How ‘Only’ May Change your Sentence

(270 words, about 3 minutes reading time)

James J Kilpatrick, an ultra-conservative, a fiery supporter of racial segregation and a strong voice against the Civil Rights Movement is an unusual columnist to be remembered. Only for his skill of being a grammarian, I read a few of his columns, and amply use the tips as a reviewer of the documents. The column on long sentences made a mark, and the one about usage of ‘the’ rang a bell.

But what stuck with me was a usage of ‘only’ and how it can change your sentence. So here goes the example.

A simple English sentence - Jack hit John in the nose.

Check how the meaning changes by placing an ‘only’ in the sentence. As the ‘only’ moves from left to right, the meaning differs every time.

Only Jack hit John in the nose.

May be there were other people in the room. But none hit John, except for Jack. Or maybe others slapped, or kicked, but not hit. Or maybe others hit him in the ear, jaw, back or stomach, but not nose.

Jack only hit John in the nose.

May be, Jack also carried a revolver, or a machete, but he did not use that. A full force of the fist landing on John’s nose was enough.

Jack hit only John in the nose.

Jack may have spared Jason, Jerald, Jeremy – only John was subject of his angst.

Jack hit John only in the nose.

Jack was so focused, that other body parts didn’t matter. A bloody nose was sufficient!

The trick? Place ‘only’ as close to the subject, on which it is acting, as possible.

Responding to Pakistan – How about some bureaucratic introspection instead?

(708 words, about 5 minutes reading time)

Uri has been avenged, and Pakistan is on the back foot. And yet, the question begs for how long? The mad men of Pakistan will retaliate, overtly or covertly – and that’s a given. Are we prepared for that?

Several countries have condemned the incident that happened in Uri, and yet no notable friends of India have mentioned Pakistan directly. While Russia did that, contrary to earlier news reports, it went ahead with the military drill…and that too in an area under dispute by India. What to make of all this? Well, that we have to fight our own battles.

Why has the US succeeded in not having a repeat of the 9/11? And why has India seen the attack on the Parliament, the train bombings, the 26/11 attack, two attacks on army bases in a quick succession, attacks on Indian embassy in Afghanistan, and countless other skirmishes and issues? If we are able to find an answer to this question, therein lies our victory over Pakistan.

India could do better on several fronts – the Prime Minister has taken the efforts on international affairs and diplomacy. We see that paying for itself. Support to sensitivities of India has increased, and we are able to tackle two of our worrisome neighbors with a clear message of shift in our policy. This needs to continue with gusto. For so many years of Pakistan raising Kashmir issue in UNGA, many of us were not even aware that there is an official provision to respond.

But there are several other initiatives that need to be taken on war footing. Two such being our external defense mechanism, and our internal defense mechanism.

Our Ministry of Defense has downgraded the generals, with an illogical and irrational fear of coup and the military taking over syndrome. That needs to change. The generals need to have a place in policy formation, and defense mechanism. This is far too important to be left alone to non-military mandarins, who have never undergone a training to give up their life. A modernization of the army needs to be taken up quickly, and many lethargic organizations such as the DRDO need to answer for money spent and the delays.

Most importantly, to deal with low-cost, nuisance based approach of Pakistan, the internal defense mechanism needs to be upgraded. Today, the Home Ministry, which deals with this, has achieved the proportions of a wooly mammoth in dimensions. It looks after a wide variety of issues, with internal security being just one.

Want to know what all things the ministry of Home Affairs looks after? Well, the list seems endless:

1. Administration Division – looks after a host of items such as Table of Precedence, RTI, National Flag/Anthem/Emblem, Gallantry and Padma Awards etc.
2. Center-State Division
3. Intra ministry coordination division, and Parliamentary matters, Public Grievances, Annual action plans etc.
4. Disaster Management Division
5. Finance Division
6. Foreigners Division
7. Freedom Fighters and Rehabilitation Division
8. Human Rights Division
9. Internal Security Division I
10. Internal Security Division II
11. Jammu and Kashmir Division
12. Judicial Division
13. Left Wing Extremism Division
14. North-east Division
15. Police Division I
16. Police Division II
17. Police Modernization Division
18. Policy Planning Division
19. Union Territories Division (the department Kejriwal must love to hate)

Of the 19 different listed departments, and countless unlisted items, Internal Security and Police are just two items, of insignificant proportion. The police force today is nowhere capable of tackling the 26/11 style attacks. And if we believe that the mad men of Pakistan will keep their fight limited to Kashmir valley, our naïveté will be entertaining to them.

This calls for a few immediate actions:

• De-politicizing and modernizing the police force,
• Breaking the Home Ministry and carving out a separate ‘Internal Security Ministry’ or ‘Homeland Security’ to plagiarize the name from a certain country that took the fight to the terrorists, rather than bring it home, and
• The institutions such as R&AW, IB etc. need to be given more teeth. And while there is no reason to tell the world of their teeth, the bite should be catastrophic to the enemies.

Mr. Suresh Prabhu has shown magnanimity in letting go of the Railway budget. I am sure Mr. Rajnath Singh won't mind the break up. India will thank him profusely.

Let political compulsions not drive this. Because a lesson to be learnt is not in our ability to retaliate, but in our ability to stop before it happens!