Category: Editorial

A recent letter from Indian Archbishop Anil Couto of Delhi calling for a prayer campaign ahead of national elections next May has sparked a backlash, mostly from politicians ignorant of history.

The letter was branded by the incumbent Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) as an attempt to dissuade voters from supporting it. A clear understanding of how the church has functioned over the centuries, and how it does today, could help place the controversy in context.

The relationship of priests (or sants, mahants and mullas) to politics depends on the kind of society one lives in. If one lives in a feudal society, theocracy is usually the rule, and religion and politics are blended, so that the religious values of the majoritarian community predominate, especially its idea of God (whence theocracy, God’s rule). Anyone who does not belong to this community is considered a heretic and deviant, and so persecuted.

Religious leaders (priests, sadhus, ayatollahs) play an important role in such societies. This was the case with medieval Christian Europe, and so it is in many majority-Muslim countries today. Hindu society in India is increasingly torn between a fundamentalist medieval outlook and adherence to the secularist principles of its constitution.

For India (like many countries of the West) society is officially secular, with a clear demarcation between state and religion. The legal set-up in such a society accepts pluralism, with multiple beliefs and values, over which the guiding norm is the common good guided by reason, and not religious creed. Such societies, which define themselves as modern, generally oppose priests meddling in politics or politicians meddling in religion.

However, there is usually a wide gap between the ideal enshrined in the constitution and the reality on the street. Even more, in secular states even today, human rights are denied to certain groups based on ideology, race and gender.

Christian society in antiquity and in medieval times was theocratic, where a Christian king or emperor ruled, and his decisions were final. For centuries in Christian Europe it was the kings who chose bishops, and through their bishops, controlled the election of the pope.

But things were to change. Steadily, through manipulation, forgery and deceit, and sometimes by outright violence, the popes established themselves as the supreme arbiters in religious and political matters in Europe. This is a fascinating, if somewhat uncomfortable history of papal control, both of territory and status, and it culminates in the infallibility doctrine, the last vestige of an absolutist monarchical system.

So today when Rome decrees that priests shouldn’t take part in politics, it is trying to establish something new: the exclusive right of the pope to arbitrate in matters of politics and statecraft, a right which is not to be shared with any priest or bishop.

But throughout history, priests have always taken part in politics, usually as advisers and ministers of royalty (Cardinals Richelieu, Mazarin, Ximenez, Wolsey); occasionally as princes ruling over a fiefdom (the prince bishops of central Europe), and as popes claiming the right to select and reject kings.

At present, the leaders of the church in every country are not laymen/women, but the hierarchy. They are really religious leaders who have a political voice. Usually they are lacking in political savvy, but as they command the total veneration and obedience of the Catholic laity, they are assumed to be its leaders by government.

From what we can ascertain, in the church of the first centuries (of Palestine, Syria and the Greek cities), the leaders were charismatic prophets. Side by side were the elders in the community, presbyters, who, assisted by deacons and deaconesses, cared for the community in routine matters. From these elders came the episkopoi, the supervisors, bishops.

As the centuries rolled on, charismatic prophecy receded as the church became an institution. And in this institution, pride of place was given to the clergy and hierarchy. The laity existed only to promote and support this hierarchy.

But the prophetic spark, though diminished, was never quite extinguished. The charismatic and prophetic element in the church now expressed itself through the religious reformers, especially in the great founders of religious groups of the medieval ages, almost all of whom did their greatest work as laymen and women.

So, can we foresee a time when the Catholic community will be governed by a council, and not by an absolute leader (like a pope or bishop)? In this council, lay men and women, priests and bishops, both married and single, will speak for the local church to society at large and to governments of the day.

The leaders (whether by election or nomination) will be merely “first among equals.” The question of a religious leader engaging in politics (or in theology) then becomes a redundant question.

To sum up, religious leaders have always taken a role in politics, and — as Gandhi said, one who argues that politics should be divorced from religion, knows nothing of either — it is foolish to argue that priests should be packed off to the sacristy and given no public forum.

The issue for debate is; what kind of society does one wish to live in? A theocratic society or a secular one? And related to this, what kind of Christian church structure is one looking at — a modern one with complementary roles between clergy and lay, men and women; or an archaic model in which a monarch makes all the decisions in the name of God?

Father Myron Pereira SJ is a media consultant based in Mumbai.

Source: UCAN

For a decade and a half now I’ve been a tireless advocate of India’s soft power, arguing that in the information age, it is not the side with the bigger army that wins, but the side that tells the better story. In the past India has successfully managed to be what I’ve called the “land of the better story”: As a society with a free press and a thriving mass media, with a people whose creative energies are daily encouraged to express themselves in a variety of appealing ways, India has an extraordinary ability to tell stories that are more persuasive and attractive than those of its rivals.

This is not about propaganda; indeed, it will not work if it is directed from above, least of all by the government. But conversely, government actions can undermine the story. Indeed, troubling internal disruptions have begun to tarnish this global perception of India.

If one were to pick up an international daily of repute, such as the New York Times or the Washington Post in the US or Le Monde or Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung in Europe, to look for stories on India, one would be assailed by the reportage on incidents of communal violence, cow vigilantism, minorities feeling besieged and the alienating effects of the present ruling party’s disposition towards a narrow-minded Hindutva ideology. Even less traditional news outlets and programmes such as Vice and John Oliver’s popular Last Week Tonight show have picked up on this disturbing trend in India. The recent murder of Gauri Lankesh raises India high on the list of countries where journalists are perceived to be in danger.

In this super-connected world, people across the globe are now more aware than ever of incidents of beef violence, the rise of gau rakshaks, the assassinations of rationalists and the episodes of mob-lynchings that have taken place in India in the last couple of years. Instead of strongly condemning these incidents and bringing the elements that have perpetrated them to heel, our dominant political dispensation has instead decided that their energies are best spent making unbecoming statements about everything from disowning the Taj Mahal as a symbol of Indian culture to the “cleansing” of Western cultural influences from India’s ethos. The horrors of Kathua and Unnao, and the unforgivable political defence of the perpetrators by the ruling party, have plunged India’s image worldwide into the depths.

For the “better story” is not merely the story that can be told; it is the story that is heard and seen (and repeated), whether or not you are trying to tell it. That is what the Indian government and ruling circles seem to be in danger of overlooking.

For millennia, India offered a haven for the persecuted, a refuge to Jews after the destruction of their Temple by Babylonians and Romans, a new home for Parsis, Tibetans, Sri Lankan Tamils, Nepalese fleeing their civil war, and most famously 10 million Bengalis escaping the Pakistani Army’s crackdown in 1971, the largest recorded refugee crisis in the history of humanity. In all this India’s humanitarian record has been exemplary and has been admired around the world. Yet our present government announced a unilateral decision to deport all members of the Rohingya refugee community in India back to Myanmar, where a state-sponsored genocide is currently taking place in the Rakhine state against this ethnic group. This move, which seems prompted by the fact that the Rohingyas are Muslims (and therefore are being accused without evidence of supporting terrorism), has invited strong condemnation across the board and has damaged the popular perception of India abroad as a democracy and a land of asylum.

As a result of all these developments, a global impression has gained ground that India is now governed by obscurantist and intolerant forces determined to put minorities, rationalists and liberals in their place. This has far-reaching implications for India and threatens to derail the country’s soft power projection. It is a far cry from the time of the 2004 elections. I remember, when I was travelling through the Gulf as a diplomat with the UN, senior officials I was meeting expressed their astonishment and unabashed admiration about the 2014 election results, where a party led by an Italian woman of Roman Catholic faith had made way for a Sikh to be sworn in by a Muslim President as the Prime Minister — of a country where 80 per cent of the population were Hindus. To go from that celebration of diversity to a time when our President, Vice President and Prime Minister are all followers of a sectarian Hindu chauvinist movement is a fall indeed in the eyes of the world.

I have repeatedly argued that we cannot simultaneously sell ourselves to the world as a land of pluralism, tolerance and Gandhianism, while promoting intolerance, communal hatred and minority insecurity within the country. The present government would do well to learn that it cannot promote ‘Make in India’ abroad while condoning the propagation of ‘Hate in India’ at home.

However, that said, as a cautious optimist, I still believe that India can reverse this recent trend. It continues to have a thriving free press, a strong watch guard in its civil society and an independent judiciary (which has passed verdicts that have struck down triple talaq, upheld an Indian citizen’s fundamental right to privacy and convicted a popular religious leader for rape, despite an overwhelming show of force and violence from his supporters). I believe it is these principled elements of India’s society, along with our civilisational ethos, that are and will continue to be an immeasurable asset for our country.

This is also soft power and we don’t have to thank the government for it. When people argue that cultural diplomacy is important, they tend to focus on what governments can do to showcase culture and promote Indian society. I believe the message that really matters and the one that gets through is that of who we are, not what we want to show.

As an opposition Member of Parliament, that is my message to the Indian government too. Don’t change our invaluable traditions. Don’t try to remake India in a way that will actually damage its soft power. We as a society have celebrated our own diversity, our own democracy and our own pluralism and the world has admired us for these very things. Today we have unfortunately given free rein to those who have promoted bigotry and intolerance that should have no place in the narrative of Indian society.

We must be conscious of the qualities that are so attractive about our culture and that give us our soft power in the world and we must ensure those qualities are not undermined by recklessly irresponsible, often semi-educated individuals who have been given a free hand by some of those in power who should know better.

I believe that the principal ingredients for India’s soft power success continue to remain. But in order to realise that potential, India needs to address its own internal challenges first. It is essential that India does not allow the spectre of religious intolerance and political opportunism to undermine the soft power that is its greatest asset in the world of the 21st century.

Our democracy, our thriving free media, our contentious civil society forums, our energetic human rights groups, and the repeated spectacle of our remarkable general elections — all of these together make India a rare example of the successful management of diversity in our globalised world. It adds to India’s soft power when its non-governmental organisations actively defend human rights, promote environmentalism and fight injustice. It is a vital asset that the Indian press is free, lively, irreverent, disdainful of sacred cows. Maintain that, and true leadership in our globalising world — the kind that has to do with principles, values and standards — will follow.

(Shashi Tharoor traces the changing dynamics of India’s soft power in this article written exclusively for IANS. Shashi Tharoor is a former UN diplomat; a writer of several bestselling books and a Member of Parliament, representing Kerala’s Thiruvananthapuram constituency. The views expressed are personal. The copyright of this article rests with the author.)

The belief in Jesus’ resurrection actually changed that defeat, that darkness and hopelessness into a new Hope. We have been asked to double our prayers with deeper fervour for peace in the world”, announced the organiser during the social gathering of senior citizens of the church where I serve as priest last Friday. “There is a strange sort of disturbance in the world that needs addressing”, she added. Though she meant the likes of war in Syria where even children suffered due to poisonous gas, my thoughts inadvertently flew farther away from my current location in Austria, to Kathua, Surat, Indore and so on. The organiser having no idea whatsoever of the horrific incidents that shook the nation, causing widespread “disturbance” to the conscience of more than a billion people, was so right. Besides the endless questions that God fearing people raise, along with candle light marches for the ghastly incidents, there is also a strong sense of losing hope in the future — losing faith in human goodness that finds its origin in God’s benevolence.

Reflecting on such distressing situations Christian mystics and theologians contend that God too suffers and feels as much, if not more, helpless as we do. It is such incidents that throw some people out of balance leading them often to abandon their faith in God. “Where indeed is God in such earth-shattering inhuman events”, they ask. And would anyone blame them? Certainly not I! Until of course I am led to the incident that took place 2,000 years ago in Jerusalem with a man named Jesus.

Analysing that whole event from the biblical perspective, the Christian mystics believe that God too writhed in pain when He saw His own son crucified. With all His might and power, He did not intervene to save Jesus. He remained silent and seemingly ignored Jesus’ plea, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me”? Completely abandoned by God and by his friends Jesus died a lonely death much like the children in our cruel world.

Suddenly then a new hope dawned as the doubts of the disciples began to slowly change into faith when they saw and

Is Corruption endemic to politics? With Politics front and center in both India and the US, US Attorney Preet Bharara discusses corruption in various avenues on October 9th at Rosenthal Pavilion, Kimmel Center, NYU.

On May 15, 2009, President Barack Obama nominated Preet Bharara to become the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York. Mr. Bharara’s nomination was unanimously confirmed by the U.S. Senate on August 7, 2009, and he was sworn in on August 13, 2009. As U.S. Attorney, Mr. Bharara oversees the investigation and litigation of all criminal and civil cases brought on behalf of the United States in the Southern District of New York, which encompasses New York, Bronx, Westchester, Dutchess, Orange, Putnam, Rockland, and Sullivan counties. He supervises an office of more than 200 Assistant U.S. Attorneys, who handle a high volume of cases that involve domestic and international terrorism, narcotics and arms trafficking, financial and healthcare fraud, cybercrime, public corruption, gang violence, organized crime, and civil rights violations.

Under Mr. Bharara’s leadership, the office has experienced one of the most productive periods in its history. Early in his tenure, he formed the Terrorism and International Narcotics Unit, which has continued the office’s long history of prosecuting leaders and associates of global and domestic terrorist, narco-terrorist, narcotics, and money – laundering organizations. Its convictions have included major terrorists such as Usama bin Laden’s son-in-law Sulaiman Abu Ghayth, London imam Abu Hamza, and Times Square bomber Faisal Shahzad, and international criminals such as arms trafficker Viktor Bout and Somali pirate Abduwali Muse.

Since Mr. Bharara’s appointment, the office has continued the tradition of being at the forefront of prosecuting financial misconduct, including securities fraud. The office has secured convictions of numerous insider trading defendants, including Galleon hedge fund founder Raj Rajaratnam, McKinsey managing director and Goldman Sachs board member Rajat Gupta, and hedge fund SAC Capital Advisors. The Civil Frauds Unit has brought a number of significant civil actions alleging financial and healthcare fraud and collected hundreds of millions of dollars in settlements, including from Deutsche Bank, CitiMortgage, and Bank of America for fraud relating to faulty lending practices.

We live in an unequal world.  World Bank figures for world poverty reveals a higher number of people living in poverty than previously thought to be in most nations today, Inequality—the gap between the rich and the poor—is quite high and often widening. High levels of inequality will affect social cohesion and lead to problems such as increasing crime and violence. Almost half the world — over 3 billion people — live on less than $2.50 a day. The GDP (Gross Domestic Product) of the 41 Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (567 million people) is less than the wealth of the world’s seven richest people combined. One billion children live in poverty today, which is half of world’s total children. Eighty percent of the global wealth is in the hands of 15% of the “privileged.”

Poverty is the state for the majority of the world’s peoples and nations. A report on inequality published by The Economist recently  corroborates this sad scenario that deserves attention: one in two people live on less than two dollars a day, one in three have no access to electricity, one in five have no access to drinking water, one in six is illiterate. One in every seven adults and one child in three suffers from malnutrition. Every five seconds a child dies of hunger in the world, although there is fertile land for growing food.

If the world around is facing poverty, the United States, the world leader, is not free from this evil. The US Census Bureau states that nearly 13 to 17% of Americans  are living below the federal poverty line at any given point in time, and roughly 40% falling below the poverty line at some point within a 10-year time span.  The recession that the country has been going through has affected the poor more than the others. Poverty rate in the US in 2009 was 14.3 percent — up from 13.2 percent in 2008, the second statistically significant annual increase in the poverty rate since 2004. In the same year, 43.6 million people were in poverty, up from 39.8 million in 2008 — the third consecutive annual increase in the number of people in poverty. This number is the largest in the 51 years for which poverty estimates have been published.

The relative poverty rate is higher among the colored people. Between 2008 and 2009, the poverty rate increased for non-Hispanic Whites from 8.6 percent to 9.4 percent, for Blacks from 24.7 percent to 25.8 percent, and for Hispanics from 23.2 percent to 25.3 percent. For Asians, the 2009 poverty rate was 12.5 percent, not statistically different from the 2008 poverty rate.

Poverty reduction is a central feature of every country’s agenda and contemporary poverty reduction strategies increasingly focus on “targeting the poor.” Over the past decades, policies and programs by nations across the globe have not resulted significantly in alleviating poverty. In recent decades, economic and social policies of the nations of the world have contributed to increasing poverty levels around the globe.

Government policies and their priorities play a significant role in poverty reduction or its increase. Quoting aCensus Bureau report, Ronald Brownstein, a columnist, wrote that the United States lost ground during George Bush’s two terms. While Bush was in office, the median household income declined, poverty increased, childhood poverty increased even more, and the number of Americans without health insurance spiked. By contrast, the country’s condition improved on each of those measures during Bill Clinton’s two terms, often substantially. Under Bush, the number of people in poverty increased by over 8.2 million, or 26.1 per cent. When Clinton left office in 2000, the Census counted almost 31.6 million Americans living in poverty. When Bush left office in 2008, the number of poor Americans had jumped to 39.8 million, the largest number in absolute terms since 1960.

President Barak Obama recently acknowledged that inequality is on the rise “even though the economy is growing.” That growth hasn’t helped many people who lost mid-wage jobs during the recession. Half of the U.S. population is now considered poor or low-income. The U.S. is one of the wealthiest countries in the world, and yet nearly one-quarter of the nation’s residents recently said they had trouble putting food on the table over the past year, according to a survey by the Pew Research Center.

A recent report from the International Labour Organization says, income inequality in the U.S. is much worse than it is in other industrialized countries, where it is also an alarming problem. The gap between the rich and the poor is only getting wider as the median wage continues to fall. The top 1% own as much as 80% of the nation’s wealth whereas, the bottom 80% of the people own only 7% of the nation’s wealth.

Income inequality has become a familiar part of American life over the last half-century. Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist David Cay Johnston says, the bottom 90 percent of Americans saw their incomes grow by just $59 between 1966 and 2011, where as the average income for the top 10 percent of Americans rose by $116,071 on average over the same period.

In comparison with the US, the poverty level in India is even more alarming. The sheer number of people below poverty line is shocking. Although, the number of people living below the poverty line has shrunk to 21.9 per cent in 2011-12 from 37.2 per cent in 2004-05 on account of increase in per capita consumption, the total number of people in a country of over 1.1 billion is alarming.

According to Dean Nelson of The Telegraph, India now has a greater share of the world’s poorest than it did thirty years ago. Then it was home to one fifth of the world’s poorest people, but today it accounts for one-third, nearly 400 million. Based on a recent study, Nelson says, the number of extremely poor people had declined from half the world’s population in 1981 to one fifth in 2010, but it has increased in Sub-Saharan Africa and in India. On an all-India basis, there were 217 million poor in rural areas and 53 million in urban areas in 2011-12, as against 326 million and 81 million, respectively, in 2004-05. This means that roughly every fifth Indian lives below the poverty line.

Thomas Chandy of Save The Children said 200 million people had been lifted from poverty in the last two decades but the recent economic growth had left one third of the population untouched. “India’s status has gone down despite the economic growth, inequality has widened which makes the poor poorer. In child mortality, infant mortality and maternal mortality, India seems to have the largest populations in all these categories. We would like to see focused interventions [because] the most difficult areas remain untouched,” he said.

A recent United Nations Flagship report tilted, Combating Poverty and Inequality, based on extensive analysis of country case studies, found that increases in inequality are linked to a range of economic policies that have dominated the development agenda in recent decades. These include financial liberalization, regressive taxation, privatization in the context of weak regulation, public expenditure policies that fail to protect the poor during crisis or adjustment periods, and labour market policies that lead to precarious forms of flexibility, informalization and an erosion of minimum wages and union bargaining power. Other causes of rising inequality include disparities in educational attainment, technological change and employment policies that widen wage gaps between skilled and unskilled workers; rural-urban wage differentials in the process of structural change; inequality in asset ownership (including land); and unequal access to credit and basic production inputs, particularly in the agricultural sector.

World Bank president Jim Yong Kim said while the overall decline was “remarkable progress,” the remaining 1.2 billion people living in extreme poverty was “a stain on our collective conscience.” Poverty around the world is very alarming. More than 1.4 billion people across the globe are reported to be living in poverty so extreme that they can barely survive. Nearly 25,000 people die from hunger each day. At the same time, a new billionaire is created every second day. The call for a global safety net for all human beings has never been so urgent. The sharp and cruel realities of inequality and unjust policies must compel the international community to transform economic priorities and guarantee the universal securing of basic human necessities.

Former President Bill Clinton told Yale seniors that today’s college graduates will be left to deal with a world that has three major problems. “It is too unstable; it is too unequal, and it is completely unsustainable.”  He urged them to change that, and said that will mean working together. I am reminded of what Victor Hugo, a French novelist, wrote: “The real relief to be provided to the poor is the abolition of poverty.” That’s the challenge that we all face today.

Recently, I had the privilege to attend a ceremony where 14 young and talented Indian American students from across the United States were honored in New York City. They had won an Essay contest on “My Role in Eradicating Hunger in India” organized by The New York Life. Of the hundreds of youth, who had participated, these 14 were chosen and they were sent out on a 14-days Journey to discover and experience India and its people.

The event in New York was the culmination of their journey. These 14 youngsters were full of zeal to “give back to their motherland.” These 18-23-year-old youngsters were born and raised in the US, studying in professional colleges here, ranging from Medicine to Computer Sciences. Now, after returning from India, where they witnessed and were face to face with real life struggles of the people in India, they had returned with full of zeal and enthusiasm to give back and enrich the lives of the people back in India.

In their personal sharing with a select audience, many of them adhered to the fact that this spirit of generosity and openness to reach beyond their own selves and see the larger interest of the community was instilled in their hearts and minds by their parents. They also said, they saw this spirit of giving to the less fortunate and to those who are in many ways are suffering from disadvantages in their lives, in their parents. After coming to this nation of plenty, they have not forgotten their origins,  and their past lives back in India. Their parents were successful in imbibing in these youngsters the spirit of generosity and kindness.

I was touched by the stories of each individual as he/she shared with us how each of them found in the suffering people in India a sense of hope. They are not despaired in the midst of suffering and pain. They taught these youth the value of the many gifts and blessings of life we all take for granted everyday in our lives. These poor, illiterate, and disadvantaged people taught these educated young professionals the value of looking at the positive things in life rather than being discouraged by the obstacles of daily living. The lepers and the handicapped persons whom they met while in India, taught the youth to see how lucky they are to have a healthy body and mind.

These rich experiences have enriched the lives of the young tourists and they are ever enthusiastic about returning to India, especially after they graduate as Doctors, Teachers, Social Workers, Computer Professionals and Scientists, trying to touch the lives of as many people as possible.

Soon after coming back from India, many have already started doing fund-raisers for various projects back in India. One of them said, he will use his musical talents to raise awareness on the problems he saw in India. Another said, he has developed a website to share with other youth of his experiences, trying to inspire many others to come forward and give a helping hand to the people who are in suffering and pain.

Many of them have vowed to return to India, after they graduate and dedicate their time and resources at the service of the needy that they saw while they were in India during the two-week long journey. People such as these are the HOPE for a better world.

Living in a world that is self-centered, it’s important to imbibe in our children the values of generosity and kindness. When we as parents are willing to come forward to touch the lives of the needy, our children are witnesses to this reality and want to follow in our footsteps. When we forget our roots and are comfortable taking care of our own families here and forget our neighbor, we are not challenging our children to go beyond their personal selves and touch the lives of others.

The tragedy, often, is that when we are busy with our own work and the challenges of taking care of our own families, we tend to forget the path we have undertaken to reach where we are today. We have forgotten the people and the institutions that have helped us reach where we are and accomplish the achievements that we are so proud of. We are so engrossed in our lives, we tend to forget that there are many who need our helping hands to reach the heights that we have been able to climb.

The Human Rights Council (HRC) of the United Nations in Geneva adopted a Declaration on the Right to Peace by a majority of its Member States recently. It is the result of three years of work with all stakeholders led by Costa Rica, through its Ambassador Christian Guillermet-Fernández.

The draft resolution L. 18, in which the Declaration was annexed, was presented by the delegation of Cuba. In its presentation, they highlighted not only the hard work of its Chairperson-Rapporteur, his team and Secretariat during the negotiation and preparation of this text.

They’ve emphasized that the adoption of this Declaration is framed in the context of the bilateral ceasefire and cessation of hostilities signed in Havana, between the Government of Colombia and the Revolutionary Armed forces of Colombia-People’s Army (FARC-EP) on 23 June 2016.

While Costa Rica has provided the necessary guidance towards its completion from the first session of the Working Group on the Right to Peace, held in February 2013, to the last session in April 2015 in Geneva, the HRC’s work was aided by the invaluable mobilization and leadership shown by public figures from the world of art, culture and sport, gathered around Peace Without Borders founded by Miguel Bose and Juanes.

Furthermore, the wide-ranging civic engagement is reflected in the wording contained in the first article, which states that “everyone has the right to enjoy peace”.

In light of this Declaration, the main elements of the right to peace agreed among the various international actors, including most of the civil society organizations which actively participated in the intergovernmental process, are the following: the principles contained in the Charter of the United Nations; the absolute obligation to respect human rights in combating terrorism; the realization of the right of all peoples, including those living under colonial or other forms of alien domination or foreign occupation; the recognition that development, peace, and security and human rights are interlinked and mutually reinforcing; the peaceful settlement and prevention of conflicts; the positive role of women; the eradication of poverty and sustainable development; the importance of moderation, dialogue, cooperation, education, tolerance and cultural diversity; the protection of minorities and the fight against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance.

In promoting the right to peace, it is imperative that we implement the Declaration and Programme of Action on a Culture of Peace, which focuses its attention on human security and the eradication of poverty, disarmament, education, development, environment and protection of vulnerable groups, refugees, and migrants.

The Declaration invites all stakeholders to guide themselves in their activities by recognizing the great importance of practicing tolerance, dialogue, cooperation and solidarity among all peoples and nations of the world as a means to promote peace. To reach this end, the Declaration states that present generations should ensure that both they and future generations learn to live together in peace with the highest aspiration of sparing future generations the scourge of war.

At the level of implementation, the Declaration recognizes the crucial role of UNESCO, which together with the international and national institutions of education for peace, shall globally promote the spirit of tolerance, dialogue, cooperation, and solidarity. To this end, the Declaration recognises in its operative section that “University for Peace should contribute to the great universal task of educating for peace by engaging in teaching, research, post-graduate training and dissemination of knowledge”.

Based on the resolution A/HRC/32 /L.18, the HRC recommends that the General Assembly adopts the “Declaration on the Right to peace” as contained in the annex to this resolution, which will occur in the 71st regular session of the General Assembly, which began its work in September 2016.

Thanks to research, the academic contribution and the trust of many people, governments and institutions, this joint adventure has successfully concluded in Geneva. In particular, the Declaration is the result of the important role played by some sectors of civil society for years, which have shown that genuine dialogue among all stakeholders and regional groups are the foundation of peace and understanding in the world.

Dwight Eisenhower, the former President of the United Sates once said ‘only our individual faith in freedom can keep us free’. The question to ponder on this August 15, as we celebrate the Independence of India from British colonialism is whether we are losing faith in that hard fought victory of freedom with the blood, toil and sweat of our founding fathers.

Some may argue that my skepticism is rather unfounded as democracy has taken deep root in India, and freedom and liberty are ingrained in the psyche of the nation’s conscience. While that assertion may ring true in a larger sense, one needs to be concerned with eroding civil liberties and increasing threats to the basic rights of all citizens.

The preamble to the Indian constitution reads as follows: “WE, THE PEOPLE OF INDIA, having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a SOVEREIGN SOCIALIST SECULAR DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC and to secure to all its citizens:

JUSTICE, social, economic and political; LIBERTY of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship; EQUALITY of status and of opportunity; and to promote among them all FRATERNITY assuring the dignity of the individual and the unity and integrity of the Nation; IN OUR CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY this twenty-sixth day of November, 1949, do HEREBY ADOPT, ENACT AND GIVE TO OURSELVES THIS CONSTITUTION”. In 1995, the Supreme Court has upheld that the preamble is an integral part of the constitution.

The Jeffersonian definition of freedom always referred to release from despotic restraints, whether it is freedom of religion or of the press or any other freedom. It has been said that a free conscience is indeed the beginning of freedom.  Conscience is a difficult concept to study because of its abstract nature. However, freedom of conscience is without equal in a democratic society, as all other rights flow from it. The idea of choice is borne out of it. A free conscience is, indeed the beginning of freedom.

Freedom of conscience is innate; it is god-given and nobody has the right to trample on it. There is an inherent yearning in every human being to be free. In other words, people wish to live and behave towards each other in a way in which each serves the community, which in turn provides for and looks after its members.

The United States declaration of Independence spells out the basic essence of that iconic document without any ambiguity: ‘We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness’. — Perhaps no one sentence in American history has had such a profound impact than these powerful words written by Thomas Jefferson.

During the march in Washington in 1963, Martin Luther King, recited these words, and challenged the nation to make good on this promise. A year later, President Lyndon B. Johnson fulfilled that promise with the signing of the landmark civil rights legislation that transformed the nation once and for all. One hundred years earlier, Abraham Lincoln in his famous Gettysburg address insisted on the proposition that all men are created equal.

About 166 years later after Independence, the office of war information released a poster that added the following to that declaration: ‘we are of one mind – Hitler, Mussolini or Hirohito shall never take from us the freedom for which our forefathers sacrificed our lives and fortune’. United States today, despite many of its current shortcomings, still remains a beacon of freedom to the rest of the world.     .

On the eve of Independence in 1947, India’s first Prime Minister in his historical speech said the following: ‘Long years ago we made a tryst with destiny, and now the time comes when we shall redeem our pledge, not wholly or in full measure, but very substantially. At the stroke of the midnight hour, when the world sleeps, India will awake to life and freedom. A moment comes, which comes but rarely in history, when we step out from the old to the new, when an age ends, and when the soul of a nation, long suppressed, finds utterance’. Undoubtedly, Pandit  Jawaharal Nehru remained a valiant defender of the freedom of every citizen, as enshrined in the constitution, of which he was a co-architect, till the very end.

Mahatma Gandhi, the father of the nation said  “I do not expect the India of my dreams to develop one religion, i.e., to be wholly Hindu or Wholly Christian or wholly Mussalman, but I want to be wholly tolerant, with its religions working side by side with one another’.

India’s founding fathers had a dream to create a just society based on the values of that preamble, and they strove to create Institutions that would seem to protect that hard earned freedom and liberty. It is indeed our responsibility as succeeding generations, to safeguard those cherished principles. However, the constitution cannot protect our rights if we do not protect the constitution. If we display a cavalier attitude towards those who violate the constitution, we would very likely be accomplices in undermining our own rights and ultimately the freedom of the entire nation.

The biggest challenge India is facing today is the majoritarian view of democratic governance. Unfortunately, a large segment of the voting public along with a significant section of the NRIs seem to be either antagonistic or apathetic to the very notion of an open society where the freedom and liberty of every citizen of the country is respected regardless of their caste or religion. Without fully committing ourselves to this essential creed, we may never achieve the political tranquility that is required for economic development and prosperity of all its citizens.

Terrorism, a growing issue worldwide, is reported to have been responsible for killing 130,000 innocent people from a total of 90,000 terrorist attacks between 2006 and 2013 alone. Everyday we read, hear and watch of terror attacks and killing of innocent people in corner of the world. No country or continent is immune to this new threat that has endangered the existence of the world as we have known it for centuries.

There are many who believe that the next round of third World War has already started. An analysis of the casualty statistics of global terrorism shows they follow the pattern previously observed for conventional conflicts ranging from small local skirmishes to the Second World War. Recent public attention to the concept of terrorism created a popular perception of heightened vulnerability of the State.

“We have entered the Fourth World War,” said Cardinal Renato Martino, who had served for many years as Pope John Paul’s ambassador to the United Nations.  “I believe that we are in the midst of another world war,” he said in comments published in Italian newspapers. “And it involves absolutely everyone because we don’t know what will happen when we leave a hotel, when we get on a bus, when we go into a coffee bar. War itself is sitting down right next to each and every one of us,” he said.

So-called “international terror” is arguably no more than a type of asymmetric warfare.  The aims of “terrorists” typically are not the physical destruction of a military installation or the reduction in the capabilities of the military force to wage a decisive battle, but rather the exertion of influence on the domestic population of the target country in order to alter the external behavior of the target country’s government.

There is no commonly accepted definition of “terrorism.” But it is often described as the wrongful use of violence in order to intimidate people for ideological, religious, or political reasons with no regard for public safety.  It is a multifaceted phenomenon arising from a myriad of social, economic, and political factors. Focusing for present purposes on terrorists of most contemporary international concern, what is clear above all here that we are dealing with a very complex phenomenon, with quite different levels of organization and group identity and objectives.

In recent years, the countries with maximum terrorist attacks were Iraq, Pakistan, Syria, Libya, and Afghanistan. Altogether, the number of terrorist attacks in these countries amounted to around 7,400 attacks.  The acts of indiscriminate violence by a State that necessitate the use of the unconventional tactic of “terrorism” usually inspire a limited reaction. Compare the events of the “Arab Spring” to events in Libya and Syria.

Terrorism continues to inflict pain and suffering on people all over the world. There are acts of terrorism taking place somewhere in the world, indiscriminately affecting innocent people, who just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Countering this scourge is in the interest of all nations and the issue has been on the agenda of every progressive nation. Education and training and the role of religious mentors are significant factors in waning these individuals and groups. Vigilance is the need of the hour. International cooperation among nations and organizations to fight terrorism need to be conducted in conformity with international law and safeguarding the lives of every human being who is a law abiding citizen. Concerted and coordinated efforts by all nations for the greater good of humanity is the only way to eliminate and win the war against terrorism.

In a world that is beset with inequality, hatred, violence, divisions, epidemics, uncertainty and fear, faith can sometimes be overshadowed by doubt, despair and a sense of defeat. The ongoing wars around the world between nations, religious, ethnic, and ideological groups, threats to human existence by terrorist groups and piling up of nuclear and biological weapons, as well as through the mindless destruction of the resources of the planet earth, have made us lose hope in ourselves and the world. The future appears grim, as been found in a recent Pew Research, where majority of people from the developing nations less hopeful of the future.

However, there is hope in the midst of all these. Initiatives of small and large by individuals, groups and nations give us hope for a better world. Technological advances that help fight diseases, protect the earth, and keep the peoples around the world connected with one another instantly through the social media give rise to hope.

The recent announcement by the Nobel Committee has sprung a happy surprise this year, with the Noble Peace Prize being given to two notable representatives from South Asia.   Every right-thinking person across the globe is delighted that Malala Yousafzai’s valiant championing of the rights of girls to education has been so well honored. The heroic young Malala’s recognition is a reminder for the entire humanity when she asks national leaders, international opinion makers, and families to see the urgency in confronting and changing ancient destructive patriarchal attitudes.

Kailash Satyarti, another humanist from India, awarded with the Nobel Prize is a reminder that all is not lost in this selfish world. And it proves beyond doubts that one man’s efforts for restoring basic human dignity and rights can have a lasting impact on millions.

Among the many noble causes that Vanita Gupta, who is featured on our cover this month, has championed over the last two decades, she has been lauded for working on a case to defend 40 African-Americans in Tulia, Texas, who were wrongfully convicted. The story on Neha Gupta, 18, the Indian American founder of Empower Orphans, a group that has raised more than $1 million to help 25,000 orphaned and underprivileged children, and has been shortlisted for the 2014 International Children’s Peace Prize, is truly inspiring.

Another individual we have featured this month is a Rutgers University student, who is striving to reduce the chances that his fellow South Asians will acquire diabetes by getting them to alter their traditional high-carb diet. That is making a difference in the lives of millions. The story on a Pew Research study stating that people in emerging and developing nations are more optimistic for the next generation, confirming that they will leave a better future for the next generation than the present generation is what gives and sustains our hope for a better world today and for all generations.

It is astonishing to note that the Clinton and Bill & Melinda Gates Foundations, in their less than two decades of services to humanity have provided services to more than a billion people from around the world. Ekal Vidyalaya Foundation- USA (EVF-USA),whose story we carry this month, has raised over a Million Dollars to educate poor children in India. Prartham, another non-profit organization, supported by millions of people across the world has brought education to tens of millions of poor children across India. American India Foundation is yet another example of how corporate leaqders can commit to make a positive change in the lives of millions of poor and those denied human dignity.

During the course of my half a century long life on earth, I have personally met and been enriched by the examples of several individuals and small groups who have made it a commitment to share their riches, resources, skills, talents, time, and their lives to bring hope in this hopeless world. On the occasion of Diwali, the festival of lights,  we dedicate this issue to those who continue to bring hope and make a positive change in the lives of others.

Happy Diwali And A Bright, Healthy, And Prosperous New Year To All.

Houston:  U.S. and India have strengthened their ties in defence and counter-terrorism, global health, cyber security and deep space exploration, and will continue to push the bilateral cooperation to “new heights” in the months ahead, a top American diplomat has said.

“In our strategic cooperation, we’ve deepened our military-to-military relationships. We now train for joint operations, we’ve moved to joint production of defence items, and have developed a close and consequential counter-terrorism partnership to help keep both our populations safe”, U.S. Ambassador to India, Richard Verma, said. He was speaking at the Indo-American Chamber of Commerce of Greater Houston (IACCGH) 16th Annual Gala.

Both as “natural allies” and “best partners”, we continue to push our cooperation to “new heights” from global health security, to agriculture, deep sea and deep space exploration, cyber security and law enforcement we are expanding our work together, and we will continue to do so in the months ahead. We have aligned our vision for cooperation in the Asia-Pacific ocean region, standing up for the post-World War II rules-based order that both our countries hold so dear, he said.

Addressing a packed gathering of over 600 prominent businessmen, community leaders, Mr Verma also said, “We support India’s move to become a rising power, with global political, strategic and economic influence. That’s why President Obama has explicitly called for India’s permanent seat on a reformed UN Security Council,” he said.

“During past nine months, I’ve witnessed first-hand the excitement of the U.S.-India relationship; I’ve seen the impact that our people and our programmes can make; and I’ve seen the great promise of our strategic partnership what clearly has become the critical strategic alliance for the 21st Century”.

Since the Prime Minister’s visit to Washington last September, we launched or re-energised some 30 different working groups, from trade to the environment. And, following the President’s January visit, we are working on some 80 different lines of work, Mr Verma said.

But perhaps most significantly, we are becoming increasingly aligned on the key strategic questions of our time. “In last one decade we’ve achieved a strong, solid record of performance. In 2005, our two-way trade numbers were around U.S. $ 30 billion, now it is U.S. $ 105 billion.

“10 years ago, we had around 30,000 Indian students studying in the U.S., but last year, it rose to highest number ever of was 1,05,000 students. Indian visitor visiting the U.S. in 2005 were 400,000, past year number soared to over 1.2 million. And in defence, we went from U.S. $ zero in defence sales to well over U.S.$ 10 billion, in just a few short years,” Mr Verma said.