Wednesday, April 13, 2011

RTI IMPLEMENTATION: An issue of grave concern

After Irom Sharmila last year, Anna Hazare wins IIPM's 2011 Rabindranath Tagore Peace Prize of Rs. 1cr. To be handed over on 9th May

How highest government offices are denying RTI implementation

Right to information, or RTI ' being touted as one of the revolutionary achievements of the UPA ' has virtually become a dormant volcano. With an aim to address issues of rampant corruption, fight injustice, lack of accountability and transparency among ministers and bureaucracy, the UPA regime implemented the amended version of RTI in 2005. Information disclosure in India was hitherto restricted by the Official Secrets Act 1923 and various other special laws, which the new RTI Act now relaxes.

The Centre's move to amend sections of the RTI Act negates the very purpose for which the Act had been passed. The Chief Information Commission (CIC), an autonomous body that ensures the implementation of RTI Act, expressed dissatisfaction over non-cooperation of some important state agencies.

Recently, an RTI activist Subash Chandra Agrawal requested the Chief Information Commissioner (CIC) Wajahat Habibullah to issue a notice to the Prime Minister Office (PMO) for non-compliance with RTI in providing information about personal assets of Union ministers. But responding to CIC's request, the PMO said that it needs to take a call from both houses of Parliament. But despite clearance from both the Houses, the PMO is purportedly not declaring it ' meaning denial of the RTI.

In another case, P.D. Bunker, an appellant and an accountant with the Employees Provident Fund Organisation (EPFO), demanded a copy of the CBI report under RTI in the case of M/s Govind Rubber. But the Public Information Office (PIO) of the EPFO denied citing it is confidential. The RTI Act does not recognise 'confidential' as being a ground for denial in Section 8(1). The Sikkim Bhutia Lepcha Apex Committee sought clarification from the Chief Minister Office (CMO) on CM Pawan Chamling's controversial statement during the Jorethang Maghey Mela on a road accident, where three of his adversaries died. But the committee didn't get a desirable response from the CMO.

The UPA government may also bring an amendment which allows rejection of request for information, which is considered 'frivolous and vexatious.' This merits serious concern as it makes non-compliance easier. Information can be withheld or refused whimsically based on this exemption. The proposed amendment favours the information provider who would be only too happy to reject many of the requests on flimsy grounds. For the RTI Act to manifest its benefits, information should be viewed from both the information-seeker and the providers' angle. The amendment would demean the interests of the information seeker. The spirit of this citizen-centric legislation that brought in a paradigm shift in the citizen-government relationship is being dampened.

For More IIPM Info, Visit below mentioned IIPM articles.
IIPM Marches Ahead in B-School Rankings...
IIPM in sync with the best of the business world.....
IIPM BBA MBA Institute: Student Notice Board

Indian universities and higher education institutes seem to be caught in a time warp teaching things
Best Colleges for Vocational Courses in India
INDIA'S BEST COLLEGES, INSTITUTES and UNIVERSITIES

Friday, April 08, 2011

PIRACY TERROR FUNDING: The silicon terrorism

After Irom Sharmila last year, Anna Hazare wins IIPM's 2011 Rabindranath Tagore Peace Prize of Rs. 1cr. To be handed over on 9th May

How piracy is funding the global terrorism?

The Hurt Locker, a story on Iraq war and winner of six Academy Awards, may be just another movie in the line of terrorism, but it took war on piracy to an interesting turn. One of the scenes in the movie, where Christopher Sayegh (as Beckham) sells pirated DVDs and various electronic items outside the Jeremy Renner's military base, may not be the climax, but has a significant role in the theme of the film. The pirated DVDs, which are sold for about $1 each, are not only a major source of terror funding in the Middle-East, but are sources of minting money for global terror groups.

On May 2010, Voltage Pictures, the production company of The Hurt Locker, sued thousands of computer users who downloaded pirated copies of the film and filed complaints against 5,000 unidentified BitTorrent users with the US District Court (largest lawsuit of its kind). In addition, it demanded $1,500 from each defendant to release them from the suit. This case, however, may be one-of-its-kind, but it would surely go a long way in influencing production companies to take such steps to reduce piracy. According to a report, counterfeiting and piracy cost around $250 billion annually from the movie industry. Terrorists and organised criminal groups are exploiting this huge market in order to fund their evil plans ' for instance, the highly active D-Company that spearheads the major syndicate involved with film piracy in India and sub-continent for the past 25 years. In 2004, an Interpol report revealed that intellectual property crimes (illegal CDs manufacturing) are a growing resource for terrorist groups from Northern Ireland to the Arab world, including Al-Qaida and Hezbollah. This mode of terror funding is not only present and practised in Asia and the UK, but also found in Latin American countries like Brazil, Argentina and Paraguay. According to a report by Rand Corporation, Hezbollah receives $20 million annually from proceeds of pirated films in the tri-border area. Moreover, restrictions on release of international movies in countries like China (allows only 20 foreign movies per year) have cost its industry a whopping $2.5 billion in 2005 (the last available data), due to influx of pirated DVDs. Studies say that developing a pirated DVD in South Asian countries costs less than 70 cents and these can be sold in developed countries for around $10 each. Not only is developing a pirated DVD relatively safer and cheaper, the transfer is equally easy. For example, in France, transacting counterfeit products, including pirated DVDs, is punishable by a fine up to $0.19 million and imprisonment up to two years (whereas selling drugs is punishable with 10 years imprisonment along with a fine up to $9.5 million). However, the pirating gets more lucrative not just because of the returns it offers, but also because of the low risk factor. The rate of conviction for piracy is lower compared to that of smuggling drugs. In 2002-03, merely 134 criminals were convicted of piracy while smuggling of drugs pushed around 1.5 million criminals behind the bars in the US alone.

It is just not about saving millions of dollars that finds its way into the terror industry, but actually about several innocent human lives that are eventually hit. While anti-piracy laws will take its own time to stop piracy, a move like Voltage Picture's will certainly deter internet users from downloading pirated movies.

For More IIPM Info, Visit below mentioned IIPM articles.
IIPM Marches Ahead in B-School Rankings...
IIPM in sync with the best of the business world.....
IIPM BBA MBA Institute: Student Notice Board
An array of unconventional career options

Indian universities and higher education institutes seem to be caught in a time warp teaching things

Best Colleges for Vocational Courses in India
INDIA'S BEST COLLEGES, INSTITUTES and UNIVERSITIES

Monday, February 14, 2011

Can India ever match China

INDIA'S BEST COLLEGES, INSTITUTES and UNIVERSITIES

Even horses that have been flogged to death by pundits can be resurrected if you express a point of view that is factual and yet startling. The India-China horse has been flogged many times to death. But new insights or a new way of presenting old and buried facts keep reviving this great debate of the 21st century. Put quite simply, academics, nationalists, strategists, CEOs, politicians, media professionals, think tanks and sundry others keep asking that one question: Can India ever match China? Recent news about China 'officially' overtaking Japan as the second largest economy in the world will once again convulse, confound and titillate all those who have a passion for comparing India with China.

Let us start with a fact that most Indians are either unaware of, or prefer to ignore since our sense of history is as strong as our performance at the Olympic Games. Professor Emeritus of London School of Economics Meghnad Desai has written a new book called The Rediscovery of India. Right at the beginning, this is how Desai tries to put the India-China comparison in perspective in his own words: ' India, unlike China, was never a unitary or even a single federal state through much of its history. In his fascinating one volume history of India, John Keay has a diagram showing how much of India's territory was controlled , over the last three millennia, by any ruling dynasty. The contrast with China is striking. For China, once you leave a turbulent period during 300-200 BC, there is a continuity in state formation. For India, the reverse is true. After the Maurya period of 400-300 BC, you have to fast forward (almost 2,000 years) to the Mughal rule which controlled a similar percentage of territory'India is at once a young polity and a very old culture.'

Says Shi Yinhong, professor of international relations and director of Centre on American Studies at Renmin University of China, 'China's current leaders and, through them, the majority of the Chinese people have a strong belief in Chineseness and its overwhelming importance to national reform and development. This belief in Chineseness is not like the traditional Confucian one, which treated it as a universally applicable value. It is more particular, not assuming that what is best for China is necessarily best for the world.' Can India ever match China ? Quite clearly, that will raise the hackles of ultra and pseudo nationalists who keep telling us that India was the defining and leading nation state of the world throughout much of history. But the fact is that China has always been bigger than India and will arguably remain bigger even in the future. A large number of analysts and pundits commit the cardinal sin of presuming that India was bigger or superior in some numerically measurable way than China. It never was. Once you acquire that perspective, it leads to much less hand wringing and self-flagellation about how China has raced ahead of India in the last three decades and how it is already an economic superpower even as Indians quibble and argue about the number of citizens still living below the poverty line.

In any case, it would be obscene to be obsessed with facile India-China comparisons when more than 600 million Indians earn less than $ 2 a day and when more than 500 million Indians cannot even write their own name in any language. It would be instructive for Indians who obsess with China to learn a few lessons from the trajectory taken by Pakistan as a nation state in the last 60 odd years. Ever since it became a nation state, Pakistan has defined itself against India and remains obsessed with it. And look where the obsession has taken and is still taking Pakistan. And yet, comparisons - facile or serious - have been the staple of academics, the media and even the world at large. You keep listening to, watching or reading endless debates whether Ricky Ponting is a better batsman than Sachin Tendulkar and whether Rafael Nadal will become a greater tennis player than Roger Federer.

Shorn of the hype, a comparison between India and China serves at least two key purposes. First, it helps us focus more effectively on what needs to be done to even match and catch up with China; forget about racing ahead of it. Second, it helps us seek and identify national strategies that will enable India to do what even now looks improbable, that is catch up with China. Most readers are familiar that China is ahead of India when it comes to economic, human development and military parameters. And yet, it is important to recount and highlight some of the more glaring ways in which China - which was always bigger than India anyway - today outstrips and outperforms India. Can India ever match China ? Both in terms of absolute and per capita GDP, China is today four times bigger and richer than India.

Despite an unthinkable decline of more than 10 per cent, thanks to the recession after the global financial meltdown, the value of exports from China to the United States was about $ 300 billion in 2009. This is almost double the total exports of India to all nations of the world.

China is sitting on more than $ 3,000 billion of foreign exchange reserves. That is 10 times the size of the foreign exchange reserve of India.

China is now the largest automobile market in the world with projected sales of 13 million automobiles in 2010. India remains content with automobile sales of less than 2 million.

China manufactures 10 tons of steel for every ton of steel manufactured by India. This should be a sobering thought for those gloating ever since L. N. Mittal took over Arcelor and Tata Steel acquired Corus!

The average Chinese farmer produces more than 4,500 tons of wheat for every hectare cultivated. The average Indian farmer manages to produce less than 2,500 tons despite the Green Revolution.

More than 95% of China is literate while India can boast of a figure of less than 65%.

China won 100 medals at the Beijing Olympics. Indians were ecstatic with joy when our athletes came back with three medals.

The military budget of India in 2009 was about $ 22 billion; that of China was close to $ 80 billion. Most analysts are convinced that the actual military and strategic budget of China is far more than that.

Indians are very proud of Bollywood and prouder of our democracy. There is a perception that the authoritarian regime of China denies citizens any freedom, including that to be entertained. Well, the total value of business generated by the entertainment industry in India in 2009 was less than $ 23 billion. The size of the entertainment industry in China was more than $ 175 billion in the same period! Can India ever match China ? Any which way you look, a comparison between China and India can be a depressing pastime for Indians. It is no consolation to be told by historians and academics that the difference between China and India was as stark and as glaring even during the 17th century when Imperialism started making serious inroads into Asia. The obvious question is: Why is this so? From a historical perspective, perhaps the fact that China has been a unitary nation state far longer than India makes it easier for the rulers of China to remain focussed on the big picture. It also helps that the ethnic group and language called Han accounts for almost 90% of the population of China while India is a bewildering cocktail of ethnic identities, religions, languages, castes and what not. Says Dani Rodrik, a professor of Political Economy at John F. Kennedy School of Governance, 'The Chinese and their administration are committed to a different idea of the social order and polity: Community-based rather than individualist, state-centric rather than liberal, controlling rather than democratic. China has more than two millennia of history as a diverse society from which to draw potency. It will not merely fold under Anglo-Saxon values and institutions. The best part is that a Chinese Global order will exhibit greater reverence for national sovereignty and more forbearance for national multiplicity. There will be larger room for trailing with various economic models.'

But most people who want to get a sense of what makes China so consistently outperform India are more interested in recent history and also a peep into the future rather than going back to the days of Marco Polo or Huein Tsang.

When you look at things from a more recent historical perspective, two key reasons for China's unquestionably superior performance emerge clearly. The first is the superior ability of the rulers of China to think long term and pursue strategic national interests cold bloodedly and ruthlessly. Amongst all major nation states, India displays a baffling lack of strategic clarity and long-term vision. The second is the superior ability of the Chinese state to deliver clearly defined results in pursuit of strategic national interests. The comparative performance of the Indian state has been abject and pathetic, to say the least. Can India ever match China ? Lets analyse the first reason more closely. China remerged as a nation state after a civil war in 1948 as a Marxist regime. But those who ruled China, starting with Mao Ze Dong, had a clear agenda and a long-term vision that would not be accurately defined as Marxist or Communist. They wanted the Middle Kingdom to re-emerge as the most formidable nation state and country of the world. After 1947, when India emerged as a nation state, our long-term vision was a more idealistic (many would say wooly-headed) desire to be a leading moral force in the world. Look at the last 60 odd years and you will realise that India's foreign policy and approach towards the world has gone through numerous contortions. First, America was a friend; then it became the bad Imperialist and Pakistan backer; now it is being embraced again as a strategic partner. Just one example will suffice to contrast India with China in this context. Even when the Shah of Iran of Iran ruled the nation as an American ally during the 1960s and 70s, China was consistently building bridges with Iran as it recognised the strategic importance of oil. China continues to do that even with the Islamic regime. India actually voted with America and her allies against Iran. It is still paying the price as China walks away with all lucrative oil, gas and construction contracts. Even today, ask the elite of India based in Delhi where and how they see India in the next 30 years and most will have no clue except a few clich's about India 'emerging as an economic powerhouse'. The Chinese are not infected with such strategic confusion.

This lack of strategic posture among the ruling elite of India is something that a majority of common Indians don't understand or would even bother to understand. But what they do understand very painfully is the performance of the Indian state vis a vis the Chinese state. There is no doubt that the Chinese state has spectacularly outperformed the Indian state in delivering 'concrete and measurable' results to its citizens. Says Bob Wheil, an acknowledged China expert working at the US-based China Study Group, 'Some Indians, especially in the upper and middle classes, look to the current policies in China with unrestrained capitalist development tide to a still fairly high degree of state control, as an example to be followed. What they in most cases forget however is that though the rapid Chinese rise in recent years results from many causes, it was the head start provided by the socialist revolution - in better health, education, infrastructure development, and social egalitarianism -that laid the basis for this advance. Lacking a similar revolutionary transformation, India lacked in most key economic and demographic indicators by the late 1970s. Many in the Indian working classes and amongst oppressed communities have not forgotten this lesson. For them, the Chinese model is not its current capitalist market system but the socialist revolution that preceded it under Mao's leadership. In India today, as well as in Nepal, The Philippines and elsewhere, Maoist revolutionaries are a growing force as they try to carry out the social transformation that was never done after 1947.' Can India ever match China ? Quite simply and very starkly, the only effective strategy that the rulers of India can adopt if it can ever match China is to deliver better education, healthcare, sanitation and infrastructure to the aam aadmi. And it is here that the growing failure of the state becomes even more glaring and dangerous. The terrible truth is that even desperately poor parents in Indian cities try very hard not to send their children to government schools. Even if they are tottering on the edges of the poverty line, Indians prefer to go to private clinics and hospitals for treatment. So all those who argue that India needs less state are plain wrong. The Indian state largely works to further enrich the already rich; it simply doesn't work for the poor and the marginalised. That is the reason why despite corruption in both countries being equally rampant, China has moved so far ahead of India in key human development indicators. The truth is: Indians have ended up getting the 'wrong' state.

The solution is simple and India has the unique ability to harness both its imminent demographic dividend and democracy to deliver the goods to citizens. Some years ago, this magazine argued in favour of a United States of India; a new political and administrative system that would replace the colonial legacy left behind by the British. Even Manmohan Singh, in his early days as Prime Minister in 2004, had singled out administrative and bureaucracy reforms as the most important ones in his agenda. The plain fact is that the Indian bureaucracy - used as it is to complete lack of accountability and transparency - will always sabotage and destroy any plan to reform the bureaucracy. This magazine had argued a few years ago that India could be better served if, like in the United States, judges, collectors, police chiefs and district magistrates were 'elected' by voters rather than 'appointed' by the state. That is a revolution that Indians are still awaiting. Till that happens, let us keep agonising over how China beats India and will keep beating India.

For More IIPM Info, Visit below mentioned IIPM articles.
Best Colleges for Vocational Courses in India
When foreign shores beckon
An array of unconventional career options
A language that divides
Ragging rights and wrongs

Indian universities and higher education institutes seem to be caught in a time warp teaching things
Delhi University Students' Union (DUSU): Students' Unions can not be banned
The hunt for hostel and paying guest (PG) accommodation for students
Role of Media in the moulding of youth

Friday, February 11, 2011

KOSOVO CONFLICT: Breathless in Belgrade

INDIA'S BEST COLLEGES, INSTITUTES and UNIVERSITIES

ICJ's decision on Kosovo will help both Belgrade and Pristina to move ahead, says Saurabh Kumar Shahi

'If it is ok for the Kosovar Albanians, why isn't it for the Karabakh Armenians' seems to be the new rhetoric around the world. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) at The Hague has cast off Serbia's case that the assertion of independence of Kosovo had no legal base. In a landmark' and surprisingly unambiguous' judgment, the judges of the UN's top legal body have held with a majority of 10 to 4 that the declaration of independence from Serbia on February 17, 2008 did not violate international law.

The judgment has yet again brought forth the division in the international community. The UN Security Council is deeply fractured over the Western-backed international recognition of Kosovo wherein three of its five members with veto power (the US, UK and France) have accepted the declaration of independence, while China has expressed apprehension, urging the continuance of earlier conciliation agenda. Russia, on the other hand, considers it illegal.

As things stand today, 69 out of 192 sovereign UN member states have officially recognised Kosovo. Majority of the EU (22 out of 27) and NATO (24 out of 28) members have also recognised Kosovo. Among its immediate neighbours, only Serbia refuses to recognise it. Fourteen nations have set up their embassies till now. If recognition touches 100, it will offer fresh impetus for Kosovo's progress and integration with the world.

The nations that contest recognition of Kosovo suggest that such an act in the Balkans, a powder-keg, will further the ethnic claim for greater autonomy and will have severe implications for separatist activities around the globe. Russia, that spent two gory decades to squash a separatist rebellion in Chechnya, has recognised both insurgent Georgian regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia as sovereign states but few have followed its lead. Spain, which has its own problems in Catalonia and Basque regions, has expectedly refused to recognize an independent Kosovo. The ruling will also provide momentum to the separatist movement in the Azerbaijan's Nagorno-Karabakh. International experts are closely watching the implications of the judgment. Dr. Bibi van Ginkel, an expert on separatist militant movement at Clingendael Security and Conflict Programme, believes that since the judgment is not legally binding, individual states can interpret it as they wish. 'Although the judgment is provocative, it will present an outline for diplomats to attempt and launch a functioning relationship between Belgrade and Pristina,' she said while talking to TSI from The Hague. Very slyly, the court appears to have evaded the prickly question of the right of people to self-determination over the right of a sovereign state to territorial integrity. It has instead maintained that Pristina's legitimacy will be decided by the sovereign nations that recognise it and not by the ICJ.

Among other things, the judgment has also reinforced that whether a rebel region can legitimize itself amidst the international community is essentially a political rather than a legal question at the root. The Armenian dominated enclave of Karabakh declared independence from Azerbaijan but it was not recognised by any other sovereign nations, not even Armenia. In case of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, Russia, with all the resources at its disposal, could not muster even a little recognition. As far as Serbia is concerned, it is understandable that the decision has not gone down well with them and they feel cheated.

However, the judgment has also, in its own way, will set the wheel rolling for Belgrade. Serbia has quietly understood that Kosovo has gone forever and it's time to move on. With Russia on its back, Serbia will continue to fight diplomatic battle at international forums, but those will be futile. Belgrade's future lies as a full member of the EU and its amiable relationship with its neighbours. A serious political and economic reform will follow.

For More IIPM Info, Visit below mentioned IIPM articles.
Best Colleges for Vocational Courses in India
When foreign shores beckon
An array of unconventional career options
A language that divides
Ragging rights and wrongs

Indian universities and higher education institutes seem to be caught in a time warp teaching things
Delhi University Students' Union (DUSU): Students' Unions can not be banned
The hunt for hostel and paying guest (PG) accommodation for students
Role of Media in the moulding of youth