





|
Act
Now,Talk Later Fight terrorism in
Kashmir -- but try not to make a song and dance about it.
Over the past week, the term "war of words"
has been repeatedly deployed in describing the Indo-Pakistani exchanges over Kashmir. To
an extent, there can be no quarrel with verbal belligerence. It is certainly preferable to
real conflict. However, what is unquestionably irritating is that the fiery statements
seem to have much to do with electoral politics -- and bear only an incidental relation to
Kashmir's festering wound. It is difficult to disagree with Home Minister L.K. Advani's
resolve to "quell" militancy and punish Pakistan for its proxy war in India's
most troubled state. Even so, what Advani has said is scarcely a revelation. If his
ministry has formulated a new plan to finally eradicate the pestilence of Kashmiri
terrorism, surely it can be implemented without sounding the war cry.
Advani's reference to the changed strategic environment in
south Asia in the light of the Pokhran tests -- and his suggestion that Pakistan take note
of this in deciding the future of its Kashmir policy -- is equally exceptionable. At one
level, it makes India appear overly bellicose. More substantially, it confuses issues:
Kashmir is a problem which has to be solved, nuclear weapons or no nuclear weapons. If
Advani can be accused of needlessly thinking aloud, Madan Lal Khurana must be charged with
letting his tongue get the better of him. In Jammu, ostensibly on Tourism Ministry duty,
Khurana declared India ready for a fourth war with Pakistan and even asked it to
"tell us the place and time". Less sympathetic quarters have a term for such
indiscretion: warmongering. The reactions from Islamabad and Washington have been
predictable. Two lessons emerge from these events. One, the post-Pokhran euphoria is
making even senior ministers forget that diplomacy is not quite the stuff which is
practised in a wrestling pit. Two, to reshape Ted Roosevelt's immortal dictum, carry a big
stick in Kashmir -- but for heaven's sake, speak softly.
Try Teaching
For a Change
Pay college teachers more only if they agree to
conform to academic standards
No society likes its college and university teachers
to get embroiled in conflicts with the state. Yet the haggling currently going on between
the Government and teachers' organisations over pay scales has led to the boycott of
examinations by the Delhi University Teachers' Association (DUTA), one of the leading
teachers' units. The Delhi High Court -- acting on a petition by a students' organisation
-- has ordered the parties to work out a negotiated settlement. Despite a meeting between
Human Resource Development Minister Murli Manohar Joshi and the teachers' representatives,
the dispute is far from being resolved. The teachers are demanding a pay structure
recommended by the University Grants Commission (UGC) but Joshi insists on paying a
somewhat smaller package and wants to create two new grades. If the Joshi package proves
unacceptable to teachers, they may go on strike after the summer vacations, like DUTA had
done when it went on a 109-day strike in 1982-83.
In the present face-off, Joshi is focusing on the financial
package but is vague on the issue of accountability. He should do the opposite. The
teachers are not overpaid; they simply don't offer quality teaching. A half-century after
Independence, the number of college and university students has spiralled to 64 lakh, but
the 2.3 lakh teachers, under whose charge they are, have little obligation to quality.
Their selection is subject to political influence and their tenures are as secure as those
in government jobs. The minister should offer the teachers the salaries they seek but ask
them to strictly conform to the often-ignored UGC norm of working 40 hours a week for 30
working weeks in a year. He should also make the teachers responsible for the academic
performance of students. The dignity of the teaching profession demands it should give
back to academia at least what it gets. |