Minorities vote for legislators, councillors but don't become one 

Rajeev Kumar Singh

Parliament and Legislative Assemblies should be a body representing plurality of society and should not be a collection of those political parties’ candidates who just have got more votes than other candidates from constituencies. In an electoral system, in which the votes to those who have got less votes than the ones who have got the maximum, is unaccounted for, makes Parliament and Legislative Assemblies a collection of political parties’ majority community members. Such an electoral system has rid the Lok Sabha and Vidhan Sabhas of minority community members and hence lets highest body of India and in states lose the plurality of the country. Even though, the Constitution requires one Anglo-Indian person to be nominated in each legislative assembly, but except for Karnataka, Kerala, Bihar, West Bengal, Jharkhand, Telangana, Uttarakhand and Uttar Pradesh, other state governments don’t fulfill this Constitutional duty. Except for Kerala, Madhya Pradesh and the north-eastern states, there isn’t any elected Christian member in any legislative assembly, though nationally they form 2.5% of India’s population and have contributed to education, health and other professions in the country since 18^th century. Though, there’s a Muslim is in each legislative assembly, but, except for Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and West Bengal, their numbers are much less than the percentage of India’s total population they constitute. Country’s second largest state, Madhya Pradesh, whose 7-8% population is of Muslims, has just one Muslim MLA. The Lok Sabha now has least ever number of Muslims. Uttar Pradesh, which has 80 seats and is the country’s most populous state with Muslims making 18.5% of its population, has not sent any Muslim to the Lok Sabha. BJP, the largest party with 282 members, does not have a single representative from the community. In the country’s only Muslim majority state – Jammu and Kashmir – the BJP has only one Muslim MLA and including him just 4, nationally, out of more than 1,016 of its legislators. The number of BJP’s Muslim MLAs declined in Maharashtra and Haryana from 11 to nine, and from five to three respectively. In both Jharkhand and Jammu and Kashmir, the number of Muslim MLAs has declined. The BJP did not nominate any Muslim candidate in Jharkhand, where it won 37 seats. Rajasthan has just 2 Muslims from the BJP and one in Bihar. Gujarat has only 2 Muslim MLAs. The number of Muslim MLAs is the least ever in the history of these legislatures. In other states too, number of Muslim MLAs and MPs is declining over the years/decades. Except for Haryana, Rajasthan and Maharastra, there is no Jain MLA in any other states. Except for the north-eastern states, there isn’t any Buddhist MLA in the country. Apart from Punjab and Delhi, there isn’t any Sikh MLA in any other states, inspite of their contributing so much to trade, armed forces and agriculture of the country. Parsees have contributed to the country’s freedom movement and also to its industry and commerce but there isn’t any Parsee MP, MLA, municipal corporation member in the country. Jews have always been totally absent as MP, MLA or member of municipal bodies in the country, despite their contributing so much to commerce in the country. How about seats in Legislative Assemblies be reserved in the same percentage of the population each minority community forms in each state and nationally? Or the percentage of population each minority community forms in each state, let’s its half be reserved each legislative assembly. So be it in the country’s municipal bodies and panchayati raj institutions. Or at least, one seat be reserved in each legislative assembly and municipal body for the minority communities which normally don’t get elected in a state’s legislative assembly or municipal body. And let all voters (of all communities) in the state vote, state-wide and not constituency-wise, for the members of the respective minority communities as one community voting for its representative would encourage hardliners in each minority community and generally are minority in number in almost all constituencies and wards. Let there be no constituency or ward be reserved for them but all voters from all over the state vote for representative/s of each minority community. Is India’s world’s largest democracy just because its minorities vote for members of legislative assemblies or municipal bodies and are not in it? 

Slight mistake and Congress was swept away by broom

Rajeev Kumar Singh
New Delhi, February 10 : The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and Congress had from the beginning underestimated the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) and the yearning of the common man for a corruption-free administration. If the Congress had facilitated Arvind Kejriwal pass its Lokpal bill in the Delhi Assembly by bringing about the required constitutional amendment so that AAP Govt could present its Lokpal bill in the Assembly, Kejriwal wouldn't have resigned. It would not have called for another election. The people of India, though don't have a monopoly over power but surely have monopoly over down-to-earth wisdom. When Kejriwal turned its government into just a temporary puppet show, the voters of India punished the AAP with the party candidates losing its deposits in about 410 Lok Sabha constituencies. AAP, like its rivals BJP and Congress, overestimated itself. Why did AAP think that without any credible work as Delhi Government, it could take on Narendra Modi in Varanasi and Rahul Gandhi in Amethi? It began to think that whatever it would do, it has blind support of the masses. It just has to show its honesty card by showing that it isn't greedy of being in power and could resign if Lokpal bill isn't passed. But people had voted him for honest government not for his resignation. But, mistakes AAP did commit and it never tried to escape from the blame. It went on with its ground work with its cadres in the bylanes of Delhi. The voters also saw that Modi hasn't much to show as regards development. But, if Congress had helped AAP in passing its Lokpal bill, the AAP Government would have remained, totally dependent and in control of Congress and with the BJP at bay. 
But by withdrawing support, it lost everything in the city. It should have realised that BJP was waiting in the wings. The Congress' withdrawal of support led to writing off of both the BJP and Congress and the rise of AAP to take on the country. The Congress would be seen as the party which opposed the Lokpal bill, which the AAP now would sail through with it as the Congress would now only be able to see it on TV.

http://thesikhtimes.net/index.php/national/20393-slight-mistake-and-congress-was-swept-away-by-broom

B&E lead story
Damn it!
Is India ignoring a large chunk of population whose livelihood gets affected by big dams?

Pundit Jawaharlal Nehru, the architect of modern India, is credited with calling big dams “the temples of modern India.” He is hailed as the visionary who inculcated scientific temperament into the Indian psyche, overwhelmed with religion and rituals. For Nehru, “size did matter!” He was overawed by the enormity of the engineering marvel, which dams represented. But one cannot blame Nehru for the current ills bestowed on displaced ‘damned’ Indians by successive governments, can one?!Although one would surely desist from a blanket criticism of Nehru’s policies (as many were aimed intellectually and logically towards arming India with industrial infrastructure), it would be difficult, with current day statistics, to support his blind reverence for dams. Unlike what our malevolent governments would wish us to believe, environmental sciences have made the ill-effects of large dams quite undeniable. If numbers could crunch, we guess our report would be smashing!Unfortunately, the lackadaisical attitude of policy-makers in India, as bemoaned by Himanshu Thakkar (of the much respected South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers and People) to B&E, is evident by the fact that no concerted governmental efforts have been made to find out the efficacy of dams, or on their effects on global warming. According to the mind-numbing Inter-Governmental Panel on Climate Change study, dams have the potential of 25 times more contribution towards global warming than CO2 emissions. It is estimated that 19% of global warming is caused by dams. Dam construction consumes huge funds, so they said! Astonishingly, according to the report Dams and Development: A New Framework for Decision Making by the World Commission on Dams (set up by the World Bank), 3/4th of all the large dams are confined to just five countries in the world! If that hasn’t got your goat, then this would – 2/3rd of all the large dams exist in developing countries!And if the issue is of humans being displaced without recourse, the evidence is, as the cliché goes, damning! The World Bank commission, commenting on the compelling human displacement losses, concludes that “dams have delivered many benefits, but in too many cases, the price paid to secure those benefits has been unacceptable and could have been avoided.” Independent studies have estimated that in India, large dams have displaced between 21 to 40 million people. And the situation has sadly been the same since decades. Even till 1980, estimates state that establishment of dams had submerged 500,000 hectares of forest-land. But of crying shame is the fact that studies now indicate that despite roughly 4,000 odd large dams present in the country, almost two-thirds of irrigated land in India is still shockingly dependent on minor irrigation facilities. However, the Indian authorities defend dams on the grounds that these monolith, yet complex structures, are capable of improving irrigation, enhancing power and helping flood control. Countering the government claims, Arundhati Roy – for however much her vitriol is respected or disrespected in public (due to her own ‘death sentence opposition’ undoing) – subjectively opines, “Irrigation uses up the water you need to produce power. Flood control requires you to keep the reservoir empty during the monsoon months to deal with an anticipated surfeit of water. And if there’s no surfeit, you’re left with an empty dam. And this defeats the purpose of irrigation, which is to store the monsoon water.” Continuing the diatribe, Thakkar spouts to B&E, “Government economists go by flat statistics, blindly taking a snapshot macro or aggregate view of the country. Their pristine method is: If total food grain requirement of the country is this much, then to fulfill that in one go, simply build so many dams! It would be so wonderful if, instead, planning could have commenced from individual water sheds, then to river sheds and finally culminating at the Planning Commission level for the number of dams.”Does this mean that a blanket ban be imposed on building dams? In a more moderate response, Patrick McCully, Executive Director, International Rivers Network, disagrees to B&E, “There shouldn’t be an outright ban. One should be selective in identifying locations and should take care of social and environmental costs.” However, looking at the World Bank’s continuous dilly dallying on the subject, one is forced to question why does the World Bank continue to support such dams, despite being fully aware of the problems created by these structures? The World Bank had been famously forced to stop funding the Narmada project in year 1993. However, a decade later in 2003, the Bank restored its interests in project through its private financial arm IFC, which is now considering supporting the Omkareshwar Dam along the Narmada. The reasons behind the World Bank’s renewed interest is not difficult to discern, as McCully succinctly suggests, “Some sections in the bank and dam industry lobby do play a role in the funding of dams.”Then why are developing economies with scores of social problems considering dams as the ultimate panacea for their growing water & electricity needs? Expressing his opinion, Paul Sinclair, Head of Environment Victoria, Australia, opines, “Building more dams would be a 20th century response to a 21st century problem. We need solutions that restore rivers system & create wealth from conservation.” Clearly, on one hand is the imperative need to support the Indian farmer and to protect India’s food generating machine, and on the other hand, the grim statistic that dams cause more environmental harm than what policy makers believe.And to think about it that the largest industrialised nation of the world, the United States, is now dissuading dam construction and reverting to river restoration, flood-plain recovery by phasing out embankments, wetland revival and the rehabilitation of river eco-systems for fisheries! And why is the US doing that? Swapan Kumar Das, Chairman, Central Water Commission, belligerently shares a contrarian (and quite amusingly confusing) viewpoint for the same to B&E, “After putting up 10,000 dams, the US has stopped, as they don’t have space for more dams. The developed countries don’t want developing countries to come to their level with enhanced production through dams.” And one thought the US had one of the largest geographical expanses in this world! Oh well... you must be right Sir, and we must be wrong... Damn it!
The agony of Aswan!
One of the worst cases of dam failures bringing about misery of a nation is that of the Aswan Dam, built on Nile River, Egypt, in the year 1902. The dam flooded Nubia region, displacing over 90,000 people. Lake Nasser, the reservoir created by the dam, has flooded archaeological sites. The silt carried by the river is now held behind by the dam, reducing the water-storage capacity of Lake Nasser. Poor irrigation practices and waterlogged soil contributed to salt deposits on the surface. Fishing has sharply declined. The Aswan increases the salinity of Mediterranean Sea, affecting the Mediterranean’s outflow into Atlantic Ocean. The dam’s effect on this outflow speeds up processes that could lead to the next ice age.

B&E edit bureau: Rajeev Kumar Singh

14.6.2007

B&E lead story
Biodiversity Plan
Is India missing the woods for the trees by ignoring its vast & varied natural inheritance? Do we need a more viable & robust plan to take care of our biodiversity?

Years ago, when it was not so politically correct to talk about climate change, Mahatma Gandhi had the vision to say, “The Earth has enough to satisfy everybody’s need but not anyone’s greed.” When man’s endeavour to survive & fulfil its need took the giant leap to go for a no-holds-barred drive of greed, it set on a fast-track move towards devouring the golden goose (read: nature) that laid the egg for him. So much so, that human activity has increased the extinction rate (of life) by at least 100 times compared to the natural rate. Harvard Biologist E. O. Wilson estimated that Earth is currently losing about 30,000 species per year. It’s estimated that nature gives to humanity $16-54 trillion worth of ‘services’ to humans per year. Scientists estimate that between US$20-25 billion needs to be spent every year to achieve effective conservation of life forms on Earth. At the 1992 Earth Summit – in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, the UN Convention on Biological Diversity was signed. It is the single most important global agreement designed to protect & develop our planet’s biodiversity. India, one of the signatories to the convention is required to come out with National Biodiversity Strategy & Action Plan (NBSAP). The NBSAP, which is likely to come up for Cabinet approval shortly, observes that main harm to biodiversity in India is from destruction of habitat. It states that nearly 50% of the aquatic plants of the world are recorded from Indian subcontinent, but only few have been studied in detail. Moreover, about 150 crops feed most of the human population at present, but just 12 of them provide 80% of food energy. Landraces, grown traditionally by farming communities through generations, locally adapted obsolete cultivars and their wild relatives comprise crop genetic resources. Alarm bells are ringing as narrow genetic base means more vulnerability to epidemics. A large number of over 300,000 samples of these cultivars, kept under long term storage in the National Gene Bank, have gone out of cultivation. About 30 mammalian and bird species are used extensively, but just 15 of them cause over 90% of global livestock production and of the many well known, about 140 native breeds of farm livestock and poultry, are facing threat to survival.Even though forestry is the second largest land use in India after agriculture, covering approximately 23.57% (recorded forest area) of the total geographical area, the contribution to the Gross Domestic Product from forestry & logging was 1.1% in 2001. An estimated 41% of the country’s forest cover has been degraded. As much as 78% of forest area is subject to heavy grazing. NTFPs (non-timber forest products) contribute to over 75% of total forest export revenue, and add income of about 30% ruralites. But, getting maximum utilisation from our forests is hampered by lack of inventory data or value addition, weak forestry information system and inadequate space for private participation. Of India’s over 6,500 medicinal plants species, nearly 90% of those in trade are harvested from the wild. In India, conservation biological studies are scant mainly because of the lack of expertise on specific groups, lack of funding to work on groups having only scientific importance and lack of coordination in exchanging data. Not to be missed out is India’s strong base of indigenous knowledge on various aspects of biodiversity. The document states that documentation of traditional knowledge available in our ancient texts is being undertaken by NISCAIR, in the form of a computerised database, Traditional Knowledge Digital Library (TKDL). The document calls for factoring in natural resource accounting (NRA) in the national economic planning processes. The Act provides for establishment of a National Biodiversity Authority (NBA), State Biodiversity Boards (SBBs) and Biodiversity Management Committees (BMCs) at local levels. The Act also stipulates preparation of People’s Biodiversity Registers (PBRs) by the BMCs.
However, Ashish Kothari of Kalpavriksh (Kalpavriksh was asked by the government to provide technical support for preparing the action plan) told B&E, “Our main problem with this action plan is that it more or less ignores the final draft plan that we had given in late 2003, to Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF). Thereafter, MoEF with some modifications (mostly minor), gave it to the UNDP, in 2004. Additionally, the strategies given in this current document are about 50% the same as given in a 1999, MoEF document called the Macro-Strategy on Biodiversity.” Also Dr. Suman Sahai of Gene Campaign, echoed Kothari’s, view, and told B&E,“Loopholes have been put up in the plan document to cater to commercial interests.” On the issue of private participation, T. Manoharan of World Wide Fund for Nature- India, told B&E, “Though the plan invites private participation in biodiversity. The extent of their being permitted in biological resources is sensitive. The plan doesn’t specify the areas and levels of their involvement in country’s biodiversity. Moreover, the plan calls for giving economic valuation to biological resources. But, who will value it?” Noted environmentalist Vandana Shiva further added, “Agriculture as been kept out of biological intellectual property rights in the document.” Commenting on biological intellectual property being left open for corporates, Chairman, National Biodiversity Authority, S. Kannaiyan, told B&E, “The corporates will have to observe international agreement of beneficiary & would have to return part benefits to local communities, from whom they extract nature’s information.” The plan has been successful in giving a formal and national level starting point for endeavours towards appreciation of the unity in diversity of life in India. But, our understanding of causes of loss of biodiversity is limited, as is the assessment of the consequences of such a loss for the functioning of ecosystems.Time is no longer waiting for us to translate words into action, for we are on to being extinct on Earth. Evidences reveal that there have been at least five major extinctions of life in the past 500 million years on Earth. “Only 10% of world’s species survived the third mass extinction. Will any survive this one?” asks Niles Eldredge, a paleontologist & author of the book, The Sixth Extinction.

Resurrecting the lost pride
We are only busy with the trinity of the big cats – tiger, lion & leopard and in contemporary India, the best known of the non-roaring big cats – the Cheetah, who are fastest land animal, has been forgotten. It can reach speeds between 112 km/h & 120 km/h and can accelerate from 0 to 110 km/h in three seconds, faster than most of the modern racing cars. Its hunting prowess attracted nobility, through 5,000 years, to keep it with them, & it was this practice, which has cornered it to few corners of the world, as it is biologically weak to breed in captivity. Moreover, growing human & livestock population caused reduction in Cheetahs’ habitat and that was major reason of it being extinct in India, since 1952. Cheetah is also in World Conservation Union (IUCN) list of vulnerable species. 90% cheetahs are now in Namibia & Botswana. “Earth is left with just 12,000 Cheetahs,” Dr. Divyabhanusinh, an authority on Cheetahs in India, told B&E. But, can’t Cheetahs be rehabilitated in India? In 100-200 sq. kms. of grassland, with sufficient prey base & vegetation, Cheetahs can be rehabilitated, Sinh said, adding that he had studied empty DNA of Indian Cheetahs and Botswana Cheetahs and they are same. Then, their Cheetahs can be rehabilitated in India. “Cheetahs can be brought from Botswana, where their growing numbers are harming human’s interests,” said Sinh. “The Narayan Sarovar in Kutch, holds the potential for introduction of the lost specie,” said Dr. Yadvendra Dev Jhala of Wildlife Insitiute of India. “Lack of money isn’t hampering rehabilitation of Cheetahs in India, it’s absence of political will,” said Sinh.

B&E edit bureau: Rajeev Kumar Singh

13.12.2007

BHUTAN: ELECTIONS
King’s democracy not 100%
Only graduates were permitted to cast their votes in polls

Last week when voting for the 47-member National Assembly took place, the results took everyone by surprise, candidates and the public included. The Bhutan Peace and Prosperity Party (dpt) won a whopping 45 of the 47 seats, while its rival Peoples’ Democratic Party (pdp) floundered in the polls, winning only two seats. For a state holding its first ever election, the results could not have been more dramatic or lopsided. "These elections are a farce. They were staged when a movement of true democracy confronted the monarch of Bhutan,” says Deki Yangzom, a pro-democracy activist, working from exile in Nepal, adding: “The king admitted that but for this movement for democracy, he would have continued as monarch.” For the period of elections, the monarch had ordered his Prime Minister, Jigme Y. Thinley, to resign and set up the DPT. While the DPT is all set to form a government, the bickering refuses to die down. PDP leaders and spokesmen have since then targeted the DPT for rigging the elections, including the charge that voting machines were tampered with. They also allege that civil servants "unduly" influenced the polls leading to such a one-sided results.Thinley Penjore, President, Druk National Congress told B&E the elections were grossly unfair. Other activists and NGOs are equally miffed. Devendra Raj Pandey, member of South Asians for Human Rights told B&E: “As one-sixth Bhutan’s population is refugee, only graduates could contest elections and only two parties allowed to contest elections, in which dissent wasn't permitted. What is very distressing, says Pandey, "is the insensitivity of government, civil society and media of India towards bringing about 100% democracy in Bhutan."

B&E edit bureau: Rajeev Kumar Singh

17.4.2008

B&E lead story
Indian Railways?!?
Does Laloo really deserve all the accolades for engineering a ‘turn around’ of railways? Are the surplus figures quoted in his budget speech the true reflection of the progress achieved?

“A few years back, Laloo used to shout at the top of his voice that he will not allow the privatisation of Railways – same Laloo Prasad Yadav is now the chief proponent of outsourcing even the core functions of railways,” says Gopal Krishna, a trade union leader with Centre of Indian Trade Unions (CITU) in a conversation with B&E. “And all this talk about outsourcing & PPP (public-private partnership) is a euphemism for privatisation,” the union leader critically added. One may agree or disagree with the CITU leader, however, what one cannot deny is that PPP is the new mantra of Indian Railways (IR), being chanted with great devotion & fervour. Yes, over the past few years, a discernable shift in the IR mindset has become apparent. A fertile ground is being diligently laid to transform the behemoth into a dynamic & agile organisation, capable of optimally utilising its assets to enhance profits. Now, the big question is: does this new found love to increase private participation in IR affairs, clash with its social objectives? “It is not correct to view IR as just a corporate body or having corporate functions. It is a part of social fabric of the country, having a far greater role than just meeting economic needs of the country,” Y. P. Anand, former Chairman, Railway Board told B&E. But how does an organisation meet its social obligations, if it continues to operate in the red for years on end? With operation ratio plummeting from 82.6 % in 1994-95 to 98% in 2001 & with staff pensions & salaries accounting for 44% of the total revenues earned in 2004-05, IR was indeed mired in a mess towards the beginning of the 21st century. It was in no position to honour its commitment to pay dividends to the government. A pall of gloom had spread along the 64,000 kms railway networks & 7,000 stations across the nation. It is perhaps these dark hovering clouds of bankruptcy, which led the government appointed Rakesh Mohan Committee to recommend massive ‘structural changes’ for IR, suggesting privatisation as the panacea for the ailing gargantuan.“Rakesh Mohan would see the issue purely through liberal economist’s view while Indian Railways is a body which is representative of Indian population,” added Y. P. Anand. Since the very word ‘privatisation’ was not considered to be politically correct, the report was obviously put on the back-burner – a via media was sought to turn things around in the IR – chaperon in the private actors, desperately seeking to enjoy a share of pie in this rather large organisation- accounts for 2.3% of its GDP and owns roughly 45,000 hectares of idle land. And what followed this decision to drop privatisation & introduce PPP, is now history. A big media campaign was launched hailing the Railway Minister Laloo Prasad Yadav as the messiah, who through his sheer management skills, had turned around an almost bankrupt public sector enterprise into a profit earning corporation. (In 2007-08 budget, IR generated a surplus of $4.5 billion or Rs.200 billion on revenue of $16 billion. Astonishingly, the revenue & surplus targets for 2007-08 stands at whopping $ 18 billion & $5 billion respectively.) However, Laloo’s tryst with surpluses seems to nearing an end. The recent media reports & Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) of India’s indictment of the IR’s accounting procedures have revealed that at least Rs.26.89 billion (roughly 13%) have been reflected in the 2006-07 surplus figures not because of any increase in the business, but primarily because of altered accounting policy adopted by IR. Had this 13% not been added the ‘surplus’ figures would have been much closer to what was achieved during the 2005-06 period. And this would certainly have prevented Laloo from receiving accolades from top B-schools across the globe. The question is: did Laloo encourage fudging of figures or was he assisted by the MNCs to pave the way for private entry? Private players too should be held responsible because the IR ‘turn around’ is being celebrated as the victor of PPP. Needless to add that in any partnership both the brickbats & the accolades must be equally shared.
It is a widely known, since Independence, scores of IR functions have been performed by contractors, then why this clamour about private participation now? “IR have a natural monopoly over rail sector in India. The private sector is not enthusiastic in venturing into rail industry.” Anwarul Hoda, member, Planning Commission, told B&E. Endorsing the view, N. M. Balasubrahmanyam, Secretary General, Chartered Institute of Logistics & Transport, told B&E. “A lot of investment is needed by a company, which requires a good return, as good a return as in other industries. Hence, privatisation isn’t likely to take off in a big way in India,” Not withstanding the comments, the fact is that both the MNCs and the domestic private players are queuing up to grab the IR contracts both in core & non-core sectors. As opposed to the innocuous contractors’ of the yesteryears’– the fear about the present day private contractors results from the enormity of contracts (see box – IR is seeking investment to the tune of Rs.3,500 billion, in 11th Five Year Plan).Only fools would oppose improvement in financial viability & health of an organisation & therefore, its capacity to meet its social responsibility. But if the process of improving the bottomline is undertaken in a dubious manner; paying scant regard to the long-term sustainability of the reform process, credibility of the participating actors takes a nosedive. Then, whether you name the process as privatisation, PPP or simply an effort for public good, it is bound to be opposed tooth & nail by the public.the ppp bullet – major contractsl Bombardier Transportation (US), – $33.68 million to set up a plant to make rail cars in Vadodara. l GE Equipment Services – has picked up 15% equity stake in Titagarh Wagons. GEES is likely to build & operate wherewithal for maintenance of wagons and signalling equipment. GE is getting into a joint venture with IR for production of diesel locomotives.l Consortium of RITES (India) – PCI (Japan) - PBI (USA) - SYSTRA (France) – $52.36 million order to provide general consultancy services to Bangalore Metro Rail. lL&T, Adani Logistics, Boxtrans Logistics, Gateway Rail Freight, Innovative B2B Logistics Solutions, Reliance Infrastructure also in the fray.

B&E edit bureau: Atul Bhardwaj (inputs by Rajeev Kumar Singh)

4.10.2007

ELECTION SCENARIO: PAKISTAN
Is Pakistan Musharraf’s own country?
Chances of united democratic alliance against Musharraf are remote

Till date there hasn’t been any election in Pakistan without rigging, says Smruti S. Pattanaik, Research Fellow, Institute of Defence Studies and Analysis, India. If this is a fact, then one more truth, which emerges from the current turmoil in Pakistan is that “never before in history of Pakistan, it’s civil society was so keen for elections,” Prof. Uma Singh, Centre for South Asian Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, told B&E. And Benazir Bhutto’s brutal assassination was perhaps the beginning of the rigging. It disturbed, as Saeed Naqvi, Editor, World Report, a syndication service on foreign affairs, said, “the arrangement, in which Pervez Musharraf was to be president; Kayani, army chief, and Benazir, PM; as was fixed by the US.” Uma Singh said, “Only after the US gave the green signal, did Benazir returned to Pakistan & she never was critical of the US (in her election campaign).” But Benazir’s death has made her Pakistan People’s Party, like a ship without a captain. Asif Zardari, Benazir’s husband, Co-chairman of the party, is not very popular, opposed by some PPP leaders; and her only son, Bilawal, hasn’t finished his formal education. In such a situation, Asif Ali Zardari has designated Makhdoom Amin Fahim, Vice-Chairman of PPP as prime ministerial candidate. “Fahim has run the PPP in Pakistan during Benazir’s absence and didn’t show political ambitions,” Pattanaik told B&E. The elections have been postponed to February 18 for various reasons. Naqvi feels that PPP & Nawaz Sharif’s party, Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz) might come together for the election. But, PPP, with Nawaz Sharif, won’t be compatible to the US. And, for that matter, neither to Musharraf.

B&E edit bureau: Rajeev Kumar Singh
24.1.2008