|
Records the wanderings of a wordsmith
|
Thursday, April 03, 2003
The Swedish industry and trade minister Leif Pagrotsky addressed the press in Bangalore today. He came out as a different kind of chap. For a politician, that too a trade negotiator, he was unusually outspoken. He chewed no words, relied on no jargon, hid behind no formality.
He said it was unfortunate that India's law and commerce minister Arun Jaitley was reluctant to agree to discuss a multilateral arrangement to cut red tape in import procedures, under the aegis of WTO. Pagrotsky said it was important for countries to simplify procedural formalities, but that was not enough. They should commit to abide by a common set of rules and procedures to be evolved at WTO, so that an exporter will have to deal with the same rules in all the countries, which are WTO members. Made sense.
He sided with India on the issue of visas by advanced countries. He charged Europe, US and Japan with imposing non-tariff barriers on India and other services-exporting nations. The comment is timely, as a senior I-flex official is facing visa violation charges in Europe.
posted by S. Srinivasan at 9:45 AM
My moon mission story, within hours of being released on the AP Wire, was picked up by several Web sites. One such link is http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Science/2003/04/02/56679-ap.html
posted by S. Srinivasan at 9:37 AM
Wednesday, April 02, 2003
A few thoughts came to mind when I read Tim's story on the politics of archaeology. He had written about how Hindu fundamentalists were trying to establish the Hindutva credo by tampering with history and achaeological evidence. My thoughts related to some of the facts he referred to.
1) The widely-held theory that Hinduism came to India with the invasion of Indus Valley by Aryans from central Asia is simply wrong. It was mainly forwarded by German Indologists who wanted to show that Germans were the original Aryans. However, what Hindu zealots say is equally wrong. There is no proof to say that Hinduism began here and that the Indus Valley people were Aryans. A more credible theory is that Aryans came as immigrants and mingled with the Indus Valley people. The various Aryan tribes worshipped different gods and they also took to the customs of natives. The blend of all this emerged as Hinduism, a religion with 330 million gods and as many complexities.
2) Hindu zealots want to show that Indus Valley people domesticated the horse. Nothing could be farther from truth. Of the hundreds of seals excavated from the Valley, not one is that of a horse. The horse was an Aryan speciality. Aryans could travel across mountains and rivers and migrate to India because they rode the horse. It also gave them supremacy over native Indian tribes in course of time.
3) The existence of Saraswathi river during Vedic times is a good possibility. The Gaggar river which flows through Rajasthan empties itself at the Rann of Kutch after passing through Pakistan. This is a narrow river with unusually wide banks. Why should a narrow river that often goes dry have such wide banks, unless it was once a mighty river? Another curious thing is that hundreds of Harappan type settlements have been found along the course of the river. Some food for thought, this.
4) Irrespective of these finer points about ancient India, the fact remains that today's Saffron Brigade is bent on rewriting, tampering with, fudging and distorting history to strengthen its claims. The agenda behind these claims is not truth, but establishment of Hindu hegemony and exploitation of Hindu sentiments for politics. Future archaeologists will puke when they dig out the 20th/21st century layer of India, because the result of the mess that the brigade is creating today will be revealed then.
posted by S. Srinivasan at 8:39 AM
Criticism against India's moon mission
1) India is a poor country and ISRO's budget is limited. Why waste scarce resources on a moon mission when more urgent projects are crying for attention..
2) As much as 97% of the moon has been mapped. It is unlikely that India's moon mission can yield anything of compelling interest..
3) Indian scientists have hardly done anything to study the reams of data already available on the moon. Only when they finish that task, will a moon mission become relevant.
4) Very little high science research is going on in this country, which has not produced a Nobel Laureate in decades. Even ISRO is weak in such research...Why not correct this if the need is to focus on frontier science?
5) The moon mission was carried out by the US in 1969. It is old. To talk of this as frontier science is humbug.
6) It is "flag-waving" political opportunism that yields national pride but little else.
Support for the mission:
1) Doubting Thomases have always been there. But India's space plan has gone ahead and shown results.
2) The moon mission will be a launch pad for deep space exploration.
3) It will help India position itself as a hitech country in the comity of nations.
4) It will spread the message of science to the people.
5) Poverty is no excuse for not taking up scientific research..Science and poverty alleviation can go together...They are parallel activities not sequential..
6) The U.S, Russia and Japan which have carried out moon mission will one day colonize the moon for its mineral and other resources. India wants to join the race too.
My Verdict:
The moon is not going to go away in a hurry. Let us go there some time later. For now, there is so much we have to do on the earth.
posted by S. Srinivasan at 2:35 AM
Monday, March 31, 2003
Some interesting points emerged in the moon mission story. Why is it important for India to spend money on the mission, when poverty and illiteracy issues have not yet been sorted out in the country? If frontier science research is a priority, there are any number of sciences that cry for the attention of Indian scientists. Even within the Indian Science Research Organization, there is a need for introducing a new generation launch vehicle. One scientist said the argument that India should take up the moon mission because it is cutting edge work, is mere hogwash..Most of the moon has been mapped and even richer countries did not take up moon missions any more. Further, he said, India has not produced one scientific paper that ranks in the class of Nobel Laureate's works. Why not produce original works of science rather than sending an orbiter to moon 34 years after the U.S landed its man there? I am trying to find Indian scientists who will boldly tackle these issues and give me good quotes on the record. My search is yet to yield results....
posted by S. Srinivasan at 3:13 AM
Sunday, March 30, 2003
Did Raja Ramanna turn down an offer from Saddam Hussein in 1978 to help build a nuclear bomb? That is what a book written a few years ago and cited in a story by Hindustan Times today says. Must check out Ramanna's views on this.. I doubt if he will talk about it or if it is worth talking about, but will check any way.
posted by S. Srinivasan at 8:58 AM
I plan to do a story on India's moon mission this week. The country's space agency is planning to send an unmanned (why have feminists not come up with a replacement for this term?) orbiter to the moon in the next few years. It is primarily to boost national pride and is a politically correct project. But scientists doubt whether it will benefit India in any real sense. They say India has a lot of catching up with the world to do on other fronts of space science than playing catch-the-moon. Let us dig deeper into the issue this week.
|
|
