Iraq - A Close Look

This isn’t the first time that Iraq has been in the global headlines. In 2003 also, the UK government sent British troops to the country in a US-led invasion.

But, the current situation in Iraq is much more dangerous as the people are under immense threat and this may have catastrophic repercussions on the development of the country. The Islamist extremist group called Isis, has taken control of several cities in the country. Lakhs of people have left these areas to avoid conflicts, which is getting closer and closer to the capital city, Baghdad.

Recently, the Iraqi army found counter offensive techniques to fight more effectively after the Sunni insurgency began. According to local channels, thousands of government soldiers with warplanes and tanks had recaptured Tikrit. Preparations were on track for government forces to move north towards Mosul. Sources said that more than 50,000 Christians were forced to run away from the villages near Mosul after the insurgents attacked. They sought shelter in the Kurdistan region of Iraq, which is now an independent entity.

Daily riots and fights are common news to the Iraqi population and the rest of the world which thinks that despite the fact that a lot is going on within, Iraq hears only 50% of it. A spokesperson for the Sunni insurgents fighting primarily against the Shia forces supporting the government of Nouri al-Maliki claimed that the attack had failed, and also reported continuous battle. Insurgents have secured power over large swathes of the territory to the north and west of Iraq.

The Obama administration made a delayed move against Maliki. It called upon his State of the Law coalition and his opponents to form a government of national salvation approving Shia, Sunni and Kurdish parties.

This equates to a demand for Maliki to go—a move considered a precondition for ending the insurgency by the Sunni tribes.

Maliki on the other hand has also begun parley for the return of more than 100 Iraqi planes detained by Iran from the Iraqi pilots during the 1991 Gulf War. A top Iraqi intelligence official told the Guardian that Iran was secretly supplying huge destructive weapons in large numbers. Maliki has also secured planes from Russia and Belarus to counter the failure of the US.

According to the information available over the internet, the US response to the extrication of its previous Middle East policy seems incoherent. Consider the Syrian case, where for years it supported ISIS and other Al Qaeda-linked forces. Washington has officially provided $287 million to the Syrian opposition since 2011 and has trained its fighters in the camps in Jordan.

There is no way to determine where US weapons would end up, especially as the FSA is a much less effective and influential force than the Islamic Front coalition.

There is confirmation of a degree of US cooperation with Iran as well.

Obama sees to it as Iraq needs support to break the momentum of extremist groups and that he may take military action if required. But military advice and support won’t accomplish much if Mr. Maliki and other Iraqi leaders refuse to join together to save their state. Whatever action Obama decides to take, it must be grounded in a larger political strategy considering all the dangers that are developing in the region.

Because of the persistent violence by the Sunni militants, it seems less probable that Iraq might become a unified state.

Events in Iraq are an upsetting denunciation of the role played by US there and throughout the Middle East. The rapacious aims of the US risk a combat that could engulf the entire region. Hence, the role of US is very uncertain in insurgency and this ongoing rebellion in the Middle East. Since Iraq has failed as a state, the UN should intervene as they did in Afghanistan. Only, if peace is seen as the last resort and nothing else, only then the situation can ameliorate. Hence, there should be an extensive modern educational program in Iraq, Iran and similar states to curb the orthodox Islamic organizations’ attempts to rope in youngsters of the region.

There should be job opportunities and foreign investment. Instead of the sanctions posed on these countries which kills jobs and alleviates the violent situation, more financial assistance should be provided. There should be democratic elections moderated by the UN and not the US as was the case in Afghanistan. In the latter case, it becomes the case of puppet governance by the US.

For women empowerment, propaganda should be run with examples like that of Malala Yousafzai. The UN can help and improve the condition of Iraq unlike any other ally.

If that happens, we can hope that the people living there will get a huge relief. But till then we can just pray for peace and raise our voices to support the poor innocent common people suffering in Iraq.

Amen

Do we need an IIT in each state?

The first IIT was founded in May 1950 at the site of the Hijli Detention Camp in Kharagpur. Jawaharlal Nehru, in the first convocation address at the IIT Kharagpur in 1956 said:

“Here in the place of that Hijli Detention Camp stands the fine monument of India, representing India’s urges, India’s future in the making. This picture seems to me symbolical of the changes that are coming to India.”

So, IIT was constructed with this motive. It was supposed to be the driver of India’s technological advancement, producing the best human resources the country would need to make a dent in the world after independence.

Recently our HRD minister promised to establish an IIT in each state. At present, there are already sixteen Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs) viz. at Bombay, Delhi, Kanpur, Kharagpur, Madras, Guwahati, Roorkee, Hyderabad, Patna, Bhubaneshwar, Ropar, Jodhpur, Gandhinagar, Indore, Mandi and Varanasi.

Now, is it wise to open new institutes in every state? Can India actually afford it in the present scenario where other issues are of a much greater concern?

I don’t think so. Because, establishing a quality institute or especially an IIT requires a lot of resources. While the total government funding to other engineering colleges is around Rs. 100–200 million (USD 2–4 million) per year, the amount varies between Rs. 900–1,300 million (USD 18–26 million) per year for every IIT. Not just this, it needs well trained and experienced faculty, which is its lifeline. Faculty is the driver of IIT, money is just the fuel – very important, but insignificant if there is no good driver.

Honestly, given a population of 1.2 billion and a GDP of 1.8 trillion USD, it seems an obvious ‘yes’. But it does not. It has the money, but even the existing IITs lack a world-class faculty. The conditions of other institutes are even worse, call it infrastructure or facilities. Well, on a lighter note, students are trained to live in extreme adverse situations which make them tough enough.

A lot of regional engineering colleges and private institutes do not have necessary equipments and a good teaching staff. My friend who joined a engineering college complains that most of the time either the faculty is absent or the college is closed. Surprisingly the newer NITs do not even have a campus of their own. NIT is an institute of national importance. In such a condition establishing IITs namesake with poor infrastructure will just denigrate the brand value of the institute.

Okay, for a while let us even consider that we’ve funds. But, a very important question that arises here is, do we actually need an IIT in each state?

While India produces millions of engineers every year, industries are complaining that they are facing a severe shortage of well trained people. This is a real challenge for India. While we have the world’s largest population of young people, we are ignoring the fact that they many of them are untrained, which would become a liability rather than an asset.

We should keep in mind that creating more IITs would probably give us a few thousand more engineers, but unless vocational institutes and other universities are upgraded, the problem cannot be solved.

A typical engineering graduate follows this treaded path: work for a private firm (most of them end up in the IT sector or consulting, irrespective of their stream), get an MBA and then work for a private firm or go abroad for studies. It is rare that they would join some research institute, or go on for civil services. Some of my friends joined the government agencies, but they told me that they have nothing to do there. I definitely blame them for the brain-drain problem, if the government can’t excite the fresh or talented graduates, then one must not resort to the term “patriotism” and blame the students.

Furthermore the education in our country focuses more on a paper-pen module and mugging up whereas in the US and other countries, there is an emphasis on practical aspects, training and projects. The Government can fuel this sector instead of generating more and more bookworms so that people consider India as the first option for research instead of foreign universities, where they have to go unwillingly and spend huge sums of money.

In addition to that, with the mindless reservation system in India, it is really tough for general candidates to get into this. Definitely they’ll prefer to work where they are chosen for their work and not their surname.

So, the real talent of India hardly serves the nation. In this scenario, will more IITs help? Are we magically going to create new minds at the new IITs?

Think over it, that we have NITs in every state, if we could focus on improving the condition and quality of the existing institutes will lead to development and it’ll produce quality engineers. Moreover, with so many IITs and NITs, we can surely erect buildings but we can’t mould each and every brain. It’s high time that we understand that not every brain is meant to be an engineer. There exist artists, businessmen, and writers as well.

With the increasing number of IITs and other engineering colleges, are we increasing the number of talented technocrats in India? Maybe yes, or maybe no. The answer is uncertain because there are a lot of talented engineers in India, meeting the current technological demand along with several frustrated students who are contemplating on other future options while doing engineering like writing, acting, journalism, hotel management, MBA, IAS etc. It’s not wrong, but most of the times the reason behind this is, as they say, that they can’t understand engineering or they never wanted to be one. Most of the students choose engineering because it’s a trend or because it’s a safe option.

It’s time that now we question that ‘Why is engineering the best and perhaps the only safest graduation option?’

Instead of establishing more IITs we should focus on improving the existing institutes, promote and create opportunities for other professions as well. A student should opt for a stream out of choice and not due to the availability of opportunity.

We should really stop this IIT, Kota hype and ask the children, what they actually want to be, where they think they can prosper and give their best, instead of making them mindlessly following the IIT-IIM herd.

It’s a request to the HRD minister, to create opportunities to train students instead of building IITs. Let them secure their dream job; can earn more than just money. I feel that in this way, we can also cope-up with the rising dissatisfaction, frustration, crime and increase the number of skilled people in various fields and not just engineering.