Scientists' letter to CMs voicing concern over Koodankulam equipment

The following is a letter written by a group of scientists to the Chief Ministers of Tamil Nadu and Kerala expressing their concern about the use of substandard components in ooudankulam Nuclear Power Plant 1 & 2, and the revelation at this late stage that four valves in a critical safety system were found defective:

To: Hon'ble Chief Minister

Government of Tamil Nadu

Secretariat, Chennai 600 009;

To: Hon'ble Chief Minister

Government of Kerala

Secretariat, Thiruvananthapuram 695001

Copy: Prime Minister's Office

South Block, Raisina Hill, New Delhi 110011

                                                      Date: 14^th of May 2013

Respected Chief Ministers:

We, the below-signed, are scientists from various disciplines who are concerned about the quality of components and equipment used at the Koodankulam Nuclear Power Plant (KKNP) Units 1 & 2. Our concerns arise from recent media reports about the use of substandard components in KKNP 1 & 2, and the revelation at this late stage that four valves in a critical safety system were found defective.

These safety concerns are compounded by the fact that Russian authorities arrested Mr. Sergei Shutov, procurement director of Zio-Podolsk, on corruption charges for having sourced cheaper sub-standard steel for manufacturing components that were used in Russian nuclear installations in Bulgaria, Iran, China and India.  This has led to several complaints of sub-standard components and follow-up investigations in Bulgaria and China. The ramifications of such corruption need to be taken very seriously as they have implications on the long-term safety of the nuclear plant.

As the Chief Ministers of the states hosting and neighbouring the nuclear power plant, the two of you have a responsibility to satisfy yourself and the residents of Tamil Nadu and Kerala that the plant has been constructed to the highest safety standards. Any exercise to assure oneself of the quality of components used will have to be done before the plant is commissioned. Once commissioned, the radioactive environment in sections of the plant will make it impossible to access and test some potentially critical components.

Unfortunately, as we have seen in Fukushima, there is the danger that the impact of a major hazardous event in Koodankulam may not be localized but could spread to larger regions in both Tamil Nadu and Kerala. To reduce such a risk, in the light of recent revelations, we believe that it is important to have a fresh independent and thorough quality inspection of the components used in the two reactors.

We, the below-signed, include scientists who believe that nuclear energy has a legitimate role in securing our energy future and others that believe that nuclear energy is too risky. Through this letter, we are not advocating for or against nuclear energy. All of us are of the opinion that when dealing with complex and potentially dangerous technologies transparency, honesty and a rigorous adherence to the highest quality standards are imperative.   Even the Supreme Court's recent judgment has emphasized the need to ensure the quality of components and systems before operationalising the plant.

We urge you to convey to the Prime Minister and the Department of Atomic Energy that before commissioning the reactors, they should consult independent national experts to formulate an inspection regime and carry out a full-fledged inspection into the safety of KKNP 1 & 2. Such an inspection should pay particular attention to the allegations of sub-standard equipment and components.

	Name	Designation	Dept/Specialization	Affiliation	City
1	Atul Chokshi	Professor	Materials Engg.	IISc	Bangalore
2	Subodh Kumar	Professor	Materials Engg.	IISc	Bangalore
3	Debasis Sengupta	Professor	Oceanography	IISc	Bangalore
4	Bikramjit Basu	Assoc. Professor	Materials Science & Engg	IISc	Bangalore
5	Venu Madhav Govindu	Asst. Professor	Electrical engg	IISc	Bangalore
6	Siddhartha P. Sarma	Assoc. Professor	Molecular biophysics	IISc	Bangalore
7	Vidyanand Nanjundiah	Professor	Ecological sciences	IISc	Bangalore
8	Sanjit Chaterjee	Asst. Professor	Computer sci. & automation	IISc	Bangalore
9	K.S. Gandhi	Professor	Chemical engg	IISc	Bangalore
10	A.G. Menon	Professor	Earth sciences	IISc	Bangalore
11	Bhanu Pratap Das	Senior Professor	Astrophysics	IIA	Bangalore
12	Vandana Shiva		Environmentalsit/Physicist	Navadanya	New Delhi
13	Sushma V. Mallik	Assoc. Professor	Astrophysics	IIA	Bangalore
14	C.V. Mallik	Professor (ret’d)	Astrophysics	IIA	Bangalore
15	Rohini Balakrishnan	Assoc. Professor	Ecological sciences	IISc	Bangalore
16	Mahua Ghare	post-doc	Ecological sciences	Centre for Pollination Studies	Kolkata
17	Ravi Sankar Kottada	Asst. ProfessorI	Materials Engg.	IITM	Chennai
18	Partho Sarothi Ray	Asst. Professor	Phsyics	IISER	Kolkata
19	Shiv Sethi	Assoc. Professor	Astrophysics	RRI	Bangalore
20	Meher Engineer	Professor/ex-director		Bose Institute	Kolkata
21	K.S. Jagadish	Professor (ret’d)	Civil engg	IISc	Bangalore
22	Supratik Chakraborty	Professor		IITB	Mumbai
23	Deepak D’Souza	Assoc. Professor		IISc	Bangalore
24	MJNV Prasad	Asst. Professor	Materials Engg.	IITB	Mumbai
25	Kartik Shanker	Assoc. Professor	Ecological sciences	IISc	Bangalore
26	Dibyendu Chakravarty	Scientist D	Materials Engg.	ARCI	Hyderabad
27	T.A. Abinandanan	Professor	Materials Engg.	IISc	Bangalore
28	K.V.S. Hari	Professor	Elec & comm engg	IISc	Bangalore
29	C.P. Rajendran	Visiting Professor	Earth sciences	IISc	Bangalore
30	Arijit Bishnu	Assoc. Professor		ISI	Kolkata
31	Renee Borges	Professor & Chairperson	Ecological sciences	IISc	Bangalore
32	Lakshmi Saripalli		Astrophysicist	RRI	Bangalore
33	Vijay Chandru	Chairman and CEO	Management/Comp sci. & automation	Strand	Bangalore
34	Sumati Surya	Assoc. Professor	Physics	RRI	Bangalore
35	Sachindeo Vaidya	Assoc. Professor	Physics	IISc	Bangalore
36	Procheta Mallik	none	Physics	none	Bangalore
37	Sushama Yermal	Instructor	Biologist	IISc	Bangalore
38	Palash B. Pal	Professor	Astrophysics	Saha Inst.	Kolkata
39	M.S. Bobji	Assoc. Professor	Mechanical Engg	IISc	Bangalore
40	Gopal Krishna	NASI platinum Jubilee Senior Scientist	Astrophysics	TIFR (retired)/IUCAA	Pune
41	Harish Bhatt	Professor	Astrophysics	IIA	Bangalore
42	Arati Chokshi	none	Astrophysics	none	Bangalore
43	Vinod John	Asst. Professor		IISc	Bangalore
44	Dileep Jatkar	Professor		HCRI	Allahabad
45	Anshuman Maharana	Reader		HCRI	Allahabad
46	Naresh Dadhich	Professor		IUCAA	Pune
47	Vikram Vyas	Professor		Shiv Nadir Univ	UP
48	Krsihnendu Sengupta	Professor		IACS	Kolkata
49	Suvrat Raju	Reader	Physics	TIFR	Bangalore
50	Abhishek Dhar	Professor		TIFR	Bangalore
51	R.I. Kaveri	post-doc	Ecological sciences	IISc	Bangalore
52	Ashok Pati	Professor	Astrophysics	IIA	Bangalore
53	Joseph Samuel	Professor	Physics	RRI	Bangalore
54	Carol Upadhyaya	Professor	Social sciences	NIAS	Bangalore
55	Madan Rao	Professor	Phsyics	RRI	Bangalore
56	Sujay Basu	ex-Professor/director	Energy	Jadavpur Univ/Centre of Energy and Environment Management	Kolkata
57	Prajwal Shastri		Astrophysics	IIA	Bangalore
58	Anjula Gurtoo	Assoc. Professor	Management/Comp sci. & automation	IISc	Bangalore
59	Sudhir Vombatkere	Major General (ret’d)	Civil engg	none	Mysore

Learning the wrong lessons

BRP Bhaskar
Gulf Today

The political leadership has developed a penchant for drawing the wrong conclusions, which does not augur well for Indian democracy.

Time was when the leadership of the Congress party, the premier political organisation, possessed the moral courage and authority to ask a holder of public office accused of misdemeanour to step down and stay out until he is cleared of all charges.

Now the party is in a debilitated state and its leadership has neither the courage nor the authority to act swiftly and decisively at a time of crisis. They vacillated for more than a week before asking Law Minister Ashwani Kumar and Railway Minister Pawan Kumar Bansal, who were caught in acts inconsistent with the solemn oath they took on assumption of office, to put in their papers.

Ashwani Kumar had summoned the officials of the Central Bureau of Investigation, which is probing irregularities in the allocation of coal blocks, and made certain changes in the status report the agency had prepared for submission to the Supreme Court. He also got the agency to show the report to officials of the prime minister’s office and the coal ministry, giving them also the opportunity to make changes in it.

When CBI director Ranjit Sinha acknowledged in an affidavit that the agency had shared the report with the law minister and the officials and that they had made changes in it, government spokesmen sought to justify the interference in the investigation, advancing specious arguments. The law minister claimed he had only made minor verbal changes in the report.

External Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid nonchalantly declared, “The government may be under the scanner but we have a right to find out what is happening.”

The interference of the PMO and the coal ministry constituted a grave impropriety since their acts are under scrutiny in the CBI probe. What’s more, the Supreme Court had specifically instructed the CBI not to share the report with the political executive.

While the government underplayed ministerial and bureaucratic interference in the investigation, the Supreme Court took a dim view of the situation. It described the CBI as a caged bird parroting the words of its many masters.

Pawan Kumar Bansal came under a cloud when the CBI caught his nephew Vijay Singla as he was accepting Rs9 million from a member of the Railway Board alleged as part payment of a hefty bribe for shifting him to another position, which will offer scope for collecting kickbacks in the award of contracts.

In keeping with the current level of political morality, the two ministers sought to brazen out the charges with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh extending silent support. Ashwani Kumar argued that the court’s stinging remarks did not contain any personal reference to him. Bansal claimed he had no business links with his nephew.

When the Congress won the assembly elections in Karnataka, where the Bharatiya Janata Party’s government was embroiled in serious graft charges, Manmohan Singh led an attempt to use the electoral victory to whitewash his beleaguered colleagues. He said it was a verdict against corruption, and the Congress party’s spokesmen attempted to project the Karnataka mandate as implicit rejection of the corruption charge against its own ministers.

Bansal’s continuance as minister became untenable as the CBI’s railgate investigation led to the arrest of some more persons close to him. Since the Supreme Court put off further hearing of the coalgate case until after the summer recess, the government thought there was no need to take an early decision on Ashwani Kumar’s future.

According to media reports, Manmohan Singh was forced to end pussy-footing and seek the resignation of the two ministers when Congress President Sonia Gandhi, realising that procrastination was damaging the party’s image, asked him to resolve the issue without delay. Many believe these reports are part of preparing the ground for Rahul Gandhi’s projection as the prime ministerial candidate ahead of the parliamentary elections due next year. 

It is not just the Congress party that is given to drawing the wrong conclusions from adverse developments. The Karnataka vote has dampened the BJP’s hopes of benefiting from the poor image of the scam-hit Manmohan Singh government. Its leadership appears to be looking up to Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi as the saviour overlooking the reservations of its allies about him in view of his image as an accessory in the communal riots of 2002.

There is a rising demand to take the CBI out of the government’s hands and make it independent. This may be a case of the remedy being worse than the disease. The problem is not that the CBI is under the government but that there is a dearth of men of integrity in the agency and the government. -- Gulf Today, Sharjah, May 14, 2013.

Demons do not dance alone

BRP Bhaskar
Gulf Today

Mutual demonisation has long been a part of the political charade of Indian and Pakistani players, particularly communally motivated elements. When their caricatures of each other come alive, the demons dance in tandem, not alone, as the lyric says.

On April 26 a group of convicts in a Lahore jail attacked and fatally injured 49-year-old Sarabjit Singh, an Indian undergoing life term in two cases. Pakistan said he was injured in a scuffle but unofficial reports suggested the attack was an act of reprisal for the execution of Afzal Guru, a Kashmiri, sentenced to death in the Parliament attack case.

Pakistan refused Indian requests to send Sarabjit Singh home for treatment but allowed relatives to visit him in hospital as he awaited death. His body, handed over to the family, was flown to India for the last rites.

The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP), in a statement, accused the jail authorities of compromising Sarabjit Singh’s security. Not even the most naïve person could believe the assault could be executed without the knowledge and support of prison guards and the authorities, it said.

“Those in Pakistan who take pride in their vengefulness must feel some shame today, if they are capable of that,” it added. “All those elements in India who are no less vengeful, intolerant and fond of jingoism than their Pakistani counterparts would no doubt write their own script now.”

Even before Sarabjit Singh’s body was cremated in his village on Friday, an Indian prisoner in a Jammu jail attacked and critically wounded Sanaullah Haq, a 64-year-old Pakistani convict, undergoing life term there. Jail officials said the attack followed a petty quarrel but Pakistani officials referred to it as an act of revenge.

India turned down Pakistan’s request to send Sanaullah Haq home for treatment but allowed officials of its high commission to visit him at the Chandigarh medical institute where he was admitted.

Ironically, the attack on Sarabjit Singh took place the day a panel comprising five retired judges – three from Pakistan and two from India — began visits to Pakistani jails to look into the condition of Indian prisoners as part of a bilateral effort.  Pakistani authorities presented before it 535 Indian prisoners lodged in three jails. They included 483 fishermen, 11 of them juveniles.   

According to official sources in New Delhi, there are about 7,300 foreigners in Indian jails. Of them, only about 300 are Pakistanis. They include 260 fishermen.

The troubled relations between India and Pakistan and the ire aroused by the terror charges against some render prisoners belonging to one vulnerable to attacks in the other. The prolonged detention of prisoners, including fishermen who ended up in jails only because their boats strayed into the other country’s territorial waters, testifies to the inconsiderate handling of issues by officials on both sides.

The two countries are believed to be still holding several persons taken into custody during the 1965 and 1971 wars, although they do not publicly acknowledge this. Chuck Yeager, an American air force officer stated in his autobiography, published in 1984, that while on assignment in Pakistan he had seen Indian fighter pilots who had been shot down during the 1971 war.

In March 2011, at a meeting at the Home Secretary level, the two countries agreed to release civilian prisoners and fishermen who had served their jail term and whose nationality had been confirmed by the respective governments.  A few months later they exchanged lists of prisoners in each other’s custody. A bilateral mechanism has been created to update the lists periodically.

Both Sarabjtit Singh and Sanaullah Haq were convicted on terrorism charges and spent more than two decades in prison. This is a much longer period than what those given life terms ordinarily spend in jail in the two countries. Although each government claimed its convicted national was an innocent civilian who had inadvertently crossed the border, the possibility that the two were intelligence operatives cannot be ruled out.

In January, an Indian prisoner, Chambail Singh, was killed in a Pakistani jail. His body was sent to India only after two months, and that too without an autopsy report.  Sarabjit Singh’s body too came without an autopsy report. Indian doctors who conducted a second autopsy found that the internal organs had been removed.

If only the two governments learn to respect the human rights of each othe’s prisoners there will be less scope for jingoists of the two sides to cry for blood. -- Gulf Today, Sharjah, May 7, 2013,

Not playing by the rules

BRP Bhaskar

Gulf Today

 

The joint parliamentary committee (JPC) probing the 2G scam has run into a stalemate. The chief of the Central Bureau of Investigation has admitted to sharing with the political executive a progress report on the coal scandal probe which was prepared on a Supreme Court directive. Parliament has transacted little business in recent days with the opposition Bharatiya Janata Party stalling the proceedings demanding Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s resignation on the issue of interference in the coal scam investigation.

All these indicate that the government and the opposition are not playing the game according to the rules.

The JPC was set up to look into allegations of corruption in the allotment of 2G spectrum. Several criminal cases in connection with the scam are under investigation or prosecution, and the accused include A Raja, a former minister belonging to the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam, and several senior officials.

JPC chairman PC Chacko recently circulated a draft report which pins the blame solely on Raja and absolves the Prime Minister and the Finance Minister who were apparently aware of his actions. To beat Chacko’s plan to push the draft through the committee, which is equally divided, with his casting vote, the opposition members have written to Lok Sabha Speaker Meira Kumar saying they have lost confidence in him and asking that he be removed. To gain majority in the committee, Congress members have asked her to disqualify three opposition members citing conflict of interest. 

The JPC mechanism was first tried in 1987 when Rajiv Gandhi’s government faced allegations that the Swedish company Bofors had paid $12 million in kickbacks to secure an order for howitzers. Opposition members pulled out of it saying the chairman, B. Shankaranand, was acting in a partisan manner.

Alladi Aruna, of the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam, which was then an ally of the Congress, stayed on and added a dissenting note to the committee’s report. He said later that Congress members were engaged in a cover-up effort. They did not follow the procedures properly and denied members enough time to study the documents.

The JPC failed to identify the beneficiaries of Bofors payments. The Central Bureau of Investigation, which probed the matter, too could not find them. Ottavio Quattrocchi, an Italian businessman and friend of the Gandhis, whose name came up during the investigation, slipped away.

Between 1992 and 2003 there were three more JPC probes, all into irregularities in the financial market or the commercial sector. Since no member of the government was under the scanner, the committees could complete their work without any hitch. However, there was no meaningful follow-up action.

The 2G JPC has generated more acrimony than any previous probe. Raja offered to testify before it but Chacko turned down the offer. Chacko also rejected the BJP members’ suggestion to summon the Prime Minister and the Finance Minister.    

The poor record of JPCs notwithstanding, political parties still demand setting up of such committees when allegations come up. A proposal to set up a JPC to probe reports of kickbacks in the Agusta Westland helicopter deal, approved by the Rajya Sabha, is awaiting the Lok Sabha’s concurrence.    

CBI director Ranjit Sinha’s admission, in a sworn affidavit, that the agency had shown Law Minister Ashwini Kumar and senior officials of the Prime Minister’s office and the Coal Ministry a report on the progress of the coal scandal investigation before it was submitted to the Supreme Court may prove more troublesome to the government than the confrontation with the opposition in the JPC.

In this investigation, the Coal Ministry is in the position of a suspect since what is being looked into are its alleged wrongdoings. Sharing of the report with officials of the ministry was, therefore, an act of gross impropriety. Since Manmohan Singh personally handled the Coal portfolio at one stage his office’s interest in the investigation cannot be viewed as innocuous.

Sinha’s affidavit does not say whether the agency made any changes in the report at the instance of those who were shown it.  The court is not likely to overlook his silence on this crucial aspect.

The Supreme Court has been keen to ensure that the CBI has functional autonomy, especially in dealing with cases involving members of the political executive. An adverse finding by it on its handling of the coal probe report can have far-reaching consequences. --Gulf Today, Sharjah, April 30, 2013.

New phase in land war

BRP Bhaskar

Gulf Today

 

With the opposition Bharatiya Janata Party agreeing to cooperate in the enactment of a new land acquisition law, the government has crossed a major hurdle in the way of its effort to create an industry-friendly environment. However, it is too early for it to rejoice.

The land acquisition law now in force was enacted by the British in 1894. It gives the state the power to seize citizens’ property for public purposes without their consent and casts no responsibility on the state to rehabilitate and resettle the dispossessed.

Invocation of this law, which is inimical to the interests of vulnerable sections of society like the poor and the marginal farmers, has provoked widespread anger and protest in various parts of the country and stalled implementation of many government and private projects.

In September 2011 the government placed before Parliament a draft law which will allow it to acquire property to meet the requirements of state units as well as public private partnerships (PPPs) and private companies. While land owners’ consent is not required when land is acquired for public sector units, acquisition for PPPs and private sector units will require the consent of 70 per cent and 80 per cent of the owners respectively.

A standing committee of Parliament which examined the draft suggested that the government should not acquire land for PPPs and private companies. The government has not accepted the suggestion.

In a bid to meet criticism from the corporate sector and from civil society groups, the government has made some changes in the draft. Some of its provisions are no doubt an improvement on the colonial law. For instance, it provides for a social impact assessment survey before the government notifies its intention to acquire land and for payment of compensation within a specified period. The proposed compensation is four times the market value for property in rural areas and two times in the urban areas.

The draft also contains provisions which can make the position of the poor worse. For instance, it brings mining within the ambit of ‘public purpose’. Many mines are in areas where the tribal population lives. Extension of the measure to these areas will involve violation of the provisions of the Constitution aimed at protecting the tribes and their homelands. 

The draft has a provision which gives the government the power to acquire land temporarily, for a period of three years, without assuming responsibility for rehabilitation and resettlement.  The government has made temporary provisions of many laws permanent features by repeatedly reissuing notifications on the expiry of the time limit.   

At last week’s all-party meeting the BJP pledged support to the proposed measure after the government accepted some of its suggestions.  Land mafia has grabbed vast tracts of land from marginal farmers in recent months, hoping to profit from the liberal compensation formula. The government agreed to the BJP’s demand that if land has changed hands after the bill was introduced in Parliament half of the compensation must be paid to the original landowner. 

The government is keen to put the new law in place to carry forward economic reforms before its five-year term ends next year. While the measure may have a smooth passage in Parliament, its implementation may lead to an intensification of land wars which, in turn, may invite harsh governmental measures, resulting in bloodshed. Determined local opposition to land acquisition has already blocked huge projects of the UK-based Vedanta group and South Korea’s Posco group in Odisha state for several years.

The state government allowed Vedanta to set up a $1.7 billion bauxite mining project in the Niyamgiri hills. The tribal population objected to it, citing its traditional cultural and religious links with the hills. Last week the Supreme Court ruled that the project cannot be allowed to interfere with the tribes’ religious rights. It said the village councils, and not the state, must decide on their claims. 

For seven years the government has not been able to acquire enough land for Posco to set up the world’s largest integrated steel plant. Repressive measures could not subdue the people. Aware of the people’s mood, the company has been reluctant to take over the land acquired so far. -- Gulf Today, April 22, 2013.

DD to telecast independent films: response to online petition

Film maker Onir Dhar wriotes:

This is historic for Indian cinema! Now you can watch independent films on Doordarshan after 10pm. Thanks for your support on our petition.

When 62 film makers joined my petition to save independent cinema in India, we wanted Doordarshan to telecast independent films. More than 19,700 people including you supported our campaign.
After we delivered these signatures to the Minister of Information and Broadcasting, Mr.Manish Tewari, he promised us to take action and forwarded our suggestions to Prasar Bharathi (Doordarshan).

My friend and fellow filmmaker Nandita Das has shared her thoughts on the save indie campaign in this video:



Share Nandita Das's video with your friends and family, asking them to join us 

For the first time, people-power forced Doordarshan to telecast independent films. Now we can do more and ensure that Mr.Tewari doesn’t ignore our demand to have special cinema screens for independent films.

I feel that this is a great move by the Government to encourage independent films and filmmakers. Together we’ve achieved this milestone, but there is a lot more to do.

Please forward my mail to your contacts and ask them to sign and share my petition.

Looking forward to your continued support.

Thank you so much for taking action,

Onir Dhar via Change.org

PS: Forward my mail to your contacts and ask them to sign my petition. http://change.org/saveindie
 

Afghanistan forcing a rethink

BRP Bhaskar
Gulf Today

Hectic multilateral consultations on Afghanistan are under way in advance of the scheduled withdrawal of American forces, and there are indications that at least some of the players are ready to revise their past approach.

The US pullout, due to begin this year, is expected to be completed by the end of next year.

Indian and Chinese officials are due to meet in Beijing this week to discuss the post-2014 Afghan scenario. This is the first official-level meeting between the two countries on Afghanistan.

The two countries have been holding regular consultations on Central Asia, the Middle East and Africa for some time. However, when China proposed a South Asia dialogue, India baulked, since it did not want to be drawn into discussions on issues such as Kashmir and Tibet.

China explained that it was keen to discuss Afghanistan, where it has investments of more than $3 billion as against India’s $2 billion.  Accordingly, the dialogue theme was narrowed down and talks were scheduled.

China’s concern over Afghanistan’s future is deep. It is in conversation with all those who have a stake in the region. It has been in talks with the United States on the subject. In February, it held trilateral discussions with Russia and India in Moscow. This was followed by another trilateral, this time with Russia and Pakistan, in Beijing.

The only two countries which are not having direct discussions on Afghanistan are India and Pakistan, its immediate neighbours who hold different perspectives. Former Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran said recently that India had offered to work with Pakistan on projects in Afghanistan but there was no response.  

Given the history of discord and distrust between the two countries, Islamabad’s approach is understandable. Pakistan’s involvement with the Taliban and India’s assistance to the Northern Alliance against Islamic militants in that country are factors with the potential to draw them into the whirlpool of faction fights in Afghanistan.

There is a tendency in both India and Pakistan to view Afghan developments in the limited context of their own prickly bilateral relations. Pakistani fears were stoked when former Defence Secretary Leon Panetta talked of a new US defence policy which hinges upon a strategy which recognises that India has to play a vital role in Afghanistan to ensure peace and stability in the region. His successor Chuck Hagel’s 2011 speech, a recording of which gained much attention recently, has given the Pakistani establishment some comfort. In that speech he said India has always used Afghanistan as a second front against Pakistan.

Afghanistan is important to China from the standpoint of energy security. The China National Petroleum Company is due to begin oil extraction from its wells in the northern part of the country next month. It was the first foreign company to sign an oil contract with Iraq after the war in the country. US analysts believe China will likewise step into Afghanistan to pick up contracts as soon as the Western forces are out. It has already indicated interest in laying gas pipelines from Turkmenistan and Tajikistan through Afghanistan.

China’s interest in Afghanistan is not limited to economic factors. It is very concerned over the possibility of spillover of Islamist terrorism into its Muslim-majority Xinjiang region, which is already experiencing ethnic unrest.

Writing in the government paper Global Times, Zhang Jiadong, associate professor at the Center for American Studies, Fudan University, recently envisaged a situation where China, like the former Soviet Union and the US, may get trapped in Afghanistan. “If China does not intervene, Afghanistan will fall into chaos again and endanger China’s security,” he said, “but if China intervenes China’s interests will be damaged as it gets bogged down in the mountains.”

To avoid the trap, he wanted China to seize the initiative in Afghan affairs. Specifically, he suggested that China should enlist the cooperation of the former occupation forces as well as Afghanistan’s neighbours and bring that country into platforms of regional cooperation.

China’s severest test in Afghanistan may come from Pakistan which is not ready to distance itself from the Afghan Taliban, whose leaders are on its territory. Pakistan did not heed US pleas to allow them to hold talks with Afghan President Hamid Karzai to reach an internal settlement. The US dealt with the problem posed by ally Pakistan by exercising military options like drone strikes on Taliban sanctuaries. China may have to deal with this ally without being able to exercise such options. -- Gulf Today, Sharjah, April 16, 2013.

Another scandal to ride through

BRP Bhaskar
Gulf Today

Governmental and business circles, inured to periodic breaking of scandals, are seeking to brazen out the unearthing of several hundred offshore accounts of Indians in the British Virgin Islands and other tax havens by an international team of journalists.

Scions of old industrial houses as well as nouveau riche of the era of globalisation are among the 612 Indian nationals who form part of the 2.5 million individuals and entities in over 170 countries, whose names have been revealed by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) in the first batch of reports yielded by a continuing probe.

Launched in 1997 as a project of the Washington-based Center for Public Integrity, the ICIJ is a network of 160 journalists in more than 60 countries engaged in investigation of corruption and cross-border crime. The team is led by Irish-born Gerard Ryle whose award-winning investigative reports on use of orphaned babies for medical experiments and the Firepower fraud in Australia had attracted attention worldwide.    

The ICIJ offshore operations probe was made possible by more than 260 gigabytes of data which Ryle received by mail while investigating Firepower which was said to cut petrol consumption and vehicle emissions. It included about 2.5 million files and more than two million emails that helped chart offshore activity over several years.

Responding to queries, Finance Minister P Chidambaram said, “Inquiries have been put in motion in respect of the names that have been exposed.” Such pronouncements were made by government spokesmen after information about secret bank accounts of Indians in Switzerland and Liechtenstein came to light but they did not lead to any action.

Opening offshore accounts is not a crime but their structures are designed to conceal actual ownership and they are often used for illegal purposes like tax evasion. Interestingly, almost all the Indian accounts uncovered by ICIJ were opened during the economic boom of the last decade.

The Indian Express, which published information about the account holders, contacted them to find out what they have to say. Some responses suggest that they have something to hide. 

While the ICIJ report named several persons with high political connections in Azerbaijan, Colombia, France and the Philippines, no Indian politician of consequence figures in it. The two MPs in the list, Vijay Mallya and Vivekanand Gaddam, are political lightweights.

Some including Vivekanand Gaddam, Sonu Lalchand Mirchandani of the Onida group, Teja Raju, son of Satyam Computers founder Ramalinga Raju who was jailed in a fraud case, and Gurbachan Singh Dhingra of Berger Paints pleaded ignorance about the accounts in their names.

Some others like Samir Modi of the KK Modi group, Chetan Burman of the Dabur group and Thiagarajan Murugesan of the Paramount group said they had opened offshore accounts to attract investments or boost exports but the plan did not work out. Lankalingam Murugesu, known as ‘papad’ king, said his firm set up an offshore operation for better tax planning but did not use it. “We just thought it is better to pay full taxes,” he told the newspaper.    

Mallya’s firm, Ravikant Ruia of the Essar group whose name has come up in the telecom spectrum scam and Maitreya Vinod Doshi of the Premier Ltd said the Indian authorities had been informed about their offshore accounts. Radhikaraje Samarjitsinh Gaekwad of the erstwhile Baroda royal family and Rahul Mamman Mappilai of the MRF group did not respond.

Two years ago the authorities had received from a foreign government the names of 782 Indians with accounts in the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation’s branches outside the country. They refused to reveal the names on privacy grounds. The promised investigations did not lead to any action.

Cobrapost, a website, came out with a sting report alleging  the ICICI Bank, the Axis Bank and the HDFC Bank helped in money laundering. The Reserve Bank of India was said to be “seriously looking into the matter” but the Finance Minister gave the banks a virtual clean chit saying, “On the face of it, no real money was transacted and no real money laundering deals took place with any real person.”

When a financial scandal involving private players breaks out, the government goes through the motion of conducting an investigation but it does not result in action against the wrongdoers. The Supreme Court recently remarked that the government’s failure to control black money was indicative of its weakness and softness. -- Gulf Today, Sharjah, April 9, 2013.