Just a quick status update on the state of the Union- especially the state of the society and its spurious ways of dealing with wrong doing.

A recent BBC investigation, finds that there is enough evidence that the UN Peace Keepers in DR Congo were involved in a Arms-for-Gold scandal with a rebel group. While the Head of UN Mission to DR Congo says, "We have lost lives in fighting these militias", BBC's investigation revealed that militia were receiving arms from the same UN agency they were fighting against, through some unscrupulous elements. When confronted with the question that the militia leaders have confirmed they received answers, he says, Militia is Militia and they have their own interests", as if UN doesn't have any self interest in the whole issue- but that is a mute point to what I am to discuss here. Though the article doesn't directly implicate any Indian involvement in the episode, the Indian news agencies were quick to pick this story up- and they were referring to this article, which says,

As for the allegations against Indian peacekeepers, the OIOS found many of them were not substantiated, says the UN.

But there was enough evidence to substantiate an allegation that some troops purchased counterfeit gold and illegally detained a local resident.

That report was sent to the Indian government in March 2008.

While the allegations and refusals might linger on for ever, and it does pains me that Indian Army is being alleged to have a part in this scandal, what pains me more is the comments that appeared in the article. I am producing them full below, just in case they are removed, deleted or otherwise not available for future reference:

Raghav: This docu on BBC was about many other troops and not Indian Army along. The alligations against other troups were more severe. Thought programs like this are quite common in here to keep public moral high after what ever the UK troup is involved in around the globe.( Posted: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 at 03:17 )

Devesh:If British army can get involved in child abuse, sex with minors and rape why are they trying to chase Indian army who is simply trying to make some money without hurting any one emotionally and physically. ( Posted: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 at 03:02 )

Reading them, I am appalled at the insensitivity and a blatant disregard for morality and probity in the conduct of duty. "....who is simply trying to make some money without hurting..."- gosh, have we become such a bunch of insensitive, arrogant people, who snugs off grave mistakes? Is this what 60 years of "Independent Corruption" has made us?

Is this now a part of our national life, accepting corruption as a "trying to make money"? When are we going to stop this- will we ever grow up as a civilized nation?. The other appalling part of the comment is trying to make it a nationalistic cause, saying "Indian army is being chased"- I can say only one thing on this- Crap!

Pragmatic has a good article on the reasons why the Indian Government keeps sending troops for UN Peace Keeping missions and the reasons why it should not continue with it, and there is an even more radical reason for scrapping the UN Mission itself. The reasons given for it are flimsy and the assertion that the UN interferes with the affairs of countries, though correct, misses out the important point, that it does so, at the behest of the same country that Ann Shibler is trying to defend! It also misses out the other point that US has been meddling in the affairs of other countries and pressing UN to do its bidding in the post-mess scenarios!

An excellent piece of editorial in NY Times, on the Mitt Romney's recent speech on his Mormonist faith. When I first read about the US election issues (may be in May 2007), in Times, the caption read "Is America ready for a Mormon President?" or something similar. That caption did more to debunk my myths about the US society, than more than a couple of You Tube videos by Richard Dawkins and his "The God Delusion".

Though, Europe was the place Secularism in its current form that we know of originated, US had been a clear adherent, with the ideal enshrined in its constitution, as the First Amendment. While, there is no denying that the undercurrent of religion is there in all Societies, it is really unfortunate that a presidential candidate would find it necessary to give a speech like this to an audience of mostly Conservative Christians.

Where this gets even more interesting is, his Republican party has a known conservative bias- what with the current incumbent's ability to speak with and hear God's voice, there is no denying that the influence is ever present. But to make a speech that doesn't clearly distance oneself from the Church and goes one step further to say,

......religion does have a place in the public domain, and that those establishing the religion of secularism are "wrong."

is definitely not something that I would expect from a Presidential hopeful from US. When the world is much less a safe place to live, nations divided on religious lines are the last thing that we would want. What we need are not assertions of religious identities- but more of Humanitarianism.

As such, there are enough issues that need urgent attention- like the Subprime mortgage woes, the Iraq War, the Iran issue, Climate Change and Global Warming- these are those things that would affect every day life of most people in the world- not just US. It is indeed disappointing to see that there are hardly much of intellectual debate or fresh thinking in any of these issues- the most debate and haggling happens on issues, which are of secondary- but highly emotional issues.

I hazard a guess, that this is the way a Democracy work- I can see similar strains in India too- in Gujarat elections- look at the issues that are being discussed- not economy, not irrigation or power or infrastructure- but "Mauth ka saudagar", "Mercy of God", "Mercy of Sonia", "Hindu Terrorists"- where does that leave us?

I am left with a feeling that elections are more an emotional issue than the cold rational thought process that are associated with choice and freedom!!

It baffles me time and again, when non-issues can be stroked to such propositions, that they tend to occupy prime time in our media. CNN-IBN practically needs nothing to stroke sentiments like this. Remember Sunitha Williams?- Yeah, the second "Indian" woman in space- put there by an American Agency- an Indian as much as Musharaff is one :)

Now, see this video news item from CNN-IBN:



You know what is the most pressing issue on hand in Gujarat and in India?-
Why isn't the Gujarat government according a state reception and welcome to Sunitha Williams?- Is it because she is a relative of Haren Pandya?

I am sorry to say this, but WTF?- We have her "relatives" coming up on TV and saying that, she is the daughter, sister of Gujarat, India and the World- I mean why are we so hell bent on this "national" back smacking? What is there for India to be proud in what Sunitha achieved?- Why should Gujarat Government even be concerned about her visit, except may be for providing security?

Just hearing the words like "We dont mind it"-(when commenting on the Gujarat Govt's supposed unwillingness to welcome her), "It shows their smallness, hallowness"etc, makes me hot under the collar. As I had already written about this earlier, it is absolutely none of our business to ask questions like,"Is it becoming a camp for anti-modi campaign" and get answers like, "We dont mind because the Government is not welcoming her- it shows their smallness, hallowness", when the person is supposedly here on a personal visit- Gosh- what is the government for- to roll out red carpet welcome to some fake national pride?

Here, in the US, there is hardly any mention of her or the other astronauts who had gone with her to space- I can atleast understand all the euphoria, if she had been put in space by ISRO, with our own rockets and science. We have absolutely no connection what so ever to what she has achieved than fathering her father in some distant past- then I guess African tribes should be celebrating for every damn thing that we achieve- after all, all humans came from Africa only- right?

The ending of the interview was a piece of cake- the host says, "Hope her visit remain a personal one"- simply amazing- do these guys have any such thing as common sense?- I am sure not!