G-8 PLEDGES TO INVEST 20 BILLION DOLLARS TO INCREASE FOOD PRODUCTION AND FIGHT HUNGER

WORRIED FOR AFRICA OR FOR THEMSELVES?

Leaders of world’s most developed nations, grouped as G-8 have pledged 20 billion dollars to boost agricultural production in Africa so that fear of hunger which is looming large, could be fought. This declaration was made in G-8 summit which has just concluded in Italian city of L‘Aquila.

It is estimated that owing to seemingly unending global financial crisis (GFC), World is likely to face unprecedented hunger situation and Africa naturally will be the hardest suffer. At present, it is estimated, that about 1 Billion people, mostly in African countries, are hungry and this figure would be further enhanced at least by another 100 Million by the end of this year. The world is going to face unprecedented humanitarian crisis amidst examples of lofty success.

In this back drop, the world’s most developed nations deliberated upon and focused on hunger with ‘utmost sincerity’. Climatic change and GFC were of course the major areas of concern, but world leaders vowed that we cannot have a sustained growth and prosperity amidst abject and rampant poverty.

INVESTMENT AND NOT SUBSIDY- the leaders committed that this 20 Billions USD (12.4 Billion £) money would be invested in African countries in Agriculture to boost food grain production over three years. Meaning thereby, this money, African countries are not going to get as farm subsidy or outright humanitarian help.

Many African leaders however casted a doubt on this pledge and said that such pledges have been made by world leaders in past also but their commitments and promises have not been kept.

There are another group of people who actually doubt on the entire gesture of G-8 leaders itself. They opine that this pledge in not blended with ‘philanthropy’ but actually ‘orchestrated’ with economic game plan. With the GFC still ensconced into the American and Western economy, they are looking for another area of investment and consequent returns of their investments. These activists fear that Trans-National Companies (TNCs) and MNCs from these develop countries would invest in agriculture sector of African and Asian countries and convert the very nature of farming. The use of GENETICALLY ENGINEERED SEEDS, INORGANIC FERTILISERS, big machines and high yielding variety seeds into these countries would change the very nature of farming and will make agriculture somewhat unsustainable throwing farmers in an economic quagmire.

They have a valid point when they quote instances of farmer’s suicide in India especially cotton growing farmers in Vidharba and A.P etc. Actually, they say, that use of B-2 cotton seeds and other high yielding variety seeds, most of them are genetically engineered, have made agriculture unsustainable because the cost of production has gone alarmingly high. Moreover the most defective and disastrous part of use of these seeds is that such seeds cannot be re-used. In traditional methods, farmers can use part of the harvested grains as seeds also. Thus once the farmers switch over to these genetically engineered seeds, will have to depend on MNCs and TMCs for uninterrupted supply of these seeds forever.

If this is the game plan of the G-countries, it is afraid that in the coming years, African farmers will meet the same fate as of ours.

BIHAR TO STOP LAND GRABBING

LAND IS STILL FOR THOSE WHO CAN HOLD IT

The govt of Bihar is planning to come out with a legislation in the current session of Legislative assembly to stop illegal and forceful dispossession of lawful owner from his land.

At present there is no specific law with respect to prevention of forceful and illegal dispossession of lawful owner of land. Such cases are tried in civil courts and take many years to get the matter adjudicated. In fact the aggrieved persons have to go to Civil Courts to prove his ‘Title’ over the land in question and naturally burden of proof lie on the petitioners. Thus the aggrieved person has to prove first that the land in question belong to him, only them the court will order for restoration for which the aggrieved person has to bring a fresh suit after winning title. The process obviously is complicated and biased against the law abiding and weak citizen and slated favourably towards land grabbers and land mafia.

Nitish Kumar’s much published and praised experiment of holding Janata ke Darbar me Mukhya Mantri or ‘Chief Minister in the court of public’ programme has been flooded with complaints related to land disputes. Most of the cases which came before the CM are related to forceful dispossession of land by land mafia or criminals. Since no such powers of restoration of such illegal and forceful dispossessions are vested with executive branch of government, the CM found himself helpless on this issue. He use to send the petitioners either to police or to district collectors for redressal, but of no use, because neither collectors or police has the power to restore back the dispossessed land to the lawful owner. In fact CM’s secretariat got stuffed with such problems and become an issue of much discomfort to the CM.

Taking cue from this problem, CM constituted a committee which suggested enactment of a legislation to this effect. The draft of the proposed legislation is ready and likely to get cabinet’s nod within a couple of days. The legislation titled ‘Bihar Land Dispute Redressal Act’ is likely to be put up before the Legislative assembly after approval by the Cabinet. Once this law is passed, Bihar will perhaps become second to Andhra Pradesh only to legislate such law.

It is going to be a land mark because land grabbing and illegal dispossession have become a chronic problem across the country. Lands especially in urban and metros, are becoming costlier day by day and absence of any specific law gives Police and other muscle men to earn fortune due to this problem.

It would require Union government’s consent also because powers under this proposed law would be conferred on executive branch of government hitherto enjoyed by Civil courts, meaning thereby that some provisions of Civil Procedure Code (CPC), which is a central code, would be amended.

Hopefully this law would pave way for other states also to ponder on this vital issue and frame law on similar lines.

OBAMA PRESSES RESET BUTTONS WITH RUSSIA

HAVE TO GO A LONG WAY

OBAMA PRESSES RESET BUTTONS WITH RUSSIA

Obama and Medvedev agrees to cut down Nuclear war heads by one third and pave way for new nuclear disarmament treaty

In a significant development regarding reductions of ‘Nuclear Armament’, USA and Russia agreed to cut down their nuclear warheads by 1/3^rd of the existing stockpiles. Pact to this effect was signed by Dmitry Medvedev and Barrack Obama in Kremlin on Monday. Obama’s maiden visit to Russia, the once staunch enemy of USA, is viewed as corollary of US administration’s vow to end hostilities and undo grotesque legacy of George W. Bush. Both leaders signed an agreement which would pave way for reduction of nuclear warheads by one third of existing stockpiles. This agreement would culminate in signing of a Treaty, said Obama and Medvedev, which will be formally prepared by the end of this year. This Treaty will replace START, 1991 (strategic arms reduction treaty) which is scheduled to expire in December 2009.

This Summit marked the pressing of ‘Reset Buttons’, a significant change in American foreign policy of which Joe Biden had elaborated upon in Berlin conference early this year. Obama emphatically said ‘we resolve to reset US-Russian relations so that we can cooperate more effectively in areas of common interest’. It is a ‘reversal of drift’, the drift which had started during Bush regime. This détente will help create congenial atmosphere in the region, they claimed.

Sources say that USA currently has 2,200 operational nuclear war heads whereas Russia has 2,790 such warheads. It is pertinent to mention here that US-Russia combine constitute 90% of global nuclear arsenals. Therefore one third reductions is a substantial one and ‘Operationalisation’ of this treaty would mean huge reduction in this stockpile. This would probably pave way for similar gestures by other nuclear powers across world.

This Summit is also important for this region because relation between these two powers had sunk all time low in post cold war era on Georgian issue. The Georgian invasion on Ossetia and Abkhazia was supported by USA and other NATO countries were viewed by Russia as an invasion on itself. Russian military built-up in Black sea followed by NATO’s open support to Mikhail Saakashvilli, the Georgian president, has made US Russia confrontation somewhat imminent, thanks to good sense prevailing that the situation was saved from going to all out war. This Summit of Obama and Medvedev would certainly instill confidence in the region and help return normalcy restored.

However only signing of this agreement does not guarantee success of this resolution. In 2002 also Bush and Putin had singed such agreement which was sacrificed at the altar of mistrust and clash of interests. This Summit was different from that of George Bush and Putin in the sense that it meant business only and lacked jokes and personality clash. Obama and Medvedev were straight forward and meeting ran for 5 hours only. Obama oratory skill is widely acknowledged especially after his Cairo speech. He is not hector in his speech, a departure for Bush’s style.

Obama choose to meet Putin also, because like many others, Obama too share the view that it is Putin who runs the country, a gesture though seems apparently related to courtesy and etiquettes, blended with hardcore diplomacy and reality. Obama ecstatically said that this pact would lead them to hold a ‘Global Summit on Nuclear Arms reduction’ next year.

Apart from international media hype on this Pact, both leaders failed to reach to an agreement on ‘Missile Defense System’ of Eastern Europe. They remained at loggerheads on this, an issue on which USA has been rigorously pursuing and Russia persistently opposing.

Obama’s hidden Agenda- This summit was not given the kind of coverage in State (Russia) controlled media, which generally such meetings get. TV channel one, the state controlled electronic media, did not show Obama’s visit in headlines. It is naïve to believe that the channel might have skipped it. This may be a calculated and calibrated telecast. Russia deliberately wanted to keep this visit at low pitch. Obama’s visit, according to Russia, might be aimed at killing two birds with one single stone. Obama knows it well that American success in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Israel and Palestine largely depends on Russia’s stand on these issues. Bygone are days when US had the ability to dictate terms. Now there is ‘no room on the chess board’ and US can no longer ‘play with the pawns’ as Paul Bracken has put it in his book ‘Fire in the East’. Obama has to undo Bush’s legacy which was characterized by ‘with us or against us’. America can no longer afford hostilities all around the world. US Billion dollar national debts largely due to its whimsical war against terror have thrown this country in quagmire, of which USA is desperately trying to get out.

Iran’s obstinacy, belligerence and ‘ready to fight attitude’, North Korea’s defiance, Israel’s reluctance to come to terms of much talked ‘two nation solution’ and seemingly unending war in Afpak region have shattered Obama in particular and Americans in general.

Obama wants at least one success in this journey so that he can use it as sojourn in his long march to boondocks. Putin, a staunch nationalist and hardcore realist, is unwilling to give this leverage to Obama. Russia itself is recuperating from its economic shambles and desperately trying to regain a place in the world order, it has lost after eclipse of USSR. The post cold war era has so far not been a happy experience for Russians; they have lost the coveted status of ‘SUPER POWER’ and economic hegemony is a bygone chapter.

Russia wants to show that it matters again and USA cannot take it for guaranteed. Gazprom crisis was deliberately created by Russia to make its presence felt in the international arena. Acceptance of MISSILE DEFENCE SYSTEM as proposed and conceived by Bush cannot be acceptable to Russia in the above backdrop. For many experts ‘Missile defense system’ is an obsession of Bush same as STAR WARS or SDI (strategic defense initiative) was for Ronal Reagan. Hopefully obsessions and personality clashes did not figure in this summit. Well begin is half done, Obama and Dmitry Medvedev have miles to walk on bumpy roads in boondocks before they reach a resort of happiness and détente.

JUDGEMENT ON GAY; WHICH WAY SOCIETY WILL GO

which will you go?

The judgement of Delhi High Court which seeks to legalise gay relationship is all set to trigger a national debate between forces representing modernity and forces representing old order. The Court said that Law outlawing homosexual acts was discriminatory and ‘violation of fundamental rights.’

The judgement is based on the concept that Indian Penal Code (IPC, 1860) is one and half century old colonial law and does not represent the changing social and ethical order. It is of common knowledge that section 377 reads ‘whoever voluntarily has carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman or animal, shall be punished with 152[imprisonment for life], or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Explanation- Penetration is sufficient to constitute the carnal intercourse necessary to the offence described in this section.

The Delhi court while hearing a PIL filed by one NAJ, an NGO, has held section 377 as an infringement on the fundamental rights enshrined in constitution (article 21). This judgement is going to have far reaching ramifications in socio-religious life of many Indians and would have profound impact on the legal architecture of this country.

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS- the decision of Delhi High court will have its impact in the state of Delhi only, and other parts of territory would be governed by the same section of IPC, but this land mark judgement would necessitate the Union govt to bring about amendment to the colonial Penal code. This case shall certainly be quoted by the lawyers in related cases in other parts of the country and is going to affect judgement thereto.

Secondly, other sections like 309 of IPC and host other such provisions will be subjected to such societal and legal scrutiny because many people are of the opinion that this 150 years old law should either be scrapped and replaced with a new one or at least amended to such an extent that vestigial instincts of erstwhile order are removed. The legal framework and laws should also change at the same pace at which society is changing, they say, otherwise the laws and customs etc would be rendered meaningless. Thus we can expect in near future, more such land mark judgments or huge dose of constitutional and legal amendments. Our legal system is all set to pass through rigorous tests.

SOCIAL IMPLICATIONS- every change is a painful process, therefore the society is not going to take this change without resentment. The force of status quo is bound to fight back. In fact strong reactions have started pouring in the social panorama. It seems that the society is trying to take recourse to newer ethos and slowly discard older values. It is clash between ‘newer order and older order’ also. On the one hand, we have one India where younger generation is competing with west. This generation wants to move in resonance with the changing world. It aspires to follow new global social, financial, ethical and political order. Globalisation, Liberalisation and Privatisation for them are not just a government policy, but a way of life. They want western type of liberalism and freedom, which unfetters them of all the ethical, moral and social shackles, but on the other hand, there is one group or you can say one generation which is not cosmopolitan and is living with mundane realities. There are people who have to fetch water from distant wells to satiate thirst. They have to collect fodder for their cattle so that they can earn their livelihood. They collect leaves to feed their babies. They don’t even spend 12 Rs/day because they do not have the money to spend. For them, life means continuous struggle for subsistence and not existence. Fundamental rights and gay relationship and many such issues for them are nothing but a joke.

There is also one more group of people in India. These people believe that they are the custodian of social order and society cannot and should not change without their consent and concurrence. They believe that ethical and social values cannot be dictated by anyone other than themselves. This judgement is a jolt on such forces because this imminent change has not come from them but from other sources. They argue that just to satiate the desires of some people who indulge in ‘Unnatural sex’, legal and social order cannot be changed. They have a valid point when they say that ‘will the courts legalise sex with animals then because some people do enjoy animal sex? Some children may enjoy sex with grownup lady, will the court legalise it also?

Thus the coming days these issues are likely to constitute topics of discussion for media and middle class, but legalising gay or punishing them makes no difference for them who do not enjoy even natural sex amidst abject poverty.