making that there is a desire on the part of the leadership of the two countries to move ahead.

Both the countries have gone to wars three times, twice over the disputed Kashmir, and had a brief armed conflict in Kargil. Did any of the two countries gain anything? On the contrary, the international community always keeps its fingers crossed fearing a nuclear war between the two. Both the countries are seen as villain to global peace. It is high time both New Delhi and Islamabad display a matured leadership and shrug off world’s concerns and make a new beginning.

Now that the first step has been taken, the two countries should try to redefine their relationship by taking up issues which are less complex in nature. As they grow in confidence, they can approach complicated issues. Trade, for example, appears to be a low-hanging fruit where both the countries can make tremendous progress. Better trade ties will act as a deterrent against any misadventure. Pakistan can reciprocate by granting the long-awaited MFN status to India which will be a win-win situation for both the countries. What’s strange that Pakistan continues to import goods from India, but via third countries, thus inflating its import bill. Pakistan, which has been importing several items from other countries, can do so from India saving on its transportation costs and high-cost imports.

Both the countries should learn from Indo-China relations. In spite of decades of stand-off and a war over border, New Delhi and Beijing have made giant progress in several fields, particularly in bilateral trade. Today, both the countries stand together at world forums to take on the powerful West on issues of common interest. They have not let their border dispute come in between their relationship.

Then there are humanitarian issues of fishermen who inadvertently cross over to each other’s waters. A mechanism can be worked out so that fishermen of both the countries are not detained for long. Easy visa regime is another area which can be looked into as people have families in both the countries.

And what about cricket diplomacy! One of the easiest issues could be the resumption of cricketing ties between the two countries. The love and affection that the cricketers are showered with when they travel to each other’s country is unimaginable. It will not only improve people-to-people relationship but may prove to be a game changer.

But the road ahead is not hunky-dory. Both the leaders will have to encounter several roadblocks. The renewed bonhomie between the two countries may not be music for terrorists who may feel threatened that Pakistan may turn its back to them in future. The terrorists have always responded ferociously whenever Pakistan was forced to take action against them. Pakistan may have nurtured them as their safe assets, but they are increasingly becoming its liability. As the world unites against terrorism, Pakistan will have to take a hard call. It would not like to be seen bracketed as “with us or with them”.  Pakistan’s seriousness in improving ties with India will also be tested in future. It is then that terrorists may carry out some spectacular attacks against India forcing the two countries to retrieve to its “no-talks” position. This is one scenario which will weigh heavily in any future engagements between the two countries. Will India under the hardline Hindu party government not forced to call off talks and take jingoistic stand? India can weather such an attack if it is convinced that Pakistan has stopped providing oxygen to terrorist groups and that Islamabad has no direct hand in it. But for that to happen, Pakistan will have to prove its credentials.

Back home, Modi will have to take the Opposition into confidence as he moves ahead with his kind of diplomacy. For, there seems very little opposition to their meeting in Pakistan. In India, the Opposition has cried foul as the Modi government has taken a complete U-turn as far as its policy with Pakistan is concerned. The Opposition will pester the government which is being seen as yielding too much and too soon to Islamabad without any tangible change on the ground. Perhaps the BJP would also have reacted in the same fashion had it been in opposition. Therefore, Modi will have to reach out to the Opposition and use his charm offensive to bring them on board. Modi might have pulled off a diplomatic coup but the success of such an adventure will depend largely how he mends the frosty relationship with the Opposition. Equal responsibility lies with the Opposition to give Modi a fare opportunity as he tries something different from the time-tested old formula. There is no doubt that India-Pakistan relationship is very complex in nature. But every complex problem has its solution also. It is time both the countries display maturity and self-confidence to do business with each other.

FROM PARIS TO BANGKOK TO ISLAMABAD IN 10 DAYS!

The lightening speed with which India-Pakistan talks have traveled is amusing if not baffling. Can a less than three-minute conversation between prime ministers Narendra Modi and Nawaz Sharif on the sidelines of the Paris climate summit change the atmospherics so much that the two countries would agree to composite dialogue within 10 days? How can a government, which takes offence to Pakistan high commissioner to New Delhi hosting Kashmiri separatists leading to cancellation of foreign secretary level talks, take a sudden 360-degree U-turn? What has happened in between that the Modi government decided to expand the scope of bilateral dialogue from terror-specific talks? There is something more to this sudden development which meets the eye. Is there a nudge from some foreign power? Any guesses? Will the government come clean on it?

Questions are being asked whether the Indian government has conceded too much and too soon? Has the government smelt something which others have not? Has Pakistan created a positive atmosphere warranting a “composite” dialogue? There does not seem any prevention of infiltration attempts from across the border. Terror activities continue unabated in Jammu and Kashmir, not to talk about the on-off border skirmishes.

It will be interesting to know whether Pakistan has committed to India that it will look seriously into the concerns of New Delhi. Will it fast-track the 2008 Mumbai blasts trial and bring the guilty to book? Will it not allow its soil to be used by terrorists whom it continues to shelter at its backyard against India? Will it take action against people like Hafeez Saeed, who India considers to be the mastermind of the Mumbai blasts, by arresting him and not allowing him to spew venom against New Delhi? Why terrorists like Syed Salahuddin continue to be feted by Pakistan? Will Pakistan stop denying the presence of Mumbai blasts’ main accused Dawood Ibrahim in its country? These are some of the crucial issues on which India wanted some progress before full-fledged talks could be resumed. Has there been any forward movement on any of the abovementioned issues? India knows the answer best.

Some of the fundamental questions remain unanswered. All through, Prime Minister Modi government had been maintaining a very hardline approach vis-à-vis Pakistan. In fact, it came under criticism for abruptly cancelling the National Security Advisers meet early this year, for it wanted to discuss terrorism only while Pakistan was opposed to restricted talks and wanted the scope of the talks to include Kashmir. In reality, the Modi government was incensed at the decision of Pakistan’s National Security Advisor Sartaj Aziz to entertain Kashmiri separatist leaders ahead of the talks. Why the hullabaloo over such a meeting? In the past, Kashmiri separatist leaders have met Pakistani leaders whenever they visited India. Pakistan high commission to New Delhi has been regularly hosting them on Eid. Everybody knows that Kashmiri separatists are nothing but proxies of Pakistan.

In fact, Mr. Vajpayee also had a meeting with them while he was trying to find a peaceful solution to the vexed Kashmir issue in 2009. So, what is the big deal if they meet any Pakistani leader or any official? Today, the Hurriyat leadership has lost its relevance in Kashmir as successive state elections have proved. The participation of people in the elections has increased over the years despite Hurriyat’s poll-boycott calls. Gone are the days when its writ used to run in Kashmir Valley. Today, its influence has shrunk to a very few pockets in the Valley. Moreover, it has been considerably weakened following numerous splits in the past. Therefore, it hardly matters who they meet? India-Pakistan relations should not be seen through the prism of Hurriyat.

Is the sudden volte-face by the Modi government in dealing with Pakistan an admission of defeat of its policy? The hawkish stand taken by India on Pakistan since Modi came to power last year has proved to be counter-productive. It might have increased his standing among his hardcore followers in India but it certainly did not enhance his position at international level. Modi was increasingly being seen as a hardline leader wanting to isolate Pakistan while reaching out to other countries. Has the reality dawned on Modi and his top bureaucrats that his ambitious plan to enhance regional cooperation will not materialize as long as India-Pakistan relations remained frosty?

The fact of the matter is that over the last few months Pakistan’s stakes have gone up after it facilitated talks between Afghanistan government and the Taliban. The US and other NATO countries have deep interests in Afghanistan as they want to pull out of the war-torn country but not before restoring a semblance of normalcy. Pakistan, which pulls strings of several militant groups, has a pivotal role in Afghanistan. In fact, the US President Barack Obama has gone on record praising the role of Pakistan in Afghanistan when Sharif called on him in Washington in October this year. A joint statement after the meeting said “President Obama affirmed Pakistan’s role as a key counterterrorism partner and recognized the sacrifices that Pakistani civilians, military, and law enforcement personnel have made over the years as they confront terrorism and militant groups.”

Is it a mere coincidence that both the countries went into a diplomatic overdrive after Nawaz Sharif expressed his desire to hold unconditional talks with India during his meeting with British Premier David Cameron on the sidelines of CHOGM meeting in Malta last month?

All said and done, talks had to happen. How long can the two neighbours be at odds with each other and not on talking terms? There is no other option but to talk to resolve all issues, no matter how intricate they are. As the then Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee rightly said: “You can change friends, but you can’t change neighbours”.

Now that the talks are back on track, it is expected of the leadership of the two countries to display maturity and not act amateurishly. What has given hope to the fresh initiative is that it is being backed by Pakistan’s powerful military. The appointment of Lt Gen. Naseer Khan Janjua as Pakistan’s National Security Advisor is being seen as a positive development as he comes from army. It will be difficult for the Pakistani military leadership now to veto any decision taken during future talks. In the past, Pakistan’s army was seen as a major obstacle whenever the democratically elected government tried to strike peace with India. Kargil happened soon after Vajpayee traveled to Lahore and signed an agreement with Sharif. The agreement between Modi and Sharif in the Russian city of Ufa was followed with a spurt in infiltration attempts and ferocious ceasefire violations.  One can now hope there will be no such provocations from either side to derail talks. The talks must go on.  

HOPES RISE AS ADAMANT INDIA & PAKISTAN CLIMB DOWN

Taking a step back is a great way to move forward. And both India and Pakistan have done the right thing in Bangkok.  Away from the piercing eyes of hawkish media, top security advisors of the two countries met secretly and decided to put the stalled talks back on track. Not talking makes no sense. So, it is a good and modest beginning. What matters most is that both the countries have decided to do away with their rigid stand to get talks going. It has been a major diplomatic departure from their stated positions. New Delhi’s decision to engage with Islamabad is a major shift in its position as it wanted talks on terror only as a pre-condition from its earlier stated stand of no talks till its neighbour stopped terrorist activities in India. And so far, there is no firm commitment from Pakistan that it will not allow its soil to be used by terrorists against India. Right from the beginning, Pakistan was opposed to limit talks to terror only as it would have put it in a tight corner and wanted a broad-based dialogue. The fact that India has ceded too much ground in Bangkok to re-engage with Pakistan shows its desire to have normal and peaceful relations with its neighbours.

What Ufa could not produce, the meeting in Bangkok offers a ray of hope. Ufa was bound to be a non-starter as desperate Nawaz Sharif caved in to India’s demand for terror-specific only talks between National Security Advisors. This did not go down well with Pakistan’s powerful military establishment which did all it could to scuttle the talks. Hardly had Sharif returned to Islamabad from the Russian city of Ufa that the army stepped up border attacks leading to frequent exchanges of fire from both sides. Pakistan’s Inter-State Intelligence also increased infiltration bids and Pakistan-based militants carried out some of the most audacious attacks in Kashmir and in Punjab. To make matters worse, Pakistan’s High Commissioner to New Delhi met Kashmiri separatist leaders intentionally ahead of the foreign secretaries’ meeting, thus spoiling whatever little chance of hope was there.

Unlike Ufa, a joint statement issued in Bangkok talks about "peace and security, Jammu and Kashmir and tranquility along the Line of Control" apart from terrorism. It encompasses the main issues which bedevil the relationship between the two countries. Pakistan can’t be expected to join talks if the Kashmir issue is kept under the wraps. No democratically-elected government of Pakistan can afford to go against the wishes of Pakistani military which considers Kashmir as the most disputed issue between the two countries. India, too, considers Kashmir as a disputed territory and it should not be seen as a country which is wavering from taking up the issue. Kashmir remains an unfinished agenda for India as it considers the territory occupied by Pakistan as illegal.

The Bangkok talks have paved the way for Indian Foreign Minister Sushma Swaraj’s visit to Pakistan, the first ministerial level visit in three years. Her scheduled meetings with Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and his advisor on security and foreign affairs, Sartaj Aziz, would give a further push to the new initiative. If all goes well then it could also clear the way for Prime Minister Narendra Modi to visit Islamabad in November next year to take part in the SAARC summit, which has often been a casualty due to frosty ties between the two estranged neighbours.

While it is too early to comment on the success of talks, what is more important is that the next rounds of dialogue would certainly help bridge the gap and melt the chilling relations. Both the countries need to go beyond the conventional ways and explore out of the box ideas so that the innocent people don’t suffer. The situation demands mature response from leadership of the two countries. India and China, too, have been embroiled in border dispute for several decades. But the situation on the border has remained largely peaceful, except for intermittent incursions. Both the Asian giants have not allowed their border dispute to affect their bilateral ties. The two-way trade is booming and the people-to-people contact between the two countries is growing.

Both India and Pakistan would do well to take up the less volatile issues first where chances of convergence are bright. Trade, for one, is one area where both the countries and their people stand to benefit. The trust deficit between the two countries has taken a heavy toll on business, which otherwise, has great potential. According to a report prepared by the PHD Chamber of Commerce and Industry, India-Pakistan trade has the potential to increase many folds to scale 10 billion US dollars in the next very few years if the ‘normal’ relations are established. If Pakistan is accused of not reciprocating the most favoured nation (MFN) status to India, then New Delhi is to be equally blamed for tariff and non-tariff barriers.

All said and done, the talks in itself don’t mean much if the two countries don’t have the courage to bite the bullet. The two countries will need to address each other’s concerns seriously than paying a mere lip service. The two countries can make success only if they catch the bull by its horn. But given the history of talks, the future looks uncertain if not bleak.

WHY THE FUSS OVER MODI-SHARIF HANDSHAKE?

News and social media went into frenzy after Prime Minister Narendra Modi walked up to his Pakistani counterpart Nawaz Sharif on the sidelines of a climate change summit in Paris and shook hands. Many jumped the gun and

started discussing the fate of the stalled talks between the two countries. Was the handshake a mere courtesy photo-op or was there something more to it? And so on and so forth. Well, one just does not know what the two leaders discussed, but one thing is certain that they did not discuss the climate of Paris. But what mattered most was the handshake which replaced the most important Paris climate talks as the lead story in Indian and Pakistani newspapers.

Tongues have started wagging about the future of the talks. What a prosaic interpretation? Is there any doubt about resumption of talks? Absolutely not! It is just a matter of time when the two countries will again start talk the talk, but what is more important is whether they will walk the walk.

No two neighbours can remain in a perpetual mode of denial for long. In the past also, the two countries have been involved in talks despite going to full-fledged wars three times and a brief conflict in Kargil in 1999 since their independence. But they were back to talks after sometime. It is an on and off exercise which will go on before the two nations regain trust about each other to operationalise the full-scale structured talks.

The leadership of both the countries is mature enough to understand that war would only lead to catastrophe and complicate the matters beyond repairs. Dialogue can only take them forward to any meaningful and lasting solution to the issues that bedevil their relations.

But for that to happen, a congenial atmosphere is the basic requirement. Incidents in the last few months have only widened the trust deficit as both the countries view each other with suspicion. The media of the two countries has also played a devilish role by resorting to jingoist rhetoric forcing the hands of the leadership of both the countries to move cautiously. The cross-border firing, increase in militant activities in Kashmir, the recent arrest of agents affiliated to Pakistan’s intelligence agency in India do not augur well for the immediate resumption of talks, even though cosmetic, in the immediate future.

The handshake offers a ray of hope. One hopes that this gesture turns out to be ice-breaker before the winter chill sets in. This was their second meeting this year after they met in the Russian city of Ufa in July and decided to give a push to the stalled talks by agreeing to a meeting of National Security Advisors. But sadly, the meeting just failed to take off as both the sides stuck to unreasonable grounds. There was another opportunity a month later in the United Nations General Assembly session for them to meet. But by then the ties had soured and the two leaders intentionally decided to stay away from public glare by only waving at each other.

Talks for the sake of talks should be avoided. Both the countries should do some serious introspection and adopt a pragmatic approach if they are really serious in taking the talks forward. Nawaz Sharif’s recent offer of unconditional talks with India during his meeting with British Premier David Cameron on the sidelines of the Commonwealth summit in Malta has largely gone unnoticed in India as New Delhi has not even bothered to take note of it, leave aside making any comments.  

Pakistan needs to understand that talks and terror can’t go hand in hand. At a time, when the world has been rattled by a series of bloody terrorist activities, the sentiments are running high against terrorist groups. And to expect India to enter into talks with Pakistan as long as it is seen as in collusion with terrorist groups is asking for too much. Pakistan needs to make some forward movement in this regard before it can hope for resumption of normal ties.

The use of terrorism as a state policy is falling apart as the nations themselves are feeling the pinch. Who knows is better than Pakistan which has suffered the most? The same groups whom it cradled have started turning their back on it and are causing the maximum damage. Terrorism today poses a major threat to the world than anything else. The Paris attacks have only emboldened the resolve of the global community to formulate a common and concerted strategy to defang this monster which is spreading its tentacles.

There is an opportunity before Pakistan to join the global war against terrorism to regain its bruised image. India is not the only country which views its estranged neighbour with suspicion. The list is endless. Pakistan has been ticked off by major powers from time to time. It should listen to the sage counsel and launch a war against terrorism. There is no doubt that it will feel the pain initially, but this pain is worth suffering, because if it is allowed to fester it will become a deadly disease and amputation will be the only recourse. It is up to Pakistan to decide which path it wants to tread. Talks with India can wait.