Sunday, December 30, 2007

THIS ABOVE ALL - by Khushwant Singh

Idol speculation
PREETAM Giani is an iconoclast (an idol-breaker) in more senses than one. He was born of Pakistani Muslim parents, given a Muslim name and brought up as one. He changed it to a recognisable Hindu-Sikh name Preetam Giani. While a student of English literature in Cambridge University, he openly proclaimed himself to be a gay and continues to champion the cause of homosexuals. He has been in trouble with the police. Looked upon by the orthodox as a renegade, he also declares he is an idolater: he worships Lakshmi, the goddess of wealth. However, Lakshmi has not been very kind to him as he is always hard up for money.
Preetam lives in Abbotabad (Pakistan) and often writes to me. Some years ago, he came to Delhi with his Pakistani friend. I took an afternoon off to drive them round the city. He was not interested in seeing monuments but agreed to visit Ghalib’s grave in Nizamuddin. While his friend recited the fateha beside the tomb of the poet, he stood at a distance taking photographs. He showed no desire to go into the dargah to pay homage to Amir Khusrau or Hazrat Nizamuddin Auliya. Instead, he went next door to the Ghalib Institute and handed over a set of his translations of Ghalib’s Diwan.
In his last letter to me, Preetam wrote: “Anyone who has ever kissed the photo of a loved one should be able to understand the reason for idolatory.” That I think is going too far. Most of us have photographs of people we love or admire on our walls or in silver frames on our tables but we do not worship them.
However, one has to concede that the dividing line between respect, admiration and worship is often blurred. However much some religions decry worship of idols, it manifests itself in different forms in all of them. Jainism and Buddhism question the existence of God and decry worship of idols as symbolic representations of the Divine. Nevertheless idols of Mahavira and other Tirthankars and those of Gautama Buddha are the central pieces of all Jain and Buddhist temples. Hinduism, which often maintains God is nirankar (without form), in practice makes no apology for representing the formless God in human or symbolic forms. The only Hindu temples without idols that I came across were in Bali. Reformist sects like the Brahmo and the Arya Samaj which tried to discard idol worship failed in their quests.
Sikhs, who also profess to be against idol worship, treat the Granth Sahib much the same way as Hindus treat their idols. The Granth Sahib is “woken up” in the morning (prakash) and put to sleep (santokhna) at night. It is draped in rich embroidered silks and taken out in processions. In homes of the rich, a room is set apart for the holy book (Baba ji da kamra), and fans or ACs are kept going round the clock in the summer months.
Christians deny they are idol worshippers. However, the reverence they show towards the statues of Jesus Christ and Virgin Mary are no different from reverence shown by idol worshippers to their deities carved in stone or wood.
Muslims claim with pride that they abominate idol worship and regard idol-breakers as their heroes. It is true that they do not allow pictures or idols of the Prophet to be made but Shias in Iran have pictures of Hazrat Ali Hasan and Hussain in the streets and on walls in their homes. More Muslims visit dargahs, where their holy men are buried, to ask for favours than they go to mosques to offer namaaz. Instead of worshipping idols, they worship graves of their peers, rightly described as kabar-prasti.
Idol worship is inherent in human nature.
=======================================

Saturday, December 20, 2003
THIS ABOVE ALL
The art of doing nothingKhushwant Singh
I spent my childhood and youth shirking work by bunking school and college lectures. But for the fear of parents and teachers, I had no problems spending my days playing and loafing about. That attitude to life continued into the years in office. I found an excuse to absent myself, roamed the streets gazing into shop-windows, see the raunaq of bazaars, people going from nowhere to nowhere. I looked forward to week-ends and holidays. If the office closed down in honour of the demise of some national leader or departmental head, I celebrated it as a bonus by taking my family to the pictures or a picnic. My role model was a loafer.
Things began to change when I became my own employer and had to live on what I earned by my own efforts. I proved to be a hard task-master. Painful though the transition was, I learnt to rise before dawn, slog all day into the late hours and cut down on my social activities. Slogging became my second nature. I lost the ability to relax, to sit still and stare at nothing without a care in the world. I can't make up my mind whether it is better to be a loafer or a workaholic. Since I am determined not to drive myself hard anymore, I am trying out different techniques to teach myself to do nothing.
I sit in my garden basking in the winter sun. I keep my habit of picking up a book or a magazine under check. I succumb to crossword puzzles because they keep my mind from going to sleep. I watch my cats (they've multiplied to six). They spend their day doing nothing besides playing with each other and dozing off. I envy their carefree existence. They can do so because they live on my bounty. Envying cats does not solve my problems. I have eliminated some causes of my restlessness and come to the conclusion that both the impulse to restless activity and the desire to do nothing ultimately depend on one's mind. How can one train the mind?
Very reluctantly I turned to meditation. I did my best to keep the outside world from intruding into my solitude. I read the morning papers and watched TV to keep abreast of world events. Then put the world out of my mind. I tried some preliminary exercises like shutting my eyes and focusing my mind on inhaling and exhaling my breath. I found it very soothing. For a few fleeting seconds, I could also still my mind and prevent it from jumping like a monkey from one branch to another. It didn't last too long. The mind is simian: it is its nature to jump about. It continues to do so when I am asleep. I cannot control my dreams because I cannot control my mind except for a few fleeting moments.
In any event what does stilling my mind produce? Some maintain it produces peace of mind — which in its turn produces nothing besides peace of mind. I am in a conundrum: should I persist in trying to meditate? Or should I give it up as an exercise in futility? I wish some reader knowledgeable about the subject would advise me.
============================================
THIS ABOVE ALL
The potent Gayatri Mantra
by Khushwant Singh
I HAVE succeeded in memorising the lines (like to show-off the little knowledge Ihave) but I have failed to comprehend their meaning nor understood why Hindus regard it as the mantra of all mantras. To me it appears to be no more than a hymn in praise of the sun. Allama Iqbal in his poem Aaftab also regarded it as a litany of solar worship. I have two other versions in translation. The first is by Professor V.N. Datta. The second by Nafay Kumail Radaulvi. Before their versions I reproduce the original:
Aum Bhur Bhuvah Svah, Tat Savitur VarenyamBhargo Devasya Dhimahi Dhiyo Yo Nah Prachodayat
Professor Datta translates the lines as follows:
"O Lord, who pervades the earth,
The intermediate world and the world of life,
We mediate on the supreme light
Of the illumining Sun-god,
That he may impel our mind."
Rudaulvi, who is himself a poet of some calibre, translated the same lines in more poetic words:
Oh Lord, the soul of this beautiful world and the founder of day and night
You are the creator of the universe and the provider for all
The Moon the Sun are there due to you and help creation
The life and death is subject to your existence
You are the Noor that is everywhere
The heart beats and all breathe with your permission
Please have mercy in the name of that noor
The knowledge and Aql gets the right intellectual orientation
Can some reader tell me why this mantra is looked upon as the most potent?

Wednesday, November 28, 2007

Social activism and not politics need of the hour: Govindacharya



Former general secretary of the BJP, K N Govindacharya, once a well known face in party circles has been quite a recluse for some time now. However, he continues to keenly observe political developments in the country and the world. Proud of his long association with the RSS, the soft-spoken ideologue considers the Pokhran explosion as the greatest achievement of NDA regime, and feels the Indo-US nuke deal is irrelevant. In a free-wheeling interview to Arun Chaubey, he calls Nandigram a natural reaction to the forces of marketism and touches upon topics like terrorism and impact of liberalisation on the Indian society.
Excerpts:
What is your opinion on the Indo-US civil nuke deal?
Neither is the deal required nor would it be helpful in its objective. The deal has very little to offer. It is only for power generation, and in terms of power also it would fulfill merely 10% of energy demand. As far as technology is concerned, India has evolved on its own and not at the mercy of US. In fact in the present situation, US needs India more. Therefore India should begin negotiation from a higher pedestal, as this treaty in an indirect way of forcing India towards NPT. India should have made it clear to the US that the Hyde Act cannot be a feature of the deal.
Is the US failure responsible for Islamic terrorism in India as well as other parts of the world?
The US has tackled the international situation in a wrong way. It has become isolated and got the image of ‘Dadagiri’. And this wrong approach is responsible in promoting jehadi terrorism across the world. In the post-Cold War era and with the disintegration of USSR, the US lust for attaining the sole leadership position was even further whetted. But it in return got the sting of 9/11. Since then, the foundation of international relationships has changed radically and the US has not been able to cope with the change. At this juncture, India has to play an active role instead of adopting a defensive stance. In that way, US can be a useful assistant to India. We need to shed the hangover of inferiority and assume a leadership role through aggresive political diplomacy.
On the home front, how do you view developments in Nandigram?
Nandigram is a natural reaction to forces of marketism. Singur and Nandigram are specimen events on the process of struggle but their context has not been taken cognisance of. In Singur, Mamata Banerjee despite her 45 days’ epic fast could not attain the needed result. While the role of violence in Nandigram has undervalued the limitations of peaceful methods of protest in the public discourse, which is tragic and unhealthy for democracy as well as the nation.
How would you describe your long association with the BJP?
As far as my association with BJP is concerned, I contributed my bit on an ideological level. On electoral plank, I was a witness at close quarters of power circles. I could observe that coming to power is easy, but status quoists and insensitive operatus in the party create hurdles.
Please explain the status quoists and their role in politics?
The tool of implementation for the party was state machinery, which was not tuned for the purpose of change, therefore the status quoists created hurdles. The political leadership, which was also deficient in terms of motivational and competence, failed to act against it.
But this status quoism lead to disillusionment especially among youth?
Since the political leadeship was not trained, they were satisfied with their mediocrity of performance and failed to notice that expectations were high from them. The gap between expectation and performance led to disillusionment.
Is there any hope for alternative leadership?
Indian youth is capable of going ahead on its own. Only thing it has to have is the robustness of Indian civilisation. It has to have the capacity to limit and rule the state power. Only then the establishment and the state will be able to understand India in its own way and not in the European context, and India will be able to contribute its worth globally.
You see hope for India in second generation of leadership, but youth movements have been a failure in India?
People’s movement including JP movement, anti-Boffors or Ram Janmabhoomi movements and also pre-independence movement were mainly fought against the onslaught, menace and distortion of the state. Therefore, all these movements ended up changing the state, as they neither had the stamina for systemic change nor had the ability to make the government conducive to Indian ethos. Indian society and youth are now ranged against forces of marketism, indiscriminate globalisation and degeneration of democracy into a sort of ‘corporatocracy’. The need of the hour is to galvanise a parallel political movement like the pre-1934 freedom movement. The structure needed, methodology adopted and traning needed for the leaders of the movement has to be original.
How do you see the role of so called nationalist parties?
Are they losing their edge? The political space for vibrant nationalism coupled with pro-poor is vacant in the public sphere of India. As far as nationalist parties- who offer verbal support to the nationalist issues- are concerned, they have lost their credibility because of the disjoint between their promises and their deeds. And those who have pro-poor approach are deficient if not ignorant about the traditions and moorings of the nation. You have spared a lot of time in studying the impact of liberalisation on Indian society.
What is your observation?
My study on the impact of liberalisation on Indian society has come to the conclusion that:
Rural poverty has not decreased; instead despair and anarchy are looming large in the countryside.
Urban poverty decreased a bit in terms of heavy cost of unemployment, but pollution, crime and atrocities on weaker sections have increased.
Inequalities have increased manifold and the system is attending to only 30 per cent of the society, leaving 70 per cent to their own fate.
Attitude towards women has degenerated to mere consumerism.
Consumerism and permissiveness have pervaded the social fabric resulting in erosion of Indian values and functioning levers of the society.
It has eroded the confidence of India in contributing its might globally, thererby affecting self-pride and self-confidence of Indian society.
It has created acute tension in the socio-political fabric of the nation. New structures, new tools of change will have to be identified, harnessed and integrated as a fighting unit in its own way.
Besides, globalisation has directed towards further centralisation, homogenisation and monopolisation in which democracy is captured and controlled by money bags. The organs of the state including media and channels of information are used to condition the minds of society for creating false demands to manipulate the system for immoral profits alone. This process in turn creates disconnect between state and markets and society and state, while markets collude together to deprive the society from fulfilling its aspirations.
Therefore, I feel that the battle has to be fought on multiple planks. It has to be decentralised, diversified and localised so that localised communities which defy the dominance of the state as well as market and yet are able to lead a prosperous life based on inter-dependence and cultural advancement.
Besides, it requires a three-pronged robust effort in the direction of intellectual, constructive and educational activities in a decentralised, localised mode.
For all this, an understanding has to be evolved about the concept of development- ways of development based on family being the unit- which has to be nature-friendly in the context of investment, technology, management and participation of people.
Will you return to active politics? If not, why?
I do not agree to this proposition. The role of the party and power politics in India is mostly alien and unmindful of Indian tradition as well as needs. And the whole idea has been borrowed from a society carved out by the formulae of Social Contract theory and the individualism evolved through Protestantism as an ideology. So unprotected individual participation in politics leads to dominance of politics by local and foreign money bags that disconnect the state from the understanding and organisation of the society itself.
The basic dictum about the state’s existence is supposed to protect the interest of those who cannot protect themselves. But the state has played the role of obstructor, disruptor and speed governor upon the society. Therefore, understanding the limitation and role of party and power politics, my plan is to carve out a social dynamo to speed up the progress and create social deterrant to bring back party and power politics to the rails of values and issues to salvage the society from self-destructive marshy land of crass power game.
Since there is not much difference in politics with regard to sense of purpose, discreet world view, national vision of their own manifestos, the political parties have degenerated into gangs vying for power with no-hold barred methods, visualising power as a tool of social progress. They have turned into groups competing for power, which has become an end in itself and not the means.
Internal participation merely will not suffice as the external pressure of societal level is the need of the hour. So I decided to contribute in the unity of nation and the society in constructive and educational mode, desisting from being a part of the partisan and power politics.

Friday, November 23, 2007

On Kamala Suraiya's conversion

Varsha Bhosle
Prophet-sharing
We feel that it is an incumbent duty of Intellectuals like us to announce to the world via the Press, our private decisions concerning our personal life. Hear ye, hear ye: We have resolved to embrace the great religion called Islam because our freedom had become frayed at the edges. We have outgrown the desire for freedom. Hinduism is too lenient for us; there is simply too much freedom... Naturally, Hindu fundamentalists are crying for our blue blood. But so are the, er... remarkably devout sections of our future co-religionists. They denounce us as a Hindu mole! We simply fail to understand! What have we said that can be construed as shedding a poor light on Islam, we ask you?!
We Intellectuals tend to come full circle: When Hagar was cast out by her husband Abram and his first wife Sarai (later christened by God as Abraham and Sarah, respectively), and was languishing in the middle of the desert, the angel of the Lord said unto her, "Behold, thou art with child and shalt bear a son, and shalt call his name Ishmael... And he will be a wild man; his hand will be against every man, and every man's hand against him; and he shall dwell in the presence of all his brethren" (Genesis 16:1-16). And, lo, Ishmael was fruitful and begat twelve princes, who begat twenty-one tribes, which multiplied into the Arab nation, the soil for our beloved Islam.
You see, we, too, were abandoned by Lord Krishna (to whom, our grandma told us when we were a twee princess, we were married) and the other 30 million Hindu gods who are presently too busy to regulate and discipline our life and protect us. It was because of these entities that we sent shockwaves through strait-laced India with our erotic works; under their influence we became the controversial rebel who exploded hypocrisies. And so we are left with no choice but to augment the augury on Ishmael: We are a wild personage, and we shall dwell here, and we shall speak frankly and fearlessly about the religion we were accidentally born into, and our hand will be against every man, and every man's hand against us. (Figuratively! You have a filthy mind!) If Allah is merciful, we will also be fruitful and beget many tribes (which we will keenly monitor, just in case they show a propensity for Buddhism).
These fundamentalists are mad at us for revealing to an interviewer that we are converting Lord Krishna, our former intimate friend and love, to Allah, as well as making him a prophet after naming him "Mohammed." They are threatening us with death. We do not see what this fuss is all about! For, as you know, "Brahma" is just a distortion of "Abraham," and Sarah is really Saraswati, and the ten thousand cows in the Vedas actually refer to the ten thousand saintly companions of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). As far as we're concerned, God is an abstract entity. Even so, that will not prevent us from visiting Mecca and embracing the soil of Madina asap. You see, towns and soil are also abstract entities.
In any case, we don't give a rat's ass about these fundamentalists. We have been getting calls from almost all the Muslim countries extending their support to us; many have invited us to visit their countries. Our announcement has greatly enthused the Muslim community in our state. And their enthusiasm enthused us so much that we promptly informed UNI about the welcome-to-the-fold telegram from Abdul Nasir Mahdani, founder of the Islamic Sewak Sangh, temporarily residing at Salem Central Jail, framed under various sections of the IPC, including 153 (a) spreading communal hatred, 120 (b) criminal conspiracy, 124 (a) sedition, and under the Arms Act. Now all we are waiting for are communiques from Dawood Ibrahim and Osama bin Laden. Then we can embrace the soil of Pakistan and Afghanistan, too.
If you remember, barely three years ago, we had said that we believe that God is there in every cell of our body, your body, every cell of this world. Some kind of power, that is how we thought of God. We had said that that God was good enough for us; that we didn't need "Gods trapped in mausoleums, temples, churches, mosques"; that we didn't need such "Gods who can be imprisoned." Now we know: we never did have a clue about God. God is He who's trapped in the Ka'ba. Now we are wiser: we need gods who can be imprisoned. And why just gods? A fact of life is, all feminists need to be imprisoned.
The immediate reason for our accepting Islam seems to baffle others, we do not know why: We were travelling in a car from Malabar Hill to Kandivili. We started the journey along the highway at 6.45 am. We looked at the rising sun. Surprisingly, it had the colour of a setting sun. It travelled with us and at 7.00 am, it turned white. For years we have been looking for signs telling us when to convert. Finally, we got the message: People squat. Besides, we are against the Hindu way of cremating the dead; we do not want our body to be burnt. We would prefer to rot and be gnawed away by maggots.
Hindus have abused and hurt us. They (they!) have often tried to scandalise us (us!). We cannot repose faith in Hinduism because Hindu gods never forgive. They only punish. Our feeling is that Islam is a religion of love, the religion of forgiveness. Allah is the fountainhead of love and compassion. We will write about that. We will write poems with illustrations from the Quran and the Hadeeth, the holy books containing the religious, social, civil, commercial, military, and legal codes for Muslims:
* Fighting is obligatory for you, much as you may dislike it. But you may hate a thing although it is good for you, and love a thing although it is bad for you. God knows, but you do not. (Surah 2:216)
* Let believers not make friends with infidels in preference to the faithful -- he that does this has nothing to hope for from God -- except in self-defence. (Surah 3:28)
* He will put terror into the hearts of the unbelievers. They serve other deities besides God for whom He has revealed no sanction. The Fire shall be their home; dismal indeed is the dwelling of the evil-doers. (Surah 3:151)
* Those that deny our revelations, We will burn in fire. No sooner will their skins be consumed than We shall give them other skins, so that they may truly taste the scourge. God is mighty and wise. (Surah 4:56)
* Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them [captive], and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush. But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then leave their way free. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. (at-Taubah 9:5.10)
* Fight those who believe not in God nor the last day... nor acknowledge the religion of truth, and fight people of the book, until they pay Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. (Surah 9:29)
On second thoughts, we would not like to comment on controversial subjects. We have no interest in making a speech about the Shariat. Let others take care of it. We are concerned only about the good things Islam can offer to us and to the world at large. Like Omar Bakri Muhammad: "Using any biological weapons in self-defence is, in Islam, permissible, and I believe that we are currently operating under a defensive jihad... Obviously we regret what happens to people but there are always people who are war casualties." Or Uganda's Idi Amin, who slaughtered 300,000 of his people, mostly Christians, after he embraced Islam. Or Nawabzada Nabiullah Khan, the ideologue for Jamaat-i-Islami: "More science and technology is bad for civilisation. I had completed civil engineering, hence I am privy to scientific knowledge. I can tell you how corrupting that is. It even makes you question the glorious Quran. There are many Hadeeths which say that the earth is flat. But any science will tell you the earth is a sphere. But you can use the same science like relativity theory to prove that the earth is flat." Or even Abul Kalam Azad, who forced Tagore's Shantiniketan to delete "Satyam Shivam Sundaram" from its letter-head by threatening to stop governmental subsidies when he was education minister.
On second thoughts, we'll avoid this, as well. For, of course, we did not study much about Islam. We only thought about it a lot; we have been nurturing the idea in our mind for the last 27 years. We have been lonely all through our life. At nights, we used to sleep by embracing a pillow. We kept our desire a secret for long. We embraced it now, when we strongly felt the need for love and protection. NOT BY A YOUNG MUSIM LEAGUE LEADER! You have a filthy mind!
In any case, we do not bother about the reactions from people like you. Our secularist community has expressed happiness at our exercising our freedom. You know, secularists are good people: they fully support conversion from Hinduism. The only time they lose their cool is when fundamentalists begin reconversion drives. If you remember, in March, Congressman Sultan Ahmed, CPI-M's Robin Dey and nominated member Rosemary Gellian Hart raised the matter of the VHP's paraavartan yagna in the West Bengal assembly and condemned the extremists for their vile deed and demanded that the VHP be banned. Such is their mettle.
On the whole, the response has been very elating. At this stage of life, how else could we have collected so much goodwill and publicity? We profited from our Prophet. The only jarring note came from Bharatiya Vichara Kendram director, and thinker, P Parameswaran: "May the Lord save Islam."

Monday, November 19, 2007

AG Noorani's articles

AG Noorani, Hindustan Times
November 07, 2007
Deve Gowda's MoU.
The JD(S) President, HD Deve Gowda's memorandum of understanding (MoU) of November 1 with its 12 conditions has no precedent in the annals of parliamentary government. We must be careful about setting bad precedents in the states. As BR Ambedkar told the Constituent Assembly on December 30, 1948, apropos conventions on the appointment of a government, "The position of the Governor is exactly the same as the position of the President".
The MoU acquires a more sinister hue when read in this context. A Congress-JD(S) coalition led by Dharam Singh assumed office in Karnataka on May 28, 2004, after the general elections to the state assembly. The JD(S) withdrew from the coalition on January 18, 2006, and took the BJP as its partner instead. JD(S) leader HD Kumaraswamy said they would discuss more than sharing of ministerial berths. "Other details such as the sharing of Boards and Corporations (PSUs) will also be finalised." Of the 70 such bodies, the BJP got 40, the JD(S) 30. This is what we have come to. The coalition would be led by Kumaraswamy in the first 20 months and by the BJP leader BS Yeddyurappa in the remaining 20 months of the assembly's tenure. Moreover, in the first phase, the Speaker would be nominated by the BJP, in the second by the JD(S).
The coalition took office on February 3, 2006. On October 3, 2007, he reneged on his promise and refused to yield the CM's chair to the BJP. Stung, the BJP withdrew from the coalition on October 7. The next day Kumaraswamy resigned as CM. On October 9, President's rule was imposed in Karnataka but the assembly was suspended, not dissolved.
Come October 24, HD Deve Gowda wrote to Governor Rameshwar Thakur, and to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, very properly urging dissolution of the assembly.
The JD(S) embraced the BJP once again to form a government.
On November 1, HD Deve Gowda sent his historic MoU to the BJP President, Rajnath Singh, stipulating 12 conditions which no political party with any self-respect would accept. It renders governance impossible and unconstitutional. It goes beyond the usual minimum common programme on matters of policy. "Important administrative postings and promotions in respect of high administrative offices which have an influence on the quality of administration shall be made by the chief minister in consultation with the political partner, the JD(S)." In effect, it stipulates consent. The same rule applies in the appointment of Advocate General and "other law officers". Finally, "in the event of any significant departure/deviation from the above understanding that impairs the ability of the coalition to provide highest standards of governance in the state, which remains unresolved through the mechanism of coordination committee, any of the partners shall be at liberty to withdraw from the coalition". This is a conveniently vague and sweeping condition.
This is no way to run any ministry. It is a Deed of Marriage with the divorce papers annexed for each to file at will. On November 4, Kumaraswamy said that while his support to the BJP was unconditional, "the rider is that the Dal (S) should not be blamed or held responsible for any untoward incident or unhealthy development that takes place during the regime of the BJP-led coalition government". This flouts Article 164 (2) of the Constitution which lays down "The Council of Ministers shall be collectively responsible to the Legislative Assembly of the State".
In the same vein Deve Gowda said on November 1 that the alliance was only a "temporary arrangement" till elections to Lok Sabha are announced. What of his letter written a week earlier urging dissolution of the assembly? "I maintain the same position despite the JD(S) entering into a fresh tie-up with the BJP. I have not written any fresh letter to the Governor or the President, which could possibly nullify the contents of the first letter", which warned against defections.
The BJP also favoured dissolution then. Parliament should take him at his word and ratify the proclamation imposing President's Rule. So should the Union Cabinet. It should dissolve the assembly thereafter.
The country has long suffered two obscenities. The constitutional one of abuse of the power to impose President's Rule has been taken care of by the Supreme Court's ruling in the Bommai case. The political one of coalitions promiscuous and unstable must be brought to an end also. It surfaced in 1967 in a big way.
At that time, the President appointed on November 26, 1970, a committee of governors "to study and formulate norms and conventions governing the role of governors under the Constitution". Its report is instructive. "We witness an assortment of parties with widely divergent programmes and policies — wherever such programmes and policies are publicly announced — combining themselves to form what are now called samyukta vidhayak dals (united legislature parties), the only agreement among them being the agreement to get into government. The two basic conditions which would ensure a stable government by such combinations are, first, that the different parties should enter the combination as a unit, and secondly, that they should remain faithful to the combination. Experience has shown that neither of these two conditions has existed in the states where we have had samyukta vidhayak dal governments."
Its censures on defections and the remedy it proposed apply to such alliances. "It may be considered whether in situation like this the proper course would not be a dissolution of the legislature and an appeal to the real political sovereign, namely the electorate as was done in Mysore." In a similar case of alliances broken and mended, the governor of Gujarat reported to the President, "The conditions prevailing in the state at this juncture are such that any party agreeing to form a ministry will have a tenuous majority and will not be able to provide a reasonably stable government to the state."
In Bihar, the Supreme Court rejected the governor's claim to decide whether majority was secured by bribery. But it accepted the test of stability in the very passage quoted by BJP supporters. "If a political party with the support of other political parties or other MLAs satisfied the governor about its majority to form a stable government, the governor cannot refuse formation of government because of his subjective assessment that the majority was cobbled by illegal and unethical means of horse-trading and allurements."
Rodney Brazier, an authority on constitutional law and practice, holds that in a House where no single party commands a majority, it would be prudent for the Queen "to tell the leaders that if she were to receive evidence… of a copper-bottomed agreement on a majority coalition, its leadership, proposed disposition of ministerial officers and agreed Queen's speech (on policy issues), together with an equally sound guarantee that the coalition government would not seek dissolution within a reasonable time, then she would appoint the person agreed upon to be Prime Minister".
Deve Gowda's MoU is not 'copper-bottomed'. It is full of holes. The Centre must not allow his MoU to make a mockery of the Constitution. In such a situation parades of fickle politicians are constitutionally irrelevant.

Friday, November 16, 2007

Vedas and unity

By J.G. Arora
There is a misconception in some minds that Hinduscriptures sanction the caste system. Vedas, the proudpossession of mankind, are the foundation of Hinduism.Vedas are all-embracing, and treat the entire humanitywith the same respect and dignity. Vedas speak ofnobility of entire humanity (krinvanto vishvam aryam),and do not sanction any caste system or birth-basedcaste system. Mantra, numbered 10-13-1 in Rig Veda,addresses the entire humanity as divine children(shrunvantu vishve amrutsya putraha). Innumerablemantras in Vedas emphasise oneness, universalbrotherhood, harmony, happiness, affection, unity andcommonality of entire humanity. A few illustrationsare given here. Vide Mantra numbered 5-60-5 in RigVeda, the divine poet declares, “All men are brothers;no one is big, no one is small. All are equal.” Mantranumbered 16.15 in Yajur Veda reiterates that all menare brothers; no one is superior or inferior. Mantranumbered 10-191-2 in Rig Veda calls upon humanity tobe united to have a common speech and a common mind.Mantra numbered 3-30-1 in Atharva Veda enjoins uponall humans to be affectionate and to love one anotheras the cow loves her newly-born calf. Underliningunity and harmony still further, Mantra numbered3-30-6 in Atharva Veda commands humankind to dinetogether, and be as firmly united as the spokesattached to the hub of a chariot wheel. The BhagavadGita, which contains the essence of Vedas andUpanishads, has many shlokas that echo the Vedicdoctrine of oneness of humanity. In shloka numbered V(29), Lord Krishna declares that He is the friend ofall creatures (suhridam sarva bhutanam) whereas shlokanumbered IX (29) reiterates that the Lord has the sameaffection for all creatures, and whosoever remembersthe Lord, resides in the Lord, and the Lord resides inhim. Shloka numbered XVIII (61) declares that Godresides in every heart (ishwar sarva bhutanamhrudyeshe Arjun tishthti). Guna (Aptitude) and Karma(Actions) Hindu scriptures speak only about ‘varna’which means to ‘select’ (one’s profession, etc.) andwhich is not caste or birth-based. As per shlokanumbered IV (13) of the Bhagavad Gita, depending upona person’s guna (aptitude) and karma (actions), thereare four varnas. As per this shloka, a person’s varnais determined by his guna and karma, and not by hisbirth. Chapter XIV of the Bhagavad Gita specifiesthree gunas viz. satva (purity), rajas (passion andattachment) and tamas (ignorance). These three gunasare present in every human in different proportions,and determine the varna of every person. Accordingly,depending on one’s guna and karma, every individual isfree to select his own varna. Consequently, if theirgunas and karmas are different, even members of thesame family can belong to different varnas.Notwithstanding the differences in guna and karma ofdifferent individuals, Vedas treat the entire humanitywith the same respect and do not sanction any castesystem or birth-based caste system. Veda is theFoundation Hinduism is all-embracing and grants thesame respect to all humans, and anything to thecontrary anywhere is not sanctioned by the Vedas.Being divine revelation, the shrutis (Vedas) are theultimate authority on Dharma, and represent itseternal principles whereas being humanrecapitulations, smritis (recollections) can play onlya subordinate role. As per shloka numbered (6) ofChapter 2 in Manu Smriti, “Veda is the foundation ofentire Dharma.” Shloka numbered 2(13) of Manu Smritispecifies that whenever shruti (vedas) and smritisdiffer, stipulation of Vedas will prevail oversmritis. In view of this position, anythingdiscriminatory in Manu Smriti or anywhere else isanti-Veda, and therefore, is not sanctioned byHinduism and has subsequently been inserted withunholy intentions, and deserves to be weeded out.Besides, precise codification of Hinduism in one bookis indispensable to make Hinduism easier to beunderstood by a layman. For this codification,appropriate mantras of Vedas and Upanishads, andselected shlokas in the Ramayana and the Mahabharata(which also includes the Bhagavad Gita), etc. willprovide the basic material. Role of Media In order tousher in a casteless and harmonious society, theall-embracing and universal message of Vedas has to befollowed and spread. Both the print and electronicmedia play an important role in a country’s life. Theyshould contribute their mite to unite various sectionsof the society. But in India, most of the media areunwittingly strengthening caste and communaldivisions. By publishing divisive articles anddescribing political leaders and electorates,achievers and sports persons, and even wrong-doers andtheir victims as members of a particular caste orcommunity, the media is strengthening the divisionsinstead of unifying the society. The media should playa positive role so that there is amity all around. LetYour Hearts be One Anyone believing in the castesystem is violating the Vedic command of oneness ofentire humanity. Although the first known poem in theworld appeared as the first mantra in Rig Veda, andthough the Vedas and Upanishads contain the sublimestthoughts in the sublimest language, because of afaulty education system, most of the educated Indiansare ignorant of their rich heritage contained in theVedas and Upanishads. Most Indians do not knowSanskrit, the language of Vedic literature. Manypersons do not know even the meaning of their Sanskritnames. By learning Sanskrit one can read the Vedas,though even translated Vedic literature can bestudied. We have to ensure that we do not lose ourrich Vedic heritage as it would amount ot losing ouridentity. To ensure the survival of our Vedicheritage, and to bring about unity and harmony insociety, it is imperative that the all-embracingmessage of the Vedes is practised and propagated. (Theauthor is a former Chief Commissioner of Income Tax.

Sunday, November 04, 2007

Objections raised by Shri Haran to "Committee of Eminent Persons"


Objections Raised by Shri Haran to "COMMITTEE OF EMINENT PERSONS" -SSCP10/31/2007 4:14:40 PM To:The Secretary,The Committee of Eminent Persons onSethusamudram Shipping Channel Project,"Malligai"30/95. P.S.Kumarasamy Raja Road,Chennai – 600 028.SirSub: Objections and Suggestions on SSCP.Ref: Your Press Advertisements inviting for Objections & Suggestions.The Great Nationalist and Poet Subramania Barathiyar, being a believer and a staunch Hindu, probably motivated by the Great 'Ithihasa' Ramayana, had dreamt of a bridge connecting India and Srilanka, about which he had expressed in one of his immortal poems.The British rulers also studied and analyzed such a project and dropped the idea altogether, as it was not a viable one in many aspects. In independent India too, committees were constituted to study the viability of the project and lastly the A.Ramaswamy Mudaliar Committee had categorically said that, only a land-based canal could be built and that, the idea of demolishing "Rama Sethu" must be abandoned.Later, after almost four decades, the NDA Government laid the foundation and gave the green signal, and the present UPA Government had inaugurated the project in 2005.Since then, I have been closely following the development of the project and the relevant issues and their consequences.In a life full of uncertainties, many things might be conceived, but only a few are brought out. Many projects might be planned, but only a few are implemented or executed. There are many reasons for the non-implementation of projects. Some reasons are economical; a few are scientific; a few are environmental; a few are due to security concerns and a few are beyond our reasoning, which are attributed to GOD and Nature by the Religionists and the Atheists respectively. I strongly feel that, the SSCP belongs to the non-viable & non-implemental category because of all the above-said reasons and that is the 'unique aspect' of this project!I, as the Citizen of this Great Country, am deeply concerned with the "fall outs" (Economical, Environmental, Law & Order and National Security) of the implementation of a controversial project of this magnitude and hence I request you to kindly consider the "Objections & Suggestions", which I have enclosed along with necessary supportive materials as annexure.I hope and pray, that the Eminent Committee would recommend for a peaceful solution for the utmost satisfaction of all concerned.Thanking You Sir, Yours truly, B.R.Haran.OBJECTIONS* The "Rama Sethu" is a sacred and revered monument for the millions of Hindus and along with the "Himalayas", it plays a great role in integrating the people of this Great Nation. While Rameshwaram is a very important place of pilgrimage, the "Rama Sethu" is a place of worship for the Hindus. The Hindu religious and cultural organizations have requested only for the change of alignment without opposing the project as such, but certain quarters, with an intention of politicizing this issue, have given a communal colour by spreading a canard like "150 years dream of "Tamils" is being threatened by the "Hindus" in the name of Lord Rama and Rama Sethu", through the media, which is very unfortunate. The so-called rationalists have also indulged in hurting the religious sentiments of the Hindus by issuing statements and through press interviews. Such actions give a lot of room for anti-social & fanatic elements, which take law in to their hands and play havoc threatening peace & harmony. Since time immemorial, our Nation has been a land of Rishis, Munivars, Acharyas, Mahans, Gurus and Mahatmas and the people of our Nation have always revered and worshipped them. They have always been our permanent source of "strength". As all the Hindu Religious Gurus are opposed to the demolition of the Rama Sethu, we should heed their advices and accept them. Hence, the "Rama Sethu" must not be destructed at any cost, and the religious sentiments of Hindus must be respected.* Mr.S.R.Rao, Eminent Scientist and President of Society of Marine Archeology in India, who discovered the submerged "Dwaraka" off the coast of Gujarat and proved the historicity of Krishna & Mahabaratha, had categorically said that, a proper exploration and survey must be done to save & protect the Rama Sethu. He had said, "Rama Sethu is an ancient monument of national and international importance. Based on overwhelming archeological, epigraphical and scientific evidences, Rama Sethu should be declared and protected as a World Heritage Site". Hence the Rama Sethu must not be damaged and steps must be taken to implement the suggestion of Mr.S.R.rao.* Dr.S.Badrinarayanan, Eminbent Geologist and former Director, Geological Survey of India and Consultant, National Institute of Ocean Technology had said, "It is a well known fact that the coral reefs can only form in clean & unpolluted water and these being marine organisms require firm & compact formation as foundation. Geological & geophysical studies of Rama Sethu reveal the presence of loose marine sand below the coral layer clearly indicating the coral layer in the form of boulders are not natural and formed on their own, but have been transported by somebody and dumped there; thus clearly establishing the fact that Rama Sethu is very much manmade in the hoary past". Hence the Rama Sethu must not be damaged, but protected.* The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) has been done by NEERI much before the fatal attack of Tsunami on 26th of December 2004 and hence it becomes imperative to have a new study done by considering the impact of Tsunami and the effects of future Tsunamis. Prof. Tad S. Murthy, Vice President, The Tsunami Society, Ottawa, who is also a consultant for our central government for developing our own Tsunami Warning Systems, has said, "Execution of SSCP in its present form & alignment will lead to unprecedented disasters along the coast line of southern Tamil Nadu& Kerala during the next Tsunami". Hence the Rama Sethu must not be destroyed.* Prof. CSP Iyer, Executive Director, Center for Marine Analytical Reference and Standards, Trivandrum has said "The execution of SSCP would have an adverse impact on the sensitive ecosystem and the marine life in Palk Bay and the Gulf of Mannar, home and breeding ground to a large number of endangered marine life and species, viz, Dugong, Sea Turtles, Dolphins and Sea Horses thriving in the coral reefs that abound in this region". Hence the Rama Sethu must not be damaged, as the damage & dredging would prove detrimental to all the rare marine organisms.* Captain (Indian Navy) & Master Mariner H.Balakrishnan has studied the [project in detail and had presented his findings in the form of articles as "Mariner's Perspective", which have been widely published by the mainstream media in India. So far his findings have not been objected or contested by any of the functionaries associated with the project, which goes to prove that the project doesn't make any 'nautical sense'. He had analyzed the project taking in to consideration the important factors such as distance, fuel-need, time duration, pilot requirement & pilotage and tonnage of vessels, etc and arrived at a conclusion that the project is not viable at all. Captain Balakrishnan has said, "Considering the present global and geopolitical situation and insurgency & terrorists' threat perceptions, it is felt that the execution of SSCP would poise a grave danger to National Security". Hence the Project deserves to be shelved.* Dr.S.Kalyanaraman Ph D, Eminent Scientist & Director, Saraswathi Research Center who is in the forefront of saving & protecting the magnificent & wonderful world heritage monument Rama Sethu, hasd said, "The SSCP would lead to destruction of fish & marine life in the Palk Bay and Gulf of Mannar, resulting in loss of livelihood of thousands of fishermen and their families, along the southern coast of Tamil Nadu. The project does not include Tsunami protection measures". Hence the project must be shelved.* Apart from the expert opinions of the experts belonging to relevant fields, there are umpteen evidences to prove the historicity of Rama Sethu. Historical, Sculptural, Socio-Cultural, Literary, Numismatic, Cartographical, Epigraphical, Geological & Archeological evidences have been presented for the existence of the Rama Sethu for ages. Mr.V.Sundaram I.A.S. First Chairman of Tuticorin Port Trust, Scholar & Journalist, who had compiled all the above-said evidences in his masterpiece titled "Rama Sethu-Historic Facts vs Political Fiction" had said, "SSCP in its present form is scientifically inconsistent and technically indefensible". Hence, Rama Sethu must be protected and the SSCP must be shelved.* Mr.Ossie Fernandes, Environmentalist & Leader, Coastal Action Network, has been working tirelessly to save the livelihood of thousands of fishermen and their families and also to save the lives of thousands of rare marine species. He has been vociferously against the project since the beginning and he had said, "A spoilt environment would lead to the threat of livelihood of fishermen in the coastal districts of Tamil Nadu". The website www.earthdive.com has published a news item along with his interview in January 2007.* The famous journal "Current Science" has addressed the short term & long term implications of this project, raising relevant questions on the technical feasibility of the project.* Retired Army Officer Colonel S.S.Rajan, concerned with the implications of the SSCP, took a "Padha Yathra" from Chennai to Rameshwaram, covering a distance of 650 Kms for creating awareness on the importance of protecting Rama Sethu. Through this padha yathra, he had appealed to the government "To protect Rama Sethu for saving the livelihood of thousands of fishermen, to save the environment for the safety & well being of thousands of marine organisms & rare species, to respect the religious sentiments of millions of Hindus as that of Christians, Muslims and other Minorities, to secure the Nation from the threats of Terrorists". He also had the support of a great number of Army, Air force and Naval officers in person, as well as through correspondences, thereby upholding the secular fabric of the Armed Forces. Hence, this project must be shelved and the Rama Sethu must be protected.* The Tamil Nadu Tourism Department had rightly claimed that the Gulf of Mannar Marine National Park is a wild life sanctuary and a great Marine Biosphere running along the coasts of Ramanathapuram & Thoothukudi covering 21 Islands, 623 ha, full of Coral reefs, Dugong, Turtles, Dolphins and other Marine Species. The Department says that the Kurusadai Islands off Mandapam boasts of a vast expanse of shallow water. The presence of 'flora & fauna' here are in their virgin form.* The Honourable Shipping & Road Transport Minister Mr.T.R.Balu, when he was the Union minister for Environment & Forests during the NDA regime, had inaugurated The Gulf of Mannar Biosphere Trust on the 16th of December 2000. During the function, he had given a scintillating speech delving at the concept & importance of Biosphere. He had said, "The Biosphere is a "Biologists' Paradise" and that it was established for attempting an integrated approach to resolving the adverse impact of human activities on the rich biodiversity of this ecologically fragile area". He had called upon the people, "Work with commitment & vigor for the cause of conservation of biological diversity". So, as per the contention of Mr.T.R.Balu, it becomes imperative for us to protect the ecologically fragile area and hence the project must be shelved.* In the event of implementation of this project after completion of dredging, there is a strong possibility of spillage of oils & chemicals, which would be devastating for the entire marine life in the area. In this context, we must recall the situation prevailing in the rivers & oceans of Europe, which are totally polluted and completely rid of marine organisms. Now the authorities there are finding it very difficult to repopulate the rivers & oceans with newly bred organisms like the "Salmon Fish", etc, which have become almost extinct. In the event of such a disaster, do we have a disaster management mechanism in place? D we have a disaster prevention mechanism in place? * The present committee constituted by the Central government does not have experts from the fields of Geology, Marine Archeology, Marine Industry, Coastal Security and Indian Navy, which are vitally relevant & important to assess the viability of the project. So, I feel the said committee must be reconstituted as experts from the above said fields have been missed out.* I feel the inclusion of Historians in the committee is irrelevant and doesn't make sense at all, as the central government had already accepted the historicity of Lord Rama, Ramayana and Rama Sethu. Despite the fact that the Existence of Rama Sethu for ages has been established with authentic facts & evidences, it is a matter of faith & belief of millions of Hindus, which cannot be questioned by any authority, as Freedom of Religion and Freedom of Worship have been enshrined in our Secular Constitution. Hence the inclusion of Historians in the committee is not necessary. SUGGESTIONSAs this unviable project is destined to be shelved, I, as a Tamilian, have a sincere suggestion for the development of the state, particularly the area under debate.* The Gulf of Mannar Biosphere can be developed as a prominent place in the map of International Tourism.* An Underwater Aquarium can be built, where the national & international tourist community could enjoy the sight of coral reefs and thousands of rare marine organisms.* A portion of Rama Sethu at "Sethukarai" near "Thirupullani" can be identified and promoted as a prominent tourist place.* A fresh Geological and Marine Archeological survey could be conducted and consequently the Rama Sethu could be declared and protected as a World Heritage Monument, which would help for a heavy inflow of international tourists.* Governments may come and go. But, the people, environment and the site remain forever. So, if the above suggestions are considered, the governments can have the satisfaction of spending the taxpayers' money in a useful and productive way.* In the event of implementation of the above steps, coastal areas would develop further; fishermen livelihood would not be affected; environment would be maintained & protected; marine organisms would flourish; revenue will keep on increasing due to tourism & pilgrimage. Last but not the least, all sections of people would live in peace & harmony without getting hurt, religiously or otherwise.ANNEXURES1. The statement of Dr.S.R.Rao, Founder, Society of Marine Archeology in India.2. The statements of Dr.S.Kalyanaraman,Ph D, Director, Sarswathi Research Centre.3. The statements of Prof CSP Iyer, Executive Director, Center for Marine Analytical Reference and Standards, Trivandrum.4. The papers presented by Captain H.Balakrishnan.5. The news published by www.earthdive.com6. The news published by "Current Science".7. The Tamil Nadu Tourism's Advertisement (Web Page)8. Text of Mr.T.R.Balu's speech, when he inaugurated the Gulf of Mannar Biosphere Trust, in December 2000, when he was Union Minister for Environment & Forests, in the NDA government.9. "Rama Sethu – Historic Facts vs Political Fiction" – Compiled by Mr.V.Sundaram. I.A.S.10. "Sethu Bandhanam" – A compilation of Tamil Literary evidences by Shri.R.Subbarayulu.

Tuesday, October 30, 2007

‘In the Tulsidas Ramayan, Sita is not Ram’s wife but his sister. Only in the Valmiki Ramayan is she his wife’

ON THE RECORD
M Karunanidhi, Tamil Nadu CM & DMK chief
Posted online: Monday, October 29, 2007 at 0000 hrs Print Email
Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M. Karunanidhi’s recent statements on Lord Ram and the Sethusamudram project created a controversy. In this second part of an interview with The Indian Express Editor-in-Chief Shekhar Gupta on NDTV 24x7’s Walk the Talk, he says there is no scope left for political negotiation on a new alignment for the Sethusamudram project. He also talks about how bitter politics in Tamil Nadu has become and why he thinks highly of Congress president Sonia Gandhi and former prime minister V.P. Singh
Related Stories
‘Whether you are democrat or dictator, on the left or right, exclusion will sooner or later destabilise you’‘Given the nature of competitive politics and fractured mandates... difficult for us to do what is manifestly obvious’‘We should neither proceed with n-deal nor dump it altogether... to avoid immediate elections’'It's possible for us to have military history written without carrying sensitive material''Unfortunately it took the Columbia disaster to remind people of the thrill of space flight. Otherwise, it had become a bit too routine'
• Do you think that, over the last 10-15 years, coalition politics has been the antidote to the poison of separatism?
Coalition is a temporary arrangement. It is not a permanent solution. We cannot say it is an antidote. But because of coalitions, we have been able to get some of our demands fulfilled. To that extent coalitions have been useful. Sethusamudram, the Salem steel plant, Neyveli Lignite Corporation — these are issues we raised in the past. But nobody bothered. They have begun to show concern now. We had asked for projects like the Bhakra Nangal dam here in the south. We wanted poverty to be eradicated here. Now we are able to get poverty-eradication schemes implemented here. Our aspirations are being fulfilled. Even the demand for classical language status for Tamil — which we never thought it would be given — has been conceded. When we are getting what we want, where is the need for separatism?
• So the cure is a federal government, which will require a new Constitution. You mentioned the Sethusamudram project. Were you surprised how big an issue it became?
Not merely surprised! Those who wanted it are the ones who are now opposing it. Atal Bihari Vajpayee of the BJP sanctioned the project when he was prime minister. Now the BJP is against the project.
• The BJP set the Indo-U.S. nuclear deal rolling too. Now it is opposing the deal.
Yes.
• So politics is like that. But this whole . . .
There should be no politics on certain issues. If someone politicises projects taken up in the national interest, he is a politician and not a statesman.
• But this is not just politics; this is also religion.
No, no. Where is religion in this?
• Well, because there’s a belief that Ram Sethu was the bridge built by Lord Ram.
I’m not a detractor of Ram. Let them keep Ram. I am no enemy of Ram. I have even written about this. Was the Ram issue raised when Vajpayee sanctioned the scheme? Or when three or four BJP ministers, in charge of surface transport, passed orders and chose the sixth alignment? It was not raised at that stage.
• You say Vajpayee approved it (the Sethusamudram channel project). But now it has become a religious issue because people will say that this bridge was constructed by Lord Ram. Lots of people believe in that; they think it’s sacrilege to cut through the bridge (for the Sethusamudram project).
It is not necessary to cut through this bridge. But let me ask: why can’t we cut the bridge even if it is named after Ram? Why can’t we cut through this bridge for the good of the people and build a new one? Jawaharlal Nehru did not accept Ram (as a divine being); he calls him a hero, not a god. C. Rajagopalachari wrote a book called Chakravarthi Thirumagan (The Emperor’s Blessed Son) that says Ram is a prince, not a god. It is not as if only the DMK is saying it.
• I understand that what you say is that Nehru called Ram a hero, not a god. Similarly, Rajagopalachari called him a great prince, not a god. But Nehru used to go to the Ramlila in New Delhi and fold his hands before (the idol).
That’s different. I am a chief minister. If there’s a festival in a Ram temple, do I stop it?
• But will you go to one of those festivals if invited?
Oh yes! (Laughs) Muslims invite us and we go. Christians invite us and we go. Why can’t we go when Hindus invite us? There’s nothing wrong.
• In one of your statements you asked that if this bridge (the Ram Sethu) was built by Lord Ram, then which engineering college did he go to.
It was said in lighter vein. Why make an issue of it.
• I’m not making an issue. All I’m saying is that what’s said in lighter vein is not taken in lighter vein because these are very sensitive issues.
They are using it deliberately for propaganda, as if I had hurt their sentiments. It is not true. In an election campaign, Periyar (founder of the Dravida movement) asked people in every street to beat Ram. I don’t want to elaborate, but what happened? He asked people to break idols of Pillayar (Lord Ganesh). But Anna said he would neither break Ganesh idols nor break coconuts in offering before gods. Recently, some 4,000 idols of Ganesh were immersed in the sea. Did we stop it? On the contrary, we provided police protection. In a sense, isn’t Ganesh considered greater than Ram?
• People in the Congress are not happy. They think you made a statement that the Valmiki Ramayan describes Lord Ram as a drunkard.
Yes, please read it. Even now I say that Valmiki has written that. What does Valmiki say? He says, ‘Hanuman tells Sita that because of being separated from her Ram has not touched any liquor.’ Tell me, does this not figure in Valmiki? I’ll show you Valmiki (Ramayan).
• Have you read the Valmiki Ramayan?
Yes. The Valmiki Ramayan and the Tulsidas Ramayan too. In fact, in the Tulsidas Ramayan, Sita is not Ram’s wife but his sister. Only in the Valmiki Ramayan is she his wife. In many versions of Ramayan, she is his sister.
• What will the solution to Sethusamudram problem be? Are you open to the idea of another alignment?
The matter is in the Supreme Court. We are waiting for that.
• Yes, but as a political negotiation, will you be open to the idea of a different alignment?
It’s not possible.
• The Congress has conveyed its concern to you about your Lord Ram statements, saying, ‘Look, in the south it’s okay . . .’
If you want to create a rift between us and the Congress, you will not succeed.•
Hasn’t the Congress told you that you have given the BJP something to talk about? No, I’m not saying anything about a rift. Parties can talk to each other.
No, I haven’t given the BJP any issue to raise. There’s no reason for me to do it. The BJP is talking on its own. The people of Tamil Nadu won’t accept what the BJP says. This the land of Periyar, of Anna.
• Yes, but at the same time, the Congress is worried that this will affect . . .
No, it’s not worried. Only you are worried (laughs).
• The Congress tells us it is worried. Do you see the situation getting defused in Supreme Court or do you see there’s room for political negotiation outside the Supreme Court on Sethusamudram?
It’s only for the Supreme Court to decide. There is nothing for us to say. We are waiting for the Supreme Court’s judgement.
• This is very interesting. You are placing so much faith in the Supreme Court. Just a few weeks back you had a brush with the Supreme Court (over the DMK protests and your fast on the Sethusamudram issue). A judge got very angry.
Once upon a time, there was an old lady who was very sick. There was a child who prayed to God every day. But she dies. Does it mean they will not pray any more? The Supreme Court is like that.
• You may not believe in God. But I like the way . . .
I believe in only one god.
• Which god do you believe in?
My conscience.
• It is fascinating that you nevertheless use that comparison (about God and praying and the Supreme Court). But what was your reaction to the Supreme Court’s strong remarks (about the DMK’s bandh call and yourprotest fast). Do you think you deserved those remarks or were they undeserved?
If I answer your question, it would mean what the court said about me is true.
• That’s very well said. You know, so many very senior politicians in the Congress and other parties told me that I would find that you have one of the sharpest minds in politics. I think they were so right.
(Laughs)
• There has been so much speculation, analysis, guesswork . . . tell me what happened in the case of Dayanidhi Maran?
I don’t want to speak about it.
• Tell me exactly what happened?
Nothing, nothing.
• He is your nephew. How painful was it for you?
I generally don’t discuss personal matters.
• But you think it is a forgotten chapter now?
I don’t consider anything a closed chapter.
• I see. Is there still hope for Dayanidhi Maran tomorrow if he did prayaschit or penance?
I am not ready to answer these questions now.
• What is the reason? You answer everything but avoid this.
It’s because there is scope for such unanswerable questions too.
• Why is Tamil Nadu politics so bitter? Why do people - you and Jayalalithaa, in this case, the two main parties - you are not even on talking terms. It is very bitter and very vicious. Why is it so? Was it so earlier?
In Tamil Nadu, things were all right till the time of MGR. He started a party against me, but we remained friends. Even though we were leaders of different parties, we were friends. However, after MGR, the party leadership began to hate us and abjured us. Kamaraj and I, Bhakthavatchalam (former Congress chief minister) and I were friends. R. Venkataraman and I are friends even today. So in Tamil Nadu, except for a party called the AIADMK, the others are all very friendly.
• And do you regret it?
Certainly. Not because that single person is unfriendly. But I regret that Tamil Nadu politics has come to this.
• Sir, you are the senior-most politician in India, not just in Tamil Nadu. Would you take the initiative someday to bring down this bitterness so that people can fight elections, fight in the Assembly, but have a decent relationship?
In 1967, there was a big (electoral) fight. We defeated Kamaraj. Bhakthavatchalam was defeated, R. Venkataraman was defeated. Anna became chief minister. All of us went to Kamaraj’s residence and took his blessings. We also went to Bhakthavatchalam’s house.
That was how we conducted ourselves. We showed no disdain towards the losers. But today people gloat over their victory. It is the AIADMK under Madam that has caused so much bitterness. She castigates me in her statements every day, calls me names. It would look very silly if I took up the initiative you suggest. But because you advise me, maybe I should go to her house and try to make up! When I, as chief minister, went to pay homage to Nedunchezhian (DMK stalwart who switched loyalties to the AIADMK), AIADMK members wielded broomsticks against us. Such is their culture.
• But would you appeal to her (Jayalalithaa)? Would you advise her that this is not the right thing. Would you appeal to her and say, ‘Let’s bring back some decency in our politics’?
There are several leaders here — Ramadoss (of the PMK), communist leaders, and even L. Ganesan of the BJP. Look how I treat them and how friendly they are to me. She is the only one (who is unfriendly). No, we cannot advise her.
• Before you go, let me ask you one thing. You dealt with many great political figures at the Centre. You shared power with Mr Vajpayee, and are now sharing power with Dr Manmohan Singh and Sonia Gandhi. You knew Jawaharlal Nehru, you knew Rajiv Gandhi to some extent, and also Indira Gandhi. Tell us your impressions of the people you met at the Centre. Whom did you find really remarkable or great.
V.P. Singh.
• Why do you think so highly of V.P. Singh?
Social reforms, reservation, the Mandal Commission. Since then we are friends.
• What about Mr Vajpayee?
Vajpayee is a very good man.
• Will you tell us some story from Vajpayee’s times, some conversations that you had? I am told you are a great storyteller. You are the great Kalaignar, so you should tell us a story.
Once during a TESO (Tamil Eelam Supporters Organisation) conference in Madurai, Nedumaran, Dr Subramanian Swamy and all had gathered. On that occasion, Vajpayee spoke in support of the LTTE. After that, because of change in circumstances, he withdrew from it. On many occasions, Vajpayee has been very kind to me. One reason for my relationship with Vajpayee getting stronger was Murasoli Maran. Vajpayee had great regard for Maran when he was a cabinet minister. And therefore for me too.
• Mr Vajpayee spoke in support of the LTTE?
Yes. During the Emergency, we also addressed meetings together.
• Who do you rate as a better prime minister —- V.P. Singh, Deve Gowda, Manmohan Singh? How do you rank them?
All of them are good. When Vajpayee was prime minister, new rules were framed prohibiting construction on the coast. When we wanted to build a memorial to Kamaraj in Kanyakumari, permission was denied. However, when I told Vajpayee that the memorial was for Kamaraj, he sanctioned it. Even now you can see the building in Cape Comorin.
• What’s your view on Dr Manmohan Singh as a prime minister?
A very good man.
• And Sonia Gandhi as a politician? You did not know Rajiv Gandhi so well, and I think that with Indira Gandhi you had a hostile relationship. She (Sonia) is the first Gandhi you are friends with.
What impressed me most was when she gave up the prime minister’s post.
• But would she make a good prime minister?
If she becomes prime minister, she will be a good prime minister.
• You have no objections to her becoming prime minister?
No, no. Even then I had said she should be the prime minister.
• In the three years that you have known her, have you been surprised by her maturity, her understanding of politics?
She has developed well as a political leader. She is a good administrator. She is ensuring an honest government. She has the capacity to nurture a big party.
• Before I let you go, if you would say a word . . . if you can just give me a sense of what India, Tamil Nadu, and the world look like to you after seven decades in politics? Are you happy? Are you unhappy? Do you see a lot of work having been done or do you see a lot more work still to be done?
Even after a good night’s sleep, when you wake up at 6 a.m., you feel like sleeping a little more. That is how I feel (laughs).
• That’s a wonderful note to conclude this on. Sir, thank you very much. You have been very generous with you time. And you have been generous with your laughter, which is so wonderful.editor@expressindia.com

Dare to know


2007/10/31
By Ali Sina
Hermit crab carries a shell on its back. This borrowed home provides shelter and protection from predators. When the crab feels threatened, it pulls into its shell to hide. Hermit crab does not leave its shell unless it no longer provides safety. Then it finds another shell to relocates.

We humans use faith for the same purpose that the hermit crab uses shell. Faith gives us security. We do not abandon our faith, unless we find something better. Very few people can live truly free from faith. Faiths come in all shapes and forms. Not all faiths are theistic. Materialism is also a faith. Communism, which is a “sect” of materialism, is an atheistic faith. The carnage that this faith did during the last century, in Soviet Union under Stalin; in China during the Cultural Revolution, and in Cambodia under Pol Pot, and virtually anywhere communists came to power or were striving to come to power, is only surpassed by the carnage of Islam.
Not all faiths are murderous, but all faiths are blind. In his first missile to the Corinthians, the apostle Paul says, “For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe.” (1 Corinthians 1:21). He then adds, “For the wisdom of this world is foolishness in God's sight. As it is written: "He catches the wise in their craftiness" (1 Corinthians 3:19) Imam a Ghazzali (1058 – 1111) also praised blind faith when he said: “Where the claims of reason come into conflict with revelation, reason must yield to revelation.” (Tahafut al-falasafa, the Incoherence of Philosophers)Do not think that those who have left religion are automatically faith-free. Many atheists are as blinded by their faith in materialism as religious people are with their "God delusion". Francium is said to be the least stable of the first 103 elements on the periodic table. Less than an ounce of it exists on the Earth at any one time. Free thinking is just as rare as Francium. Do not believe it, when atheists tell you that they are free thinkers. They have switched faith, but free thinkers they are not. They believe in materialism. I know many religious people who are far more free thinkers than many atheists. Atheism has nothing to do with free thinking. Not only most atheists oppose free thinking, they vehemently negate any innovative idea that challenges the materialistic view of the world and become vicious.
In the words of the physicist Max Planck, “science progresses funeral by funeral.” Socrates, who chose poison over silence, in his trial said, “The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance.” Socrates was charged with two crimes: He did not believe in the gods of the Athenians, and he “corrupted the young.” How did this alleged corruption happen? He went to the streets (a precursor of the Internet) and spoke of his maverick ideas to the young people who gathered to listen. He told them not to believe in the orthodoxy taught by the establishment, but to use their own intelligence and think. He taught them to use logic in lieu of faith. Although a gentle soul, Socrates was seen by the majority of the Athenians as a trouble maker, a revolutionary and a corrupter.
In the words of Australian biologist Jeremy Griffith, the director of Foundation for Humanity’s Adulthood “The Copernican model of our solar system, which showed that Earth was not the centre of the universe, was staunchly rejected by the scientific establishment and by religious zealots of Copernicus’ time. In fact Copernicus delayed publication of his theory until the last days of his life in 1543 because he feared persecution. Fifty seven years later Giordano Bruno was burnt at the stake for teaching Copernican theory and when Galileo upheld the same belief some ten years after Bruno’s incineration he was also made to endure horrific persecution.” [1]
When Galileo advocated Copernican ideas, he was accused of putting ideas that were contrary to religious teaching, which claimed that the Earth was fixed and the center of the universe. He went to his friends for support. They showed him their shoulders. He was denounced to the Inquisition and despite his age and frail health; he was forced to travel to Rome to stand trial. In order to avoid being burnt on stake he recanted, but spent the last eight years of his life in confinement. The Copernican theory was declared “false and erroneous” and Galileo’s book was banned by decree.
Darwin so feared opposition that he did not publish his book for eight years. When he did, he was ‘greeted with violent and malicious criticism’ (The Origin of Species, title page, 1968 Penguin edn). He was even accused of being psychotic. He was so fiercely attacked that he wrote: ‘I have got fairly sick of hostile reviews…I can pretty plainly see that, if my view is ever to be generally adopted, it will be by young men growing up and replacing the old workers’ (Charles Darwin, ed. Francis Darwin, 1902, p.244).
Darwin was mocked for his maverick ideas. During the famous debate at Oxford in 1860 about Darwin ’s idea of natural selection Bishop Wilberforce, said, “ Darwin ’s views are contrary to the revelations of God in the Scriptures’ (Charles Darwin, ed. Francis Darwin, 1902, p.236). As a final crushing blow, he turned to Thomas Huxley, the young biologist and the champion of Darwinism who was among the audience and said: “Is the gentleman, related by his grandfather’s or grandmother’s side to an ape?” Springing to his feet, young Huxley retorted: “I would far rather be descended from a monkey on both my parents’ sides than from a man who uses his brilliant talents for arousing religious prejudice”. A roar of rage went up from the clergy, yells of delight from the Oxford students. The day was Huxley’s—and Darwin’s. (Reader’s Digest, Great Lives, Great Deeds, 1966, p.335, 336) To keep away from being abused by hostile academicians, Darwin lived a recluse life.
Griffith says, “Each of these giant strides in the journey of demystification met so much resistance that the insights were lucky to survive. Science historian Thomas Kuhn pointed out that there is no guarantee truth will survive prejudice when he wrote, ‘In science…ideas do not change simply because new facts win out over outmoded ones…Since the facts can’t speak for themselves, it is their human advocates who win or lose the day’ (Shirley C. Strum, Almost Human, 1987—Strum’s references are to Thomas Kuhn’s The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, second edn, 1970). Similarly John Stuart Mill, in his essay On Liberty, emphasized that, ‘the dictum that truth always triumphs over persecution is one of those pleasant falsehoods which men repeat after one another till they pass into commonplaces, but which all experience refutes. History teems with instances of truth put down by persecution. If not suppressed for ever, it may be thrown back for centuries.”
These words should be engraved in gold. It is a lie to think that truth will automatically triumph over lies or that goodness will eventually win over evil on its own. This is a sweet lie that has no bases on reality and it serves to no purpose other than to lull us into inaction. Truth does not win unless someone promotes it and goodness will not triumph unless someone advance it.
Who will advance the truth? The orthodoxy will not tolerate innovative ideas that defy its paradigm. Kuhn also recognized that “revolutions in science are often initiated by an outsider—someone not locked into the current model, which hampers vision almost as much as blinders would’ (Shirley C. Strum, Almost Human, 1987, pp.164-165 of 294—Strum’s references are to Thomas Kuhn’s The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, second edn, 1970).
Why an outsider? It is because an outsider does not know that it cannot be done. He has no idea that it is impossible. Because he is ignorant, i.e. ignorant of the conventional wisdom, he tries the “impossible,” and indulges in experiments that are deemed to be foolish. The pioneers of science and inventors are often outsiders. They are heretics, rejected by the priests of orthodoxy and barred from the tabernacle of the custodians of “knowledge.”
Not all learning is knowledge. Most people have learned a lot, but they do not know much. They are scholars, but not scouts.
Griffith says, “Even Charles Darwin was ‘a lone genius, working from his country home without any official academic position. (Geoffrey Miller, The Mating Mind, 2000, p.33 of 538). The danger of not being part of the establishment is that the ‘outsider’ is an easy, undefended target for those in the establishment who feel threatened by the outsider’s new ideas.
“The philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer summarized the journey that new ideas in science have historically had to undergo when he said that ‘the reception of any successful new scientific hypothesis goes through predictable phases before being accepted’. First, ‘it is ridiculed’ and ‘violently opposed’. Second, after support begins to accumulate ‘it is stated that it may be true but it’s not particularly relevant.’ Third, ‘after it has clearly influenced the field [including members of the establishment quickly remodeling/ plagiarizing the ideas as their own discoveries] it is admitted to be true and relevant but the same critics assert that the idea is not original.’ Finally, ‘it is accepted as being self-evident’ (compiled from two references to Schopenhauer’s quote—New Scientist, 15 Nov. 1984 and PlanetHood, Ferencz and Keyes, 1988). Note that each stage of recognition is achieved in a way that protects the ego of the onlookers. The extent of insecurity in the human make-up is very apparent. Because the ego or sense of self worth of each generation becomes attached to its view of the world, paradigm shifts typically have to be introduced by new generations.
“George Bernard Shaw warned of the true nature of progress when he said that, ‘All great truths begin as blasphemies’ (from his play Annajanska, 1919).” [2]
Many Muslims tell me that after reading my articles criticizing Islam, their faith in Islam has increased. How can one’s faith increase after reading that the man whom they had believed to be a prophet of God was a mass murderer, a looter, a pedophile, a rapist and an assassin? This defies logic. What actually is happening is that they feel threatened. Their faith is challenged, and as the result, they hide deeper in their shell. They will not venture out, until that shell is completely broken and it can no longer provide protection. To achieve that goal, we must pound on it with truth until it is smashed into pieces.
Muslims are not the only people hiding in their shells. The majority of mankind needs the protective armor of a faith. We want to make sense of the world. We are afraid of the unknown. We cling to our beliefs because they give us comfort. We fear the unknown. We fear freedom.
Not too long ago I received an email (I am sorry I could not find it to publish it here) from a Muslim who said, Ali, I agree with everything you say about Islam. But I can't leave Islam because it is everything that I have. Without it I don't know what to do.
Erick Fromm in, The Fear of Freedom, (Routledge 17 May 2001) upholds the idea that capitalism frees man from a society that reduces him to a single role, but at a price. The price is isolation. Man has to find or create his place in the world. This causes anxiety. Whilst fascism, Nazism, theocracies, and all forms of authoritarianisms, satisfy man’s psychological need to belong. They provide a simple "us vs. them" ethos which gives the adherent something bigger to be a part of. Through conformity man tries to beat the anxiety of separation. That means loss of freedom and loss of independence. By conforming you belong, but you give up your wholeness and become a part of something else.
The fear of being different, to be isolated, to become an outcast, is cause for anxiety and this is what makes us humans conform – conform with the norms and dictums of the society – with its values, its standards, its mores and its wisdom. We need to find something to belong. Our community, our country, our religion and ultimately our faith/ideology give us security and the sense of belonging. They are shells that we carry along to hide within and feel safe. Therefore, we are protective of them. That is why we become defensive if our beliefs are challenged. People can become abusive, aggressive and even violent when their faith is threatened. That is why Socrates was forced to drink poison, Jordano Bruno was burned, Galileo was imprisoned, Jesus was crucified, Joan of Arc was burned to ashes and Bab was executed. They died because they pioneered new ideas that threatened the faiths of the people.
We humans have not changed much psychologically. Technologically, we have advanced, but psychologically we are still cavemen. We have changed our beliefs. We have changed our shells, but we are the same hermit crab, with the same fears that haunted our ancestors thousands of years ago.
Today the Inquisition is performed in the academia. There are dogmas that are taboos and you must not violate or you will be assaulted with vicious ferocity, until you recoil and remain silent. If you don’t, you’ll pay the price, dearly. You may not be executed literally but you’ll be mocked, vilified, insulted, called lunatic and discredited.
Yet, only those who dare to know are enlightened. Daring to know does not mean just learning, but also discovering the unkno wn. It is daring to ask questions that are not allowed to be asked, delving into worlds that are taboo, and to borrow a phrase from the Star Trek movies, “to boldly go where no man has gone before.”
Answering the question of “What is Enlightenment?,” the German philosopher Immanuel Kant wrote:
“Enlightenment is man's emergence from his self-imposed immaturity. Immaturity is the inability to use one's understanding without guidance from another. This immaturity is self-imposed when its cause lies not in lack of understanding, but in lack of resolve and courage to use it without guidance from another. Sapere Aude! [dare to know] ‘Have courage to use your own understanding!’--that is the motto of enlightenment.” [3]
According to Kant, “laziness and cowardice are the reasons why so great a proportion of men, … gladly remain in lifelong immaturity, and why it is so easy for others to establish themselves as their guardians. It is so easy to be immature. If I have a book to serve as my understanding, a pastor to serve as my conscience, a physician to determine my diet for me, and so on, I need not exert myself at all. I need not think, if only I can pay: others will readily undertake the irksome work for me.”
Kant compares the unthinking masses to sheep and domestic livestock and says, “Having first made their domestic livestock dumb, and having carefully made sure that these docile creatures will not take a single step without the go-cart to which they are harnessed, these guardians then show them the danger that threatens them, should they attempt to walk alone. Now this danger is not actually so great, for after falling a few times they would in the end certainly learn to walk; but an example of this kind makes men timid and usually frightens them out of all further attempts.”
Let us dare to know. Let us dare to ask questions that we are told not to ask. Let us take the road less traveled. Let us not be followers but prophets unto ourselves. Let us explore the unknown. The worst thing that can happen is that we find nothing. But we shall never know until we try.
I am ignorant, but not as ignorant as to not know that I am ignorant. I will continue wondering, exploring and daring to know.

Sunday, September 23, 2007

Sethusamudram project — Trials and travails


The Sethusamudram project was first conceived in 1860. After several reports and studies, it was only in 2000-01 that the Government allocated Rs 4.8 crore and an SPV was formed. The channel will cut short the sailing distance for ships to the extent of 425 nautical miles (780 km) and up to 30 hours of sailing time.
Raghu Dayal
Joining the Ivy league of the world’s best known maritime waterways (Panama Canal, Suez Canal, Malacca Strait), albeit not of their size or strategic significance, will soon be the Sethusamudram canal, across the Palk Straits between India and Sri Lanka, linking the Palk Bay and the Gulf of Mannar, through Rameswaram island.
Currently, ships traversing between India’s east coast and west coast are obliged to circumnavigate Sri Lanka due to a sandstone reef, termed Adam’s Bridge (a chain of islets and shallows linking India with Sri Lanka) located southeast of Rameswaram, close to Pamban, which connects the Talaimannar coast of Sri Lanka. The depth of the sea here being only about 3 metres restricts ships to navigate.
The Sethusamudram Ship Channel Project (SSCP) constitutes the country’s first effort to dredge a navigation channel that is located 30-40 km offshore. It is also the longest sea bed dredging project ever to be taken up by India.
With two legs – one in the Adam’s Bridge, where the average depth is only about 3 metres, and the other leg in the Palk Strait where the depth averages 6-8 metres – the present Sethusamudram channel is over 20 km from the Shingle Island off the Gulf of Mannar near Dhanushkodi, running parallel to the India-Sri Lanka Medial Line, at a minimum distance of 3 km within India’s own territorial waters.
The length of the proposed channel is expected to be 167.57 km, with its southern leg at Adam’s Bridge area 34.92 km long, the northern leg in Palk Strait 54.33 km long, and the intervening Palk Bay stretches in the central portion 78.32 km long.
While the northern and southern legs, involving the shallow sea bed of the Palk Bay and Adam’s Bridge, will need to be dredged for a depth of 12 metre, the central leg requires no dredging. The SSCP, when completed, will be 167 km long, 12 metres deep and 300 metres wide at the bottom, and would enable ships to navigate through the Gulf of Mannar and Palk Bay, and enter the Bay of Bengal directly.Historical background
Cherished for long that the country should have a continuous navigable sea-lane within its own territorial waters, there were as many as nine proposals made between 1860 and 1922 for a ship channel to be carved across the narrow strip of land, linking the Gulf of Mannar and the Palk Bay for providing a short-cut for ocean-going vessels to navigate between the two coasts of India.
Initially proposed in 1860 by Commander A.D. Taylor of the Indian Marines, the proposal envisaged cutting a canal across the Tonitorai Peninsula at a place about 20 km west of the Pamban Pass.
At an initial estimated cost of about £90,000, subsequently revised to £1,500,000, the scheme was to excavate a deep cutting about 4.5 km in length through the dry land and deepen to five fathoms for about 5 km on each side to connect it to the harbour on the south and the deep waters on the north.
Another proposal a year later by Townshend, contemplating silting the canal through the Pamban Pass, was found to be impracticable.
Prior to various proposals individually submitted by Sir William Dennison, Acting Governor of Madras, in 1863, Stoddart in 1871, and Robertson, Harbour Engineer for India, in 1872, a Parliamentary Committee of Her Majesty’s Government recommended in 1862 an alignment situated some 3 km east of Pamban, crossing the island in a straight northerly direction.
After a 12-year interval, the South India Ship Canal Port and Coaling Station Ltd., UK, surveyed and considered the construction of a canal across the Rameswaram Island.
In fact, the Secretary of State for India granted this company a perpetual concession, but the Madras Government advised the Government of India in October 1890 to give up the scheme as the shoals at the Palk Strait between Pt. Calimere and Pt. Pedro would prevent the proposed canal being made use of by vessels of deep-sea draught.
The project languished for long until, in 1922, Sir Robert Bristow, Harbour Engineer of Madras, having studied all previous submissions, put forth his proposal for an alignment somewhat similar to that adopted by the South Indian Railway Company in 1903 across the Rameswaram Island. After Independence
Nothing tangible did, however, happen until the country’s Independence. In 1956, a committee under Sir A. Ramaswamy Mudaliar considered a 7.8-metre draught land canal crossing the main land at Mandapam at an estimated cost of Rs 1.8 crore. Some modifications were suggested by Capt H.R. Davis in 1959 by way of an alternative alignment across the main land maintaining the same draught.
In 1963, the State Port Officer, Madras, examined the feasibility of increasing the draught from 7.8 metres to 10.8 metres, entailing an estimated cost of Rs 21 crore.
In 1967, the Government appointed a committee under Dr Nagendra Singh, Secretary, Union Ministry of Shipping and Transport, and again, in 1981, constituted another committee under H.R. Laxminarayan, Development Adviser (Ports).
The former suggested an alignment in the Rameswaram Island Crossing called the DE alignment near Thankachemadam, while the latter proposed a new alignment across Dhanushkodi. The project cost was estimated at Rs 282 crore.
In 1996, yet another report came out – from Pallavan Transport Consultancy Services Ltd, which was directed by the State Government to update the Laxminarayan Report.
The consultants proposed a number of infrastructural facilities in addition to the canal which, no doubt, constituted the major component of the project.SPV formed
At long last, the Government moved towards implementing the project, when the 2000-01 Union Budget included a provision of Rs 4.8 crore for its feasibility study. An SPV – Sethusamudram Corporation Ltd – has been entrusted with the responsibility to execute the project. A debt equity ratio of 1.5:1 is contemplated for its funding, with a contribution of Rs 495 crore by the Central Government, and partnership from the ports of Tuticorin, Chennai, Ennore, Visakhapatnam and Paradip, besides Shipping Corporation of India and Dredging Corporation of India.
Designated in February 1997, by the Union Ministry of Surface Transport, as the nodal agency for the project, Tuticorin Port Trust has been scaling up its business prospects of domestic transhipment containerised cargo. Sethusamudram Corporation Ltd has proposed a container transhipment hub to be constructed at Colachel, a minor port in southern Tamil Nadu.
Although the project at Colachel had been proposed by RITES in its Port Vision 2020, and a feasibility study was prepared in 1998 by the State Government, and updated in 2000 by a Malaysian enterprise for a greenfield port, a detailed project report has been contemplated afresh by the State Government.
The project is of strategic importance, as it will facilitate easier and quicker access between the country’s coasts for Indian Coast Guard and naval vessels.
The channel will cut short the sailing distance for ships to the extent of 425 nautical miles (780 km) and up to 30 hours of sailing time.
It will signify a shorter navigation route between Kanyakumari and Tuticorin and other east coast ports of Chennai, Ennore, Kakinada, Visakhapatnam, Paradip, Haldia and Kolkata, apart from Chittagong in Bangladesh. Domestic movement of cargo along the coast should likewise reap the benefit. (The author is a former Managing Director of Concor.)