Art of Living founder Sri Sri Ravi Shankar interacts with inmates of Paraplegic Rehabilitation Centre in Mohali on Friday. A Tribune photo

Chandigarh, June 10

Ahead of International Yoga Day, an inaugural meditation session was held today at Paraplegic Rehabilitation Centre (PRC), Mohali, under the guidance of the Art of Living founder, Sri Sri Ravi Shankar. He was in the city in connection with the yoga day preparations. During his brief stay at the centre, which caters to rehabilitation of 100 per cent disabled soldiers who have lost the use of their lower limbs, he interacted with the inmates and gave them some tips to remain happy and content.Two specially designed Art of Living courses, including chair yoga, have been conducted in the recent past for the inmates of the PRC under the aegis of Western Command HQ.On the occasion, Lt Gen KJ Singh, General Officer Commanding-in-Chief, Western Command, said a sports complex would shortly be inaugurated on the PRC complex for the fitness of the inmates. — TNS

FOR four decades, over a dozen countries have tried to control Afghanistan’s political destiny. India has been an active player since the post-colonial great game first began in 1978. India’s influence has waxed and waned with changes in Kabul. But several recent developments have again sent India’s stock in Afghanistan soaring. Prime Minister Narendra Modi figures in two of them. Last week the Prime Minister inaugurated the Salma Dam in Afghanistan. Before that he presided over a leasing ceremony for an Iranian port that would be India’s route to Afghanistan’s Pashtun areas. In between, and to India’s relief, a US drone attack killed Taliban’s anti-talks chief Mullah Mansour Akhtar.The Indian strategic community, especially its diplomats and security managers, must now ensure that the hard work done and the lives sacrificed by our unsung engineers, architects and foot soldiers do not go in vain. The project was delayed by six years not just because of extremely difficult working conditions. Ministries often sat on requests for the release of funds and engineers would cool their heels in Kabul because travel by road was too dangerous. The story was the same for the crucial Delaram-Zaranj road built by Indian engineers that will eventually connect to the Iranian port of Chabahar. Unlike India’s two completed projects in Afghanistan — the Parliament House building and a power transmission line to Kabul —dams and transport corridors cannot exist in isolation. In order to capitalise on the goodwill generated by the two projects, India should opt for a cooperative model. This will mean integrating the power generated from Salma Dam with the Central Asia backed electricity grid and connecting the proposed Iran-Afghanistan road to the existing routes such as Taftan-Quetta highway (where Mullah Mansour was droned). India had consciously selected these projects to put across its policy of providing wholesome assistance to Afghanistan. India should now dovetail them with other projects to benefit the wider region, and not just small parts of Afghanistan. This will ensure a lasting influence in the region that is not circumscribed by national boundaries.

Mukesh Ranjan in new delhi
The NIA’s shifting stance in prominent terror cases, such as the Samjhauta and Malegaon blast cases, can seriously damage the country’s reputation of conducting a fair probe

INVESTIGATORS are generally used to denying things too apparent, something even in their plain sight, until there’s “undeniable evidence.” A conviction brought out by a court of law is the most savoury moment for an investigator/prosecutor. Remember the streaks of success on the face of Ujjwal Nikam, the famed prosecutor in the 26/11 Mumbai terror attack case, when Ajmal Kasab was convicted and subsequently hanged? A series of terror cases are, however,  thought to have been “solved” by our intelligence services, the newest being the National Investigation Agency (NIA), but in some crucial cases, the conviction has remained elusive. It’s time for one hard look at how things have fallen through the cracks in the face of evidentiary indispensability. Sample this: the NIA’s stand is leading to the weakening of prosecution in “saffron” terror cases. For example 17 of 299 witnesses in the 2007 Samjhauta Express case and 19 of 180 witnesses in the Ajmer Dargah case (2007) have turned hostile; the 2008 Modasa (Gujarat) blast case has been closed by the NIA, citing lack of evidence; and three key conspirators — Ramchandra Kalsangra alias Ramji, Sandeep Dange alias Parmanand and Ashwini Chouhan alias Amit — are at large.In Samjhauta blast case, NIA investigators deny that they are either giving clean chit to anybody or shifting the charge to Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT) as reported in a section of the media. They say they are giving a fresh look at a few “new leads.” These include involvement of LeT financier Arif Qasmani. “Our effort is to rule out involvement of any other outfit in the case, as the US authorities have documented the alleged role of Qasmani in the case,” said an IG rank officer in the NIA. Last year, the Union home ministry declined permission to challenge the bail granted to two of the accused in the Ajmer Dargah case, Devender Gupta and Lokesh Sharma. The ministry said the decision was taken on “grounds of parity” — bail was granted to two other accused in the same case in 2013, and their bail plea was not challenged by the prosecution. The NIA chose not to oppose the bail granted to Swami Aseemanand in the Samjhauta Express blast case.Lieutenant Colonel Prasad Srikant Purohit, the alleged main conspirator of the 2008 Malegaon blasts, recently wrote to National Security Adviser Ajit Doval that he was falsely implicated. He has asked Doval to intervene on his behalf “immediately”, as the NIA was preparing to file its charge-sheet soon. Home Secretary Rajiv Mehrishi has sought the NIA response in the matter, as Doval redirected the letter to the Home Ministry.Meanwhile, investigators and prosecutors seem to have locked horns following former special public prosecutor Rohini Salian’s charge that Suhas Warke, a superintendent of police in the NIA, had asked her to “go soft” on the accused in the Malegaon blasts case after the BJP came to power in 2014. Former senior police officers see danger in the frequent change of stance by NIA as it “weakens India’s criminal justice system.” “It is sad to see the same investigation agency taking contradictory positions. These days the stick-and-carrot policy of political masters is so real that officers succumb to it,” said former Delhi Police Commissioner Ved Marwah.NR Vasan, the former NIA DG, has reportedly rued the fact that the investigation agency is toeing the CBI lines. Like CBI, the NIA is being filled with officers on deputation from paramilitary forces such as the Border Security Force (BSF). Thus, investigation into “critical terror case” takes a beating, he said. Security experts have observed that in recent times much is being said about witnesses turning hostile. In many such cases, most witnesses are friends or family members of the accused. “In such situations, it is natural for them to turn hostile,” says an observer, adding it was where the experience of the agency sleuths matters. “They can gather enough evidence that can stand the test of law.”The idea of “Hindu radicals” first came up in 2011 at the annual All-India Director General of Police (DGP) Conference in Delhi held behind closed doors. Intelligence officers raised alarm over rightwing Hindu organisations. “Such outfits have been espousing emotive issues, leading to radicalisation and the phenomenon of saffron terrorism,” a special director of the IB had noted. He said Hindu activists were “either under suspicion or under investigation in 16 incidents of blasts.”

Our Correspondent

Nurpur, May 26

Social Justice, Empowerment and Sainik Welfare Minister Col Dhani Ram Shandil has announced that the Sainik Welfare Board’s sub-office would function permanently in Nurpur. Shandil said he had received the demand to this effect from ex-Army men hailing from lower Kangra areas where nearly 30,000 ex-servicemen resided.He was here to preside over the meeting of the local Congress cell of ex-servicemen. He said earlier a camp office had been functioning only twice a week due to which thousands of ex-servicemen of the area were facing inconvenience in procuring requisite documents relating to their pension and CSD facility.Shandil pointed out that the state government had identified land between Una and Bilaspur district for establishing Army’s CSD depot. Land transferring formalities were in progress for the purpose. He said the Virbhadra government was committed to the welfare of ex-servicemen and families of martyrs.

Rasgotra, then Foreign Secy, reveals details in autobiography ‘A Life in Diplomacy’

Vikas Datta

New Delhi, May 2

India and Pakistan had agreed on a peace and no-war treaty and were on the verge of signing it in July 1984 before then Pakistani President Zia ul-Haq, who had even dismissed any need to discuss Kashmir, backtracked on the advice of US lawmakers, reveals former Indian Foreign Secretary MK Rasgotra.In his autobiography “A Life in Diplomacy”, Rasgotra, who was Foreign Secretary from 1982 to 1985 and is now in his 90s, recalled that ahead of his visit to Islamabad, then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, who was leaving on a visit to the US, gave him a free hand, telling him, “You know it all and you can talk to them about any subject they want to talk about, including Kashmir and the no-war pact they are so keen on”. She only wanted to know if “there is a grain of sincerity” in General Zia.As Rasgotra called on him at the President’s House in Islamabad, President Zia, with the humility and charm he was known for, was standing in the verandah, close to to where he would get out of the car, and welcomed him with a big hug. During the talks, to India’s willingness to talk about Kashmir, Zia’s response was “noteworthy”. “Rasgotra sahib, what is there to talk about Kashmir? You have Kashmir and we cannot take it. I want you and (Pakistani Foreign Secretary) Niaz Naik to work on a treaty of peace and good neighbourliness, including a no-war pact,” he quoted the Pakistani President as saying.He said progress was made in discussions on the agreement, to the extent that in March 1984, Naik proposed that the Indian draft of a treaty of peace and friendship and Pakistan’s draft of a no-war pact should be “merged”. By May 1984, there was “full agreement on all six or seven clauses in the draft treaty’s preamble and on nine of the 11 articles of the treaty’s operative part” and both sides reached an agreement on these two.“Accordingly, Naik announced in the final plenary meeting of the two delegations that on clauses IV and V, he and I had reached an understanding, to which he would obtain the President’s approval on his return from the UAE and we would all meet in Delhi in July to initial or sign the treaty. But the July meeting never took place,” he recalled.According to Rasgotra, there were two reasons why Zia changed his mind, and the primary one was the advice of his American “well-wishers”.“While awaiting the President’s return from the UAE, Naik had telegraphed the text to Foreign Minister Sahabzada Yaqub Khan, who was on a visit to Washington DC. Khan took the text around to his friends in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and Foreign Affairs Committee of the House of Representatives, who strongly advised him against signing a treaty of that kind with India,” he noted.Rasgotra said he learnt of this from a Congressman friend of his, from his earlier stints in the US, and member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee “asking me why we were coercing Pakistan into signing an anti-American treaty”.The other reason was India’s troubles in Punjab, “in which General Zia saw an opportunity to weaken India by supporting a violent secessionist campaign by Sikh extremist groups lead by Jarnail Singh Bhindrawale”, said Rasgotra.On Zia, Rasgotra said he reported to Indira after his first visit and meeting that he had “seemed anxious to win India’s goodwill and I had my doubts about his sincerity”.  —IANS

President Pranab Mukherjee is received by China’s Foreign Affairs Vice Minister in Guangzhou. PTI

Simran Sodhi

Tribune News Service

Guangzhou, May 24

India is looking to de-hyphenate itself from Pakistan as far as membership to the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) goes. As President Pranab Mukherjee landed in China on a four-day visit, those familiar with the developments made it clear that India had never objected to Pakistan’s NSG membership.“China, along with other countries, have been maintaining that there should be a thorough discussion on whether non-NPT countries can join the NSG, and this decision should be made on consensus. This applies to all non-NPT countries, including Pakistan,” a Foreign Ministry spokeswoman told mediapersons on Monday, ahead of Mukherjee’s visit. China had recently objected to India’s membership of the NSG on the grounds that it has yet to sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). This was  seen as a sign of China’s friendship towards Pakistan which has been arguing that if India is allowed in the elite NSG club, so should Pakistan.(Follow The Tribune on Facebook; and Twitter @thetribunechd)However, those in the know in the government maintain that India has never endorsed or blocked Pakistan’s membership to the club. The membership is by consensus and the US has backed India’s claim, given India’s clean record on non-proliferation. Pakistan, whose nuclear proliferation record has always been a matter of concern, is pushing for a berth in the NSG, if India gets it. India had recently cited the example of France which became a member of the NSG without signing the NPT. The Chinese have, however, countered this saying, “France was a founder of the NSG so the issue of its acceptance to the NSG did not exist.”Officials in the government said the Chinese argument (that India could not be admitted in the NSG club without first signing the NPT) did not hold because there were no set of rules as such for the NSG membership. Also, India is primarily concerned with its own membership rather than that of another country.India, Pakistan, Israel and South Sudan are some of the UN members that have not signed the NPT yet. The NSG membership issue is likely to be raised by Mukherjee during his talks with the Chinese leadership, including President Xi Jinping, over the course of next few days. While the India-China relationship is a not a smooth one, it is nevertheless being hoped that the visit of the President will help remove the strain between the two countries. 

In a tangle

• China is opposed to India’s inclusion in the Nuclear Suppliers Group, arguing it hasn’t signed the Non-ProliferationTreaty (NPT)
• The stand is indicative of China’s tilt towards Pakistan; the latter says if India is allowed to join the group, so should it be
• The US has backed India’s claim, given the country’s clean record on non-proliferation
• India, Pak, Israel & South Sudan are some of the UN members that haven’t signed the NPT

The government’s almost-impulsive about turns have made its Pakistan policy unpredictable and prone to gaffes. But there is some serious work happening underneath the surface of cultivated indifference and caution. As the India-Pakistan relationship is prone to many missteps, both governments have replicated the technique of springing a meeting from the closing years of the UPA-Zardari governments. This denies spoilers time to activate their standard technique of arranging bomb blasts just before a high-level Indo-Pak meet. The Pakistan Foreign Secretary’s sudden visit to Delhi and his prolonged conversation with his counterpart may be part of this piece just like Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Foreign Minister Sushma Swaraj and National Security Adviser Ajit Doval met their counterparts virtually unannounced. Then Pathankot happened and the pace slowed down. But it was the result of the continuing conversation that India convinced Pakistan to send a probe team to Pathankot, although the outcome wasn’t what it had wished for. And the arrest of a former Indian Navy officer has diminished India’s moral high horsing. In the eyes of the international community, both seem to be fomenting violent discontent in each other’s land. The separate statements issued at the end of the talk between the Foreign Secretaries reflect this realism in Indo-Pak affairs. India called the talks “frank and constructive”, meaning both sides pulled no punches, and Pakistan highlighted the “cordial environment” which stands for courteous allowance to the other side’s views. What is noteworthy is neither side has criticised the other.From available indications, the talks might have paved the way for a structured meeting between the Foreign Secretaries. Provided there is no Pathankot or Dinanagar, this could herald the beginning of the composite dialogue, a format that discusses each and every issue of discord. Continued dialogue among officials with adequate political oversight should set the stage for the meeting between the Prime Ministers and Foreign Ministers, respectively, on the sidelines of two international conferences late this year. The Modi government has shown the gumption to take a leap in the dark. The coming days will test its talent to land on its feet.

DOUBLE CLICK ON THESE CLIPPINGS FOR ENLARGED VIEW