ANALYSIS
It augurs well for both the countries that the prime ministers are scheduled to watch the India-Pakistan semi-final together at Mohali.
Not just cricket
This is with reference to 'PM's appeal upheld, Gilani says yes', (March 27). It augurs well for both the countries that the prime ministers are scheduled to watch the India-Pakistan semi-final together at Mohali. The match between the traditional rivals is set to be more exciting than the final itself. Cricket has always been a game of uncertainty and hence every prediction about the outcome of the match is meaningless speculation. All our good wishes are with the Indian team. But it was a sign of immaturity on Pakistan captain Shahid Afridi's behalf to declare that they would not allow Sachin to score his hundredth century. Sachin must play his natural game with confidence.
—MC Joshi, Lucknow
Invite the ISI chief
Apropos 'PM's appeal upheld, Gilani says yes', (March 27), there is unnecessary euphoria and optimism over the visit of Pak PM. It is so because the democratically elected government of Pakistan is very fragile and uncertain. We all know that the Pakistan army is the main centre of power in Pakistan. It is well noted that people of Pakistan and India want peace but it is the Pakistan army which does not want it, as its main survival depends upon enmity towards India. It would have been much better and sensible on our part, if, besides the Pak PM and president we had also invited ISI chief for the cricket match.
— SP Sharma, Mumbai
Revelry vs security
The Sena chief's ire and desperation against the government is understandable and I fully agree with him ('Why not also invite Kasab, Afzal Guru for match: Shiv Sena', March 28). Peace can be meaningful only if it is negotiated from a position of strength. We have frittered it away once when we released nearly one lakh Pakistani POWs in the aftermath of the Bangladesh war and again when we let them become a nuclear power. It is a pity that entertainment in the form of cricket is given greater importance in our country than nationalism and national security. These matches benefit the cricketers and the organisers who make lot of money but at whose cost? The state-sponsored terrorism will continue as before. Is entertainment more important to us?
—GV Shankar, Thane
Wicked leaks
Of late, the media has been carrying plenty of reports of so-called 'WikiLeaks'. All these are said to be diplomatic dispatches sent by various diplomats of a particular foreign country at various points of time to their headquarters. As soon as any leak comes out, our media laps it up. Political parties and politicians are maligned at will. There is no guarantee or confirmation about the contents and nobody can be held responsible. Let us seriously analyse whether this is being done to destabilise Indian democracy and economy, as elections are due in many states. Is it strange to think that some deliberate effort is being executed by a foreign country? Similar leaks from other nations about India are yet to be seen in the media. Don't they have diplomats working in India?
—AJ George, via email
State-backed violence
The manhandling of Swami Agnivesh, who was on his way to Dantewada with relief material for the Adivasis whose homes were burnt down by the state police commandos (SPO), confirms the trend evident in the last two years — the state of Chhattisgarh will not tolerate any interference in its mission to take over Adivasi areas by force. In this war, the supposed targets, the Maoists, remain unbeaten, but the unfortunate Adivasis for whom those mineral-rich forests are home, get massacred. Anyone who has protested against this — be it Dr Binayak Sen or Himanshu Kumar — have been silenced. The incident also confirms that the SPOs, civilians armed by the state to fight their fellow Adivasis, are free to behave as they like, with the full approval of the State. Union home minister P Chidambaram, so vocal about state violence in West Bengal, seems oblivious to similar violence in Chhattisgarh. Could it be because in Chhattisgarh, state violence against innocents serves the interests of corporate groups?
—Anand Patwardhan,
Daniel Mazgaonkar,
Rohini Hensman,
Kamayani Bali Mahabal, Nandini Manjrekar,
Geeta Seshu, Saurav Dutta,
S Seshan, Ruchi Shroff,
J Sakrikar