Stung by Sting Operation

Eleven (yes 11) MPs were expelled from the Lok Sabha as an outcome of the sting operation. Welcome step indeed. Time for our democracy to sit back and think for a while.

A strong Deterrent
If the tainted MPs were counting on short public memory to negotiate through the aftermath of the sting operations – they were in for a surprise. Parliament showed an uncanny swiftness in acting against them. The punishment meted out was also quite stiff – for tainted MPs it will be difficult to get selected again specially after having been expelled. For the first time (to the best of my memory) justice seems to have been delivered with the alacrity that it deserves.

Already, MPs are wary of even meeting strangers. Doomsayers are already predicting the start of the end of connectivity between the elected and those whom they represent. This is obviously too strong a reaction. Politicians who considered themselves above law were obviously shocked with the speed at which things unfolded. For the first time they are feeling responsible. The extreme caution is a part of that process. It will make every corrupt sit & think before we act.

Lest I be considered an optimist dreaming of utopia – this effect is going to be short lived as I pointed out in an earlier post here. Our MPs learn fast and soon there will be fool proof channels to ensure that palms are kept greased unnoticed. However – there is an opportunity for law makers to act and bring in some measures that can arrest the increasingly corrupt governance. Dare I say this first step was effective? Will the onslaught continue?

Divided House
What was disappointing in the whole episode was that this action of parliament was not unanimous. After the initial unanimous reaction of suspending the MPs from the party – some political calculation seem to have taken over. The BJP for whom the sting was arguably the most poisonous opposed expulsion tooth & nail. First they tried to bring in procedural delays by asking to refer the Bansal committee report to privileges committee of the parliament. Then they staged walkout against the motion. Excerpt from this report of TOI

Leader of Opposition L K Advani termed the expulsion as the parliamentary equivalent of "capital punishment"and "not commensurate with the act, definitely of corruption, but more of stupidity".

Now, now aren’t we hearing one of the great leaders of our time saying that the MPs were stupid to have been so indiscreet as accepting money in their own hands, specially after what happened to our own bangaru Laxman. So the people of India, be lenient to these stupid people as they are not expert at being corrupt. One would expect a leader of advani’s stature to stand up to the call of the times and make a big difference to the posterity.

No Mr. Advani – don’t for a moment think that I miss your point. I understand that you are just suggesting that the punishment is too strong. But sir we must NOT tolerate corruption in any form – even if it is stupidity. By doing what you suggest we will encourage future generations of corrupt leaders to portray themselves as mere stupid whose corrupt practices should be looked at sympathetically. You also owe it to your country to create precedence by which the scoundrels in this country do not consider politics as their ultimate resort to dodge accountability.

And yes do not think that this helps your party’s political fortunes. I am told that the BJP’s vote bank has a major chunk of middle class educated youth. If they are watching your words your party might soon be staring them in opposition disenchanted from the promises of the Ram Rajya your party always promised.

Post Script
One wonders, why did other parties (read the congress) kept their reactions moderate on Advani’s stupid statement. It would be a great time to take some sweet revenge for the way the BJP has targeted Sonia Gandhi. May be because everybody has some skeletons in their cupboards too. These are fluid times – no one knows what these channels might have up their sleeves next.

Debates, Questions and Opinions

I read somewhere that "A Questions is often a cleverly disguised opinion".

Madukar in an excellent piece Setting the terms of debate convinces us that

"A debate is often a cleverly disguised path to a desired outcome"

In this second part of the theme he goes on to convincingly state that the terms of the debate set by wolcker's report on the "oil for food programme" takes the discussion away from fundamental issue that the programme itself was illegal and that wolcker investigation just establishes the programme as legal.

He had earlier suggested in part-I that the wolcker's report names 129 Indian companies and one politician. But the terms of debate have been so set that the one individual is the centre of all hoopla in the MSM and among politicians but there isn't a single discussion on the 100+ companies.

Could this be true? Is the intelligensia in India so vulnerable or madhukar has his facts wrong?

Sting Operations : Democracy at work

There are some great signals for democracy & governance in India. The wind is changing and changing fast. The push & pulls of our system seem to be far more active in the new liberalised, confident, aggressive, aware and most of all competitive India. The latest example are the series of sting operations.

Tehelka started it all when it caught on camera BJP president Banagaru Laxman accepting a wad of notes. And now its a trend. We have had a series of sting operations both national and some at the regional levels too (yes there are even local TV cables who are conducting such operations). The latest & the most talked about ones being the recent cobrapost+ Aaj Tak and Star News + DIG which trapped a dozen odd MPs accepting, demanding bribes and even bragging about it, for work they are anyways supposed to do.

Ofcourse, channels conducts stings to improves TRP ratings and hence advertising revenues. But there is something great about all that is unfolding.

Democracy & Sting Operations
Arguably the biggest vice of our democracy is that we are a corrupt society. Not that we are the only corrupt society, however we do carry the dubious distinction of being a heaven for corrupt people. The corrupt can remain so with impunity - they are hardly ever brought to books and almost none gets punished. Most of this people have carefully cultivated the image of being clean and hence are in high places due to their image.

Sting operations have added a curious twist to this. One such expose and this image (read kai varsho ki mehnat - year's of hard toil) is shattered. Whatever one does - it will never be the same again. Look at what happened to Bangaru Laxan, Jaya Jaitley, Shakti Kapoor etc. They have surely lost their status in the society. Think about calling them to inaugurate your club's activity this year - & you know what I mean.

Its a deterrant - and that too a strong one. This will at least make people think about feeling secure. They might not be deterred by the law of the land - but they are feeling the heat of the law of free (competitive enterprise).

Its a tool
Another important aspect is that sting operation is a tool. The competition in the system makes it work. Because channels compete for eyeballs - so they go the extra mile to catch bigger fishes. We might soon have political parties getting such operations conducted to bring the skeletons in the opposition out. That would be the ultimate state of functionality that a state can reach for.

Will it work
Surely not. Such tools lose their efficacy by regular exposure - once they lose the novelty value. However - it brings an opportunity for our system to respond and conduct an operation clean out. If the churning brings about a cleaner lot of people reaching public offices - it would have done its job. The system needs to gear up - ensure that this time those caught red handed gets punished - visibly. Is the prime minister & the home minister listening?

Jagjit Singh - Sliding Away??

After a long time this Sunday, I attended a live concert of Jagjit Singh - Our own Gazhal Maestero. Four hours of soulful music with a huge audience. It was good as always, but I really did not feel my soul stirring in the same way as it did in the days when I grew up to become one huge fan of Jagjit. Could it be that he is sliding down the ladder which he climbed year after year, gazhal after gazhal and album after album. As I ponder - Some interesting questions arise.


No more innovating
His concerts are highly predictable now a days - not just the gazhals, even the jokes that he cracks, the break that he takes, his ideas of connecting to the audience - there is nothing new in his concerts for his committed fans. In fact, I noticed that his ardent followers (me included) know when his concert is going to finish (Thats when he picks up his Punjabi Songs - a signal that he is going to end that section in two songs flat). All this when a concert of his carries a five star price tag.

No more New Gazhals
There used to be a curiosity value about his concerts, a decade ago - that he would share new gazhals from his forthcoming albums. Now none seem to be on the cards - he has slowed down (or has been slowed down?) on creating new compositions. In fact Sazda was his last great innovation which was way back when Lata Mangeshkar was still singing with great zeal.

The Chitra Vaccum
Except for Sazda and to some extent marasim he did not deliver a truly outstanding album after the break-up of the duo. Chitra's sangat used to add the variety which made the two an unbeatable combination. None of his recent albums were a break away success because that variety was missing.

A Youth Icon??
It is heartening to see a huge young crowd (20-30years) in his concert. Surprising but true, His ageold albums & Gazhals still appeal to the young as much as they used to do a few decades ago to a generation which is now in their late thirties. It is almost like he is losing appeal in the older generation and with the same rate if not more he gets youth following.

This is another reason why his concerts are predictably a drag for his long time followers and fans. They are the same as we witnessed them years ago but a younger audience responds to the concert with same josh & exuberance as we used to do when we were that age. I have never seen or heard of farmaish (demand) from the audience of one of his deeper works like mirza Galib, A milestone or even sazda.

A Maestero
Jagjit undoubtedly is one of the best (if not the best). He experimented and made gazhal simple and popular. His voice even today is velvet. Will he bring his magic back once again - mushkil hai. But as his long time fan - I wish he does.

Plain Speaking

Excellent instance of some plain speaking - wish more people had the nerve to use such critical occassions to speak their minds out the way this year's Noble prize winner for Literature did. Could not find the link on the TOI website for this particular article hence simply pasting it.

Inspiring stuff. Mr. Harold some day I will write with the passion you do.

‘The invasion of Iraq was a bandit act’
TOI - 19th Dec 2005
Harold Pinter’s Nobel acceptance speech, via video, was a furious attack on the US and the UK.The playwright called for George Bush and Tony Blair to be tried by the International Criminal Court—and with a dart of dark wit, even supplied Blair’s address: No 10, Downing Street. Excerpts from the speech

As every single person here knows, the justification for the invasion of Iraq was that Saddam Hussein possessed a highly dangerous body of weapons of mass destruction, some of which could be fired in 45 minutes,
bringing about appalling devastation. We were assured that was true. It was not true. We were told that Iraq had a relationship with Al Quaeda and shared responsibility for the atrocity in New York of September 11th 2001. We were assured that this was true. It was not true. We were told that Iraq threatened the security of the world. We were assured it was true. It was not true.

The truth is something entirely different. The truth is to do with how the United States understands its role in the world and how it chooses to embody it. But before I come back to the present I would like to look at the recent past, by which I mean United States foreign policy since the end of the Second World War. Direct invasion of a sovereign state has never in fact been America’s favoured method. In the main, it has preferred what it has described as ‘low intensity conflict’. Low intensity conflict means that thousands of people die but slower than if you dropped a bomb on them in one fell swoop. It means that you infect the heart of the country, that you establish a malignant growth and watch the gangrene bloom.

I put to you that the United States is without doubt the greatest show on the road. Brutal, indifferent, scornful and ruthless it may be but it is also very clever. As a salesman it is out on its own and its most saleable commodity is self love. It’s a winner. Listen to all American presidents on television say the words, ‘the American people’, as in the sentence, ‘I say to the American people it is time to pray and to defend the rights of the American people and I ask the American people to trust their president in the action he is about to take on behalf of the American people.’ It's a scintillating stratagem. Language is actually employed to keep thought at bay. The words 'the American people' provide a truly voluptuous cushion of reassurance. You don't need to think. Just lie back on the cushion. The cushion may be suffocating your intelligence and your critical faculties but it's very comfortable. This does not apply of course to the 40 million people living below the poverty line and the 2 million men and women imprisoned in the vast gulag of prisons, which extends across the US.

The United States no longer bothers about low intensity conflict. It no longer sees any point in being reticent or even devious. It puts its cards on the table without fear or favour. It quite simply doesn’t give a damn about the United Nations, international law or critical dissent, which it regards as impotent and irrelevant. It also has its own bleating little lamb tagging behind it on a lead, the pathetic and supine Great Britain.

What has happened to our moral sensibility? Do they refer to a term very rarely employed these days—conscience? A conscience to do not only with our own acts but to do with our shared responsibility in the acts of others? Is all this dead? Look at Guantanamo Bay. Hundreds of people detained without charge for over three years, with no legal representation or due process. At present many are on hunger strike, being force-fed, including British residents. No niceties in these force-feeding procedures.

No sedative or anaesthetic. Just a tube stuck up your nose and into your throat. You vomit blood. This is torture. What has the British Foreign Secretary said about this? Nothing. What has the British Prime Minister said about this? Nothing. Why not? Because the United States has said: to criticise our conduct in Guantanamo Bay constitutes an unfriendly act. You’re either with us or against us. So Blair shuts up. The invasion of Iraq was a bandit act, an act of blatant state terrorism, demonstrating absolute contempt for the concept of international law. The invasion was an arbitrary military action inspired by a series of lies upon lies and gross manipulation of the media and therefore of the public; an act intended to consolidate American military and economic control of the Middle East masquerading—as a last resort—all other justifications having failed to justify themselves—as liberation. A formidable assertion of military force responsible for the death and mutilation of thousands and thousands of innocent people.

How many people do you have to kill before you qualify to be described as a mass murderer and a war criminal? One hundred thousand? More than enough, I would have thought. Therefore it is just that Bush and Blair be arraigned before the International Criminal Court of Justice. But Bush has been clever. He has not ratified the International Criminal Court of Justice. Therefore if any American soldier or for that matter politician finds himself in the dock Bush has warned that he will send in the marines. But Tony Blair has ratified the Court and is therefore available for prosecution. We can let the Court have his address if they’re interested. It is Number 10, Downing Street, London. Early in the invasion there was a photograph published on the front page of British newspapers of Tony Blair kissing the cheek of a little Iraqi boy. 'A grateful child,' said the caption. A few days later there was a story and photograph, on an inside page, of another four-year-old boy with no arms. His family had been blown up by a missile. He was the only survivor. 'When do I get my arms back?' he asked. The story was dropped. Well, Tony Blair wasn't holding him in his arms, nor the body of any other mutilated child, nor the body of any bloody corpse. Blood is dirty. It dirties your shirt and tie when you're making a sincere speech on television.

I know that President Bush has many extremely competent speech writers but I would like to volunteer for the job myself. I propose the following short address which he can make on television to the nation. I see him grave, hair carefully combed, serious, winning, sincere, often beguiling, sometimes employing a wry smile, curiously attractive, a man’s man.‘God is good. God is great. God is good. My God is good. Bin Laden’s God is bad. His is a bad God. Saddam’s God was bad, except he didn’t have one. He was a barbarian. We are not barbarians. We don’t chop people’s heads off. We believe in freedom. So does God. I am not a barbarian. I am the democratically elected leader of a freedom-loving democracy. We are a compassionate society. We give compassionate electrocution and compassionate lethal injection. We are a great nation. I am not a dictator. He is. I am not a barbarian. He is. And he is. They all are. I possess moral authority. You see this fist? This is my moral authority. And don’t you forget it.’ I believe that despite the enormous odds which exist, unflinching, unswerving, fierce intellectual determination, as citizens, to define the real truth of our lives and our societies is a crucial obligation which devolves upon us all. It is in fact mandatory.

Taken from the Times of India - 19th Dec 2005

Inhuman apathy

Life is truly perplexing. It springs up surprises - some pleasing ones and then some which shakes one's soul. I currently face one such time

I live in a fairly "well to do" locality of Indore - the mini Mumbai situated in MP. And we have had a fairly peaceful and successful existence. One fine evening during dinner, my mother surprised me with this question - "Do you know somebody in the police?"

"Hey ! why ?". Could I have reacted in any other manner?

She then told me about a very scared lady who came running (literally) towards our house at noon that day. She requested for a glass of water. She looked traumatised and was very scared. When my mother talked to her, she realised that the woman has been beaten by her husband. Some of her glass bangles were broken and a few pieces had pierced her wrist resulting in minor cuts.

Gradually she opened up to my mother's comforting tone & words telling her how she is harrassed for every little thing that she does or fails to do. She lives with her husband and in laws in a flat of a multistoreyed building in our locality. Her Husband is a medical representative with a leading pharmaceutical company. Her in-laws and Husband tortures her, apparantly for dowry. Could this be true? - are we living in a city & in a locality where stories like this happen? Till now we had only read such stories in newspapers.

A quick little neat investigation brought forward more startling fact : everybody in that building (where she lives) is aware of her situation - however everybody blissfully ignores it as something of a mess to get into.

1. On my mother's egging - the woman in question - called up her parents who live in a small village in rural MP. To our consternation her mother suggested her to live with her husband and face their wrath. Hers was a simple explanation - how will she explain to her community/society as to why her daughter has come back.
2. We then considered contacting the police and were stumped by an innocent question from her - Can I keep living with my family once the complaint has been made?
3. My mother ruled out our getting involved directly in the situation - too dangerous, we live in the same locality. I with some pangs of guilt and shame on myself accepted that as the most practical thing to do.
4. I seemed to be running out of options and started feeling a little helpless. I had read & heard of agencies like National Commission for women (NCW) and National Human Rights commission (NHRC) - surely they can handle this better. I searched and found their websites; mailed to the NCW, only to realise I will not be responded to. Its more than 10 days now but no reples. No the mail did not bounce.

I feel helpless, guilty, even a little ashamed. May be thats why I am writing it all. How can somebody make a difference to such lives? I have taken a resolution I will keep trying something or the other. I guess I will atleast make some difference if not change her life. For a change my mother & my wife seem to be cooperative.

News Crazy ??

Not often now a days, we come across some great piece on the Times of India. However this was something that immediately attracted me.

I am not a regular visitors to many "national" news channels (except NDTV) and after reading this article I am happy not to add to their TRP.

The age of marketing has changed everything including some of the most noble prefessions - education, medicine and Journalism to name a few. Earning money any which way has become the one point mission of everyone. In the hysteria the distinction between business and profession has completely been wiped out.

Correcting the Competitive Exam mess ?!?

Rashmi in a thought provoking post MBA-Entrance : Time for a rethink makes a case for rethink on the way MBA-Entrance is conducted in our country. Few will disagree with the need to rethink on the admission process. However I wish that well meaning individuals be careful about offering piecemeal soutions. I write this blog to add my few pennies worth to the issue.

Rashmi in her blog writes:
"The future of b school entrance is online, but getting the technical and infrastructural details right will take a couple of years. We would have to go the GRE/ GMAT way and not insist on a simultaneous exam for 150,000 students.

While the idea is in the right direction, my concern is far bigger than just getting the infrastructure right or the difference in difficulty levels.

A very large part of our country is still not computer savvy - making CAT an online exam would mean that they will be at an obvious disavantage. Now, people might wonder whether such people write CAT - my answer is YES and many are both ambitious and sincere and quite a few have started making it to the best of B-Schools. By making the exam online we are warding off certain sections of our society from aspiring to enter our hallowed portals of education.

Sceptics might scoff at this as a socialist idea - let them. An online exam is against certain sections of our society and hence is a poor idea.

Rashmi in her blog writes:
Allwin Agnel, a non-MBA and founder of pagalguy.com has an interesting perspective on this. Right now, he says, we have 150,000 applicants because all they have to do is take a 2 hour multiple choice exam

Good that she wrote allwin agnel is a non-MBA but I wonder how could Rashmi - an IIM alumni accept those lines? A quick back of the paper analysis will tell us that more than that number of students prepare for this exam with various coaching classes in India for months if not years. Obviously they are investing money and year long efforts not becuase they think its just a 2 hour exam but because they find management degree from an IIM a sure method to upwardly mobile careers.

Rashmi in her blog writes:
...Make it harder - ask applicants to write 3 essays, get recommendation letters, demonstrate leadership capability through past work experience. The number will fall drastically, as only committed students will apply.......

I am sure even if we introduced all of these, the number of applicants will NOT drop till management remains one of the coveted careers. For all of the above methods, the coaching classes will modify their syllabus to assist on these issue.

But Rashmi goes on to provide an example of IIMA's PGP X program to prove this point -

Rashmi in her blog writes:
That could well be true. IIM A's newly launched PGP X program is a 1 year course for managers with 7-15 years experience. The admission procedure was very different - GMAT scores were accepted, candidates had to write essays and 'leadership potential' was an important selection criteria

As regards selectivity: around 1000 applications were received; admit offers were made to 71 candidates of which 67 accepted (a bit of a surprise - the institute was expecting 60 to join).

This is a case of simplistic analysis. The number of applicants in this case was less because of two reasons first, the program was new and second, they were looking for people with 7-15 year work experience. In fact for such a profile profile, 1000 applicants to a new programme is a huge number.

Whatever be the real reason - I feel reasonably confident that the numbers were less NOT because of a different exam format.

Lets ask another question - is the aim simply to reduce the number of students writing the test? If yes, this is like correcting one wrong with another. Let any number of people aspire for the best career available.

One major reason for this number to be so huge is an inherent insecurity in the minds of towards their careers as graduates do not get jobs easily. They are on a look out for lucrative career options. As job opportunities multiply (and it is happening) these numbers could actually start reducing.

May be the problem is not as big as it appears to be today and its a matter of time before it settles on its own.

P.S. Rashmi rightly suggests that individual institutes should not conduct their seperate exams and must refer to one of the top exams results.