Climate action

You have stolen my dreams and my childhood. People are suffering, people are dying, entire ecosystems are collapsing. We are in the beginning of a mass extinction and all you can talk about is money and fairy tales of eternal economic growth. How dare you?
- Greta Thunberg at the UN on 23-Sep-2019. 

• This is her best speech.  It captures the anxiety of a generation and those living on the front lines of famines, heat waves, droughts, and sea level rise.
• They whispered to her, “you cannot withstand the storm”. She whispered back, “I am the storm”!  You go girl.
• Why is Trump there? He doesn't believe in Climate Change. 
• On 26-Nov-2018 asked about the findings in a report warning of devastating effects of climate change that unchecked global warming would wreak havoc on the US economy, US President Donald Trump said: "I don't believe it." 
• I feel no need to meet President Trump. My message to President Trump is just listen to science, and he obviously doesn't do that. - Greta Thunberg
• Pro-tip: Yielding to the demands of a catastrophizing 16 year-old who has no experience with unintended consequences is a bad idea. We are not beginning a mass extinction. Both mankind and nature can and will adapt to the modest increases in temps. Don't fall for the drama. - Doug Sheridan
• We have taken planet stability for granted and our stable, reliable planet no longer exists. What we do in the next few years, will determine the next few thousand years. - David Attenborough. 
• She is amazing. The only reason people can make fun of this statement is because they still feel safe and their bellies are full. In about 20 years nothing will be funny anymore. The older people will die but millennial's have the possibility of horror.

• Greta has done more in 16 years to raise climate awareness than you or I have in our lifetime.
• Rich people will be ok. Poor people will not.
• We have to look for a solution, because she is right - people are dying and ultimately the planet will die if we don’t do something fast.
• The earth will fix itself by killing off as many humans as it can. That’s the only way balance will be restored.
• Everyone, can fight, climate change every day,  just by making the right choice of food.
• No one is willing to live without modern luxury and necessities to deal with it.

Diplomatic immunity

The rules set forth in the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, agreed upon by 187 countries, clearly states that diplomatic agents including "the members of the diplomatic staff, and of the administrative and technical staff and of the service staff of the mission" enjoy "immunity from the criminal jurisdiction of the receiving State." They also enjoy immunity from civil proceedings unless the case involves property or business interests unrelated to their diplomatic duties.

• Immunity means an exemption. Diplomatic Immunity allows diplomats to have safe passage and stay in foreign nations, and provides blanket protection to diplomats from lawsuits and legal prosecution in a foreign (host) nation. 
• The purpose of diplomatic privileges, immunity and exemptions, is not to benefit individuals but to ensure the efficient performance of the functions of diplomatic missions that represent States. While 'privileges' is defined as a benefit or right to do something that others have no right to do, 'immunity' is defined as the exemption from local jurisdiction. Immunity have a legal basis, but privileges are a matter of courtesy.
• Diplomatic privileges and immunity guarantee that diplomatic agents or members of their immediate family (i) may not be arrested or detained, (ii) may not have their residences entered and searched, (iii) may not be subpoenaed as witnesses, and (iv) may not be prosecuted.
• The person of a diplomatic agent is inviolable. Inviolability of the mission is unqualified. He shall not be liable to any form of arrest or detention. The Vienna convention specifies different levels of immunity to diplomats posted in various levels of the embassy, consular or international organisations such as the UN. The purpose of the immunity was so that foreign diplomats can maintain their dignity and safety in the host nation, without any threat of attack or intimidation to their person. 
• Host countries can’t withdraw diplomatic immunity, but several have expelled diplomats for alleged interference in internal affairs and violate their laws. Even for serious crimes, the host country can generally do is expel the offender. Intimidation is a frequent recourse of authoritarian regimes, including against the families of diplomats. The doctrine of immunity represents a departure from the conventional practice of holding people responsible for their wrongful actions. 
• The concern of protecting life was more important than immunity. Without prejudice to their privileges and immunity, it is the duty of all persons enjoying such privileges and immunity to respect the laws and regulations of the receiving State. 
• A diplomat’s home country can waive his diplomatic immunity in particularly egregious cases. Immunity of a diplomat from the jurisdiction of the host country does not exempt him/her from the jurisdiction of his/her home country.
• Violations of the Vienna Convention are extremely rare because countries are usually reluctant to put their own diplomats at risk. 

Diplomatic Immunity can be a double edged sword. On the one hand, it protects the life and dignity of a diplomat in a host nation, especially in times of conflict. Many international abuses of the clause by powerful diplomats and their kin has led to substantial criticism of the Vienna Convention. Many critics and legal experts want a reworking of the treaty's clauses to make the legal tool more useful of its purpose instead of being just an escape tool in the hands of powerful criminals. 

Words are one thing, actions another.
Good words are a mask for concealment of bad deeds. 

Sincere diplomacy is no more possible than dry water or wooden iron ... LC Green

Generally, Diplomatic passports are issued to people holding diplomatic status & powers i.e. the IFS officers posted abroad in Indian Missions, or deputed by the Government of India for diplomatic duty abroad and others visiting abroad for negotiations with foreign governments. Over the years, the process has been abused and misused with many getting issued the diplomatic passport thus losing its value, like VIP status granted to as many as 6 lakhs people. Almost all elected law makers, appointed top bureaucrats etc obtain diplomatic passports for themselves & families and use them for personal foreign travel and bypass the processes at the ports of entry& exit in India and abroad..

No one can harm you but yourself

Vijaya Lakshmi Pandit, Jawaharlal Nehru and Gandhiji

The best advice I ever had came from one of the greatest souls the world has ever known -- Mahatma Gandhi -- on a sunny afternoon a decade ago.

Most people pass through a period of anguish when their belief in humanity is at a low ebb. I was in such a period. My husband had recently died. My deep sorrow over his loss was followed by the humiliating realization that in the eyes of Indian law I had no individual existence. Along with other Indian women I had participated for years with men in the national struggle for freedom, working and suffering side by side with them until it had finally been achieved-yet in law we women were still recognized only through our relationship to men. Now as a widow without a son, I was not entitled to any share of the family property, nor were my two daughters. I resented this galling position. I was bitter towards those members of my family who supported this antiquated law.

At this time I went to pay my respect to Gandhiji and say goodbye before leaving for America to take part in a conference. After our talk he asked, "Have you made your peace with your relatives?"

I was amazed that he would takes sides against me. "I have not quarrelled with anyone," I replied, "but I refuse to have anything to do with those who take advantage of an outworn law to create a difficult and humiliating situation for me."

Gandhiji looked out of the window for a moment. Then he turned to me and smiled, and said, "You will go and say goodbye because courtesy and decency demand this. In India, we still attach importance to these things."

"No," I declared, "not even to please you will I go to those who wish to harm me."

"No one can harm you except yourself," he said, still smiling. "I see enough bitterness in your heart to cause you injury unless you check it."

I remained silent, and he continued: "You are going to a new country because you are unhappy and want to escape. Can you escape from yourself? Will you find happiness outside when there is bitterness in your heart? Think it over. Be a little humble. You have lost a loved one-that is sorrow enough. Must you inflict further injury on yourself because you lack courage to cleanse your own heart?"

His words would not leave me. They gave me no peace. After some days of severe struggle with myself, I finally telephoned my brother-in-law. I would like to see him and the family, I said, before leaving.

I hadn't been with them five minutes before I sensed that my visit had brought a feeling of relief to everyone. I told them of my plans and asked for their good wishes before starting on this new stage of my life. The effect on me was miraculous. I felt as if a great burden had been lifted and I was free to be myself.

This small gesture was the beginning of a significant change in me. A year and a half later I was in New York, leader of the Indian delegation to the United Nations. Important to us was India's complaint regarding the treatment of people of Indian origin in the Union of South Africa. Harsh things were said by both sides. I resented the manner in which my opponents made personal attacks harmful to India's prestige and to mine. I struck back with the same sharp weapons. Then, after a distressing duel of words, I suddenly thought of Gandhiji. Would he approve? To him, means were as important as the end -- in the long run, perhaps more important. What if we succeeded in getting our resolution passed by questionable tactics that injured our self-respect?

Before going to bed that night I resolved that, come what may, no word of mine would be lightly used in the UN. From then on, I lifted the debate back to where it belonged, refusing to retaliate to personal attacks or to score a cheap point. Our opponents met us on the new level and from then on we argued the case on its merits.

Before leaving the committee room on the last day, I went up and spoke to the leader of the opposing delegation. "I have come to ask you to forgive me if I have hurt you by any word or action in this debate."

He shook my hand warmly and said, "I have no complaint."

It was good to feel right with him, but even better to feel right with myself. 

To retain a sense of proportion is as important as being able to keep one's heart free from hatred. For all of us, no matter what our work, the advice Gandhiji gave me is meaningful: "No one can harm you but yourself."

______________________________________________________________________
Vijaya Lakshmi Pandit, Jawaharlal Nehru's sister, wrote this article in 1955 when she was the Indian High Commissioner to the United Kingdom. She passed away in 1990.
This story first appeared in January 1956

Democracy and its Perils

• Democracy is a political system which combines the elements of fairness, legitimacy and effectiveness. It is the least worst system. 
• Democracy is imperfect and, when misapplied or incorrectly interpreted, can be saddled with flaws and weaknesses. 
• Democracy is the most expensive & inefficient form of governance.
• A democracy is not a democracy unless it has independent and strong institutions that help facilitate good governance and right thinking citizens demanding accountability and transparency.
• Proper democracy is far more than a perpetual ballot process. It must include deliberation, mature independent institutions and checks and balances. It may include educated citizens, strong civil society and strong laws.
• Freedom is an essential part of democracy. Freedom is essential for both the ruled and the ruler.
• Unfettered freedom brings with it its own hazards that would undermine the institutions that help sustain democracy.
• The victim of democracy is the politics itself. Politics in a democratic set up tends to be looked upon with contempt by the people. It is much maligned and abused field in all the democracies.
• Politicians once elected to power become the custodians and abusers of power.
• Bad politics leads to corruption. As the people responsible for corruption are ‘enabled’ to loot the exchequer either by the loopholes in the laws or indifferent ‘people’ who form the very basis of democracy.
• Corruption has reached gargantuan proportions, because of the indifferent attitude of the people and enabling environment provided by democracy for the corrupt to practice their art. 
• Democracy aides both the individual and the ‘corrupt’ authority. Democracy with weak institutions gives them free hand to run the government, they tend to err, and err with impunity.
• Criminalization of politics is the biggest peril of democracy. With it comes misuse of position and authority. It inevitably leads to corruption.
• Corruption directly brings underdevelopment and spawns poverty. In India poverty is the major benefactor for the politicians. As long as poverty is sustained, they can amass wealth – always unaccounted.
• Democracy promotes capitalism which in turn results in uneven wealth distribution. Rich becomes much richer while poor remain poorer.
• Risk of capitalism is usually socialized while profits gets privatized.
• Democracy in itself is not a threat, but any weak link within it is bound to weaken the whole structure.
• Democracy has become synonymous with elections and is reduced to the process of elections.
• In democracy poor people vote, and the elected become rich at the cost of the poor. It’s a government of the rich, for the poor to sustain the poverty. This sounds cynical, but hard facts vindicate the statement. If 70% of India’s population still earns less than Rs 50 per day, even after 70 years of independence, should we compliment ourselves or introspect?
• Development has suffered more in democracy than in other forms of governments. Though it is fashionable to say that democracy is better than despotism despite lack of development, does it do justice to the vast millions who go to sleep hungry?
• Within democracy, we need a change of mindset both of the people and politicians in their attitude towards development. We are witnessing the loot of our resources by the powerful few who are covertly supported by the government machinery. Every penny that’s put to improve the lot of this country is unaccounted for. The crux is lack of accountability.
• Education of the masses and strong institutions is a solution to most problems in India.
• Institutions which are not pestered and interfered by the ruling classes perform better. The fear that these institutions if given complete autonomy would grow as a threat is unfounded. The Supreme Court of India and Election commission of India are governed by bureaucrats, not by the elected politicians. These institutions function well within the scope of our constitution.
• Our military has gained reputation for being fair to its people and the constitution. Where there is no interference by the politics, the institutions serve well. For a democracy to thrive and bring development to the masses, we need independent institutions to act as check and balances on the government.
• We need universities which are not at the mercy of government; we need public service commissions not interfered in their functioning by the government; we need a strong Lokpal to punish the corrupt; strong local governments to bring development at the bottom; independent CBI and a police force which is pro-people; the list goes on.
• These changes are not difficult to bring on. It is the will which is missing, lest it affects the power of few to amass the wealth. Perils of democracy are the result of loopholes within it. To plug them, we need to fight. Of course, non-violently.
• A blanket endorsement of it as a convenient panacea will do more harm than good.
• There are very few nations on this Earth, which openly reject the notion of democracy. Most countries espouse it, or at least offer it lip service.
• Myth #1: The people can do no wrong.  The legitimacy of majority rule with no reservations or caveats raises the issue of sub-units within the voters viz territorial, cultural, ethnic or religious. What happens if the people change their minds? Democracy cannot be just if it is not just over time. Does a coalition automatically legitimize the action of individuals or groups or nations without regard to higher principles of morality or ethics? The doctrine of popular infallibility can be kept as a useful reference point but must not be abused or overextended.
• Myth # 2: Direct  democracy is always better than representative democracy. Given the volatility of public opinion, the complexity of social psychology and the possibility of inter generational conflicts, the representative democracy is often superior to direct democracy, with the representatives acting as buffer. Mistakes can then be attributed to representatives and not to the people. The conventional assumption is that the will of the people should always trump that of the elites. The principal arguments against leaving too many decisions to the direct appreciation of the masses can be summarized as follows: (1) Uninformed or insufficiently informed electorate (2) Influence of money and media (3) People changing their mind (4) Contradictory Referenda (5) Deleterious effect on public policy.
• Myth #3: Democracy trumps all other social goals. The backlash against Dumb Democracy is the realization that democratization, although a valid goal, is not the only desirable one that a Society can legitimately aspire to. The following compete for priority with democracy. (1) Peace (2) Justice (3) Liberty & Freedom (4) Security (5) Good governance (6) Escape from extreme poverty (7) Public Vs Private goods (8) Good health (9) Traditional values (10) Climate change and sustainable development. 
• Myth #4: Democratic countries will never go to war against each other. There is a frequent assumption that once a country becomes democratic it will renounce violence, avoid going to war especially against other democracies, and try to resolve outstanding problems by peaceful means. Experience shows that the relationship between democracy and war is actually very complex and far from straightforward. 
• Myth #5: National democracy automatically leads to global democracy. Will a world composed of democratic nation-states automatically mean that it will also be democratic? This question is as complex and there are no simple answers. The UN Security Council, with coercive powers, is composed of five permanent members with veto powers who appointed themselves to that position. The other non-permanent members are elected by the UN General Assembly, but do not have veto power. The elected President of United States has real authority over the whole world by virtue of the overwhelming military power, which it has used in Iraq and threatens to do so elsewhere. There is a serious democratic deficit where 2% of the world’s voting population manages to have a determining influence on the entire world.
• There is no formula of global democracy and every formula suffer from inefficiencies and conflict of goals. The attempted simple transition from national to global democracy without a lot of preparation and adaptation is therefore destined to fail unless treated with a more sophisticated analysis.
• Other than democracy, there are no other known political alternatives which will work in the long run.  There is no permanent security in tyrants and the checks and balances of democracy make it the only sustainable political system, which can claim both long-term efficiency and legitimacy. Democracy must prevail because of mounting global interdependence requiring team responses and collective decision-making. A leader has to motivate his troops and keep their confidence. No single individual holds absolute power anymore, and everyone has to report to some group or a parliament, all leaders are accountable to some committee of peers, which makes democracy sustainable, indispensable and inevitable. 
• The modalities of this accountability have to be modulated and perfected.
• The construction of a democratic state must be gradual and well planned. It can rarely be imposed by non-democratic means. Democracy by force of arms is self-defeating. 

 In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great 
difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; 
and in the next place oblige it to control itself ... James Madison

The Perils of Dumb Democracy


Ambedkar described constitution as a fundamental document stated that the purpose of a constitution is not merely to create the organs of the state but to limit their authority because if no limitation was imposed upon the authority of the organs, there will be complete tyranny and complete oppression. The legislature may be free to frame any law; the executive may be free to take any decision, and the Supreme Court may be free to give any interpretation of the law. It would result in utter chaos. Constitutional morality is not a natural sentiment. It has to be cultivated. We must realise that our people have yet to learn it. Democracy in India is only a top-dressing on an Indian soil which is essentially undemocratic. Demonetisation has negated the fundamental and constitutional rights of Indians. By forcing every Indian, and not just the black marketers and counterfeiters, to stand in queues to withdraw hard earned money, our elected government has insulted all. Citizens have been temporarily deprived of property by a single fiat, even though the constitution says this can only be done with the authority of law. Countless have died, been rendered jobless, hungry and homeless. Is this a democratic act? RBI has been reduced to cipher. Fiscal policy has become political and the finance ministry redundant. The parliament and the cabinet have been turned into a mere formality. Judiciary appears seriously weakened. It is not easy for the victims of police and investigative agencies to get any relief against wrongful detentions and prosecutions. But it is the concerted attack on institution after institution by the Modi government that raises serious concerns. Bhakti in religion may be a road to the salvation of the soul. But in politics, bhakti or hero-worship is a sure road to degradation and to eventual dictatorship. India has moved away from constitutional democracy to populist democracy. Ambedkar is losing. Modi is winning.