Bush & Mush: Tom & Jerry?
Forget the US threat to bomb Pakistan, thought in both nations is often back to the Stone Age anyway

(column by Vijay Simha)

Of all international engagements, the one between US President George W. Bush and his Pakistan counterpart Pervez Musharraf is the most entertaining. There is barely a dull day and they can run through a range of emotions from a bear-hug to betrayal in the matter of hours. Over the past few days, they’ve done just that. Consider this exchange after their September summit in the US. First, Bush: “When the President (Mush) looks at me in the eye and says the tribal deal is intended to reject the Talibanisation of the people and that there won’t be a Taliban and there won’t be alQaeda, I believe him.” Then, Mush: “I trust President Bush and I have total confidence in him that he desires well for Pakistan and for our region. And I trust him also that he’s trying to do his best to bring peace to the world. And I trust him also that he’s trying to resolve the core issue of the Palestinian dispute.” Finally, Bush: “This is a person with whom I’ve now had a close working relationship for five-and-a-half years. And when he says, if we find – when we find – Osama bin Laden, he will be brought to justice, I believe him.”

It was touching, this show of trust. But, around the same time, Musharraf was also peddling his book In The Line of Fire. There he said the US had threatened to bomb Pakistan into the Stone Age if it didn’t back Bush’s war on terror. This unleashed just what Musharraf may have desired: A huge controversy. Bush smiled indulgently a few days later when Musharraf coyly suggested he couldn’t talk more because of his obligations with the publishers of his book. In such disarming fashion, Bush underscored the truth – the US-Pakistan equation is complex and extremely gratifying to their respective selfishness. Pakistan is the only major ally the US has in the Islamic world (Gulf nations don’t count because they have very little influence on international politics). The US accepts this, it is in fact ready to go the whole hog with Musharraf. Bush gropes without Musharraf on the question of bin Laden. The war on terror is the official glue and both nations have zillions of dollars riding on this.

So how come they can’t get a man they vowed to chase till the end of earth. There are some fascinating recollections in Musharraf’s book. At one place he says Mullah Omar, the cruel Taliban chief, got on to a Honda and vanished, suggesting that Honda use this as a great ad for their product. At another place, he says bin Laden is busy crossing the Pakistan-Afghanistan border back and forth. This should have been enough for Bush to resume bombing, this time in Pakistan as well. After all, what could be more important for a American President: Getting Laden or lose a shift yally. Bush didn’t bomb anything. And when Musharraf came visiting, it looked like both were preparing for life after presidency, perhaps in Washington’s talk circuit.

The only big nation that seems impervious to this side show is China. It has its own deals with the US and Pakistan, and is content to allow the Bush-Mush pair its clowning. But that shouldn’t trivialize the US-Pakistan equation. It is hugely strategic and Pakistan will, in all probability, play an increasing role in influencing US policy on terror. It is also true that both nations have failed to take the lead in a world starving for people to look up to. Bush and Mush oft en come across as caricatures. More like Tom & Jerry.

(End of Vijay Simha column)

Oil & Ardour
Sadly, oil wells can’t buy respect

(column by Nidhi Sharma)

A recent development that has hogged international economic headlines is the strengthening of ties between the leaders of Venezuela and Iran. There seem to be a whole lot of reasons to have brought them together. But has the real reason come to the forefront?

Iran and Venezuela have always shared cordial ties being members of OPEC (Oil and Petroleum Exporting Countries). But lately, they renewed their relationship status. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s recent visit to Caracas was marked by the two nations signing a series of bilateral agreements. The deals mainly focus on setting up a joint petrochemical company, a cement company and a car plant. All this is for a common cause. Iran and Venezuela are heading a group of developing nations that oppose the US. Iran is openly supporting Venezuela for a seat on the UN Security Council against Guatemala, which has the support of the US. Hugo Chávez in turn will use his place in the Security Council to protect Iran from Washington imposing sanctions on it in response to its nuclear ambitions. The latest incident where Chávez called George W. Bush a devil in his speech at the UN General Assembly criticising the American president’s actions, in trying to gather support from other nations, is a Red Herring.

Iran and Venezuela put together produce seven million barrels of oil a day. Apart from that, Iran’s oil reserves are close to 126 billion barrels, while Venezuela holds 77.2 billion barrels. The new oil well, where the two countries have started drilling, is estimated to contain 18 billion barrels of oil. The two oil rich nations have played their cards very well by engaging the world in issues like nuclear program & multi-polar world. They have their energy resources right in place; after all, most international conflicts are fuelled by petroleum. The onus now is on how the US and its allies respond to this new pact.

(End of Nidhi Sharma column)

The words are empty, the war loaded
Islam and Christianity have enough to worry about; God is the least

(column by Kalyan Upadhyay)

When Benedict XVI became the Pope, interesting times were predicted. He isn’t letting us down either: With a million things to worry about, he chose to refer to the 14th century Byzantine emperor Manuel II Paleologus during his speech at the University of Regensburg in Germany. Former Cardinal Ratzinger, the Pope, quoted Paleologus’s conversation where he had called the teachings of Prophet Mohammad as “evil and inhuman.” Predictably, the Muslim world didn’t let us down either. They protested like they were looking for a chance to. What is of interest is that the highest of- fice at the Vatican chose to use such words at a time of intense conflict and suspicion between the West and the Islamic world.

For centuries, the Roman Catholic Church has had a significant authority over the lives and actions of Christians. Before Renaissance, the church imposed its authority over almost everything a Christian did. It is this influence and the subsequent fear of loss that seems to be pushing the successors of the Holy Roman Empire to stimulate and administer the crusades against its old-new rival – Islam.

The Pope’s words have a sad reflection of subterfuge. They exposed the vulnerability that the Church has come to feel after vague threats by the al Qaeda that it would target non-believers. On the occasion of the fifth anniversary of 9/11, George W. Bush called “terrorism” a “threat to civilisation.” Fortunately, he stopped short of quoting Samuel Huntington and his now famous theory of the “Clash of Civilisations”.

The Pope’s halfhearted apology may not bridge the divide between the two worlds. But an injection of honesty might least help the damage-control exercise. God has oft en been an alibi when man is upto no good. Let’s not do so now.

(End of Kalyan Upadhyay column)

25-yr-old virgins, a campus dream
Lyngdoh wants spotless students to clean up college politics; that’s a good reason why it won’t work

(column by Vijay Simha)

Look at it this way: If James Michael Lyngdoh was asked to suggest ways to clean up India’s student elections a few year earlier, one of the country’s fine acting prospects may have died. Irfan, now a household name, made his mark playing the role of a murderous student politician in Allahabad, in the movie Haasil. It worked because it was so every day. Barely a college exists in India where students are not threatened by peers who have nothing better to do than get violent and build a shady CV with a few murders thrown in. Some weeks ago, a professor in Madhya Pradesh died at the hands of a student mob who thought they would lose the election under the professor’s supervision.

It was a new low. Lyngdoh in fact was asked to do his job before the professor died. Aft er he retired as Chief Election Commissioner, where he did a terrific job of riling people like Narendra Modi by insisting on clean elections in Gujarat, Lyngdoh lives in a magnificent retreat near Hyderabad. He spends his day with plants, books, music and his dog. It’s a bit like having a retired Bill Clinton at home: He’s never going to be still. Lyngdoh got to work with characteristic ardour. His committee on students’ elections reforms has made some very good recommendations (all accepted by the SC). They have the Lyngdoh stamp. He says, for instance, that students can’t contest elections after they reach the age of 25. This should rid colleges of hundreds of troublemakers. Then, Lyngdoh says all these students should have minimum attendance of 75% in class if they are to be eligible for contesting elections.

This is like searching for 25-year-old virgins. You might strike the odd gold, but it’s unwise to bet on it. Third, Lyngdoh has capped the election expenses of each candidate at Rs.5,000. No one in his senses will object to this: What would a student want to spend on anyway in elections barring wining, dining and indulging. Trouble is, sense is not common in Indian colleges. So there’ll be all kinds of ways to get around this stipulation. Fourth, Lyngdoh has banned donations from political parties to fight student elections. Again, who would object to this barring the political parties and their shadowy student outfits. For example, it is impossible to worship any Indian student body without apology. For years, they’ve simply done nothing you can feel truly proud of. The other impormagtant recommendation is the ban on posters. They should be dancing on this, such is the disgust that campaigning in the Delhi University students elections evokes. Put together, the Lyngdoh Committee report is the best news in a long time. Lyngdoh has the guts to do dirty jobs. He’s been like that all his life, especially as a bureaucrat in Bihar.

His ways were not too appreciated in the Election Commission headquarters either, but there was never a stain. Some states like Andhra Pradesh banned student union elections after things got too violent even for the political parties. Cleaning up the political system is a passion with Lyngdoh. He tried it with some success in Jammu and Kashmir by conducting the first widely cheered election there in a long time, and now he’s trying it with students’ body elections. The catch is, Lyngdoh is typically ideal. He’ll need a revolution for his suggestions to work. That’s not going to happen, and nor are his suggestions going to work. This is India 2006, political courage is rare.

(End of Vijay Simha column)