iasinterviewmaterial 2010.doc

8/12/2019 Iasinterviewmaterial 2010.Doc

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/iasinterviewmaterial-2010doc 1/52

1. Timeline of climate change history

1824

French physicist Joseph Fourier is first to describe a "greenhouse

effect" in a paper delivered to Paris's Académie Royale des Sciences. 1861

Irish physicist John Tyndall carries out research on radiant heat andthe absorption of radiation by gases and vapors including CO2 andH2O. He shows that carbon dioxide can absorb in the infraredspectrum, and it can cause a change in temperature. Tyndall famouslydeclares: "The solar heat possesses. . . the power of crossing anatmosphere. But when the heat is absorbed by the planet, it is sochanged in quality that the rays emanating from the planet cannot getwith the same freedom back into space. Thus the atmosphere admitsof the entrance of the solar heat, but checks its exit. The result is atendency to accumulate heat at the surface of the planet."

1896

Swedish chemist Svante Arrhenius first proposes the idea of aman-made greenhouse effect . He hypothesizes that the increase in

the burning of coal since the beginning of industrialization could leadto an increase in atmospheric CO2 and heat up the earth. Arrheniuswas trying to find out why the earth experienced ice ages. He thoughtthe prospect of future generations living "under a milder sky" would bea desirable state of affairs.

1938

British engineer Guy Stewart Callendar compiles temperature

statistics in a variety of regions and finds that over the previouscentury the mean temperature had risen markedly. He also discoversthat CO2 levels had risen 10 percent during the same period. Heconcludes that CO2 was the most likely reason for the rise intemperature.

1955

http://topics.cnn.com/topics/global_climate_change


http://new/

http://new/

http://new/

http://new/




John Hopkins University researcher Gilbert Plass proves that increasedlevels of carbon dioxide could raise atmospheric temperature. By 1959Plass is boldly predicting that the earth's temperature would rise morethan 3 degrees Fahrenheit by the end of the century.

In the same year chemist Hans Suess detects the fossil carbonproduced by burning fuels, although he and Roger Revelle - director ofthe Scripps Institute of Oceanography - declare that the oceans mustbe absorbing the majority of atmospheric carbon dioxide, they decideto conduct further research.

1958

Revelle and Suess employ geochemist Charles Keeling to continuouslymonitor CO2 levels in the atmosphere. After only two years of

measurements in Antarctica an increase is visible. The graph becomeswidely known as the Keeling Curve and becomes an icon of globalwarming debate and continues to chart the year on year rise in CO2concentrations to this day.

1970

The first "Earth Day" takes place on April 22nd across America. Twentymillion people participate in the event organized by DemocraticSenator Gaylord Nelson . It follows and precedes a series of U.S.Department for Energy reports highlighting concern about globalwarming

1979

The first World Climate Conference is held in Geneva attended bya range of scientists and leads to the establishment of the WorldClimate Program.

1985

Scientists at the World Climate Program conference at Villach inAustria confidently predict that increased CO2 concentrations will leadto a significant rise in the mean surface temperatures of the earth. Ahole in the ozone layer is discovered over Antarctica.

1987









Montreal Protocol on Ozone Depleting substances(ODS). Officiallythe hottest year on record to date. Three years later the 1980s isconfirmed as the hottest decade since records began.

1988

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is setup by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and by theUnited Nations Environment Program (UNEP). The IPCC will providereports based on scientific evidence which reflect existing viewpointswithin the scientific community.

Parts of the Mississippi river are reduced to a trickle and YellowstoneNational Park becomes a tinderbox. In June, Dr James Hansen of theNASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies delivers his famous

testimony to the U.S. Senate. Based on computer models andtemperature measurements he is 99 percent sure that the [humancaused] greenhouse effect has been detected and it is alreadychanging the climate.

1990

The IPCC delivers its first assessment on the state of climate change,

predicting an increase of 0.3 °C each decade in the 21st century --greater than any rise seen over the previous 10,000 years.

1992

The United Nations Conference on Environment and Development --better known as the Earth Summit -- takes place in Rio de Janeiroattended by 172 countries. It is the first unified effort to get to gripswith global warming and leads to negotiations which result in theKyoto Protocol.

1995

The hottest year on record . Four years later the 1990s areconfirmed as the hottest decade in 1000 years.

The IPCC report for that year states that "the balance of evidencesuggests a discernible human influence on global climate."

http://new/

http://new/

http://topics.cnn.com/topics/james_hansen




http://new/



1997

The Kyoto Protocol : Industrialized countries agree to cut theiremissions of six key greenhouse gases by an average of 5.2 percent.Under the terms of the agreement each country -- except developingcountries -- commits to a reduction by 2008 -- 2012 compared to1990 levels. Notably, the U.S. Congress vote 95 to 0 against anytreaty which doesn't commit developing countries to "meaningful" cutsin emissions.

2001

Newly elected U.S. President George W. Bush renounces the KyotoProtocol stating that it will damage the U.S. economy. The third IPCCreport declares that the evidence of global warming over the previous

50 years being fueled by human activities is stronger than ever.

2003

Europe experiences one the hottest summers on record causingwidespread drought claiming the lives of over 30,000 people.

2005

Following ratification by Russia -- the 19th country to do so --in November 2004, the Kyoto Protocol becomes a legallybinding treaty . America and Australia continue their refusal to signup claiming reducing emissions would damage their economies.

2007

175 countries in total have ratified the Kyoto Treaty. Under new PrimeMinister Kevin Rudd, Australia ratifies the treaty. The IPCC report for afourth time states that "warming of the climate is unequivocal" andthat the levels of temperature and sea rise in the 21st century willdepend on the extent or limit of emissions in the coming years.

http://new/

http://new/

http://new/



Former vice-president Al Gore and the IPCC jointly win the NobelPeace Prize for services to environmentalism.

2008

160 square miles of the Wilkins Shelf breaks away from the

Antarctic coast . Scientists are concerned that climate change may behappening faster than previously thought.

Following the Bali talks/roadmap, negotiators from 180 countrieslaunch formal negotiations towards a new treaty to mitigate climatechange at the Bangkok Climate Change Talks.

http://topics.cnn.com/topics/al_gore








2.Climate change — frequently asked questions

What is the difference between global warming and climatechange?

The Earth is warming faster than it has in the past thousand years,

hence the term global warming. But climate change is a better

description than global warming, as some areas may, in fact, cool. It

also describes other effects like rising sea levels and more extreme

weather.

Is the ‘greenhouse effect’ the same as global warming?

No: The ‗greenhouse effect‘ is the way the atmosphere traps some of

the energy we receive from the Sun (infrared radiation or heat,

ultraviolet and visible light) and stops it being transmitted back out



into space. This makes the Earth warm enough for life. The problem is

that scientists believe we are adding dangerously to the natural

greenhouse effect with the gases from industry and agriculture (chiefly

carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide). This traps more solar

energy and increases the temperature.

Has climate changed in the past?

There is little doubt, from the evidence so far, that there have been

enormous changes in climate in the past. These ranged from a

complete absence of ice over the Poles to ice sheets extending across

much of Europe, Asia and North America. The last major extension of

polar ice retreated only 10,000 years ago. Since then, the climate has

sometimes been warmer and sometimes cooler than it is now.

Has the climate changed recently?

Natural sources, such as tree rings and glaciers, as well as human

records, show that climate has changed significantly over the past few

hundred years. There was a relatively warm period in Europe duringthe 14th century, followed by a quite sudden change to cooler

conditions in the 15th century. This extended into the Little Ice Age of

the 17th and 18th centuries, followed by a warming trend that has

recently accelerated. The evidence for this recent warming comes

largely from direct measurements of temperature.

In the more temperate northern latitudes, winters are less severe than

30 years ago, with cold snaps generally being short-lived.

As natural emissions of carbon dioxide are very much greater

than those from human activities, surely the effect of man is

insignificant?



The exchange of ‗man -made‘ carbon dioxide between man -made

emissions, atmosphere, ocean and land, is about 7 GtC/year (billion

tons of carbon, in the form of carbon dioxide, per year), which also

shows much larger natural exchanges between atmosphere and ocean

(about 90 GtC/yr) and atmosphere and land (about 60 GtC/yr).

However, these natural exchanges have been in balance for many

thousands of years, leading to the pre-industrial concentration of CO2

remaining steady at about 280 ppm.

If we’re meant to have global warming, why is the weather so

miserable a lot of the time?

This is the fundemental difference between weather and climate. Even

in a warming climate we will still get individual weather systems which

will bring ‗miserable‘ weather. There is indisputable evidence that the

climate is changing. The average global surface temperature has risen

by 0.6 °C in the past 140 years. Globally, nine out of the ten hottest

years ever recorded have occurred since 1990. Here in the UK, four

out of five of the hottest years ever recorded over a 330-year period

have occurred since then.

Is lots of rain a sign of climate change?

A research project, carried out by Met Office and the Centre for

Ecology and Hydrology, looked at extreme flooding in October and

November 2000. It concluded that, though the events were extreme,

they could not in themselves be attributed to climate change.However, heavy rainfall and peak river flows of similar duration have

been increasing in frequency and magnitude over the past 50 years.

This pattern is consistent with model predictions of how human-

induced climate change affects rainfall.



Will climate change mean that we will see more severe weather

events?

Experts predict that fierce storms and floods, such as those that

brought chaos to parts of the UK in October 2000, are likely to become

more frequent in the future. Over the past 100 years, warming has

been accompanied by a reduction in the frequency of frosts and an

increase in the number of heatwaves in many parts of the world. The

amount of rainfall is getting heavier in some countries in terms of

volume per downpour.

Weather forecasts aren’t always accurate a few days ahead, so

how can you possibly predict what climate over the next 100

years?

Although they are made by the same sort of mathematical model,

weather forecasts and climate predictions are really quite different. A

weather forecast tells us what the weather (for example, temperature

or rainfall) is going to be at a certain place and time over the next few

days.

A climate prediction tells us about changes in the average climate, its

variability and extremes. So, it might say that Somerset, in 40 – 60

years time, will have, on average 25% more rain in winter with three

times the current number of heavy rainfall events. It not forecast that

it will be raining in Somerset on the morning of 15 October 2044.

Will ice sheets melt with climate change?

The two major ice sheets are on Greenland and in the Antarctic. The

Greenland Ice Sheet contains enough water to contribute about 7 m to

sea level, and the West Antarctic ice sheet (WAIS), which is the part of

the Antarctic ice sheet most vulnerable to climate change, contains



about 6 m.

A sustained rise in local temperatures of about 3 °C, equivalent to a

global-mean warming of about 1.5 °C, which is likely to be reached by

the end of the century if man-made emissions are not controlled,

would melt the Greenland Ice Sheet, although it is estimated that this

would take a few thousand years. A major collapse of the WAIS is

thought to be very unlikely during the 21st century, although recent

measurements suggest that contributions to sea-level rise from this

source may be greater than previously estimated.

Is climate change affecting tropical cyclones?

The impact of climate change — specifically global warming caused by

the burning of fossil fuels — on tropical cyclone activity is the subject

of ongoing debate and research in the scientific community. Although

there is no clear consensus on whether global warming is currently

having any measurable impact on tropical cyclones, climate models

indicate that there may be an increase in tropical cyclone intensity in

the future, while tropical cyclone frequency will either remain

unchanged or decrease.

Is climate change a bad thing?

There will be winners as well as losers. Warmer weather would allow a

longer growing season in temperate latitude and reduce the need for

heating. However, reduced rainfall in tropical regions can lead to theexpansion of deserts and rises in sea level would threaten low-lying

coasts and islands.

Can anything be done about climate change?



March 7, 2006 - At least 15 people are killed and 60 wounded in three explosions inthe pilgrimage city of Varanasi.

July 11 - More than 180 people are killed in seven bomb explosions at railwaystations and on trains in Mumbai , blamed on Islamist militants.

Sept. 8 - At least 32 people are killed in a series of explosions, including one near amosque, in Malegaon town, 260 km northeast of Mumbai.

Feb. 19, 2007 - Two bombs explode aboard a train bound from India to Pakistan,burning to death at least 66 passengers, most of them Pakistanis.

May 18, 2007 - A bomb explodes during Friday prayers at a historic mosque inHyderabad, killing 11 worshippers. Police later shoot dead five people in clashes withhundreds of enraged Muslims who protest violently against the attack.

Jaipur, May 13, 2008: 68 people killed in serial bombings.

Ahmedabad, July 26, 2008: 57 people killed after 20-odd synchronised bombs wentoff within less than two hours.

New Delhi, Sep 13, 2008: 26 people killed in six blasts across the city.

Assam, Oct 30, 2008: At least 45 killed (figure can change) and over 100 injured in18 terror bombings across Assam.

Mumbai, Nov 26, 2008: Several killed and many more injured in seven terrorattacks targetting mostly foreigners' hangout places.

4.Naxalism-Frequently asked questions

Who are the Naxalites]?

The Naxalites, also sometimes called the Naxals, is a loose term used

to define groups waging a violent struggle on behalf of landless

labourers and tribal people against landlords and others. The Naxalites

say they are fighting oppression and exploitation to create a classlesssociety. Their opponents say the Naxalites are terrorists oppressing

people in the name of a class war.

How many Naxalite groups are there?

Many groups operate under different names. The Communist Party of

India (Marxist-Leninist) is the political outfit that propagates the



Naxalite ideology. There are front organisations and special outfits for

specific groups such as the Indian People's Front.

The two main groups involved in violent activities, besides many

factions and smaller outfits, are the People's War, the group many

believe is responsible for the attempt on Naidu, and the MaoistCommunist Centre.

Where do they operate?

The most prominent area of operation is a broad swathe across the

very heartland of India, often considered the least developed area of

this country. The Naxalites operate mostly in the rural and Adivasi

areas, often out of the continuous jungles in these regions. Their

operations are most prominent in (from North to South) Jharkhand,Chhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh eastern Maharashtra the Telengana

(northwestern) region of Andhra Pradesh, and western Orissa. It will

be seen that these areas are all inland, from the coastline.

The People's War is active mainly in Andhra Pradesh, western Orissa

and eastern Maharashtra while the Maoist Communist Centre is active

in Bihar, Jharkhand and northern Chhattisgarh.

Who do they represent?

The Naxalites claim to represent the most oppressed people in India,

those who are often left untouched by India's development and

bypassed by the electoral process. Invariably, they are the Adivasis,

Dalits, and the poorest of the poor, who work as landless labourers for

a pittance, often below India's mandated minimum wages.

The criticism against the Naxalites is that despite their ideology, they

have over the years become just another terrorist outfit, extorting

money from middle-level landowners (since rich landowners invariably

buy protection), and worse, even extorting and dominating the lives of

the Adivasis and villagers who they claim to represent in the name of

providing justice.

Who do the Naxalites target?



Ideologically, the Naxalites claim they are against India as she exists

currently. They believe that Indians are still to acquire freedom from

hunger and deprivation and that the rich classes -- landlords,

industrialists, traders, etc -- control the means of production. Their

final aim is the overthrow of the present system, hence the targeting

of politicians, police officers and men, forest contractors, etc.

At a more local level, the Naxalites have invariably targeted landlords

in the villages, often claiming protection money from them. Naxalites

have also been known to claim 'tax' from the Adivasis and landless

farmers in areas where their writ runs more than that of the

government.

When did this movement start? How did it get its name?

The earliest manifestation of the movement was the Telengana

Struggle in July 1948 (100 years after the Paris Communes were first

set up, coining the word Communist). This struggle was based on the

ideology of China's Mao Zedong, with the aim of creating an Indian

revolution. Not surprisingly, the ideology remains strong in this region

of Andhra Pradesh.

But the Naxalite movement took shape after some members of theCommunist Party of India (Marxist) split to form the Communist Party

of India (Marxist-Leninist), after the former agreed to participate in

elections and form a coalition government in West Bengal. Charu

Mazumdar led the split.

On May 25, 1967, in Naxalbari village in Darjeeling district, northern

West Bengal, local goons attacked a tribal who had been given land by

the courts under the tenancy laws. In retaliation, the tribals attackedlandlords and claimed the land. From this 'Naxalbari Uprising' came

the word Naxalite.

Was it ever popular?

In the late 1960s and early 1970s, the Naxalite movement

was popular. There were reports of brilliant students, including from



the famed IITs, dropping out of college to join the struggle for the

rights of the tribals and landless labourers. But as has been the case

with many movements set up with high principles, over the years the

Naxalite movement is seen as having lost its vision and having

compromised its principles. Nevertheless, the fact that it has an

endless supply of men and women joining its ranks shows that many

still believe in its cause.

Do the Naxalites face much opposition?

Yes they do, almost from the entire Indian political spectrum.

Noticeably, when the Naxalite movement first started in the late

sixties in West Bengal, it was the CPI-M [that cracked down hardest on

the Maoist rebels, with ample support from the Congress at the

Centre. At village levels, the Naxalites' terror tactics have spawned

local armies to provide protection to the landlords and others. The

most infamous of these is the Ranvir Sena in Bihar and Jharkhand,

formed by Bhumihar caste landlords, which kill tribals, Dalits and

landless labourers either in retaliation or to enforce their domination.

5.NAXALBARI (1967): THE NAXALITEMOVEMENT IN INDIA

The 'spectre of Communism' maybe no longer haunts Europe from thepages of The Communist Manifesto . But it continues to haunt theruling powers of India from its vast and volatile rural hinterland - inthe shape of Naxalism. The armed movement carrying that namewhich was born in the turbulent 1960s, still survives in India. It has anabiding appeal among the dispossessed and underprivileged rural poorin several parts of India, who see in it a hope to free themselves fromtheir present miserable conditions. The police and bureaucrats of atleast eight Indian states (Bihar, West Bengal, Maharashtra, MadhyaPradesh, Chhatisgarh, Jharkhand, Andhra Pradesh and Orissa, whichcomprise a large chunk of the Indian land mass, and accounts formore than half of the Indian population), meet at regular intervals todevise ways and means to check the armed guerillas who operate in anarrow belt of Naxalite pockets that stretches across these states.

The Naxalite movement takes its name from a peasant uprising which



took place in May 1967 at Naxalbari – a place on the north-eastern tipof India situated in the state of West Bengal. It was led by armedCommunist revolutionaries, who two years later were to form a party– the CPI (M-L), or the Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist).Under the leadership of their ideologue, a 49-year old Communist,Charu Mazumdar, they defined the objective of the new movement as

'seizure of power through an agrarian revolution'. The strategy wasthe elimination of the feudal order in the Indian countryside to free thepoor from the clutches of the oppressive landlords and replace the oldorder with an alternative one that would implement land reforms. Thetactics to achieve it was through guerilla warfare by the peasants toeliminate the landlords and build up resistance against the state'spolice force which came to help the landlords, and thus gradually setup 'liberated zones' in different parts of the country that wouldeventually coalesce into a territorial unit under Naxalite hegemony – ala Yenan of China!

The uprising at Naxalbari was crushed by the police within a fewmonths. But although defeated, it unleashed a flow of events whichescalated over the years into a political movement that brought aboutfar-reaching changes in India's socio-cultural scene. The fact is thatdespite the continuing use of the most repressive methods by thepolice to crush its cadres - and in spite of a series of splits that hadfissured the movement – during the last three or four decades,Naxalism as an ideology has become a force to reckon with in India.Its continuity can be explained by the persistence and exacerbation ofthe basic causes that gave it birth – feudal exploitation and oppression

over the rural poor (who constitute the majority of the Indian people),and the Indian state's repressive policies to silence them wheneverthey protest.

The Historical Background The birth and development of the Naxalite movement under theleadership of the CPI(M-L) should also be located in the contemporaryglobal context of the 1960s.

This was the period in Europe, Asia and America, when new radicalstruggles were breaking out, marked by the rereading of Marx, therediscovery of the sources of revolutionary humanism and the revivalof the ideals that inspired individual courage and the readiness tosacrifice for a cause. These trends were reflected in the nationalliberation struggle of the Vietnamese people; in the civil rights andanti-war movements in the USA; in the students' agitations in WesternEurope; in Che Guevara's self-sacrifice in the jungles of Bolivia inpursuit of the old dream of international solidarity of allrevolutionaries; and in China's Cultural

Revolution which, in spite of being derailed by excesses, errors and



crimes committed in the name of `class-struggle', initially began as acampaign for putting an end to bureaucratic authoritarianism andtransforming the individual. The Naxalite movement was a part of thiscontemporary, worldwide impulse among radicals to return to theroots of revolutionary idealism. In the Indian context, it took the formof going back to the source of all revolutions in the Third World – the

peasantry, which had a long tradition of fighting against imperialismand feudalism. The Naxalite leaders drew inspiration from the Indianpeasant jacqueries of the18th and 19th centuries (which were directedagainst the British colonialists and their Indian landed agents), and themore modern organized armed peasants' struggles led by Communistsin Telengana in south India in the late 1940s, as well as thecontemporary Vietnamese war of liberation and other globaldemonstrations of protest.

Ironically enough, although the uprising in Naxalbari in May 1967 wascrushed by the police within two months, the Naxalite ideology gainedrapid currency in other parts of West Bengal and India within a fewyears. By the early 1970s, the Naxalite movement had spread fromfar-flung areas like Andhra Pradesh and Kerala in the south, to Bihar inthe east, and Uttar Pradesh and Punjab in the north. Srikakulam inAndhra Pradesh in particular became a mini-`liberated zone' for a briefspell, when Naxalite guerillas drove out the landlords, and set upalternative institutions of administration in several hundreds ofvillages. In parts of Bihar and Uttar Pradesh, the Naxalites succeededin mobilizing the peasantry to recover lands that they had lost to themoneylender-cum-landlord class (to whom they had mortgaged their

properties in lieu of money) and carry their harvested crops to theirhomes. In Punjab rich landlords and policemen were targeted bybands of Naxalites. In West Bengal itself - the birthplace of theNaxalite movement – armed peasants' struggles broke out in Midnapurand Birbhum, where some villages passed over to total Naxalitecontrol during the 1969-70 period. Incidentally, in Andhra Pradesh andin West Bengal, the Naxalites found their main support among theaboriginal tribal communities, who had been the most oppressed andmarginalized in Indian society – the Girijans in Andhra Pradesh andthe Santhals in West Bengal.

The situation was alarming enough for the Indian government toinvestigate into its causes. It set up a committee to compile a report.Prepared in 1969, and entitled The Causes and Nature of Current

grarian Tensions , the report acknowledged: " The basic cause ofunrest, namely, the defective implementation of laws enacted to

protect the interests of the tribals, remains... " It then added: " unlessthis is attended to, it would not be possible to win the confidence ofthe tribals whose leadership has been taken over by the extremists. "(Emphasis added). The term extremist is still being used by the Indian



officials to describe the Naxalites, or any one resorting to armedresistance against the Indian government.

While the Indian countryside saw extensive guerilla actions, Calcutta(now known as Kolkata) in West Bengal, became the center ofNaxalite urban violence from the beginning of the 1970s. Young cadresof the CPI(M-L) targeted police personnel and political rivals. Theyplanned to build up an arsenal by mass scale snatching of arms andammunition from police stations. These youth were mainly middleclass Bengali students who had been inspired by the Naxalite ideologyof agrarian revolution. Some went to the villages, lived and workedwith the rural poor among whom they propagated the Naxaliteideology, fought shoulder to shoulder with them against the police,and laid down their lives. Those who remained in Calcutta hoped tosupplement the rural movement with such violent urban actions thatwould keep the police and para-military forces fully bogged down inCalcutta, and thus cripple their capacity to intervene in the rural areas.But they underestimated the military strength of the Indian state.

Instead of fully implementing land reforms to alleviate their grievances- as suggested by many impartial observers as well as its ownpreviously mentioned committee of 1969 - the Indian governmentchose the simplistic path of military suppression of peasantgrievances. It unleashed a reign of terror on the Naxalite bases and

the villagers who supported them. In Srikakulam, para-military forcesswooped down upon Girijan villages, arrested thousands of youngtribals, captured and killed their Naxalite leaders, and resorted to thepolicy of setting up `strategic hamlets' (as the US did in Vietnam)where entire tribal villages were removed, so that the mass base ofthe CPI(M-L) could be dispersed. In Birbhum in West Bengal, theIndian army was deployed to encircle the Naxalite-controlled villages,close in and kill the leaders. Thousands of their Santhal tribal followerswere thrown behind bars.

Apart from the state repression, several splits within the Naxalite

movement in the 1970s weakened its capacity to resist the police andarmy offensive. Many among Charu Mazumdar's comrades andfollowers became critical of his tactics of assassination of individual`class enemies', his indifference to mass fronts like trade unions (thatled to the isolation of the Naxalites from the industrial workers), andthe growing bureaucratization of the party organization. As a result,the CPI(M-L) split into several factions – often fighting amongthemselves. This fragmentation in the Naxalite ranks helped the Indianstate to suppress them – for the time being.



By 1972, the Indian state had succeeded in defeating the Naxaliterebellion to some extent – its main trophy being the capture of theideologue Charu Mazumdar from a Calcutta hideout on July 16, 1972.Mazumdar died in police custody 12 days after his arrest – raisingsuspicions about the treatment meted out to him by the police. Themovement continued even after his death – with sporadic battles

between the police and the Naxalites in far-flung villages in AndhraPradesh, Bihar, West Bengal and other states. But it faced increasingrepression from the state. By 1973, the number of Naxalite activistsand supporters held in different jails all over India had swelled to32,000. News of their ill-treatment compelled more than 300academics from all over the world including Noam Chomsky andSimone de Beauvoir to sign a note protesting against the Indiangovernment's violation of prison rules, and send it to New Delhi onAugust 15, 1974 – the 27th anniversary of India's Independence day.A month later, Amnesty International released a damning report,listing cases of illegal detention and torture of Naxalite prisoners inIndian jails. Such attempts by academics and human rightsorganizations – whether in India and abroad – to highlight the plight ofthese prisoners, were soon snuffed out by the Indian Prime MinisterIndira Gandhi, when she declared Emergency on June 26, 1975, whichimposed censorship on publication of news, apart from clamping downupon public demonstrations of protest. With military suppression oftheir bases in the villages, dissemination of their leaders by the police,dissensions within their ranks, and choked out from any democraticavenue of expressing their grievances, the Naxalites reached the endof a phase of their movement in the late 1970s.

The new phase and the present situation It was only after the lifting of the Emergency and the coming to powerof the Janata Party (an alliance of non-Congress and anti-IndiraGandhi parties) at the Centre in New Delhi after the 1977 elections,and following a wide scale movement organized by various humanrights groups in India and abroad, that the Naxalites were releasedfrom jails. The different Naxalite factions and their leaders found anopportunity to meet and chart out their new path of action in the lightof their past experiences. Although committed to the original strategyof eliminating the feudal order in rural India, they parted ways on thequestion of tactics - one group of followers deciding to lay stress onthe parliamentary path of elections (e.g. the Liberation group of theCPI - M-L, concentrated in Bihar), and the others preferring to go backto the path of guerilla warfare, like the PWG - People's War Group - inAndhra Pradesh, and MCC - Maoist Communist Centre - in Bihar.During the last two decades since the 1980s, these two differentstreams of the Naxalite movement drifted along with their respectivetactics – often fighting among themselves.



But during this period, it is these armed groups which have emergedas the main challenge to the Indian state. They have also expandedtheir area of operations (from their old pockets in West Bengal, Biharand Andhra Pradesh in the 1970s) to new guerilla zones in otherstates like Orissa, Maharashtra, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, MadhyaPradesh and Uttar Pradesh in the new millennium. Their main support

base in these states are the poorest and the most deprived classes – the landless and tribal people who are ousted from their homes by up-coming industrial projects, are being denied access to their traditionalforest resources, regularly exploited by landowners and money lendersand persecuted by the police, and who continue to suffer from non-availability of education and health facilities in their far-flung andinaccessible villages.

Apart from expanding their guerilla zones within India, the PWG, MCCand other smaller armed Communist groups have been able to build anetwork with similar Communist revolutionary organizations in theneighbouring states of Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Bhutan and Nepal underthe banner of the Coordination Committee of Maoist Parties andOrganizations of South Asia. Their representatives met in a guerillazone in eastern India in July 2003, to chalk out future strategy ofcoordination of their activities. All these South Asian Maoist parties arealso members of a larger international organization called theRevolutionary Internationalist Movement.

It should be pointed out however that despite their survival for almostfour decades, the Naxalites do not yet control any large areacomparable to the `liberated zone' that the Chinese Communists couldestablish in Yenan within a decade or so in the 1930-40 period, or thesizable tract that the Maoists occupy in neighbouring Nepal today.They have not been able to reach out to the masses of the peasantryin the vast countryside of other parts of India, and have expandedonly to a few isolated pockets and stretches of areas inhabited mainlyby tribal and landless poor. Closeted in their rural undergroundshelters, the Naxalite leaders have ignored the task of setting upbases among the large number of workers both in the organizedindustrial and the unorganized sectors. They have also failed to buildup a regular army like the Chinese People's Liberation Army, or the

Vietnamese military organization – that helped both the Chinese andthe Vietnamese to effectively fight their enemies.

These shortcomings have both crippled and distorted the character ofthe Naxalite movement. The failure to establish a `liberated zone' hasfrustrated their original strategy of setting up an alternative order tobring about agrarian and social reforms. Instead, all their energies arenow devoted to defensive actions to preserve their pockets ofinfluence, and offensive assaults which are degenerating into acts of



terrorism against soft targets like village headmen or juniorgovernment employees.

The main villains always escape, as evident from their abortiveattempt on the life of the Andhra Pradesh chief minister in Octoberlast. Moreover, the Naxalites in spite of their belief in armedresistance, have shied away from the task of squarely facing theviolence of the Hindu communal forces – the new fascist face of theIndian ruling powers – who are increasingly occupying the politicalspace in the country, and are also burrowing holes into the Naxalitesupport base.

If the Naxalites, along with other democratic and secular forces fail toresist this advance of Hindu fascism, their movement may soon bereduced to an insignificant factor in the current Indian politicalscenario, lacking any decisive power to change the balance of forces infavour of a revolutionary transformation of Indian society.

Lasting impact of Naxalism But even if the movement declines and is suppressed, its ideology willcontinue to threaten the Indian ruling powers as long as they fail toput an end to the grinding poverty and social oppression that crushthe Indian poor. Their pitiable living conditions nourish the soil for therejuvenation of Naxalism. What is peculiar to Naxalism is not thephysical occupation of and administrative control over land by itsleaders and followers, but its lasting popularity among theeconomically impoverished and socially oppressed rural people.

We cannot but acknowledge that Naxalbari was a water-shed in therecent history of India – in more than one sense. It sensitized Indiansociety to the desperate efforts made by the rural poor to escape theintolerable conditions of economic oppression and social humiliation. Itserved as a catalyst in West Bengal (the birthplace of the movement)for the introduction of some limited land reforms by the Left Frontstate government there. Most of the progressive trends in Indiansocial activism today (like the growth of voluntary organizationsworking among the underprivileged and powerless, or the role of themedia in exposing atrocities on the depressed castes and the landless,or the affirmative actions by human rights activists as agents of

entitlement, acting on behalf of the dispersed social groups) can betraced indirectly to the issues raised by, or associated with, theNaxalite movement. Hand in hand with these political and socialdevelopments, Naxalism has left an indelible imprint on modern Indianculture. Apart from a rich crop of poems and songs composed by theparticipants and sympathizers (both urban and rural), major works offiction, theatre and films have been produced in different Indianlanguages, dealing directly with the movement, or keeping it as thebackground. To understand today's India, it is essential to listen to



guarantees that had been agreed on were supposed to lapse. Studentagitation for the continuation of the agreement began at OsmaniaUniversity in Hyderabad and spread to other parts of the region.Government employees and opposition members of the statelegislative assembly swiftly threatened "direct action" in support of thestudents. This movement, also known as Telangana movement, led towidespread violence and deaths of hundreds of people and students ofthis Telangana region. Approximately 360 students gave their lives inthis movement.

Although the Congress faced dissension within its ranks, its leadershipstood against additional linguistic states, which were regarded as"anti-national." As a result, defectors from the Congress, led by M.Chenna Reddy, founded the Telangana People's Association (TelanganaPraja Samithi). Despite electoral successes, however, some of the newparty leaders gave up their agitation in September 1971 and, much tothe disgust of many separatists, rejoined the safer political haven of

the Congress ranks.Movement in 1990-2004

The emotions and forces generated by the movement were not strongenough, however, for a continuing drive for a separate state until1990s when Bharatiya Janata Party, promised a separate Telanganastate if they came to power. But the BJP could not create a separateTelangana state because of the opposition from its coalition partner,Telugu Desam Party. These developments brought new life into theseparatist Telangana movement by year 2000. Congress party MLAs

from the Telangana region, supported a separate Telangana state andformed the Telangana Congress Legislators Forum. In anotherdevelopment, a new party called Telangana Rashtra Samithi (or TRS)was formed with the single point agenda of creating a separateTelangana state, with Hyderabad as its capital lead by KalvakuntlaChandrasekhar Rao popularily known as KCR.

Proponents of a separate Telangana state feel.. all the agreements,accords, formulas, plans and assurances on the floor of legislature andLok Sabha, in last 50+ years, could not be honoured and Telanganawas forced to remain neglected, exploited and backward. The

experiment to remain as one State proved to be a futile exercise andtherefore, separation is found to be the best solution.

2004 and later Flag of TRS

In 2004, for Assembly and Parliament elections, the Congress partyand the TRS had an electoral alliance in the Telangana region with thepromise of a separate Telangana State Congress came to power in thestate and formed a coalition government at the centre. TRS joined the

http://party/

http://party/

http://party/

http://samithi/

http://samithi/

http://party/

http://party/

http://party/



coalition government in 2004 and was successful in making a separateTelangana state a part of the common minimum program (CMP) of thecoalition government. In September 2006 TRS withdrew support forthe Congress led coalition government at the centre on the grounds ofindecision by the government over the delivery of its electoral promiseto create Telangana.

In December 2006, the TRS won the by-election to the Karimnagarparliamentary constituency with a record margin.

There was pressure on the Congress party to create a Telangana statein 2008.

All TRS legislators in Parliament and in State (4MPs, 16MLAs, 3MLCs)resigned in the 1st week of March 2008 and forced by-elections toincrease the pressure on Congress party, and to intensify themovement.

By-elections for the 16 MLA seats, 4 MP seats were held May 29, 2008.During the election campaign the TRS party said it is a referendum ona Telangana state but both Congress and TDP parties said it is not areferendum on Telangana and also said that they are not opposed tothe formation of Telangana state. To the disappointment of Telanganaproponents TRS retained only 7 out of 16 MLA seats and 2 out of 4 MPseats after the by-elections.

In June 2008, Devender Goud, who is considered number two in theTDP, a politbureau member and Deputy Leader of the Telugu DesamLegislature Party, resigned from the party saying he would devote his

time and energy to the formation of a separate Telangana state. InJuly 2008, Mr Goud along with some other leaders like Mr. E PeddiReddy formed a new party called Nava Telangana Praja Party.

On 9 October 2008, in a historical turnaround from its 26-year historyTDP announced its support for the creation of Telengana.

Symbolic declaration of statehood

The Nava Telangana Party, led by the former home minister of AndhraPradesh, T Devender Goud, declared Telangana as a separate provincewithin India on November 2, 2008. Konda Laxman Bapuji announcedthat "We solemnly declare statehood for Telangana on November 2,2008." Goud released ten pigeons in the air symbolising the tendistricts of the region, while he also unfurled the national flag on theoccasion. Along with his party activists he was later arrested whenthey tried to barge into the Andhra Pradesh Secretariat to change thename plate - — from Andhra Pradesh to Telangana. A scuffle thenfollowed between the police and the NTP workers before the partyworkers were taken to the Chikkadapalli police station. Other NTP

http://party/

http://pigeons/

http://pigeons/

http://party/



workers soon descended on the scene and staged a dharna to protestagainst the arrest.

2009 and later

Ahead of the 2009 General Elections in India all the major parties in APsupported Telangana state.Congress still says it is committed to

Telangana statehood. But it does not have convincing answer when itasked why it could not create Telangana state in last 5 years. Also itclaims Muslim minorities are opposed to creation of separate statealong with majority people..

TDP promised to work for Telangana statehood. TRS joined theMahakutami(or grand alliance) with TDP and left parties to defeatcongress party for cheating Telangana people on statehood.

Praja Rajyam Party(PRP), newly founded by film star Chiranjeevi, toosupports Telangana statehood. NTP merged with PRP after it realized

that there is not enough political space for two sub-regional Telanganaparties with Telananga statehood as main agenda.

The BJP again announced their policy of having smaller states and willcreate 2 more states Telangana and Gorkhaland if they win theelection. They also said that smaller states are better governed anddeveloped.

All political parties, including some Telangana congress leaders,criticized Chief Minister YSR, when he changed his stand from pro-Telangana and gave anti-Telangana statements right after the polls toTelagana ended.

Congress returned to power both at center and state. TRS and grandalliance lost the elections.

In Dec 2009, TRS president, KCR started fast-unto-death demandingCongress party to introduce Telangana bill in Parliament. As his healthdeteriorates, the Telangana movement itensifies and it becomes anissue which Andhraites want ended.

http://gorkhaland/

http://gorkhaland/



7.Statehood for Telangana: newimperatives (THE HINDU)

C.H. Hanumantha Rao

A genuine response to the present discontent in Telangana would be toembark upon a fresh round of land reforms and other socio-economicmeasures.

IN THE recent by-election to the Lok Sabha from Karimnagarconstituency in Andhra Pradesh, the voters were confronted with achoice between `development' (within an integrated State) and a`separate Telangana.' The verdict went overwhelmingly in favour of aseparate Telangana. By attributing this verdict to the `sentiment' (forTelangana), some sections of the political leadership are evading the

real issue. There was no religious or ethnic `sentiment,' not even oflanguage, at issue in this election. No doubt, some assertion of`regional identity' can be read into the result, but this does not defyrational explanation. The simple and straightforward explanation isthat the people perceive that `development' — in the sense ofequitable share in water resources, jobs, opportunities for enterpriseand career advancement, and adequate voice in political decision-making — is not possible within the integrated State and that separatestatehood alone can ensure justice for them.

The demand for separation is far more widespread now than in 1969

when the agitation for a separate Telangana was first launched. It hasnow engulfed farmers, youth, and women on a much lager scale. Themovement of the late 1960s petered out not just because of theopportunism displayed by the leaders of the movement or due to therepressive measures of the state, as is often made out.

It was in the early 1970s that Indira Gandhi's slogan of `Garibi Hatao'caught the imagination of the poor throughout the country. N.T. RamaRao was another charismatic leader with a pro-poor and gender-sensitive agenda who virtually took the place of Indira Gandhi inAndhra Pradesh in the 1980s. Their credibility with the common people

of Telangana was primarily responsible for sweeping the statehoodissue under the carpet for quite some time.

However, the policies initiated by these charismatic leaders could notbe sustained for long because of the absence of commitment amongtheir successors. The period following the demise of these leaderswitnessed a major shift in socio-economic policies. The neglect ofagriculture, rural development, and the social sectors in the post-



liberalisation period and the consequent rise in rural distress broughtinto sharp focus the rise in regional disparities in development.

For example, in the 1980s, the per capita GSDP (Gross State DomesticProduct) of the four richest States in the country was 100 per centhigher than that of the bottom four States — Bihar, Uttar Pradesh,Madhya Pradesh, and Orissa. But by 1990s this disparity rose to 200per cent.What is true of the rise in inter-State disparities in development wouldbe true of regional disparities within some of the larger States. For,the factors giving rise to such disparities are common.

A disquieting feature of the current political scene in Andhra Pradesh isthat those still interested in the integrated State refuse to learn theright lessons from the developments since the first agitation for aseparate Telangana started. Otherwise, they would not have initiated adiversionary move like the constitution of the Second States'

Reorganisation Commission (SRC). Fifty years ago, the first SRC hadrecommended the formation of Telangana as a separate State inresponse to the simmering discontent in the region. The new SRC, inthe present circumstances of widespread discontent, is most likely toendorse the recommendation of the first SRC.

If the motivation behind the constitution of the SRC is to avoidembarrassment from the people of the Andhra region in caseTelangana is conceded immediately, and eventually to bring themround to the inevitability of separate Statehood for Telangana, thenthe bargain may prove to be too costly. For, this would open up a

Pandora's box in terms of innumerable demands — just as well asunjust — for the constitution of separate States in the country. In anycase, the move will fail to satisfy the people in Telangana, as they areno longer gullible, especially when the powers that be have refused toimplement the recommendation of the first SRC.

Short of conceding separate statehood, a genuine response to thepresent discontent in Telangana would be to embark upon a freshround of land reforms and other socio-economic measures affectingthe large majority of the disadvantaged sections; constitute regionalplanning committees consisting of elected representatives as well asexperts; and make the whole planning process, including the sharingof resources, transparent by making it accountable to the electedrepresentatives. The suggested special package of Rs.10,000 crore forTelangana could be an additionality to the just share of the region inthe existing resources. The execution of this package could be madean integral part of the regional planning process.

More than 70 per cent of the population in Telangana belongs to thedisadvantaged social groups: Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, and



OBCs. Agrarian reforms were the prime agenda for the peasantmovement in the 1940s. However, not enough time was available forthis process of radical social transformation to run its course. In fact, itwas interrupted with the integration of Telangana with the Andhraregion, so that it still remains an unfinished task.

In a larger and heterogeneous State like Andhra Pradesh, there is noadequate perception of this problem by the dominant politicalleadership that hails basically from the developed parts of the State.

Regional planning is not a new or uncharted course in Andhra Pradesh.This was tried earlier but soon abandoned for lack of earnestness andpolitical will. And also because of the wrong notion that regionalplanning through elected representatives and the dissemination ofrelevant information would prove to be divisive by breedingregionalism. However, experience has amply demonstrated that shyingaway from regional planning through representative institutions andwithholding information would produce the opposite result ofintensifying the feelings of injustice and generating the demands forseparation.

More than 50 years ago, the SRC noted the fears of Telangana andanticipated the adverse social consequences if Andhra and Telanganawere brought together to form an integrated State. The SRCemphasised that, within a time period of five years, two importantissues needed to be sorted out: developing infrastructure in Telanganaso as to bring it on a par with other regions; and preparing the peopleof Telangana for integration with Andhra through consensus. Inpractice, however, consensus of the people who do not belong toTelangana has been the guiding factor.

In pursuance of the gentlemen's agreement of 1956, the TelanganaRegional Committee (TRC) was formed with elected representatives.The responsibility of this committee was to assess the availableresources and allocate them to ensure proper development of theregion. But in 1973 the TRC was abolished under the Six-PointFormula and the Regional Planning and Development Committees wereconstituted which, unlike the TRC, were not accountable to the electedrepresentatives. However, these Committees too have been abolished.There is virtually no mechanism now for regional planning.

The funding

As for the Finance Commission transfer to States, 25 per cent ofdevolution is based on population and as much as 75 per cent is basedon criteria such as per capita income and other indicators ofbackwardness. Thus the per capita devolution has been higher forAndhra Pradesh on account of the lower per capita income ofTelangana. Therefore, the financial viability of a regional development



plan for Telangana, or for that matter of a separate State, is beyonddoubt.

But is regional planning through Regional Development Committeesand participatory institutions workable in a larger State composed ofheterogeneous regions? Experience with politics of planning at theState level shows otherwise.

Therefore, it can legitimately be argued that the political commitmentnecessary for focussed attention to the problems of growth and equitycan be ensured only in the smaller States, which are relativelyhomogeneous.

Take the case of Uttarakhand. The annual growth rate of its GSDPaccelerated and reached the double-digit level in six years since it wasformed.

It is perhaps too much to expect the requisite foresight andstatesmanship from the political leaders in Andhra Pradesh, who, infact, have a track record of overpowering the central leadership,including even a towering personality like Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, onthe issue of separate statehood for Telangana.

But Nehru's vision and the prophecy of the SRC are knocking at ourdoor again. One hopes that the present national leadership wouldpositively and wisely respond to this call.

(The writer is Chairman, Centre for Economic and Social Studies,Hyderabad.)



8.Women's reservation bill - A social necessity,national obligation

- By Rajindar Sachar

History does not repeat itself is a self-evident maxim which mostpeople tend to accept without demur. But now we are witness toseeing history being repeated every year in Parliament in the matter ofhypocrisy of all political parties in the context of the Women'sReservation Bill.

Every political party for the last six years has been assuring its supportto the Bill which disarms women activists. And then a farce rather thana tragedy is played out by so-called radical politicians, jumping intothe well of the House, tearing copies of the Bill and making impossiblefor proceedings to continue - the House gets adjourned, the Bill isthrown into the dustbin till it is revived in subsequent years with thesame result. It is time this mockery stopped, considering that theCongress, the BJP and Left parties proclaim that they are for the Bill inthe present form, and really want it to become a law.

Women are not asking for grace and charity. Their contribution to thecause of nation-building exceeds that of men. An International LabourOrganisation study shows that "while women represent 50 percent of

the world adult population and a third of the official labour force, theyperform nearly two-third of all working hours, receive a tenth of worldincome and own less than one percent of world property." Therefore,reservation for women is not a bounty but only an honest recognitionof their contribution to social development.

An alternative to the Bill suggests amending the Representation ofPeople Act, 1951, to compel political parties to mandatorily nominatewomen candidates for at least one-third of the seats on the pain of



losing recognition. This is politically flawed and not evenconstitutionally permissible.

It may be violative of the fundamental rights to form an associationguaranteed under Article 19(1) (c) of the Constitution. The onlypermissible restrictions are those in the interest of sovereignty andintegrity of India or public order or morality, and such an amendmentwould not fall within these.

That apart, this alternative will not achieve the objective behind theAmendment Bill, because even if a third of women candidates are putup by political parties, there is no guarantee that the same number willget elected.

It is freely admitted by all parties that because of the inbuilt prejudiceagainst women, male candidates will have an unfair advantage inelections. This aspect is freely admitted even by Left parties. Thus,

parties will tend to allow women candidates to fight elections fromtheir weak constituencies. Though I am all for the Bill in its presentforms, it is unwise to underestimate the opposition from the maleconstituency in Parliament. Given the present instability in politicalcoalitions, and the material that is in Parliament, to expect one-third ofthe male members to accept political hara-kiri is unrealistic. They areno Gandhians. They will not give up their privileges so easily.

There is also some merit in the objection that the reservation of seatsfor women would mean rotation of seats at every general election withthe result that the members will not be able to nurse theirconstituencies and also that candidates will be uncertain of anticipatingtheir future constituencies. This will be thus breaking their link with theelectorate. Notwithstanding these ticklish problems, I would havecontinued insisting on the present Bill. But there is another alternativewhich can give one-third seats to women without in any way askingthe male members to make the way.

This alternative gets further strength now that the DelimitationCommission has been asked to adopt the 2001 census for delimitingthe constituencies, and therefore the same inevitable consequencesmust follow.

Article 81 provides for the Lok Sabha to have not more than 530members. Further amendments were made to freeze the number ofLok Sabha members on the basis of the 1971 census till anothercensus after 2000 had been published.

Article 82 provides for the allocation of seats upon the completion ofeach census. As per the 1971 census, the population of India was



about 54 crores. Now after the 2001 census, it has risen to about 102crores. So the strength of the Lok Sabha can be easily increased byone-third to 750 well within the requisite formula. This will take awaythe fear of any male member to vacate the present seat. These extraseats could be dovetailed into double-member constituencies, whichwin ensure the reservation of one seat for women and, evenpermitting two to be elected, if the other woman candidate gets themaximum of the votes polled.

This is what happened in former President Giri's case during the 1957general election when both seats were won by Scheduled Castemembers - one reserved and the other a general seat - because SCcandidate got more votes than Mr. Giri.

The argument that the women's quota wilt be monopolised by urbanwomen is a red herring. There are about 200 OBC candidates in theLok Sabha, it is a stark reality dial, it is not their public service, but

merely the caste configuration that has preferred them. Similar resultswill follow even after the reservation for women. The only differencewill be a big Chink in the male bastion. That is the real reason foropposition by male MPs.In my view, the provision of a sub-quota for the OBCs runs the risk ofbeing held as unconstitutional. A sub-quota for Muslim women wouldviolate secularism, a basic feature of the Constitution, and even anamendment would be illegal. Article 325 provides for one generalelectoral roll for every constituency and mandates that no person shallbe ineligible for incursion on grounds of religion.

In the matter of the fight against injustice and discrimination, womenas a class should not be weakened by seeking to bifurcate them oncaste lines. Reservation for women would check the muddy politicsthat the men folk have brought about. It would bring socialconsciousness to political life. It will also help in brushing the criminal-politician nexus - the real danger to our democracy.

Bill, I am afraid, the strategy of women's organisations has been faultyfrom the start. Holding seminars or lobbying political leaders in theiroffices or on television will not help. All women's organisations,irrespective of political affiliation, should form a common platform witha single agenda. It must become a mass social movement and sendout a message to all political parties, warning them that women willwithdraw their backing in the next election if they do not support theBill now.

9.Roadblocks to Women’s Reservation Bill



The topic of Gender Equality has gained much prominence in thiscentury. Every progressive nation is working towards achievingequality for women in all aspects of the social structure. However thereality is that women are still far behind in many areas in most nationsand there are still some big roadblocks to clear.

The United Nations Development Fund for Women (UNIFEM), in areport stated:

“Though women have progressed relatively slowly in the areas ofeducation, literacy and employment, there have been encouragingsigns of improvement in women’s legislative representation. Theincrease in women’s share of seats in parliament was attributed mainlyto political measures in several countries, where quotas werelegislated or adopted on a voluntary basis.”

As shown in the table below only 17 countries have reached the 30 percent benchmark in electing women to national parliaments; many of

these countries are known to have used quotas. In US and Japanwomen‘s share of parliamentary seats were only 16.80 per cent and9.40 per cent respectively. India is at 99th rank with 10.90 %representation of women in Parliament.

In the recently constituted 15th Lok Sabha, 59 women MPs areelected, while it amounts to only 10.90 % representation , alegislation should have brought 183 MPs , i.e 33% women to LokSabha.

Rank Country

Lower

orsingleHouse

Upper

HouseorSenate

Elections

Seats*

Women % W Electio

ns Seats

* Wom

en % W

1 Rwanda 9 2008 80 45 56.3%

102003 26 9 34.6

%

2 Sweden 9 2006 349 164 47.0% — — — —

3 SouthAfrica 4 2009 400 174

43.5% 4 2009 54 16

29.6%

4 Cuba 1 2008 614 265 43.2% — — — —

5 Iceland 4 2009 63 27 42.9% — — — —

6 Finland 3 2007 200 83 41.5% — — — —

7 Netherlan 11 150 62 41.3 5 2007 75 26 34.7



ds 2006 % %

8 Argentina 102007 255 102 40.0

% 10

2007 72 28 38.9%

9 Denmark 112007 179 68 38.0

% — — — —

10

Angola

9 2008

220

82 37.3

% —

—

—

—

11 CostaRica 2 2006 57 21 36.8

% — — — —

12 Spain 3 2008 350 127 36.3% 3 2008 263 79 30.0

%

13 Norway 9 2005 169 61 36.1% — — — —

14 Belgium 6 2007 150 53 35.3% 6 2007 71 27 38.0

%

15 Mozambique

122004 250 87

34.8% — — — —

16 NewZealand

112008 122 41 33.6

% — — — —

17 Nepal 4 2008 594 197 33.2% — — — —

33 Australia 112007 150 40 26.7

% 11

2007 76 27 35.5%

47 Pakistan 2 2008 338 76 22.5% 3 2009 100 17 17.0

%

64 Bangladesh 122008 345 64 18.6% — — — —

72 UnitedStates ofAmerica

112008 435 73 16.8

% 11

2008 98 15 15.3%

99 India 4 2009 543 59 10.9% 7 2008 243 23 9.5

%

Japan 9 2005 480 45 9.4% 7 2007 242 44 18.2%

In India, we are surprised to see that the Women‘s Reservation Billwhich propose 33% reservation to women in Parliament is not yetpassed by the parliament. The bill was tabled in the Parliamentthirteen years back. Most political parties have expressed support forthis bill but so far only discussions, debates and deliberations aretaking place in the name of achieving consensus projecting a picture ofa deliberate delay .

It is always very difficult to bring drastic changes in politics and societyovernight since the “status quoist’s” plan and bring obstacles for a



change. They never admit that they oppose a change and blameothers for not effecting a change.

Changes are initiated and discussions about a change is set in motiononly when the forces representing alternate voices gain power. We canrecall and compare what happened and is happening in the case ofreservation to other backward classes.

When Viswanath Pratap Singh was the Prime Minister leading a NonCongress - Non BJP Government, he implemented therecommendations of Mandal Commission report to provide reservationfor other backward classes who were under- represented in educationand employment at that time. This is one major change in Indianpolicy effected when the “status quoist’s” were temporarily kept out ofpower. This happened after 45 years of achieving independence andafter finding backward classes lagging behind the elites in those fourdecades, purely due to their historical and hereditary liability of socialand educational backwardness. But both Congress party andBharathiya Janatha party opposed that move and VP Singh was madeto step down from power.

Again only a Non Congress and Non BJP Government of United Frontled by Deve Gowda, tabled 81‘st constitution amendment bill forproviding reservation to women in legislative bodies for the first timein 1996. This was to be the next major change since achievingindependence. That too was initiated when the “status quoist’s” wereout of power again for a brief period. Since then thirteen years havepassed. Subsequent governments were run by either BJP or Congressparty. And they too tabled the amendment bill but failed to pass it. Itis ironical that these parties are blaming the parties run by backwardclass leaders for blocking the women‘s reservation bill.

It is interesting tp note that those who opposed empowering backwardclass people through providing reservation, pretend to supportwomen‘s rese rvation bill while those who are in favour of reservationfor other backward classes are seen opposing the reservation forwomen in parliament. I think, this kind of a philosophical clash hasbeen created deliberately to stall or delay the empowerment ofWomen.

Mr. Mulayam Singh Yadav, Mr. Lallu Prasad Yadav and Mr.SharathYadav are known to have expressed their opinion against enactingwomen‘s reservation bill in its present form and are demandingseparate reservation for other backward class (OBC) women. Thesethree leaders are collectively called as ―Cowbelt politicians‖ ordescribed as ―Mandal brigade‖ by partisan elite media.

Samajwadi Party (SP) of Mulayam Singh Yadav opposed the proposedwomen‘s reservation bill, terming it as a “conspiracy” against the



leaders who have reached the Lok Sabha through “hard struggles” .The SP chief also backed the contention of JD(U) leader Sharad Yadavthat if the bill was passed without a consensus, it would amount togiving “poison by force” by the ruling class to those opposed to thelegislation as had been done to Greek philosopher Socrates. But themedia twisted the story and was reporting that Sharath Yadav wouldconsume poison if the bill was passed!

Those who accuse these Yadavs for their opinion conveniently hide afact that the major political parties Congress and BJP had always hadopportunities in the past thirteen years while running thegovernments, to join together in this issue to corner a two thirdmajority to bring an amendment to the constitution but are dodging inthe name of consensus form very minor parties. Why is a 100%consensus needed on this? Is it possible?

The truth is that both BJP and Congress party under the control of“manuwadi” established forces were not sincere and wanted to delaythe amendment to constitution as far as possible. Further all theparties including these major parties are predominantly filled by men.Now a situation has developed that it can no more be delayedespecially when a women from a foreign country is committed to fulfillthe long spoken promise.

Promote Gender Equality and Empower Women - Millenniumdevelopment goal no# 3 set by United Nations

If we have to attribute lesser reasons to Religion for suppressingwomen in public life, we have to only blame the very evolution of the

society in favour of men bound by many factors including religion.Woman of this day carry the past of their ancestors just like thesections of the society belonging to the Scheduled Castes and Tribes.Our Indian society too is hippocratic in its ideas on women. We cansee a poor man worshipping women deities and singing in praise ofgoddess in the evening and on returning home by night drunk to hisneck beating his wife and scolding in a lowly language. Same thinghappens in a rich mans house but in a different style.

Can we forget the inhuman practices of the orthodox Hindus such asshaving the head of young widows and throwing them to a corner ofthe house or pushing them in the funeral fire of their husbands? Suchthings lasted up to the last century and there were few who argued infavour of such practices . These were the people who even argued forthe continuation of Devadasi system in the Madras state assembly byassigning divine purpose for prostitution. Such ideas are still hiding inthe hearts of the so called progressive establishments and they alwaystry to stop women from actively participating in the social, economicand political activities. Further, It is convenient for men to



retain women in family life since she nowadays earns more and alsoworks in the home as an unpaid maid.

One need not belong to any political party, religion or a caste to goagainst women‘s reservation bill. It is just very simple - Men opposeWomen‘s Reservation Bill because they are Men and particularly moreso since they are Indian men.

10.The Women’s Reservation Bill – Empowerment or Besides the Point?

By Martin Lehmann-Waldau

The Indian parliament recently showed intense activity to promotewomen‘s representation in decision -making bodies. Some monthsback, a bill was passed that reserves a staggering 50% of seats forwomen on the panchayat level. Currently under review and soon to bedebated in the Lok Sabha is the Women‘s Reservation Bill thatpromises 33% of seats in Parliament to women.

To give an international comparison: the current German Parliamenthas 32.1 % women in Parliament (1980: a mere 9 %). In Germany, alegal quota system does not exist. However, parties have internallyintroduced certain reservation systems for women (Green Party: 50 %,

Socialist Party 40% etc.). Women however are still largelyunderrepresented in top ministries as well as top commercial jobs.

Therefore, I am surprised to notice that this new law that bears thepotential of helping women into important positions within a culturethat sees their role largely within the domain of household and family,does not get a lot of coverage in media and discussion forums. Theexchanges that do take place are dominated by male politicians suchas Lalu Prasad and Jaswant Singh (both of whom, fortunately, nowhave other problems to deal with). A somehow lukewarm statementcame from the young MP Agatha Sangma: ―Social and economic

empowerment of women is ―much more important‖ than the women‘sreservation bill, which will only give political empowerment‖ (Indi anExpress, August 8, 2009).

In my opinion, the quota system in itself is certainly not enough toovercome a deeply chauvinistic tradition but it certainly is animportant tool for Indian women towards getting more power. Thecurrent female MPs do not seem to be of the opinion that women‘sempowerment is a big issue. They refrain from challenging old rolemodels and belief systems about what women can and should do in



Indian society. The Pink Chaddhi Campaign and the protests aroundValentine‘s Day were a r are example of women standing up for theirrights as a group and a power to be reckoned with.

However, as long as women see themselves primarily as daughters,sisters and wives, they will lack the strength needed to facilitatechanges in society. Lukewarm youngsters like Miss Sangma are a goodexample of such self-restricting behaviour.

So, I wonder where the women activists have gone since February2009. Lauded in the West as a big step forward, the President Ms.Patil, is not an example of a modern woman. India clearly is not readyfor women in leadership positions to challenge old habits of men head-on. Maybe the soon-to-be-founded Green Party of India will changethat? In Germany, it was the Green Party that managed to empowerwomen and got them important ministerial positions long before theConservative Party was even dreaming about it.

The debate on the Women‘s Reservation Bill now rages around howmany of such seats should be reserved for scheduled tribes etc. Someare suggesting that more seats should be made available to providefor the ―female seats‖. All these arguments lead away from the topic:Indian women need a larger representation and a say in the decision-making process. They need to be educated and understand themselvesas independent female members of society, not an extension of somehousehold or other social group.

I remember a friend of mine, a single mom from Mumbai, cursingloudly while driving past a Manu temple that for her embodied all that

was wrong with Indian society. Left alone by her husband, living onthe fringe of society (even though we‘re talking Middle Class here),has provided her with an intense resentment against any kind ofchauvinism. That‘s the type of strength needed to uproot deep -seatedprejudices in men and women and create a society of real equalpossibilities. It‘s a long way, but the debate on the Women‘sReservation Bill should be reclaimed by the people whom it is allabout: women.

Martin Lehmann- Waldau is a foreign journalist working on women’sissues across Asia.

11.Women Reservation Bill: Look beyond thenarrow prism

The Women Reservation Bill, recently tabled in the Parliament, wasopposed by many. However, they must remember that every Bill has a

http://www.merinews.com/topic/women-bill-critical-issues.shtml




scope of amendment and no one is averse to positive suggestions, butstalling it is wrong and should be condemned.

IN THIS session of Parliament if something keeps our Member ofParliament (MP) shouting, along with increasing inflation, it is theWomen Reservation Bill. Those who are opposed to this Bill for their

own manufactured logic are crying foul on the introduction of the Bill inthe Upper House. A few are selling the logic of million discrepancies inthe Bill. These sellers are none other than self-styled socialist groupsof this nation, who never hesitated in dealing with Saharas andAmbanis of the world, despite carrying the flag of socialism. Hope thatthere are few buyers of their logic and the progressive gentry of thisnation is more than happy that finally the Bill has been tabled.

What will happen to it is a matter yet to be decided. Keeping thepresent opposition, nobody can predict the outcome but still

congratulations to all those who bravely defended the Bill inside theUpper House of the Parliament, and all the best for the future wheremore hurdles to stop the Bill are expected. Citing the argument ofinconsistency for differing on the Bill and call for a debate is one thing,but rejecting it is not acceptable. Those who are opposed to theWomen‘s Reservation Bill must understand that condition of wom en inthis nation by no scale is satisfactory.

Government needs applause for its painstaking effort in bringing theBill on the table, but there are some critical issues, which requireefficient handling on the part of the government and by the women‘smovement of our nation. If we just take the Gender DevelopmentIndex of the World, the position of India is reprehensible. UnitedNations Development Programme prepares this Gender DevelopmentIndex. In last five years, that is from year 2000 to 2005, position ofIndia dipped from 105 to 113. The sex ratio in India is the nastiest inSouth Asia and comes to worst from bad in the Census report of 1901to 2001. As per the Census of 1901, the sex ratio in India was 972women to 1,000 men, which in 2001 Census came down to 933women, per 1000 men. The girl child is looked upon as a burden byour society and people apply all possible methods to stop the birth of agirl child. The girl child is slaughtered mercilessly in the mother‘swomb and according to reports, around 50 million women are missingbecause of female foeticide in India. Apart from this, women are alsosubject to mental and physical torture for giving birth to a girl child.

In Indian society, women are considered as personal possession andare viewed as the honour of family and society. This patriarchalmindset restricts freedom of women and pressurises them to act





according to the set paradigm of the society, with no role ofintervention in decision-making. In majority of cases, from the level ofeducation to the choice of a life partner, voice of family prevails,leaving lesser scope for individual preference. In addition, after themarriage, women face oppression, but she bears it for the shake of herfamily, the biggest institution of our society. Those who resist rarely

finds a voice of support in both sides of their family. Inside the lockeddoors of family prestige, many crimes against women are a regularfeature, but majority of them go unreported. If we believe the reportsthen the majority of women are sexually harassed by people they arewell acquainted with.

In numerous cases culprits are close relatives and family friends butwomen keep mum for the sake of honour and to avoid the socialstigma, which is a product of this patriarchal society. A girl in a familyis like an added burden as to look after her and to ensure that all

traditional criteria remains intact is difficult. Sometime if the girl triesto break this chain then in majority of cases, the same chain becomesa death tag for her. From caste panchayats to religious leaders, theyonly pronounce death sentence for such girls.

Dowry is another such social evil, which has crippled our society sincelong and with the passage of time demand for dowry has increased.Law prohibiting dowry is in place from 1961, but this law is broken inthe presence of leaders to judges in several marriage ceremonies.Bluff with the anti-dowry law is easy by using different terminologieslike gift, offering, part of tradition, etc. According to the National CrimeRecord Bureau (NCRB), one dowry death is reported in every 77minutes. Domestic violence has direct correlation with dowry in oursociety. The increasing demand of dowry, particularly in the middleclass has made the life of women more vulnerable. Parents in the fearof giving dowry do not want a girl child.

These are some of the most visible aliments and there are other deep-rooted problems, which need immediate attention. Through women‘sreservation in the Parliament at least, would ensured that in importantdecisions of the nation this deprived gender will have a vital say. Many

of those, who are opposed to women‘s reservations in Parliament,consider Mahatama Jyoti Rao Phule as their ideal. Mahatama Phule,the father of social reforms in India considered women equallydefenseless, along with other deprived sections of the society. Phuleeven started a school for women in which anyone could come. Thevisionary Phule was well aware of the fact that irrespective of caste,women are subject to oppression in the society. Taking the presentWomen‘s Reservation Bill on the path advocated by Phule, we mustsupport it unequivocally.



There are many battles where more strong fight is required and we‘venot been able to make any breakthrough till date. Women ReservationBill is a step in right direction and those opposed to it for whateverreasons are only defending the age-old patriarchal mindset. The scopefor debate will always exist and contentious issues must be resolvedamicably, but taking a position per say against women‘s reservation is

only helping those who want to retain patriarchal values by anymeans. Rome was not built in a day and much needs to be done.Every Bill has a scope of amendment and no one is averse to positivesuggestions, but stalling it is wrong and should be condemned.Keeping the poor record of our nation in World Gender Index, let ushope that sense will prevail in some of our leaders and more efforts toameliorate the status of women would be taken, rather thanmaintaining the status quo.

12. Genetically-modified foods (GM foods)

Genetically-modified foods (GM foods) have made a big splash in thenews lately. European environmental organizations and public interestgroups have been actively protesting against GM foods for months,and recent controversial studies about the effects of genetically-

modified corn pollen on monarch butterfly caterpillars1, 2

have broughtthe issue of genetic engineering to the forefront of the publicconsciousness in the U.S. In response to the upswelling of publicconcern, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) held three openmeetings in Chicago, Washington, D.C., and Oakland, California tosolicit public opinions and begin the process of establishing a newregulatory procedure for government approval of GM foods 3 . Iattended the FDA meeting held in November 1999 in Washington,D.C., and here I will attempt to summarize the issues involved andexplain the U.S. government's present role in regulating GM food.

What are genetically-modified foods?The term GM foods or GMOs (genetically-modified organisms) is mostcommonly used to refer to crop plants created for human or animalconsumption using the latest molecular biology techniques. Theseplants have been modified in the laboratory to enhance desired traitssuch as increased resistance to herbicides or improved nutritionalcontent. The enhancement of desired traits has traditionally beenundertaken through breeding, but conventional plant breeding



http://www.csa.com/discoveryguides/gmfood/gloss.php#glossary








methods can be very time consuming and are often not very accurate.Genetic engineering, on the other hand, can create plants with theexact desired trait very rapidly and with great accuracy. For example,plant geneticists can isolate a gene responsible for drought toleranceand insert that gene into a different plant. The new genetically-modified plant will gain drought tolerance as well. Not only can genesbe transferred from one plant to another, but genes from non-plantorganisms also can be used. The best known example of this is the useof B.t. genes in corn and other crops. B.t., or Bacillus thuringiensis , isa naturally occurring bacterium that produces crystal proteins that arelethal to insect larvae. B.t. crystal protein genes have been transferredinto corn, enabling the corn to produce its own pesticides againstinsects such as the European corn borer. For two informativeoverviews of some of the techniques involved in creating GM foods,visit Biotech Basics (sponsored by Monsanto).

What are some of the advantages of GM foods?

The world population has topped 6 billion people and is predicted todouble in the next 50 years. Ensuring an adequate food supply for thisbooming population is going to be a major challenge in the years tocome. GM foods promise to meet this need in a number of ways:

Pest resistance Crop losses from insect pests can be staggering,resulting in devastating financial loss for farmers and starvation indeveloping countries. Farmers typically use many tons of chemicalpesticides annually. Consumers do not wish to eat food that has beentreated with pesticides because of potential health hazards, and run-off of agricultural wastes from excessive use of pesticides andfertilizers can poison the water supply and cause harm to theenvironment. Growing GM foods such as B.t. corn can help eliminatethe application of chemical pesticides and reduce the cost of bringing acrop to market 4, 5 .

Herbicide tolerance For some crops, it is not cost-effective toremove weeds by physical means such as tilling, so farmers will oftenspray large quantities of different herbicides (weed-killer) to destroyweeds, a time-consuming and expensive process, that requires care sothat the herbicide doesn't harm the crop plant or the environment.Crop plants genetically-engineered to be resistant to one very powerful

herbicide could help prevent environmental damage by reducing theamount of herbicides needed. For example, Monsanto has created astrain of soybeans genetically modified to be not affected by theirherbicide product Roundup ® 6 . A farmer grows these soybeans whichthen only require one application of weed-killer instead of multipleapplications, reducing production cost and limiting the dangers ofagricultural waste run-off 7 .







Disease resistance There are many viruses, fungi and bacteria that

cause plant diseases. Plant biologists are working to create plants withgenetically-engineered resistance to these diseases 8, 9 .

Cold tolerance Unexpected frost can destroy sensitive seedlings. Anantifreeze gene from cold water fish has been introduced into plantssuch as tobacco and potato. With this antifreeze gene, these plants areable to tolerate cold temperatures that normally would kill unmodifiedseedlings 10 . (Note: I have not been able to find any journal articles orpatents that involve fish antifreeze proteins in strawberries, although Ihave seen such reports in newspapers. I can only conclude thatnothing on this application has yet been published or patented.)

Drought tolerance/salinity tolerance As the world population growsand more land is utilized for housing instead of food production,farmers will need to grow crops in locations previously unsuited forplant cultivation. Creating plants that can withstand long periods ofdrought or high salt content in soil and groundwater will help people togrow crops in formerly inhospitable places 11, 12 .

Nutrition Malnutrition is common in third world countries whereimpoverished peoples rely on a single crop such as rice for the mainstaple of their diet. However, rice does not contain adequate amountsof all necessary nutrients to prevent malnutrition. If rice could begenetically engineered to contain additional vitamins and minerals,nutrient deficiencies could be alleviated. For example, blindness due tovitamin A deficiency is a common problem in third world countries.Researchers at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Institute forPlant Sciences have created a strain of "golden" rice containing anunusually high content of beta-carotene (vitamin A) 13 . Since this ricewas funded by the Rockefeller Foundation 14 , a non-profit organization,the Institute hopes to offer the golden rice seed free to any third worldcountry that requests it. Plans were underway to develop a golden ricethat also has increased iron content. However, the grant that fundedthe creation of these two rice strains was not renewed, perhapsbecause of the vigorous anti-GM food protesting in Europe, and so thisnutritionally-enhanced rice may not come to market at all 15 .

Pharmaceuticals Medicines and vaccines often are costly to produceand sometimes require special storage conditions not readily availablein third world countries. Researchers are working to develop ediblevaccines in tomatoes and potatoes 16, 17 . These vaccines will be mucheasier to ship, store and administer than traditional injectablevaccines.

Phytoremediation Not all GM plants are grown as crops. Soil andgroundwater pollution continues to be a problem in all parts of theworld. Plants such as poplar trees have been genetically engineered toclean up heavy metal pollution from contaminated soil 18 .

How prevalent are GM crops?

What plants are involved?





According to the FDA and the United States Department of Agriculture(USDA), there are over 40 plant varieties that have completed all ofthe federal requirements for commercialization(http://vm.cfsan.fda.gov/%7Elrd/biocon). Some examples of theseplants include tomatoes and cantalopes that have modified ripeningcharacteristics, soybeans and sugarbeets that are resistant toherbicides, and corn and cotton plants with increased resistance toinsect pests. Not all these products are available in supermarkets yet;however, the prevalence of GM foods in U.S. grocery stores is morewidespread than is commonly thought. While there are very, very fewgenetically-modified whole fruits and vegetables available on producestands, highly processed foods, such as vegetable oils or breakfastcereals, most likely contain some tiny percentage of genetically-modified ingredients because the raw ingredients have been pooledinto one processing stream from many different sources. Also, theubiquity of soybean derivatives as food additives in the modernAmerican diet virtually ensures that all U.S. consumers have been

exposed to GM food products.Thirteen countries grew genetically-engineered crops commercially in2000, and of these, the U.S. produced the majority. In 2000, 68% ofall GM crops were grown by U.S. farmers. In comparison, Argentina,Canada and China produced only 23%, 7% and 1%, respectively.Other countries that grew commercial GM crops in 2000 are Australia,Bulgaria, France, Germany, Mexico, Romania, South Africa, Spain, andUruguay.

Soybeans and corn are the top two most widely grown crops (82% of

all GM crops harvested in 2000), with cotton, rapeseed (or canola) andpotatoes trailing behind. 74% of these GM crops were modified forherbicide tolerance, 19% were modified for insect pest resistance, and7% were modified for both herbicide tolerance and pest tolerance.Globally, acreage of GM crops has increased 25-fold in just 5 years,from approximately 4.3 million acres in 1996 to 109 million acres in2000 - almost twice the area of the United Kingdom. Approximately 99million acres were devoted to GM crops in the U.S. and Argentinaalone.

In the U.S., approximately 54% of all soybeans cultivated in 2000

were genetically-modified, up from 42% in 1998 and only 7% in 1996.In 2000, genetically-modified cotton varieties accounted for 61% ofthe total cotton crop, up from 42% in 1998, and 15% in 1996. GMcorn and also experienced a similar but less dramatic increase. Cornproduction increased to 25% of all corn grown in 2000, about thesame as 1998 (26%), but up from 1.5% in 1996. As anticipated,pesticide and herbicide use on these GM varieties was slashed and, forthe most part, yields were increased .

What are some of the criticisms against GM foods?



Environmental activists, religious organizations, public interest groups,professional associations and other scientists and government officialshave all raised concerns about GM foods, and criticized agribusinessfor pursuing profit without concern for potential hazards, and thegovernment for failing to exercise adequate regulatory oversight. Itseems that everyone has a strong opinion about GM foods. Even theVatican 19 and the Prince of Wales 20 have expressed their opinions.Most concerns about GM foods fall into three categories:environmental hazards, human health risks, and economic concerns.

Environmental hazards

Unintended harm to other organisms Last year a laboratory studywas published in Nature 21 showing that pollen from B.t. corn causedhigh mortality rates in monarch butterfly caterpillars. Monarchcaterpillars consume milkweed plants, not corn, but the fear is that ifpollen from B.t. corn is blown by the wind onto milkweed plants inneighboring fields, the caterpillars could eat the pollen and perish.Although the Nature study was not conducted under natural fieldconditions, the results seemed to support this viewpoint.Unfortunately, B.t. toxins kill many species of insect larvaeindiscriminately; it is not possible to design a B.t. toxin that would onlykill crop-damaging pests and remain harmless to all other insects. Thisstudy is being reexamined by the USDA, the U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency (EPA) and other non-government research groups,and preliminary data from new studies suggests that the original studymay have been flawed 22, 23 . This topic is the subject of acrimoniousdebate, and both sides of the argument are defending their data

vigorously. Currently, there is no agreement about the results of thesestudies, and the potential risk of harm to non-target organisms willneed to be evaluated further.

Reduced effectiveness of pesticides Just as some populations ofmosquitoes developed resistance to the now-banned pesticide DDT,many people are concerned that insects will become resistant to B.t.or other crops that have been genetically-modified to produce theirown pesticides.

Gene transfer to non-target species Another concern is that cropplants engineered for herbicide tolerance and weeds will cross-breed,resulting in the transfer of the herbicide resistance genes from thecrops into the weeds. These "superweeds" would then be herbicidetolerant as well. Other introduced genes may cross over into non-modified crops planted next to GM crops. The possibility ofinterbreeding is shown by the defense of farmers against lawsuits filedby Monsanto. The company has filed patent infringement lawsuitsagainst farmers who may have harvested GM crops. Monsanto claimsthat the farmers obtained Monsanto-licensed GM seeds from anunknown source and did not pay royalties to Monsanto. The farmersclaim that their unmodified crops were cross-pollinated from someone



else's GM crops planted a field or two away. More investigation isneeded to resolve this issue.

There are several possible solutions to the three problems mentionedabove. Genes are exchanged between plants via pollen. Two ways toensure that non-target species will not receive introduced genes fromGM plants are to create GM plants that are male sterile (do notproduce pollen) or to modify the GM plant so that the pollen does notcontain the introduced gene 24, 25, 26 . Cross-pollination would not occur,and if harmless insects such as monarch caterpillars were to eat pollenfrom GM plants, the caterpillars would survive.

Another possible solution is to create buffer zones around fields of GMcrops 27, 28, 29 . For example, non-GM corn would be planted to surrounda field of B.t. GM corn, and the non-GM corn would not be harvested.Beneficial or harmless insects would have a refuge in the non-GM corn,and insect pests could be allowed to destroy the non-GM corn andwould not develop resistance to B.t. pesticides. Gene transfer to weedsand other crops would not occur because the wind-blown pollen wouldnot travel beyond the buffer zone. Estimates of the necessary width ofbuffer zones range from 6 meters to 30 meters or more 30 . Thisplanting method may not be feasible if too much acreage is requiredfor the buffer zones.

Human health risks

Allergenicity Many children in the US and Europe have developedlife-threatening allergies to peanuts and other foods. There is apossibility that introducing a gene into a plant may create a new

allergen or cause an allergic reaction in susceptible individuals. Aproposal to incorporate a gene from Brazil nuts into soybeans wasabandoned because of the fear of causing unexpected allergicreactions 31 . Extensive testing of GM foods may be required to avoidthe possibility of harm to consumers with food allergies. Labeling ofGM foods and food products will acquire new importance, which I shalldiscuss later.

Unknown effects on human health There is a growing concern thatintroducing foreign genes into food plants may have an unexpectedand negative impact on human health. A recent article published inLancet examined the effects of GM potatoes on the digestive tract inrats 32, 33 . This study claimed that there were appreciable differences inthe intestines of rats fed GM potatoes and rats fed unmodifiedpotatoes. Yet critics say that this paper, like the monarch butterflydata, is flawed and does not hold up to scientific scrutiny 34 . Moreover,the gene introduced into the potatoes was a snowdrop flower lectin, asubstance known to be toxic to mammals. The scientists who createdthis variety of potato chose to use the lectin gene simply to test themethodology, and these potatoes were never intended for human oranimal consumption.





On the whole, with the exception of possible allergenicity, scientistsbelieve that GM foods do not present a risk to human health.

Economic concerns

Bringing a GM food to market is a lengthy and costly process, and ofcourse agri-biotech companies wish to ensure a profitable return ontheir investment. Many new plant genetic engineering technologiesand GM plants have been patented, and patent infringement is a bigconcern of agribusiness. Yet consumer advocates are worried thatpatenting these new plant varieties will raise the price of seeds so highthat small farmers and third world countries will not be able to affordseeds for GM crops, thus widening the gap between the wealthy andthe poor. It is hoped that in a humanitarian gesture, more companiesand non-profits will follow the lead of the Rockefeller Foundation andoffer their products at reduced cost to impoverished nations.

Patent enforcement may also be difficult, as the contention of thefarmers that they involuntarily grew Monsanto-engineered strainswhen their crops were cross-pollinated shows. One way to combatpossible patent infringement is to introduce a "suicide gene" into GMplants. These plants would be viable for only one growing season andwould produce sterile seeds that do not germinate. Farmers wouldneed to buy a fresh supply of seeds each year. However, this would befinancially disastrous for farmers in third world countries who cannotafford to buy seed each year and traditionally set aside a portion oftheir harvest to plant in the next growing season. In an open letter to

the public, Monsanto has pledged to abandon all research using thissuicide gene technology 35 .

How are GM foods regulated and what is the government's rolein this process?

Governments around the world are hard at work to establish aregulatory process to monitor the effects of and approve new varietiesof GM plants. Yet depending on the political, social and economicclimate within a region or country, different governments areresponding in different ways.

In Japan, the Ministry of Health and Welfare has announced thathealth testing of GM foods will be mandatory as of April 2001 36, 37 .Currently, testing of GM foods is voluntary. Japanese supermarkets areoffering both GM foods and unmodified foods, and customers arebeginning to show a strong preference for unmodified fruits andvegetables.

India's government has not yet announced a policy on GM foodsbecause no GM crops are grown in India and no products are



commercially available in supermarkets yet 38 . India is, however, verysupportive of transgenic plant research. It is highly likely that Indiawill decide that the benefits of GM foods outweigh the risks becauseIndian agriculture will need to adopt drastic new measures tocounteract the country's endemic poverty and feed its explodingpopulation.

Some states in Brazil have banned GM crops entirely, and the BrazilianInstitute for the Defense of Consumers, in collaboration withGreenpeace, has filed suit to prevent the importation of GM crops 39, .Brazilian farmers, however, have resorted to smuggling GM soybeanseeds into the country because they fear economic harm if they areunable to compete in the global marketplace with other grain-exporting countries.

In Europe, anti-GM food protestors have been especially active. In thelast few years Europe has experienced two major foods scares: bovinespongiform encephalopathy (mad cow disease) in Great Britain anddioxin-tainted foods originating from Belgium. These food scares haveundermined consumer confidence about the European food supply, andcitizens are disinclined to trust government information about GMfoods. In response to the public outcry, Europe now requiresmandatory food labeling of GM foods in stores, and the EuropeanCommission (EC) has established a 1% threshold for contamination ofunmodified foods with GM food products 40 .

In the United States, the regulatory process is confused because thereare three different government agencies that have jurisdiction over GMfoods. To put it very simply, the EPA evaluates GM plants forenvironmental safety, the USDA evaluates whether the plant is safe togrow, and the FDA evaluates whether the plant is safe to eat. The EPAis responsible for regulating substances such as pesticides or toxinsthat may cause harm to the environment. GM crops such as B.t.pesticide-laced corn or herbicide-tolerant crops but not foods modifiedfor their nutritional value fall under the purview of the EPA. The USDAis responsible for GM crops that do not fall under the umbrella of theEPA such as drought-tolerant or disease-tolerant crops, crops grownfor animal feeds, or whole fruits, vegetables and grains for humanconsumption. The FDA historically has been concerned with

pharmaceuticals, cosmetics and food products and additives, not wholefoods. Under current guidelines, a genetically-modified ear of corn soldat a produce stand is not regulated by the FDA because it is a wholefood, but a box of cornflakes is regulated because it is a food product.The FDA's stance is that GM foods are substantially equivalent tounmodified, "natural" foods, and therefore not subject to FDAregulation.

The EPA conducts risk assessment studies on pesticides that couldpotentially cause harm to human health and the environment, and







establishes tolerance and residue levels for pesticides. There are strictlimits on the amount of pesticides that may be applied to crops duringgrowth and production, as well as the amount that remains in the foodafter processing. Growers using pesticides must have a license foreach pesticide and must follow the directions on the label to accordwith the EPA's safety standards. Government inspectors mayperiodically visit farms and conduct investigations to ensurecompliance. Violation of government regulations may result in steepfines, loss of license and even jail sentences.

As an example the EPA regulatory approach, consider B.t. corn. TheEPA has not established limits on residue levels in B.t corn because theB.t. in the corn is not sprayed as a chemical pesticide but is a genethat is integrated into the genetic material of the corn itself. Growersmust have a license from the EPA for B.t corn, and the EPA has issueda letter for the 2000 growing season requiring farmers to plant 20%unmodified corn, and up to 50% unmodified corn in regions where

cotton is also cultivated41

. This planting strategy may help preventinsects from developing resistance to the B.t. pesticides as well asprovide a refuge for non-target insects such as Monarch butterflies.

The USDA has many internal divisions that share responsibility forassessing GM foods. Among these divisions are APHIS, the AnimalHealth and Plant Inspection Service, which conducts field tests andissues permits to grow GM crops, the Agricultural Research Servicewhich performs in-house GM food research, and the Cooperative StateResearch, Education and Extension Service which oversees the USDArisk assessment program. The USDA is concerned with potential

hazards of the plant itself. Does it harbor insect pests? Is it a noxiousweed? Will it cause harm to indigenous species if it escapes fromfarmer's fields? The USDA has the power to impose quarantines onproblem regions to prevent movement of suspected plants, restrictimport or export of suspected plants, and can even destroy plantscultivated in violation of USDA regulations. Many GM plants do notrequire USDA permits from APHIS. A GM plant does not require apermit if it meets these 6 criteria: 1) the plant is not a noxious weed;2) the genetic material introduced into the GM plant is stablyintegrated into the plant's own genome; 3) the function of theintroduced gene is known and does not cause plant disease; 4) the GMplant is not toxic to non-target organisms; 5) the introduced gene willnot cause the creation of new plant viruses; and 6) the GM plantcannot contain genetic material from animal or human pathogens .Thecurrent FDA policy was developed in 1992 (Federal Register DocketNo. 92N-0139) and states that agri-biotech companies may voluntarilyask the FDA for a consultation. Companies working to create new GMfoods are not required to consult the FDA, nor are they required tofollow the FDA's recommendations after the consultation. Consumerinterest groups wish this process to be mandatory, so that all GM food





products, whole foods or otherwise, must be approved by the FDAbefore being released for commercialization. The FDA counters thatthe agency currently does not have the time, money, or resources tocarry out exhaustive health and safety studies of every proposed GMfood product. Moreover, the FDA policy as it exists today does notallow for this type of intervention.

How are GM foods labeled?

Labeling of GM foods and food products is also a contentious issue. Onthe whole, agribusiness industries believe that labeling should bevoluntary and influenced by the demands of the free market. Ifconsumers show preference for labeled foods over non-labeled foods,then industry will have the incentive to regulate itself or risk alienatingthe customer. Consumer interest groups, on the other hand, aredemanding mandatory labeling. People have the right to know whatthey are eating, argue the interest groups, and historically industryhas proven itself to be unreliable at self-compliance with existingsafety regulations. The FDA's current position on food labeling isgoverned by the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act which is only concernedwith food additives, not whole foods or food products that areconsidered "GRAS" - generally recognized as safe. The FDA contendsthat GM foods are substantially equivalent to non-GM foods, andtherefore not subject to more stringent labeling. If all GM foods andfood products are to be labeled, Congress must enact sweepingchanges in the existing food labeling policy.

There are many questions that must be answered if labeling of GMfoods becomes mandatory. First, are consumers willing to absorb thecost of such an initiative? If the food production industry is required tolabel GM foods, factories will need to construct two separateprocessing streams and monitor the production lines accordingly.Farmers must be able to keep GM crops and non-GM crops frommixing during planting, harvesting and shipping. It is almost assuredthat industry will pass along these additional costs to consumers in theform of higher prices.

Secondly, what are the acceptable limits of GM contamination in non-GM products? The EC has determined that 1% is an acceptable limit ofcross-contamination, yet many consumer interest groups argue thatonly 0% is acceptable. Some companies such as Gerber baby foods 42 and Frito-Lay 43 have pledged to avoid use of GM foods in any of theirproducts. But who is going to monitor these companies for complianceand what is the penalty if they fail? Once again, the FDA does not havethe resources to carry out testing to ensure compliance.

What is the level of detectability of GM food cross-contamination?Scientists agree that current technology is unable to detect minutequantities of contamination, so ensuring 0% contamination using





existing methodologies is not guaranteed. Yet researchers disagree onwhat level of contamination really is detectable, especially in highlyprocessed food products such as vegetable oils or breakfast cerealswhere the vegetables used to make these products have been pooledfrom many different sources. A 1% threshold may already be belowcurrent levels of detectability.

Finally, who is to be responsible for educating the public about GMfood labels and how costly will that education be? Food labels must bedesigned to clearly convey accurate information about the product insimple language that everyone can understand. This may be thegreatest challenge faced be a new food labeling policy: how to educateand inform the public without damaging the public trust and causingalarm or fear of GM food products.

In January 2000, an international trade agreement for labeling GMfoods was established 44, 45 . More than 130 countries, including the US,the world's largest producer of GM foods, signed the agreement. Thepolicy states that exporters must be required to label all GM foods andthat importing countries have the right to judge for themselves thepotential risks and reject GM foods, if they so choose. This newagreement may spur the U.S. government to resolve the domesticfood labeling dilemma more rapidly.

Conclusion

Genetically-modified foods have the potential to solve many of theworld's hunger and malnutrition problems, and to help protect andpreserve the environment by increasing yield and reducing reliance

upon chemical pesticides and herbicides. Yet there are manychallenges ahead for governments, especially in the areas of safetytesting, regulation, international policy and food labeling. Many peoplefeel that genetic engineering is the inevitable wave of the future andthat we cannot afford to ignore a technology that has such enormouspotential benefits. However, we must proceed with caution to avoidcausing unintended harm to human health and the environment as aresult of our enthusiasm for this powerful technology.

Bt Brinjal- india’s first geneticall y modified foodcrop

India's biotechnology regulator Genetic Engineering AppraisalCommittee (GEAC) on Wednesday gave thumbs up Bt brinjal in thebackdrop of the controversy surrounding GM crops.

GEAC assessed the recommendations of a special committee that hadaccumulated data for over nine years to study the bio-safety of Bt



brinjal.

Bt brinjal is the first modified genetically modified vegetable that hasbeen introduced to Indians.

The experts, however, have raised concern over the environmentalimplications due to GM crops.

GM crops are those in which genetic material (DNA) is altered for someperceived advantage either to the producer or the consumer.

Bt cotton was the first transgenic crop to be introduced in the countryin 2002. Since then there has been a lot of controversy surrounding itwith experts debating on its performance and impact on theenvironment and health of cattle.

India, as a party to the Convention on Biodiversity and having ratified

the Cartagena Protocol (CP), is committed to the safe handling ofliving modified organisms (LMOs) or genetically modified organisms(GMOs).

The Protocol provides a broad framework on biosafety especiallyfocusing on trans-boundary movements of GMOs and also coversseeds that are meant for intentional release into the environment, aswell as those GMOs that are intended for food, feed or used in foodprocessing.

iasinterviewmaterial 2010.doc

Documents