Sare jahan se (nahi) accha...
If only muttering Vande Mataram could reduce poverty

(column by Mansi Goel)

Vande Mataram, the Indian national song, which inspired many during the British reign to fight for their motherland, is finding itself being made into an object of petty politicking. The UPA government first made it mandatory for everyone to sing it on September 7 (on the 100th anniversary of it being sung in the Indian national assembly), then made it optional when a section of Muslim clerics objected to the diktat complaining that the song amounted to them “worshipping the motherland” (the literal translation of Vande Mataram) and Islam prohibits the apotheosis of any deity.

The opposition BJP lapped up the issue to whip up passions by accusing the government of indulging in minority appeasement. Demagogues in the BJP cited their age-old slogan, “Desh mein rehna hai to Vande Mataram kehna hoga.” Says BJP leader Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi, “It (singing Vande Mataram) doesn’t preach worshipping a deity but is just an expression of your love for your motherland.” The BJP has surely upped the ante; and the objective? To portray itself as the true nationalistic party while branding others as pseudo-secularists.

Controversy is not new to the song. Similar objections had been raised in 1937 when the Congress had decided to take only the first two stanzas of Bankim Chandra Chattopadhyay’s immortal lyric as the national song. But that was then, And now? The pity of it all is that instead of focusing on most urgent debilitating factors of health, literacy and poverty, our politicians and our dear parties continue to garble out support (or opposition) for issues that can best be described as unlettered. If only simply uttering Vande Mataram could solve all the problems that India’s destitute suffer.

(End of Mansi Goel column)

...yeh Hindustan hamaraa...
If only our politicians could follow the examples of people like Gavit

(column by Sanjay Basak)

It makes a great eyeball-grabbing story for television, every time a senior politician is caught accepting bribes or shielding criminals. Minister of State for Home, Manikrao Gavit, was no exception when he was caught on audio-tape talking to a western UP gangster lodged in jail. A TV channel flashed the story for over two hours at a stretch, kicking off a row.

But, instead of defending himself and clinging to the chair, Gavit demanded a thorough probe into the incident. He also shunned all trappings of a ministerial office till cleared of the charge. Political leaders, cutting across party lines, rallied around this Minister. The Home Minister, Shivraj Patil, gave him a clean chit. As Deputy Leader of the opposition in Rajya Sabha, even Sushma Swaraj vouched for his innocence. Interestingly, a CBI investigation into the authenticity of the tape using audio spectrography found the Minister’s voice not matching with that in the tape. Two days later, CBI even arrested two persons, alleging that they were the persons in the taped conversation. Interestingly again, so far, nothing has been done against the TV channel that relayed the fake conversation without verifying its authenticity. But still, what has not been brought out in this controversy is the fact that Gavit, who is known for his clean image, has won a massive number of eight consecutive Lok Sabha polls. His insistence on the probe, as well as his giving up off all ministerial powers till he was cleared of charges, are traits that were seen many ages ago in Indian politics. If only Indian politicians could follow his example... someday...

(End of Sanjay Basak column)

Pull the Syrian carpet from under their feet...
The Syria angle is too important to be ignored; Israel must address it sooner or later

Elmar Brok, Chairman, Committee of Foreign Affairs, European Parliament, Jana Hybaskova, Chairman, Delegation for Relations with Israel, European Parliament, Charles Tannock, Vice President, Human Rights Subcommittee, European Parliament

Powerful countries know that it is dangerous to be seen to fl inch, because enemies take heart and allies’ knees begin to knock. A great power also knows that if it sets out on a military adventure without setting achievable goals, it can get into bad trouble. What’s true for great powers is doubly true for beleaguered Israel, which failed to dismantle Hezbollah’s power over Lebanon. But the Lebanon war’s failure may yet provide an opening to peace if Israel is bold enough to seize it.

The world has two chief aims in the area between Cairo and Teheran: To maintain peace in the wider Middle East so that oil flows freely through the Persian Gulf; to steer the dispute between Israelis and Palestinians toward a settlement that guarantees the safety of Israel in its internationally recognised borders, while meeting the Palestinian people’s legitimate national aspirations for their own state.

The two issues have long been connected, but the main link is now President Bashar Al-Assad’s Syria. Isolated, desperate for allies, Syria has been helping Iran in its quest for regional hegemony. Since Lebanon’s Cedar Revolution evicted Syria last year, the Syrians have sought to haul Lebanon back within their sphere of influence. They back Hezbollah – and help Iran send it weapons – because Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah’s shock troops keep the government in Beirut weak. The Syrians also like to present themselves as the last real Arab defenders of the Palestinian cause. In short, Syria, with its geographical position, its Iranian links and weapons, and its brutal Ba’athist regime, has become the lynchpin of developments between the Mediterranean and the Gulf. To secure Lebanon, and to bring Hamas to the bargaining table with Israel, it is Syria that Israel and the US must deal with, one way or another.

Syria’s position and interests should make it amenable to a deal. Of course, Syria still believes in a “Greater Syria” and never fully accepted Lebanon’s sovereignty. Syrian intelligence and troops – present in Lebanon since 1976 – were forced out in 2005 only under enormous international pressure and $1 billion were lost in smuggling revenues last year, much of which previously fl owed to the Syrian military. Many of the Hezbollah rockets that rained on Israel bore the markings of Syria’s Defence Ministry.

Yet Syria has one redeeming feature: It is a secular country that traditionally recoils from Islamic fundamentalism. Indeed, President Hafez Al-Assad, Bashar’s father, massacred up to 38,000 mainly Sunni fundamentalist Muslim Brotherhood insurgents in Hama in 1982. Today, parts of the ruling Ba’ath elite worry about Syria’s deepening alliance with theocratic Iran and Islamist Hezbollah. That alliance, however, reflects fear, not commitment. The moderate Sunni Gulf Arab emirates, suspicious of growing Shia ascendancy and of Iranian irredentism in the region, have now stopped propping up Syria’s economy due to its alliance with the ayatollahs of Iran. Labelled by the US as a part of the “axis of evil”, Syria has also seen Saudi financial aid dry up and it fears that the trade benefits that would come with ratification of its Association Agreement with the EU will never ever materialize.

Both, Syria’s reluctant alliance with Iran and its economic desperation, provide openings that Israel and the West should test. But what might Syria want? Like most Arabs, Bashar Al-Assad views Israel from the perspective of pan-Arab anguish at Palestinian dispossession, but also sees a chance to use the Palestinians to strengthen his regime’s power by putting his own imprint on any settlement. Like his father, Assad is cautious. So long as Egypt remains neutral, he is unlikely to risk another war with Israel, let alone a war with America or with America and Israel combined.

The big puzzle is what Assad wants with Lebanon. If his aim is a government in Beirut that takes into account Syria’s genuine security concerns, Israel can live with that. Besides, widespread revulsion against Syria for its alleged role in the murder of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri, particularly among Lebanon’s Maronites, Sunnis and Druze, means that Lebanon is unlikely to ever become totally subservient again – that is, unless Hezbollah gets to call the shots.

Israel now faces three options. It can fl inch while pretending not to; it can carry on more or less as before, hoping for some positive new development; or it can try to decouple Syria from Iran and Hezbollah. The latter option is the only scenario that could stop the Islamist drift in the Middle East. But prying Syria from Iran’s embrace means, eventually, reopening the Golan Heights question.

A deal with Syria is not impossible, given the ambiguities in Assad’s position. On the Israeli/American side, it would include recognition that Syria has security interests in Lebanon. If Syria, in turn, accepts Lebanon’s sovereignty, and if it helps force Hezbollah into becoming a political force shorn of its military power, Israel and America ought to persuade Lebanon’s government to accept that Syria and Lebanon need to consult each other in security matters. For Syria, a peace deal would also include an understanding that Israel’s occupation of the Golan Heights is to be settled by serious negotiation, not war. Such a diplomatic opening may be hard for Israel’s Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert, to accept, let alone to sell to Israelis. So America and Europe must help him reach this conclusion.

America and Israel must drop their refusal to talk to Syria. Indeed, the time is ripe to offer assurances to the isolated Syrian regime that blocking Hezbollah’s rearmament, stopping Islamist fighters’ passage into Iraq, and improving the country’s appalling human rights record would bring valuable diplomatic and economic benefits, including a strengthened association agreement with the EU.

Israel would gain much by talking to its enemy. Conscious of its vulnerability to rocket attacks, Israel understands that it needs a defensible state, which is safe from external aggression. Removing Syria as a threat will be a key element in achieving this strategic objective.

(End of Elmar Brok, Jana Hybaskova & Charles Tannock column)