View from the Right: Flood and politics
The editorial in Organiser, calls the floods a “national calamity” and asserts that the reconstruction process of Kerala should not be discussed in a partisan manner.
Published: August 29, 2018 12:55:35 am
Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan hands over a citation to Brigadier C G Arun, Station Commander, Pangode Military Station, in Thiruvananthapuram. (File Photo)
Despite the demands from the opposition parties to declare the Kerala floods a national calamity, the Centre has called it a “calamity of a severe nature”. The editorial in Organiser, however, calls the floods a “national calamity” and asserts that the reconstruction process of Kerala should not be discussed in a partisan manner. It says that “Kerala has seen the unprecedented dance of death to the flood fury. Hundreds of people lost their lives; lakhs are stranded or have taken shelter in the relief camps and the material losses of how many thousand crores is still to be estimated. Whether somebody declares it or not, it is a national calamity”. It adds: “As we have been showing in all the disasters and tragedies, it is ‘we, the people’ who have to come forward in the reconstruction process. While doing so, we should not forget the role of usual and unsung saviours like Army Jawans, NDRF teams, Swayamsevaks of the RSS and the volunteers of the Sewa Bharati, in the case of coastal areas — the fisherman community.” On the recent controversy related to foreign aid for rehabilitation, the editorial says that the controversy is unnecessary, as no official communication is there regarding such an offer. “More importantly, we as a nation are capable enough regarding resources — material and human — to rebuild parts of our motherland. Besides this, the whole discussion about North vs South or narrative against the discrimination by the Union Government or the campaign against the armed forces is nothing but the concocted attempts by breaking-Bharat forces,” the editorial argues and adds that in the reconstruction process, we should keep in mind that the much celebrated Kerala Model of development went wrong somewhere.
Un-Indian thoughts
Without mentioning Congress leader Shashi Tharoor by name for his remark on “Hindu Pakistan”, RSS Sah Sarkaryavah Manmohan Vaidya has written in Panchjanya that the term “Hindu Pakistan” is an oxymoron. Vaidya claims that some Congress leaders, who are supported by churches and are influenced by the un-Indian thoughts of communists, make statements that hurt Indian sentiments only for their own political interests. Vaidya adds that such leaders are highly educated. Terms like “Hindu Pakistan”, “Hindu Taliban”, “Hindu Terrorism”, are all an expression of “un-Indian thoughts”, according to Vaidya. The article also states that Congress leaders often forget that Pakistan was created by negating the liberal, all-inclusive and plenary spiritual tradition of India. Vadiya writes: “India will remain Hindu, but will not become Pakistan. Because Pakistan was created due to negation of Hindus. India’s existence lies in its unity, freedom, ecumenism and integrity.”
Without mentioning Congress leader Shashi Tharoor by name for his remark on “Hindu Pakistan”, RSS Sah Sarkaryavah Manmohan Vaidya has written in Panchjanya that the term “Hindu Pakistan” is an oxymoron. Vaidya claims that some Congress leaders, who are supported by churches and are influenced by the un-Indian thoughts of communists, make statements that hurt Indian sentiments only for their own political interests. Vaidya adds that such leaders are highly educated. Terms like “Hindu Pakistan”, “Hindu Taliban”, “Hindu Terrorism”, are all an expression of “un-Indian thoughts”, according to Vaidya. The article also states that Congress leaders often forget that Pakistan was created by negating the liberal, all-inclusive and plenary spiritual tradition of India. Vadiya writes: “India will remain Hindu, but will not become Pakistan. Because Pakistan was created due to negation of Hindus. India’s existence lies in its unity, freedom, ecumenism and integrity.”
Rafale noise
An article on “Defence Modernisation” in Organiser says that the “ruckus” over the Rafale fighter deal in Parliament by the Opposition clouds the realities of the Indian Air Force’s (IAF) fighter modernisation programmes, particularly to raise its force level based on having 50-plus squadrons by 2050. “Furthermore, the fury and the cacophony indulged by the Troika — Yashwant Sinha, Arun Shourie and Prashant Bhushan — in the media further obfuscates key issues of IAF modernisation,” says the article and argues that “as intellectuals having access to sources inside the closed doors, they should have brought the shortcomings of IAF modernisation into the limelight and done justice to national security, particularly since two of them had held Cabinet berths in the past instead of indulging in ‘politics of paralysis’ — a disservice to the nation.” The article claims the IAF must project their estimated projections annually at the time of the Air Force Commanders Conference, which must be attended by the prime minister, members of the Cabinet Committee on Security, members of the Defence Planning Committee, and the heads of Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL), Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO). The analysis concludes with an appeal to stop playing politics and stalling modernisation: “Let there be greater transparency and informed and constructive debate both inside the Parliament and in open forums. Let not the tax payers and the common people be fooled for eternity under the secrecy clause when design and developments of futuristic technologies are available in the public domain,” it reads.
An article on “Defence Modernisation” in Organiser says that the “ruckus” over the Rafale fighter deal in Parliament by the Opposition clouds the realities of the Indian Air Force’s (IAF) fighter modernisation programmes, particularly to raise its force level based on having 50-plus squadrons by 2050. “Furthermore, the fury and the cacophony indulged by the Troika — Yashwant Sinha, Arun Shourie and Prashant Bhushan — in the media further obfuscates key issues of IAF modernisation,” says the article and argues that “as intellectuals having access to sources inside the closed doors, they should have brought the shortcomings of IAF modernisation into the limelight and done justice to national security, particularly since two of them had held Cabinet berths in the past instead of indulging in ‘politics of paralysis’ — a disservice to the nation.” The article claims the IAF must project their estimated projections annually at the time of the Air Force Commanders Conference, which must be attended by the prime minister, members of the Cabinet Committee on Security, members of the Defence Planning Committee, and the heads of Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL), Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO). The analysis concludes with an appeal to stop playing politics and stalling modernisation: “Let there be greater transparency and informed and constructive debate both inside the Parliament and in open forums. Let not the tax payers and the common people be fooled for eternity under the secrecy clause when design and developments of futuristic technologies are available in the public domain,” it reads.
Compiled by Lalmani Verma
For all the latest Opinion News, download Indian Express App
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario