The 'Values' of the ICC

The crux of the issue which caused the Indian team to take a stand and put the tour on hold has truly got swept under all the rhetoric which has been pouring out from every news channel and any two-bit columnist with half a keyboard.

Its not like this is the first time that India (or a sub-continent team) has faced awful umpiring. Its happened before and we have always taken it on the chin and gone on. How many times have Indian fans not groaned when the Indian captain remarks after another lost test match that 'these things happen in cricket', and maybe we should have done better inspite of poor decisions. But this is definitely the first time that the Indian team has taken such a strong stand against it. The key issue here is the fact that the Indian team has not asked for the second test to be annulled. They have asked that the umpires responsible for this embarassment of a result, should not be allowed to stand in the remaining matches.

The other main issue is that the Indian team believes there is no case against Harbhajan, and there should not have been any ban imposed on him consequently. Its clearly a scenario where a group of people feel hard done by, and are demanding justice. The fact that this group of people happens to be the Indian cricket team, the so-called most powerful cricket team in terms of financial clout, is immaterial. If this situation had happened with Zimbabwe playing against Kenya, the issue would still have been as important.

There are so many organisational faults with the ICC that its just a mystery how this body manages to keep a hold on world cricket. The very fact that even the CEO of this organisation, Malcolm Speed, is incapable of sifting through the mounds of crap and addressing the real issue, is astounding. The last thing this issue needed was for Speed to call a press conference and tell the world that the ICC will not allow a different set of rules for India. We have not asked for different rules, Mr Speed, we have asked that a different set of rules currently favouring Australia be not allowed. We have asked you for justice, Mr Speed. Does that sound like a familiar word?

I would really like to know what the responsibilities or objectives of the ICC are. Have they been written down somewhere? Do the employees of the International Cricket Council know what is involved in being a cog in the wheel that runs the global game?

In fact, they have been put up on their website. Hmm.. The ICC Mission! Values!

The ICC Mission
As the international governing body for cricket, the
International Cricket Council will lead by:

• Promoting and protecting the game, and its unique spirit
• Delivering outstanding, memorable events
• Providing excellent service to Members and stakeholders
• Optimising its commercial rights and properties for the benefit of its
  Members

How do you protect the game, Mr Speed? Why has there never been any protection to Asian teams against the boorish Aussies? Do I even need to give examples here? Why didnt the ICC step in during the tens of occasions of boorish behaviour from the Australian team - the one team that has consistently claimed to be a proponent of 'hard cricket'. But they could never take it themselves, could they? So when the Indians appeal strenuously for a catch which they believe was taken, Sehwag is suspended. But here we have two cases - Ponting's awful 'cheat of the worst kind' appeal, and the equally awful 'Fifth umpire' ruling of Clarke's catch. Where is the protection, Mr Speed? Who are you protecting, Malcolm? Sehwag and the Indian team has no integrity? Whereas Ponting does?

Excellent service to members?? Clearly, Mike Procter has a different idea about providing service to the member countries of the ICC. How can you, Malcolm, overlook the fact that Mike Procter doled out a three match ban without a shred of evidence, except for hearsay from the Aussies? How do you provide for the selective acceptance of evidence from the Aussies, without considering that there was one other voice in the room which claims that the racist remark was not made? The person who that voice belonged to, was one of two people who were withing hearing distance during the incident, but he must have been lying, right? He isnt an Aussie after all. Why is it that your countrymen are considered to have more integrity than two veterans of the game, both with flawless records of having played the game with dignity and integrity? Is the ICC racist, Mr Speed?

'Openness, honesty and integrity' - these are some of the values espoused by your organisation. There is 'Accountability and responsibility', 'Respect for our diversity' and finally - 'Fairness and equity'. Please point out some instances of any of these values being upheld during and after the Sydney test, Mr Speed.

And with your comments equally distorting the real issues involved here, maybe its time to drop the hypocrisy and note down the real 'Values' you uphold, Mr Speed.

Its been a while. There have been a few starts and stops, beginnings which were ended long before any end was on sight. There has been no lack of comment-worthy news, but due to a combination of several reasons, no comment came forth.

To continue from my previous post, the politics of power seems to have triumphed over good intentions. The nuclear agreement is all but dead. Dr. Manmohan Singh, perhaps the most important leader this country has had post-independence, has had to bow down to the pressures from several sides to accept the fact that the death of the nuclear deal is preferable to the downfall of the government. He has had to face up to the truth that an Indian electorate may not bear in mind his efforts as they go to the voting booths, there is no guarantee that the Congress will be able to come back to power if they call for elections now by defying the Left to pull out their support.

And the fickleness of Indian politicians has never been so blatant. The mischief-mongering Leftists like Karat, Yechury and Bardhan with a supposedly anti-American ideological stance has proved itself to be truly anti-Indian and anti-developmental. Their actions have appeared to be purely sensation-seeking and an attempt to assume a more central role than they are capable of in the national political stage. Their resistance to negotiations shows their closed mindset. They oppose to show they can oppose. As if we needed more proof!

The BJP being the single largest opposition party has also made opportunistic noises with the sole purpose of shaking the foundations of an otherwise stable government. That the economy has boomed under the secular image of the Congress party is not of any consequence to them. That foreign investment is driving growth in every sector of the industry is of no import. We are the opposition, our dharma is to oppose everything the government does. It does not matter one little bit that the discussions on the nuclear deal was started under the BJP government. If it goes through now, the credit will lie with the Congress. It does not matter an iota that it may lead to further growth for the nation, we oppose and oppose and oppose.

Anyway, so much for our political scenario. In other areas, the news has been much better. Dhoni leads India to the Twenty20 WC, it was definitely a tournament worth remembering. What is it about the absence of the big three that seems to spur a young Indian team on?

Vishwanathan Anand becomes the world champion of chess. This man must be brilliant. Its a huge achievement and it couldn't happen to a nicer guy.

Sania Mirza breaks into the top 30 ranks in the world. I hope she can hang on and keep doing better. She really has something to prove in the Grand Slams.

The Sensex has been soaring to new heights making me feel like banging my head on my desk for not having invested in the market a few years ago.

There does seem to be a curious drop off in IT jobs recently in Bangalore though. At least, the TOI's Ascent seems to give that impression. There hasn't been a lot going on and the Ascent is getting slimmer every week. Have IT companies completely gone with the likes of monster.com etc?

Well, its nice to be back here indulging my need to rant again. Hopefully I will stick to a more frequent verbal diarrhoea from now on.

Doing the 1 2 3 dance

And so the Left has been trying to make Mr. Manmohan Singh do the 1 2 3 dance! The way things have gone reminds me of the classic Procol Harum song, 'A Whiter Shade of Pale'.

We skipped the light fandango

Turned cartwheels cross the floor

I was feeling kinda seasick

But the crowd called out for more

The room was humming harder

As the ceiling flew away

When we called out for another drink

The waiter brought a tray

The skipping, turning, feeling seasick with joy, is very much how Manmohan Singh and most of the nations thinkers and well-wishers have felt. But when the UPA wants the deal sealed, the comrades played the errant waiter and pooped the party with their tray full of threats, ideological hypocrisy and generally antagonistic stance.

When the PM announced the 123 agreement with the US on sharing of civil nuclear technology, it was treated as a huge breakthrough. Diplomats on both sides have been working for the better part of a year on the technicalities of the deal, a lot of pushing and pulling has been done, and both the US and Indian governments have had to make several compromises in putting the deal on paper.

But now in the final stretch, when commitments have been made by the Indian govt, the communist comrades have decided to rise and sound the warning bells declaring that snuggling up to the Americans is not the way they see India go. Karat, Yechury and the Communist politburo are vociferously putting forth that the deal would limit India's sovereign right to test nuclear weapons. The hypocrisy in this, especially coming from the Left, is mind-boggling.

When our ex-PM of the soporific 'Yeh achi baat nahi hai' fame sanctioned the Pokhran tests, the Left was the most vociferous opposer. They even organised a 'Convention against Nuclear Weapons' at that time! Now they claim they are against the 123 deal as it stops India from testing nuclear weapons.

The Left claims it does not want increased collaboration with their ideological 'Evil Empire', the US, but at the same time, the CPM government in West Bengal is actively pursuing more American investment. Thankfully, Buddhadeb has tried to distance himself from the politburo's decisions.

Part of the ideology of communism is that it is against nationalism, but suddenly the politburo is upholding India's nationalism. The mantra for communism has always been 'Workers of the world unite', not just indian workers.

The deal itself has its points worth discussing. There is the Hyde Act which in some way tags along with the 123 agreement. It is easy for those wholly backing the deal to see the Hyde Act as required policing in such agreements. But there are clauses in there which can be seen as undermining India's sovereignty and its right to defend itself.

The crucial points are -

1. The 123 provides an opportunity for India to move out of the 'developing country' class into a class above. Nuclear energy is critical in this, as without power, development is stunted. Especially in the backlands, and even the class B or C towns, it would drive growth. It would drive an increase in jobs in the heartlands where youths are constantly migrating to the larger cities in search of work. It also specifies that collaboration will be spread to other areas besides nuclear technology, and this can mean improvements in agriculture, chemical industries etc. Havent we had enough farmer suicides already?
2. Once the deal is signed, it opens up trade not just with the US, but with several other countries forming the Nuclear Suppliers Group. This includes France and Russia, countries which may not be so concerned about stopping nuclear trade with India, in case the US decides to pull the plug from the deal sometime in the future.
3. Another crucial factor is that the deal is not just signed between India and the US, it needs to be ratified by both the NSG and the IAEA. The NSG will decide whether India will have a right to re-process spent fuel and definitely has a more accomodating policies.

There is so much good that can come to the country from this deal that the cons are completely out-weighed. But unfortunately, they cannot be completely ignored.

1. In the event that the NSG or IAEA does not sanction the deal, it remains only between India and the US. In this case, India will need to sit down and re-negotiate some of the clauses. So there is still some more diplomatic hustle to go.
2. If the US pulls out from the deal in the future, say in response to India testing nukes, and if the NSG also stops fuel supply, India will be left with a huge power problem. There is a great deal of investment required in setting up the infrastructure for nuclear energy generation, and this would be money down the drain. This is a remote possibility though.
3. If Musharraf loses power in Pakistan, and is replaced with a more fundamentalist government, India will have no choice but to make nuclear noises. This is not that remote a possibility.

This deal could be the way into the future for India. If it goes through, maybe in a few years, India Shining will not just be a phrase - it will be what India looks like from space. Maybe that will attract a few of those UFO's which only seem to show up in the US! ;)