quits To TjO, soiflfwnar dut of tune With' her non-impulsive nature. Although she has cited lack of implementation of the IJO-announced goals and policies as her reason for seeking a withdrawal, many tend to regard this as an upshot of the tie in the election for Executive Director, held recently. India and France got equal number of votes in it with the result that none has been elected to the post this year. India is a jute exporting country while France is an importing one. Evidently, she has not been able to garner the majority vote of the jute exporting countries.

IJO being the joint forum of jute exporting and Importing countries it is not totally unexpected that a representative from the latter group of countries might someday become an executive director of the organisation. In fact, without making light of the inconclusive results this year or any possible debacle of jute exporting countries in the future elections, it is time we prepared ourselves for working in concert under all organisational circumstances.

At a time like this it is inexplicable why India which is an important member of the IJO should like to leave the organisation. The IJO was created nearly two and a half decades ago basically to fend for iute against the onslaught of synthetic fibres. Both the jute exporting and importing countries have a common stake there. The jute market is depressive at the moment and it will be an act of irresponsibility on the part of any member of IJO to turn its back to it now. Moreover, if India claims to be espousing the cause of jute exporting countries then she should continue to be in the organisation to help them in their bargains with the jute importing countries.

Neither can India benefit from the world jute market by being a loner in it nor can she voice her concerns effectively by opting out of IJO. Let India reconsider her decision for withdrawal.