Home Blog Page 444

India working to utilise 100% of its water share under Indus Waters Treaty

The Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) of September 1960 gives 33 Million Acre Feet (MAF) of Eastern Rivers to India for its exclusive use. This is the quantum of annual flows in Rivers Ravi, Beas and Sutlej that are collectively known as the Eastern Rivers.

Under the Indus Waters Treaty, 138 MAF annual flows of the Rivers Chenab, Jhelum and the Indus were given to Pakistan. These are known as the Western Rivers and were given to Pakistan.

It works out to an apportionment of 19.48% of Indus basin waters to India. Pakistan gets 80.52% of the basin waters. This is why this Treaty is sometimes pejoratively referred to as 80:20 Treaty favouring Pakistan.

Be that as it may, but about 2 MAF water of the River Ravi flows into Pakistan, downstream of Madhopur Headwords. This will henceforth be stopped and diverted away from Pakistan territories lying downstream.

It will happen because of the revival of Shahpur Kandi Barrage Project. This projects’ details were first worked out between Punjab and Jammu & Kashmir in January 1979. It remained incomplete for decades, work was revived later on but was stopped again in 2016.

Now, things have been sorted out between Punjab and its neighbouring state Jammu & Kashmir. Due to intervention from the Central government which has declared it to be a national project. So far, about 2 MAF of River Ravi’s water continues to flow into Pakistan every year despite it being the Indian share under the IWT. This will stop going into Pakistan over the next couple of years.

Besides, about 0.58 MAF waters of the River Ujh flows into Pakistan but it is a tributary of Ravi and the entire water flow is part of India’s share. This too will be diverted in a manner that it will stop flowing into Pakistan territories located downstream south west of River Ujh.

Thus from these two projects alone, Pakistan stands to lose 2.58 MAF of water per annum, after they are completed over the next few years. This will put a squeeze on Pakistan and water availability in Punjab will be more problematic than it already is.

Presently, Pakistan draws 3.7 MAF of groundwater annually. Of this, only 3 MAF gets recharged leaving a deficit of 0.7 MAF. This is creating problems in Pakistan and drawing groundwater is becoming costlier with every passing day.

In the years to come, recharge of groundwater in large areas of Punjab in Pakistan will only worsen as 2.58 MAF stops flowing there. The recharge deficit will only increase substantially and add to the distress of farmers.

The construction of Ujh Multipurpose Project to create storage of 781 MCM (Million Cubic Metre) is the third project which will stop India’s water share from flowing into Pakistan. Together, the three projects will have very deleterious effects on Pakistan.

It needs to be made clear that a humongous quantity of water, 2.58 MAF per year, for the last 60 years has already flown into Pakistan, though this water was India’s share. In the next five to six years, this is set to change completely.

Presently, India uses 95% of 33 MAF it has been allotted under the IWT. Once this utilisation is enhanced further, India will be able to utilise its entire share of waters under the IWT division of rivers.

Pakistan Army continues with anti-India tirade on Pakistan Day

March 23rd was celebrated as Pakistan Day. On this day, the country should have acknowledged the severe fault lines that spread across Pakistan’s social, economic, political and internal security framework, which now threaten its existence. Instead, Pakistan chose to boast about its nuclear power and take a jingoistic stand against India.

Pakistan observes its Republic Day on 23rd March every year. Also known as Pakistan Day, it commemorates the Lahore Resolution that paved the way for adoption of the first Constitution of the country which gave to it an Islamic character. Technically speaking, commemoration of this day does not stand to order since the said Constitution of 1956 was abrogated in 1962 and then again in 1973. In between there were a large number of Dictatorships when the Constitution was held in suspended animation. The present Constitution of 1973 has also witnessed as many as 22 amendments and more are expected in the future. 

Notwithstanding the foregoing, Pakistan continues to commemorate the first Constitution with a Parade and a lot of fanfare, more so, to replicate the Republic Day parade held in India on 26th January each year. This year was no different. The Parade was held on due date at Shakarparian Hills near Islamabad and was attended by President Arif Alvi and Prime Minister Imran Khan along with the top brass of the country including the all important Chiefs of the Armed Forces. The prime minister of Malaysia, Mahathir Mohammad, was the chief guest for the parade.

One does not grudge Pakistan its parade and fanfare despite it being technically irrelevant. What is galling is the India-centric tone and tenor of the event. It is utilised to give vent to an intensive anti-India brand of nationalism and a so-called show of military strength to demonstrate a military parity with India. Kashmir stays central to the narrative of the event.

The laid out script was played out this year too. The presidential address during the ceremony focused predominantly on India. “Pakistan is a responsible nuclear state but it wants peace, not war. Pakistan respects integrity and sovereignty of other states,” said President Arif Alvi during his address. There can be no doubt as to who was being targeted in the statement as the “other state.” There can also be no two thoughts about the use of the word “nuclear” and the connotation thereof. In his second statement aimed at India the Pakistani president was more direct, “India will have to accept Pakistan as a reality, and it must come to the conclusion that dialogue is the only way to resolve issues.”

The objective of the address was to create an impression that India is solely responsible for road blocks in a dialogue process with pristine clear Pakistan, a country that has the nuclear potential but continues to maintain exemplary restraint.

The second aspect is the drama that is played out every year by the Pakistan High Commission in India by inviting the Hurriyat leadership for the function that it holds on the occasion of Pakistan Day. This year, more than 30 Hurriyat leaders were sent invitations despite the fact that most are under arrest/detention by Indian authorities on charges of foreign money laundering and anti-national activities, and also an investigation by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) is underway. The invites were a case of malevolent posturing designed to heckle India. The Indian government, much to the embarrassment of Pakistan and very rightly so, boycotted the event after terming it as double speak and a blatant attempt to meddle in the internal affairs of the country.

The most hilarious was Pakistan Air Chief’s coming on social media to say, “…. make no mistake we will safeguard Pakistan; Presenting to you our wings of freedom as the guardians of the skies; Pakistan Zindabad.” This was followed by a Public Relations exercise to show the Pakistan Air Chief personally leading the fly past during the parade and visuals of his preparing for the same were posted on twitter. Experts, however, are saying that the Pak Air Chief took to the sortie as a second pilot much to the embarrassment of the establishment. Beyond the mirth being generated by this episode, what gains importance is the motive behind the same. It was designed to build up the confidence of the common man in Pakistan with respect to the capability of its Air Force to defend the country which has been shaken by the aerial face-off between India and Pakistan in February this year. It came across as a pathetic propagandist act.

The only saving grace for Pakistan Day celebration was the admission by top leadership about the need to usher reforms in the trouble torn country. Prime Minister Imran Khan said that reforms would be directed towards converting Pakistan into an Islamic Welfare State. While it is difficult to understand what the prime minister implies by use of this new term, what is quite evident is that a lot of work is required to be done to turn around the country from acute financial difficulties that it is facing. Even as the ceremonies for Pakistan Day were underway, China gave the country a $2 billion bailout for day-to-day expenses. Under these circumstances what welfare activities can be carried out is anybody’s guess.

President Arif Alvi, in his message, said that the nation had overcome challenges pertaining to extremism and terrorism. Even when he was so saying there was news of a massive attack by the Balochistan Liberation Front on an outpost of the Pakistan Army in Khuzdar leading to a large number of fatalities of Pakistani troops. Obviously, a lot needs to be done before the optimism of the good President can be changed into reality.

Pakistan needs to engage with the problems that it is facing in order to shed the threshold of being a failed state. It has to accept the fault lines it has in the social, economic, political and internal security framework and take credible steps to remove the same. To remain engrossed with India is not going to help. It is time for the country’s leadership to go beyond a traditional script and face the new challenges with a new outlook. Pakistan Day provided a good opportunity to the leadership to change the narrative. Sadly the opportunity was lost.

Deepika Padukone to play acid attack survivor in the film Chhapaak

Deepika Padukone recently took to social media to unveil her look in the film Chhapaak. Directed by Meghna Gulzar the film is based on the journey of acid attack survivor Laxmi Agarwal. Deepika is also the producer for the film.

“A character that will stay with me forever… #Malti. Shoot begins today! #Chhapaak. Releasing – 10th January, 2020,” she announced in an Instagram post, which has garnered over 5 lakh likes in less than an hour. Netizens have been lauding her for taking on such a powerful role.

Chhapaak is scheduled to release on January 10, 2020

Plan, Accordingly: Expect the Expected

According to the Friendly Atheist, a Republican State Representative, John Ragan, filed a bill called HB 1490 in which taxpayer money would not be permitted to subsidize abortions.

The basic belief, here, is that the funding of abortion will endorse secular humanism in addition to violating the separation of church and state. I will not need to delineate the obvious to the audience here, on those first points of inquiry implied by the strange but expected bill.

The language of HB 1490 states some of the common tropes within the rhetoric amongst pro-life advocates; those who wish to deny safe and equitable access to abortion, which, as described by Human Rights Watch, is a fundamental human right and, in fact, saves women’s lives — literally — and livelihoods.

Important to note, this is not simply about the legislation. The documentation, in terms of rights, is explicit about three criteria. One is accessibility. Another is safety. A third is equity. It should be within the national consciousness.

Women have the human right, in fact, fundamental human right not simply “human right,” to reproductive health services with abortion as an aspect of this. The notion of abortion is to have the ability to get one in a legal fashion, as a fundamental human right.

Think about the opposition case, if women have their access to abortion denied, what will happen to these women who become pregnant with an unwanted child, for an example?

As a friend and colleague and former child violin prodigy, Paul Krassner, noted decades ago, there will need to be underground referral services, where, in fact, Krassner provided some referral services; in other words, women will get those abortions anyway.

When women get them in a legal or illegal context, in which the access is there or not & the state approves it or not, the main consideration becomes the respect for fundamental human rights or not.

By refusing to provide these services, which are far and away one of the least frequent provided services by reproductive health centres anyway, the legal structures, the society, and the opposition actively oppose the right to this fundamental human right and, in fact, the eventual — and statistical — health and wellness of women. It may not be in every single case, but, on average and based on the empirical evidence available to us at an international level, the general principle of heuristic is women will have improved wellbeing, as a group within societies, with the provision of abortion services.

That’s layer one. The basic respect for the right for it, as women will get them anyway. Thus, the best work would be to give this to them anyway. Following from this, we come to the second consideration, which is safety. Once women have it, is it safely available to women? This is a highly relevant question given the context of the United States of America after the appointment of Brett Kavanaugh.

If not, then this violates the fundamental human right. Women will be in only marginally better circumstances getting unsafe abortions in a licit context as they would in an illicit environment. Therefore, the purpose of a legal protection and provision of abortion services under the banner of reproductive health services would be two-fold: 1) the protection of the fundamental human right of women and 2) the increased probability for the improved outcomes for women in the context of a needed medical service, abortion.

The final criterion is equity, or “equitable.” Different sectors of the population of women have different levels of access to these provisions. This requires an explicit statement as to the import of the protection of women of color, rural women, poor women, and so on, in the case of provision of abortion.

With these criteria for the respect and implementation of a fundamental human right, it is simply about safe and equitable access to abortion services. Without these, with these made illegal or women turned into outlaws for needing or even wanting them, women will die or become injured by the thousands, in the former case, and by the millions, in the latter case, according to Human Rights Watch, at an international level.

The language of HB 1490 simply speaks to the talking points of the pro-life stance on this debate. That is to say, there will be references to direct opposition about abortion not being murder, about abortion not being immoral, and abortion not beginning at conception, and so on:

The naked assertions that “abortion is not murder”, “that abortion is not immoral”, and that “life does not begin at conception” are unproven faith-based assumptions that are implicitly religious and are unproven truth claims that are inseparably linked to the religion of secular humanism;

The stance of secular humanism is against religious dogma, where the stance is not dogma, e.g., no holy text, nothing to pray to, no suggested practices, no gods as traditionally defined at least, and so on; thus, the assertion of secular humanism as a religion simply speaks to the indication that religion, in the United States, continues to garner a bad reputation as an idea and as a term, which is cynically being exploited by Ragan in the language here.

This comes from a fundamentalist branch of Evangelicalism within the United States that has been working to demonize secular humanism, and other groups, for some time, including feminists, activists, progressives, and the like.

The statements continue:

That the establishment clause prohibits the state of Tennessee from enforcing, respecting, recognizing, favoring, or endorsing policies that fund abortion facilities with tax dollars because the practices are nonsecular and such appropriations have the effect of excessively entangling the government with the religion of secular humanism, putting religion over nonreligion;

To deconstruct this, the obvious implication of the title “secular” in secular humanism is the endorsement, explicitly if not implicitly, of the separation of church and state, or, more properly, place of worship and state. How does this qualify as a faith, exactly?

As we have seen in the history of the United States, the conservative religious fundamentalist base — not simply old fashioned conservatives — are working with what has worked for progressives in the past and then, non-creatively, attempting to reverse the arguments with their own talking points on the notion of religion interfering in the politics and health provisions of the country, which has been a progressive argument and pro-choice — as in, pro-human right, pro-maternal health, pro-infant health, and pro-women’s reproductive health — argument for years in order to prevent the encroachment of the fundamentalist religion into the reproductive lives of women.

Now, the conservatives realize the loss in the courts, e.g., Roe v Wade from 1973, but then see the utility in the form of the argument of the prevention of religion entering into political life. In this case, the attempt is to fight the ‘evils’ of secular humanism by trying to label secular humanism as a religion and then working to encroach religion into the public sphere, into the domain of reproductive health services and reproductive health rights for women, through the denial of abortion services, but from the opposite angle.

By the implication of this reversal, the pro-life sector represented by Ragan, perhaps not all but many, therefore, become people of politic rather than people of principle and may reflect the general assault on the population by “people of means,” as recently declared as a preference by billionaire Howard Schultz. The principles would be the same, as in the arguments would be consistent. But now, the arguments have reversed for Ragan and, thus, the principle is not principles but the restriction on the rights of women — full stop, by whatever arguments or means in order to do it.

The statements in the reportage continue:

The direct or indirect subsidization or facilitation of abortion with funds distributed by the state of Tennessee constitutes paying for an abortion and, therefore, conflicts with the First Amendment establishment clause of the United States Constitution;

The state of Tennessee may not favor or endorse one (1) religion over another, nor may the state of Tennessee favor or endorse the religion of secular humanism generally over nonreligion.

By the respect for human rights and the provision of a fundamental human right, the notion is the utilization of the First Amendment establishment clause to the United States Constitution in HB 1490 as, in some way, a religious issue from the other side, where, in fact, the basic principle of secular humanism is human rights and the separation of place of worship and state.

The argument for the prevention of abortion services through the labeling of secular humanism as a religion simply restricts the provision of abortion services to women — for the vast majority of cases — in need of one. By default or reflection, this would lean towards and instantiation of the pro-life position, or standard fundamentalist religious position, of the prevention of abortions for women. In either case, the outcome is the same: women simply denied equal status in American society through the denial of respect for their fundamental human rights.

“Not that we should have to waste time debunking any of that, but the assertion that abortion is ‘murder’ or ‘immoral’ and that life begins at conception are all faith-based statements that also have no basis in reality. It’s rhetoric, not science,” Hemant Mehta explained, “To suggest that a pro-choice chance promotes secular humanism but that an anti-choice stance has nothing whatsoever to do with religion is the sort of lie we’ve come to expect from conservative Christians. Keep in mind that the laws have nothing to do with whether abortion is ‘moral.’ That’s your call, not the government’s.”

In addition to HB 1490, Ragan, according to Mehta, is also endorsing, as a co-prime sponsor, a bill with the clear intent to ban abortions based on the detection of a fetal heartbeat, where, not conception, but the heartbeat detection becomes the first point of no abortion possible. As the readers here can tell, and certainly know, the work is to try anything that work, simply to restrict women’s freedom; the sensibility seems to come in the indirect pervasive truth, in some manner: a fear of sexually and economically free women — not a proof of this but a sense of it.

Mehta, properly, notes, “I guess it’s not government overreach when it involves his religious beliefs. In case that point about hypocrisy isn’t clear, Ragan also co-sponsored a resolution just this year that would literally change the state’s Constitution to say our ‘liberties do not come from government, but from Almighty God.’”

As Mehta reasonably and accurately observes, the issue is not about principle; it is about the innervation of a singular interpretation of religion into government rather than the permission of all voices via the denial of religion into public life. No religion in the politics is simply a recognition of the obvious: a respect for the non-religious and the religious across the board through equal treatment. The religious have been in power forever; thus, any movement towards equality feels like oppression.

The issue may seem ambiguous, to some, in the single HB 1490 case, but, if compared across examples, then the conclusions seem clear: the purpose is forced intervention into public life of one denomination of Christian religion in American legal structures and political life in order to have the consequence of the denial of the fundamental human rights of women.

And as this comes down to an individual choice of abortion, if you do not want an abortion, then don’t get one; if you disagree with it, on religious grounds, or for others, then still don’t get one, but, at the same time, don’t deny the safe and equitable access for women, or, if the case may be, other women.

Photo by Guillermo Álvarez on Unsplash

SC to hear plea in disproportionate assets case against Mulayam, Akhilesh

The Supreme Court would hear on Monday a plea seeking a direction to the CBI to place the investigation report in the disproportionate assets case against Samajwadi Party leaders and former Uttar Pradesh chief ministers — Mulayam Singh Yadav and his son Akhilesh Yadav.

A bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi has listed the fresh plea of political activist Vishwanath Chaturvedi for hearing on March 25 in which he has sought a direction to the CBI to file its probe report either before the apex court or before a magisterial court in the assets case.

Chaturvedi, in 2005, had filed the PIL in the top court seeking a direction to the CBI to take appropriate action to prosecute Mulayam Singh Yadav, Akhilesh, his wife Dimple Yadav and Prateek Yadav, the other son of Mulayam Singh, under the Prevention of Corruption Act for allegedly acquiring assets more than the known source of their income by misusing their power of authority.

Chaturvedi, in his fresh plea, said, “Despite the yawning gap between the complaint made/court’s directions and the pendency of filing of a regular Case in this matter, an unusually long period as already escaped without any action being taken on the matter for 11 long years”. The matter was still pending with the CBI for registration of a regular case, “fair, impartial and immediate investigation leading to prosecution of the offenders”, it said. Till date, no FIR has been registered against the Yadavs and it has not only caused “some irremediable and irrecoverable damaged to the whole case, but also raised serious questions of credibility and integrity of our investigating agencies”, the plea said.

The Heavy Price of Protests in Kashmir

Violent agitations involving a deluge of stones thrown on police forces in the Kashmir valley, has, in effect, written a new page in the books of asymmetric warfare. With relative reduction in militant activity, dipping public support and dwindling number of militants, the separatists and radicals have found “stone pelting” a new weapon in Jammu and Kashmir. Hartals (strikes) and Bandhs (lockouts) in Kashmir have become an integral feature of the routine life of people.  The connection of Hartals and Bandhs in Kashmir is quite extensive and can be linked with many stakeholders, especially the separatists. People have been made to believe that these are quite justifiable and that they are called for appropriate causes. However, with increasing violence and indiscipline that are associated with Hartals and Bandhs, the justification, relevance and importance of the same is diminishing. It is now believed by a certain section of people that they are strong measures for civil revolution but the tremendous hardships caused by them on the daily life of common people is making them quite unpopular as a means of showing dissent.

A Hartal and Bandh becomes a deterrent for a daily labourer or casual worker who has to earn his or her livelihood on a day-to-day basis. They can’t go to work and therefore lose their daily wages. Since the transportation system during a Hartal is dysfunctional, patients requiring emergency and lifesaving medical attention can’t reach the hospitals leading to tragic outcomes. Pregnancy cases and emergency patients are the worst hit during such an expression of anguish.

Tourists coming to the state get to see Hartals and carry a bad impression. This is not beneficial for the travel and tourism industry of the state that fetches a lot of revenue, which in turn contributes towards the growth of the economy as a whole. Tourism is amongst the more established industries in the Kashmir Valley. Small businesses are also hit by these meaningless Hartals and Bandhs since they largely depend on their daily sales or turnover. Foreign tourists are particularly not used to such incidents and suffer due to interruptions or delays in the schedule and have problem in arriving at their desired destination. Travelers ready to set off on their trip also get held up by these unprecedented events. Public transport is grossly unavailable on these days, creating a mess for the needy travelers. Sometimes they have to spend an exorbitant amount for private transport and in this way, the private operators make merry.

Hartals and Bandhs often result into violent clashes between mob and state administration (Police), causing death and injuries to participants. Though on the face of it, these Hartals appear to be an expression of annoyance or disappointment of thecommon man but actually they are stage managed, and often these are sponsored financially. 

These have been instances where protesters were brought from different places and employed by inimical elements and paid for participating in protests and pelting stones. The modus operandi has involved recruitment of a hundred odd stone pelters, with a large percentage of children amongst them, in a few areas of Kashmir. These cadres assemble as per a schedule that is circulated via Twitter, Facebook, SMS and such other means.  

The crowd agitates forcing the deployment of police forces, and the core cadre starts pelting stones. Mob mentality takes over and the situation turns violent with the crowd braving the riot control arsenal till they draw fire. This leads to the death of a few more, thereby providing fodder for the Kashmir Valley to remain on the boil, a little longer.

Till recent past, the method adopted by anti-national elements was grenade lobbing using children. The ruthlessness of radicals in their use of children is shocking. Often, the safety pin of grenades are removed before putting it in a child’s hand, thereby, leaving him with no choice but to throw it.  Most often the children fail to throw the grenades appropriately, thus resulting in their deaths. The design of the sponsors of such acts is to sell such activities as political defiance or a mass movement in Kashmir.  Going a step further, the stone throwing has been compared to the intifada (uprising) in Palestine. However, this is anything but a mass movement.

With the valley in turmoil, the average Kashmiri has taken a hard hit. They surely did not want any such trouble, and definitely not in the season when it would be detrimental to their annual earnings, the most. The organisations behind the whole movement belong to the separatist groups. 

Today, there is hardly a constituency left in Jammu and Kashmir that espouses a merger with Pakistan. Those who raise the banner of independence are also fully aware that within days of such independence, Kashmir will be taken over by the Jihadis and there will be no such civil liberties as they are enjoying now and they will not even be allowed to undertake protests. The leadership perpetuating violence in J&K has long been hijacked by the Lashkar-e-Tayiba and the Hizbul Mujahedeen.  The call for liberation is a tool in the quest of extending their radical boundaries further.

India is the biggest democracy in the world. In a democratic setup, everyone has the right to articulate their views and vocalize their problems as long as it does not lead to the infringement on law and order. In a number of developed countries including the US and France, an embargo has been put on strikes and lockouts. It is quite regrettable that the separatists in valley abuse the democratic rights of the people by calling these Hartals and Bandhs which are stifling the economic development of Kashmir. People can’t go to work, students are unable to go to school and exams get postponed. There is no logic for calling for these disruptive activities that cause so much hardship to the common people. It is the common people who bear the brunt of these machinations of civil revolution. We should remember that only sensible discussions and talks can bring us to a feasible solution and these talks should serve the interest of the common people. It is high time that people of Kashmir are not held to ransom just to serve the motivated agenda of few.

Vaccines: The Mattering of “Matters Into Your Own Hands”

A young man, 18-years-old, Ethan Lindenberger, has not been vaccinated, pretty much, his entire life, NPR reports.

This is becoming a common phenomenon with the rise of measles cases, for example. Lindenberger is among a cohort of young people who are simply tired of the denial of medical science, in this case, vaccines, that can put their — as young people — health as a real risk.

Now, this cohort of young people, in part, is simply going outside of the dictates of the parents in their lives and getting vaccines themselves; even though, the parents may have been deluded into anti-vaccination hysteria over the years.

It is a sincere, heartfelt, and honorable desire: to protect one’s children. But it comes at a cost when being explicitly exploited by the peddlers of what has been termed junk science, pseudoscience, and non-science depending on the framing of it.

Lindenberger, literally, is being vaccinated for diseases including “hepatitis, polio, measles, mumps, rubella, or the chickenpox.” That’s remarkable. The mother of Lindenberger, a Jill Wheeler, is an anti-vaccine advocate, which simply translates into anti-medicine or anti-science advocate based on the firm empirical basis of the efficacy of vaccinations.

This, much or all of it, started with the reiterations of a debunked study. The notion is that the vaccines themselves, somehow, “cause” rather than correlate with autism. Do vaccines cause autism? No. Do vaccines correlate with autism? As far as I know, “No.”

As some have joked, autism may increase chances of interest in science and maths; thus, autism ‘causes’ vaccines. Aside from the lighthearted sideshows, these are serious issues, of which, unfortunately, due to the negligence of the elders in these young people’s lives, the youth are having to take matters into their own hands — to, potentially, save their lives. And that’s no joke.

Photo by Sandro Gonzalez on Unsplash

Pakistan army violates ceasefire along LoC in J-K’s Poonch

Pakistan army on Saturday resorted to unprovoked firing on forward posts along the Line of Control (LoC) in Poonch district of Jammu and Kashmir, a defence spokesman said.

The small arms firing from across the border in Poonch sector started at around 5.30 pm. The Indian Army retaliated befittingly, the spokesman said. He said there was no report of any casualty on the Indian side in the latest ceasefire violation by Pakistan.

Official sources said Pakistani troops targeted Shahpur and Kerni areas, forcing people to take shelter inside their homes.

The skirmishes between the two sides witnessed a spurt after India’s preemptive air strike on a Jaish-e-Mohammad terror camp in Balakot on February 26 following the February 14 Pulwama terror attack in which 40 CRPF personnel were killed.

Five persons – four civilians and a soldier – were killed and several others injured as Pakistan army targeted dozens of villages in over 125 incidents of ceasefire violations along the LoC in the state, especially in the twin districts of Poonch and Rajouri, since then.

According to official sources, Pakistan army suffered heavy casualties and a number of its posts were destroyed in the retaliation action by the Indian Army over the past couple of weeks.

Lt Gen Ranbir Singh, Commander of Udhampur-based northern command, had on Friday visited forward posts in Rajouri and Reasi sectors to interact with soldiers and review the operational preparedness. He was accompanied by White Knight Corps Commander Lt Gen Paramjit Singh.

Shining Light Upon the Hill of Songs: A Morning Star’s Waning, Singing in Descent

Prominent actress, Ellen Page, has been more outspoken, recently, about what she sees as injustices, then simply speaks directly on the subject matter. Some of these can include environmental issues, and hateful rhetoric and leadership or racism.

The Progressive Secular Humanist wrote on this calling out of an American actor, Chris Pratt, in an interview with Stephen Colbert. The interview focused on sheep, sheering of sheep, and a diet coming from the Book of Daniel in the Bible called the Daniel Fast. Pratt said that this diet made him feel good.

As reported, “According to its website, the Daniel Fast is ‘based on the fasting experiences of the Old Testament Prophet,’ and serves to help people ‘draw nearer to God.’” Always, always, there should be a “maybe” followed by a comma and a space — and other conceptual necessities — preceding bold pseudohistorical statements like the one there, as in: “…maybe, the Daniel Fast is based on the fasting experiences of the purported Old Testament ‘Prophet’…”

Pratt described to Colbert how this was, in essence, their church’s Lent, to bridge the conceptual gap with Colbert, who is a practicing Roman Catholic Christian. The diet consisted of no meat, no sugar, and no alcohol. The interviewed continued in this chummy way.

Page went on social media to critique Pratt because of the anti-LGBTQ nature of the church that Pratt takes part in now; in fact, Page, at the same time, was critiquing the soft interviewing of Colbert.

statement (2015) from the church, Hillsong Church, stated, “God’s word is clear that marriage is between a man and a woman.”

Thus, the traditional view is the one purportedly endorsed by a supposed god, where this god is displeased and looks down upon gay ‘lifestyles’ and gay marriage.

That is to say, Hillsong Church views homosexuality as a social lifestyle rather than a reality; an innate tendency within the human species. Why? Because God did not intend things this way, likely. He intended marriage between male and female without homosexuality in the cards.

To their credit, the statement noted a welcoming attitude to everyone coming into the church. However, they do not affirm all — what they non-scientifically assert as — “lifestyles”:

Put clearly, we do not affirm a gay lifestyle and because of this we do not knowingly have actively gay people in positions of leadership, either paid or unpaid. I recognise this one statement alone is upsetting to people on both sides of this discussion, which points to the complexity of the issue for churches all over the world.

Discrimination in marriage, regressive in social outlook, and bias in hiring all-at-once; this is Hillsong Church circa 2015, where this extends to the non-Australian extensions in which Pratt and other American celebrities take part now. Other promoters of the Hillsong Church have been “Justin Bieber, Selena Gomez and the Kardashians.”

America is coming to the head of a huge culture war. One of the linchpins, among many, is the issue of LGBTQ+ acceptance within their society or not. This callout by Page will be among a number of others, as this continues to be just below the surface of public consciousness.

As with the many explosions in American history, the outcome will be further repression of the LGBTQ+ community or further acceptance of them. Hillsong Church is based on Australia but boasts over 100,000 members worldwide. It is a massive church, where the lead pastor, Brian Houston, has been embroiled in media ploys to try to clear the name of infamous misogynist pastors including Mark Driscoll of defunct Mars Hill Church.

The Hillsong Church stands against stem cell research, abortion, supports Creationism, and views homosexuality as against the teachings of the Biblebut Hillsong Church, itself, does not, at the same time, condemn homosexuals. This exists along the lines of “hate the sin but not the sinner” seen in some weaker arguments in the Pentecostal arsenal for social control of homosexuals and theological grounding for marital and sociocultural discrimination of the LGBTQ+ community.

The bottom line is that Houston does not think the Bible can be unwritten or rewritten, as it is the fundamental delivery from He on High, the Creator of the Universe. Pastor Chad Veach of Zoe Church — Pratt’s pastor and church — modeled everything after Hillsong Church. These are not complicated moral issues. These are not complex questions about the nature of human relations. These are basic, elementary even, moral and ethical questions.

Do you, as a leader of a community, want to include sexual orientation and gender identity minorities into your communities as full members or simply as advocates of Christ in the church as members but those members who simply are not permitted the possibility to be real equals based on the contents of the holy text within the fundamentalist Pentecostal reading of the Bible? In short, do you want to include homosexuals in the community as full participants or not?

If you don’t, then you do not believe in equality for all, as in the case of marriage only for heterosexuals in binary units or a male and a female united in the eye’s of God as a husband and wife. If you do, then you believe in the inclusion of these members of the community, not as honorary badges of marginal progressivism.

Furthermore, if the latter, it would be an interesting reflection and observation that the progressive secular communities have already been working on this issue for some time without the need to pray on it, to read the holy text for answers, to go to a higher religious authority or body for detailed theological exegesis, but only to the basic instincts, when unencumbered by too much dogma, for inclusion, general honesty, and compassionate community-building based on mutual respect and camaraderie.

It becomes a basic ethical fact. Either LGBTQ2IA+ are included in the subculture or not. If not, please explain the reason. Because, the reasons, typically, are amoral if not immoral and based on the tacit understanding of a purported holy text in which they may be identified spiritually as equal — whatever that means — but, in the concrete world, the nitty-gritty of everyday life, simply get left out as equals compared to the heterosexual communities. Pratt, Houston, Veach, et al, seem to have failed this base moral question. Pratt et al in terms of implicit endorsement, e.g., attendance and financial in terms of tithing; Houston and Veach in terms of preaching and theology. Page is on point; I look forward to reading her next one.

Get flipping.

Photo by Paul Thomas on Unsplash

Open Letter to Narendra Modi by a Journalist of French origin

Dear Mr Prime Minister,

Many of us believe that you need to be re-elected for a second term, even a third term, and that with an absolute majority. Why? Firstly because you are the first Indian Prime Minister who demonstrated simultaneously while at work several qualities: total non-corruption, both for yourself and your party, devotion to Mother India with a dose of great nationalism, a quality that most PM’s missed; no favour for your family, as we witnessed in the case of the Congress’ Robert Vadra (we know that your brother still runs a ration shop in Gujarat and you mother lives a simple life); and above all, hard work: 18 hours a day, something that your predecessor, Manmohan Singh, seemed to have missed.

Secondly, you require an absolute majority so that you can implement crucial reforms that India needs so badly, if it wants to move forward as a superpower on par with China. Constitutional reforms for instance: your country wastes incredible amounts of time and money on endless elections and politicians cannot work for the people, because they always have an eye on the next elections. Thus, at least central and state elections need to happen simultaneously. India also still functions in a Raj-like system, with a president and governors who have no power, but cost enormously to the exchequer both in manpower and budget. A parliamentary system, with an elected President, who nominates his or her Prime Minister from amongst the majority party, is thus a must.  Education too, Sir, a subject you did not dare to touch, during this mandate – but schools and universities still teach a totally westernized curriculum, which does not impart any pride to be an Indian and produces clones good for export – the biggest brain drain in the world.

This said, Mr Prime Minister, it unfortunately looks to me and few others, who have an ear on the ground, that at the moment, no doubt the BJP is going to win the elections – but with a reduced majority that could lead to a collation government, where you will have your hands tied and will spend most of your time firefighting allies and their egoistical demands.

What are the reasons for this somewhat pessimistic view? Firstly, the GST (Goods and Services Tax). No doubt the GST was a much needed reform and it is no more exorbitant than, say, in France my country, where the TVA tax is quite similar. Yet, India being such a huge and complicated country, it has created a nightmare for small people, who can’t afford accountants and who have been accustomed not to pay any taxes. This may cost the BJP millions of votes. The Demonetization was also a bold and indispensable reform, but people in India have been accustomed to cheat, from the richest, who hoard black money, to the rickshawallah who still refuses to turn his meter on. There is resentment there too amongst the rural people, who do not always grasp all the important tasks that you have done during your mandate, in terms of economic, social and foreign policies: all they see are their troubles and the fact that you did little for the Hindus who have elected you.

Indeed, let’s talk about that, Mr Modi. You were elected in 2014 with a united Hindu vote, from the Dalit to the Brahmin. The Congress or Mrs Mamata Banerjee have shown us that once in power, they cater to the people who brought them there — in case of Mrs Banerjee, the important Muslim minority of West Bengal. Since the beginning of your mandate, Sir, you had a very laudable will to be the Prime Minister of ALL Indians and you went out of your way to prove it. But the Hindus who elected you, saw with dismay that nothing was done for them. They were aghast for instance at the Ayyappa episode – and your silence: How can the Supreme Court of India tamper with the religious beliefs of Hindus, whether Ayyappa, Holi colors, Jallikattu etc, but dare not touch those of the Muslims, Sikhs or Christians?  Hindu temples are still under government control with priests in Karnataka being paid Rs 400 a month, whereas churches and mosques are free of any government interference. Why could you not do something about that? Hindus also realized that the BJP putting its faith in the Supreme Court to build the Ayodhya Ram Mandir (Temple), or to remove Article 35A from Kashmir, was either a great stupidity, or a way of avoiding taking a decision on what you had pledged during the 2014 campaign. Hindus find it a one-way traffic that they cannot own land or open commerce in Kashmir, while Kashmiri Muslims have taken the souvenir trade all over India, even though they do not feel they belong to India.

Furthermore, the Congress has skillfully used Negationism to darken your good deals. Belgium Indologist Koenraad Elst defined very well what is Negationism: ‘Negate truth, as many times as possible, even if it is outrageous, until it puts doubt in people’s minds’. In my humble opinion, the Congress has employed skilfully and efficiently negationism in cases of the Rafale and the Balakot airstrike. Most of us, when you announced the Rafale deal in Paris, thought it was a brilliant stroke, absolutely above board, but after so many stories, counter-stories, denials, counter-denials, doubt has crept in the minds of many and the Congress certainly has gained quite a few points. The same is true of Balakot airstrikes: it appears to me that much of the glow and national pride that rose immediately after the strike, has diffused, and people have given some credibility to an often hostile western and even to the Indian media and their satellite photos. Again you have lost ground amongst the Hindus there.

Also – and it has been said before – Rahul Gandhi’s ‘soft Hindutva approach’ has borne fruits and many innocent Hindus think not only that Rahul Gandhi is a Hindu (whereas he is a baptized catholic, as his sister) but even that he is related to the Mahatma Gandhi.

I am not sure either about the alliance which you cobbled: the AIADMK is rudderless and people of Tamil Nadu have always shown a preference for charismatic leaders, such as Jayalalithaa and M. Karunanidhi – and for the moment the only one visible is Karunanidhi’s son, Stalin, whose party may better the AIADMK in the elections. As for the others, we do know how small parties in India get power disproportionate to their elected MPs, thanks to a flawed electoral system.

And lastly, something that most political observers have overlooked: Mr Modi, it seems to me that you have not been able to break away from the shackles created by seven decades of Congress Central rule. Seven rings of VVIP security, seven layers of bureaucrats – no doubt intelligent, polished, nice men and women for many of them, but who have a Nehruvian bent of mind and to whom you have listened too long and too much; a Judiciary, which remains in the hands of the Congress and in whom you have put your faith to build the Ayodhya Ram temple you promised in 2014. And this Race Course Road residence which is both a fortress and a golden jail.

Dear Prime Minister, the paradox, as a result of all this, is that there are many areas which functioned better under the Congress than under your Government! The Swachh Bharat was an inspired and essential reform too – but the tendency to cheat is still too ingrained in your people – and contractors paid by the Government to collect and sort the trash, dump it at night in deserted places – the Kanakapura road, for instance, near Sri Sri’s Ashram in Bangalore, or in Auroville near Pondichery. Many places and cities in India are as dirty as ever, dirtier even, and you get to see only sanitized places, where everything has been cleaned beforehand (I believe Banares (Varanasi) is the exception). Banking has become even more difficult, particularly for foreigners and it is practically impossible, even with a one year visa, to open a savings bank account. Visas that you wanted to liberalize, are a nightmare: the BJP Govt made stringent rules against Christian missionaries and hostile NGOs which were warranted. But the lower bureaucracy and the old style Nehruvian immigration officials have applied them to ALL foreigners. I know of a lady who speaks fluent Sanskrit and is an expert on the Vedas, who has been blacklisted for giving an online course to six people on the Vedas and has been separated from her two small children for 2 months. I know of young boys born in India, married to Indians, who were on the point of getting their OCIs (Overseas Citizenship of India) who were also blacklisted by the Foreign Registration Officer of Chennai and are now separated from their wives. I know of the rudeness of the Chennai Immigration officers, who grill foreigners for hours as if they are criminals…

In conclusion, one of the first tasks for you in your next term, should be to decentralize the government away from Delhi. As a preamble, you should move your government periodically to other places of India: Bombay, Chennai, Dehradun, for example, so that you can again listen to the aspirations of your people. Ideally, like the British did in 1911, shifting the capital from Kolkata to Delhi, you should build an entire new capital in the Center of India, Indore or Pune for instance (the Pakistanis did it, so why not India?). This is will break the huge bureaucratic hold that is still resisting all your reforms and give a new impetus to a novel government. But for that you need to be re-elected with the same majority than in 2014.