Some Lessons from Elections – 2012

Brig (retd.) RS Chhikara

Elections 2012 have been over for some time. Media and public have analyzed the results. Political parties are currently busy either celebrating or finding alibis for failure. They also claim to be waiting for a deeper analysis. In the public view the grand old party has received a solid drubbing including in Uttrakhand where they should have won hands down after Pokhriyal did the BJP in, to start with and even after he has done the Good General Khanduri in, through sabotage. They have just about managed to form a government with a contrived majority of one.

Political parties, some glibly, others apologetically and still others blatantly, have coined excuses howsoever belabored, for their failure or that of their vote banks. Others have tried to take credit where there is none. None; not even Maya and Digvijay have admitted defeat with a modicum of grace. Media with their 24 by 7 noise have contrived the highest ever TRPs through mischievous speculations. The dust has yet not settled down fully. Party spokespersons remain as bitterly antagonistic and diversionary as ever, each trying to defend the indefensible and parrying the truth. Our political parties can hardly be expected to speak of learning the right lessons or making a fresh beginning. Grand standing is the order of the day.

So, what are the lessons that our politicians, political parties and the electorate need to take away from these elections? An ordinary citizen voter could hazard a few.

The first of these is perhaps more in the nature of an observation to be noted for the benefit and happiness of all. The Indian voter is astute and wide awake. He has recognized what our politicians and political parties are worth. CWG, 2G, Yeduarappa, Maya Jal, and umpteen other episodes of corruption as also Anna and Ramdev movements are not lost on him/her. Yet, politicians and political parties being a necessary evil in democracy, they have – under duress perhaps, voted for stability, development and hopefully for better governance. The voter has effectively served notice on the chosen parties that severe retribution is in store if his expectations are belied. This is also the first lesson for the Yadavs, Badals, Manohar , Ibobi and whosoever is anointed Chief Minister in Uttrakhand.

Then there is lesson for the losers regardless of whether they are bad losers or worse losers. The voter has shown encouraging signs of rejecting the politics of religion, caste, sub caste, forwards, backwards or most backwards. All Indians, regardless of which vote bank they are perceived to be part of, have demanded to be looked upon with respect and care. The Indian voter demands economic, educational, social and physical development in equal measure as a matter of right – not charity or largesse. In no uncertain terms he has told the political class that elephantine parks, Shared quota of poverty and not even I Pads or laptops will appease him any longer. He will take them but will not vote because of them.

The next lesson is essentially for the Indian National Congress but by extension it is also worthy of recognition by the Badals nd Yadavs. This time around it comes from Amethi and Rai Barreily. Next time it may well be posted from Malwa or Etah. The lesson is that dynastic politics is obsolete. It must be junked. High command culture needs to be jettisoned. People want their representatives to identify with them and not visit them merely on election eve as patronizing maharajas, maharanis, princesses or yuvrajs. Nor do people care much for eloquent but clever by half orators like Sushma, Jaitley,salman or Sibal and other legal luminaries fielded by all political parties, whose sole expertise is to weave clever arguments and justifications, thrusts and parries only to divide the electorate or obfuscate issues. People can see through them. They want their representatives to understand, reflect and represent their simple and straightforward hopes and aspirations and to remain accessible and answerable.

The biggest lesson is for congressmen only; if at all they care to learn. People recognize that the INC has long jettisoned the original Gandhi. They have not demonstrated the least respect for his political ideology or probity in public life. They are too far removed from the ideology of Jawahar Lal Nehru or even of Indira Priyadarshani as well. Present day Gandhis: if indeed they are Gandhis by any contrived lineage, have no claim whatsoever to the political or ideological legacy of any one of these leaders. Not even in matters of Secularism. Sonia, Rahul, Priyanka or for that matter Vadra do not belong either to that clan or to that class. Where is the question of legacy? They as also their sycophants and hangers on are surviving on mutual need and mutual exploitation, all aimed at personal survival and gains. The lesson for congressmen is that the party or their own perch will not last long unless they get out of this opportunistic relationship and return to their original democratic roots. Congress as a party has no long term future unless they jettison these pseudo Gandhis and find new leadership from within themselves and allow fresh leadership to emerge. These elections have given them that rare opportunity which they must not lose. There will certainly be an upheaval in the short term but that would be worth their while for the long term.

There is also a lesson for the BJP. For some time it has been evident that the party is struck somewhere in the middle of an ideological void. They do not seem to be able to decide whether to ape the congress or to follow the VHP. There has not been the slightest indication of clarity on the issue till now but Goa should give some hope. True, the Sunni Muslim voter and strident Hindu reactionary are severely antagonistic. This is historical baggage- pre partition .It is just possible that a serious enough effort at re conciliation has not yet been made. True also, that the pseudo secularists will do their utmost to thwart such reconciliation that has the potential to undo their game of Divide and Rule. Should the congress become significantly weak due to their own shortcomings and should the collateral unintended advantage accrue to the BJP the latter party must shed its blinkers , not walk blind folded into the quagmire of socially divisive politics into which they have been lead by the so called secularists. BJP’s future lies in becoming an all-inclusive party of Indians. Goa has shown them how.

But then, the Muslim voter must also take home a lesson. Have they achieved any worthwhile advantage by allowing the wily politicians to fan and then exploit their ghetto mentality? They need to recognize that they are just as much Indian as a Brahmin or a catholic is. Subhash Chandra Bose and Mohan Das Karam Chand Gandhi were the only two leaders of India who shunned division of Indians along lines of religion and caste. Both have been forgotten by our present day rulers and their vision has been dumped. We need to recognize that these sub identities are the result of political exploitation – not the cause of it. These group identities must not be allowed to override their primary identity as Indians. The future of Indian Muslims lies not with Islamabad, Jeddah or Tehran but within India. Electoral alignments for short term yet elusive gain can only perpetuate their exploitation and consequent exclusion from progress and development.

There is perhaps a lesson for the civil society too. The need for political reform or can we call it political renascence, has been recognized. Record voting percentages are indisputable evidence of the effects of anti-corruption movements on the mind of young India. They will no longer sit back and watch arrogant politicians intoxicated on power to talk down to them. It is for civil society to ensure that the momentum of the phenomenon is not allowed to die down by argumentatively down playing the essence and justification of these movements.

It is not easy for the present polity to self-reform themselves, given their narrow vested interests. They will surely need some help. Can we the people help make it a little easier for them? Can we give them a five year electoral holiday by putting in place a national government of political reconstruction. This would give them time and incentive to think afresh. Can civil society go for it?

Unless at least some of these lessons are learnt there may be no real take away from this massive democratic exercise of 2012. Some opportunities have indeed arisen. Let India not miss out on them. Civil society activists and media must seize the initiative and deliver an unambiguous message to the political class that their business as usual practices have to undergo drastic change.

PLA Navy Long Legs from the Coast to the Blue Water and Deep Seas

Vice Admiral (retd) Barry Barathan

“Knowing others is intelligence; knowing yourself is true wisdom. Mastering others is strength; mastering yourself is true power”. Tao Te Ching

The Chinese Navy nee the People’s Liberation Army Navy has been evolved on the above philosophy.

Openers

The picture below is not an aircraft carrier but a building called the Maritime Education Centre

     OVERHEAD VIEW OF MARITIME EDUCATION CENTRE

• Military exercises designed for training purposes as well as to act as a deterrent;

• Longer-range power projection experiments;

• Military diplomacy in the form of port calls and bilateral cooperation

The PLAN is now focusing beyond merely achieving the capabilities required for a military resolution of the Taiwan issue. In an effort to demonstrate to the World, China's ability to deploy a multi-layered and multi-armed defensive ring around its territorial waters, the PLAN has conducted long-range missile tests off the coast of Nanjing military region featuring PHL03 multiple-launch rocket systems. These have a range of some 150km and can fire precision-guided munitions.
The 10,000-tonne Peace Ark, China's largest hospital ship has also been sent to conduct medical exercises with countries in the Gulf of Aden and along its route. Its “Soft power” sinews are symbolized well, through this deployment wherein its medical crew would provide assistance in Bangladesh, Seychelles, Djibouti, Kenya, and wherever needed.
Over the last three decades China has grown long sea legs as is evident from the above. Leaning from perhaps the British, the Americans on the value of sea power, it has built and still building a reckonable military maritime force that is capable of denying access and raising the threshold of intervention not only in the military sense but also in the context of economic impacts.

Extract from the web-

“A maritime education center opened on Wednesday, 09 June 2011 in Qingdao, a coastal city in east China's Shandong Province, The center opened on the "World Ocean Day" and aims to boost the public's knowledge of China's Ocean resources, said Li Yaozhen, a deputy party chief from the Ocean University of China. Located on the university's Laoshan campus, the 400-square-meter center showcases marine organisms, models of Chinese warships and a "sand map" that displays China's maritime rights and interests. The State Oceanic Administration sponsored the construction of the center. The center will not only be educational for students, but also for the whole Nation, said Li .China has abundant marine resources, with 3 million square kilometers of offshore waters and 32,000 kilometers of coastline. China's maritime industry saw a record annual profit increase of 13 percent over the past five years, hitting 3.8 trillion yuan (579 billion U.S. dollars) last year and employing more than 33 million people.

China should stick to the policy of coordinating the development of its land- and sea-based economies during the 12th Five-year Plan period (2011-2015), Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao said in April, adding that China should explore and utilize ocean resources and speed up the development of its marine economy”.
Source: Xinhua

Elements of PLA Navy Strategy

The International institute for strategic studies assessment on China’s Naval Strategy makes interesting reading- “The PLA (N) current maritime strategy has three main elements:

It is a maritime strategy which seeks to secure China's access to energy resources and to give it more diplomatic leverage in territorial disputes with its neighbours. It has been able to draw on a military- industrial base and research and development capabilities that have gained maturity through two decades of reform and military modernization.

Of late, Chinese naval and coastal-defense exercises have been unusually intense and numerous. Moving away from the heavily scripted affairs of the past, the emphasis has been on 'real-life' combat situations. Focusing on littoral defense, rapid mobilisation, command-and-control flexibility and longer-range projection, the exercises have been highly significant for the development of the PLAN.

In early April 2010, 16 warships from all three fleets (the North, East and South Sea Fleets) conducted an unprecedented maritime exercise. The vessels sailed within 140km of the Japanese island of Okinawa, through the Bashi Channel, and in the direction of the Malacca Strait. The ships conducted live-firing and anti-submarine drills along the Chinese coast, during which flotillas and air regiments from numerous PLAN bases simulated attacks on the training fleet. The exercise demonstrated that the PLAN had achieved its greatest-ever level of operational flexibility in the simultaneous deployment of underwater, surface and air assets, and has the confidence to sail over longer distances as it seeks to reinforce Chinese territorial claims in the South China Sea. In July, PLAN fleets conducted a series of drills in response to United States–South Korean naval exercises in the Yellow Sea. Though Beijing understood that the bilateral exercises were a response to North Korea's alleged sinking of the South Korean corvette Cheonan in March, it still objected strongly to the presence of the aircraft carrier George Washington so close to Chinese shores. The first of the drills was conducted by Type 022 Houbei-class fast missile-attack vessels of the 16th Fast Attack Flotilla of the East Sea Fleet. The Type 022s, each carrying eight YJ-83 long-range anti-ship missiles, is an important element of China's littoral defense doctrine, using 'wolf pack' tactics aimed at harassing larger enemy fleets from a distance. The most significant outing came later in July when at least a dozen warships from all three fleets conducted a maritime exercise in the South China Sea. They included the most modern vessels from the PLAN's surface and submarine fleets: Type 051C Luzhou, Type 052B Luyang I and Type 052C Luyang II destroyers, Type 054A Jiangkai II frigates, all four of the East Sea Fleet's Sovremenny destroyers, and Kilo-class attack submarines, with JH-7/7A fighter bombers providing air cover. Numerous live-firing and missile tests were carried out. The exercise received widespread domestic media coverage and was attended by a large number of high-ranking PLA personnel, including General Chen Bingde, a Central Military Commission member and Chief of the General Staff Department, who called upon the PLAN to 'pay close attention to regional situations, and be militarily prepared'. Amid tensions in the South China Sea, this long-range combined-arms exercise sent a clear message of deterrence to China's neighbours. It displayed China's abilities and willingness to project its naval power to the South China Sea in a flexible and comprehensive manner.

South China Sea

The naval aviation branch of the PLAN, the PLA Navy Air Force, has provided extensive support towards these efforts.

The above is a pointer to first to the SE Asian littorals and to India that the Cliché,” slowly- slowly catchy monkey” is what China believes in!

Since December 2008 it has deployed naval vessels to the multinational anti-piracy mission in the Gulf of Aden. Each four-month rotation usually consists of two destroyers or frigates and one replenishment ship. The PLA terms these 'military operations other than war', and sees them as an opportunity to train officers and test equipment. China has established arrangements for resupply ports. Chinese warships visit Djibouti, Salalah in Oman and Aden in Yemen. China's task force has also begun to participate in meetings at which navies exchange operational information. The PLAN flotillas have participated in joint exercises and officer exchanges, and have been keen to gain experience of anti-piracy tactics from other navies. The PLAN has expressed an interest in taking on more of a collaborative role in the anti-piracy effort, which would be a significant step of its overall approach of acquiring long sea legs.

The PLAN's largest vessel the Kunlun Shan, a 17,000-tonne Type 071 Yuzhao-class landing platform dock (LPD), was dispatched to the Gulf of Aden, carrying a platoon-level force of PLAN marines – the elite of the Chinese navy. With Z-8 medium helicopters, a new landing craft and two new speedboats, the Kunlun Shan was able to test the navy's expeditionary capabilities – vital for a vessel that would play a crucial role in any military action against Taiwan. In August helicopters and marines deployed from the Kunlan Shan repelled three groups of pirate skiffs.

From the Coast to Blue Waters and Deep Sea

(Author is Distinguished Fellow in Vivekananda International Foundation)

Need to Review the Constitution

RNP Singh
Senior Fellow, VIF

After over sixty years of Parliamentary democracy in India, people have started losing faith in it as it has become synonymous with elections only. The victim of democracy is the politics. If in India, people are asked to vote for an institution that has maintained some level of integrity – they would vote for the Supreme Court, Election Commission or to the Comptroller and Auditor General of India. Their last preference would be either Parliament or State Assemblies. In the parliamentary democracy till the leaders become responsible, conscious of their duties and responsive to the public opinion, democracy itself will not be stable. If they start ignoring the will of the people, the government will become dictatorial. In India, politicians are looked upon with disdain. There is reason for this. Politicians whom people elect with much fanfare tend to become the arbiters and abusers of power.

The realization of social and economic justice, as promised by the Constitution still remains a dream, and the system of administration has reduced and limited the sovereignty of the people to a mere right to exercise their franchise at elections. Gloomy, harsh, unimaginative and indifferent administration has affected the poor to their core. Corruption, inefficiency and insensitivity, particularly in the distribution of goods have given rise to extra-legal systems. The people in India today stand more divided amongst themselves than at the time of the country’s independence. Common national purpose is seldom seen pursued by the national political parties and noble purposes of public life have degenerated into opportunistic and self seeking politics of competitive personal gains.

Corruption, it seems, has been legalized, particularly in political life. Electoral reforms and reforming of the political parties and their internal democracy are essential parts of reform.The politician- bureaucrat nexus have eroded administrative credibility. Unprincipled, opportunistic political re-alignments and defections and re-defections minimize the scope of the stability of the governments. The instability of the governments gave rise to maladministration which has paralyzed the creative energies of the people. The opportunistic and self seeking politics and politicians and an increasing scenario of politician, criminal and the bureaucratic nexus has resulted into enormous corruption in electoral, political and bureaucratic spheres. There is pervasive degeneration of values.

In view of the prevailing atmosphere, the foremost requirement is the restoration of confidence in the institutions of democracy. This needs strong and enlightened leadership to address the emergent problems of divergent nature dealing with the aspirations of the people and requirements of the country. Besides the politicians, bureaucrats and criminals, the voters are also responsible, to some extent, for the prevailing situation because they do not discharge their civic duty honestly. The alarming increase of violence and money influence in the electoral process is a matter of grave concern which threatens the very survival of the democratic system. Besides the frustration from political and administrative side, there has been a picture of near collapse of the judicial trial system. The delays and mounting costs of the cases have kept the general people away from justice, thereby causing frustration and blocking of their aspirations. The percentage of cases that go through the whole processes in courts is quite large which urgently need exploration of some other means.

There has been increasing disillusionment about the fairness of electoral process. Corruption and criminalization has over-shadowed its processes. The enormity of the costs of elections has kept the suitable persons away from this exercise and has led to the degradation of political processes to detriment of common good. Political parties collect enormous funds from criminals and capitalists for meeting electoral expenditure, thereby causing pervasive degeneration of standards in public life. This is also reflected in the quality of governments and of the governing process.

The above mentioned systematic and constitutional failures were foreseen by some members of the Constituent Assembly and they had raised their doubts in the discussion of the Constituent Assembly. Damodar Swaroop Seth, a member of the CA had raised similar views in the discussion held on 5th November 1948. He had said “this Constitution as a whole, instead of being evolved from our life and reared from the bottom upwards is being imported from outside and built from above downwards. A Constitution which is not based on units and in the making of which they have no voice, in which there is not even a mention of thousands and lakhs of villages of India and in framing which they have had no hand, well you can give such a Constitution to the Country but I very much doubt whether you would be able to keep it long”.

Participating in the debate on the same day (5^th November, 1948) HV Kamath had said “Now, what is state for? The utility of state has to be judged from its effect on the common man’s welfare. The ultimate conflict that has to be resolved is this: Whether the individual is for the state or the state is for the individual”.

Carrying forward the debate Naziruddin Ahmad (West Bengal) had commented “Coming to the Directive Principles of the State policy, articles 28 to 48, I think that these are pious expressions. They have no binding force. These cannot be enforced in a court of law and really, as the Honourable the Law Minister himself candidly admitted they are pious superfluities. That is the criticism.”

Even after over sixty years of independence the country is still reeling under the heat of minority and reservation. While participating in debate in Constituent Assembly Krishna Chandra Sharma (United Province: General) had said” I do not think our minorities are minorities in the real sense of the of term or classes or groups accepted by the League of Nations. We all lived in this Country for centuries, for thousands of years. We have imbibed a common culture, a common way of living, common way of thinking. Thus, I do not understand the meaning of giving these special privileges in chapter XIV. It creates statutory minorities and to say that the thing will last for ten years only is to forget the lesson of the past……But the result was the partition of the Country”. He suggested” if there are any safeguards or any encouragement necessary for the backward classes or certain other classes, there might be other means namely, giving scholarship to deserving students, giving other financial help, opening institutions and other facilities which are necessary for their amelioration and lifting up; but to perpetuate division in body politic, to perpetuate division in the nation, would be detrimental to the healthy growth of the nation and would do an incalculable harm to us and our prosperity”.

During six decades the country has grown from 10 states to 28 states with seven Union Territories. The population has grown from 36 crores to 1.2 billion; it has become sixth largest economy in the world; the literacy rate has grown; and the country is today a nuclear power. Inspite of this progress, country's track record to fight against poverty, illiteracy and corruption are shockingly by below the poverty line. The largest democracy in the world has moved in the direction of instability and crisis of governability. The gradual decline in value system, erosion in political order and a deepening of social and economic crisis have brought the Indian political system to cross roads. Now the time is ripe for the people and its leaders to take a decision about the future course of action.

It is no denying a fact that despite all those shortcomings, the people of India have reposed their faith in the democratic process, they maintained the democratic system. But democracy gets strong roots where its plantation proceeds from social to economic and then to political. In India, instead of social democracy taking strong roots ahead, the economic and political democracy arrived earlier. As long as equality and social justice are not visibly present, only voting rights can not bring about change in the profile of a society which was under alien control for centuries.

Today, in the 21^st Century can we say that the real power to govern this country is vested in its people? Often question arises that does the Constitution in true terms express the will of the people or it has just become a tool in the hands of some hungry politicians? Are the people of India in real terms assured of justice, liberty, equality and fraternity? Is the common man receiving justice? Does equality really prevail? Has the Constitution not failed to translate noble principles into practical instruments? Its glaring inadequacy is seen in the dispensation of justice, protection of basic liberties enforcement of bureaucratic accountability and appointments of constitutional functionaries.

The nature of the Constitution of India is not Indian. The Constitutions of USA and Britain has been copied. Some articles have been borrowed from the Constitutions of Ireland, Australia and Canada besides being dependent upon the Government of India Act 1935. Thus, the very nature of the Indian Constitution is a slavish imitation of the Constitution of these Countries. Due to the mismatch in the nature of the Constitution, it has been amended more than 110 times during last sixty years. On the other hand when we see the Constitution of United States which was presented on 17^th September 1787 with only eleven articles has so far, been amended only twenty seven times. This comparison speaks volume of the mismatch of the Constitution with the Indian condition.

The need for Constitutional review has been a topic widely debated across the Country. The founding fathers of the Indian Constitution who granted more rights to the people without balancing them with their duties, perhaps did not foresee the emergence of present political environment, wherein the political players of the various segments in the country are more interested in fulfilling their individual aspirations than the aspirations of the people. The debate to review the Constitution started right from the first decade of the enforcement Constitution and within two years of its coming into force, it was required to be amended vide first amendment Bill 1951.

During the period from 1950 to 1967, the Parliament and most of the state assemblies were under the rule of the Congress Party. But after 1967 non-congress coalitions took over the reign of power in several northern states. During this period several issues pertaining to union-state relations cropped up. In the period following fourth General Election there was wide spread concern over the phenomenon of unprincipled defections. The problem came up for discussion in the Lok Sabha on 8 December in 1967. The Parliament adopted a resolution which said” The House is of opinion that a high level committee consisting of representatives of political parties and Constitutional experts be setup immediately by Government to consider the problem of legislators changing their allegiance from one party to another and their frequent crossing of the floor in all its aspects, and make recommendations in this regard”. Following Parliament resolution, Y B Chavan (Home Minister) committee was formed which addressed variety of issues including the problem of defections.

Subsequently the Congress president D. K Barooah appointed a committee on 26 Feb 1976 to study the question of amendment of the Constitution. The 12 member committee headed by Sardar Swarn Singh submitted its report to the Congress President in April 1976. The committee in its recommendation touched upon wide range of issues including the Preamble, Directive Principles, Power of Parliament to amend Constitution, Election matters, disqualification of membership of House or State legislature etc.

On 27- October 1976 the 42^nd Amendment Bill was presented in the Lok Sabha. The Prime Minister Mrs. Indira Gandhi in her speech said that the purpose of the Bill was “To remedy the anomalies that have long been noticed and to overcome obstacles put up by economic and political vested interest”. She said “the Bill was responsive to the aspirations of the people and reflects the realities of the present time and the future”. The Bill was passed in the Lok Sabha with 4 against it and 366 in favour and in Rajya Sabha passed by 190 Votes in its favour and none against it. The amendment led to imposition of Emergency in the country which is a dark period of the Indian democracy.

After change of the Government in 1977, the then Prime Minster Morarji Desai appointed a committee of the Members of Parliament and subsequently set up a sub-committee of the cabinet mainly to correct imbalance in the Constitution caused by some provisions of the 42^nd amendment. In 1983, a committee was constituted under the chairmanship of justice R S Sarkaria with fairly wide ranging terms of reference.

The NDA in its National Agenda for Governance issued as its Election Manifesto had pledged to appoint a commission to review the Constitution. The pledge was affirmed in the President’s address to the Parliament on 22 February 2000. Accordingly on 23^rd February 2000 the President of India appointed II- member Commission headed by Justice M N Venkatachaliah, Former Chief Justice of India. The Commission was named as “The National Commission to review the working of the Constitution“. The terms of reference of the Commission stated - The commission shall examine, in the light of the experiences of the past 50 years, as to how best the Constitution can respond to the changing needs of efficient, smooth and effective system of governance and socio- economic development of modern India within the framework of Parliamentary democracy and to recommend changes, if any, that are required in the provisions of the Constitution without interfering with its basic structure or features.” The Drafting and Editorial Committee of the commission submitted the complete Draft Report to the chairperson on 15 February, 2002. It is not known as to what action was taken thereafter.

During last two decades there have been persistent demands from the civil society, some NGOs, academics, Constitutional scholars and others to have a comprehensive review of the Constitution. Several books and large number of articles and research papers are published, and numbers of seminars have been organized on this topic. There is a general feeling that a review of the Constitution will have a positive impact on the system which will neutralize the hurdles in governance. A Constitution is meant to facilitate the working of the government and administration and also to guide other structures of the country. The static form of the Constitution will not be able to meet the challenges of the situations and requirement of the changing world.

Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru while speaking on the Draft Constitution on November 8, 1948 said “The Constitution is after all some kind of legal body given to the ways of Government and the life of the people. A Constitution if it is out of touch with the people’s life, aims and aspirations becomes rather empty, if it falls behind those aims, it drags the people down. It should be something ahead to keep people’s eyes and minds made up to a certain high mark... Remember this that while we want this Constitution to be as solid and as permanent a structure as we can make it... there should be certain flexibility. If you make anything rigid and permanent you stop a nation’s growth, the growth of a living, vital, organic people”. Pandit Nehru reiterated this view over and over again on different occasions.

It is now high time that instead of amending one clause or the other of the Constitution, we must gather courage to review the suitability of this Constitution to the people, culture and civilisation of this country. It must be emphasised that a Constitution of the country has to be deeply rooted to the cultural and civilisational ethos of the country.

Recent Political Turmoil inside the Communist Party of China

Dr. Binod Singh

The Downfall of Bo Xilai

While the world is busy in finding a peaceful solution for Syrian crisis, and saving the Euro Zone, the world’s largest Communist Party of China (CPC) is currently undergoing a power struggle where one of the most ambitious party leaders of Chongqing, Mr. Bo Xilai was removed last week. The outgoing Hu-Wen administration seems determined to clean the house before handing over the power to new generation of Chinese leaders in the late autumn this year.

This incident has generated a huge debate behind the fire walls on the Chinese internet. The demise of Bo Xilai has been termed as one of the most significant event after the downfall of reform minded Chinese Premier Zhao Ziyang in 1989. After all, Bo Xilai was seen as the rising star of the princeling group in China. He was the son of Bo Yibo, another reformist leader during the time of Deng Xiaoping. Before shifting to Chongqing, Bo Xilai was the commerce minister of China (2002-2007). Earlier he has been at the helm of affairs in the province of Liaoning. Mr. Wang Dejinag, currently a vice premier has been assigned to look after the Chongqing Municipality.

The story unfolded when one of the Vice Mayor of the Chongqing city, Mr. Wang Lijun was denied asylum when he entered the American consulate in Chengdu. ¹ Wang was the head of Chongqing public security bureau and instrumental in cleaning the city from 3000 brothels and 100 of city gangs. He was especially shifted from Liaoning province (the den of all the major gangs in northern China) to the Chongqing municipality by the leader Bo Xilai, when the latter joined as the party secretary in 2007. Currently Mr. Wang is under surveillance and was not allowed to take part in the recently concluded NPC and CPPCC sessions. He had applied for asylum fearing threat to his life by making him political scapegoat by certain leaders in the party. But why the United States, the only champion of human rights in the world, has denied him asylum is yet not clear. Perhaps Vice President Xi Jinping was expected to travel to the United States on the invitation of Joe Biden. Giving asylum to Wang would have given a quite wrong signal to the China’s president in-waiting.

What will be the fate of Wang Lijun is very obvious to any observer of Chinese Communist party Politics. If not executed, he will be charged with serious crime of sedition and conspiracy and may spend rest of his life behind bars. But during his trial what all the revelations he will make will certainly decide the fate of many small or big party leaders. Mr. Bo Xilai always liked the media lime light and since he shifted to Chongqing, he has been credited with major economic and social reform. He attempted to bridge the rural urban poverty gap by including the rural dwellers into the city benefit facilities. He organized Red-Singing campaigns which had been popular during the cultural revolution of Mao’s time. What has evolved as Chongqing model in the recent media reports was bitten to dust in a fort night. The indication was very clear in the Premier Wen’s press conference on 15^th March after the end of NPC session. In response to a question from AFP journalist, Wen indicated very clearly that a proper investigation will take place and law will take its own course.

Political Reform not on the Cards

On the issue of democracy and popular elections in China, Mr. Li Zhao Xing, the spokesperson for the 12^th NPC & CPPCC, made it very clear that it is too early for China to go for direct election of its leaders, with universal suffrage. China is the largest nation in the world and geographically it is very diverse. There are hundreds of villages still not connected by any transport communication. Currently the Chinese society is also very imbalanced economically; hence it is early for China to go for popular voting.

Now, what would the next course of political reforms in the country is not yet clear. But one thing is very clear that the Chinese Communist Party is intolerant of any disciplinary misbehavior by whosoever it may be. It is premature to conclude that the downfall of Bo Xilai has already exposed the factional struggle inside the party. Earlier the false news of Jiang Zemin (ex Chinese President) had created similar controversies but the party managed to get hold of the editor of Hong Kong Based magazine, who is currently facing trial. Bo many not find any sympathizer in the top leadership who can openly come in his support, but his demise will make sure that the party is united and still far from disintegrating as some observers have predicted. Factionalism inside the party is prevalent from the very beginning, as it is the nature of any political party in the world. Some time it is less visible, but some time it is more when heads roll.

The Rise of Fifth Generation Leaders

In the fall of 2012, China will undergo a major transition in leadership. Xi Jinping, China’s current vice president, is expected to replace Hu Jintao as general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party and as president of Chi¬na. With this change comes a new generation of Chinese leaders, the rise of “fifth generation”. Seven out of nine members of the Standing Committee—China’s most pow¬erful decision-making body—will also be replaced. It is yet too early to write an obituary for the demise of Mr. Bo Xilai as he still continues to be a member of the politbureau. But it is clear that he is out of the race for the nine-member standing committee members of the politbureau. Only two members, Mr. Xi Jinping and Li Keqiang are confirmed, as they are all set to take over as president and prime minister of the country later next year. For the rest seven members of the standing committee, the competition is still open. It is believed that the downfall of Mr. Bo Xilai will only make the case of Wang Yang, party secretary of Guangdong province stronger.

As of now it seems that the leadership transition in China will be peaceful and will take place later this year. But what kind of governance this fifth generation of leadership will undertake and how they will keep the party intact is yet unclear.

Reference :

1. American influence in China is on unprecedented rise especially with the designation of Garry Lock as the latest Ambassador in 2011. Mr. Lock has been rated one of the most travelled ambassador in China and has been able to maintained direct contact with individuals in the country. His forefathers were migrated from China 100 years ago and now he is trying to connect his family friends and relatives in order to leverage his influence in the domestic society. But the disappointment came to his fans when Mr. Wang Lijun, the deputy mayor of Chongqing city was denied political asylum when he spend the whole day in the American consulate located in the city of Chengdu.

Chinese Chequers

Vice Admiral (retd) Barry Barathan
Distinguished Fellow, VIF

“ Shi lang, the latest addition to the PLA Navy has triggered speculation, concern, and some anxiety about what next by China as America the lone super power and the supposed to be guardian of the Free World seems to crawl into a fetal position into an embryo of self inflicted economic woes. History teaches those who want to learn and hence it may be worth our while to seek to look at China first and then its Navy next”

Historical Realities

China is an ancient civilization with a history of an occupation by Japan and, also subjugation by the English. China is also fairly insular despite various dynastic divisions and sectarian influences. Its memory is long and never fleeting. Sun Tzu’s has been the guiding light of the Chinese leadership.

“Be extremely subtle to the point of being formless. Be extremely mysterious to the point of being soundless. Thereby you can be the director of the opponent’s fate” -Sun Tzu

English Penetration of China

The first opium war of 1839 saw the subjugation of China in being forced to award concessions to Great Britain. Hong Kong was ceded, with ports of Shanghai and Ghuangzou opened up to trade. The second Opium war in 1858 also resulted in Chinese defeat. More ports were opened up along with rights for foreigners to travel into interior China. To date the Chinese remember this with a quiet but intense outrage.

Japanese Occupation

The rape of Nanking, Japanese occupation of China in early 20th century during the Second World War, was perhaps the darkest period in East Asian history. The Chinese claim to have lost around 25 million people in this conflict. It is replete with stories of unimaginable atrocities by the occupying Japanese military. China is still quietly licking its wounds.

Communist China –Emerging Definiteness

October 1949 is the watershed for the Chinese with the advent of Communism. Whatever happened or did not happen, an emerging definiteness became the start point of Chinese rise in the 20th century. In six decades the Middle kingdom has arrived on the International arena. Its leadership is consistent with a constancy of purpose. Mostly phlegmatic in style, the Chinese polity has osmotic ally optimized its position in the World’s stage. The World may not like its posturing or its new wealth but can no longer discount its positioning! Therein remains the denouement of the red dragon.

The Middle Kingdom Response

When the communists took power, the official name for China has been “ZHONGHNA RENMIN GONGHEGUO” (Middle Glorious People’s Republican Country or in English; the People’s Republic of China). It believes itself and in its destiny with a resolve never to allow history to repeat the aberration of occupation in its land that was after all between “Heaven and Earth”

The World did not take any serious notice; The West flush with success in World War II was pre occupied with the Soviet and Warsaw pact. Post collapse of the Soviet Union, the war on terrorism kept it on its toes. The East on an economic high, though conscious of China, was confident that the West would guard its backwaters. It also believed that a backward China would not pose any immediate threat. The South led by India and Nehru felt that Panchsheel was the answer to Asia. The sixties changed all that with the PRC carving out an independent path for itself away from the Soviet style of communism and economic strategy. The brief Indo-China 1962 conflict changed the statics of South Asia. India and Russia on one side with China Pakistan aligned against them. The admittance of China in the UN Security Council, its military nuclear stature, growing global economic clout and de-recognition of Taiwan were all part of a well directed, and orchestrated Chinese strategy. China for now, seems well suited to its oligarchic leadership style of combining, osmosis of patient effort and optimizing opportunity across the span of International Relationships. Its maritime strategy is embedded within this approach. It believes its sovereign security lies in the Oceans of the World.

Even a cursory analysis of the Middle kingdom’s performance today highlights continuity and constancy in:

A National Commitment to Stability

Its commitment to internal stability even by use of force, wherever and whenever necessary, is remarkable. China’s leadership places the highest priority on stability post the turmoil of the Cultural Revolution of the 1970’s. It internally uses an iron hand with an iron gauntlet.

Sustained Strategy

China has framed its macro objectives in the context of five-year plans, with clearly defined targets and policy initiatives designed to achieve targets with a high degree of accountability. It is unique, that Communist China follows liberal economic policies with flexibility. The recently enacted 12th Five-Year Plan that has shifted from the highly successful producer model of the past 30 years to a flourishing consumer society is an illustrious example.

Aligned Policies

Despite vastness of geography and immensity, all its policies are aligned with its strategy of sustaining itself in the long term

Liberal Economics

In six decades, it has displayed a strong economic dynamism with sound regulation and market reforms. Willingness to learn from within and outside is a key characteristic of its regimes openness to change.

Domestic Thrift

A domestic saving rate in excess of 50% has shielded China from external shocks. It has swelled the foreign-exchange reserves that has served China well and aided economic development. The Country now stands ready to absorb some of that surplus saving to focus on internal demand.

Domestic Servicing and Consumption

Robust plans are afoot to increase both service and consumption percentages of China with a salutary impact on its overall GDP. Rural to urban migration is also on the increase with a positive impact on accelerated infrastructural growth.

Education

China is well on its way to a, knowledge- and industry based economy. English, mathematics, sciences, computer learning and history are part of Chinese schools and colleges. Literacy rates are growing rapidly. Chinese universities now graduate more than 1.5 million engineers and scientists annually. The country regularly sends its PLA officer in the guise of students to America, the West, Europe and Russia. Interestingly, more PLA officers know Hindi than what India realizes.

Foreign Direct Investment

PRC attracts FDI. In 2010 the foreign direct investment in China was estimated to be around 106 billion US dollars and rising. In stark comparison India’s FDI is about 4.5 billion dollars. This Huge FDI is the catalyst to its accelerated growth.

Innovation and Cloning

China innovates and clones unmindful of IPR violations. China is fourth and rising in terms of international patent applications. Its research-and-development share of GDP is projected to be 2.5 % by 2015, twice of what was in 2002. It is focusing on innovation-based “strategic emerging industries” – energy conservation, new-generation information technology, biotechnology, high-end equipment manufacturing, renewable energy, alternative materials, and autos running on alternative fuels. Its consciousness resource management strategy is equally sound as evident in its R&D investment.

An Evolving Military Strategy

“China is a riddle, wrapped in an enigma and encircled, (as the Internet gurus inform us) by The Great Firewall of China” Joel Bowman

This is integral in China’s mind set and its continuum of comprehensive National Power. It encompasses a maritime vision in both the short and long term. The Chinese understanding of short, being around 30/40 years and long about 100 years. Embedded in this is a resolve never to be occupied as happened twice in their long history. Its increasing Global reach is complimentary to this idea.

It is subtly adopting a strategy of influence and hold through, arms transfer, military assistance, and aid in direct defiance of American Global interests. It knows that its trade surplus with the latter provides it a position of strength and power to play then game and guard its interests.

A grand master in International relationships the red dragon skillfully uses its ancient cultural instinct, its potent economic strength, it’s rising military potential, nuclear weapons capability to let the World know that the China can no longer be taken lightly less alone ignored.

(Next article in series on China’s maritime strategy)

The Lessons Of State Elections, 2012

Dr. M.N. Buch

Visiting Fellow, VIF

The Election Commission has successfully conducted general elections to State Assemblies in Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Punjab, Goa and Manipur. The results were declared on 6^th March, 2012. The Commission is to be complimented on ensuring that even in insurgency hit Manipur the elections were held under tight security in which voters felt safe to cast their votes and there was an excellent turnout of voters. Even in Uttar Pradesh, where it was feared that the elections would be violent, the Election Commission very competently saw to it that peace was maintained and the elections were free and fair. It had been alleged that S.Y. Qureshi, the Chief Election Commissioner, would be biased towards the Congress, but he deserves unstinting praise for the completely bias free election conducted under his directions. The results of the elections are proof of his fairness and impariality because in three States out of five, including in Uttar Pradesh, which is the most populous State, the Congress did very badly indeed. We should be proud of this officer and the Commission headed by him.

There are lessons to be learnt from this election and the first and most important is that the 2012 elections are witness to the decline of the two major parties which can be considered national. The Congress has a presence in every State, has always been considered a middle of the road party and is the party which has been in power longest at the national level. In Bihar and Uttar Pradesh the party has been virtually wiped out, which does not speak highly of its prospects in the coming elections in 2014. Similarly BJP, which has an imposing presence in many States, has fared badly except in Goa. If the second national level party, BJP, is also not to be a serious contender in the 2014 elections, we are bound to have a situation in which there is a splintered parliament and no party would have the strength to lead a stable coalition in which junior partners in the coalition cannot call the tune. A weak coalition means that policies which are in the national interest, though not necessarily in the interest of a component party, cannot be framed or implemented and the government, therefore, would never rise above a lame duck position.

In the case of BJP the party faces a major dilemma. It has a cadre, largely of the RSS, which means that it has a grass-root presence. At the same time its secular credentials are in doubt and there is a popular perception that the party has a somewhat narrow Hindutva agenda, which makes it unacceptable to large sections of people, especially in Southern and Eastern India. If the party wants to come to power at the Centre it was to widen its base in order to increase its acceptability. In order to widen the base the party must abandon a narrow Hindutva programme, but here it runs the danger of losing the RSS cadre. The party, therefore, will have to build a cadre separate from RSS in order to retain a grass-root presence, while moving its own agenda towards a more secular, centrist stance. It remains to be seen whether the party has the courage to take these hard decisions.

When one reads the manifesto of BJP no clear picture emerges about the party’s vision of the India of the future, nor does it place before the people the party’s stand on overall development and sectoral development. In broad terms the party is not clear whether it wants a socialist economy, a mixed economy or an economy in which the private sector has the major role and the public sector is peripheral. There is no specific statement on infrastructure development and role of the State in this behalf, nor is there a clear statement about the education policy for the future and how the State will ensure that high quality education is available to every child in India. There is no policy about health care; the party does not state what the agriculturist can expect of it in the coming years, not the industrialist, the businessman or the worker. Margaret Thatcher, on becoming the Prime Minister of Britain, stated that she would dismantle socialism and then steadfastly in the next eleven years she went about achieving her objective. What course has BJP set itself? Only if BJP comes out with a picture of what people can expect from a BJP government in terms of development in its widest context, will people have a fair chance of deciding whether BJP has a programme which would be of benefit to India and, therefore, they can vote it to power.

The problem with the Congress is not one of acceptability but is the more existentialist question of whether there is such a thing as the Congress party. One senior Congress leader told me that anyone who thinks that there is a Congress party is a fool and that it is the private fiefdom of the Nehru-Gandhi family, to which all Congressmen owe their existence and to whom they have to swear loyalty. This became amply clear in the recent Uttar Pradesh elections. The Congress put all its eggs in the Gandhi family basket. Rahul Gandhi was the star performer who, under suitable tutelage, ran the election campaign in the field, with his sister putting in a star guest appearance and his ailing mother providing support from the sidelines.

What did Rahul Gandhi offer? A circus that might have had some relevance about forty years ago but which is totally obsolete in the India of today. Therefore, the star performer spent time in a Dalit household in which he kept a two-day stubble on his chin. He went on stage, made meaningless speeches, resorted to dramatics and publicly tore a manifesto of the Samajwadi Party which paper, however, was not the manifesto but just a miscellaneous bunch of papers of no consequence. He went to constituencies that had a sizable Muslim presence and there he sported a beard so that in looks he could appear to be Muslim. The Muslims were promised reservation in jobs, an enquiry into the Batala House encounter and many empty promises to protect the Muslims. The agenda was obviously communal because nothing positive was mentioned about Muslim education, emancipation of Muslim women, a development agenda based on job creation rather than just reservations, economic uplift and improvement of the Muslim social structure. What Rahul Gandhi offered would probably have worked four decades ago when the Muslims voted en masse. It did not work in 2012. Personal security, notwithstanding aberrations, including Bombay in 1993 and Gujarat in 2002, is now taken as a right by Muslims. The Muslims are aware of their backwardness, but they have done introspection and are prepared to accept that it is their low level of education which is a major factor in keeping them backward. The average Muslim wants access to education, vocational training for children which can make them employable, creation of job opportunities through economic development and equal opportunities in employment coupled with affirmative action. Reservation is the least of the Muslim priorities. On none of these issues did Rahul Gandhi or the Congress make any significant contribution, which has caused the Muslims to turn away from the Congress.

The communal card no longer holds validity in today’s India. Nitish Kumar realised this and his entire election campaign was based on a development agenda. That is why his BJP partners were able to get Muslim votes in Bihar. In Gujarat Narendra Modi never speaks of the Muslims and 2002 notwithstanding, the development momentum which has been unleashed in Gujarat has also improved economic opportunities for the Muslims, benefitted them in improving their economic status and, therefore, has brought about a better law and order environment in the State. Therefore, in local body elections a number of Muslim candidates preferred the BJP and were successful in the elections. This point is made not as an apology for Narendra Modi, but rather as a pointer to what the Muslim needs. No Indian Muslim wants separation from India nor would he like to migrate to Pakistan. Every Indian Muslim accepts India as his own country. This has buried the ghost of 1947 and political parties should not try to revive it. The Muslim wants education for his children, safety for himself, honour and dignity for his women folk and job opportunities and a business environment in which the Muslim can prosper. The party which gives him this, which is exactly what every other community wants, will win the next election. Rahul Gandhi’s 2012 agenda promises none of these and does not bode well for the party.

The Congress, like BJP, has not placed before the people any worthwhile agenda of governance which could enable the people to decide whether the Congress is the right party to be voted to power. At least Indira Gandhi gave such slogans as “gareebi hataao”. Sonia Gandhi’s Congress does not even give this sort of a slogan. How can a party which has no worthwhile economic agenda to offer, but is dependent almost entirely on caste and an effort to woo voters on account of religion call itself a national party and hope that the people of twenty-first century India will vote it to power?

The entire planning process set in motion by Jawaharlal Nehru with the first Five-Year Plan was as much an economic statement as a political one. The Plan, with its priorities, was and is a government document, but because it is approved by a government whose composition has to be political, it is also a statement of the ruling party’s ideology and programmes. That was perhaps true for the five initial Plans. Thereafter the planning process has become bureaucratic rather than reflective of the wider thinking of government and the means of converting this thinking into a concrete plan of action. Unless the Congress Party once again begins to take the people of India into confidence about where they want lead India to, the party can neither aspire for national power, nor deserve it.

The growth of regional parties is a repeat of what happened after the emergency and the defeat of Indira Gandhi in 1977. In the last two decades of the twentieth century one saw signs of reemergence of national parties, including the Left Front. 2012 has reversed this trend and the regional parties are becoming powerful. As I have already stated, this is not a promising sign.

The government of Atal Bihari Vajpayee and the two governments presided over by Dr. Manmohan Singh have had to face the same dilemma, generally speaking from the same opposition parties, which were or are in coalition with the party in power, that is, the most outrageous demands from coalition partners and the continuous threat of withdrawal of support, which would cause the government to collapse. In turn this has led to the dominant partners of the coalition continually striving to retain power and, for that purpose, to make totally unacceptable concessions to the alliance partners.

Let us take the current scenario. The scheme of the Constitution is federal, with strong centripetal forces. The Constitution gives the States certain independent powers and also prescribes the relationship between the state governments and the federal government. As per List 1 and 2 of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution, the exclusive powers of the Union and the States are prescribed. If federalism demands that the Central Government should not dabble in state affairs, it also demands that the States should not intrude into areas where the Central Government has the constitutional authority. For example, foreign relations and international treaties are exclusively within the domain of the Centre as per Entries 10 and 14 of List 1 of the Seventh Schedule. Similarly, as per Item 221 List 1 of the Seventh Schedule Railways are within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Centre. No State Government has the right to interfere in these matters or to force the Central Government to adopt a particular policy dictated by the State. The Prime Minister wanted to make certain concessions to Bangladesh, of which a treaty on the sharing of the waters of Teesta River was one of the components. It is legitimate for the Chief Minister of West Bengal to put forward the case of the State regarding the consequences of the Teesta water treaty, but it is neither legitimate for her to block the treaty or for the Prime Minister to surrender to the demands of a Chief Minister. A treaty with a neighbouring country which benefits both is more important than the rights of a riparian State in India. Unfortunately the equation within Parliament which has made Mamata Banerjee’s party a key factor in supporting government seems to have outweighed the considerations of an amicable relationship with Bangladesh. The Central Government should have consulted the West Bengal Government, but for the West Bengal Government to have blocked an international treaty which had larger ramification than those within West Bengal alone is itself a breach of the federal principle. This has been possible only because the electorate has given to India a hung parliament in which compromise has replaced principled policy as a means of government.

The latest fiasco over the railway budget explains the danger of the growth of regionalism at the cost of national parties. The railway budget is required to be drawn up by the Union Minister of Railways who, together with his cabinet colleague, is responsible to the House of the People under Article 75(3) of the Constitution. He is not responsible to the chief of the political party to which he belongs and which is a coalition partner. For Mamata to insist that the Railway Minister should resign or be dismissed because of the provisions of the railway budget, of which she did not approve, is a clear violation of federal principle because here it is the Prime Minister and Parliament to whom the Minister is accountable, not Mamata Banerjee. Similarly, for a coalition partner to demand that a particular portfolio should be in the exclusive domain of that party goes against every principle of democratic government. This all the more dangerous because one hears bazaar gossip that the price that the Samajwadi Pary is demanding for its support of the Central Government is that the Defence Ministry be given to Mulayam Singh Yadav. At a time when the Defence Ministry is engaged in the most delicate negotiations for acquisition of weapons and weapon system worth lakh of crores of rupees the Minister should not be changed, especially because Mr. A.K. Anthony has a reputation for total personal integrity. If to save its own skin the Congress party succumbs to these demands, then the party has no right to rule this country. That is one of the major lessons which have emerged from the state elections of 2012.

First and foremost the Prime Minister should have the courage to tell his coalition partners that not only they, but all parties and all State Governments would be consulted in matters of national interest but also that the ultimate decision would be that of Central Government and that would be binding. He must make it clear to the coalition partners that once a decision is taken by the cabinet it applies to everyone, even to those cabinet ministers who come from allied parties and not from the Congress Party. He must also make it clear that beyond a point the coalition partners will not be allowed to dictate terms and if this causes the government to fall fresh elections would be held. Whatever is in the national interest should be done, including a massive effort by the two major parties to ensure that in the next elections the importance of the regional parties is reduced and the major parties get a clear run to bring proper government to India. 

Diplomatic Dilemma: India and UNHRC Resolution against Sri Lanka

Dr. N. Manoharan

Senior Fellow, VIF

The ghosts of war continue to haunt Sri Lanka in one form or the other. Now it has come as US-sponsored resolution at the 19^th session of the United Nations Human Rights Council. The resolution is also backed by France and Norway that once acted as ‘facilitators’ in the peace process between the Government of Sri Lanka and the LTTE. Moved on 06 March 2012, the resolution placed three requests for Sri Lanka:

1. To “implement the constructive recommendations made in the report of the Lessons Learnt Reconciliation Commission” (LLRC) and to “initiate credible and independent actions to ensure justice, equity, accountability and reconciliation for all Sri Lankans.”
2. To “present a comprehensive action plan as expeditiously as possible detailing the steps the Government has taken and will take to implement the LLRC recommendations and also to address alleged violations of international law.”
3. To “accept, advice and technical assistance from the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and relevant special procedures mandate holders on implementing the above-mentioned steps, and requests the Office of the High Commissioner to present a report on the provision of such assistance to the Human Rights Council at its 22nd session”

There are two aspects to the entire debate: one is fixing accountability for excesses committed by the Sri Lankan forces during ‘Eelam War IV’; and the other is the way forward in the form of post-war reconciliation in the island.

Colombo is uncomfortable with both. The Sri Lankan government argues that the problems should be dealt with internally and any solution has to be “home grown”. It cites steps taken so far in this regard. On accountability the Army has appointed a Court of Inquiry as an initial fact-finding mission. For reconciliation the President-appointed LLRC has already submitted its report late last year and the government is in the process of implementing its recommendations. To Colombo, any UN action “would only lead to derailing the ongoing reconciliation process that has been put in place by the government.” Some in the regime go to the extent of arguing that “If we submit to this resolution, Tiger terrorists will raise their head again.”

But the underlying point made by the sponsors of the resolution is that the objective behind the move at UNHRC is not to condemn Sri Lanka but to “sow the seeds of lasting peace.” It is pointed out that the “real reconciliation must be based on accountability, not impunity.” The Court of Inquiry appointed by the Army is considered “too late and too little”. Since it is not independent, its findings may not be impartial. The LLRC contained both positive and negative aspects. On positives, it talked about the need for demilitarisation, investigation of disappearances, apart from acknowledging existence of ethnic grievances; surprisingly, it supported devolution of powers to minorities, although did not spell them out. At the same time, it did not fix accountability for human rights abuses during Eelam War IV. For the collateral damage, the report reasoned it out as a result of LTTE action and military reaction. Most importantly, the LLRC did not give any action plan on the way forward either on reconciliation or devolution. It is only after the introduction of resolution in Geneva on 27 February that talks of roadmap have commenced. Sri Lanka seems to be bit more sensitive to external pressures than to the internal ones.

Given these factors, India’s role is important. In a similar situation in May 2009, India, along with China, Pakistan, and Russia, bailed Sri Lanka out from a Western-sponsored resolution at UNHRC. But what should India do now? Should it support the resolution as demanded by all parliamentarians from Tamil Nadu, or should it oppose the resolution keeping in mind the interest of bilateral ties with Sri Lanka? India’s dilemma is evident when the External Affairs Minister SM Krishna said, “Certainly we will take into account the overall relationship between India and Sri Lanka and the sentiments that are prevalent in our country.” However, in a letter to the present and ex-chief ministers of Tamil Nadu, from where pressure on the Center is increasing to act on the issue, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh sounded less dilemmatic: “We are engaged with all parties in an effort to achieve an outcome that is forward-looking and that ensures that rather than deepening confrontation and mistrust between the concerned parties, a way forward is found on issues related to accountability and reconciliation,"

This is the key. Neither ‘for’ nor ‘against’ the resolution is an ideal way out for the problem. New Delhi has to think out of the box at this juncture. Two options can be explored. One is to act as a ‘mediator’ between the sponsors and the state concerned – Sri Lanka – to rework on the Resolution and make it as a consensus document. For this, two aspects of the resolution – accountability and reconciliation – have to be dissected. The accountability component can be taken-off from the resolution completely and can be addressed separately. Colombo should be persuaded to clear the air on excesses committed by its forces. It could be through a non-partial investigation involving combination of local and international experts. Sri Lankans have to be involved in the exercise to gain acceptability in the country; outsiders have to be included for credibility at the international level.

On reconciliation, Colombo should be made to realise that military defeat of the LTTE was not the end in itself; only a political settlement that addresses grievances of minority communities can lead to lasting peace in the island. Unfortunately, this seems to be not on the priority list of Rajapaksa regime. In a recent interview, President Mahinda Rajapaksa outlined his thoughts on political settlement succinctly when he said, “We are keen on a sustainable political settlement. But it must have wide acceptance, especially in the context of the post-conflict situation.” When this pronouncement is taken seriously, writing on the wall is clear. At the maximum, what is on cards is some arrangement revolving around the existing 13^th amendment. Through 13^th Amendment, the island was divided into various provinces and granted some powers under Provincial List. However, the Provincial Councils always lacked sufficient powers – especially land, police and finance – to run their affairs in an efficient manner. In addition, Colombo wields immense powers of overruling any of Provincial decisions. Instead of strengthening the Provinces, the present government is planning to dilute the present arrangement further. Unless there is genuine power sharing, the Provincial Council arrangement will be mere eyewash. The best option is to go beyond 13^th amendment framework as always insisted by India.

While this will take time to work out, Colombo should meanwhile seriously implement recommendations of the LLRC. There is nothing wrong in presenting an action plan on this to the UNHRC. In that case, the US should be persuaded to take this action plan as the final resolution and passed as a consensual document. The West also should understand Colombo’s constraints and compulsions.

In case Sri Lanka refuses to make international commitment on reconciliation; in case Washington insists on going ahead with the present resolution without any amendments, the second best option for India is to abstain from voting. It would convey a clear-cut message to Colombo: “Our friendship is very important, but that thrives on making commitments and, most importantly, seriously implementing them.” And, to the West, the signal would be “your resolutions will remain mere paper tigers as long as they are away from the reality.”