LETTERS

WTO meeting

Your Cover Story "The battle of Doha" (December 7), which presents the various shades of opinion, reflects the politics behind the WTO Ministerial meeting. The opinion of Jairam Ramesh that "India has won, Maran has lost" (though he is the secretary of economic affairs for the Congress party) reveals that neither India nor Maran has lost. "China in the WTO" has added a new dimension. Why not look at China in this regard also? What we need to do is to leave double talk and work hard to achieve competitiveness in every field as far as possible and as fast as possible.

A. Jacob Sahayam
Karigiri, Tamil Nadu

Chomsky in India

I cannot tell you how impressed I am with your extensive coverage of Noam Chomsky's visit to India ("Noam Chomsky in India", December 7). I believe that this affirms Frontline's status as one of the world's foremost magazines. Again, I congratulate you on your achievement. Keep up the good work - the world needs to hear more from people like Chomsky.

Somendra Singh
Received on e-mail

Now that Uncle Sam is pointing one finger towards the terrorists of the world, the rest of the fingers are pointing towards him, as reflected in the article on Prof. Noam Chomsky's visit. The atrocities by and arrogance of the self-declared global policeman are well known throughout the world. It is the outcome of the consistent neglect of India's outcry against extremism and state-sponsored terrorism that the venomous serpents whom America once nourished are breathing fire into it. An offence becomes offensive only when it is targeted against America!

Rashmi Jitendra
Bhopal

One of the many pleasures of India is buying Frontline on railway platforms at strange times and in distant places. Please let me congratulate you on your issue of November 23, which I bought in the middle of the night in Bilimora in southern Gujarat. As usual your writers are well-informed, open-minded and balanced, and you seem able to access the best talent, worldwide. Please come and teach our British publishers how to put out a decent magazine!

Noam Chomsky's article is particularly timely. We do not need more Western cowboy rhetoric from the United States, nor do we need more radical ranting that implies that September 11 was just and proper retribution against the U.S.

But Chomsky's argument that the attack was a major change from the age-old pattern of 'us' Europeans and Americans attacking 'them', the rest of the world, does need a little qualification. Maybe we need not go back to the 10th century invasion of Spain by the Moors of North Africa, but what about Pearl Harbour in 1941? Chomsky also implies that 'we' have a monopoly of misdoing. Even in the last 10 years, Hutus and Tutsis have slaughtered millions of each other in Rwanda, Tigreans and Amharas have done likewise in Ethiopia, and if we go back a little further we come to Iraq and Iran, Chinese against Chinese, Hindus and Muslims in India, and so on - a long and wretched history of atrocity.

There is also a disturbing implication in Chomsky's paper, as in many others. Somehow it is suggested that while it is acceptable that 'they', Arabs, Africans or whatever, can take violent revenge, 'we' Americans and Europeans must be judged by higher standards. I submit that we should all be judged by the same standards, and that we are all found wanting.

Is it not a sad but normal feature of mankind that the strong attack the weak, and we all attack one another? Change is needed, yes, but not only by 'us' Europeans and Americans. Let us all look to the rule of law and to what our various religions tell us, as opposed to what their misguided interpreters tell us they tell us. Difficult, of course, but if the 'horrendous atrocity' of September 11 makes all of us a little more aware of this need, maybe some good may come out of a great evil.

Malcolm Harper
Filgrave, U.K.
(Camp: Bhubaneswar)

America's war

I wish to express my appreciation of both Satindar Bindra's (CNN) news reports on the Kargil War and now the war in Afghanistan, at his own risk. He deserves an award from President K.R. Narayanan for his factual reporting of the war against terrorism. He is a bold Indian patriot.

It is gratifying to see from his report that the Taliban's terrible administration is crumbling at last. The news report of the reopening of the Indira Gandhi Memorial Hospital in Kabul showed women and children entering the hospital for treatment after five years of its closure under the Taliban regime.

It is also gratifying to see that the combined efforts of Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee and Prime Minister Tony Blair as well as President George W. Bush against terrorism are bearing fruit. Hopefully, the terrorists and their associates harbouring them will be brought to justice.

India could play an active role, with the United Nations, in setting up a broad-based democratic government in Afghanistan, which has had cultural and historic ties with India for generations.

Syed Abdul Khadir
Harrow, U.K.

The American government trains, arms and supports militants and terrorists (including the Mujahideen) to promote its interventionist policies. President George Bush Jr. and his Republican Party promised to stop American intervention and to withdraw American troops from the Balkans. But they reneged on their promise. America ought to abandon its interventionist policies, which have long caused immense sufferings to the people of the world.

John J. John
Mumbai

In a way the U.S. position is right vis-a-vis the ongoing "war massacre" in Afghanistan, for the attack on the World Trade Centre towers was no less ghastly. Though the Taliban and Osama bin Laden might not be involved in the destruction of the WTC, their postures since 1996, to some extent if not fully, justified the action of the U.S.-led coalition against them.

However, some important questions arise out of this blood-bath. How long will humanity continue to thrive on human blood? Shall we continue to live in the Medieval Age? How long will it take to make the world truly civilised? If we really wish to answer all these questions, then first we have to abandon our double standards. Morally, we cannot call terrorism an evil when we have been piling up weapons of mass destruction in our own backyard.

Secondly, in the post-Taliban scenario, as an immediate task the U.S.-led coalition (which also includes Muslim nations) must solve the problem of Palestine, Kashmir, Northern Ireland, Sri Lanka, and so on. This may take time but certainly should not be dragged for long, even if such mediation runs counter to the national policies of the countries concerned.

Thirdly, the world community has to eradicate poverty, inequality, discrimination, human rights violations and so on from the globe. This will give legitimacy to the fight against terrorism.

Above all, we have to ensure that the religions are not in competition with one another.

Shakil Akhtar
Bhagalpur

Nuclear terrorism

We have to shed our complacency regarding a nuclear Pakistan. The recent news of the arrest of two top ex-officials of the Pakistani Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) is disturbing. But for the unfortunate happenings of September 11 and the ensuing U.S. pressure, these elements in Pakistan would have been continuing their work on their sinister mission. No wonder sometime back Osama bin Laden boasted that Pakistani nukes are as good as his own.

As some reports suggest, Pakistan now would have the world believe that these nuclear experts have been perhaps helping Taliban in making biological weapons. In these days the U.S. has found a strange bedfellow in Pakistan and does not seem to appreciate the long-term hazards from this new relationship based on placating Pakistan for the immediate goal of gaining access to Afghanistan.

India has to be more concerned about the danger of a terrorist nuclear attack. More than America, which is located far away, India, owing to its proximity to Pakistan where elements loyal to terrorists seem to have penetrated even the custodians of nuclear weapons, has to be more alarmed. Experience should tell us that Western powers are not worried about other victims of terrorism so long as they are not harmed. It will be a long time before they realise that they cannot live in an island of safety so long as terrorism and its state-sponsored manifestations such as those that exist in Pakistan are not tackled.

M.R. Iyer
Chicago

GM cotton

This is with reference to the report "Waking up to GM cotton" (November 23). The report refers in passing to a patent for a "terminator" gene that it associates Monsanto with. Please allow me to state the facts for the benefit of your readers:

In fact, in April 1999, our then chairman Bob Shapiro called for a thorough and independent review of gene protection technologies and pledged not to commercialise any of them. He reiterated that decision in October 1999.

The Monsanto pledge, publicly made by our president and CEO Hendrik Verfaillie on November 27, 2000, commits the company "not to pursue technologies that result in sterile seeds".

Let me state most categorically that there is no "terminator" gene in Monsanto's portfolio of products, either in India or anywhere in the world. Monsanto has also publicly pledged "to work within rigorous, science-based regulations as required by appropriate government agencies around the world".

Ranjana Smetacek
Director
Government & Public Affairs
Monsanto Holdings Private Ltd
Mumbai

Kashmir dispute

This refers to the article "Distant thunder" (November 23). The statement made by the UNMOGIP chief, Major-General Hermann Loidolt, is quite justified. For 54 years both India and Pakistan have played a politically motivated game by accusing each other of sponsoring terrorism and militancy in Jammu and Kashmir. During all these years Indian leaders have shown a lack of will to settle this problem. This issue is really the central issue, as mentioned by Colin Powell, the U.S. Secretary of State. If India and Pakistan are unable to solve this most serious issue bilaterally, then the U.S. should be allowed to mediate.

Neeraj Kr. Jha
Madhubani

Temple and U.P. polls

This refers to "Vajpayee's shifting stand" (November 23).

No politician acts without a motive and generally the motive is either to capture or to stay on in power. Vajpayee, Advani & Co. have again introduced the "Ram temple" formula because they want to leave nothing to chance as far as the elections to the Uttar Pradesh Assembly are concerned.

The BJP is desperate to win the Uttar Pradesh elections. As Vajpayee himself has said, its existence depends on the elections and it will go to any extent in order to survive in power. The BJP has desecrated the name of Rama, "Maryada Purushotam" (the finest of human beings). Rama was an ideal son, brother, husband and king. The ideal way to remember Rama is not by using his name meaninglessly but by emulating his actions in day-to-day life.

Mohammed Firoz Alam
Patna

POTO

This has reference to the article "Terror through ordinance" (November 23). Laws like the Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance are necessary for a country like India. Taliban leader Mullah Mohammad Omar has threatened that Russia, the U.S., Israel and India are the terrorists' next targets. Each and every day we have paid homage to innocent people killed in barbaric terrorist acts. But only after September 11 the whole world understood India's position. Critics of POTO should be taken to Srinagar (not Kandahar) and shown the bodies of innocent victims of terrorism. These leaders talk about the rights of terrorists but do not bother about the fundamental liberties of innocent victims of terrorism.

S.A. Sundaramurthy
Tirupur

BJP Chief Ministers

Nityanand Swami could not remain in office as the Chief Minister of Uttaranchal even for a year ("Leadership change in Uttaranchal", November 23). In the BJP-ruled States of Uttar Pradesh, Gujarat and Uttaranchal, Chief Ministers fall like ninepins. Perhaps this is the reason why the BJP calls itself the party with a difference. Even with lots of 'hoshiari', I do not think the new Chief Minister, Bhagat Singh Koshiari, will be able to remain in his chair for more than a year, considering in view of the average tenure of Chief Ministers in the above States.

I suggest that the BJP amend its manifesto to the effect that a Chief Minister will hold office only for a year, or perhaps six months, so that the selection of the next incumbent is easy and can be done without any rancour.

K.P. Rajan
Mumbai