HARYANA GOVT MUTE SPECTATOR TO ORCHESTRATED VIOLENCE

NDTV.com

Everything went according to the script. There was no element of surprise. Hundreds and thousands of armed followers were allowed to congregate at Panchkula days before the special CBI court was to announce verdict on the self-claimed godman. These followers knew very well that their Baba was a rapist and the court verdict would go against their “Bhagwan”. Otherwise, what is the raison d'être of his “bhakts” arming themselves with sticks and weapons?

And as was to happen, happened! Minutes after the court found him guilty in a 2002 rape case, Baba’s followers went into a rampage. They were uncontrollable. Police was helpless. And the administration bewildered. It was an abject surrender by all those supposedly responsible to maintain law and order. It was a free run. The goons in the garb of followers of the rapist went about their job clinically, targeting innocents, media and the establishment.

The toll, over two dozen, could have been much higher had the army not come to the rescue of a hapless administration which was simply clueless.

The role of the administration is highly questionable. The violence was anticipated. There were intelligence reports warning of violence. And still the administration chose to sleep over the issue. Why did it allow Dera followers to congregate in large numbers when Section 144 was imposed? Why no attempt was made to disperse the rowdies then? And that too when they were openly flashing the sticks they were carrying? How can the administration allow such a large number of people occupy every nook and corner of Panchkula, be it parks, pavements and roads? 

Was the administration lulled into believing that the armed followers will respect the court order and leave peacefully? Its height of administrative as well as political incompetence!

Or the reason is something else? Was Manohar Lal Khattar government hesitant to take action against the followers of the rockstar “Baba” who played a crucial role in the formation of the first BJP government in the state in 2014? The “Dera”, which has a large following among the dalits, has often been courted by politicians from neighbouring Punjab. But it was in 2014 that the “Dera” decided to put its might behind the BJP, which resulted in its humungous victory.

Whatever may be the reason, the fact is that so many innocent people have been killed and several hundreds injured. And property worth millions of dollars has been destroyed. Who will take the responsibility? Somebody has to be made accountable.

An embattled Khattar promised compensation to the families of those lost their dear ones in the mindless violence. Will a few lakh of rupees heal their loss? Sorry, Mr Khattar, you have no moral right to continue. You have proved your ineptness not once but twice. Six people died in 2014 when another self-styled guru Rampal Maharaj had turned his ashram into a garrison town by storing stones, petrol bombs and weapons to ward off an arrest warrant. It is high time you accept your failure and resign.

WHY DONALD AS PRESIDENT IS ANTITHESIS TO TRUMP?

nbcnews.com

In one of the most blatant reversals, President Donald Trump has promised increased troop numbers in Afghanistan, where the US is far from winning the war. While the decision, no doubt, is a welcome step, it also exposes his penchant to flip-flops.  His gaffes, by now notorious, seem to be part of his split personality. And he is unabashedly unruffled!  

If one pores over his earlier tweets, Donald Trump comes across as a person who was dead against committing troops in the war-torn country and pooh-poohed the then President Barrack Obama for his administration’s decision to keep at least 9,800 troops in the Central Asian nation through most of 2016, with at least 5,500 of them till the end of 2017. Throughout his campaign rhetoric, Trump committed to withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan, which went down well with the US citizens.

And eight months into his presidency, Trump has chosen to eat crow.

“We have wasted an enormous amount of blood and treasure in Afghanistan. Their government has zero appreciation. Let's get out!” said Trump in a series of tweets on November 21, 2013. And he followed it up with another tweet. “Do not allow our very stupid leaders to sign a deal that keeps us in Afghanistan through 2024-with all costs by U.S.A. MAKE AMERICA GREAT!”

Ten months ago (September 12, 2012), Trump had tweeted: “84% of US troops wounded & 70% of our brave men & women killed in Afghanistan have all come under Obama. Time to get out of there.”

But in a televised address on Monday, he announced a new “fight-to-win” strategy for Afghanistan. There are also reports that he is considering sending more troops to Afghanistan.

"The consequences of a rapid exit are both predictable and unacceptable," President Trump said. "A hasty withdrawal would create a vacuum that terrorists, including ISIS and al Qaeda, would instantly fill."

It was unbecoming of a presidential candidate to use derogatory language against the then President of the country of his origin also. Has Trump not bloodied his nose today by committing more money and forces in Afghanistan?

“Why are we continuing to train these Afghanis who then shoot our soldiers in the back? Afghanistan is a complete waste. Time to come home!” tweeted Trump exactly five years ago (August 21, 2012) drawing a howl of protests from Afghani leaders and people.

So, will President Trump tell his nation the reason behind his change of heart when he said:  "The stronger the Afghan security forces become, the less we will have to do. Afghans will secure and build their own nation and define their own future. We want them to succeed."

The list is endless. Now his positions on China, Syria, NATO, to name a few, are in stark contrast to what he thundered before the people of the US elected him as their president.

Therefore, it is not surprising then that Trump’s approval ratings are slipping every time he opens his mouth. He will perhaps be the only US president who is not approved by the majority of the people within one year of his office.

WHY US CURBS AGAINST HIZBUL NOT A BIG DEAL?

Does India have any reason to rejoice after the United States added Hizbul Mujahideen to its blacklist of nearly 60 terrorist organizations and designated it as a foreign terrorist organization? Will it any way help India in its fight against terrorism in Kashmir where Hizbul, one of the largest and oldest militant groups, is fighting against Indian security forces?

How does it make any difference if the US freezes any assets of Hizbul Mujahideen it may be holding there, and barring US citizens from engaging in any transactions with the group? The US move is nothing but to please the Indian leadership while doing little to put pressure on Pakistan to rein in militants operating from its soil.

Moreover, how does the US’ latest action help India in its fight against terrorism? Do terrorist organizations maintain bank accounts in their names? It’s a known fact that most of the terror activities are financed through cash and that too through illegal hawala transactions.

Also there is a widespread practice among Muslims of donating money to charities which have over the years played a major role in financing terrorist groups. Charities based in Saudi Arabia for long were involved in sponsor and financing of terrorist organizations before the government launched a crackdown against them under pressure from the US. There is no denying the fact that several charity organizations in the Muslim world diverted “zakat” to finance “jihad” (the so-called holy war).” “Zakat, considered to be one of the five pillars of Islam, was meant to giving alms to the poor and needy and spread the message of Islam. But the money was grossly misused by charities in the Middle East.

Then there is drug money. Reams of reports are available to link the billions-dollar opiate trade to terror groups. Al-Qaeda’s rapid growth in Afghanistan was directly linked to the illegal opium trade.  According to a report by the United Nations, Afghanistan’s poppy crops were the major source of terror funding and Al-Qaeda was the main beneficiary from the illegal drug trade in the late nineties before the collapse of the illegitimate Taliban government in 2001.

Of late, the Islamic State has emerged as the wealthiest terror group by engaging in illicit trade in oil after it occupied vast tract of territories in Iraq and Syria. According to conservative estimates, the group makes as much as $ 3 million a day, a huge amount compared to a paltry amount needed to carry out acts of terror.

Therefore, it is amply clear that the US move claiming “such designations are aimed at denying individuals and entities access to the US financial system” will have any impact as far as the insurgency in Kashmir is concerned.

Had President Donald Trump lived up to promises which he made during electioneering, the war against terrorism could have taken a paradigm shift? "We will defeat radical Islamic terrorism when I’m president. We will stand shoulder to shoulder with India in sharing intelligence and keeping our people safe mutually," Trump had said during electioneering. But all those promises seem hollow now.

Pakistan made a mockery of the US by allowing Syed Salahuddin, the head of Hizbul Mujahideen, to address a press conference at Muzaffarabad’s Centre Press Club soon after he was named as a specially designated global terrorist by the US department of state on June 26 this year.

Both Salahuddin as well as India’s most wanted terrorist, Hafiz Saeed, who also carries a $10 million bounty on his head by the US, have been openly holding rallies spewing venom against India and the US. Had the US been serious in its fight against terrorism, it could have easily put pressure on Pakistan to take action against them. If the US could enter Pakistani territory and smoke out al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden in May 2011, mastermind of the deadly September 11 attacks, could not it do the same with Salahuddin and Saeed? It is not that the US can’t, but it won’t do it. For, Laden was a direct threat to the US as his jihadis were fighting against the US military forces in Afghanistan. As far as Salahuddin and Saeed are concerned, they don’t pose any threat to the US as both have been carrying out terrorist operations in Kashmir.

The US is more concerned about Afghanistan than Kashmir where its forces are in direct line of fire. And it knows it very well that it cannot ensure a decisive victory in Afghanistan without the help of Pakistan. Otherwise what explains the US decision to continue patting Pakistan occasionally in spite of Laden being provided a safe sanctuary by Pakistan?

Therefore, India should do well not to rejoice at such theatrics and sharpen its own strategy to meet with the challenge. Militancy in Kashmir is India’s own headache and it has to win this war without anybody’s help.

INDIA DRUB LANKA 3-0: A TALE OF TWO CONTRASTING TEAMS

photo courtesy : Oneindia

The sorry saga of Sri Lanka’s shambolic performance continued in the third test as well as it crashed to an innings defeat and 171 runs against India exposing major chinks in its batting as well as bowling arsenal. Since the retirement of Tillakaratne Dilshan, Kumar Sangakkara, Mahela Jayawardene and Lasith Malinga from Test cricket, the Sri Lankan team has been down in the dumps.  One expected that it will put up at least a symbolic resistance to India on its home soil. Alas, it was not to be.

LAMB TO THE SLAUGHTER

“The Lions”, ironically, walked like lambs to the slaughter the day Virat Kohli-led Indian team set its foot on the Lankan soil.  What was so pathetic about the Lankan performance during the entire three-test match series was that the team did not even resist subjugation by the rampaging India. After losing the first two test matches inside four days, the Lankans allowed themselves to be annihilated by India inside the third day of the final match making the humiliation complete. The 3-0 whitewash on its own soil tells the tale of two contrasting teams.

LANKANS NO MATCH

If the Indian performance was of the highest quality, the Sri Lankans were plain mediocre.

Had Kohli enforced the follow-on in the first test match at Galle, the Lankans would have recorded their worst series defeat by losing all the matches with innings defeat. Sri Lanka totaled 536 runs in its two innings in the first test against India’s first innings total of 600 runs. That match also could have folded in third day itself, had Kohli not opted to bat again in the second innings.

ABJECT SURRENDER

One expected that the Lankans would rise from the ashes after suffering a bloody defeat in the first test match. But not only did they lose the plot, they surrendered with their tails between their legs. This was something unexpected of them.

Given the all-round failure in all departments of the game, the home team gave a sense that it was not at all in the competition. Except for the second innings of the second test match at Colombo, where it showed some character by playing more than 100 overs (116.5 overs to be precise), there was no serious attempt to stay put in the wicket.

 While Indians played 133.1 overs in the first match to score 600 runs, the Sri Lankans played a combined 129.5 overs in the two innings of the match to score 536 runs (291 in the first innings and 245 in the second). The home team gave its best performance of the series in the second innings of the second test by playing 116.5 overs and scoring 386 runs. In the first innings of the match, it could not even last 50 overs as it was bundled out for 183 runs in 49.4 overs.

Refusing to learn from its mistakes, the Sri Lankan batting slumped once again in the first innings of the final match as it was dismissed for paltry 135 runs in 37.4 overs in reply to India’s first innings total of 487 runs. In its second essay, the team did try to stretch a bit longer (74.3 overs), but collapsed to 181 runs all out handing India a convincing victory of an inning and 171 runs.

HUMILIATING DEFEAT

This is the second time Lanka has faced a humiliating 3-0 whitewash on its soil. Shane Warne-led Australia was the first team to record a 3-0 clean sweep in 2003-04.

Sri Lankans were also done in by injuries to wicket takers Nuwan Pradeep and Rangana Herath, and the weak bench strength further compounded their problems. On the contrary, India faced a problem of plenty as bowlers Ishant Sharma and Bhuvneshwar Kumar and batter Rohit Sharma could not make it to the playing eleven in any of the match. Interestingly, opener Shikhar Dhawan, not an original choice and a replacement for Murali Vijay, emerged as the top scorer with 358 runs with two scintillating centuries under his belt.

As captain Chandimal rightly said after the loss of the match and the series, “Our batting and bowling was below-par through the series,” one hopes his team will put up some semblance of fight in the five one-day internationals and a Twenty20 beginning Sunday. 

NITISH RESIGNATION A BOLD STATEMENT

Nitish Kumar’s decision to resign as chief minister of Bihar has put Rashtriya Janata Dal president Lalu Prasad Yadav in a tight spot. For, he will be seen by people as a villain for the fall of the government as he put up stiff opposition to the resignation demand of his corruption-tainted son Tejashwi Yadav. In one masterstroke, Nitish has shown to the people of Bihar and the country that he could sacrifice his government than let anybody cast aspersions on his image. There is no doubt that his political stock has gone up several notches.  In fact, Nitish was not very comfortable to share political space with his one time friend-turned-foe-turned-friend Lalu who has several corruption cases stacked against him. But he was forced to be part of the “mahagathbandhan” or grand alliance to keep the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) from coming to power in Bihar. The thick-skinned Lalu’s insistence not to drop his son from the government forced the hands of Nitish who did not want to be seen as compromising with corruption.

What happens next? 

Will the alliance partners elect a new leader minus Nitish and Tejashwi as proposed by Lalu to save the government? It looks unlikely as Nitish decision to resign to set high moral grounds would then appear to be a political stunt. Moreover, Nitish would have consulted his Janata Dal United party before taking this far-reaching decision. Therefore, Lalu’s proposal falls flat. The arithmetic is such that RJD, which emerged as the single largest party in the 2015 elections, can’t form the government even if it secures the support of the Congress.

There are two possibilities. The BJP, which has already announced that it is against mid-term polls, may agree to prop up the Nitish government by offering outside support. But it remains to be seen whether Nitish would be agreeable to the offer from his former ally whom he divorced in 2013. Of late, Nitish has been seen cosying up to the BJP by throwing his weight behind the NDA presidential candidate Ram Nath Kovind causing consternation among the anti-NDA partners. It should not be difficult for Nitish to revisit his decision and break the bread with the BJP again as there are not permanent enemies in politics. Moreover, Narendra Modi has emerged as a no-nonsense prime minister who is seen as pushing aggressively for economic reforms without inviting any stain of corruption against any of his cabinet colleagues. The BJP would also like to see Nitish at the helm without Lalu. It will be like killing two birds with one stone. Not only will Lalu lose his face and the next elections, it will also spell doom for the Congress party which is clutching on to these regional parties to stay relevant. But a lot will depend on Nitish if he has to accept the BJP offer. For, the 2015 Bihar verdict was clearly against the BJP-led NDA.

The next possibility could be a rebellion in Lalu’s party. Some of the RJD MLAs, who are not comfortable with the stranglehold of Lalu and his family on the party, may rebel and join hands with Nitish. This makes sense as they also know it well that the Lalu and his family is fighting a lost battle. With the CBI filing a case against Lalu, his wife and former chief minister Rabri Devi, their son Tejashwi and others against irregularities in awarding the tender for development, maintenance and operation of hotels in Ranchi and Puri in 2006, it will be difficult for the RJD to approach the next elections with conviction. This is one of several corruption cases filed against Lalu and his family. And if the snap elections are to be held now, the RJD is bound to suffer an ignominious defeat. This will certainly weigh heavily on them if they decide to continue with the party. Moreover, some of them would not like to lose the perks as the next elections are due only in 2020. So, why would they spoil their political career by siding with Lalu and seen as a party to corruption? By now, they must have known the pulse of the voters who defeated the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance in the 2014 general election. That vote was against the corruption.

India gets its new President

The election of Mr. Ram Nath Kovind as the 14^th President of the country was a foregone conclusion given the brute majority the Bharatiya Janata Party and its allies command in Lok Sabha and the states ruled by them. His victory against the Congress party-led opposition candidate Meira Kumar was emphatic as he secured 65.65 percent votes of the electoral college with a total vote value of 702,044. Kumar ended up getting 367,314 votes representing 34.35 percent of the total votes polled.  The electoral college consisted of 4,896 voters --- 776 elected members of parliament and 4,120 members of legislative assemblies.

This is for the first time that a leader associated with the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh or RSS will occupy the highest office since independence.  Mr. Kovind also becomes the second President representing the low-caste Dalit community. Mr. K. R. Narayanan was the first Dalit to be President of India. He will replace Dr. Pranab Mukherjee who demits office on July 24 after completing his five-year term. Mr. Kovind will be sworn in the next day.

The 71-year-old Mr. Kovind comes from a very humble origin from Kanpur as his father was a farmer.  After completing his graduation in law, Mr. Kovind moved to Delhi to prepare for the civil services exams. He cleared the exam in his third attempt but did not join as he was selected for the allied services.  Thereafter, he began practising as a lawyer in the Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court before he joined politics.  He also served as a Central Government standing counsel in the Supreme Court from 1980 to 1993. He also has the reputation of representing India in the United Nations, and even addressed United Nations General Assembly in October 2002.

In 1991, he joined the BJP. Seven years later, he was made president of the BJP Dalit Morcha. He was also president of the All-India Koli Samaj. His political career did not start on a happy note as he made an unsuccessful bid to parliament from Ghatamur in Uttar Pradesh in 1990 on a BJP ticket. In 2007 UP assembly polls, the BJP fielded him from Bhognipur constituency, but he finished third. However, his two consecutive stints as a Rajya Sabha member from 1994 till 2006 give him an added legislative experience which will come in handy while discharging his duties as the President of the country.  He also served on several parliamentary committees as a member of parliament. He was also governor of Bihar before he was picked by the BJP to contest the presidential election.

Though the President’s role is largely ceremonial in India, but as the custodian of the constitution the President has to play a crucial role in times of uncertainty. However, in Mr. Kovind’s case, his stint is likely to be largely predictable as the BJP-led NDA commands absolute majority in the Lok Sabha and if political pundits are to be believed the alliance has fair chance of returning to power when the next general elections are held in 2019. Having its nominee at the Raisina Hill will also be a comforting factor for the Prime Minister Narendra Modi government in getting assent on key bills, particularly the ordinances. The Modi government has often taken the ordinance route while heralding several economic reforms to bypass the Rajya Sabha, where it does not have a majority.

Now that the suspense regarding who will occupy the top constitutional post is over, it would have been better had there been a consensus candidate for the highest seat of power. For, the President does not belong to a particular political party. He is the first citizen of the country. The political parties will do well in future to present a united candidate rather than just putting up a candidate for the sake of opposition. This should be the ideal situation.  In fact, this has happened in the past when Mr. Sanjiva Reddy was elected unopposed in 1977. But all said and done, both Mr. Kovind and Mrs Kumar should be commended for leading dignified campaigns in the run-up to election. Both of them represent the backward Dalit community and have set the highest traditions by not getting involved in mud-slinging. In Mr. Kovind, the country can be reassured that the rights of the poor, downtrodden and the marginalized sections of the society will be secure.

BUILDING A BETTER FUTURE THROUGH CSR

Corporate social responsibility is a new concept in India.  India is perhaps the first country in the world to have CSR in statute. In just two years since the law came into being in April 2014, it is proving to be a game changer for the weaker and marginalized sections of the society.

India’s business houses deserve a special mention for partnering with the government to improve the health and welfare of socially-excluded populations through the corporate social responsibility (CSR). A country which grapples with multiple socio-economic challenges, the CSR has the potential to create sustainable development.

An estimated 23.6 percent of Indian population, or about 276 million people, continue to live below the poverty line with purchasing power parity of just $1.25 per day. And most of them come from the marginalized sections of the society such as tribes, dalits and lower castes. Though the government has been providing subsidy to them in various forms, those are either not enough or do not reach the needy due to red tape and corruption.

It is in this context that the parliament passed the bill in 2013 making it mandatory for some companies to spend 2 percent of profits on uplifting the poor. The proposal was first mooted in 2011 when the government came out with national voluntary guidelines (NVGs) which listed out social, environmental and economic responsibilities of businesses in India. But the NVGs were largely advisory in nature than mandatory. It was only with the new Companies Act, 2013, that CSR spending was made a statutory obligation for companies incorporated under the Act.

And in just two years, the initiative has touched the lives of millions of poor people and its benefits have percolated down to the lower strata of the society. Education and skills, healthcare, environment sustainability, gender equality and rural development are among several sectors which have been aggressively targeted by hundreds of business houses.  According to a PwC/CII report, this two per cent from some 6,000 companies in India may amount to as much as Rs 20,000 crore (Rs 200 billion) every year. This has the potential to address the country’s chronic problems in near future.

There were many who thought that the CSR was another form of tax which was introduced through back door. But figures suggest that the initiative has been well received by business houses. Out of a total 250 Bombay Stock Exchange-listed companies, over 100 firms spent either more than the prescribed CSR or spent exactly as prescribed. This shows that there has been explicit compliance to the government’s legislation. There were only 19 percent of companies which either did not spend on CSR or their contributions were between 0.1 percent and 33 percent of the prescribed amount.

In fact, some of the prominent Indian businesses have been involved in philanthropy for long and have done a commendable job in non-profit causes. Those firms had their own foundations which were involved in philanthropic works. But still there were companies which did not take upon the responsibility to make contribution towards the society. There was a growing demand that the business sector needed to do more for the country’ socio economic development. It was then that the need for legislation was felt. The new law required companies with market capitalisation of more than 5 billion rupees to spend 2 percent of their annual net profits on CSR, such as social work or charity.

Poverty eradication, promotion of education and skills, rural sports, environment sustainability, protection of national heritage and contributions to prime minister’s relief fund were among the measures suggested by the government. But companies have expanded the scope and have brought under preview of CSR healthcare, gender equality, rural development, technology incubation, armed forces to name a few.

A close scrutiny of sector wise CSR spend shows that healthcare and education got the maximum boost. Nearly one third of the total actual CSR spent in the 2014-15 fiscal year was reserved for healthcare which saw the launch of 924 projects. Education and skills followed with 29 percent of total spent amount attracting 1,144 projects. Environment sustainability, rural development and gender equality were the other targeted areas of corporate business houses. The 2014-15 figures show that 55.63 billion rupees were spent under the CSR head as against the prescribed spend of 70.40 billion rupees amounting to 79 percent, which is very encouraging.

But not all the states have reaped the benefits as CSR activities have not covered the entire country in an equitable manner. Maharashtra, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Gujarat and Uttar Pradesh, which already figure in the top ten states as far as GDP growth is concerned, benefitted the most as far as the number of projects is concerned. On the contrary, the remote northeastern states of Tripura, Nagaland, Mizoram, Meghalaya and Manipur saw very little CSR spend.  Maharashtra, which is the country’s leading industrial state and number one in terms of GDP, bagged the maximum 948 projects, according to Ngobox. The country’s eight northeastern states, which contribute just 2.64 percent to the national economy, invited very less CSR spend. One reason can be attributed to the fact that most of the business offices have their presence in industrialized and software hubs where it is easier for them to implement and monitor the projects. The government and the corporate sector should chalk out a strategy to address this anomaly.

There are many who believe that the CSR scope can be widened by getting more companies under its net if the government offers 100 percent tax exemption. So far, the government has   announced 100 percent tax exemption in CSR activities for Clean Ganga Fund and Swachh Bharat Kosh. Contributions to Prime Minister's National Relief Fund are allowed as 100 percent deduction. The government can consider widening the activities under the CSR ambit for tax exemption to encourage business houses to participate in the nation-building exercise on a sustainable basis.