I agree with you that India must stay the course and not be deterred by the ISI’s bullying tactics (Mint, 9 July). But I wonder if the families of Indians who died in the Kabul blast and those of others being posted in such explosive situations think the same. That the country’s interest is larger than personal interest sounds nice. But the realities on the ground are different. We have had too many examples of families being left to fend for themselves after the chief breadwinner laid down his/her life in the line of duty. We as a country have failed these people; so how right would we be to expect such sacrifices from our fellow countrymen, when all we have done is regretted their death before our TV sets or written an article or a blog post appreciating their bravery?
- Eswaran Krishnan
I really like Mint. I would like to comment on a common thread which runs in two of your recent columns. Namita Bhandare is not strictly correct when she refers to “the new globalized work culture” which most of us have embraced (“Summer break in the age of globalization”, Mint, 8 July). This is not apparent in Europe. I have been working with and for European institutions for the last 30 years and all of us have kept the annual vacation sacrosanct.
The measly four weeks off which I started with is now between five and six weeks a year. No one will ever work on a weekend and all work stops on Friday late afternoon for a drink or an early clock out. Yet, Europe makes world-class products such as cars and Airbus aircraft, fantastic wines, spirits and food products. I think the key here is “passion” — to work smart and to enjoy life. Only European companies and institutions can accept a charge for wine or beer on a working lunch.
This is also reflected in Rahul S. Verghese’s “Get out, and cheer” (Mint, 8 July). I think most of us lack passion and are constantly under some kind of pressure to appear to be busy. We do not cheer our sport teams, we do not show up for kids games at school. I think we are in danger of becoming a mediocre, insecure culture. So, keep up the pressure through your excellent columns.
- Raj Khalid
There is a lot of controversy over the nuclear deal and the safeguard agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency. Bharat Karnad has succinctly put forth the opposite view (“Safeguards that erode security”, Mint, 14 July). It is difficult for the common man to form his opinion on such technicalities. However, there are certain points which require clarification. Nuclear energy is not all that clean. It will not meet more than 8% of our energy requirement. There is the question of nuclear waste, which remains radioactive for thousands of years.
We should use thermal and hydro sources after suitably modifying/adopting technology which is environment-friendly. And the future will be one with renewable energy sources. The more basic question is whether we need that rate of growth for which energy is required, when the fruits of present prosperity are not reaching the aam aadmi (common man) and we are paying a heavy price in terms of the waste of non-renewable resources such as coal and steel,?as well as the destruction of environment.
Why does the US, or for that matter any of the other rich nations, want to rope in India under the pretext of meeting our energy requirement? They are not helping us remove poverty, when about 80% people are living at less than $2 a day. They are not helping us or the world fight environmental destruction.
They have subjugated Iraq. They have made North Korea fall in line. Now they are threatening Iran. India is too big a country for them to adopt such tactics. But then it has very pliable people.
- Shrikant Pundlik