Probes that get nowhere

BRP Bhaskar
Gulf Today

Just as the Congress party, which heads the ruling United Progressive Alliance, thought the Bofors scandal, which brought down the Rajiv Gandhi government more than two decades ago, had been finally laid to rest, it has come back to haunt it and its head.

The scandal relates to kickbacks paid by the Swedish arms maker Bofors to secure its biggest ever deal of $1.3 billion for the supply of 410 howitzers to India and a supply contract for almost twice that amount.

Led by the Bharatiya Janata Party, the opposition rushed in to make the most out of the Congress party’s discomfiture. But a worse embarrassment was in store for the BJP. A court slapped a four-year jail term on its former president, Bangaru Laxman, in another corruption case.

The Bofors scandal was broken by the Swedish radio which said the company had bribed Indian politicians. The names of Rajiv Gandhi and Italian businessman Ottavio Quattrocchi, a friend of the Gandhi family, came up in later media reports. VP Singh, who became prime minister following the Congress party’s defeat, referred the matter to the Central Bureau of Investigation, which registered a corruption case.

In 2004, long after Rajiv Gandhi’s assassination, the courts exonerated him but the continuing proceedings against Quattrocchi remained a source of worry for the party, now headed by his Italian-born wife, Sonia Gandhi. Last year the courts granted the CBI’s request to drop the proceedings against Quattrocchi as he could not be brought to India.

Former Swedish police chief Sten Lindstrom, who had leaked a large number of documents relating to the kickback payments to Geneva-based Indian journalist Chitra Subramaniam-Duella, leading to a series of investigative stories in The Hindu, rekindled memories of the scandal last week with an interview to her to mark its silver jubilee. 

Lindstrom said he had turned whistleblower as he could not count on Bofors or the Swedish and Indian governments to get to the bottom of the deal in which rules were flouted, institutions bypassed and honest Swedish officials and politicians kept in the dark.

Lindstrom’s leaks did not yield expected results as there was no one in the Indian government or investigating team who shared his passionate desire to get to the bottom of the matter.

The CBI, which is directly under the Prime Minister, has a fair record of successful prosecution of offenders in ordinary crimes. However, its performance in cases involving top politicians, senior bureaucrats and high police officials is generally poor.

Recognising that the agency is susceptible to political influence, the higher courts have taken upon themselves the task of overseeing investigation of some sensational cases and asked it to report directly to them. The 2G spectrum cases in which two former ministers, a member of parliament and several high officials figure among the accused are among them.

The CBI’s failure to pursue the Bofors investigation vigorously even under non-Congress governments shows the issue of political control is not a simple one. The BJP-led National Democratic Alliance government, which served a full five-year term, too could not get to the bottom of the matter.

Lindstrom, in his interview, made two significant revelations. Fearing the media campaign might force India to cancel the contract, Bofors had sent its top executives to disclose the names of beneficiaries of kickbacks but no one of consequence received them. Politicians who met him and vowed to unravel the truth if they came to power did nothing when they had the opportunity.

Lindstrom has raised the Bofors issue again without high expectation. “Maybe we will get nowhere,” he said, “but silence cannot be the answer.”

The moral of the Bofors story is that politicians tend to view cases of corruption as grist to the mill of election propaganda rather than as acts of misdemeanour that call for punishment.

Ironically, while those involved in the Bofors affair, a real scandal, have got away, Bangaru Laxman has been convicted in a spurious arms deal. He took bribe not from an arms dealer but from a journalist posing as one in a sting operation conducted while the NDA was in power. Since there are two higher courts to which he can appeal, the present verdict cannot be taken as the last word. Eleven other cases filed on the basis of the same sting operation are still before the trial court. --Gulf Today, Sharjah, April 30, 2012.

New kid on the missile block

BRP Bhaskar
Gulf Today

Indian public opinion responded with a display of patriotic fervour last week as the country blasted its way into the elite club of countries with long-range missile capability by successfully test-firing the indigenously designed and built Agni V, with a range of 5,000 kilometres.

 “We are today a missile power,” said VK Saraswat, head of Defence Research and Development Organisation, which handles the Agni missile programme. Sections of the media interpreted it to mean the country now has the capability to fire an intercontinental missile.

China greeted the arrival of the new kid on the missile block with a quaint mix of sneer, suspicion and sobriety. The state-owned Global Times said India, swept up by missile delusion, apparently is hoping to enter the intercontinental ballistic missile club, although ICBMs normally have a range of over 8,000 km.

The newspaper quoted a researcher at the People’s Liberation Army Academy of Military Sciences as saying Agni V actually has the potential to reach targets 8,000 km away, but the Indian government is downplaying its capability to avoid causing concern to other countries.

“China and India should develop as friendly a relationship as possible,” the newspaper said. “Even if this cannot be achieved, the two should at least tolerate each other and learn to coexist.”

A 17.5m tall, solid-fuelled, three-stage vehicle with a launch weight of 50 tonnes, Agni V cost more than Rs 2.5 billion to build. It can carry a one-tonne nuclear payload.

India did not inform China in advance about the launch. But China was following developments closely. Its media carried reports on the launch preparations and took note of a day’s delay caused by bad weather.

Apart from China, parts of Europe and capitals as far apart as Tehran, Jakarta and Manila fall within the range of Agni V but there was hardly any criticism from the rest of the world.

The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation said it did not consider India a missile threat to its allies or territory. The United States responded with a call for restraint, addressed to all nuclear-capable states.

With the border dispute which led to a short war between India and China a half-century ago still unresolved, the relationship between the two countries remains uneasy. In view of China’s cosy relations with Pakistan, Indian defence planning takes into account the possibility of having to fight on two fronts at the same time. 

Pakistan’s response to Agni V was muted presumably because it makes little difference to the military balance between the two countries. Both countries possess intermediate-range nuclear-capable missiles and have thus been, in a sense, in a situation of mutual deterrence already.

Both China and India hiked up their defence budgets this year – China by 11.2 per cent to touch a record $106 billion, and India by 17.63 per cent to reach a new high of $39 billion. The huge gap between the outlays reflects the differing strategic perceptions of the two countries. 

China justifies its huge military spending, pointing out that it is only 1.2 per cent of its gross domestic product and is in keeping with its security environment and economic and social development. It already has a missile with a range of 13,000 km, which puts North America within striking distance.

India’s defence budget is about 1.9 per cent of its GDP. Military and strategic experts have been arguing it must be raised to three per cent to effectively deter both China and Pakistan. However, military spending of that order can be ruled out as it will hamper the country’s developmental efforts.

China knows that India is not seeking military parity with it and poses no threat to it. Its concerns actually stem from the fear of India’s possible involvement with the USA which has stepped up its presence in the Pacific.

India has cause for worry too. Its problem is not that it cannot match China’s military manpower and hardware but that it is heavily dependent upon outside sources for equipment. It is now the world’s largest importer of arms.

What India perceives as China’s arrogance and China terms India’s persecution mania are pointers to the psychological hurdles the two countries must cross before they can establish healthy bilateral relations. Close cooperation in a forum like BRICS, which includes, besides them, Brazil, Russia and South Africa, may help in this regard.  -- Gulf Today, Sharjah, April 23, 2012

A colonial legacy that must go

BRP Bhaskar
Gulf Today

The Indian government is under increasing pressure from within the country and outside to curb the gross human rights violations resulting from prolonged use of the armed forces to deal with internal disorder.

Deployment of army personnel to deal with uprisings is a colonial practice. The British rulers were fighting rebellious elements in the northeastern region, as also the northwestern region which now forms part of Pakistan, till their very last days in the subcontinent.

Since insurgency in the northeast continued to be a problem, the government re-enacted in 1958 the colonial-era Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) and brought it into force in the northeast. Following a spurt in terrorist activity, the law was extended to parts of Jammu and Kashmir in 1990.

AFSPA allows military personnel deployed in areas, which the government has declared as “disturbed”, to fire upon and even kill anyone acting in contravention of law and search any premises and arrest without a warrant anyone who has committed or is suspected to have committed certain offences. It grants security personnel immunity against legal action.

Although the law prescribes a six-month time-limit for an order declaring an area as “disturbed” the government has circumvented the restriction by repeatedly re-promulgating orders. Thus the draconian measure has been in force continuously for well over half a century in the northeastern states and more than two decades in Kashmir.

As a result, the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution remain abridged in these areas. The bulk of the people of the northeast are tribesmen with distinct cultures of their own. J and K is a state with a Muslim majority. These demographic factors give the story of denial of democratic rights an additional dimension.

In the affected areas there have been continuous anti-AFSPA protests, the most poignant of which is the 11-year-old fast by Manipur poetess Irom Sharmila whom the authorities are keeping alive through forced nasal feeding. Since public opinion in the mainline states is muted, the government has found it easy to ignore the local protests.

The large number of cases of missing persons reported from areas where AFSPA is in force and the unearthing of an unmarked mass grave in Kashmir have fuelled civil rights groups’ demands for repeal of the law.

Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah has demanded that AFSPA be withdrawn in view of the decline in militant activity in the state. In its report to the Central government, the team of interlocutors headed by journalist Dileep Padgaonkar has drawn attention to the recommendations of various bodies, including the Justice Jeevan Reddy Commission, to repeal AFSPA or at least amend it to bring it in line with the criminal law. It wants the army to remain in the barracks and policing functions to be transferred from the paramilitary units to the state force under a phased programme.

Last week Home Minister P Chidambaram flew to Kashmir to persuade the Chief Minister to accept a modified version of AFSPA. This appears to be part of an attempt to soften public opinion in view of the adverse observations made by the United Nations Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, Christof Heyns, at the end of his recent visit to India.

Heyns, who had met government representatives as well as rights activists in different parts of the country during the 12-day visit , described AFSPA as a symbol of excessive state power which “clearly violates international law” and asked that it be scrapped. This recommendation is sure to figure in the report he submits to the UN Human Rights Council.

It is not the Central government alone that wants to keep the AFSPA alive in some form. The Bharatiya Janata Party, which is in power in several states, is an even more ardent advocate of its ruthless application than the Congress, which heads the ruling coalition at the Centre. The Communist Party of India (Marxist) favours its withdrawal from Kashmir, but wants it to continue in Tripura, where it is in power.

Sudhir Vomnatkere, a retired major-general who had headed the Army’s human rights cell, in a recent interview to a website threw light on a little known aspect of AFSPA. When an area is declared as “disturbed”, there is political darkness under which “corruption of various kinds – political, economic, financial, money, women, drugs, smuggling etc” can go on, he said.  Clearly, AFSPA must go – in the interests of democracy. -- Gulf Today, Sharjah, April 16, 2012.

Royal visitors from richest Gulf state

While the attention of the entire media was focused on Pakistan President Zardari and his son who were on a private visit to India, the Emir of Qatar and his consort arrived in New Delhi,  almost unnoticed, on Sunday on an official visit.

A small Gulf state with a population of 1.7 million, Qatar was ranked by the US magazine Forbes earlier this year as the country with the highest per capita income in the world.

The magazine put Qatar’s 2010 GDP per capita, after adjustment for purchasing power, at US$ 88,000, way ahead of the UAE with $47,500, which was in the sixth place.

Emir Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thami of Qatar is a shrewd ruler. He has allowed the United States to set up in his country a forward headquarters of its Central Command, which plays a critical role in all Western military activities in the West Asian and South Asian regions. He has also set up and sustained the Al Jazeera television station which is engaged in correcting the distortions in Western media coverage worldwide.

On his India visit the Emir is accompanied by his consort, Sheikha Mozah bint Nasser al Missned, who, incidentally, is Unesco’s Special Envoy for Basic and Higher Education.  (Please see writeup at the Unesco website)

The photograph of the royal couple reproduced above was taken by The Hindu’s V. V. Krishnan on their arrival at New Delhi. It shows the Emir in traditional Arab costume and Sheikha Mozah in a Western dress.    

New tack in Maoist areas

BRP Bhaskar
Gulf Today

More than 150 young people, including 40 women, all with good academic records, selected as Prime Minister’s Rural Development Fellows, begin this week two months of training after which they will be deployed in 78 tribal districts worst affected by Maoist insurgency.

The fellows, aged between 22 and 30, include engineers, doctors, lawyers, computer personnel and journalists. They were picked from more than 8,500 applicants through a rigorous process in which their educational qualifications and performance in written tests, group discussions and personal interviews were taken into account.

Many of them are products of prestigious educational institutions and have opted out of well-paid jobs in the corporate sector to work for two years in backward areas, assisting district collectors in the implementation of welfare programmes. They will receive Rs 50,000 a month during training and Rs 65,000 a month thereafter.

The fellowship scheme, a brainchild of Rural Development Minister Jairam Ramesh, has been drawn up in the belief that accelerated development of the areas will make it difficult for rebels to enlist the support of the poor villagers, most of them tribesmen. With insurgency reportedly on the decline following harsh police measures, the time is considered opportune for such an initiative.

Several groups swearing by the teachings of Mao Zedong have been active in India since the 1970s. The largest of them, the Communist Party of India (Maoist), formed in 2004 through the merger of three previous formations, is engaged in what it calls “people’s war”. In 2009, the government launched a coordinated anti-insurgency campaign, which is widely referred to as Operation Green Hunt, in five states along the Red Corridor.

The Home Ministry had reported in 2008 that 223 districts in 20 states were affected by the Maoist movement. Last year it brought down the number of affected districts to 182, although the number of affected states remained the same. Five of the 39 members of the CPI (Maoist) central committee were killed and 13 arrested during this period.

Among those killed were Cherukuri Rajkumar alias Azad and Molajula Koteswar Rao alias Kishenji.

Azad was killed while on his way to meet Swami Agnivesh, a social activist, who was trying to persuade the Maoists to talk to the government.

While the government also reported a drop in killings by the insurgents, they still retain the capacity to strike at targets. Blasts and attacks on security personnel reported from states as far apart as Maharashtra, Bihar and West Bengal in recent months are believed to be acts of reprisal for the killing of Azad and Kishenji.

A few weeks ago Maoists in Odisha (formerly Orissa) kidnapped an Italian tour operator and a legislator belonging to the ruling Biju Janata Dal. The state government, which has been in negotiations with them since then through intermediaries, last week expressed readiness to free some arrested persons to secure their release.

There are reports that Maoists have recently made inroads into the northeastern states. This is a cause for worry as the region has witnessed insurgency by local tribal groups for several decades. In the south, Maoists are also said to be trying to establish a base in the Kerala-Tamil Nadu-Karnataka tri-junction.

Jairam Ramesh attaches much importance to the fellowship scheme which represents the first attempt to induct professionals into government activity on a large scale. Each district coming under the scheme will get Rs 300 million for a special integrated action plan for road works, water supply, farm support, children’s welfare etc. The two fellows posted in the district are expected to coordinate and evaluate the implementation of schemes there.

The young people, imbued with ideals, have volunteered for service in the troubled interior, knowing they have to face violent elements. But they may have to be ready for rearguard action, too, since the bureaucracy does not take kindly to anything which may limit its freedom of action. Corrupt officials are sure to view them as obstacles in their way. It remains to be seen if the political leadership can ensure conditions in which the fellows can perform their functions well.

The government has to bring about a measure of clarity in its approach to the insurgency problem.  It may be unrealistic to expect it to forswear the use of force while threats from armed groups remain. But, then, it is equally unrealistic to expect a constructive effort like the fellowship scheme to succeed while Operation Green Hunt, which involves serious human rights violations, continues. -- Gulf Today, Sharjah, April 9, 2012.

Looking beyond wars

BRP Bhaskar
Gulf Today

The European countries which fought one another off and on for close to 1,000 years have been at peace with themselves for two generations and the political and economic union they forged two decades ago is rewriting the continent’s history. The threat of a catastrophic third World War, which was widely talked about after the second one, has receded, hopefully never to return. But the possibility of war is still a topic of discussion in India and its neighbourhood.

Half a century after India and China fought a short war — the only one in their history of 5,000 years — so-called think tanks and defence analysts in the two countries periodically speculate on a possible new military confrontation as the border dispute which precipitated the 1961 conflict remains unresolved even after many rounds of discussions.

Pundits presume China’s growing assertiveness in the wake of its emergence as a global power and its perceived rivalry with India, which is on the same developmental track, are factors that may lead to fresh conflicts, if only on a limited basis. The Chinese leadership’s assertion that there is room for both the countries to develop has not made an impression on their minds attuned to conventional wisdom.

India and Pakistan fought three wars in 25 years as independent nations but there has been no resort to arms in the 40 years since then, barring a brief confrontation on the icy heights of Siachen in 1999. Last week, writing in a Pakistani daily, a former army brigadier spoke of a likely Indian attack on Pakistan, coinciding with an Israeli attack on Iran. He also envisaged India seeking US support to “de-nuke, balkanise and de-Islamise Pakistan” before its planned pullout from Afghanistan.

Reports from the US indicate that forebodings about India-Pakistan relations prevail in official and academic circles in that country. James Miller, who is seeking confirmation as Undersecretary for Defence, told a Congressional committee last week that Pakistani military and intelligence services’ support to militants targeting India “has the potential to result in military confrontation that could rapidly escalate into a nuclear exchange.”

Daniel Markey, Senior Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington, writing at the CFR website said another Mumbai-type terrorist attack could lead India and Pakistan to the brink of war and require the US president to play an important mediating role.

Frank Panter, a high-ranking Pentagon official, was quoted as saying the US might have to develop an alternative route with India’s help if Pakistan refused to reopen the Nato supply routes to Afghanistan which it had closed four months ago in protest against bombing raids on targets in its territory.

Since Afghanistan emerged as a trouble spot following the Soviet invasion of 1979 India and Pakistan have been invariably on opposite sides. India now works closely with the US to ensure that country’s post-war stability but it will be a folly to ignore the vital differences in their strategic interests in the region.

With the Kashmir dispute in the limbo and Pakistan-based terrorist groups remaining a source of worry to India, there is indeed plenty of room for wild speculation. However, those looking beyond short-term possibilities can see signs of a change for the better in India-Pakistan relations with economic factors moderating political sentiments.

Of particular significance in this regard are India’s offer to provide Pakistan 5,000 megawatts of power and to supply petrol across the border and the Pakistan government’s determination to go forward with its proposal to grant India most favoured nation status. Pakistan’s business community, which views grant of MFN status with disfavour, has welcomed the offer to provide power as a harbinger of better relations between the two countries.

In the early years of Independence, India was Pakistan’s largest trading partner, accounting for half of its exports and nearly one-third of its imports. Adverse political and economic conditions kept pushing bilateral trade down over the years.

Official and academic studies in Pakistan have shown that gains from increased trade with India will far outweigh the losses. Indian official and commercial interests have recognised that, as South Asia’s second largest market, Pakistan has to be accorded its due place in the economy of the region. However, given the ground realities, the development of healthy economic relations must necessarily be a slow process.-- Gulf Today, Sharjah, April 3, 2012.

The dangerous implications of India's nuclear romance

B.R.P.Bhaskar
IANS

Efforts are on to squelch the months-long peaceful movement by villagers living in the neighbourhood of the Kudankulam nuclear plant in Tamil Nadu which has delayed its commissioning. What brought the people out of their homes is the fear that the plant is a threat to their lives and livelihood. Repeated assertions by spokesmen of the national science and technology establishment, from former president A.P.J. Abdul Kalam downwards, have not convinced them that the plant is accident-proof. Instead of talking to the people and addressing their concerns, the Government of India appears set to crush their movement using crude force.

At the best of times, it is not easy to have open and honest deliberations on the nuclear issue. Since nuclear technology has military applications, all countries routinely conduct much of the work in this area in total secrecy. The Indian nuclear programme has been directly under the prime minister since its inception, and Parliament does not look into the working of the Department of Atomic Energy closely. The institutional mechanism set up to oversee nuclear safety is under the department itself. So long as the government fights shy of creating an independent nuclear safety mechanism outside the department's control, its claims about the safety of the nuclear installations cannot be taken at face value.

The arguments advanced by the official establishment to allay fears about the safety of the Kudankulam plant are irrational and unscientific, not to say dishonest. How can Abdul Kalam guarantee its safety when the Russian equipment suppliers are not ready to do so? In a bid to belittle fears of radiation emanating from the plant, the government points out in an advertisement placed in the newspapers, that the people are already exposed to radiation present in nature and used in medical treatment. It is absurd to cite the presence of natural radiation and its use for medicinal purposes to justify exposing the people to a possible nuclear catastrophe.

One factor that complicates decision making on the Kudankulam project, the first stage of which is almost ready to be commissioned, is that the government has already spent about Rs. 150 billion on it. When India signed an agreement with the Soviet Union in 1988 for setting up the project, the cost was estimated at Rs. 40 billion. It shot up as a result of the inordinate delay in starting and completing the work, occasioned partly by the Soviet Union's collapse. But can a democratic government approach an issue involving people's lives and livelihood the way an auditor looks at a statement of expenditure? That a lot of money has been sunk is no justification for continuing with a project about which grave doubts remain in people's minds after Fukushima.

Anti-nuclear groups, which include persons with expertise in the area, have suggested that part of the investment in the ongoing nuclear projects can be salvaged by converting them into natural gas-based plants. After the Three Mile Island accident, the US had converted the Shoreham nuclear plant in Long Island, New York, the William H Zimmer nuclear plant in Ohio and the Midland Cogeneration Facility in Michigan to run on fossil fuel.

The argument that India cannot ensure energy security without nuclear power rests on questionable grounds. Currently nuclear power constitutes only three per cent of the country's energy requirement. Even if the projects conceived in the pre-Fukushima period are implemented on time (which, going by the record, is most unlikely), the expectation is that nuclear plants will supply 25 per cent of the power by 2050. This means there is enough time to recast the energy plans in the light of current realities.

Two years ago many countries were working on new nuclear plants. Last week the Germans backed out of a commitment to supply equipment for two plants in Britain citing the Fukushima disaster and the European economic crisis as the reasons. Today, India shares with China the dubious distinction of being the only countries determinedly pursuing the nuclear path, undeterred by Fukushima. The ruling establishments in the two countries are guided by visions of reaching the heights of the global economy. As the most populous nations, it is quite legitimate for them to aspire to be the world's largest economies. The moot question is what route to take to reach the destination.

Currently India and China are on a track cut by the Western countries which, having brought large parts of the world under their heel, had access to cheap energy sources. This raises two problems: large-scale consumption of energy and large-scale expulsion of poisonous wastes. Neither China nor India is engaged in scientific pursuits to find solutions to these problems. Instead they are claiming the right to follow the disastrous path of the developed economies. Their scientific efforts are limited to demonstrating that they can do what the West had done.

The motivation behind India's nuclear romance is not the need for energy security, as the ruling establishment claims, but the overweening desire for big power status. Its achievements in the fields of nuclear and missile technology have generated a sense of pride not only in its scientific and technical personnel but in the nation as a whole. This sense of pride effectively camouflages the stark fact that very little original work is being done in the fields of science and technology.

As a country blessed with sunshine, India stands to benefit the most by a breakthrough in solar energy technology, which is already available but is not cost- effective. Yet the government has neglected this area, transfixed as it is by delusions of nuclear grandeur. The fall of the Soviet Union, which had made great advances in some critical areas, like space technology, pushing the US to the second place, holds a lesson for India: big power status built up overlooking the interests of the masses is liable to collapse like a house of cards.

The Kudankulam line-up reveals the contours of a division within the country. Ranged on one side are various elements of the establishment: the central and state governments, the science and technology bureaucracy, the political parties, etc. On the other side are poor, marginalized people, backed by small, scattered groups of human rights defenders. A similar line-up can also be seen at other centres where nuclear plants are coming up as also at places all across the country where national or multinational corporations are trying to squeeze the poor people out to set up mega projects.

Global Indian Network of Knowledge

The Ministry of Overseas Indian Affairs has set up a Global-Indian Network of Knowledge (Global-INK), conceived as a strategic virtual think tank that connects Overseas Indians (who are “knowledge providers”) with  the development process in India (which consists of “knowledge receivers”).

“Being a next generation  knowledge management, collaboration and business solution platform,” the Ministry says, “Global-INK provides context to connect knowledge experts with knowledge seekers. Consequently these connections enable flow of knowledge and expertise from the Diaspora back into India and facilitate collective action.

“Global-INK will catalyze Diaspora ability and willingness into well thought out projects and programs for development, transform individual initiatives into community action and achieve critical mass in chosen verticals.”

Overseas Indians wishing to participate in Global-INK activity can seek registration by filling a form available at its website www.globalink.in

The Ministry of Overseas Indian Affairs (www.moia.gov.in) and the Confederation of Indian Industry have jointly set up an Overseas Indian Facilitation Centre (www.oifc.in) with a view to expanding the economic engagement of the Diaspora within India.

Ms. Sujata Sudarshan, Director of CII, is the CEO of OIFC. Its office is located at 249-F, Sector 18, Udyog Vihar, Phase IV, Gurgaon 122015, Haryana, India. Tel 91-124401 4055/6. Fax 91-124-4309446.

Nationawide protests in solidarity with Kudankulam agitators

National Alliance of People's Movements (NAPM), Coalition for Nuclear Disarmament and Peace (CNDP), Lok Rajniti Manch and Delhi Solidarity Group are organizing a protest and fast from today (26 March) till 1 April 2012, at Jantar Mantar, New Delhi, in solidarity with ongoing fast by activists of the anti-nuclear movement at Idinthakarai, Tamil Nadu, against the Kudankulam nuclear power plant.

NAPM National Convener and noted Social activist Sandeep Pandey is sitting on a seven day fast.

In Chennai, too, people are fasting in support of anti-nuclear movement in Kudankulam.

In Mumbai, noted film-maker Anand Patwardhan is leading a protest in front of Dadar Railway Station. 

On March 27, one-day fast will be organized at many places in support of the local people protesting against the Kudankulam nuclear power plant.

NAPM Andhra Pradesh is organising a protest demonstration and candle light vigil between 6 to 8 pm on March 27 at Ambedkar Statue, near Tank Bund, Hyderabad.

In a statement, NAPM said:

It is ironical that India has raised the issue of atrocities on Tamil people in Sri Lanka at UNHRC but is not relenting its nuclear power pursuit which potentially puts its own Tamil people at grave risk of nuclear tragedy.

We strongly condemn the undemocratic manner in which nuclear energy is forced upon us. Not only Indian government has used a strong hand to snub the People’s Movement Against Nuclear Energy (PMANE) in Kudankulam, Tamil Nadu, but also is trying to intimidate and stifle resistance by misleading allegations of a ‘foreign hand’.

Dr S P Udayakumar who leads PMANE has declared his personal assets and he has no FCRA account to receive foreign money. Whereas it is clear that Indian government is working hand-in-glove with bigger ‘foreign hands’ of the USA, Russia and other countries in its joint military operations and expanding nuclear programme.

The latest attempt by the CM of Tamil Nadu to brand Udayakumar as a Naxal clearly shows the desperation of the government. We condemn such underhand tactics and attempts by government to mislead general public.

It is the people in Europe and America that have forced their governments by coming out in large numbers on street to abandon nuclear energy. But Indian government is trying to stifle such people’s initiatives to have their say. Our claims of being the largest democracy prove to be hollow.

The recent nuclear emergency in Japan leaves no doubt that the world needs to renounce nuclear power for military and civil/energy purposes, as soon as possible, to put an end to any further catastrophe in the name of 'energy', 'security' or 'technology'. Nuclear power is clearly the most dangerous options for civil or military use. Countries that have been using nuclear power such as Germany have resolved to abandon nuclear energy by 2022. Japan, the USA, and many such nations who were earlier pursuing nuclear energy option are having second thoughts now.

We believe that India should adopt the futuristic energy policy like Japan and the European Union (EU) relying on renewable sources of energy which are non-polluting. Like EU and Japan, India too should aim for a low-carbon energy production system. India’s future energy policy should be low carbon and no nuclear.

We appeal to the Indian government to support dialogue on nuclear energy in a democratic way and until there is a consensus on whether India should go ahead with nuclear programme or not, should stall all nuclear programmes.

For more details contact : P.K. Sundaram, 9810556134, Ramesh Sharma, 9818111562, Madhuresh Kumar, 9818905316 and Vijayan M J 9582862682

BRICS seeking greater say

BRP Bhaskar
Gulf Today

Leaders of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa (BRICS), who will gather in New Delhi this week for their annual summit, are expected to pitch for a greater role in world affairs in keeping with their growing clout as newly emergent economies. The main item on the agenda of the summit, scheduled for March 28 and 29, is global governance. While China is not keen on early reform of the United Nations system, it shares the BRICS partners’ enthusiasm for reform of the global financial institutions.

As it happens, the summit takes place ahead of a meeting of the World Bank to choose its next president.  Since the creation of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund at the end of World War II, the former has been headed by an American and the latter by a European.

On Friday President Barak Obama named Jim Yong Kim, an American of South Korean origin, as the US nominee for the post. Two other candidates are also in the field: Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala of Nigeria, whose sponsors include South Africa, and Jose Antonio Ocampo of Colombia, who has been nominated by Brazil.

China recently suggested that a non-American must head the institution. It is not clear if the BRICS nations can agree on a common non-American candidate. Even if they can, the US may be able to ensure the election of its nominee as it continues to wield considerable influence in the global financial system. However, the ideas the BRICS nations are working on may make reform of the system inevitable.

As an institution charged with the task of making resources available to member countries to tide over balance-of-payments difficulties, the IMF has a critical role in helping Europe to overcome its distress. The BRICS nations have already injected a large amount of capital into the IMF but some Europeans are asking for more.

“BRICS’ voice in the IMF must be enhanced if the European countries want it to provide more capital,” a Russian government spokesman said last week. At the New Delhi meet, the group is expected to work out a strategy to link increased participation in the European recovery programme to restructuring of the IMF’s capital base to bring it in tune with the new financial realities.

A parallel initiative envisages the setting up of a development bank of the BRICS nations. A proposal made by India in this connection has evoked a favourable response from Russia and China. India views the proposed bank, which will facilitate indirect investment of foreign exchange reserves of the central banks of the member countries, as an institution with the potential to become a powerful player in global decision-making.

For China, the BRICS development bank offers a platform to expand the international role of its currency, the renminbi. It has been facing criticism from other countries for manipulating the value of the renminbi to maintain export competitiveness.

With the Western economies in the doldrums, the BRICS nations are now the most favoured investment destinations. Their efforts to forge common strategies have set alarm bells ringing in some Western financial circles, particularly investment promoters.

One investment research group, in a recent report, bemoaned that countries like Indonesia and Mexico, which are beginning to rival some BRICS nations in terms of growth and investment strength, are often overlooked in favour of them.

Smaller markets such as Malaysia, Poland and Peru are also surging in importance although their total size is tiny compared to the trillion-dollar economies of BRICS, it said, adding they could be interesting picks for investors.

Against this background, the decision of leading stock exchanges of the five countries to establish the BRICS Exchanges Alliance assumes significance. Beginning March 30, members of the Alliance will begin cross-listing benchmark equity index derivatives on one another’s trading platform.

Initially, members of the Alliance aim to expand their product offerings beyond their home markets and give investors exposure to the other BRICS economies.

While in New Delhi for the summit Chinese President Hu Jintao is expected to formally declare 2012 as Year of India-China Friendship and Co-operation. With memories of the disastrous end of the Hindi Chini bhai bhai (Indians and Chinese are brothers) era, inaugurated by Jawaharlal Nehru and Chou Enlai, still fresh in mind, this slogan is sure to be viewed with scepticism by many people. But the good that can result from renewed friendship must not be lost sight of. -- Gulf Today, Sharjah, March 26, 2012.

Prominent citizens in solidarity with the people of Kudankulam

The following is a joint statement issued by a group of prominent citizens condemning the police crackdown on Kudankulam protesters:

The state government of Tamil Nadu has finally succumbed to pressure by the Central government and decided to commission the operation of the two Russian built nuclear reactors in Kudankulam. It has carried out a major crackdown on the mass movement in and around Kudankulam in southern Tamil Nadu, outrageously slapping sedition charges -- no less -- on several people, and arresting close to 200 people in a pre-emptive show of intimidation and force.

Over the last six months in what has been the latest phase of a more than decade long struggle, tens of thousands of residents in and around Kudankulam have peacefully and non-violently demonstrated against the government’s nuclear power plans. They have demanded that their concerns over issues of safety, environmental hazards and procedural violations of the AERB (Atomic Energy Regulatory Board) be fully and properly addressed. That their livelihood and life concerns should have been so casually ignored by a government that has even resorted to allegations of ‘foreign manipulation’ of what is an indigenous mass movement is extremely disturbing.

We strongly condemn the repression launched against the people of Koodankulam and southern Tamil Nadu and demand that those arrested be immediately released. If a willingness to exercise one’s democratic right of protest in peaceful and non-violent ways, or to criticize the pursuit of nuclear energy, or even to oppose government plans in this regard is to be deemed seditious and warrants being arrested, then we the undersigned also declare ourselves to be as guilty as our fellow citizens in Tamil Nadu. We stand in solidarity with them. The government may please take note.

Admiral L. Ramdas (former Chief of the Indian Navy & Magsaysay Awardee)

Admiral Vishnu Bhagwat (former Chief of the Indian Navy)

Justice Rajender Sachar (former Chief Justice of Delhi High Court)

S.P. Shukla (former Finance Secretary, Government of India)

Romila Thapar (Professor Emeritus, Dept. of History, JNU)

Aruna Roy (Member, National Advisory Council and Magsaysay Awardee)

Medha Patkar (Social Activist)

Arundhati Roy (Writer)

Sandeep Pandey (Social Activist and Magsaysay Awardee)

Ramchandra Guha (Historian and Professor, London School of Economics)

Rammanohar Reddy (Editor, Economic and Political Weekly)

Justice P.B. Sawant (former Judge of Supreme Court)

Justice B.G. Kolse-Patil (former Judge of the Bombay High Court)

Binayak Sen (Member, Planning Commission)

Ilina Sen (Professor, MG International University, Wardha)

Lalita Ramdas (former Chairperson, Greenpeace International)

Praful Bidwai (Independent Journalist and Professor, Council for Social Development)

Jean Dreze (Professor, G B Pant Social Science Institute, Allahabad)

Kamal Mitra Chenoy (Professor, School of International Studies, JNU)

Anuradha Chenoy, (Professor, School of International Studies, JNU)

Surendra Gadekar (Social Activist)

Vasanth Kannabiran, (Founder & Head, Asmita Resouce Centre for Women, Hyderabad)

Ritu Menon (Founder Publisher, Women Unlimited)

Pamela Philipose (Director, Women's Feature Service)

Rohan D'Souza (Assistant Professor, Centre for Studies in Science Policy, JNU)

Darryl D'Monte (former Resident Editor, The Times of India)

Soumya Datta (Scientist & Activist)

Lawrence Surendra (Founder Director of the Asian Regional Exchange for New Alternatives, South Korea)

Achin Vanaik (Former Dean of Social Science, University of Delhi

Protest against Kudankulam crackdown: demo in Delhi on Thursday, fast on Friday

Human rights organizations across the country have decided to observe a day’s token fast on Friday, March 23, which happens to be the anniversary of the martyrdom of Bhagat Singh, Sukhdev and Rajguru, to express solidarity with the anti-nuclear agitation at Kudankulam and to protest against the police crackdown there

The idea of a token fast was mooted by Neeraj Jain (<neerajj61@gmail.com>) of Lokayat, Pune, and endorsed by groups in different cities, including Medha Patkar and her colleagues in the National Alliance of People’s Movements and Arati Chokshy of Bangalooru.

One hundred sixty-four activists from all over the country, in a joint letter to Tamil Nadu Chief Minister J. Jayalalithaa, said: “It is with profound sadness and anxiety that we read your press statement and witnessed the large-scale mobilization of police in the areas around the Idinthakarai protest site and the Kudankulam Nuclear Power Plant.

”The decision to give the go-ahead to the power plant is ill-informed and has created a dangerously volatile situation. We, the below-signed, condemn the deployment of thousands of armed policemen in an area where people have been peacefully protesting for six months. Knowing the resolve of the agitating communities, the Government's hard-line stance and police posturing can only lead to a nuclear Nandigram.”

The Jawaharlal Nehru University Students’ Union has invited groups and individuals to join an urgent protest demonstration against the Kudankulam crackdown outside Tamil Nadu Bhavan, Chanakyapuri, New Delhi, on Thursday, March 22.

In a statement, JNUSU President Sucheta De said, “Tamil nadu CM Jayalalithaa, who had earlier 'distanced' herself from the Kudankulam project and 'shared' people’s safety concerns, has made the expected about-turn to give green signal to the Kudankulam Nuclear project, as soon elections in the Assembly constituency of Sankarankoil got over on March 18. Her cabinet has just declared that its safety concerns have been allayed, and that the TN government will soon commission the plant.

“On cue, 6000 armed policemen, led by Tamil Nadu’s Additional Director General of Police, three DIGs, and 20 SPs have unleashed a massive crackdown operation that can turn into a state-sponsored carnage of its own civilians.

“Thousands of police have surrounded Kudankulam and Idinthakarai. Hundreds of villagers marching to Kudankulam are being threatened, harassed and arrested. Also several key leaders of the movement including Advocate Sivasubramanyam, and Rajalingam have been arrested and charged with sedition including Sections 121, 121A and 153A.

“According to posts from local people, police and para-military forces are terrrorizing people by marching into the villages every now and then. Police have clamped down Section 144 CrPC prohibiting people from congregating in any manner. Despite this curfew, people keep coming to Idinthakarai by boats and on foot.

“In view of this unfolding crackdown, which is intensifying every moment, JNUSU is calling for a United Protest Demonstration at Tamil Nadu Bhawan at Chanakyapuri in Delhi, on 22 March (Thursday) at 11 am in solidarity with the fighting people in Tamil Nadu.

“JNUSU demands the withdrawal of the Tamil Nadu cabinet resolution giving sudden green signal to the Kudankulam project. JNUSU demands an immediate end to all forms of crackdown, harassment and arrests of villagers, peaceful protestors and leaders of the anti-Kundankulam movement and scrapping of this disastrous project.”

Police prepare for crackdown on Kudankulam protestors

Preparations are afoot to unleash brutal force against the villagers of Tamil Nadu who have been engaged in a peaceful protest against the Kudankulam nuclear plant for several months.

The police has reportedly asked media persons to leave the scene of action.

In a message to the Human Rights Group (humanrights-movement@googlegroups.com) sent at 2 a.m. Envirovivek (capparisvivi22mcc@gmail.com) says:

“Kudankulam was encircled by more than 10,000 police, rapid action force. Each village is also encircled by police force.

“We need to alert each and everyone across the nation. People outside Tamil Nadu spread the news. Join hands to protect the people and protest...

“Fear of life loss prevails as the Police tightens security and arrests the protestors, At one point there will be a violence break out protestors being stubborn to fight the situation. Very sad.

“We need urgent support from national and international human rights organization and journalist organizations as Police warned media to leave the place of the protesters immediately.”

Decline of national parties

BRP Bhaskar
Gulf Today

Indian democracy is in a state of transition. The decline of the national parties has created a situation which encourages the regional parties to play an increasingly assertive role.

The National Democratic Alliance, headed by Bharatiya Janata Party leader Atal Behari Vajpayee, which was in power from 1999 to 2004, was a coalition of more than 20 parties. It was able to complete the five-year term. The Congress-led United Progressive Alliance, which replaced it, too, was able to complete its term even though it had to rely upon some parties which were not members of the coalition for survival.

With two of the Congress party’s major partners in a rebellious mood there is speculation on the ability of the second UPA government, which is now in its third year, to complete its term.

Since the All India Trinamool Congress ousted West Bengal’s Left Front government, headed by the Communist Party of India-Marxist, which had been in power continuously for more than 33 years, last year its mercurial leader, Mamata Banerjee, has been throwing her weight around much to the discomfiture of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.

Her opposition has forced the central government to go easy on the globalisation programme. She is among the chief ministers who have come out strongly against the central government’s move to set up a national anti-terrorism centre, arguing it goes against the federal character of the republic.

Last week she embarrassed the Prime Minister by demanding the immediate replacement of her party man Dinesh Trivedi as Railway Minister who earned her hostility by proposing to revise railway fares and freight charges.

As party chief, Mamata Banerjee undoubtedly has the right to decide who should represent the Trinamool Congress in the Central government. The Prime Minister cannot, therefore, reject her demand. He is, therefore, confining his efforts to persuade her to let Trivedi stay until Parliament approves the Railway Budget which he introduced.

The Trinamool Congress, which has 19 members in the Lok Sabha, is the UPA’s second largest constituent. Its pullout from the coalition will not bring down the government. However, the Congress party has to factor in the mood of the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam, the third largest constituent with 18 members in the Lok Sabha.

The DMK has been sulking ever since its Cabinet ministers, A Raja and Dayanidhi Maran, were hauled up by the Central Bureau of Investigation to face criminal charges in connection with the 2G spectrum allocation scam. Kanimozhi, DMK MP and daughter of party chief and former Tamil Nadu chief minister M Karunanidhi, also figures as an accused in one of the cases.

If the Trinamool Congress and the DMK combine forces the UPA’s parliamentary majority may be in peril. However, political observers believe the Samajwadi Party and the Bahujan Samaj Party, which have 23 seats and 19 seats respectively, will be willing to sustain the UPA in office.

The SP and the BSP are already extending support to the UPA government from outside. The BSP was in power in Uttar Pradesh when the present UPA government took office. In last month’s Assembly elections, the SP ousted it from power. Though rivals in UP, the two parties have developed a common interest in the UPA’s continuance in office at the Centre.

The Congress, which had a vote share of 28.55 per cent in the 2009 Lok Sabha elections, and the BJP, which had a vote share of 18.80 per cent, are the largest national parties. The BSP, with a vote share of 6.17 per cent and the CPI-M, with a vote share of 5.33, are way behind them.

The UP Assembly elections have been a damper to the Congress and the BJP, both of which failed to improve their support base. If the electoral outcome is taken as early indication of the emergence of a two-party system in the state, it means the major national parties are doomed to remain in the fourth and third positions respectively in this state, which accounts for 80 of the 543 seats in the Lok Sabha.

The CPI-M, which played a catalytic role in the formation of non-Congress governments at the Centre in the past, believes the time is ripe to revive its idea of a third front.

Some opposition parties have called for fresh parliamentary elections in the wake of the Congress party’s poor performance in UP, but they do not appear to be serious about it. The Congress certainly is in no great shape but then there is nothing to indicate that an early poll will benefit its opponents, including the BJP and the CPI-M.--Gulf Today, Sharjah, March 19, 2012.

Fatal investigations: statement by AHRC and Nervazhi

The following is a joint statement issued by the Asian Human Rights Commission, Hong Kong, and Nervazhi, a Kerala-based rights organization:

The suicide of police officer, P G Haridath, on 15 March 2012 brings again to the limelight, issues that adversely affect criminal investigations in India. Haridath was an Additional Superintendent of Police working in the Central Bureau of Investigation. It is reported that the deceased officer was investigating the infamous Sampath murder case in Kerala state in which senior police officers are cited as the accused.

It is reported that a suicide note, allegedly obtained from the room in which the officer's body was found, mentions the name of officers stationed at the CBI office in Thiruvanandapuram, that of a former Chief Judicial Magistrate and of a lawyer, as those responsible for the officer's death. Mr. Vijay Sakhare, a senior police officer who is named as the 15th accused in the custodial murder case investigated by the deceased officer, had in the recent past approached the Kerala High Court seeking the court's intervention to remove references to Sakhare in the case, which the court had refused.

It is alleged that Mr. Mohammad Yasin, the Thrissur Police Range Inspector General at the time of Sampath's death is one of the persons responsible for brutally torturing Sampath that resulted in his immediate death. Yasin is the 16th accused in the CBI case. These senior police officers are not even suspended from active service.

The state police had arrested Sampath in connection with Crime 246/2010 from Gounderpalayam at Coimbatore in Tamilnadu state on 28 March 2010. The police brought Sampath to Kerala after the arrest. Sampath was accused of theft and the murder of a woman named Sheela, the wife of a prominent businessperson in Kerala and seriously injuring her mother, Karthiyayini. It is alleged that the police officers brutally tortured Sampath and the other co-accused in the case at a remote riverside cottage in a place called Malampuzha of Palakkad district, in Kerala.

It is suspected that Sampath died due to the injuries he suffered from brutal torture that the police inflicted upon him, allegedly to extract a confession. The post-mortem examination revealed that Sampath had suffered 63 anti-mortem injuries and that death was due to internal bleeding and blunt trauma brain injuries. The police till today have failed to explain how Sampath suffered these injuries.

Logically it is beyond doubt that the police had a role to play in Sampath's death. To what extent, which officer is involved in the murder and for what reason is for an independent agency to investigate and a court to adjudicate. It is reported that deceased Sheela and her husband had close connections with the then state home minister in Kerala, Mr. Kodiyeri Balakrishnan, who had reportedly misused his authority to force the police complete the investigation of the case in haste. It is also alleged that Sheela's husband is also well connected to high-ranking police officers.

Immediately after Sampath's death the state police worked overtime to protect officers allegedly involved in the custodial death. The manipulated records at Palakkad North Police Station where a case under section 174 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 registered as Crime 251/2010 is the result of this. Sampath's younger brother filed a writ petition in the High Court in which the court transferred the case to the CBI for investigation. In more than two occasions courts have questioned why the CBI is unable to arrest the police officers suspected for the murder. It is at this juncture the investigating officer, accusing his colleagues and other officers of illegally interfering with investigation, has chosen to end his life. The accusations by the officer against his own colleagues are serious and must be investigated.

The so-called 'ultimate criminal investigation agency' in the country, the CBI, itself is not immune to political and otherwise corrupt pressure is not a new concern. There are a series of instances where the CBI has been accused of manipulating investigation to fit illegal demands of power centres, including those from political parties. The CBI also houses officers received on transfer from the state police, a factor that cuts the root of independency of this agency.

That apart, the primary question concerning the entire affair is, what is criminal investigation in India? That a suspect tortured by the investigating agency is nothing new. Extraction of confession by use of force is often considered a legitimate investigative procedure in the country. In most cases investigation of a crime begins and ends with a confession. Sampath's case indicates the two prevalent trends in India that in cases involving powerful persons, the police could be easily influenced by local power structures, which puts into action senior police officers that willingly investigate cases to please these power pockets. And, even for them, scientific investigation of crimes is not an option so that they resort to custodial torture.

Bringing a suspect to a remote place for questioning is a practice that the police follow routinely. Such illegal detention houses where suspects are brought, tortured and taken back exists throughout the country. For instance in Kerala, one such place exists in Thiruvanandapuram district - also the state capital - at a place called Neyyatinkara. This was video documented by the media and there was no response from the administration.

Such places exist in other parts of the state, which could be either a rented house in a remote location or a government guesthouse away from the public attention. That such illegal interrogation houses exist in every part of the country is a documented, and shocking reality. Despite the fact that in Kerala, a similar incident - destruction of evidence and subsequent exposure - had brought down the then state administration as early as in 1977, the practice still continues, highlights the reality that criminal investigation is synonymous to torture in India.

Even as of today the country does not have a policy of zero tolerance to custodial torture. Police officers complain that they do not know what criminal investigation is other than extracting confession by force. So much so, the practice of torture is accepted as legitimate police procedure. The appalling nature of criminal trials that lack proper evidence and quality prosecution have led to justifying torture as the only punishment a suspect would get in the entire process.

The judiciary largely condones torture and the general public believes that the police are legally entitled to torture suspects. There has never been an attempt by the government to educate the police and the public that torture is not only illegal, but is in fact a crime against humanity, that has the viral potential to undermine the very concept of justice and thus a democratic state.

Judicial officers are required by law to enquire from the accused produced before them whether the person is subjected to torture. However they openly refuse to comply this requirement and consider asking a detainee such a question unnecessary. This often ends up in denying a victim the first chance to complain about police torture to a judge. Training provided to the subordinate judiciary does not include this.

The higher judiciary does not consider such systemic procedural lacunae as an important issue to be addressed. In fact a substantial number of judges in the higher judiciary, including those at the Supreme Court do not have an understanding how serious torture is and why the peremptory norm of ius cogens applies to torture. The appalling nature of criminal trials that lack proper evidence and quality prosecution has led to justifying torture as the only punishment a suspect would get in the entire process.

Such misconceptions regarding criminal investigation negate the very notion of criminal justice in the country. That majority police officers resort to torture demoralises those upright officers who would not want to break the law. When torture is condoned, and police records subjected to manipulations, the very concept of fair trial is undermined.

The negation of fair trial guarantees is not an exception, but a character of the Indian criminal justice system. In such an environment it is farcical to argue that the criminal justice apparatus in the country requires 'correction'. The fact is that there is nothing called justice in the entire process. To bring change into this, what is required is a complete overhaul of the system.

That a police officer has committed suicide due to this fallen system is a tragedy. That the country has lost an officer in whom the people have invested resources is a waste and shame. That an officer did not have means to ventilate his concerns and seek support shows not only how anarchic are conditions within the law enforcement agencies in the country, but also illuminates the alarming fact that the apparatus of criminal investigation is not geared to investigate crime, and help unearth the truth, but is better equipped to cover it up. What is shocking is the banality of it.