India’s World – Brexit and its consequences

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JlzpC2qFnws

Summary:

UK is all set to hold a referendum to decide whether Britain should leave or remain in the European Union. This is as per the promise made by the British PM Cameron. He had promised to hold a referendum over the Brexit issue. Britain wants to leave the group as it had not had a say since 1975, when it voted to stay in the EU in a referendum. However, experts have warned that a vote by the UK to leave the EU would pose a serious threat to global growth. It would reverse the trend of increased global trade, investment and job creation.

What is happening?

A referendum will be held on 23 June to decide whether Britain should leave or remain in the European Union.

What is a referendum?

A referendum is basically a vote in which everyone of voting age can take part, normally giving a “Yes” or “No” answer to a question. Whichever side gets more than half of all votes cast is considered to have won.

What is the European Union?

The European Union – often known as the EU – is an economic and political partnership involving 28 European countries. It began after World War Two to foster economic co-operation, with the idea that countries which trade together are more likely to avoid going to war with each other. It has since grown to become a “single market” allowing goods and people to move around, basically as if the member states were one country. It has its own currency, the euro, which is used by 19 of the member countries, its own parliament and it now sets rules in a wide range of areas – including on the environment, transport, consumer rights and even things like mobile phone charges.

What does Brexit mean?

It is a word that has become used as a shorthand way of saying the UK leaving the EU – merging the words Britain and exit to get Brexit, in a same way as a Greek exit from the EU was dubbed Grexit in the past.

Why does UK want to leave the EU?

Many in the United Kingdom are of the opinion that the EU has transformed a lot over the years. They think that since several countries have joined the union, the EU’s hold over everyday aspects of these countries has increased. Many think that Britain is better off without the EU as it is being constrained by it. Some of the constraints involve imposing many rules on Britain’s business and shelling out billions of pounds in the form of EU fees without much gain in return.

Would it affect the global economic growth?

No, say few experts. In fact, economics is not the real issue here. Politics is a bigger issue here. As far as the UK is concerned, roughly about 40% of the trade of UK is with EU and largely two countries-Holand and Germany. Hence, this would not make any big difference.

Why Britain should not leave EU?

• •Britain avoids exporter tariffs and red tape, important as 45% of British exports go to the EU. As a member, Britain can obtain better trade terms because of EU’s size.
• •By staying with EU, Britain can fight for better regulations.
• •Leaving doesn’t mean reduced immigration. Countries that trade with the EU from outside have higher rated of immigration, including from EU countries.
• •At international summits, Britain is represented twice- by the foreign secretary and the EU high representatives.

Why Britain should exit?

• •It will be able to secure trade deals important countries such as China, India and America.
• •It saves money which could be used for scientific researches and for building new industries.
• •Leaving will return control over areas like employment, law, health and safety.
• •Currently, Britain has little influence within the EU. By leaving EU, it can have a stronger influence for free trade and cooperation.

Impact on India:

This would affect the flow of FDI. The impact on Indian FDI to the UK could potentially be over two time periods: the short-medium term and the long term. The short-medium term covers the interim period before the referendum, and is likely to see FDI decrease temporarily, the deterrents being the potential financial instability and a legal regime overhaul. If the UK votes to leave the EU, FDI may fall in the long-term as well.

Also, India, unlike the British, sees the EU primarily as an economic and trading bloc, not a political organization, and Indian businesses are acutely aware of the potential of instability that a Brexit. There are over 800 Indian companies in the UK, the top 10-15 of whom contribute $4 billion to the British economy. Indian companies see the UK as the springboard to Europe. The language and legal system give Indians a comfort level. Many Indian information technology companies based in the UK with large work forces and offer services to Europe will be hit too. 

http://www.insightsonindia.com/2016/06/09/indias-world-brexit-consequences/

The ministry of women and child development wants a shift in focus from female sterilization to male sterilization.

The Ministry of Women and Child development wants to shift the focus of family planning from female to male sterilization,in order to correct the patriarchal discourse present in society while also adopting the medical best practices.
The reasons for the move :
1) Men of a household push their wives for tubectomy as they think vasectomy will hurt their pride and masculinity.
2)Medically Vasectomy is preferable to Tubectomy as it is more safer and comparatively easier process. Their are no side effects and lesser chances of post operation complications like bladder problems.
3) Vasectomy is cheaper then Tubectomy
4)Tubectomy is more invasive then Vasectomy and recovery period is longer

India needs a combination of both surgical intervention as well as contraceptive interception to control population
1)Only a push for sterilization can get controversial as consent may not be there (like the 80's imbroglio),also threat of botched operations is there because of presence of targets by Ministry. And to add to it is the risk of quackery.
2)Incentivising the usages of contraceptives like condoms,copper-t ,mass awareness campaigns in rural areas,urban slums and even schools is required 
Both along with focus on women empowerment and gender sensitization can help in family planning. 

Quest for another holy grail

India’s 30-year-old effort to secure a permanent seat on the UN Security Council has been characterised as the pursuit of a diplomatic holy grail. The chance of success in that pursuit has been receding like a mirage, though there have been tantalising signs of progress. A similar, but less intense effort is on to seek admission to the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), a body which should have included India in the first place. Here again, there is no sign of India being invited, even as the 10-year moratorium on new membership has expired. India has now embarked on another quest, this time to seek membership of the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG). The Prime Minister himself has travelled to Switzerland to seek support and he will also go to Mexico for the same purpose. It is surprising that India is investing much diplomatic effort on this issue when there is little chance of India being invited to the group.

An American initiative

India seeking membership of the NSG is like Russia seeking membership of North Atlantic Treaty Organisation: the NSG was invented to prevent Indian advance towards possession of nuclear weapons after the technology demonstration test of 1974. If India joins it, the very nature of the NSG will change and dilute its fundamental position that all members should be signatories to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Though the U.S. has stated repeatedly that it would like to see India in the NSG, it cannot be expected to be a party to the fundamental alteration of the NPT regime.

Interestingly, it was a U.S. think tank which brought up the topic in a Track II discussion with some of us in 2007. The suggestion was not that India should be given membership of the NSG, but that India should join all multilateral export control regimes like the NSG, Missile Technology Control Regime (which it is set to join later this year), the Wassenaar Arrangement for control of conventional weapons and the Australia Group for control of chemicals that could contribute to chemical and biological weapons. It appeared then that the whole proposal was to drag us into Wassenaar Arrangement and the Australia Group by presenting them as a package. We had refrained from joining both, though they were open for us from the beginning, for our own reasons. Our response to the U.S. proposal was guarded as we did not want a bargain on all the groups together. We did, however, emphasise that India’s membership of the NSG would be helpful as it had received an exemption from the NSG guidelines. As a member of the group, we could contribute to the discussion if it sought to amend the guidelines in any manner. In other words, it was not an Indian initiative to press for admission to the NSG.

U.S. President Barack Obama formalised the proposal in 2010, as though it was a concession to India, in his bid to win various contracts, including nuclear supplies. Perhaps, he was aware that a decision on the NSG was not in his hands, but promised to take up the matter with the others just to win some goodwill in the process. As was expected, the fundamental requirement that every member should be a signatory to the NPT was brought up not only by China but several others. There was similar opposition in the case of the exemption from NSG guidelines at the time of the nuclear deal also, but our bilateral efforts and heavy lifting by the U.S., including a final phone call from the U.S. President to his Chinese counterpart, resulted in the exemption. The strength of the argument was that this would be a one-time exemption with no strings attached.

No great gains in the offing

Interestingly, the NSG is an informal grouping, which is referred to in the International Atomic Energy Agency documents only as “certain states”, and there is no precise procedure for seeking admission. But since the group takes all its decisions by consensus, it follows that new members should also be by consensus. For those outside the group, there is an outreach programme which is being pursued vigorously. The outreach programme is meant merely for conveying information and not for consultation. New Delhi hosted an outreach meeting a few years ago, but it was found that the exercise was not of much use in influencing the guidelines.

The pursuit of membership of the NSG by India at the highest level has aroused suspicion that India is aiming to be in the group to deny entry to Pakistan. Such an interpretation is the result of lack of any clarity as to the benefits that will accrue to India by joining the NSG. In fact, membership of the group will not immediately open up nuclear trade as India has already pledged not to transfer nuclear know-how to other countries. If we attempt to dilute the guidelines to liberalise supply, it will be resisted by the others. Membership of the NSG will only mean greater pressure on us to sign the NPT and the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) and commit in advance to a Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty, which would impose restrictions on existing stockpiles of fissile material.

China has given scant attention to the NSG guidelines and has violated them in the case of Pakistan by claiming to act under an agreement reached before China joined the NSG. Unlike India, Pakistan has not even sought an exemption from the NSG. To say, therefore, that India and Pakistan should be equated on nuclear matters is unreasonable, to say the least. But the NSG did not even challenge the supply of two new reactors to Pakistan by China. The NSG’s ineffectiveness in countering proliferation makes it even less attractive as a group India should join.

The green signal for India to join the MTCR came when Mr. Modi was in Washington purely by coincidence, as the last date for filing objections happened to be that day. Italy had held up its approval on account of the Italian marines issue, but did not file a formal objection because of the decision to let the marines go home. Membership of the MTCR, which restricts the weight and range of missiles, is being projected as clearing the way for NSG. This is not likely because of China except that we can now threaten to veto China if it applies for membership of the MTCR.

When India is not anywhere near the permanent membership of the Security Council and even APEC membership remains elusive, the high-level pursuit of NSG membership may give the impression that India is unrealistic in its expectations from the international community. Support from Switzerland and Mexico will not make any difference as there will not be a vote on the issue. The U.S. may reiterate its support, but the objection will come from China and even some others. It will be better for India to concentrate on one or two fundamental objectives rather than fritter away our diplomatic resources on matters of marginal interest.

T.P. Sreenivasan is a former Ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency, and followed the Nuclear Suppliers Group in Vienna.

मजदूर / देवराज दिनेश

देवराज दिनेश की ये कविता 'रामधारी सिंह 'दिनकर' के नाम से लोग कई जगह पोस्ट कर रहे हैं. बचपन में मेरी ये पसंदीदा कविता थी. दिनेश जी का जीवन परिचय उपलब्ध नहीं है.अक्सर ही कवियों के परिचय ही क्या होते हैं! फ़िलहाल कविता पढ़िए और 'दिनकर' को नहीं 'देवराज दिनेश को' क्रेडिट दीजिये.

मैं जनसंख्या में दशमलव के बाद आता हूँ.

नवजात पैदा होता है
अपने खाने पीने का सामान लेकर.
मैंने भी बछड़े का दूध चुराकर प्रोटीन बटोरा आज.

नाली में ज़हर जा रहा था
वो आदमी मर गया जो साफ़ करने घुसा था.
जो साफ़ करने घुसा था उसे लोग नहीं छूते थे.

जो ज़िंदा हैं वो छूने लायक नहीं बचे.

मेरे बाप ने वसीयत में लिखा
मेरे मरने पे लकड़ियां मत देना.
वृक्ष कम हैं
हमारे बच्चों को ऑक्सीजन कौन देगा?

मेरा बाप वृद्धाश्रम में मरा था,
मरते मरते उसे मेरे बच्चों की फ़िक्र रही.

दशमलव के बाद के अंक
संख्या से नहीं पढ़े जाते.
मैं जनसंख्या में दशमलव के बाद आता हूँ.

एक इंडिया गेट पर मरे किसानों के नाम खोद डालो.
नहीं हमें बहुत से इंडिया गेट बनाने पड़ेगें.
रहने दो आईडिया अच्छा नहीं है
किसान अपनी ज़मीनें नहीं देंगे.

तुम बार-बार काटती फ़ोन
मैं मिलाता हुआ बार-बार
सोचता हूँ, तुम मेरी माँ से हो.
बारहवीं के रिजल्ट के बाद
उसने भी तीन दिन बात नहीं की थी.

शुक्र है घर में पंखा नहीं था, ए.सी. थे.

[ Poem Inspired From Incidences Published In Newspapers This Week ]

एक वृक्ष भी बचा रहे / नरेश सक्सेना

अंतिम समय जब कोई नहीं जाएगा साथ
एक वृक्ष जाएगा
अपनी गौरैयों-गिलहरियों से बिछुड़कर
साथ जाएगा एक वृक्ष
अग्नि में प्रवेश करेगा वही मुझ से पहले

'कितनी लकड़ी लगेगी'
शमशान की टालवाला पूछेगा
ग़रीब से ग़रीब भी सात मन तो लेता ही है

लिखता हूँ अंतिम इच्छाओं में
कि बिजली के दाहघर में हो मेरा संस्कार
ताकि मेरे बाद
एक बेटे और एक बेटी के साथ
एक वृक्ष भी बचा रहे संसार में।"

Tall Chabahar promises: But the gap between what we say and what we do is the India credibility gap

The Kaladan multi-modal transit-transport system connecting India’s northeastern states through Myanmar to its Sittwe port was intended to be a landmark project that would power India’s links to Asean region. Signed in 2008, the project was supposed to be completed by 2013. But it’s unlikely to get anywhere for at least another few years largely because the Indian government estimates of the entire project was wildly inaccurate.

The project first envisaged 225 km of waterway on the river Kaladan, but this was later found to be incorrect, it has now been modified to 158 km. The road between Paletwa and Indo-Myanmar border was first thought to be 62 km, also incorrect, later corrected to 110 km. Nobody counted the shoals that had to be dredged in the river – there are six shoals, which if detected at the time the project was prepared could have altered the project. The cost, starting out at Rs 535 crore in 2008, now needs a massive Rs 2,904 crore just to make amends for the mess. Not to speak of the impact on bilateral relations with Myanmar or even India’s larger strategic outreach to the rest of Asia.

Over the last decade, as India has moved to becoming a more active international player, Indian foreign policy has been hobbled by New Delhi’s inability to deliver on its promises, or follow up to see initiatives through. It means years later, subsequent governments have to jump through hoops just to maintain credibility. While the Modi government is working on laundry lists of achievements, it might be more instructive to judge themselves on things they get done rather than things they start, leaving it to others to make up for their delays.

The Chabahar port and connectivity project, for instance, has been a talking point for well over a decade. The first trilateral agreement between India, Iran and Afghanistan was signed in 2003, Manmohan Singh signed another trilateral MoU in 2012. The first framework agreement however only happened when Nitin Gadkari travelled to Iran in 2015 and Prime Minister Narendra Modi signed the final deal yesterday, to build and operate the port. India built the Zaranj-Delaram highway by 2009, but connecting to the port remained undone. So India’s great dream of connecting to Central Asia through Iran is still in progress.

In September 2013, India and the US signed the Defence Trade and Technology Initiative (DTTI), brainchild of Ash Carter and Shivshankar Menon, through which the US would be building defence equipment in India. The first meeting was held only in September 2014. DRDO, the nodal agency was hopelessly ill-equipped to handle this initiative so it ran cold. Three years later, control of this project has moved, giving India and the US a chance to perhaps manufacture jet engines here. Basically, it means the gap between what we say and what we do is the India credibility gap.

The biggest example has been nuclear liability. Having secured a historic waiver for nuclear commerce by NSG in 2008, India scored a self-goal with an ill-designed liability law in 2010. Justified on moral grounds, it froze out foreign nuclear players leading the US to take the grouse to other aspects of the relationship. It also stopped nuclear supplies by Indian companies to domestic power plants. Five years later, India had to work out a new understanding with the US, complete administration arrangements (all hanging fire), reassure nuclear companies, ratify CSC after creating an insurance pool, getting NPCIL to buy cover, etc. Indian companies are considering bidding as nuclear suppliers after almost six years.

India has messed up Nepal in more ways than one. We can think of many, but just look at this – we were supposed to build roads in the Terai to ease connectivity, prove we are as good as the Chinese. Years later, it turns out land availability was not checked, of the six phases only one has been completed, the contractor has actually abandoned the work. This government then went ahead and blockaded Nepal – New Delhi worries about growing anti-India pro-China sentiment in Nepal. Wonder why?

India was one of Mahinda Rajapakse’s earliest supporters, especially when he took the war to the LTTE and won. Somehow, Rajapakse was allowed to slip out of our sphere of influence and by 2013 India was staring at a security nightmare of the Colombo Port City project financed by China. India is the largest user of the Colombo Port. The new president, Maithripala Sirisena, also supported by India, is confronting an $8 billion debt, so can do nothing but stay with the Chinese and their usurious rates. He wants India to fix it, but short of paying their debt, India now can only do “damage control”.

China is not the only opposition to India in the global non-proliferation regimes. Enter Italy. As a result of the Indian decision to arrest two Italian marines for mistaking Kerala fishermen to be Somalian pirates, and letting the case sit around without resolution, Italy has gone out of its way to ensure there were no India-EU summits after 2013, the first being March 2016; blocked India’s membership to the MTCR at the last moment, and is opposing India in the NSG as well. Much diplomatic capital has to be expended by this government including the international arbitration to give everybody an honourable exit.

Indians will find ways to blame others for mess-ups. Or blame the lack of numbers in MEA. Maybe foreign policy practice should involve game theory. Or, Indian governments could concentrate on just getting things done. That could work.

India’s Chabahar conundrum

Prime Minister Narendra Modi is on his visit to Iran. PM Modi’s visit will be the first by an Indian Prime Minister in 15 years and comes four months after the sanctions on Iran were lifted and the international community is re-engaging with the nation.

This visit was necessary for the following reasons:

• To diversify and increase India’s oil and gas supplies.
• To enhance connectivity and trade with Afghanistan, Central Asia and beyond via Iran.
• To hedge Iran’s geopolitical bets in the region vis-à-vis other players, notably Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf Cooperation Council members.
• To balance China’s growing influence and also to engage the US in ensuring that India’s interests are protected in the region.

To achieve all the above stated objectives, the port of Chabahar has become the crucial gateway to step up relations with Iran.

All you need to know about Chabahar project:

Where is Chabahar port?

It is located on the Makran coast, Chabahar in southeastern Iran. Its location lies in the Gulf of Oman. This coast is a relatively underdeveloped free trade and industrial zone, especially when compared to the sprawling port of Bandar Abbas further west. Also, it is the only Iranian port with direct access to the ocean.

For India, Chabahar is of strategic importance for the following reasons:

• It is the nearest port to India on the Iranian coast, which provides access to the resources and markets of Afghanistan and Central Asia.
• It is located 76 nautical miles (less than 150km) west of the Pakistani port of Gwadar, being developed by China. This makes it ideal for keeping track of Chinese or Pakistani military activity based out of Gwadar.
• Also, Chabahar port is suitably located to serve India’s outreach in the region to Afghanistan and beyond as well as link with International North-South Transport Corridor (INSTC) to which India is one of the initial signatories.
• The port will cut transport costs/time for Indian goods by a third.
• From Chabahar, the existing Iranian road network can link up to Zaranj in Afghanistan, about 883 kms from the port. The Zaranj-Delaram road constructed by India in 2009 can give access to Afghanistan’s Garland Highway, setting up road access to four major cities in Afghanistan — Herat, Kandahar, Kabul and Mazar-e-Sharif.

Despite the strategic import of Chabahar for India, there has been very little progress on it for the following reasons:

• Iran’s unenthusiastic support for the project. Although the idea was first mooted in 2003, it was only in 2012 on the sidelines of the 16th Non-Aligned Movement Summit in Tehran that Iran conceded to set up a joint working group to operationalize the port project as part of the trilateral cooperation agreement between Afghanistan, India and Iran on investment cooperation, trade and transit.
• A key factor behind Iran’s reluctance to allow an Indian presence at Chabahar was the opposition by the Army of the Guardians of the Islamic Revolution (the so-called Revolutionary Guards), which reportedly uses the port to ship arms to Yemen and militant groups in the region.
• Its strategic significance notwithstanding, the economic viability of the project is suspect. India, which has had trouble raising funds for the project, has so far been able to invest only $85 million to build a couple of berths. While India recently indicated that it was willing to invest up to $20 billion—one of its largest overseas ventures—to develop the port, petrochemical and fertilizer plants in the Chabahar SEZ, it remains to be seen if it can raise the funds.
• Also, given the presence of Gwadar next door, where China has already invested over $1 billion and committed another $46 billion for the 3,000-km long economic corridor to link Gwadar to Kashgar in Xinjiang province and its One Belt, One Road project, it is unclear whether the Chabahar route will generate enough trade and traffic to justify the investment. Besides, so far the project moved slowly because of western sanctions against Iran.

Developments so far:

In May 2015, India inked a memorandum of understanding to develop the Chabahar Port. As per the MoU, India is to equip and operate two berths in Chabahar Port Phase-I with capital investment of USD 85.21 million and annual revenue expenditure of USD 22.95 million on a ten year lease. Ownership of equipment will be transferred to Iranian side on completion of 10 year period or for an extended period, based on mutual agreement.

The Union Cabinet, in February 2016, gave its approval to the proposal of the Ministry of Shipping for provision and operationalization of credit of 150 million USD from EXIM Bank for development of Chabahar Port in Iran.  

Way ahead:

The Union Cabinet has now authorized the Ministers of Finance, External Affairs and Shipping to approve the final contract with Iran and for resolution of any issue arising in implementation of the project. The Union Cabinet has also authorized the Ministry of Shipping to form a Company in Iran for implementing the Chabahar Port Development Project and related activities.

Conclusion:

Chabahar port is crucial for India as it is easily accessible from Indian western ports of Mumbai and Kandla. While, Iran would benefit from increased trade, earn transit fees and witness major infrastructural investments and developments. Also, development of Chabahar port will have a multiplier effect on the growth of its economy and boost foreign investments in the country. Hence, resolving the Chabahar conundrum is vital to securing India’s interests in Iran and beyond.

ISRO’s reusable satellite launch test

Almost everything that ISRO has accomplished in the last few years, has already been done before although by only one or two other countries. Monday’s test of a reusable satellite launch vehicle (RLV) is no different. What distinguishes each of ISRO’s missions, however, is the cost: almost all the missions, including the Moon and Mars missions, have been executed at a fraction of the cost of similar missions by other space agencies.

ISRO is by no means the only space agency to be developing reusable systems. Most of the other major space powers also have their reusable launch vehicle programmes in different stages of development.

The successful technology demonstration of a RLV is an attempt by ISRO to bring down the cost of satellite launches, which will make it an even more attractive player in the international market and bring down the cost of its own future missions. This is an important consideration as there have been frequent allegations that ISRO’s missions are a waste of money given that India still struggles to provide people with the most basic of amenities.

Space technology is very expensive. India currently uses two kinds of launch vehicles — PSLV (Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle) and GSLV (Geostationary Satellite Launch Vehicle). The PSLV is the older of the two and the more successful, having already clocked 30 successful launches. GSLV, which began in earnest only during the 1990s, has had four successful flights but an equal number of failures too. An advanced version of the GSLV, called Mk-III, that will be capable of putting very heavy satellites – up to about 4,000 kg — into space is still under development. The PSLV can carry satellites up to about 1,500 kg in weight.

The average cost of construction of PSLV is about Rs 120 crore. The heaviest version of PSLV, the XL, which launched five British satellites last year, cost Rs 145 crore. GSLV costs about Rs 173 crore, according to
information provided by the Department of Space in Parliament last year.

Nearly 80 per cent of the cost of launch vehicles are structural and only 20 per cent are those of fuel or other expendables.

RLV’s development is an attempt to recover the structural costs involved in developing such technologies. The entire structure of the RLV can be used for future missions, thus substantially saving on the costs. The actual saving will depend on the number of missions the reusable vehicle can be used for.

The current development cost for the RLV has been put at about Rs 90 crore. In contrast, the development cost of GSLV, including the Mk-III version, has been somewhere close to Rs 3,000 crore. The final development cost of the RLV will only be known when it is operationalised in about ten years’ time. ISRO’s argument is that it will be substantially cheaper than the PSLV which it is likely to replace. The GSLV will to operate for a few
more years.

India has been gaining a foothold in the international satellite launch market mainly because of the cost factor, apart from the credibility it has gained in the last few years. The PSLV has been done most of the foreign satellite launches. Last year, the Department of Space told Parliament that it had earned about Rs 7 billion since 1999 through the launch of 45 foreign satellites. The launch of PSLV-C30, which carried ASTROSAT, besides six foreign satellites, took ISRO beyond the 50 mark in international customer satellite launches. But it is still a small player in a segment dominated by the European, US and Russian space agencies.

The RLV will, hopefully, give ISRO a greater cost advantage in the future.

- See more at: http://indianexpress.com/article/technology/tech-news-technology/reusable-satellite-launch-test-its-all-about-lowering-the-cost-2815455/#sthash.exXaGYAt.dpuf

सैनिटरी पैड और हम

तमाम लोगों ने अपने हिस्से की रोशनी का इंतजार किया और इंतजार के उस पार अपनी जिंदगी की लौ बुझा दी...ये जानकर कि ऐसा हमेशा नहीं होता कि सबके हिस्से में सूरज आए। लेकिन तुमने साबित किया अपना लोहा और ये भी कि तुम उनमें से नहीं थे। तुमने अपने होने की वजहों के हजारों-लाखों चिराग बनाए और दिन-रात की अथक मेहनत से नया सूरज उगाया। अब सूरज तुम्हारे इशारे पर उगता है...देखता हूं कि कैसे लोग चरागों की शक्ल में तुमसे लिपटते जाते हैं और तुम उनका स्याह लेकर रोशनी की उम्मीद बांटते हो....बिना रुके, बिना थके।

कपड़ों के कितने मतलब होते हैं...किसी के लिए साज-सिंगार तो किसी के लिए अस्मत ढंकने का जरिया...कोई दिन में चार बदले तो किसी के पास चार दिनों के लिए एक। कपड़े वो सब छुपा लेते हैं जिन्हें हम दुनिया के सामने नहीं लाना चाहते, लेकिन यही कपड़े वो सच नहीं छुपा सके जिससे रुबरू होते ही आपकी रूह कांप उठेगी। मुमकिन है थोड़ी देर को नजरें बर्फ हो जाएं, और अंदर कुछ ठहर जाए। मैं सहम गया हूं। देश की हजारों औरतों को बच्चेदानी यानी यूटेरस का कैंसर होता है, या इन्फेक्शन की वजह से इस दुनिया का सृजन करने वाला वो अंग काटकर निकाल दिया जाता है क्योंकि उन हजारों लाखों औरतों के पास मेन्सट्रुएश्नल साइकल बिताने के लिए गज भर का साफ कपड़ा नहीं होता। सैनिटरी पैड की बात कौन करे। साथ ही ये आंकड़ा भी कि वूमन एम्पावरमेंट की बहसों के लिए सरकारों ने सैकड़ों करोड़ फूंक दिए। वूमन एम्पावरमेंट? ? ?

ऐसे में हर महीने के उन तकलीफदेह दिनों को बिताने के लिए देश के मुख्तसर इलाकों में बेइंतहां गरीब तबके की औरतें किन-किन चीजों का इस्तेमाल करती हैं...जरा दिल थामकर सुनिए...पॉलीथीन, अखबार या रद्दी के कागजों की चिंदियां, जूट की बोरी के टुकड़े, नारियल का बूज, गंदे कपड़ों पर राख यानी ऐश, पहले से इस्तेमाल किए जा चुके(कूड़े के ढेर पर फेंके) सैनिटरी पैड्स, पूराने-बेकार हो चुके कपड़े या फिर कुछ नहीं। ये औरतें सेप्टिक हो चुके इस कपड़े को धूप भी नहीं दिखा पातीं, वजह शायद बतानी जरूरी नहीं। नतीजा, यूटरस में होने वाला लाइलाज इन्फेक्शन। कपड़ा, ये एक शब्द कितना बड़ा लगता है।

ऐसे में तुमने उम्मीदों का नया उफक खोला...दुनिया से कहा कि वो कपड़ा जो तुम्हारे लिए बेमतलब हो चुका है उसे दान कर दो। रिसाइक्लिंग की, रेनोवेट किया और मुफ्त की सैनिटरी पैड बनाई, उन लोगों के लिए जहां वूमनहुड एक अभिशाप से ज्यादा कुछ नहीं। धीरे-धीरे इसे एक उद्यम में बदला। सोशल आंत्रेप्रेन्योरशिप के एक उम्दा मॉडल में। गरीब को सम्मान मिला, बदलाव की किरण दिखी और दे सकने वालों को एक वजह। एक कारण। सार्थकता का बहुमूल्य भाव। संतोष।

गूंज, जो संस्था तुम चलाते हो वो आज हर साल एक हजार टन से ज्यादा पुराने कपड़ों को इकट्ठा करती है, रीसाइकल करती है और गरीब तबके की उन औरतों के लिए सैनिटरी पैड रीप्रड्यूस करती है जो उन्हें नई जिंदगी दे रहा है। हिंदुस्तान के 21 राज्यों में गूंज की गूंज सुनाई देती है...छोटे-मोटे करीब 200 गैरसरकारी संस्थाओं, इतने ही बिजनेस हाउस, 100 स्कूल और 500 से ज्यादा स्वयंसेवी क्लॉथ फॉर वर्क की इस अनूठी योजना को अमली जामा पहना रहे हैं...वो भी कुल जमा 97 पैसे प्रतिकिलोग्राम के खर्च पर।

इस शख्स का नाम अंशु गुप्ता है। अंशु की उम्र ज्यादा नहीं लेकिन हौसले आसमान छूते हैं। मैंने अंशु को कहीं बोलते सुना...पांच मिनट में जो सुना और फिर पढ़ा, ये पोस्ट उसी का सार है। पहले अंशु ने कहा कि वो सैनिटरी पैड पर काम करते हैं। पहले मैं भी अचकचाया था, आप ही की तरह। लेकिन उन पांच मिनटों में बहुत कुछ बदला। अब ये शब्द बोलने में संकोच का भाव नहीं आता। अगर आपको आता हो तो गूंज के बारे में डब्लूडब्लूडब्लू डॉट गूंज डॉट कॉम पर जाकर पढ़ें। और ये भी कैसे उनके बीस लाख से ज्यादा सैनिटरी पैड्स ने हजारों लाखों औरतों की जिंदगियां बदली हैं।

ये लिखते हुए बालकनी से सूरज को डूबते देखता हूं और अचानक फिर से सोचता हूं, जीने की वजह के बारे में। अब वो हर जगह दिखाई देती है। चमकती सी। रोशनी की गूंज सी...तुम भी आसपास ही हो कहीं और खुश भी। कितना कुछ तो है...कितना-कुछ, खत्म होने के बाद भी।

--

Source: http://firstsignature.blogspot.in/