Army was today called in following clashes and police firing during protests by the Gurjar community on the Jaipur-Agra highway in Dausa area of Rajasthan even as seven people were killed and several injured in the violence that also affected Karauli and Bundi.
In a bid to check the protests by the Gurjar action committee demanding that the community, which has been given OBC status, be shifted to the Scheduled Tribe category, the authorities called in the Army to check the protestors from blocking traffic on the highway.
Two police personnel were missing in Dausa while the collector of Bundi S S Bissa had sustained injuries in the violence, Rajsthan DGP A S Gill told PTI.
He said four persons were killed in Bundi district while three bodies were found from the national highway at Peelplikheda village, about 165 km from here, in Dausa and in neighbouring Karauli. He, however, didnot give any further details.
Six columns of the Army were rushed at around 1300 hrs from Jaipur to hold flag march on the National Highway near Dausa, State Home Secretary V S Singh said.
Army was also alerted in Alwar and Bharatpur areas to assist the civil administration following reports that the protestors dug up roads as part their 'chakka-jam' agitation.
A senior official said three bodies found in Gangapur city, Bayana and Mahua respectively in Dausa and neighbouring Karauli districts and four bodies in Bundi have been sent for post-mortem. Police lathicharged and lobbed teargas shells to disperse the violent crowd of Gurjars who were blocking the Jaipur-Agra highway at Peelplikheda village, about 165 kms from here, in Dausa before opening fire. Earlier, police and the protestors, who indulged in stone pelting, had fought a pitched battle.
State Home Secretary Singh said that the reports reaching here indicated that the situation turned for the worse when protestors attacked a police party Mahua village situated between Karauli and Dausa and set ablaze an ambulance. Besides Jaipur-Agra highway, the agitators had also obstructed highways at Bundi, Kota, Jaipur-Ajmer-Jodhpur, and Jaipur-Bundi-Sawai Madhopur.
Tuesday, May 29, 2007
Saturday, May 26, 2007
Seven killed, 20 injured in Guwahati blast
Seven persons were killed and 20 others injured in a powerful bomb blast by the ULFA in Guwahati's Athgaon area today triggering public protest there and in nearby commercial Fancy Bazar.
City Senior Superintendent of Police S N Singh told PTI that the bomb planted in a rickshaw exploded at around 10.45 am near the Marwari Maternity Hospital in Athgaon where shoppers were going about their business.
Stating that some of the victims died on the spot while others on way to hospital, Singh said, the injured were admitted to various hospitals in the city.
Utter chaos and confusion prevailed as people attempted to flee. Police cordoned off the area and the injured were being rescued, Singh said.
The blast triggered angry protests in the area and in nearby Fancy Bazar, the commercial hub of the N-E region. Local people took to the streets in protest against the repeated blasts in their area asking shopkeepers to down their shutters
The Indo-Myanmar border at Moreh in Manipur's Chandel district has been sealed following a bomb explosion there in which five persons sustained injuries, official sources said today.
City Senior Superintendent of Police S N Singh told PTI that the bomb planted in a rickshaw exploded at around 10.45 am near the Marwari Maternity Hospital in Athgaon where shoppers were going about their business.
Stating that some of the victims died on the spot while others on way to hospital, Singh said, the injured were admitted to various hospitals in the city.
Utter chaos and confusion prevailed as people attempted to flee. Police cordoned off the area and the injured were being rescued, Singh said.
The blast triggered angry protests in the area and in nearby Fancy Bazar, the commercial hub of the N-E region. Local people took to the streets in protest against the repeated blasts in their area asking shopkeepers to down their shutters
The Indo-Myanmar border at Moreh in Manipur's Chandel district has been sealed following a bomb explosion there in which five persons sustained injuries, official sources said today.
Tuesday, May 22, 2007
Read it for sure
The Unfinished Business
BY B.Raman
BY B.Raman
After Bosnia and Jammu & Kashmir, it will be Hyderabad in Andhra Pradesh and Junagadh in Gujarat. That is what the pan-Islamic jihadi terrorist organisations in Pakistan, which are members of Osama bin Laden's International Islamic Front (IIF), have been saying even long before the IIF was formed in February,1998.
They look upon Hyderabad and Junagadh as Pakistani territory, which should have come to Pakistan in 1947. They also look upon them as legitimate lands of the Ummah, which should be restored to the Ummah. They project their jihad as a three-phase struggle. Under Phase I, they would "liberate" J&K. Under Phase II, they would "free" Hyderabad and Junagadh from "Hindu control." And under Phase III, they say they would "liberate" the Muslims in other parts of India.
Forty-five per cent of the world's Muslims live in the sub-continent. These Pakistani jihadi organisations, which support Al Qaeda, want to "liberate" all these Muslims and form a single Islamic State in the sub-continent--a South Asian Islamic Caliphate. They feel that such a State would be a major power in the world. The activities of these jihadi elements in India have to be examined against the background of their strategic objective, which has to be countered strategically by us.
Instead, most analysts in India tend to tactically project this terrorism and the mindset behind it as a short-term phenomenon not calling for long-term policies such as strict control of illegal immigration from Bangladesh, action against the illegal immigrants of the past, check on the flow of jihadi money and ideological ill-winds from abroad etc. Lack of a strategic response from the Indian state would make this threat more and more difficult to handle in future.
(Shri B. Raman is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai.)Courtesy: Outlookindia.com
They look upon Hyderabad and Junagadh as Pakistani territory, which should have come to Pakistan in 1947. They also look upon them as legitimate lands of the Ummah, which should be restored to the Ummah. They project their jihad as a three-phase struggle. Under Phase I, they would "liberate" J&K. Under Phase II, they would "free" Hyderabad and Junagadh from "Hindu control." And under Phase III, they say they would "liberate" the Muslims in other parts of India.
Forty-five per cent of the world's Muslims live in the sub-continent. These Pakistani jihadi organisations, which support Al Qaeda, want to "liberate" all these Muslims and form a single Islamic State in the sub-continent--a South Asian Islamic Caliphate. They feel that such a State would be a major power in the world. The activities of these jihadi elements in India have to be examined against the background of their strategic objective, which has to be countered strategically by us.
Instead, most analysts in India tend to tactically project this terrorism and the mindset behind it as a short-term phenomenon not calling for long-term policies such as strict control of illegal immigration from Bangladesh, action against the illegal immigrants of the past, check on the flow of jihadi money and ideological ill-winds from abroad etc. Lack of a strategic response from the Indian state would make this threat more and more difficult to handle in future.
(Shri B. Raman is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai.)Courtesy: Outlookindia.com
Advani gives perfect ten to UPA for its failures
Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha Shri L K Advani addressed a press conference in Goa on May 22 . Lambasting the UPA Government's policies Shri Advani presented an account of its failure on many fronts in the last three years. The excerpts of his statement issued at Goa.
For the first time in our Republic’s history, here is a government that is headed by a non-Prime Minister, run by a person who is not accountable to Parliament, and is surviving on life-support system provided by parties that behave more like the opposition.
Last week, when the Finance Minister was replying to the debate on the Budget in the Lok Sabha, the MPs belonging to the Left parties joined the opposition NDA in staging a walk-out in protest. Now, a senior minister in the government, Shri Mani Shankar Aiyar, has himself publicly stated that the “UPA is no more aam aadmi's government.” According to him, Dr. Manmohan Singh’s is a government whose economic policy “may not get the ‘aam aadmi's’ endorsement."
I do not know why Shri Aiyar is being allowed to say such things by the Congress high command without being reprimanded. According to some analysts, this may be part of a deliberate attempt to distance the party’s supreme leader from the failures of Dr. Manmohan Singh’s government, so that at an opportune time in the near future the nominal and nominated Prime Minister can be dispensed with.
Congress party has surrendered itself to a slavish culture in which the reigning “Dynasty” never does wrong and is never responsible or accountable for any failure.
One cannot expect any honest stock-taking of the three years of the UPA Government from this kind of imperious and dynastic leadership, which thinks that it is its birth-right to rule India. .
Ten failures of the UPA Government
1-Failure to contain inflation and the consequent steep rise in the prices of all essential commodities. This demonstrates the UPA Government’s betrayal of the aam aadmi, in whose name the Congress sought votes in 2004.
2-Failure to bring relief and revitalization to the agriculture sector. This is evident, above all, from the shocking number of farmers’ suicides in Congress-run states like Maharashtra and Andhra Pradesh.
3-Failure – and even deliberate unwillingness – to attend to the needs of internal security. The UPA Government’s very first action was to repeal POTA. Since then, its soft and confused approach to dealing with the menace of jehadi terrorism has continued unabated. Its refusal to carry out the death sentence on Mohammed Afzal, who has been convicted by the Supreme Court in the December 13, 2001 terrorist attack on Indian Parliament, is proof enough that the UPA is ready to stoop to any level to pursue its politics of minorityism. Another shocking instance of minorityism was the government’s move to conduct communal census in India’s Armed Forces, which was hastily dropped only because of stout opposition from the BJP and all-round public condemnation, including a firm “No” from the military fraternity itself.
4-The government’s failure on the internal security front is also evident from its inaction in respect of the massive and continuing infiltration from Bangladesh.
5-Dogmatic and dogged pursuit of the Indo-US Nuclear Deal, ignoring concerns expressed by eminent nuclear scientists and security experts, and ignoring also protests from the BJP and some constituents of the UPA itself. This has given rise to apprehensions that the leadership of the Congress and UPA is vulnerable to American pressure.
6-Failure to accelerate the implementation of major infrastructure development projects, which have suffered a slowdown after the exit of the NDA government. A prime example of this is the landmark National Highway Development Project. The power situation in most parts of the country is going from bad to worse. In neighbouring Maharashtra, it is perhaps the worst.
7-Failure to protect the interests of farmers in the shoddily formulated SEZ policy. Similarly, the policy on FDI in retail sector has created genuine apprehensions among lakhs of small traders, apart from raising fears of dumping of foreign goods in the Indian market.
8-Failure – indeed, conspicuous reluctance – to fight the evil of corruption. The UPA government is involved in three main corruption scandals in the past three years: The Quattrocchi scandal, the Scorpene submarine scandal, and the food-for-oil scandal in Iraq. In each of these, the government has been caught in the act of cover-up.
9-Failure to deal with – indeed, conscious promotion of – criminalization in politics and governance. The credibility of the UPA government on this score has taken severe knocks almost from day one. The inclusion of persons with proven criminal records in the Union council of ministers showed that the UPA was, for the first time, introducing criminalization into the governmental set-up at the central level. One of the former Cabinet ministers is now behind bars, convicted in a case of murder. 10-Failure of the Prime Minister to defend the dignity of his high office. Dr. Manmohan Singh has demeaned and devalued the office of the Prime Minister by demonstrating that the real power in the UPA Government is wielded not by him but by 10 Janpath.
For the first time in our Republic’s history, here is a government that is headed by a non-Prime Minister, run by a person who is not accountable to Parliament, and is surviving on life-support system provided by parties that behave more like the opposition.
Last week, when the Finance Minister was replying to the debate on the Budget in the Lok Sabha, the MPs belonging to the Left parties joined the opposition NDA in staging a walk-out in protest. Now, a senior minister in the government, Shri Mani Shankar Aiyar, has himself publicly stated that the “UPA is no more aam aadmi's government.” According to him, Dr. Manmohan Singh’s is a government whose economic policy “may not get the ‘aam aadmi's’ endorsement."
I do not know why Shri Aiyar is being allowed to say such things by the Congress high command without being reprimanded. According to some analysts, this may be part of a deliberate attempt to distance the party’s supreme leader from the failures of Dr. Manmohan Singh’s government, so that at an opportune time in the near future the nominal and nominated Prime Minister can be dispensed with.
Congress party has surrendered itself to a slavish culture in which the reigning “Dynasty” never does wrong and is never responsible or accountable for any failure.
One cannot expect any honest stock-taking of the three years of the UPA Government from this kind of imperious and dynastic leadership, which thinks that it is its birth-right to rule India. .
Ten failures of the UPA Government
1-Failure to contain inflation and the consequent steep rise in the prices of all essential commodities. This demonstrates the UPA Government’s betrayal of the aam aadmi, in whose name the Congress sought votes in 2004.
2-Failure to bring relief and revitalization to the agriculture sector. This is evident, above all, from the shocking number of farmers’ suicides in Congress-run states like Maharashtra and Andhra Pradesh.
3-Failure – and even deliberate unwillingness – to attend to the needs of internal security. The UPA Government’s very first action was to repeal POTA. Since then, its soft and confused approach to dealing with the menace of jehadi terrorism has continued unabated. Its refusal to carry out the death sentence on Mohammed Afzal, who has been convicted by the Supreme Court in the December 13, 2001 terrorist attack on Indian Parliament, is proof enough that the UPA is ready to stoop to any level to pursue its politics of minorityism. Another shocking instance of minorityism was the government’s move to conduct communal census in India’s Armed Forces, which was hastily dropped only because of stout opposition from the BJP and all-round public condemnation, including a firm “No” from the military fraternity itself.
4-The government’s failure on the internal security front is also evident from its inaction in respect of the massive and continuing infiltration from Bangladesh.
5-Dogmatic and dogged pursuit of the Indo-US Nuclear Deal, ignoring concerns expressed by eminent nuclear scientists and security experts, and ignoring also protests from the BJP and some constituents of the UPA itself. This has given rise to apprehensions that the leadership of the Congress and UPA is vulnerable to American pressure.
6-Failure to accelerate the implementation of major infrastructure development projects, which have suffered a slowdown after the exit of the NDA government. A prime example of this is the landmark National Highway Development Project. The power situation in most parts of the country is going from bad to worse. In neighbouring Maharashtra, it is perhaps the worst.
7-Failure to protect the interests of farmers in the shoddily formulated SEZ policy. Similarly, the policy on FDI in retail sector has created genuine apprehensions among lakhs of small traders, apart from raising fears of dumping of foreign goods in the Indian market.
8-Failure – indeed, conspicuous reluctance – to fight the evil of corruption. The UPA government is involved in three main corruption scandals in the past three years: The Quattrocchi scandal, the Scorpene submarine scandal, and the food-for-oil scandal in Iraq. In each of these, the government has been caught in the act of cover-up.
9-Failure to deal with – indeed, conscious promotion of – criminalization in politics and governance. The credibility of the UPA government on this score has taken severe knocks almost from day one. The inclusion of persons with proven criminal records in the Union council of ministers showed that the UPA was, for the first time, introducing criminalization into the governmental set-up at the central level. One of the former Cabinet ministers is now behind bars, convicted in a case of murder. 10-Failure of the Prime Minister to defend the dignity of his high office. Dr. Manmohan Singh has demeaned and devalued the office of the Prime Minister by demonstrating that the real power in the UPA Government is wielded not by him but by 10 Janpath.
Monday, May 21, 2007
Aiyar says it all
Congress Minister attacks UPA policies
As the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) completes three years in power this week, Sports and Panchayati Raj Minister Mani Shankar Aiyar has warned that the government badly needs a "midpoint course correction" as high economic growth has benefited classes rather than the masses to a "disproportionate" degree.
Reminding the government of its Common Minimum Programme of promoting the interests of "aam admi" (the common man), Aiyar said: "Alarm bells should be rung" as the government's economic policies have given "a disproportionate benefit to the classes".
In an interview with a television channel the minister warned that if the government does not correct course it would lose "the aam admi's support" in the next elections. "There's a disproportionate benefit of the 9.2 percent (economic growth) going to the classes. What I want to emphasise is not that there's no benefit going to the masses but that it needs to be much more consciously directed there," he told Karan Thapar in the interview broadcast Sunday morning.
"I fear that a government that is attempting to have an economic policy for the aam admi may not get the aam admi's endorsement," he said.
In an unsparing critique of his own government, Aiyar contended that its policies do not reflect the real interests of the majority of people of India and alleged that the policies are heavily influenced by elite institutions like the industry lobby Confederation of Indian Industry (CII).
"We must resist the tendency to look at the interest of the classes and instead take into account the interest of the masses," he added.
In a speech to the CII recently, Aiyar had said: "The masses determine who will form the government but the classes determine what the government will do."
As the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) completes three years in power this week, Sports and Panchayati Raj Minister Mani Shankar Aiyar has warned that the government badly needs a "midpoint course correction" as high economic growth has benefited classes rather than the masses to a "disproportionate" degree.
Reminding the government of its Common Minimum Programme of promoting the interests of "aam admi" (the common man), Aiyar said: "Alarm bells should be rung" as the government's economic policies have given "a disproportionate benefit to the classes".
In an interview with a television channel the minister warned that if the government does not correct course it would lose "the aam admi's support" in the next elections. "There's a disproportionate benefit of the 9.2 percent (economic growth) going to the classes. What I want to emphasise is not that there's no benefit going to the masses but that it needs to be much more consciously directed there," he told Karan Thapar in the interview broadcast Sunday morning.
"I fear that a government that is attempting to have an economic policy for the aam admi may not get the aam admi's endorsement," he said.
In an unsparing critique of his own government, Aiyar contended that its policies do not reflect the real interests of the majority of people of India and alleged that the policies are heavily influenced by elite institutions like the industry lobby Confederation of Indian Industry (CII).
"We must resist the tendency to look at the interest of the classes and instead take into account the interest of the masses," he added.
In a speech to the CII recently, Aiyar had said: "The masses determine who will form the government but the classes determine what the government will do."
Thursday, May 17, 2007
Kashmir needs policy, PM gives committee
The reported remarks of Syed Ali Shah Geelani in a planned meeting at Srinagar Airport on 22nd April, 2007 and the Government of India's total silence on this important issue of national security, the status of the State of Jammu and Kashmir and the Indo-Pak relations.
The meeting took place on the 22nd of March. Syed Ali Shah Geelani was under treatment in a hospital and he, thereafter, travelled to Srinagar. The preparations that were being made at Srinagar Airport, building of platforms, microphones, receiving hand, were not being done in a secret way. Thereafter, Syed Ali Shah Geelani landed at Srinagar Airport and he was escorted to this pre-arranged built dais upon which he addressed the assembly. Anti-India slogans were raised there also there and were flags demonstrating the support to Lashkar-e-Taiba.
We know that the Lashkar-e-Taiba is an organization which committed a grave act of terrorism a few weeks back, where two hundred plus citizens of India lost their lives on a Bombay train. On the very day Syed Ali Shah Gilani was making the statement, threats were received and two LeT terrorists were also arrested here in Delhi. If the Government of India two or three days later, orders that Sayed Ali Shah Gilani is to be kept under house-arrest and some one or two people are also taken into custody, the question is why was, in the first instance, a meeting permitted at Sri Nagar Airport? And, if the meeting was permitted, knowing that the he was going to address it, it stands to reason, that the Central Government has something to explain to account for.
The Prime Minister in his speech recently spoke of the new State of Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh. The Prime Minister has also spoken, time and again, of soft borders and making borders irrelevant, etc. One needs to remind the Prime Minister that on the 22nd of February, 1994 a unanimous Resolution was passed that the State of Jammu and Kashmir is an integral part of India. In addition, it had also firmly declared then that any attempt to separate it from the rest of the country will be strongly resisted by all necessary means. The House then also demanded that Pakistan must vacate the areas of the Indian State of Jammu and Kashmir which they have occupied through aggression.
The State of Jammu and Kashmir comprise the whole of Ladakh and also the entire Pak-occupied Kashmir. When has Parliament addressed this Resolution again and changed its mind about our declared status of the State of Jammu and Kashmir?
Recently in one of the States, the Chief Minister of the State asked for the withdrawal of the Army. The Prime Minister, thereafter, appointed three committees to decide whether it should be withdrawn or not. This is really the most dangerous way to do it. It is a decision of the Ministry of Defence or the Prime Minister who is the head of the National Security Council or the Cabinet Committee on Security.
The meeting took place on the 22nd of March. Syed Ali Shah Geelani was under treatment in a hospital and he, thereafter, travelled to Srinagar. The preparations that were being made at Srinagar Airport, building of platforms, microphones, receiving hand, were not being done in a secret way. Thereafter, Syed Ali Shah Geelani landed at Srinagar Airport and he was escorted to this pre-arranged built dais upon which he addressed the assembly. Anti-India slogans were raised there also there and were flags demonstrating the support to Lashkar-e-Taiba.
We know that the Lashkar-e-Taiba is an organization which committed a grave act of terrorism a few weeks back, where two hundred plus citizens of India lost their lives on a Bombay train. On the very day Syed Ali Shah Gilani was making the statement, threats were received and two LeT terrorists were also arrested here in Delhi. If the Government of India two or three days later, orders that Sayed Ali Shah Gilani is to be kept under house-arrest and some one or two people are also taken into custody, the question is why was, in the first instance, a meeting permitted at Sri Nagar Airport? And, if the meeting was permitted, knowing that the he was going to address it, it stands to reason, that the Central Government has something to explain to account for.
The Prime Minister in his speech recently spoke of the new State of Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh. The Prime Minister has also spoken, time and again, of soft borders and making borders irrelevant, etc. One needs to remind the Prime Minister that on the 22nd of February, 1994 a unanimous Resolution was passed that the State of Jammu and Kashmir is an integral part of India. In addition, it had also firmly declared then that any attempt to separate it from the rest of the country will be strongly resisted by all necessary means. The House then also demanded that Pakistan must vacate the areas of the Indian State of Jammu and Kashmir which they have occupied through aggression.
The State of Jammu and Kashmir comprise the whole of Ladakh and also the entire Pak-occupied Kashmir. When has Parliament addressed this Resolution again and changed its mind about our declared status of the State of Jammu and Kashmir?
Recently in one of the States, the Chief Minister of the State asked for the withdrawal of the Army. The Prime Minister, thereafter, appointed three committees to decide whether it should be withdrawn or not. This is really the most dangerous way to do it. It is a decision of the Ministry of Defence or the Prime Minister who is the head of the National Security Council or the Cabinet Committee on Security.
If it were Rome Sethu
The issue of Sethu Samudram Canal Project or SSCP has snowballed into a big controversy. Hindus believe that the stretch of limestone shoals between Dhanushkodi near Rameshwaram in Southern India and Mannar in Northwest Sri Lanka are the remains of an ancient bridge built by Lord Rama, as described in the holy epic, Ramayana.
Recent NASA satellite images show clear pictures of a broken bridge under the ocean floor. The heritage of the bridge and the story of Lord Rama are extremely sacred to Hindus. Every body knows that a bridge was built by the Vanarsena of Lord Rama and Bhagwan Ram’s army marched over it to Lanka and defeated Ravana. Hence during Dussehra every year and in Ramleelas depicting Rama’s life enacted across the country the Setu Bandhan or the construction of Rama’s bridge is prominently mentioned. Apart from the Ramayana, the Mahabharata also refers to the continued protection of Nala Setu following Sri Rama’s command. Kalidasa’s Raghuvamsham also refers to the Setu. So does the Skanda Purana (III 1.2.1-114), the Vishnu Purana (IV 4.40-49), the Agni Purana (V-XI), the Brahma Purana (138.1-40).
The ocean between India and Sri Lanka near the Mannar coast is very shallow and is not navigable. It does not allow ships to pass. This means that. India does not have a continuous navigational channel linking the east and west coasts. Ships coming from India's west and heading to Bangladesh or Indian ports on the east coast have to go around Sri Lanka because the waterway in the sea dividing the two countries is shallow.
Therefore, the Government of India has proposed the dredging of the sea to create a shipping canal to save up to 780 km of sailing distance and 30 hours of sailing time for ships plying between the east and west coasts of India.
Indian officials say the canal, which is called the Sethusamudram project, will also boost the national economy besides speeding up the movement of Indian Navy and Coast Guard vessels as well.
Hindu groups say this may be true but such economic progress cannot be at the expense of Ram Sethu, as they refer to Adam's Bridge, located at the southern end of the Sethusamudram project.
This is where an estimated 48 million cubic metres of silt will be removed over the next two years. The construction of the canal immediately led to wide protests in India by Hindu leaders. Several holy men have gathered together to launch a campaign of protest.
In March 2007, over ten Hindu umbrella organizations from around the world joined together to launch the Save Ram Sethu Campaign (Ram Sethu Bachao Andolan) to increase the profile of the issue amongst the international communities.
The campaign hopes to convince the Government of India to reconsider the construction of the canal as it will hurt religious sentiments of millions of Hindus and also pose a great risk to the environment of the region and the livelihood of local fishermen.
So far the sea between India and Sri Lanka has been recognised as historic waters, though the United States has been pressurising to have it declared as international waters and said in a naval notification in 2005 that it does not accept the sea between India and Sri Lanka as ‘historic’. The US declaration and the role of the Tuticorin Port Trust, the nodal agency to implement the Sethu Samudram Canal Project coupled with the haste with which the project was inaugurated, has given rise to many unanswered questions.
The US Navy operational directive refusing to accept the sea between India and Sri Lanka as ‘historic’ was made on June 23, 2005. The Prime Minister’s Office sent some queries in March 2005 to N K Raghupathy, chief of the Tuticorin Port Trust. He sent answers to the PMO’s queries on June 30, 2005 and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh with United Progressive Alliance Chairperson Smt. Sonia Gandhi inaugurated the project on July 2, 2005. Why were the queries sent to the TPT and not to an agency which had scientific authority to look into the geological and maritime aspects of the project? Why did the Prime Minister and the UPA chairperson rush to inaugurate the project without, prima facie, having the time to look into the answers given by the TPT chief? Why was the present route okayed which essentially requires the destruction of the Ram Setu, while other options, closer to Dhanushkodi, which did not touch the Ram Setu were ignored?
Local fishermen, Hindus, Muslims and Christians alike oppose the present route and are demanding alternative channels, which are available. They say the present channel would destroy marine life and corals. This will kill the trade in shankas (shells) that has a turnover in excess of Rs 150 crore (Rs 1.5 billion) per annum. Invaluable thorium deposits would be affected, which are very important for our nuclear fuel requirements.
The BJP and other nationalist forces have also came out in open in protest against the SSCP project in its present form. The issue rocked both the Houses of Parliament creating a big furore. Launching attack on the UPA Government, BJP members said the destruction of the ancient bridge would not only offend religious-cultural sentiments of the people of India but also expose the southern Indian coastlines to the vagaries of frequent cyclones and any possible future tsunamis.
Raising the issue in the Rajya Sabha during the Question Hour. BJP member Shri Shreegopal Vyas said the project in its present form would destroy India’s thorium deposits and pose a great risk to the environment, ecology, oceanic life, besides endangering the livelihood of thousands of fishermen in the local area. In reply, Union Shipping, road and Surface Transport Minister Shri TR Baalu stirred a hornet’s nest, saying that the project alignment could not be changed since it was finalised by “secularist people.”
The UPA Government's stand on this issue has been insensitive towards Hindus as it says there are no archaeological studies that reveal the existence of a Ram Sethu bridge between India and Sri Lanka.
In a written reply to the Rajya Sabha, Minister of Tourism and Culture Smt. Ambika Soni confessed, "However, a NASA satellite picture has shown the existence of a stretch of land bridge in the Palk Strait between the countries."The campaign against the Sethu Samudram Canal Project has shaped into a movement now. It would be no exaggeration if we say that by not paying respect to Hindu sentiments in the country the UPA Government is further alienating the majority of Hindus in their own country. Increasing anxiety in the hearts of millions of Hindus would do no good to the social fabric of our society. We hope the present dispensation at the Centre would soon realise its mistake. Else we are heading to the point of no return
Recent NASA satellite images show clear pictures of a broken bridge under the ocean floor. The heritage of the bridge and the story of Lord Rama are extremely sacred to Hindus. Every body knows that a bridge was built by the Vanarsena of Lord Rama and Bhagwan Ram’s army marched over it to Lanka and defeated Ravana. Hence during Dussehra every year and in Ramleelas depicting Rama’s life enacted across the country the Setu Bandhan or the construction of Rama’s bridge is prominently mentioned. Apart from the Ramayana, the Mahabharata also refers to the continued protection of Nala Setu following Sri Rama’s command. Kalidasa’s Raghuvamsham also refers to the Setu. So does the Skanda Purana (III 1.2.1-114), the Vishnu Purana (IV 4.40-49), the Agni Purana (V-XI), the Brahma Purana (138.1-40).
The ocean between India and Sri Lanka near the Mannar coast is very shallow and is not navigable. It does not allow ships to pass. This means that. India does not have a continuous navigational channel linking the east and west coasts. Ships coming from India's west and heading to Bangladesh or Indian ports on the east coast have to go around Sri Lanka because the waterway in the sea dividing the two countries is shallow.
Therefore, the Government of India has proposed the dredging of the sea to create a shipping canal to save up to 780 km of sailing distance and 30 hours of sailing time for ships plying between the east and west coasts of India.
Indian officials say the canal, which is called the Sethusamudram project, will also boost the national economy besides speeding up the movement of Indian Navy and Coast Guard vessels as well.
Hindu groups say this may be true but such economic progress cannot be at the expense of Ram Sethu, as they refer to Adam's Bridge, located at the southern end of the Sethusamudram project.
This is where an estimated 48 million cubic metres of silt will be removed over the next two years. The construction of the canal immediately led to wide protests in India by Hindu leaders. Several holy men have gathered together to launch a campaign of protest.
In March 2007, over ten Hindu umbrella organizations from around the world joined together to launch the Save Ram Sethu Campaign (Ram Sethu Bachao Andolan) to increase the profile of the issue amongst the international communities.
The campaign hopes to convince the Government of India to reconsider the construction of the canal as it will hurt religious sentiments of millions of Hindus and also pose a great risk to the environment of the region and the livelihood of local fishermen.
So far the sea between India and Sri Lanka has been recognised as historic waters, though the United States has been pressurising to have it declared as international waters and said in a naval notification in 2005 that it does not accept the sea between India and Sri Lanka as ‘historic’. The US declaration and the role of the Tuticorin Port Trust, the nodal agency to implement the Sethu Samudram Canal Project coupled with the haste with which the project was inaugurated, has given rise to many unanswered questions.
The US Navy operational directive refusing to accept the sea between India and Sri Lanka as ‘historic’ was made on June 23, 2005. The Prime Minister’s Office sent some queries in March 2005 to N K Raghupathy, chief of the Tuticorin Port Trust. He sent answers to the PMO’s queries on June 30, 2005 and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh with United Progressive Alliance Chairperson Smt. Sonia Gandhi inaugurated the project on July 2, 2005. Why were the queries sent to the TPT and not to an agency which had scientific authority to look into the geological and maritime aspects of the project? Why did the Prime Minister and the UPA chairperson rush to inaugurate the project without, prima facie, having the time to look into the answers given by the TPT chief? Why was the present route okayed which essentially requires the destruction of the Ram Setu, while other options, closer to Dhanushkodi, which did not touch the Ram Setu were ignored?
Local fishermen, Hindus, Muslims and Christians alike oppose the present route and are demanding alternative channels, which are available. They say the present channel would destroy marine life and corals. This will kill the trade in shankas (shells) that has a turnover in excess of Rs 150 crore (Rs 1.5 billion) per annum. Invaluable thorium deposits would be affected, which are very important for our nuclear fuel requirements.
The BJP and other nationalist forces have also came out in open in protest against the SSCP project in its present form. The issue rocked both the Houses of Parliament creating a big furore. Launching attack on the UPA Government, BJP members said the destruction of the ancient bridge would not only offend religious-cultural sentiments of the people of India but also expose the southern Indian coastlines to the vagaries of frequent cyclones and any possible future tsunamis.
Raising the issue in the Rajya Sabha during the Question Hour. BJP member Shri Shreegopal Vyas said the project in its present form would destroy India’s thorium deposits and pose a great risk to the environment, ecology, oceanic life, besides endangering the livelihood of thousands of fishermen in the local area. In reply, Union Shipping, road and Surface Transport Minister Shri TR Baalu stirred a hornet’s nest, saying that the project alignment could not be changed since it was finalised by “secularist people.”
The UPA Government's stand on this issue has been insensitive towards Hindus as it says there are no archaeological studies that reveal the existence of a Ram Sethu bridge between India and Sri Lanka.
In a written reply to the Rajya Sabha, Minister of Tourism and Culture Smt. Ambika Soni confessed, "However, a NASA satellite picture has shown the existence of a stretch of land bridge in the Palk Strait between the countries."The campaign against the Sethu Samudram Canal Project has shaped into a movement now. It would be no exaggeration if we say that by not paying respect to Hindu sentiments in the country the UPA Government is further alienating the majority of Hindus in their own country. Increasing anxiety in the hearts of millions of Hindus would do no good to the social fabric of our society. We hope the present dispensation at the Centre would soon realise its mistake. Else we are heading to the point of no return
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)