User talk:Atul Sharma PhD

Why not use your Mother’s name in place of your Father’s?
The Supreme Court of India has, very recently, come up with a verdict which, to put it mildly, is radical and revolutionary. The learned judges took cognizance of an appeal from a mother that her child be allowed to write her name, instead of its father’s, as the guardian. Now onward, it would not be mandatory for anyone to mention or write one’s father’s name for any official purpose. The moment I read about the verdict, another thought came to my mind: why should we Indians not use our mother’s name everywhere? One who wants to write one’s father’s name also can definitely do so but why not make it compulsory to write the mother’s name in all government as well as private instruments, vouchers, forms, files and documents? Any child would, of course, have a mother and, definitely, a father too. But while the mother is true and exists in reality, the father as an individual entity is only an assumption. Why do we attach more importance to assumption than fact? Our society is a patriarchal one – that’s why. The mother is but only a woman and the woman is the door to hell! She is nothing but a piece of property for man. She does not enjoy any right but is burdened with duties and responsibilities. A child is introduced to the society by its father’s name only. This deplorable attitude towards women has spread in almost all parts of both the western and eastern worlds. Let us flip the idea for further deliberations. In India, the legendary heroes and warriors have always been known by their mother’s name. The sons of Kunti were referred to as Kaunteya and those of Sumitra as Soumitra whereasSatyakam, Jabala’s son, was known as Jabal. Why do we put the woman before the man in, say, Sita-Ram and Radha-Krishna? For us India is not our ‘fatherland’, we lovingly describe our nation as our ‘motherland’. In the Vedas the earth has always been likened to Mother. Earth is our mother and we her children – says a famous shloka. Another one from the Vedas say that no man or woman can acquire knowledge and wisdom without the mother, the father and the Guru or the teacher – with the mother being the first in order. What happened that we followed the western concept of pushing the mother at the rear? If each and every Indian starts using the mother’s name as that of the guardian it would herald a fundamental social change. I have discussed the matter with Dr. Surat Singh, Harvard and Oxford educated top lawyer of India, who has been like a younger brother to me. We shall soon file a petition with the Supreme Court requesting it to make using the mother’s name, in place of the father’s, mandatory for all purposes.

China: an inconsistent neighbour
It seems that the bilateral talks held by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, on the sidelines of the BRICS and SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organisation) summits, have been successful to a very large extent. Shree Modi had separate tête-à-tête with Chinese President Xi Jinping, Russian President Vladimir Putin and his Pakistani counterpart NawazSharif. These one-to-one meetings afforded Modi ji to raise those issues which decorum would not have permitted him to do on the dais of BRICS or SCO. It would not be incorrect to say that Shree Modi succeeded in eking out the best out of this opportunity. In the meeting with the Chinese President, he did not mince his words while bringing up the case of Zakiur Rehman Lakhvi, the infamous conspirator behind the Mumbai attack, and asked the reason behind China not supporting the arrest, for the second time, of Lakhvi. He asked Mr. Jinping why China used its power of technical veto while the rest of the superpowers of the world strongly and vociferously demanded the arrest of Lakhvi. Modi ji told the Chinese President, unequivocally, how this act of China has angered the entire nation of India. In the same vein, he also expressed India’s apprehensions about the proposed Silk Route, going from China through Pakistan, to be built at a cost of forty-six billion dollars. All this information was shared with the media representatives, who had accompanied the Prime Minister as a part of his entourage, by the officers of the foreign ministry,but we are yet to know whether any Chinese spokesperson has confirmed it, or otherwise. When the Indian reporters questioned S. Jaishankar, the Foreign Secretary of India on the reaction of the Chinese President to Modi’s anger, he was noncommittal and said that the discussion had had a major impact on the Chinese. It must have had, no doubt, but the real picture can emerge only when they speak out about it. They did not do so even when Modi ji himself had called up Beijing immediately after the Chinese veto at the UN. The foreign ministry did brief the media about the famous phone call but failed to mention who the person on the other side was or what he had to say. If the Modi government can influence the Chinese to take a different tack on Pakistan-occupied-Kashmir (PoK), Jammu-Kashmir, the new silk Route and Lakhvi, it would definitely be considered as a significant milestone of successful diplomacy. This would, also, prove to be a test for friendship between India and China. If this threshold can be crossed, India would not have to appeal to the China for its permanent membership of the Security Council. If China extends its hand of friendship, it would actually be paying up India’s ‘loan’ along with the ‘interest’. That India had played a big role in getting Mao’s China included in the UN Security Councilmust not have been forgotten. Also, it is noticeable that, in spite of the border disputes, the trade relations between India and China are getting ever so closer. Unfortunately, there still exists a discernable deficit of trust. If this deficit is erased by the two great nations, no one can stop the twenty-first century to be hailed as the Century of Asia.

The kidnapping of a Prime Minister
If it has been tried to make people forget a great Prime Minister, it has happened with Narsimha Rao ji. Delhi was experiencing a freezing weather the day he passed away (23rdDecember 2004). People thought his last rites would be performed somewhere in the vicinity of Rajghat only. Right in the morning I received a call from a friend of mine in Congress that the body of Rao ji was about to be taken to theCongress headquarters from his residence at 9 Motilal Nehru Marg and that it had already been decided to fly it to Hyderabad. I was advised by my friend to reach the Congress headquarters directly. I was surprised to find hardly eight or nine Congress leaders there apart from Manmohan Singh and General Secretary Sonia Gandhi. Was this really a fitting farewell for the great leader? It is probably better not to reflect on it. So many revolutionary and epoch-making steps were taken by P. V. Narsimha Rao that, whatever the Congress does to make people forget him, history would never allow to happen. No other Prime Minister has had the generosity and tolerance that Shree Rao had for the Nehru family (Manmohan Singh belongs to an altogether different category). He had allotted 100 crores for the Rajiv Gandhi Foundation. He did not utter a word against Sonia Gandhi though her residence had become a favourite meeting place for his detractors – all this in spite of some people, who were ministers in the Rajiv Gandhi and/or Manmohan Singh government, advising him to take action against her. Now the BJP government has installed a memorial for P. V. Narsimha Rao at the Rashtriya Smriti Sthal. Shree Rao has been remembered on his birthday (28th June) more than ten years after his demise. What reservations can the Congress really have about this? Their only bone of contention could be that the BJP is boasting of a long list of big names, that the BJP is engaged in the political kidnap of great leaders of the Congress like Sardar Patel, Madanmohan Malaviya and now Narsimha Rao and portraying them in the colour of Hinduism. An allegation against Shree Rao is that he orchestrated the demolition of the Babri Masjid. There is no bigger lie than this. Shree Rao, along with Chandra Shekhar, tried his best to resolve the mandir-masjid issue. The inside story would be written separately at some point of time but it is imperative to state here that some people, by the dint of their good and honest work, ascend to such heights that nation, race or religion cannot confine or hold them down. The day the Congress is finally able to cut the umbilical cord with the Nehru-Firoz Gandhi (not our Mahatma!) family, the leaders of so-called Hinduism would automatically transform into leaders of the nation. That day Subhash Bose would get his justice. That day Veer Savarkar, Bhagat Singh, Chandra Shekhar Azad and Bismil would be remembered. That day, finally, history would get rid of dynastic politics.

A new dawn of hope in Iran – an Indian sunrise too?
The nuclear treaty between Iran and the five permanent members of the UN Security Council and Germany will be marked as epoch-making in the annals of international political history. I have a number of reasons to aver this. First, Iran, as a nation, and its leaders have displayed unmatched pluck and spunk in times of distress. At some point of time in the past, the supreme leader of Iran, Ayatollah Khomeini, had the gall of referring to the USA as the Great Satan and the erstwhile USSR as the Lesser Satan. America, in turn, used the moniker Axis of Evil for Iran. While Jimmy Carter was trying some sort of military intervention in Iran,the matter came to such head that Israel had even considered using nuclear weapon. And now, after forty years of bitter strife, Iran and America have been able to forge a nuclear treaty that is expected to bridge the yawning gap existing between the two. Second, the treaty puts all nuclear installations in Iran under strict international vigil and, as a result, they cannot go ahead with their plan of possessing a nuclear bomb. Third, looking at the pressure the six superpowers exerted on Iran and, also, achieved the desired outcome, would discourage such countries as have been pursuing a nuclear dream surreptitiously. Fourth, with the thawing of the relationship between Iran and America, India can work together with them for the benefit of the entire southern Asia, especially in combined military strategy, joint investments and commerce. Fifth, for the same reason, India can now find the opportunity to play a more central role in the region. India is already helping develop the Chabahar Port, which will give it access to the oil and gas resources in Iran and the Central Asian states and can now expect America’s support in fortifying its influence in the region. Sixth, India, along with Iran and America, can now deal with the Taliban more forcefully and support Afghanistan in its nation-building process. Seventh, India, by the dint of its amicable relationship with Saudi Arabia, Israel and Iran, can now discover the role it would like to play to create a tripartite equilibrium and tranquility. What America does in a bigger field, will have to be undertaken by India by regional standards. Eighth, with the lifting of the trade embargo, the flow of crude from Iran will definitely bring down the price in the international market. India, which has to import eighty percent of its crude needs, now stands to gain the most by saving billions in foreign currency reserve. It would also pave the way for India to draw pipelines for oil from Iran and natural gas from Turkmenistan. Ninth, with Iran back in international trade its economy will be rejuvenated and will surely emerge as a new powerful nation. As a result, it will start exerting more influence in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and other West Asian countries. Naturally, conflicts would also emerge and create several opportunities for India to play a major role as negotiator and truce maker. The points above do not ratify my initial statement only. They also clearly show an emerging future scenario in which India can, and should, act as a true leader and guide. Our leaders should adapt to the changing patterns in Asian political and diplomatic relationships to place India on the high pedestal of the benevolent big brother.

Atul Sharma PhD, you are invited on a Wikipedia Adventure!
 The Adventure

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Atul Sharma PhD


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. A tag has been placed on User:Atul Sharma PhD requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Flounder fillet (talk) 13:55, 17 April 2024 (UTC)