It’s so simple! Go to a search engine like “Yahoo!” and enter in a word, in seconds the screen is bombarded with an abundance of information. The Internet vividly depicts the tale of the tortoise and the hare. A contender that was once assumed to be a side player is now paving the way for the future. Day by day its audience and value grows, and daily we see how this communication device has altered our lives in every respect.

The Internet, for one, has completely revolutionized the concept of communication, bringing with it umpteen different ways to interact. Today, the Internet serves as a mechanism for information dissemination, as well as a medium for collaboration and interaction between individuals and their computers without regard for geographic location. The Internet has truly connected the globe in a way that was most likely never envisioned. But how exactly has, and does it continue, to effect you and I, that is the question posed here?

Keeping in touch, or making new friends, has never been so simply as it is thanks to the Internet. Currently, whether it be in businesses or homes, individuals can inter-act in a matter of minutes with a cost-effective mechanism. The Internet has linked families allowing not only the exchange of letters, (that once took weeks to be received), but also allowing the exchange of photographs, files and the ability for live chat. These small interactions have, for many of us, become a part of our daily routines. Many a times, we tend to neglect the role the Internet has played in our lives; we rarely stop to think how magnificent a medium the net has become.

In seconds, with a touch of a button, we can gather information of events that occurred miles away. The individual no longer has to wait for the ten o’clock news to know what is happening in their town, city, country or the world. Now with a simple connection, all the global happens can be located in the comfort of ones home. But can the availability of all this information create an information overkill for the user? That is, can we have too much information available to us? And more importantly how do we disseminate the information we obtain?

Concerns over the Internet arise in terms of privacy and crime. Obviously these two arenas are of great concern not only to the individual but to nation-states as well, and this sentiment is displayed by many governments who are fearful of how powerful the Internet may become. There is a growing fear that the Internet will, if indeed it hasn’t already, posses a life of its own. Fear of losing control is a real threat to many governments who are tackling the question of informed citizens versus over zealous citizens. The Internet has in many cases caught the governments of the world off guard. An innocent connection now appears to threaten the very fabric of our society. The inter-changing of ideas and concepts has generated a new breed of individuals who are able to reach the masses in matter of seconds. How will this relationship effect the way our world operates? Will we have more individuals taking to the net to express their concerns, to establish a foundation for groups, to lead the way for change? Or will we have individuals who merely act solely with their fingers, never once getting out to bond
with the “real” world?

The Internet surely has outdone the couch potato! When it comes laziness, nothing can be more simpler than clicking a button to shop online, to chat online, to read online, etc. Daily the uses of the Internet grow, and with this new environment our society is slowly becoming more and more impersonal. Further still, we are often building relationships with individuals we have no real concept of. That is, on the Internet, knowing an individuals true identity is “virtually” impossible. But nonetheless the Internet is truly connecting the world.

The power of the Internet is often attributed for enhancing the trend towards globalization. Many state that the Internet has served to enhance the global community. But has it in fact aided in linking the world solely, or will it too become another means of division. Will the Internet enhance the divide between the haves and the have-nots, the developed and the developing? Today, obviously individuals in the developed countries have a greater accessibility than those in the developing nations. In fact, in most of the world the Internet is considered a luxury item. Can we, however, use this medium to bring the two together? Can the Internet, just as it has bridged families, build the gap between the two extremes?

Regardless, of what the future may hold for the Internet, the fact remains that it has aided positively in many aspects. Its ability to link individuals together and its astounding amount of information has change the way we look at the world. The Internet has truly embarked itself in our lives and is here to stay!

India and Pakistan once again thrust themselves into the limelight of the international community. All eyes were focused, yet again, on the South Asia region; this time, however, it was not due to bus diplomacy but rather the possibility of nuclear warfare. Within a couple of months the situation in Kargil is easing down with troops now in retreat. Many will look back at this event and wonder what lessons can we learn and have we learned? Firstly, there are those that will argue that India was very pacified in its response to the events that occurred in Kargil. That this was a perfect opportunity for India to surge a full-fledged war and maybe even capture the whole of Kashmir. However, others argue, that yes India has “won” this battle with Pakistan, but what will happen when this event repeats itself in another area, at another time? As Pakistani Foreign Minister Sartaj Aziz, stated in a BBC interview, “If you do not deal with the fundamental issue of Kashmir there will be many more Kargils.” Then, there will be those who will ask have we in fact won anything? And others that will ponder the question of how this will now effect Indo-Pak relations and the key issue of Kashmir?

Disputes over Kashmir between India and Pakistan have been ongoing phenomena since partition. In fact, both nations have fought three wars prior to the Kargil eruption. Each time, however, the wars have never led to any full closure and this has been an issue that has sparked numerous discussions. Pakistan has almost undoubtable been held to be in the wrong, and as Stephen Cohen of the Brookings Institution in Washington states, the Kargil incident can be compared to Pearl Harbor “tactically brilliant, but a strategic catastrophe.” In fact, Kashmir has once again gained the interest of the outside world. And many observers seem to be sympathetic to India. Regardless of this fact, there are still many individuals who argue that India could have, in this current flare-up with Pakistan, crossed the “Line of Control (LoC).” The decision not to cross the LoC is actually one that can be argued from both ends. There are those that will claim that India did the correct thing in not crossing
the line since crossing the line would have meant a great deal more loss: loss not only in terms of more money and equipment, but in the lives of people. One could argue that the loss of one life is too much; however, in Kargil the count has been a thousand times worse.

On the other hand, others will state that by not crossing the LoC, India has in effect left the door open for more conflicts in the future and this could bring around an even greater loss. In simple terms, the argument is “what guarantees are there that Kargil will not repeat itself in the near future?” Well, many will say that unless a plausible solution is sought and implemented the possibility for more Kargils is not a distant reality. In fact, Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif himself acknowledges this point. As he stated on national television: ” [although] . . .we have calmed down the volcano of Kargil, . . . tomorrow the volcano can erupt somewhere else.” So, the question now is how will tensions diminish and peace be awarded to the region? When will the mentality of us-vs-them be placed aside and the concern for the people of Kashmir be acknowledged? When will we truly end keeping a tally of winners and losers?

Even in this eruption, the vital question of who actually won leaves a sense, I feel, of no real victors. Although, from reports and actions one can say that Pakistan lost the war, the actually reality is that the war was lost by more than just a single nation-state. The real victims in this no-win war were the civilians who were either forced to desert their homes or were killed in the crossfire. Also, impacted by this war were the family members of both Indian and Pakistani troops who were killed in duty. That is, the women who are now widowed, the mothers who have lost their sons, the children who will have to grow up now without fatherly figures, and the families who now will forever be haunted by the fact that their loved one will never return. So, in reality there appears to be no real victors!

Now, however, the damage has been done. We cannot deny the fact that life for those living in the region was grossly disrupted. Nor, we can we bring back those who have died in this conflict. But what we can do — and should do — is hope for a better future and work towards never allowing a repetition of this situation. Once this goal is achieved, relations between India and Pakistan will strengthen. However, currently the most pressing question is ” how will these bridges begin to be rebuilt?”

Sharif may have oversimplified the situation and possibility of peace when he announced in an address: “I [will] tell Prime Minister Vajpayee, come, let’s talk. Come, let’s take our people away from the path of war, let’s sit across the table and find paths to a better future. We have wasted too much time already, let’s not delay things further. Let us save our peoples from war and give them a peaceful and secure life.” This statement is very idealistic since in reality it appears that the possibility of talks now rest more on the issue of trust. As, External Affairs Minister Jaswant Singh stated: “Transgressions of the Line of Control are easier to heal than transgressions of trust.” Regaining trust will be a key aspect in leading to any possibility for peace. Indo-Pak relations have most definitely suffered with this incident, as an official of the Indian ministry stated: “Y
ou can’t hold peace talks one day, wage war the next, and then again demand peace talks.”

Realistically though, because of the upcoming elections in India, and politicians too concerned with campaigning, the possibility of talks being held immediately seem virtually impossible. In addition, any hopes of instant negotiations are weakened due to the fact that a caretaker government is currently running India. This stalemate can in fact aid in resolving the issue; since, one can assume that with a passage of time emotions will have settled and cooler heads will prevail.

On April 13th 1699, celebrations for Vaisakhi were in full swing, in the midst of this celebration, a new and exciting development was occurring: Guru Gobind Singh Ji was enacting the ideals of Sikhism. His simple act of initiating the “panch pyare,” (five beloved) personified the entire journey that had been begun with Guru Nanak Ji. Founded only 500 years ago by Sri Guru Nanak Dev Ji (1439-1539), Sikhism is one of the youngest world religions. Sikhism was to “ideally” be a religion rested on the premise of equality: equality among caste, creed, color, religion and gender. In Sikhism, the Guru’s envisioned a unification of humanity. The principles were adamant, yet somewhere in the past 300 years the vision got tainted . . .blurred . . . lost!

On April 14th 1999, Sikhism entered into its third century of existence; however, my concern lies in how much have we truly accomplished when following in our Guru’s footsteps. The word Sikh literally translates into disciple; hence, the question arises “how much of the teachings have we absorbed?” Have we truly embodied the ideals –the way of life prescribed to us? I believe we have swayed a long distance and we have a long way to go to truly becoming the individuals that the Guru’s intended.

Lets look briefly at some of the principles that are a part of Sikhism. In Sikhism, all individuals regardless of their ethnic, racial or religious origins and beliefs are equal. This philosophy was revolutionary at its time since in India, caste and religion have been a basis of conflict throughout history. The ideas of equality were manifested by such acts as the “langar” or “free-kitchen. This small act allowed people to sit and eat together. In a langar, one does not distinguish special treatment for any individual, regardless of status or any other variable.

Another way in which the Gurus’ ideals of equality are vividly illustrated is in the construction of the Golden Temple. The Golden Temple or “the Harimandir” in Amritsar is considered one of the holiest of Sikh shrines. But more importantly the message explicitly given by this temple is the fact that by its four entrances, each symbolic for the four corners of the world, all are welcome.

Another revolutionary step was the Guru’s interpretation of women’s role in society. In the Sikh religion, a woman has equal rights and privileges to grow spiritually and participate in all religious ceremonies. Rejecting the idea of female inequality, Guru Nanak said:

“Man is nourished in the womb and born from a woman; he is betrothed and married to a woman. Friendship is made with women and civilization originates from a woman. When a wife dies, another wife is sought because family affairs depend upon a woman. Why call her bad, from whom are born kings? From a woman another woman is born; none is born without a woman.”

Guru Nanak further questioned such practices of widow “sati” (self-immolation on the pyre of her husband); in fact, he encouraged the remarriage

of widows, which was unheard of in his time.Maybe Sikhism greatest illustration of equality was in the actions of the tenth guru, Guru Gobind Singh Ji. In creating the Khalsa, he continued to show us – by example– how we are all equal beings in this world. At the celebrations of Vaisakhi, at Anandpur Sahib in 1699, he asked for those who were willing to make the supreme sacrifice of their lives to come forward. At his call, five individuals, from various backgrounds, came forth. These five individuals were Daya Ram, Dharam Das, Mukham Chand, Himmat Rai, and Sahib Chand. Today these individuals are rightfully known as the “panch pyare,” or the ‘Five beloved.” The Guru, then, officially baptized these individuals and in turn had them baptized him; with this simple action the boldest statement of equality had been made. The Guru had showed us the true meaning of equality, his message: that in mankind no one individual was higher than another. Sikhism, hence, was open to all regardless of their background. Further, still ideally he wanted for all Sikhs to adopt the last name of Singh or ‘lion’ if they were male, and for females ‘Kaur’ (lioness/princess). This modification would eliminate one vital problem of caste. That is, in a nation where ones caste can be determined by names, the Guru had set forth a means to overcome that and enhance the equality of all.

I have to say, that as a Sikh I have a great deal of pride in what our Guru’s achieved and the messages they set out to spread. However, as the title of this write-up states: have we served it justice? Have we truly absorbed the teachings and more importantly do we practice them? Obviously, the answer to the question is no. Since if we did many of our problems today would be non-existent. It is so easy for us to say with pride that we belong to such a remarkable religion, and we can go to the Gurdawara every week and listen to the hymns and messages, but when . . . When will we begin to actually practice the teachings? Its so easy to believe in a religion, whatever the religion may be, but the true test comes when we can actually apply the teachings to our daily lives. In this area we have a great deal of work to be done, and as we celebrate 300 years of Sikhism maybe we ought to also consider are we the Sikhs the Guru’s envisioned?

The Indian Government recently passed the Information Technology Bill which aims at providing legal recognition to transactions carried out through electronic data interchange and other means of electronic communication, commonly known as e-commerce. This Bill is merely an extension of the impact, and importance, IT has had on India. Daily new dotcoms are emerging declaring the impact the internet, however, the question arising is: will India, like other nation-states, be able to sustain growth or are we indeed leading to a ‘shake’ out where only certain companies will thrive while others diminish? And if indeed many others will fail, how will it be determined which companies in this vast connected world will survive?

India, like many developing nations, is establishing itself in the Internet world. With umpteen web site designers, and the lure for a worldwide market, Indian businesses seem to have jumped wholeheartedly onto the dotcom mania. For many this change will involve changing work habits, and now companies have to adjust to a broader market. Will all these factors lead to more globalized world? Are the trends in India, a reflection of what is happening throughout the developing world? Is the Internet a blessing in disguise, finally allowing companies to tap into a global market, and maybe even reversing the potential for exploitation? Will a larger market allow developing nations to have more voice in their future?

For India, in particular, there is yet another twist to this standing saga: workforce. With tempting proposals for the world’s largest pool of engineers from the US, Germany, Japan, France, and others, what will happen to the companies in India? The brain drain, as it is commonly referred to, could potential lead to downsizing of the Indian nation. However, with the power of the Internet and the potential need for Indian software, does India have the potential to use this advantage to its benefit? Is it possible for Indians to mandate investment and development in India? The power of the Internet allows for flexibility in working, will this working arrangement finally allow Indians in India to have their cake and eat it to?

After World War II, the international environment created a bi-polar system whereby two superpowers emerged on opposite ends of the spectrum. The United States and the former Soviet Union had engulfed themselves for close to a half a century in the “Cold War.” This war left two nations in ruins. The Soviet Union in 1991 collapsed to the astonishment of the world. It had economically drained itself. The US similarly fell into an economic downfall as for the first time since 1914 the US became a debtor nation. Today, in the post Cold War era we can vividly see the consequences of this conflict. In the former Soviet Union the nation is devastated as conflicts now plague the region. Within the U.S., domestically the Cold War has not only hurt the economy, but also our children and our institutions. So, the question arises: “Who won the Cold War?” As an International Affairs student I see no victors — we all within the international community have lost.

In the South Asia region since independence we have been experiencing a “Cold War” of our own. It has been over fifty years now and we still can’t move forward to building a peaceful relationship. Although currently steps are being taken, even as I speak bus diplomacy is in effect, realistically how much will these actions contribute to viable change within the sub-continent? That is, we continue to beat around the bush on the issues, such as Kashmir, but often we lose sight of the very issue at heart — the people. For whom does the continuing tension in the South Asia region aid? How can we realistically hold our heads up among the international community and become examples for others if we can’t lead our own region out of poverty, illiteracy, aids and corruption? Our nations seem to be duplicating the same errors that the U.S. and the former Soviet Union made, but the question arises how long will it take for us to realize our mistakes? Why is we cannot learn from the lessons of
the Cold War? Will it indeed take a crippling or collapsing of the economy to awaken individuals to the reality that stands before is? And, if this is so, can we realistically afford it?

As I complete my education and prepare myself for the “real world;” my optimism and idealism makes me question the actions of our nations. When will our leaders break away from the ideology of perpetuating hate vis-Ã -vis religion, ethnicity, culture and politics and foster peace? We stand at a crossroads – Change is not impossible! Why can’t we see that in this interdependent world, cooperation is a vital tool for survival? Cooperation is not a far-fetched scenario for the region. As a region we have a lot of cultural similarities. Let us use those similarities to lay the foundation for a prosperous relationship.

Currently, we spend close to $14 billion a year on the military, and although we have succeeded in launching nuclear test and becoming members of an elite group of nuclear states, we cannot seem to amend the fact that we house 40 percent of the world’s poor people: “500 million people in South Asia live in absolute poverty, 260 million lack access to basic health facilities, 337 million are without safe drinking water. South Asia’s share of the world’s illiterate population is twice as high as its share of the global population. Soldiers in South Asia outnumber doctors 8:1. India has the world’s largest illiterate population in the world.” Where, then, do our priorities lie? When will change occur — when will the South Asia region exhibit its beauty in diversity and culture and stand tall as an example for peace and stability? When will we break the shackles of distrust and realize we have far more in common then in differences? It’s time for change! For the future of this region and the world, it’s time to give peace a chance. Let us educate, facilitate and accommodate the people. Let us replace the guns and hate with knowledge and tolerance.

The twenty-first century is around the corner; we need change for the betterment of ourselves and of our region. Let us learn from the mistakes of others and let us stop draining our resources and hurting our people. We no longer should perceive a victory for India as a defeat for Pakistan, or a victory of Pakistan as a defeat for India. This zero-sum mentality must end! Let us replace the “us versus them” mentality with a win-win approach for the region. Institutions such as slavery and dueling were a part of many societies in the past, yet today they do not exist. We, too, can change our societal thinking; we just need more commitment.