December 31, 2003
 

Movies

We watched the new JP Dutta release 'LoC Kargil' yesterday. It was quite an ok movie, except for the fact that it portrayed Indian soldiers as continuously abusing the enemy and dream about their wives/girlfriends when they weren't fighting the enemy. Dutta, the producer too, clearly tries to rely too much on his awesome starcast (Abhishek Bachchan, Ajay Devgan, Akshay Khanna, Sanjay Kapoor, Sanjay Dutt, Saif Ali Khan, Sunil Shetty, Nagarjuna, Manjoj Bajpai, Kareena Kapoor, Rani Mukherjee, Raveena Tandon) to carry the film. The ladies are more or less a waste of time. In fact I can't recall someone like Raveena Tandon having a single dialogue in the movie (unless of course she did have some, but they were snipped off so that the need for a second intermission was avoided!). The songs were a total waste of time. Why did such a serious war movie have songs?

The few positives were the acting by Manoj Bajpai and to some extent by Ajay Devgan and Sanjay Dutt. The other good aspect was the way the officers etc. questioned the need for moving so many regiments and artillery if, as the superiors claimed, the task was to drive out just a handful of mujahideens. Subtly, Dutta hints that there was a collossal intelligence failure. The cream of India's young officers and commanders was wiped out over the span of a couple of months and the defence minister still claims there was no intelligence failure!

Cricket

So the cricketing bandwagon moves to Sydney for Act IV of the Test series (and also the last act for Stephen Rodger Waugh). The momentum and the force currently seem to be with Australia, a far cry from how it was on 26th December when India were 270/1 with about an hour to go before stumps. More than Sehwag's slog down long-on's throat, I think it was Dravid's dismissal to Steve Waugh which gave Australia the belief that they had managed to put a foot in the door which was rapidly shutting them from the game (and the series). Another interesting point is that India seemed to be playing the game in the Australian way while Australia was aping India. In the 2nd Test, Ponting scored his double century at a strike-rate of 68 while at Sydney, he scored at 56 runs every 100 balls faced. Sehwag made his 195 at a strike-rate of 84 while Dravid's double century at Adelaide was made at 52 runs every 100 balls faced. India scored at 3.6 at Sydney but at 3.2 in Adelaide. In contrast, Australia scored at 3.7 at Melbourne compared to 4.4 at Adelaide. There seems to have been a deliberate attempt by Australia (and Ponting in particular) to defeat India at their own game. India had forgotten one cardinal rule. Instead of playing by their plan, they seemed to be eager to take on Australia at their own game. That came a cropper.

There're enough selection worries for the last Test. Kumble has now taken two 5fers and 12 wickets in the 2 Tests that he has played. Sydney may not necessarily be the raging turner that it used to be. Then again, this would be the second Test at Sydney this season, so the pitch would be more settled than it was when Australia whipped Zimbabwe earlier (spinners taking nearly 50% of the wickets - 6fers for Price and Katich and 3 for Hogg. Notice that they're all left-arm spinners. HINT HINT!). Should India play Murali Kartik? Now that Zaheer is ruled out, would we just revert to the winning combination of Adelaide? Should Nehra be dropped because he has just not looked penetrative at any point of time at all? Will the tail contribute again? Lots of questions, too few answers.

Labels: ind v aus 2003, kargil, movies, review

Posted @ 1:51 PM

Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

December 24, 2003
 

Quote of the day

There is no 'I' in 'Team', but fortunately, there is one in 'Vacation'

---

Politics

After the 14 December assassination attempt on Musharraf, there have been increased fears in the west about Pakistan's fate if Musharraf does end up being killed or overthrown. The NY Times quotes a western diplomat as saying that in that eventuality, the #2 general (who is not a fundamentalist) would be in charge of the nuclear button and that there would be an orderly transition after general elections (which would be held within 3 months). Somehow, I think not!

The Musharraf regime hasn't been as democratic as it makes itself out to be. There've been lots of instances (mentioned in the NY Times article) about opposition leaders and journalists being arrested and harassed by the regime.

Posted @ 12:17 PM

Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Add/View 0 comment(s)

December 23, 2003
 

Politics

Seems like Mian Musharraf and his motley crew of ex-militia, mercenaries and atomic energy doctors is in trouble. An investigation by The New York Times over the last couple of months (conducted in the USA, Europe and Pakistan) implies that questions are being raised about Iran's purchase of nuclear centrifuge designs from Pakistan 16 years ago. There also seems to be an emerging pattern where clandestine sales by Pakistani nuclear engineers have happened over the last decade and a half. There were shipments in the late 90s to North Korea. Libya's decision last week to dismantle its nuclear/unconventional weapons infrastructure is also under scrutiny because the centrifuge systems they had shown the US and UK intelligence agencies were quite sophisticated. The centrifuges are mainly used to enrich uranium to make bomb fuel. European diplomats also indicated that the Libyan program had similarities with the Iranian issue and a pattern of technology leakage from Pakistan to Iran also emerged. The CIA though has conveniently kept mum as of now.

The NY Times editorial questions Musharraf's claims that no such sales have taken place since he came to power. It argues that the US government should demand stricter control over the Pakistani nuclear labs (such as KRL supplies to which were banned by the US last year). It wants the US government to pressurize Musharraf into restoring democracy. It rightly argues that betting American security on one man in a troubled country of 150 million is risky. It would be far wiser to hold Musharraf to all his promises, on nuclear exports, terrorist infiltration and restoring democracy.

Conveniently though, the Pakistani establishment has chosen to wash its hands off the issue, claiming that the scientists who leaked designs etc. to rogue states did it for their own material gains and that the government, intelligence agencies or the military (is there a difference between the three as far as Pakistan is concerned?) were not in knowledge of these security breaches.

Another NY Times editorial talks about the Nuclear non-proliferation treaty and argues for additional inducements and penalties to ensure that it isnt misused by rogue states.

Recently declassified documents from the National Security Archive indicate that in 1984, the Reagan administration sent Donald Rumsfeld as a special envoy to Saddam Hussein to convince the Iraqis that the US was eager to improve ties even though they knew he had used chemical weapons on Kurds and Iran. His missive was to convince them that the USA's condemnation of Iraq's chemical weapons was just a facade and that the priority was to prevent Iran from winning the war with Iraq.

Guess who's shaking!



In stark contrast now, the current Secretary of Defense, the same Donald Rumsfeld and the Bush administration using Iraq's usage of chemical/biological weapons as a main reason for waging war on Iraq.

The Digital National Security Archive gives more details.

NB: The NY Times site requires you to be a registered user

Labels: aq khan, iran, proliferation

Posted @ 3:38 PM

Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

December 19, 2003
 

Politics

With the capture of Saddam Hussein last weekend, it seemed like the coalition against terror campaign in Iraq would be over and the resistance of Baath party cadre and other mercenaries would end soon. Unfortunately, that was in an ideal world. While the capture (widely televised across the world, in complete violation of the Geneva convention rules on PoWs) indicated that Saddam was just a moral force (as opposed to being a command/control centre and arms provider) behind the various attacks on US/UK/Japanese forces in the recent past, the US will continue to probe every possible trail and try to prove that Saddam Hussein has been behind the attacks all along.

The US Government has said that Saddam would be tried according to the wishes of the Iraqis (which presumably includes the administration in place currently). I really do have my doubts. As it is, Saddam is being interrogated at an undisclosed location in Iraq. Rumsfeld announced yesterday that the CIA would be in charge of interrogating him. With the US being in control of the coalition forces, and the number of times the US has stamped its authority over various issues such as preventing criminal proceedings against US military personnel involved in UN/NATO backed exercises, it would not be farfetched to say that the US will do its utmost to prevent Saddam escaping its grip. They have invested too much money, resources and reputations/goodwill to let him be tried by an international tribunal or by the Iraqis. My guess is that the US will try a situation where all they need to prove is that Saddam was responsible for the death of a single US citizen and that should be reason enough for him to be handed over to their custody so he can rot in Guantanamo Bay or elsewhere. Pity Alcatraz has been closed for the last 30 years or so.

The other thing which struck me was the timing of his capture. Just when the Bush administration was under pressure over Halliburton's (VP Dick Cheney being a former CEO of Halliburton) subsidiary overcharging the US government for fuel transportation and supply in Iraq. Speaking of Halliburton, I came across this wonderful cartoon (well its not a cartoon, just imagining what the dialogue could have been).



The capture of Saddam has also quietened the voices of those opposed to the US government's policy of Iraq reconstruction contracts being given only to those who supported the campaign in Iraq.

So this then makes me wonder if the US made sure they had Saddam tucked away somewhere and then released the news just as Bush's stock hit a low with the various problems around him. Who knows, the next time his ratings fall, you could see Osama bin Laden pop up in a cave, surrendering.

Coincidence, or just effective media management by a skillful group of professionals?

In passing, perhaps the US knew it was going to discover Saddam in a hole. Is that why they termed him Ace of Spades?

Posted @ 6:35 PM

Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Add/View 0 comment(s)

December 16, 2003
 

Cricket

On what is obviously a momentous day in Indian cricket (possibly sport?), its worth putting aside all questions on whether Tendulkar is out of form, or if Harbhajan has lost it or if Kumble is worth his place in the side, or if Ganguly is worth his place in the side, or if Dravid is the best Indian batsman currently or if Sehwag will ever get a brain. Ladies and gentlemen, just enjoy the moment. We've waited for a fair while for overseas series victories and while they haven't come so far (well not since 1986 at least), the team has won Tests in West Indies, England and Australia since 2002. Add in the games in Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Zimbabwe and you have 6 overseas Test wins in the last 3 years. Quite an achievement no doubt.

The star of the show was his loRDship, Rahul Dravid. I'm not even going to bother reasoning why (305 runs speak for itself, as well as being on the field for nearly 27 hours during the Test. Except for 2 hours, an hour in each innings, when the openers batted, Dravid was on the field throughout the game). Lets not forget the support cast of Kumble, Laxman and Agarkar as well as the contributions from the rest of the side. Sehwag had a couple of 40s and held a couple of great catches, Chopra was solid and caught well, Tendulkar had two crucial wickets and made a useful 30 in the chase, Ganguly failed with the bat in both innings but handled the captaincy and the bowling expertly (he is now statistically, and otherwise, India's best Test captain), Patel fluffed a couple of chances but batted with heart in the first innings, Nehra got the big fish (Hayden) out early in the second innings and also hung around with Dravid on Day 4 while Pathan did not look like a fish out of water, netting Hayden early on Day 1 while also being unlucky to not get a few more wickets.

Too often in the past, Dravid hasn't been given his due. He's played bridesmaid on just about every momentous occasion starting from his his debut in 1996, followed by the 1999 World Cup games against Kenya and Sri Lanka, that 2001 Eden Gardens Test, to name a few. It has only been in the last couple of years that a lot of Indian cricket supporters are beginning to realise the true value of Dravid and appreciating his contribution. England 2002 was a kind of starting point. Three centuries in as many innings meant that Dravid was finally on the centrestage ... and he didn't fluff his lines. Many of Tendulkar's knocks in the 2003 World Cup would have come to nought if it weren't for Dravid's expert handling of the middle order (and the middle/late overs).

So let the fun time begin. There're still 10 days to go before the Melbourne Test. Complacency has no place in this series. Australia is bound to come back with a vengeance, especially given that Lee is fit and so is McGrath. So enjoy the great feeling of being an Indian cricket lover/fanatic/follower today. The wait has been worth it after all.

Labels: ind v aus 2003

Posted @ 6:29 PM

Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Add/View 0 comment(s)

December 10, 2003
 

Politics

Well I'm not sure if its politics, but I'm quite befuddled at the way politicians, bigwigs, industrialists etc. have reacted to the murder of Satyendra Dubey, a 31-year-old civil engineering graduate from the Indian Institute of Technology (Kanpur), by unknown assailants around 10 days ago in Jharkhand. Dubey was working on the PM's dream project - The Golden Quadrilateral, which is a 600 billion rupees attempt to connect the 4 corners of India through modern multi-lane roads and high speed railway lines.

Mr. Dubey had written around a year ago to the Prime Minister's Office complaining about financial and other irregularities during the project. He had specifically asked for anonymity, lest he be targetted by those who he sought to expose. Yet the PMO, in its infinite wisdom, circulated the letter amongst the various departments he had accused. Each department bureaucrat made his/her own jottings on the letter and after a while Satyendra Dubey obviously became persona-non-grata and bureaucracy-enemy-number-one.

A couple of days ago the Infosys Chairman & Chief Mentor, Mr. Narayana Murthy condemned his murder and urged the PM to conduct an investigation and punish the guilty while also wishing that this would be the last such tragedy in India. He even proposed that the IIT alumni setup a fund to help Mr. Dubey's distraught family.

While I'm sure Mr. Murthy is a good, honourable man with noble intentions, I wonder whether we'd have had such a reaction if the murdered person was not an IIT alumnus, or if he wasn't as educated. Several people die of government, police, bureaucracy and public apathy everyday, some of them literate but a whopping chunk of them illiterate and poor with no means to approach any of the fora for justice. What about them? As the saying goes in Hindi, 'Tumhara khoon khoon, hamaara khoon paani?'. I suspect its true after all.

The other issue is the way the PMO handled Dubey's letter by leaking it to all and sundry. Was it a threat to other whistleblowers? The NHRC has already started asking uncomfortable questions about the PMO's actions in this issue. The PMO works for the PM, yet the PM has now asked the CBI to investigate the case. Will the officials at the PMO be interrogated?

I wonder if the CBI doesn't have enough on its plate as it is. Do they have an endless and enormous supply of good investigating officers? How come every issue gets transferred to them? They need to walk a tightrope though. If any case points fingers at the opposition, they risk being called government stooges. If the case charges someone in/close to the government, those affected call it a political case and hence claim immunity from criminal charges. Of course, they do always have the option of ensuring the case gets diluted or buried.

The Bofors gun, the early 90s stock market scam, the JMM case, the Babri Masjid demolition, the Jain Hawala case, Jayalalitha-Sashikala's money laundering, the Gujarat riots, the Tehelka expose on the weapons purchasing process, Bangaru Laxman receiving wads of notes, Jaya Jaitley agreeing to accept money in return for favours, the recent shenanigans of Ajit Jogi and Dilip Singh Judeo, there's one for just about every alternate year since the 1980s! In how many of these have the accused been convicted. The funny bit is that we as the public know whodunit, but the investigating agencies somehow fail to see the wood for the trees.

Posted @ 11:31 PM

Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Add/View 0 comment(s)

December 09, 2003
 

Cricket

So the first Test is done and dusted with. Contrary to all expectations (including mine), it ended in a draw. You cannot rule out the fact that the weather did play a factor in the ultimate result (either way??). However it was very refreshing to see an Indian team not fold up and play dead after Dravid and Tendulkar got out in the same over. A superb knock by Ganguly, great supporting role by Laxman and some bit-roles by the tail got us a lead against Australia, something unthinkable of after the first day. Zaheer and Agarkar bowled splendidly, but were assisted by some brain dead batting and running by Australia. Next stop is at Adelaide. Something tells me Harbhajan and Kumble will both play and will do well in fact. Its a ground where Michael Bevan has taken 10 wickets in a Test. I rest my case.

---

Link of the day

Some chap with absolutely loads of time (or just too keen) has implemented algorithms to solve the Towers of Hanoi problem in 108 different programming languages. Here is the Slashdot discussion.

Labels: ind v aus 2003

Posted @ 6:00 PM

Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Add/View 0 comment(s)

December 04, 2003
 

General

One of the worst forms of torture in the modern era is when the cable operator suddenly decides to retune all the signals and channels at his end. What results is mayhem. As it is, with 100 odd television channels, most of which provide garbage in the guise of entertainment, it is almost impossible to clearly remember how to access specific channels unless you watch them regularly. Now with the cable operator doing his thing (in case you're wondering, we have paid up the monthly subscription), there is an urgent need to retrain the brain so it remembers the new channel numbers. That process typically takes a couple of weeks.

I'm absolutely convinced that in 10 days from now the cable guys are going to change the numbering all over again. Woe is me!

Posted @ 8:41 PM

Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Add/View 0 comment(s)

December 02, 2003
 

Education

Last week prospective management students across India were hit by the news that the Common Admission Test (CAT) was cancelled because the question paper had been leaked. The test is rescheduled for mid-February. The sad bit was that the news about the cancellation was publicised after lakhs of students had completed the test. This does raise questions about the examination procedures adopted by various institutes throughout India. There have been question paper leaks for the IIT Joint Entrance Examination, the AIIMS examination, State & Central Board school examinations etc. in the past. Isn't it time to spare the students the misery of studying for 7 different examinations because they want to get into a good Engineering/Management/Medical institution? Why can't we have one single entrance examination (or at most a couple) for each stream of study? I suppose what is holding up a really common entrance examination is the ego factor. The IITs would want their entrance examination to be the model for admissions for engineering courses, other universities would disagree. Similarly the IIMs want the CAT to be the examination used by all MBA schools, but would XLRI or the AIMA etc. give in? Who suffers? The students.

---

Link of the day

This is a new section. You'll find a few links which I came across during my online odyssey that day.

If you're absolutely bored with what you're doing and are looking for a way out of the boredom, one way out is to try and throw crumpled sheets of paper into a basket, online.

Posted @ 1:00 PM

Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Add/View 0 comment(s)