Editor,
Apropos to Salil Gewali’s, “Online voting facility “(ST February 28, 2023), I beg to disagree with the suggestion put forward. The very need of the EVM to be internet linked is in itself adequate proof that online voting is impossible. Let us come down to ground realities that make voting fair and secret. A person enters the polling room in which is present the presiding officer who is well-trained in event of any possible eventuality. The EPIC card is handed over to the officer in charge. The officer would call aloud the name of the voter so that polling agents can scrutinise the face of the voter since polling agents are from the locality of the voter. After the face recognition is tallied with data in the register, the voter then proceeds into the polling booth to press the button on the candidate of his/her choice. Herein lies the problem. In online voting the EPIC card would need digitalisation too (ATM like). Next, who will perform the job of polling agents? Let us leave aside the challenge votes of a few rupees. If the voter is proven to be an imposter would he/she be subject to legal action? Lastly, voting is done all alone after the voters is being inked to prevent multiple voting (like in the old era of rigging or booth capturing). Lastly, voting is done all alone inside an enclosure. At home or anywhere else friends might influence the voter; worse is if the voter is under duress. These are a few obstacles to the possibility of online voting.
In conclusion, let us acknowledge the limitations of modern digitalisation vis-a-vis bare human intelligence .
Yours etc.,
Passah,
Nongkrem.
Criticising India on foreign soil
Editor,
While speaking in Cambridge (UK) wholeheartedly expressed his views on various issues against the Modi Government. This is not the first time that he had spoken on the foreign land against the government. It is expected that he should learn from Jawaharlal Nehru, India’s first Prime Minister who first crafted the foreign policy of India which is continuing till date with slight modification to keep with the times.
Nehru founded the Non- Aligned Movement (NAM) along with Marshal Tito and Anwar Sadaat where over a hundred countries joined in. At the time Nehru was at the epi-center of all international developments. Earlier we were proud of Nehru and now we have the same feelings for PM Modi. Whether it is Putin or Biden or Macron all are speaking in praise of Modi for his foreign policy. Even Imran Khan speaks highly of Modi and his foreign policy. During the Ukraine war which is still going on there was tremendous pressure on India not to purchase Russian oil and not to make payment in roubles but India adopted it’s own foreign policy and purchased oil from Russia and also made payment in roubles. India is a member of two QUADs where in addition to India and USA other countries are Japan Australia and UAE. This year the G 20 and Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) conferences will be held in India. Moreover, India is likely to enter into the G7 group of countries which will be a big morale booster in foreign policy.
When the USA was leaving Afghanistan there was extreme pressure on India to send its army to that country but India refused to do so and rather helped that country financially and also for its infrastructure developments
Recently when there was financial turmoil in Sri Lanka India assisted that country. How India is pursuing a free and independent foreign policy will be cleared with one more example. Due to the Ukraine war there was a shortage of wheat in the world market. India exported wheat to many countries but when reports came in that due to climate change as well as due to floods in various parts of the country there are chances of fall in wheat production in the country then immediately a ban was imposed on export of wheat Though there was criticism of this step taken by India but government did not care about it and followed a free and independent foreign policy. This is the strength of India irrespective of which party is in power foreign policy is a continuous process.
Rahul Gandhi always speaks against the present government on the issue of China but he should keep in mind the views of previous dignitaries also. While paying tribute to Vajpayee, TMC leader Derrick O’Brien shared an anecdote about how Vajpayee did not ask a question in the parliament relating to China because the Prime Minister had requested him not to do so. The question could have hurt the national interest of India and personal standing of Prime Minister Nehru because the Chinese premier was in India at that time. O’Brien said that all parliamentarians and leaders should learn a lesson from this behavior of Vajpayee ji.
Even Nehru while introducing Vajpayee to foreign dignitaries said, “One day that young man will become the Prime Minister of India, and his prediction came true. .Just a few days ago Law Minister, Kiren Rijiju informed that he was also advised by Prime Minister, Dr Manmohan Singh at one time not to raise the sensitive issue of China in parliament. The Law Minister further informed that Pranab Mukherjee had also advised Lal Krishna Advani not to raise the sensitive issue of China in parliament and accordingly Advani did not raise the matter. So the question that arises is that when Nehru, Vajpayee, Dr Manmohan Singh and Pranab Mukherjee did not raise the sensitive issues vis-a-vis China then what is the need for political parties to have discussions in parliament on such diplomatically sensitive matters. only. It would have been better if they had followed the previous traditions. Rahul Gandhi should refrain from criticising the present Government on foreign land and should participate in parliament discussions instead.
Yours etc.,
Yash Pal Ralhan,
Via email