M. S. Prabhakara

The Centre’s decision to ban the Jewel Gorlosa faction of the Dima Halam Daogah (DHD-J), also known as Black Widow, under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, 1967, is of a piece with its well-established response to problems whose essence is no great mystery and which neither side or, of late, sides to the dispute want to make an honest attempt to resolve. They are instead keen on making tactical gains.

The DHD-J, banned on July 2, following the arrest of its leader Jewel Gorlosa in Bangalore in June, joins the United Liberation Front of Asom (ULFA) and the National Democratic Front of Bodoland (NDFB), which have also been proscribed under the same Act. The ULFA was banned on November 28, 1990 simultaneously with the launching of Operation Bajrang, the first military operation against it. The NDFB was outlawed on December 21, 2000.

The curious thing about banning rebel outfits is that the action has followed or has been followed by the emergence of clones, often carrying the same name, styling themselves dissident or pro-talks factions, or as structures even more genuinely representative than the original, of which they were till recently a part, and more committed to their stated objectives. Further, despite seemingly nuanced differences, as for instance an apparent shift from a commitment to secure ‘sovereignty and independence’ to a demand for greater ‘autonomy,’ the core objectives of these factions, pro- or anti-talks, remain the same. The rhetoric is self-determination; the reality is ethno-nationalism, a deadly cocktail in the context of the territorial and ethnic mix of the region’s land and people.

Both pro- and anti-talks factions continue to be in contact, directly or indirectly, with the government — at the Centre and in the States — they are supposed to be fighting against, suing for peace and seeking talks, on their own terms. What, then, should one make of such bans and the more or less simultaneous phenomenon of both the banned outfit and its ‘pro-talks’ factions apparently suing for peace and talks?

There is hardly an insurgent/terrorist organisation in Assam or the northeast that has not gone through such a process. The standard explanation of the rebel groups is that such splits are encouraged, indeed, engineered, by the “agencies of the Union and State government[s],” the standard code for intelligence agencies of the GOI with a view to weakening their “revolutionary resolve.” There might be some truth in such paranoia. However, such a reading is also a typical instance of scapegoating since it fails to address the weaknesses and contradictions of the ideology and practice of such groups, in particular the attainability of their stated objectives — sovereignty and independence. In reality, such perceived malevolent manoeuvres have not necessarily led to the “weakening” of these outfits.

Thus, Operation Bajrang and Operation Rhino (September 1991), the first two military operations against the ULFA, directly contributed to the phenomenon of the so-called SULFA (Surrendered ULFA), the first instance of a split in the outfit. Though an element of criminally tainted careerism characterised the activities of many SULFA cadres, not all of them abandoned the ‘politics’ that first led them to the organisation whose stated objective has remained the same: restoration (not attainment) of the lost sovereignty and independence of Asom. Since then, there have been other groups that, while still considering themselves organically linked to the ULFA, want to talk to the Centre about their objectives which in essence are no different from the stated objective of the ULFA, also on their own terms.

Similarly, with the ‘removal’ of Ranjan Daimari as NDFB founder-chairman in December last, the residual leadership of the outfit has come to be identified as the “pro-talks faction.” The description is not strictly accurate; nor was the development, like what happened with respect to the ULFA nearly two decades ago, sudden or unexpected. The outfit entered into a ceasefire agreement with the State and Union governments in May 2005. However, the NDFB leader who signed it was Dhiren Boro, who was to replace Daimari as chairman over three years later. Indeed, the decision to replace its founder-chairman was preceded by a decision in the outfit’s general assembly in September 2008 to take part, directly or indirectly, in the forthcoming Lok Sabha polls, a decision denounced by the ousted chairman as “capitulation.” “I am still the president of the NDFB to carry out the principles and ideology that are enshrined in the constitution and manifesto of the NDFB.” (The Hindu, December 28, 2008).

The United People’s Democratic Solidarity (UPDA), a rebel outfit driven by Karbi nationalist aspirations, meaning very broadly greater autonomy for and integration of Karbi people, one of the hill Tribes, living in Karbi Anglong and Karbi inhabited areas outside and contiguous to that district, signed a ceasefire agreement with the Union and State governments in May 2002. As sure as night follows day, an anti-talks faction of the UPDS, styling itself the Karbi Anglong North Cachar Hills Liberation Front (KLNLF), came into being two years later, with the objective of attaining the rights of self-determination to the Karbi people.

The trajectory of the DHD and its clone too has followed similar lines. Its stated objective is the establishment of a ‘Dimaraji’, a political and territorial structure for the Dimasa, another hill tribe. The path chosen, as by similar structures, was armed struggle. However, again following the established pattern, the DHD decided to enter into negotiations with the State and Union governments that led to the emergence of the anti-talks faction led by Jewel Gorlosa, though one version of this trajectory has it that factionalism on the part of Gorlosa led to the DHD suing for talks and peace. Be that as it may, both ‘pro- and anti-talks’ factions have engaged in violence, declared ceasefire ‘voluntarily’, and expressed their desire to hold talks.

None of this has mitigated violence in Assam where these outfits are active. Though, barring the ULFA whose domain is the whole of the State, all outfits have a limited territorial spread defined by the dominant group (Boro, Karbi, Dimasa) identified with them. Thus, every such ethno-nationalistic mobilisation involves an element of territorial assertion, with even the smallest of groups claiming territories inhabited by the other. For instance, the Naga nationalistic assertion, the oldest of such struggles, claims for the putative Nagalim territories that are inhabited or claimed to be inhabited by the Naga people outside the State of Nagaland: in Assam, Manipur, Arunachal Pradesh and Myanmar. The violence and killings in North Cachar Hills involving the majority Dimasa and the largest minority Zeme Nagas also have this dimension, the inescapable fallout of ethno-nationalistic assertions. For, integral to such assertions is the dehumanisation and demonisation of the other, which alone explains the periodic exercises of “ethnic cleansing,” integral to all such ethno-nationalistic assertions and their rationalisation by the ideologues of ethno-nationalism.

Self-determination, sovereignty and independence, autonomy, territoriality, language and culture: there is no end to the buzzwords that animate such struggles. Some of these, like land and language, are matters of life and death to the people. However, as noted at the beginning, almost every such struggle has led to the emergence of structures that replicate the slogans and tactics, often even the strategic objective of the original. During the years this writer was a working journalist in the region, security officials used to gloat over the splits, seeing in them the beginning of the disintegration of such outfits. Life and experience have taught that the splits, far from weakening, have made the problem more intractable. In the beginning was the Naga National Council. Out of the NNC, and against its dominant politics, emerged the National Socialist Council of Nagaland, later Nagalim. Now there is another NSCN. The story is the same everywhere: to divide is to multiply.

ADMIRAL SUREESH MEHTA: The goal has already been set for the long-drawn process of transformation. — Photo: Vipin Chandran

S. Anandan

A transformational wave buoyed by blue-water capability and cutting-edge technology is sweeping the Indian Navy. The force has embarked on a plan for all-round asset-building and indigenisation. Admiral Sureesh Mehta, the Chief of the Naval Staff, in a conversation with The Hindu in Kochi on August 3, puts in perspective the tasks ahead. Excerpts:

With you at the helm, the Navy has attained many milestones: leading the Indian Ocean Naval Symposium (IONS), dedicating the Naval Academy in Ezhimala to the nation, laying the keel of the Indigenous Aircraft Carrier, launching India’s first nuclear submarine…

True, but individuals are transient themselves. The goal has already been set for the long-drawn process of transformation. The ball has started rolling and will continue in the next watch, as we call it. We’ve been carrying it forward because there is just so much that is going to happen in the armed forces and, therefore, we need to change the way in which we work. There is a need to adapt ourselves to different practices which will allow us to ride this wave. That was the roadmap we had set for ourselves.

Foreign collaboration has been a tremendous success story. A few months after taking over as the Navy chief, it struck me that we could do something novel to bring all our neighbours closer to one another, and we floated the IONS. It didn’t take long to stabilise. So in its first conclave in Delhi, of the 32 littoral countries in the Indian Ocean, 28 were represented — 23 by their Navy chiefs and five by the deputies. There was demand from other Navies that we continue to organise it. But as per its constitution, the chairmanship rotates every two years. The UAE has volunteered to host the next IONS.

Indigenisation is the Navy’s mantra and it’s in this context that we’re building the IAC. The project was conceived many years ago, but in the mid-1990s a new concept, that of the air defence ship (ADS), came about as an alternative proposition to massive, expensive carriers. Thus, the carrier we had already designed was put on the chopping block with the cost factor in mind.

However, as soon as we realised that it wouldn’t suffice, we reverted to the actual plan to have huge carriers — 40,000 tonne and above — with adequate capabilities. The keel-laying of the IAC was a significant step. We’ve been reviewing the project continuously. We’ve a good, competent partner in Cochin Shipyard, which has been doing the refits of our carriers.

The acquisition of Admiral Gorshkov, rechristened INS Vikramaditya, from Russia has been mired in controversy thanks to the time lag, scepticism over the quality of refurbishment, cost escalation and so on. What is the status?

We’re quite happy with the quality and pace of work on the Vikramaditya. We’ve changed tonnes of steel in the ship. A large amount of work that was not foreseen earlier has been done. Hence the issue of whether or not this should be paid for by us. I have conveyed to Russia our view [when it demanded an addition $1.2 billion for the refit]. A contract is a contract. You win some, you lose some. “We have been your major defence partner for some time now and so we can’t have this kind of ad hoc increase in price put into effect,” I said.

Meanwhile, the Ministry of Defence realised that so much work has been done on the ship and maybe there’s a case to give some more money. The engines have been changed. Right now we’re at the stage where a very large amount of cabling, about 3,000 km, has to be redone. Initially the plan was to re-cable wherever it was necessary. Then they thought it would be best to change it entirely. So what we’re going to get at the end of it, as far as I’m concerned, is a nice, brand-new ship which will doubtless remain operational for 25 to 30 years. That’s the stipulated period, but I hope she’ll last 30 years and more. The Vikramaditya will have some wonderful capabilities and with a versatile aircraft [the MiG 29K], which is integral to its fleet, it would be an ideal platform for us to cover all of the Indian Ocean.

We’ve done an in-depth study to ascertain the genuineness of the price issue. Both countries will now sit across and renegotiate the price. There could be some give and take, but what we’ll arrive at would be a justifiable price.

The current refit of INS Viraat is expected to extend its operational life for a few more years, by which time hopefully the IAC and the Vikramaditya would be inducted. Do we have a carrier-building programme to cater for long-term requirements?

We’ll be paying out the Viraat in eight to 10 years’ time, and by when we’ll have two carriers [the IAC and the Vikramaditya]. We are already working on the design of a second indigenous carrier, slightly bigger maybe, to cater for the aircraft we will have in future.

That calls for a question on the progress of the LCA (Navy) project. Isn’t it a tad behind schedule?

We’re very hopeful that if not at the beginning of the IAC, it should come through a couple of years later. Obviously, it’ll not be ready at the start of the IAC, which we hope will embark the MiG-29 K. In fact, we’ve planned a mix of both the aircraft for the IAC as each has a definitive role to play. As for the LCA programme, the Navy has thrown its weight behind it from the beginning. I was personally responsible for the programme not being dumped midway. I had stated on file that the Navy would like to have this kind of an aircraft. What had initially begun as a naval project turned out to be an Air Force affair along the course.

The naval variant would be quite different from the land variant, with a strong undercarriage, more thrust, an arrester hook, and the like. There would be a droop in the cockpit for enhanced visibility during landing on carrier deck. The Air Force trainer version [two-seater] will take off from the naval version, as both will have lots in common.

The sole carrier-borne fighter aircraft, the Sea Harrier, has recently undergone a limited upgrade. How long will it last now?

Well, we expect them to be in service for 10 years. Its add-on capabilities such as [Derby] Beyond Visual Range Air to Air Missile have been enhanced. The LUSH [Limited Upgrade Sea Harrier] programme is an absolute success on that count, and we’ve got a brand new aircraft electronically within the same airframe. The new radar and new missile will bring about a complete change in the aircraft’s performance.

INS Arihant marked a watershed, with India accomplishing a crucial second-strike capability. What are the other dividends?

It was a necessity that had to be brought about. Every country works for a nuclear triad and it is imperative that we have the capability of underwater launch of nuclear weapons. In fact, most countries have given up the land and air variants, and just stuck to the underwater platform because of its major advantage in terms of stealth and endurance. An indigenous project, Arihant has given as a submarine of sorts, which will have this capability. Hopefully, we’ll have more of these [Arihant-class submarines] in due course which will give us the full-fledged capability to carry out the tasks we are expected to do.

Gordon Brown

The appalling but inevitable outcome of Aung San Suu Kyi’s sham trial is final proof that the military regime in Burma is determined to continue defying the world.

Depressing news that she has been sentenced to up to 1.5 years further house arrest is not only a tragedy for her and her family but also for the Burmese people who suffer daily at the hand of tyranny.

This was the moment for the Generals to embrace the growing clamour for change and choose the path of reform demanded by the region and the global community.

They comprehensively shunned it. The charges were baseless, the verdict outrageous.

So the international community must respond to this latest injustice with a clear message to the junta that its tyrannical actions will no longer be tolerated.

Further sanctions to target directly the regime’s economic interests have been agreed by the EU in response to the verdict and must be implemented as quickly as possible.

And determined action in the U.N. Security Council must follow. Nothing less than a world wide ban on the sale of arms to the regime will do as a first step.

I also believe that we should identify and target those judges complicit in these political show trials, which are an absurd mockery of justice.

The Generals should be in no doubt about the strength of international solidarity with the cause of freedom, democracy and development in Burma.

Political and humanitarian conditions in the country continue to deteriorate.

When over 140,000 were killed and millions made destitute by Cyclone Nargis last year the world’s efforts to help were resisted, a peaceful uprising by monks in 2007 was violently quashed, ethnic minorities are persecuted and under armed attack.

The media is muzzled, freedom of speech and assembly are non-existent and the number of political prisoners — jailed only for their unwavering commitment to peace and national reconciliation — has doubled to more than 2000.

Aung San Suu Kyi is the most high profile of them.

She has long been a symbol of hope and defiance during her 14 years as a prisoner of conscience.

She is a most courageous woman. In those long years of isolation, she has barely seen her two sons yet is resolute in her faith in democracy and the Burmese people.

Her refusal to buckle in the face of tyranny is an inspiration.

The façade of her prosecution is made more monstrous, therefore, because its real objective is to sever her bond with the people for whom she is a beacon of hope and resistance.

Her treatment can only be read as the junta’s reluctance to move towards freedom, democracy and rule of law with Aung San Suu Kyi a central figure in a new Burma.

So unless they immediately free her — and all political prisoners — and start genuine dialogue with opposition and ethnic groups elections next year will have no credibility.

In July, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon demanded such measures on a visit to Rangoon. With this verdict, the Generals have publicly snubbed him.

Now comes our greatest test.

In the face of this arrogance, we cannot stand by and effectively sanction the abhorrent actions of a violent and repressive junta — but show them that the international community is united and coordinated in its response.

We have seen an extraordinary consensus building around the world against the Burmese regime, encompassing the U.N., the EU, ASEAN and more than 45 heads of state.

All of us must continue to push for genuine political reconciliation and change, especially those countries in the region with the greatest influence.

Burma is rich in natural and human resources and sits at the heart of a dynamic continent. Democratic reform would unleash the country’s enormous potential.

And I have always made clear that the U.K. would respond positively to any signs of progress but attitudes must harden in the light of this verdict.

The Generals are condemning the country and its people to ever deeper isolation, poverty, conflict and despair.

Some may question why Burma warrants so much attention. There are other countries where human rights are ignored or people live in poverty.

But the Burmese regime stands virtually alone in the scale of its misrule and the sheer indifference to the daily suffering of its 50 million people.

Once again my thoughts are with Aung San Suu Kyi — the human face of Burma’s tragedy. But words and thoughts are no longer enough.

It has utterly failed to prepare the public for a rapid spread of the flu virus within the country. In stark contrast, the scientists of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), who led efforts to keep the American media and the public informed, have been at pains to emphasise both what was known and unknown about the virus and its behaviour. Thus from the very beginning, when the U.S. had only a handful of confirmed cases, the CDC has been driving home the point that the confirmed cases were only the “tip of the iceberg.” Far more transmission of the virus could actually be occurring among humans that was not being picked up.

Thus towards the end of June, when the U.S. had over 27,000 confirmed cases, including 3,000 hospitalisations and more than 130 fatalities, a leading CDC scientist declared that there could have been “at least a million cases” in the country up to that time. Union Health Minister Ghulam Nabi Azad, on the other hand, insisted that swine flu in the country was under control. He spoke about how the government had managed to “limit the cases of swine flu to a few individuals, considering the size of our population and country.” The result is that as swine flu cases and resultant deaths begin to mount, the government looks ineffective. The public gets the impression that the situation is out of control and starts to panic.

A flu pandemic occurs when a virus arises to which the vast majority of people in the world have no natural immunity. The World Health Organisation (WHO) estimates that about two billion people worldwide — about 30 per cent of the global population — could be infected by the time this pandemic ends. But catching the swine flu is very far from being a grave illness, let alone a death sentence. In fact, data gathered by the WHO from various countries suggest that only up to 10 per cent of confirmed cases need to be hospitalised and fatalities occur in less than one per cent of confirmed cases.

But such confirmed cases, it bears reiteration, are only the tip of the iceberg. A great many people who become infected could either be asymptomatic or suffer only mild symptoms. A U.S. document on pandemic planning indicates that only half of those who pick up the virus might even seek medical help. A recent WHO briefing note points out that the majority of patients infected with the pandemic virus worldwide continue to experience only mild symptoms and recover fully within a week, even in the absence of any medical treatment.

But the sad fact remains that when so many people catch swine flu, some of them will develop severe disease and die. The vast majority of severe cases have occurred in high-risk groups, such as pregnant women and those with asthma or other lung disorders, cardiovascular problems, diabetes, suppressed immune systems, or neurological disorders. Obesity appears to be another risk factor. But while the media spotlight is on every person who dies of swine flu in the country, the toll taken by seasonal flu, which people encounter year after year with no more than a shrug, gets overlooked.

 A large part of the problem is, of course, that India lacks a proper surveillance system to track seasonal flu and many other infectious diseases. The U.S., a much wealthier nation with less than a third of India’s population, sees some 36,000 deaths from seasonal flu each year. Published estimates suggest that India accounts for 20 per cent of the 1.9 million children who die annually of acute respiratory infections in developing countries.

Given the number of people who might seek medical help and need hospitalisation as the pandemic takes hold in India, a few designated hospitals will not suffice. Yet, even in its revised guidelines issued after the Pune schoolgirl died on August 3, the Union Health Ministry asked any person with flu-like symptoms to go to a designated government facility to be checked and, if required, to give a sample for testing. The chaos that ensued in cities like Pune was predictable. In order to prevent health care institutions from being swamped, the U.S. CDC recommends that those who get sick with the virus stay home unless they have signs of severe illness or fall in a high-risk group.

The WHO too makes a similar suggestion. Better sense seems, however, to have dawned, with the Union Health Ministry now announcing that it would issue guidelines for private hospitals and laboratories that had the necessary facilities to treat and test patients for swine flu. Measures to mobilise the country’s health care infrastructure, in the public as well as private sectors, ought to have been part of the pandemic plan that the central government is supposed to have worked out and put in place. In all this, rural India and the poor must be given special attention. The swine flu could be at its worst when it affects those who are malnourished, many of whom suffer from chronic diseases and often have little access to health care. At a vulnerable juncture when a drought threatens, this pandemic could test the country’s ability to care for its people. We cannot afford to fail.

The expected victory of the opposition Democratic Party in Japan’s August 30 general election is creating a new element of uncertainty in the Asia-Pacific region, already unsettled by North Korea’s war drums and China’s assertiveness. The ruling conservative Liberal Democratic Party has held power for 52 of the past 53 years. It is the political linchpin of the U.S.-Japanese alliance. Now, largely due to lamentable domestic policy failures, opinion polls suggest it is all but dead in the water.

The centre-left Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ), ahead by up to 20 points in some surveys, is committed, on paper at least, to a radical reappraisal of Japan’s postwar defence partnership with Washington. Its manifesto pledges to “re-examine the role of the U.S. military in the security of the Asia-Pacific region and the significance of U.S. bases in Japan.” Questions have been raised about the continuing presence of roughly 50,000 American troops on Japanese soil and, more broadly, about Japan’s military support for U.S. operations in Iraq and now in Afghanistan.

At the same time, DPJ leaders are advocating improved ties with former adversaries, notably China and South Korea, strained during the 2001-2006 premiership of Junichiro Koizumi. Party chief Yukio Hatoyama has vowed not to follow Koizumi in paying respects to Japan’s war dead at the Yasukuni shrine in Tokyo, seen in Beijing as a symbol of unrepentant Japanese militarism.

Speaking at a conference in Tokyo on Monday, Katsuya Okada, the DPJ’s second-in-command, said the party wanted an equal relationship with the Obama administration. “There are various issues of concern between Japan and the US. It is necessary … to work on changing systems based on trust,” he said. Japan lacked independence, he complained. “If Japan just follows what the U.S. says, then I think as a sovereign nation that is very pathetic.”

Okada expressed impatience with the pace of international nuclear disarmament, a sensitive issue in Japan. Although his party welcomed Barack Obama’s call for a nuclear-free world, he suggested Japan should pursue its own disarmament and non-proliferation policies. These and other apparently game-changing DPJ positions have led to talk of a generational shift in Japanese politics, bringing to office leaders who have no personal memories, guilty or otherwise, of the war, and no particular reason to thank the U.S. for the postwar alliance.

For all the chat about mould-breaking, a sharp reality check may await the DPJ. Take the nuclear issue: as Prime Minister Taro Aso noted in Hiroshima last week, Japan continues to benefit from the U.S. “nuclear umbrella” when it comes to threats from North Korea, just as during the cold war. While most Japanese supported the abolition of nuclear weapons, he said, such a development was unlikely in the foreseeable future, whatever the DPJ might do or say.

Despite its talk of Asian outreach, the DPJ has already confirmed it will adhere to Aso’s tough line on North Korea’s nukes and missiles and the long-running issue of Japanese citizens abducted by Pyongyang. It will also continue with a $3.1bn missile defence programme jointly developed with the U.S.

In a similarly realistic vein, the DPJ admitted this week that, growing economic interdependence notwithstanding, China’s rising military spending was a concern. But there was not much it could do. “There is no option for us to be in a military conflict. We should not be in an arms race but rather aiming to reduce arms in the future,” Okada said. Japan is struggling with its worst postwar recession, while China is its top two-way trading partner and its biggest 2008 export market — after the U.S.

The DPJ reacted cautiously last week to a government defence review that recommended easing constitutional constraints to allow Japan’s military to expand co-operation with the U.S. In truth, its circumspection reflects splits within the party about how far to go, if at all, in loosening the U.S leash.

Nor will the U.S. voluntarily relax its close embrace just because some new faces show up at Tokyo head office next month. According to Harvard professor Joseph Nye, Washington attaches high priority to its Japanese alliance. Shared concerns ranging from China to pandemics, terrorism and failed states would bind the U.S. and Japan more closely than ever in the 21st century, he predicted. It’s a lesson other long-time U.S. allies have learned. Whatever DPJ leaders may think, there’s no escaping America when it doesn’t want to be escaped. — © Guardian Newspapers Limited, 2009

People wait in queue outside the H1N1 screening centre at Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital in New Delhi on Tuesday. - Photo: R. V. Moorthy

Aarti Dhar

NEW DELHI: Union Health and Family Welfare Minister Ghulam Nabi Azad on Tuesday asked the State Chief Ministers to step up preparedness to tackle swine flu.

Swine flu has caused the death of 11 people across the country and affected 1,000. Maharashtra is the worst-affected with seven deaths, followed by Gujarat (two), Chennai (one) and Kerala (one). As many as 119 confirmed cases were reported in the past 24 hours, with Pune accounting for 62, followed by Mumbai (24) and Delhi 15. The other cases were from Nashik, Goa, Manipal, Nagpur, Thiruvananthapuram, Osmanabad and Jammu.

The Centre has decided to involve Central, State and local government establishments, including medical colleges and institutions and private health institutions, in flu management. It has asked the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, the National Disaster Management Authority and the State governments to train doctors and paramedical staff in dealing with swine flu. Awareness campaigns will form part of the strategy.

The exercise is aimed at intensifying efforts at creating a dedicated apparatus within the government and private infrastructure to deal with the emerging pandemic of A (H1N1) influenza.

Mr. Azad asked the Chief Ministers to chair the first meeting with Central government teams to ensure on-the-spot decisions and swift implementation.

The Central teams, headed by officers of the rank of additional and joint secretaries of other Ministries, will help the States in capacity-building right up to the level of community and primary health centres.

They have been mandated to discuss the new guidelines for influenza management with the States besides identifying laboratories for testing and hospitals — both public and private — for screening, diagnosis and treatment.

Briefing the teams here on Tuesday, Mr. Azad called for an integrated approach to the problem.

Special Correspondent

CHENNAI/HYDERABAD: An earthquake of 7.8 magnitude was recorded in the region of Andaman islands with the epicentre 260 km north of Port Blair at about 1.25 a.m. on Tuesday, causing aftershocks in many cities in the southern and eastern parts of the country.

The Hyderabad-based National Tsunami Warning Centre issued the first bulletin within six minutes of the earthquake stating that it was evaluating its tsunamigenic potential.

Its next bulletin came at 2.45 a.m., pointing out that there were no significant water level changes in the Bottom Pressure Recorders and tide gauges in the Andamans, after receiving real time data from them.

Satish Shenoy, Director of the Indian National Centre for Ocean Information Services (INCOIS) — which houses the Tsunami Warning Centre — said no tsunami alert was issued. He said a tsunami watch, issued by the Pacific Tsunami Warning Centre, was withdrawn later. The information was shared with other countries along the Indian Ocean rim and also with regional tsunami warning centres in Australia, Indonesia, Thailand, the Maldives and Sri Lanka.

In Chennai, S. Rasappan, a resident of Srinivasapuram, Foreshore Estate [where about 750 families of fishermen live] said: “I felt the aftershock. Several of my neighbours also stayed awake till early morning. But, the sea remained calm last [Monday] night.”

Mumbai: A 62-year-old woman from Thane and a 13-year-old girl from Pune have died of swine flu. Of the seven deaths caused by the infection in Maharashtra, five are from Pune, while one is from Mumbai and the other from Thane.

However, Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation’s Executive Health Officer Jairaj Thanekar said here on Tuesday: “The death of Saeeda Daruwala from Mumbra in Thane should not be seen as an H1N1 death. She was already suffering from ischaemic [characterised by reduced blood supply to the heart muscle] and severe diabetes. H1N1 could at most have been a second factor. Considering her age and the other health complications, this death should not be counted as a swine flu death.”

In the early hours of Tuesday, Shruti Gawade, a student of Pune’s Ahilyadevi High School, fell victim to the virus. The head of Maharashtra’s swine flu cell, Pradeep Awate, said she was referred to the Sassoon hospital by Pune’s KEM Hospital after it suspected she had swine flu symptoms. She was admitted to Sassoon on August 7 with viral pneumonitis and breathlessness. She tested positive the next day and was immediately started on a dose of Tamiflu. She was kept on ventilator. However, her condition worsened and she died at 1.30 a.m. on Tuesday.

Related Articles:

• Private hospitals agree to pitch in
• Maharashtra defends giving Tamiflu to suspected cases

NEW DELHI: Amid the bitter battle between the Ambani siblings over the KG Basin gas distribution, the Petroleum and Natural Gas Ministry has written to the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) that the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between Mukesh Ambani and Anil Ambani would “harm” public interest.

The Ministry was responding to comments sought by the PMO on the letter written by Reliance Natural Resources Limited (RNRL) chairman Anil Ambani on July 15 accusing the Ministry of favouring Reliance Industries Limited.

Mr. Ambani had sought the intervention of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.

Meanwhile, an RNRL statement here said: “It is our considered view that the Petroleum Ministry continues to misguide all concerned including the PMO by hiding, misquoting and misrepresenting facts. As we have communicated earlier and reiterated, the Petroleum Ministry was in full knowledge of the details of the gas supply arrangements between the RIL and the RNRL way back in June 2006, if not earlier. Copy of the gas supply agreement was duly submitted by us to the Petroleum Ministry in June 2006. The Petroleum Ministry’s repeated stand that they have come to know about this arrangement only now is inexplicable and untenable.”

Further, the statement said: “The Petroleum Ministry is of the firm view that gas supply arrangements between the RIL and the RNRL are against the provisions of the Production Sharing Contract (PSC). If the Petroleum Ministry is firmly convinced of the facts, it is within their powers under the provisions of the PSC to terminate the PSC it has signed with the RIL. The RIL-RNRL agreement was fully compliant with the PSC. The Bombay High Court has held that the RIL can fulfil its obligation to the RNRL in compliance with the PSC.”

The Ministry is understood to have stated that the part of the MoU that divides the gas found by RIL between the two brothers was against public interest, flouts government authority and will set a wrong precedent. It has written to the PMO that the family MoU was clearly against the provisions of the PSC. “Any private arrangement to distribute natural gas for private business plans is nothing but monopolising a vital natural resource and will set a bad precedent under which production from other fields may also be appropriated.”

NEW DELHI: At the tripartite talks held here on Tuesday, the Centre, the West Bengal government and the Gorkha Janmukti Morcha agreed in principle to abolish the Darjeeling Gorkha Hill Council and set up an alternative administrative framework in Darjeeling.

The meeting also decided to appoint an interlocutor to carry forward the discussions and send a Central team to Darjeeling to review the development works.

“It was agreed, in principle, to repeal the Darjeeling Gorkha Hill Council Act of 1988. The repeal of the Act will be in process as soon as an alternative administrative set-up /framework is finalised through mutual consultations and agreement,” Union Home Secretary G.K. Pillai said after the meeting.

The meeting agreed that the proposal for establishing a hill council under the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution would be dropped.

“The GJM promised that a peaceful and conducive atmosphere would be maintained, and all the parties agreed to work in a spirit of constructive cooperation to carry the talks forward,” Mr. Pillai said. As an interim measure and to restore the democratic process, the Centre and the West Bengal government proposed elections to panchayat samitis, gram panchayats and municipalities. The GJM delegation promised to get back to the State government after consulting the party.

The West Bengal government informed the meeting that portions of the Central Relief Funds and Special Central Assistance, amounting to Rs.70 crore, were lying unutilised. “It was agreed that a team of State government officials would be sent to Darjeeling to discuss the utilisation of the funds,” Mr. Pillai said.

At a press conference later, Amar Lama, a GJM Central Committee member who led the 13-member delegation to the talks, described the outcome as “fruitful.”

Flanked by Jaswant Singh, senior BJP leader and Darjeeling MP, Mr. Lama said the decisions marked a “forward movement” towards creation of a Gorkhaland State, for which the GJM intensified its stir 22 months ago. While the Centre was represented by the Home Secretary and the Additional Secretary in the Home Ministry, the West Bengal government sent its Chief Secretary and the Home Secretary. The next round of talks will be held in Darjeeling on December 21.