The dominant narrative these days across much of the world is, as Ayn Rand said about her novelThe Fountainhead , the story of ‘individualism versus collectivism, not in politics, but in man’s soul’. In India, we too celebrate such individualism where heroic individuals, through their will power, strategic vision, perseverance and unique personal qualities, lift society up by its bootstraps and, like Nietzsche’s superman, and create a new moral order. This new social order will, ostensibly, enjoy a higher level of human creativity and human freedom. In this narrative, individualism has built the modern world.
This is, however, only half the story. While Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, Stephen Schwarzman, N.R. Narayana Murthy, Mukesh Ambani have made a significant difference as individuals, as alsocountless others who have passed away, there is another perspective that is equally significant but has rarely been celebrated. Obscured by the dominant narrative, this other account applauds the contribution of groups. Working together in collaborations, such groups, through sharing and cooperation, produce outcomes that are no less beneficial for society. In this story, there are no supermen just worker bees.
The making of the $9.7 billion James Webb telescope is one such story. One of the most significant technological achievements of the last few years, that involved construction, transportation, launching, alignment, and deployment in deep space, the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) is a project that marked twenty plus years of continuous collaboration between many teams. Its successful placement in deep space is a defining moment in humankind’s history of reaching for the stars. Another journey into ‘man’s soul’ has just begun.
Making the telescope
There are four aspects in this other narrative, that are complementary to, and not competitive with, that of the superman. These are, the ambitions of the project; how it was put together; the technologies involved; and its implications for human society. Taken together, they constitute an illustrative case of the collective production of a common good.
The James Webb telescope was imagined by its initiators as the coming together of many cutting-edge technologies. It was planned to enable humanity to peer deeper into space and to look further back in time. The telescope will give us new knowledge about the origins of the universe. Because it is essentially an Infra-red spectrum telescope, as compared to the Hubble which worked largely in the UV and visible light range, it will allow us to stare into the beginnings of the ‘cosmic dawn’, a period 250 million years after the big bang when light began to break through the cloud of mist and the first stars and galaxies began to form. The JWST will take us back about 150 million years further than Hubble, closer to when it all began.
The project seeks to understand how galaxies form and evolve. It will look for evidence of dark matter, study exoplanets, capture images of planets in our solar system, and other such cosmic curiosities. This knowledge will impact not just the physical sciences but also the humanities and social sciences as we attempt to understand our own place in the universe and ask those perennial questions such as: Is there other life in the universe? Will it look like us and, more worrying, will it look for us? What is the relation between ‘chance’ and ‘necessity’, to use Jacques Monod’s thesis, in the emergence of life? In this ambition, the JWST belongs to the classical tradition of scientific inquiry: the pursuit of fundamental curiosity untouched by special interests.
The CEO of Northrop Grumman, an aerospace and defence company and the primary contractor of the project, has gone on record to announce that because of the delays and production lapses, the company would only book profits after the successful deployment of the telescope.
Collaborative science
If the ambition of the project was to understand the origin of the universe, and our place in it, the execution of the project was a stellar product of collective endeavour. Although there were many remarkable individuals who led the various groups in the project, the emphasis throughout was on its accomplishment by teams who worked together to fabricate the instruments, make the telescope parts, design the cooling systems, etc. This new collective, comprising of free scientists and engineers, collaborated with the single purpose of producing, launching, and placing, at the chosen Lagrange point (a point where the Earth’s and Sun’s gravitational forces are balanced), a telescope that was lighter than Hubble but had a mirror six time larger. Compared to Hubble’s location 550 km from the Earth, JWST was located 1.5 million km away. All its parts had, therefore, to work the first time around. There were no second chances. Recent reports from NASA inform us that the deployment and aligning of the mammoth telescope is proceeding well and may even ‘exceed expectations’. The launch of the satellite, on 25 December 2021, was a joint project of NASA, the European Space Agency, the Canadian Space Agency and involved many universities, organisations, and companies across 14 countries.
Further, the science and technology that was deployed should be toasted as a tribute to human ingenuity. Eighteen hexagonal beryllium mirrors first had to be folded to fit the available space in the Arianne rocket and then unfolded, in deep space, to make a single mirror with nanometric precision. One of the instruments, for example, has 2,50,000 individually-controlled shutters to ensure that the illumination of only the narrow portion of the sky being observed is possible. The JWST teams built and installed a Near Infra-Red spectrograph, a Near Infra-Red camera, a slitless spectrograph and, after technical difficulties, a Mid Infra-red instrument because, unlike the other instruments that need to be cooled to 40 K, it needs to be cooled to 7 K. At great cost the successful cryocooler was finally engineered.
These collaborative achievements have produced a sophisticated scientific infrastructure for exploring space and for opening the door to new scientific knowledge. It has created a new ‘knowledge commons’. Administered by the Space Telescope Science Institute (STSI), which has a charter and a website that places in the public domain all relevant information, and that invites scientists from across the world to submit projects, JWST, through the process of commoning, is on the threshold of producing a huge knowledge commons. The ‘heroic collective’ thereby shares space with the ‘heroic individual’. Hubble gave us mind blowing pictures of the infinite sky, such as the Lagoon nebula. JWST will give us pictures of the heavens that Isaac Asimov only imagined in his brilliant science fiction short storyNightfall when the stars came out.
Peter Ronald deSouza is the DD Kosambi Visiting Professor at Goa University
The Criminal Procedure (Identification) Bill, 2022 (now Act), that received the President’s assent on April 18 and ‘shall come into force on the day of such notification’, has raised eyebrows. The Act authorises the police and prison authorities to take ‘measurements’ of convicts and others for the purpose of identification and investigation in criminal matters and to preserve records. The allegation is that the Act is unconstitutional and may be subject to misuse. The Act seeks to repeal the Identification of Prisoners Act (IPA) of 1920, whose scope was limited to recording measurements which include finger impressions and footprint impressions of certain convicts and non-convict persons.
Broader scope
While the scope of the ‘measurements’ in the IPA was limited, the Act now includes physical measurements such as finger impressions, palm prints, footprint impressions, photographs, iris and retina scans; biological samples and their analysis; and behavioural attributes including signatures, handwriting; or any other examination referred to in Sections 53 or 53A of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973.
The CrPC provides for ‘examination’ (of the accused by a medical practitioner) which includes examination of blood, semen, swabs (in the case of sexual offences), sputum and sweat, hair samples and fingernail clippings using modern and scientific techniques including DNA profiling and other necessary tests which could provide evidence as to the commission of an offence. Similarly, Section 311A of the CrPC empowers a magistrate to direct any person (including an accused person) to give a specimen signature or handwriting for the purpose of any investigation or proceedings.
It is evident that the apparently enlarged scope of ‘measurements’ in the Act is nothing but a merger of the scope of ‘measurements’ in the IPA and provisions of the CrPC highlighted above, with the addition of modern techniques of identification such as an iris and retina scan. Thus, the Act does not empower the enforcement agencies additionally but only explicitly provides for various measurements and includes the use of the latest scientific techniques.
The old code, the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, did not have the provision of medical examination of the accused. The Law Commission, in its 41st Report (1969), considered the necessity of physical examination of the arrested person for an effective investigation, without offending Article 20(3) of the Constitution. The recommendation was included in the CrPC (of 1973), as Section 53. Later, an amendment was made in the CrPC (with effect from June 23, 2006) and anExplanation of ‘examination’ was added to Section 53 to provide legal backing to materials/biological samples on which the medical examination could be conducted. Similarly, Section 311A was added to facilitate providing a specimen signature or handwriting during investigation.
A settled constitutionality
As early as 1961, the Supreme Court of India inState of Bombay vs Kathi Kalu held that the person in custody giving his specimen handwriting or signature or impression of his thumb, finger, palm or foot, to the investigating officer, cannot be included in the expression “to be a witness” under Articles 20(3) of the Constitution. Similarly, in a catena of cases, it has been held that taking a blood sample for the purpose of a DNA test, taking a hair sample or voice sample will not amount to compelling an accused to become a witness against himself, as such samples by themselves are innocuous and do not convey information within personal knowledge of the accused. Thus, the constitutionality of collecting biological samples or other measurements for facilitating investigation, has been settled since long.
The only exceptions are scientific techniques, namely narcoanalysis, polygraphy and brain fingerprinting which the Supreme Court inSelvi vs State of Karnataka (2010) held to be testimonial compulsions (if conducted without consent), and thus prohibited under Article 20(3) of the Constitution. These tests do not fall under the scope of expression “such other tests” in Explanation of Section 53 of the CrPC. The Court also laid down certain guidelines for these tests.
Since the Act does not lay down any specific scientific tests for the analysis of biological samples or otherwise, taking any sample or measurements for the sake of identification or comparison would not automatically violate any constitutional provision. The validity of any new scientific technique, to be applied in future, would need to be tested on the touchstone of permissible restrictions on fundamental rights.
The IPA includes three categories of persons, namely, ‘convicts of any offence punishable with rigorous imprisonment for a term of one year or upwards or of any offence which would render him liable to enhanced punishment on a subsequent conviction; persons ordered to give security for their good behaviour; and persons arrested in connection with an offence punishable with rigorous imprisonment for a term of one year or upwards’.
No harm is likely
The Act has done away with any such limitation for convicts and arrested persons. However, it is important to note that most offences punishable with imprisonment up to one year are non-cognisable. Otherwise too, for example, in a simple cognisable offence (though punishable with simple imprisonment up to only one month or fine) of achakka-jam (which generally take place during political and other protests), though arrest may become necessary to clear the road and prevent a continuing offence, no biological samples would be required normally to facilitate investigation. Only physical measurements would be sufficient to record identity. Further, not only has the amended Section 41(1) of the CrPC put limitations on arrest in cognisable offences punishable with imprisonment up to seven years, but the Act also makes a non-obligatory provision for giving biological samples in such cases. Thus, by expanding the scope of measurements, no harm is likely to be done to an individuals’ privacy. Measurementsper se do not reveal any inculpatory information.
The provision for persons ordered to give security for good behaviour or maintaining peace, the provision regarding refusal or resistance to allow taking of measurements, and the provision relating to the power of the magistrate to direct a person to give measurements for the purpose of any investigation, remain the same as provided for in the IPA.
Records of juveniles
Though the Act does not explicitly bar taking measurements of juveniles, the provisions of the (Special Act) Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 regarding destruction of records of conviction under the Act, shall apply. Since no disqualification can be attached to a conviction of an offence by a juvenile, no measurement (if taken) can be used for any future reference. The legislature has purposefully avoided the word “arrest” in the entire Juvenile Justice Act. A first information report is to be written only in heinous cases (offences punishable with imprisonment for seven years or more). In all other cases, delinquent juveniles are produced before the Juvenile Justice Board along with a general daily diary report and social background report. The power to apprehend is to be exercised only regarding heinous offence, unless it is in the best interest of the child.
However, it would have been prudent to add a provision in the Act for juveniles for clarity and allay any doubts. Similarly, since the records of juveniles are required to be erased, the period of storage of measurements of adults could have been conveniently reduced by 10 years, as the probability of committing a crime by any person after the age of 80 years is negligible. TheCrime in India – 2020 statistics published by the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) shows that the number of arrested persons over 60 years of age is less than 1.5%.
The Act does not mandate the compulsory recording of all measurements for all types of offences. The measurements shall be taken ‘if so required’ and as may be prescribed by governments. The purpose is to help the enforcement agencies in the prevention and the detection of crime. The NCRB will store, process, and preserve whatever data is collected by the States and Union Territories. The Crime and Criminal Tracking Network & Systems (CCTNS) data have only helped enforcement agencies across States in matching missing persons with found persons and unidentified bodies, matching lost/stolen mobile phones and vehicles with the recovered ones, tracking habitual criminals and inter-State gangs, etc.
The biological sample of an accused person is required during investigation for comparison with seized body fluids and blood from the scene of crime to establish linkage. Signature and handwriting specimens are taken for comparison with those on disputed or forged documents. Similarly, since fingerprints are unique in nature, latent chance finger impressions lifted from the scene of crime are admitted as clinching evidence in a court of law to establish the presence of the accused. Access to biometrics collected by the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) has been refused to enforcement agencies on the pretext of ‘technology issues’ and strict provisions of the concerning law. The matter is pending with the Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court.
Better technology cuts errors
The objective of the Act is to facilitate identification and investigation in criminal matters. Enforcement agencies must be allowed to use scientific methods to prevent and detect crime. A number of analytical tools can be applied nowadays to the database of measurements to do predictive policing (which is very common in developed countries). The use of better technology will only help in minimising the probability of errors. The right of an individual will have to be considered in the background of the interests of society. The data proposed to be collected through measurements of convicts and others does not appear to be disproportionate with the stated objectives of the Act.
R.K. Vij is a former Special DGP of Chhattisgarh. The views expressed
are personal
When the State Election Commission of Delhi had called a press conference at 5 p.m. on March 9, 2022, it was widely reported that the schedule for the elections to the three Municipal Corporations of Delhi would be declared. However, the State Election Commissioner (SEC), S.K. Srivastava, informed the media that it would be deferring the announcement following a letter from the Centre just earlier proposing the unification of the three municipal corporations.
Large-scale usurpation
In less than a month, both Houses of Parliament passed the Delhi Municipal Corporation (Amendment) Act, 2022. In a move that appears to simply unify the trifurcated Delhi Municipal Corporations, the Central government has conferred upon itself various crucial powers to assume control over the Municipal Corporation of Delhi from the State government. The casualty of these changes introduced by the Central government is federalism.
The Central government’s line is that the amendment has been passed as in Article 239AA of the Constitution, which is a provision that provides for special status to Delhi. The Union Home Minister, Amit Shah, stated in Parliament that the law is based on the power of Parliament under Article 239AA(3)(b) to make laws for the State of Delhi “on any matter”. The law provides that the power to determine the number of wards, extent of each ward, reservation of seats, number of seats of the Corporation, etc. will now be vested in the Central government. The number of seats of councillors in the Municipal Corporations of Delhi is also to be decided now by the Central government. By exercising that very power, the number of councillors to the Municipal Corporations of Delhi has been reduced from 272 to 250.
The Central government has also taken over powers from the State to decide on matters such as ‘salary and allowances, leave of absence of the Commissioner, the sanctioning of consolidation of loans by a corporation, and sanctioning suits for compensation against the Commissioner for the loss or waste or misapplication of municipal fund or property’. The large-scale usurpation of powers by the Central government has been done without any consultation with the Delhi government, and all the major stakeholders kept in the dark during the process.
Dent in federal architecture
The Central government has consciously chosen to overlook Part IXA of the Constitution that specifically states that it will be the Legislature of the State that will be empowered to make laws concerning representation to the municipalities. The argument of the Centre that Article 239AA can be applied over and above Part IXA of the Constitution does not hold good as the latter is a specific law that will override the general law relatable to Article 239AA. Further, Part IXA of the Constitution concerning municipalities was inserted into the Constitution through the Seventy-Fourth Constitutional Amendment Act of 1992 and it succeeded the Sixty Ninth Amendment Act of 1991 that brought in Article 239AA. Therefore, it can be meaningfully concluded that if the intention of Parliament was to exclude Delhi from the purport of Part IXA, it would have specifically spelt so.
No consultation
The Delhi Municipal Corporation was split into three regions, i.e., east, south and north, in 2011 after much deliberation and discussion at various levels. The split-up was first proposed in the 1987 Balakrishnan Committee Report which was bolstered in the 2001 Virendra Prakash Committee Report. A seven-member Delhi Legislative Assembly Panel was set up in 2001 to study the recommendations and suggest modalities.
Since the recommendations had to be processed by the Central government, another committee was constituted under the chairmanship of Ashok Pradhan to study the issue. The proposal finally took shape in 2011 and the law to trifurcate was enacted. Although the plan to split up the Delhi Municipal Corporation was well thought-out and studied, the decision to reunify has been done at the behest of the Central government without any study or consultation.
Article 239AA has, from its very enactment, been subject to numerous litigations and its scope finally determined by the Supreme Court of India in the famousState of NCT of Delhi vs Union of India judgment pronounced in 2018.
Potential for litigation
The Court held, “The Constitution has mandated a federal balance wherein independence of a certain required degree is assured to the State Governments. As opposed to centralism, a balanced federal structure mandates that the Union does not usurp all powers and the States enjoy freedom without any unsolicited interference from the Central Government with respect to matters which exclusively fall within their domain.” It was made clear in no uncertain terms that the aid and the advice of the State government of Delhi would bind the decision of the Lieutenant General in matters where the State government has the power to legislate. No doubt, the amendment to the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 will lead to further litigation on the aspect of a sharing of powers between the State of NCT of Delhi and the Central government. The interference of the Centre in matters such as municipal issues strikes a blow against federalism and the celebrated Indian model of decentralisation.
Mukund P. Unny is an advocate practising in the Supreme Court
Naftali Bennett, Israel’s Prime Minister, was scheduled to visit India for three days in the first week of April. Invited by Narendra Modi, he was supposed to come to celebrate 30 years of India-Israel bilateral relations. His visit was postponed because he caught COVID-19 right before the visit and soon new dates were to come from his office. He might not get to visit India soon or ever as Israel’s Prime Minister.
There are two serious events making this likely. His government has lost its majority in Parliament last week and there is a new phase of violence in Israel making every Israeli insecure — on the street from stabbing or sitting in a coffee house or bar from bullets — like the shooting that killed three Israelis in Tel Aviv on 7 April.
It is difficult to imagine which of these two developments is going to threaten his political career as much as the domestic stability and security of the state of Israel.
Government may fall
Naftali Bennett is on the verge of losing his position as Prime Minister. Idit Silman, a lawmaker from Yamina party (right wing party headed by Bennett himself) threw a bombshell by sending her resignation on 6 April. It was out of the blue, truly for everybody in Israel, because Ms. Silman was the whip for the coalition and she was supposed to see that no one leaves, defects or gets allured by the opposition.
Ms. Silman left the government because she feels this government is ‘harming’ the Jewish identity of the State and is not loyal to the right-wing constituencies. After this defection, Mr. Bennett is holding 60 out of 120 members of Israeli parliament and any one more member’s exit from coalition will bring down the government. When he became the Prime Minister, he only enjoyed support of 61 members (of nine odd political parties that have no common minimum programme or political consensus but to avoid another national election and not let Benjamin Netanyahu form the government).
The coalition or unity government started with the notion that right, left or centrist parties will soften their core ideological principles, adhere to the basic governance and administrative stability for the sake of all the people of Israel. This realisation came after the four national elections in two years when no party could get the majority. Ms. Silman’s defection is the first major crisis for this unity government. Interestingly, no other member of her party followed her, and it seems Mr. Bennett could contain the damage. He is on a weak footing now as Prime Minister who cannot pass any laws because of the lack of majority.
Security is threatened
Ordinary Palestinians from West Bank and other Israeli cities have picked up arms to attack Israeli citizens, soldiers for a long time. The Palestinian national movement is in tatters, the leadership of Mahmoud Abbas is corrupt and Israel has managed to do well with the rockets of Hamas. The agonised Palestinian youth is recklessly acting for a lost cause. In less than three weeks, there have been four major attacks by the Palestinians that have killed 11 people and injured many. The shooting in a bar killed three and wounded 13 on one of the busiest streets of Tel Aviv on 7 April. Most successful Israeli Prime Ministers are those who bring a sense of security — the longest serving prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, was called Mr. Security because of this most important concern. It is the sensitive issue of security that is the immediate challenge for Mr. Bennett while he is holding his government intact.
Mr. Bennett is addressing the issue of rising attacks and understands that it is where Mr. Netanyahu, an opposition leader now, can outdo him when it comes to public perception. He assures the people he is fully in charge of the situation and that ‘Israelis will win’ this ‘wave of terror’. He visited the bar in Tel Aviv where the last attack happened. He explained in an interview that it is the ‘carrot and stick policy’ that can help Israel — he thinks that there are ’quiet’ Palestinians who do not want to harm Israelis. There are Palestinians who wish to harm Israel, and he means to employ all forces against them. This approach might not bring radically different outcomes than of the previous Prime Ministers. Violence begets violence. Without a political solution of the Israel-Palestinian conflict, living with the violence is an inevitable reality for most Israelis.
Given these two developments, Mr. Bennett is least likely to visit India soon. When his visit was postponed, there was also an assumption that the United States didn’t appreciate his visit to India in the week when India hosted the foreign minister of Russia, Sergei Lavrov, on April 1. The U.S. might have had some influence on Israel not visiting Delhi. This is speculative but quite likely as well.
Dr. Khinvraj Jangid teaches at Centre for Israel Studies, Jindal School of International Affairs, Sonipat
The Telangana government’s decision to scrap the 1996 order for protection of two reservoirs, Osman Sagar and Himayat Sagar, which provided drinking water to the entire city for close to eight decades has drawn flak from environmentalists and lake activists. The government’s contention that the order famously known as GO 111 has become redundant now as the city does not draw drinking water from the twin lakes anymore, is being challenged by activists who say the move is intended to benefit real estate at the cost of the city’s conservation needs.
The contentious order, issued in the joint State of Andhra Pradesh, prohibited polluting the industries, major hotels, residential colonies and other establishments in the catchment area of the lakes up to 10 km from the full tank level. Sixty per cent of the layouts in the catchment area were to be left as open spaces and roads, and 90% of the total catchment area was classified for agriculture/horticulture/floriculture.
Real estate emerging as a major money spinner changed it all. Starting with the central and western parts of the city, the real estate frenzy spread far and wide, except in the catchment area of twin reservoirs where restrictions were in place. Illegal structures, however, were allowed to flourish if they were backed by money and muscle power. This predicament has resulted in disaffection among farmers and land owners.
The real estate companies, however, saw an opportunity in this. Farmers in distress sold the lands for a pittance, and builders and politicians added them to their land bank with the speculative gumption that the GO 111 would go away some day if intense lobbying with successive governments paid off. Dry spells of the reservoirs under the drought conditions provided certain shrillness to the demand for scrapping the order.
Legitimacy was accorded to the demand when the ruling TRS party made it one of the election promises in 2018, bringing cheer to the land owners in the peripheries of 84 villages. One aspect deliberately glossed over by the State in claiming redundancy of the reservoirs, is the primary objective for which the dams were built during the rule of the last Nizam Mir Osman Ali Khan in 1920 and 1927 respectively.
Mandating construction of the reservoirs were the 1908 floods in the River Musi, which had caused widespread devastation and destruction, following which the State summoned legendary engineer M. Visvesvaraya to suggest a flood control strategy for the city. In his report, Mr. Visvesvaraya noted that the city had experienced 12 floods during previous 300 years. “Immunity from the floods must come, if it ever comes, from the construction of flood catchment reservoirs in the basin above,” he noted in his report, paving way for construction of Osman Sagar on the River Musi and Himayat Sagar on its tributary Esi.
The government’s decision to withdraw GO 111 curiously comes less than two years after another bout of destructive floods in October, 2020 when at least three lakes were breached and 50 people died. There has been consensus since that the floods were caused by blockage of the city’s natural rainwater discharge channels by way of heavy construction. Blaming it on the short-sightedness of the previous governments, the present TRS government has also launched ‘Strategic Nala Development Plan’, a Rs. 986 crore initiative to develop and unclog the channels for effective drainage of the surplus rainwater.
As one famous quote goes, ‘a mistake repeated more than once is a decision.’ And this time, the decision is seemingly to repeat a mistake.
swathi.v@thehindu.co.in
In its latest World Economic Outlook report, the IMF has pared global growth hopes for 2022 from 4.4% projected in January, to just 3.6%, a sharp decline from the estimate of 6.1% for 2021. The invasion of Ukraine has significantly dampened post-COVID recovery prospects, with the IMF highlighting volatile yet sharp commodity prices and supply chain disruptions. Fresh pandemic-driven lockdowns in China’s key manufacturing and trade hubs also compound supply worries and could slow its own growth from 4.8% to 4.4% this calendar year. India’s growth through 2022-23, which the IMF had pegged at 9% in January, has now been projected at 8.2% — lowered by the same extent as overall global growth. This headline number is more optimistic than projections from the World Bank (8%), the ADB (7.5%) and the RBI (7.2%). In 2023-24, however, the IMF expects growth to slip to 6.9%, while the World Bank expects it to be at 7.1%. The IMF has emphasised that these projections are much more uncertain than usual due to the ‘unprecedented nature of the shock’ to the world economy. Growth could slow much more while inflation could turn out higher than expected. The multilateral lender expects India’s retail inflation to now average above the RBI’s tolerance threshold at 6.1% and the current account deficit to touch 3.1% this fiscal year.
The chief factors cited by the IMF for lowering India’s growth trajectory include higher oil prices, inflation that would exacerbate weak domestic demand, and the likelihood of a drag on net exports. The World Trade Organisation has lowered its 2022 global merchandise trade growth forecast to just 3% from 4.7% projected earlier. This means a critical operating growth engine, which manifested in the record $420 billion exports in 2021-22, could sputter. A corollary risk from higher food and fuel prices in emerging economies is heightened social unrest, and the IMF Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva has noted that ordinary families’ budgets are being strained to the breaking point. While she has mooted decisive actions from central banks to stem inflation worries, she has also warned that monetary policy tightening would raise debt servicing costs and put many low-income countries in distress. Indian policy makers need all hands on deck and undivided attention to cope with the multiple headwinds, which include the need to smoothen interest rate hikes, spur consumption, manage fragile fiscal math and currency fluctuations amid volatile foreign capital flows. It would be equally critical to devise a medium-term action plan to minimise the scarring effects of this ‘crisis upon a crisis’, as the IMF expects employment and output to persist below pre-COVID trends till as far as 2026, amid a further dip in global growth after 2023.
When the Taliban captured Kabul in August 2021, then Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan said Afghans had “broken the shackles of slavery”. Even while the Taliban’s victory gave some geopolitical advantage to Pakistan, it also enhanced Islamabad’s security challenges. And Pakistan’s growing frustration with the response of the new Afghan rulers to these challenges burst into the open during the weekend when Pakistani missiles struck inside Afghanistan, targeting the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP). During the American presence in Afghanistan, Pakistan had adopted a dual approach — fight the TTP, better known as the Pakistan Taliban, and support the Afghan Taliban. Its backing was crucial in the Afghan Taliban’s return to Kabul. But the fact that an insurgency founded by a group of Deobandi madrasa students forced the U.S., the world’s most powerful military, to withdraw from Afghanistan was a morale booster for the TTP. The Afghan Taliban and the TTP may be two organisations, but they are ideological brothers — both have their roots in Deobandi Islam, both share the same worldview, and have similar objectives for different geographies. If the Afghan Taliban wanted to re-establish their Islamic Emirate in Afghanistan, the TTP wants to bring down the Pakistani state and establish its Islamic rule.
Pakistan supported the Afghan Taliban for geopolitical reasons. The Generals saw the Taliban as insurance against growing Indian influence in a U.S.-backed Islamic Republic of Afghanistan. But the problem with the wheel of jihad, which the Pakistanis helped unleash inside Afghanistan, is that it could also roll back across the border. Both countries share a porous 2,500-km land border that divides the tribal areas of the region (also a fertile ground for the Taliban’s ideology). Earlier, Pakistan used to share intelligence with the U.S. forces in Afghanistan which carried out attacks against the TTP. Now, Pakistan has to depend on the Taliban to crack down on the TTP. Their relationship has also changed. If the Taliban were dependent on Pakistan for their survival during the insurgency, they are now the rulers of Afghanistan; what they need is support and recognition for their regime. This change in approach was visible in the Taliban’s warning that they would “retaliate” if Pakistan carries out more cross-border strikes. None of these developments suggests that there would be a complete breakdown in the relationship between Pakistan and the Taliban, which dates back to the Taliban’s founding in the early 1990s. But the TTP factor would remain a key fault-line. The Taliban are not ready to disown the TTP and they have also made it clear that they would not remain a Pakistani proxy forever. This poses fresh security and geopolitical challenges to the Pakistani establishment which welcomed the Taliban’s triumph in Afghanistan just eight months ago.
Houston, April 20: The Apollo-16 Command Ship failed to execute a proper engine burn to-day and Mission Control advised the lunar module, Orion, that it might have to delay or cancel its moon landing. “Anticipate a wave off for this one. Set up for the next one,” Ground Controllers told John Young and Charles Duke just 30 minutes before they were to steer Orion to a landing in the mountains of the moon. The astronauts had separated their lunar ship from the Commandship and were preparing to land. They had donned space suits and climbed aboard Orion to check out various systems. The problem, not previously announced by Mission Control, involved the Command Ship, Casper, which was being flown alone by Thomas Mattingly after the two ships separated. At the time of separation, the two ships were in orbits ranging from about 19 to 107 km above the surface. Then, Mattingly was to have fired the Command Ship engine to raise his orbit ranging from about 96 to 112 km high to conduct a series of experiments while Young and Duke were on the moon. The astronauts are in no danger, the Mission Control had reported.
In 1784, there was brought forth a semi-official organ, “The Calcutta Gazette” under the editorship of Mr. Frencis Gladwin and ten years later appeared the ‘Calcutta Monthly Journal’ which was established for the purpose of giving the whole of the Indian news of the month in as condensed a form as possible for transmission to England. Quickly other newspapers followed like “The Relator”, the “Calcutta Exchange”, “Prince Current”, the “Asiatic Magazine and Review” and a host of others. The journals of 1788 were comparatively decorous and respectable, containing no private slander, no scurrilous invective and gross obscenity. No restriction was placed on writing and journalism until 1798. Till then the press in India was on the same footing as the press in England, subject only to the ordinary laws of libel and sedition. There was only one disability, however, namely, the Governor-General might take away the license of any individual and prevent him remaining in India, not the press license, but the license under which his residence was allowed in the country.
In the age of hyperbole, everything is either “awesome” or “atrocious”, “the best movie ever” or so “problematic” that it represents all that ails society. Yet, even by the standards of the widespread penchant for exaggeration, TV show host and right-wing provocateur Piers Morgan’s claim that he is “like Nelson Mandela when he came out of prison” and that his on-air tantrums and job search are a “long walk to the freedom of expression” is a bit much. And yet, given the sharp lines that have been drawn in the “culture wars”, Morgan’s sense of self-importance is likely to be rewarded by many.
Last March, Morgan walked off his ITV show, Good Morning Britain, after a co-panelist confronted him on his statements about Meghan Markle’s interview with Oprah Winfrey. In essence, Morgan said that Markle was faking mental illness in order to gain public sympathy and tarnish the royal family’s image. After a backlash, Morgan was asked to apologise — he quit instead. Now, he claims that his new show on the Rupert Murdoch-owned TalkTV will “stand up for democracy” and against cancel culture.
Shorn of the rhetoric, all that has happened is that a powerful, extremely well-paid person has switched jobs. And even the most ardent opponents of cancel culture will agree that not being on television for a year is hardly the same as being imprisoned for decades and fighting Apartheid. Perhaps Morgan’s life has been such a bed of roses that he has lost all sense of perspective. More likely, though, he has figured out — as so many seem to have across the world — that the best way to be on TV is to upset half the people, make outrageous partisan statements, and use guests on panels to further an agenda.
India and Saudi Arabia underlined the importance of maintaining an atmosphere conducive to further negotiations between Islamabad and New Delhi, to attain the objectives of non-aggression and non-use of force. They agreed that consolidation of Indo-Pak relations would contribute to the security, stability and peace in South Asia, and the entire region according to a joint communique issued at the end of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi’s four-day visit hailed as heralding a new year in Indo-Saudi relations. The communique says that India stressed its desire to establish peaceful and harmonious relations with all countries including Pakistan.
The United States mission to bring about a settlement of the Falkland dispute between ally Great Britain and semi-ally Argentina has entered into a twilight zone of sorts. The United States envoy Alexander Haig has returned to Washington. He has not succeeded. But he hasn’t failed either. An Argentine proposal talks of flying both Argentinian and British flags over the Falkland islands. The proposal has to be transmitted to Britain.
Supreme Court lawyers threatened an indefinite strike unless the chief justice and other judges withdraw the circular that list steps for speedier disposal of cases. The circular said: “The Chief Justice and other judges are anxious to consider and take steps for the speedy disposal of cases in the Supreme Court and as a step in that direction, it has been considered that certain categories of matters should be disposed of by circulation (in chambers)”. The nine categories proposed also include proceedings under section 144 and 143 CrPc, transfer petitions, bail applications and others.
Inaugurating the WHO’s Global Centre for Traditional Medicine (GCTM) at Jamnagar in Gujarat on Tuesday, Prime Minister Narendra Modi talked of the possibilities offered by therapeutic approaches that are different from the allopathic medicine system. Their emphasis on “holistic care” makes traditional medicine systems particularly potent in dealing with the challenges posed by modern lifestyle disorders like diabetes and obesity, he said. Conversations on medical pluralism — one of the stated objectives of the new medical centre — are welcome. They could pave the way for a healthcare ecosystem in which healing approaches based on diverse knowledge systems learn from, and complement, each other. For that to happen, however, there must be thorough stocktaking on why practitioners of different medical systems rarely see eye to eye today. This would involve clearing misapprehensions but also, and equally importantly, ironing out regulatory deficits.
According to WHO data, 65 to 70 per cent of people in India use traditional therapies at some stage in their lives. The turnover of the AYUSH (ayurveda, yoga and naturopathy, unani, siddha and homeopathy) industry has gone up six times in the past eight years. Paradoxically, however, there is a lot of misinformation about such cures and their practitioners are vilified at times. A part of the blame for this must be laid at the door of a section of practitioners who make unsubstantiated claims. During the pandemic, for instance, Baba Ramdev sought to exploit mass anxiety by making wildly inaccurate claims for the products manufactured by his Ayurvedic pharmacy, Patanjali Ayurved. The yoga guru disparaged the allopathic system as a “farce” and alleged that lakhs of people had died because of the faulty treatment by doctors practising this system of medicine. Reports of traditional medicine practitioners prescribing allopathic drugs and steroids are also common. At the same time, the grouse of such physicians, about being judged according to criteria designed primarily to ascertain the efficacy of allopathic medicines, deserves serious attention. The National Commission for Indian System of Medicine Act, 2020 does try to resolve this predicament — the act was amended in 2021. But accomplishing one of the major objectives of this law — “ensuring the availability of quality medical professionals of Indian systems of medicine and adoption of the latest research” — will take time.
A growing body of scholarly literature today documents the efforts of a section of traditional medicine practitioners to sync the practices of these systems with modern research protocols. Regulatory bodies and initiatives such as the GCTM would do well to rope in such professionals.
The bulldozer is at the door, due process is underfoot, and the Supreme Court cannot unsee the danger. The sequence of events speaks for itself: At Jahangirpuri in northwest Delhi Wednesday morning, seven bulldozers rolled in, accompanied by over 1,000 policemen, to demolish “illegal encroachments” in an area still tense because of the flaring of communal violence on the occasion of Hanuman Jayanti on Saturday — and they continued on their mission to raze for well over an hour after the Supreme Court ordered them to pause. Evidently, the BJP-led North Delhi Municipal Corporation follows the BJP’s agenda ardently, even when the Court directs it to hold its hand, even when it goes against the law. At Jahangirpuri, the fig leaf — of illegal constructions — is so thin it does not even require a puff of Delhi’s acrid air to be blown away. After all, in dense urban sprawls across India, encroachment of public spaces is so widespread that it is not remarkable anymore — what is striking is the selective action taken in its name by the state. In Jahangirpuri, as in Khargone in Madhya Pradesh only days earlier, the timing was a dead giveaway. “Illegal encroachment” has become the pretext for a BJP administration to target “rioters” after the eruption of communal violence, who belong overwhelmingly to one community.
No notices were sent to the residents of Jahangirpuri before bulldozers were sent to demolish structures, many in the vicinity of the mosque that was at the centre of the communal clashes Saturday. Bylaws call for a notice except in the case of public land encroached by temporary structures — what is temporary and what is not needs to be settled as per due process. Therein lies the rub. A bulldozer’s damage can’t be reversed and that’s why this flagrant flouting of due process, and the bid to brazen it out even after the court stepped in to caution and restrain, makes victims of those who were at the receiving end in Jahangirpuri.
But it is not only they who are in danger of being left without recourse in the face of this brutish bulldozer politics. Any attack on due process, much less one that is as high-profile and therefore as unabashed as this one, affects all citizens. It goes to the fundamental promise that lies at the heart of a constitutional democracy — to protect lives and safeguard rights. Due process is not just what is written into the rule-book. It is inscribed in the everyday relations between institutions and citizens and government. It is what keeps them honest, and respectful of each other’s freedoms and spaces.
The spectacle in the national capital Wednesday, the intimidatory deployment of bulldozers and police force, the attempt to cock a snook at the judiciary, should set many alarm bells ringing, especially in the court. Illegal encroachments in public spaces need to be addressed — but as per the law. It’s for the Supreme Court to underline this principle, it is the only bulwark for the citizen against a transgressing state. It must act. It cannot kick this can down the road. For the citizen’s sake — and for its own.
Hate and bigotry feed on each other. They germinate and flourish on a toxic diet of divisive and schismatic ideologies and polarising creeds that discriminate against human beings on the basis of colour, region, gender, faith — and divide them between believers and non-believers — ranging the chosen ones against the idolatrous.
‘Calling out hate’ by S Y Quraishi (IE, April 15) has little to do with the anatomy of hate or its ongoing malignancy. It is more of an ad hominem attack on the ruling dispensation. A complex phenomenon has been over-simplified to suit a convenient political narrative. The arguments are drearily familiar, facts dodgy and conclusions delusional.
For aeons, India has had syncretic traditions inspired by the Vedic aphorism, “Ekam sad vipra bahudha vadanti” (there is only one truth and learned persons call it by many names). Because of this underpinning, Indian society has never insisted on uniformity in any facet of life. Indian philosophy is a smorgasbord of varied ideas and traditions — incongruous at times, but always a part of a harmonious milieu.
This equanimity of Indian society was, however, disrupted by invading creeds claiming only their God, and His messenger were true, and the rest were false and worthy of destruction, along with their followers and places of worship.
The first such incursion came in 712, when Muhammad bin Qasim vanquished Sindh, and as Chach Nama, a contemporary Arab chronicle states, introduced the practice of treating local Hindus as zimmis, forcing them to pay jizya (a poll tax), as a penalty to live by their beliefs. “Hate” and “bigotry” thus made their debut in India, which was hitherto free from this virus. Pakistan’s official website credits this invasion as when the country was born as an Islamic nation in the Subcontinent.
In the 11th century, Mahmud of Ghazni, while receiving the caliphate honours on his accession to the throne, took a vow to wage jihad every year against Indian idolaters. During his 32-year reign, he did keep his solemn promise over a dozen times. The rest is history.
But why go into the distant past? Unfortunately, the trail of hate unleashed over a thousand years ago continues to haunt us even today. The last 100-odd years witnessed the Moplah riots, Partition, and the decimation of Hindus/Sikhs/Buddhists in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bangladesh and the Kashmir Valley. The recent pre-planned attacks on Ram Navami processions in over half a dozen states, and the onslaught on the Hanuman Janamutsav rally have reminded us that the ogre of hate is alive and stinging.
It’s uncanny: While communal mayhem was going on in India, Muslim mobs were fighting pitched battles against the police in dozens of towns in Spain, Sweden and the city of Jerusalem. In Sweden, Muslims were agitated over blasphemy involving the holy Quran. Protests in Spain are against the imprisonment of a rapper convicted of insulting the monarchy and praising terrorist violence. While the issues involving these sordid episodes may differ, the pattern is common.
Were the Hindu-Muslim relations peaceful in the past and have soured post-2014? The fact is, ties between the two communities were seldom cordial. There were intermittent skirmishes, wars and occasional short-lived opportunistic alliances. Is the current dispensation responsible for Muslim alienation? Remember, even Gandhiji failed to wean Muslims from Muhammad Ali Jinnah’s schismatic movement.
In the aftermath of the Moplah violence and communal riots at several places in India, Gandhiji observed in Young India (May 24, 1924): “My own experience but confirms the opinion that the Musalman as a rule is a bully, and the Hindu as a rule is a coward”. Nothing much has since changed in the Subcontinent.
Can laws or police fight hate? No. If they could, Kashmiri Hindus wouldn’t have gone through the hell they did in the 1990s, and would have been happily back in their homes by now. India is a secular democracy, not because of its Constitution. It’s the other way round. When Pakistan declared itself an Islamic Republic in 1947, it would have been natural for India to identify itself as a Hindu state. It didn’t, and couldn’t have — because of its Hindu ethos of pluralism. A Hindu-dominated India, is, and will always be, catholic, plural, myriad and a vibrant democracy.
George Orwell said, “The relative freedom which we enjoy depends on public opinion. The law is no protection. Governments make laws, but whether they are carried out, and how the police behave, depends on the general temper in the country”.
Can one fight hate selectively? The burning of Graham Staines and his children is reprehensible. So was the lynching of Akhlaq and Junaid. But why the cowering silence on the dastardly gunning down of Swami Lakshmanananda Saraswati and four of his disciples (August 2008) in Orissa for which seven Christians and a Maoist have been convicted? Over a dozen Muslim workers of the BJP have been killed in Jammu & Kashmir and other parts of India in the recent past. These victims of hate are, of course, ignored. Their deaths don’t suit the narrative.
Charged reactions, punctuated with half-truths, deliberate omissions and tailored narratives, offer no real solution. Pusillanimity to face facts will only exacerbate the situation and give egregious results. Ignorance is not always bliss.
In this context, it’s relevant to recall what Lester Pearson (14th PM of Canada) said: “Misunderstanding arising from ignorance breeds fear, and fear remains the greatest enemy of peace.”
This column first appeared in the print edition on April 21, 2022 under the title ‘Ignorance isn’t bliss’. The writer is a former Member of Parliament and a columnist
India is a Union of states. It is not a confederation of states. It is not a question of holding together but of coming together. The Union is indestructible. The configuration of the states which constitute the Union can change. The Union, therefore, is integral to both the Centre and the states. The strength of the Centre lies in the strength of the states.
Therefore, the macroeconomic stability of the Union is contingent on the macroeconomic stability of both the Centre and states. That is why in grappling with the complex issues of the Fifteenth Finance Commission, of which I was the chairman, we devoted the entire Volume-IV to the states. Each state in this volume of the report has been analysed at great length. So have their individual deficits, debts and macroeconomic stability, which includes the developmental challenges each of the states face.
The political dialogue built around freebies is fraught with danger. There is great ambiguity in what “freebies” mean. We need to distinguish between the concept of merit goods and public goods on which expenditure outlays have overall benefits. Examples of this are the strengthening and deepening of the public distribution system, employment guarantee schemes, support to education and enhanced outlays for health, particularly during the pandemic. All over the world, these are considered to be desirable expenditures.
Therefore, it’s not about how cheap the freebies are but how expensive they are for the economy, life quality and social cohesion in the long run. We must dread the thought of replicating the culture of competitive freebie politics. We must go the route of achieving higher rates of economic growth. The race to efficiency is the race to prosperity.
There are seven reasons why. First, freebies undercut the basic framework of macroeconomic stability. The politics of freebies distorts expenditure priorities. Outlays are being concentrated on subsidies of one kind or the other. What, therefore, does this mean to fiscal sustainability for states which are already debt-stressed?
Illustratively, in the case of Punjab, while estimates vary, some have speculated that the promise of freebies might cost around Rs 17,000 crore for their implementation. If we take everything impacting the debt ratio of Punjab into account, there is going to be an additional impact of 3 per cent of GSDP. As we know, the debt-to-GDP ratio of Punjab is already at 53.3 per cent for 2021-22, which would worsen on account of these new measures.
Second is the issue of the distortion of expenditure priority. Take, for instance, the change to the new contributory pension scheme from the old scheme, which had a fixed return. Rajasthan announced that it would revert to the old pension scheme. This decision is regressive as the move away from the old scheme was based on the fact that it was inherently inequitable. The pension and salary revenues of Rajasthan amount to 56 per cent of its tax and non-tax revenues. Thus, 6 per cent of the population, which is made up of civil servants, stands to benefit from 56 per cent of the state’s revenues. This is fraught with dangers not only of intergenerational inequality, but also affects the broader principles of equity and morality.
Third, the issue of intergenerational equity leads to greater social inequalities because of expenditure priorities being distorted away from growth-enhancing items.
Fourth, movement away from the environment. When we talk of freebies, it is in the context of providing, for example, free power, or a certain quantum of free power, water and other kinds of consumption goods. This distracts outlays from environmental and sustainable growth, renewable energy and more efficient public transport systems.
Fifth, the distortion of agricultural priorities. This affects agricultural practices which do not depend on extensive use of water and fertilisers. The depleting supply of groundwater is an important issue to consider when speaking of freebies pertaining to free consumption goods and resources.
Sixth, its debilitating effect on the future of manufacturing. Freebies lower the quality and competitiveness of the manufacturing sector by detracting from efficient and competitive infrastructure enabling high-factor efficiencies in the manufacturing sector.
Seventh, this raises the question of whether the time has come to consider recourse mechanisms like subnational
bankruptcy. Freebies bring into question market differentiation between profligate and non-profligate states and whether we can have a recourse mechanism for subnational bankruptcy.
The race to the bottom implies government deregulation of markets and business. This means eventually that states compete to underbid each other in lowering taxes, expenditure and regulation. We must strive instead for a race to efficiency through laboratories of democracy and sanguine federalism where states use their authority to harness innovative ideas and solutions to common problems which other states can emulate.
The economics of freebies is invariably wrong. John Maynard Keynes said, “There is no harm in being sometimes wrong — especially if one is promptly found out.” In this case, it has been promptly found out that both the economics and politics of freebies are deeply flawed. It is a race to the bottom. Indeed, it is not the road to efficiency or prosperity, but a quick passport to fiscal disaster.
This column first appeared in the print edition on April 21, 2022 under the title ‘In a free fall’. The writer was chairman, 15th Finance Commission. Edited excerpts from a speech delivered at the Annual Day Celebration of the Delhi School of Economics on April 19, 2022
The effects of conflicts show up in countries geographically distant from the war zone. India faces strong headwinds to growth from the surge in energy costs due to the Russia-Ukraine clash and the resultant sanctions. The elevated geopolitical uncertainty also threatens global growth, which hurts Indian exports.
On the other hand, distant countries also get an opportunity to fill the void left by conflict areas being unable to export. Russia and Ukraine together accounted for nearly 30 per cent of global wheat exports. This sudden shortage of wheat in global markets and the surge in prices has spawned a discussion in India on how best to capitalise on the opportunity. India’s wheat output has consistently exceeded its demand for the past five years, as seen in the buildup of inventory. Wheat inventory was 23 million tons at the end of February. The rabi harvest, which is projected to be around 111 million tons (this has some downside risk), would augment it significantly. When the last rabi harvest ended in June 2021, with output at 100 million tons, stocks of wheat with the Food Corporation of India (FCI) touched a record high of 60 million tons, two-and-a-half times the buffer norms for July.
It would, therefore, appear that India is ready to reap windfall gains. Yet, on closer look, the prospects for sustained wheat exports appear limited. To start with, the available surplus of around 25 million tons (including the seven million tons exported last year) accumulated over five years, implies an average annual surplus of five million tons. Not only is this a fraction of the nearly 60 million tons of wheat exported annually by Russia and Ukraine, but even at $500 per ton, it would be worth just $2.5 billion annually.
Further, given how little political appetite exists in most countries for food price increases, particularly for cereals, exporting foodgrains also requires political resolve. Exporting all the surplus stock would push up domestic wheat prices, potentially inviting restrictions on future exports, similar to the recent hikes in export tariffs on palm oil in Indonesia. Exporting for a year and then banning exports is bad for trade relationships. In agricultural trade, India has the dubious distinction of being an unreliable trading partner, which partly explains its 1 per cent share of global wheat exports despite being the second-largest producer in the world. Rushing to“encash the opportunity” can potentially dent the long-term prospects for agricultural exports.
A bigger concern from the perspective of a sustained opportunity is that Indian wheat is not competitive globally in most years. As the government (through FCI) buys 40 per cent of all the output at the minimum support price (MSP), and FCI holds most of the surplus grain at a high cost, exports only occur when export prices far exceed the MSP (Figure 1). Under WTO commitments, the government (read FCI) may not sell procured grain for commercial gains. For private players to route the surplus to exports, a large gap is necessary given the additional intermediary (FCI releases wheat into the market, traders buy from the market and then export). As the MSP only rises every year, in years where global prices fall, exports would be difficult.
Consideration of the export parity price (EPP) amplifies the lack of competitiveness. The price a producer can expect to receive is the FoB price (the price when loaded onto the ship) minus the cost of getting the produce from the farm or factory to the border or the port. If the latter is high, as it is in India, the EPP falls for the producer, which further constrains exports. At Rs 1.2 to move one ton per kilometre, domestic rail freight costs are higher than the global average. A study conducted by IIM-Kolkata found that road transport costs from wheat producer-states were even higher — Rs 4.5 from Uttar Pradesh and Rs 2.8 from Madhya Pradesh. Domestic logistic costs in aggregate are over 13 per cent of GDP compared to the global best practice of 8 per cent. There is inefficiency at the ports too. While wheat also uses dry-bulk shipping, in container handling, India’s cost per container of $1,374 is substantially higher than those of other agricultural exporters like Thailand and Vietnam at $759 and $913, respectively. The question is: After meeting all the costs, does India remain competitive and leave enough margins for sellers? The crisis can be an opportunity for India to fix the fundamentals, like its “time to trade” and “costs to trade”, which are among the highest globally.
Perhaps the most important constraint on sustainable Indian exports is the composition of importers and the role of non-price attributes like food safety, quality, and variety of wheat. Russia exports to Turkey, Egypt, Turkey, and Bangladesh, and Ukraine to Indonesia, Philippines, North Africa, Bangladesh, Korea, Thailand, and Spain. Neighbouring Bangladesh importing wheat from Russia and Ukraine when India is accumulating surpluses deserves scrutiny. Generally, though, several of these markets are high value, demanding food safety and quality, and have preferred varieties of wheat. A recent ICRIER study showed that Indian agriculture produce faces more rejections in key export markets compared to other developing countries. India has the highest number of consignment rejections in both European and US markets despite a comparatively low level of agricultural exports. Addressing these challenges, whether concocted or real, would be more helpful in boosting the sustainable export opportunity.
Lastly, a long-term sustained export strategy must incorporate the changing nature of global trade. India’s opening up of its trade follows the “heterodox” approach: Open on the export side while being restrictive on the import side. This creates political difficulties in trading relations, but may also not be good economics.
Rushing into opportunistic export deals would thus appear to be short-termism, and cannot be a strategy for agricultural exports. Not delivering on quality or not honouring commitments sustainably can have counterproductive long-term effects, hurting India’s reputation. Much of the expansion in trade historically has occurred through new products and varieties and new customers, which requires new links, agreements, and looking at opportunity costs of wheat production, market structures within the country (like the FCI’s role), as well as reducing the risk of frequent policy interventions.
This column first appeared in the print edition on April 21, 2022 under the title ‘India’s wheat opportunity’. Roy is a Senior Research Fellow with the International Food Policy Research Institute and Mishra is co-head of APAC Strategy for Credit Suisse. Views are personal
Anyone who has ever genuinely immersed themselves in Ramcharitmanas will recognise the singular poignancy of one moment in the Sundarkand where Hanuman meets Sita. Until that point the story is hurtling towards disaster. Sita has been abducted. Ram is distraught and unsure of himself. But the moment Hanuman meets Sita is the point at which the epic turns; the confidence that order will be restored reappears. Hanuman drops Ram’s ring from the tree. Sita experiences contradictory emotions: Joy at recognition of the ring; fear about what its presence might mean. (In Tulsidas’s rendition: Harsha vishaad hridya akulani). Sita is thinking many things. Suddenly Hanuman’s words of reassurance break out as he identifies himself. In all musical renditions, whether by Channulal Mishra or the underrated version by Mukesh, the gentle line “madhur vachana bole Hanumana (Hanuman spoke, his words like honey)”, always stops you in your tracks. Its power is not just the simple poetry but the magical calm it produces, an almost irresistible effect that, for a moment at least, bathes you in gentle reassurance and bliss. That moment is itself the deliverance from all worry, and from evil.
It is a measure of our perversion as a society that Ram and Hanuman are now tropes to prepare the ideological groundwork for pogroms. The communal frenzy that has accompanied Ram Navami and Hanuman Jayanti, spread across several cities, should leave us in no doubt about the direction in which India is headed. On the surface, the narrative circulating in society is simple “Hindus were taking out processions celebrating festivals. We were asserting our right. We got pelted by stones or worse. The minorities are responsible for this. It shows Hindus are not safe nor do they have space in their own country”. And then the ominous “We need to get rid of them.” This narrative is designed to feed the most contrived sense of Hindu victimhood. This is an old playbook.
What should give us nightmares is this. The simple fact is that this narrative is very widespread. All the arguments that we used about majoritarian communalism in India no longer hold. Its logic is no longer merely instrumental (as if that is not bad enough), that will pass with election cycles. It is no longer episodic where we can take reassurance that it will somehow pass of its own accord. It is not local in nature, but has taken on a national character. The orgies of hate and prejudice are not aberrations. They are now the norm. They are the norm because the highest levels of political authority, including the prime minister, by silences or dog whistles, condone it. They are the norm because elites openly spout it, without shame. They are the norm because being communal in some ways has become almost a necessary condition of political advancement and is fast becoming the default common sense of civil society.
But what is more ominous is this. Think of what might happen to a society whose dominant religious sensibility literally inverts everything of value. Religion has often been misused and put to grossly perverse and violent uses. But can you think of another occasion in the history of modern Hinduism where everything sacred has become ominous, forms of worship have become fearsome, singing and text weapons, acts of public piety menacing, a sense of community murderous, and any talk of decency or civilisation constraining? That is the fearsome image the organised mobs that masquerade as religious processions now evoke. Let us be very clear. This new form of Hinduism you are seeing unfolding is not an expression of genuine pride and piety. It is meant to be a raw assertion of power and violence to intimidate minorities. It is meant to literally extract reaction (even one photograph will do), that can be used as a pretext to construe all minorities as a threat. The number of seemingly well- meaning people for whom stone-throwing on threatening processions can become a vindication of the deepest prejudices against minorities is truly alarming. It is the one factoid they are looking for to sustain their insidious lie that Hinduism will not be safe unless minorities are shown their place if not erased. This was the mission and the aggressive processions accomplished that. It sustains the insidious lie that the murderous perversion of modern Hinduism, now sustained by state power, is entirely reactive; a belated self-assertion against a minority that dominates us, rather than what it is: Increasingly a drive to violence and cruelty.
Writing on communalism has become a futile act. Who is it addressed to? Certainly not the state whose ideological practices and power fuel the crisis in the first place. Not civil society, because there is not much of civil society left. Not religious groups. To the votaries of new Hinduism, the only discourse of communalism that matters is one they can use in a discourse of revenge. To Muslims, what reassurance can we now give that asymmetry of numbers, state power and ideological zeal will not be used in a project of their cultural erasure? Those who claim to be secular are bulldozed by the lie that secularism is minority appeasement. To those who want to speak the language of human dignity beyond the vortex of communal identification? Is anybody left in that camp? To the Opposition parties who have no courage of conviction or a grammar of politics that can combat majoritarianism?
There is a comforting fallacy out there that somehow a pragmatic, instrumental logic will at some point assert itself over the politics of Hindutva: Inflation and unemployment will show up the cracks. But this communalism is not always rooted in material conditions. The fact that hordes of young men are seeking vindication and self-esteem through a public display of collective narcissism and violence suggests that communalism is now so deep that even social discontent has to express itself in the language of communalism.
Almost all the preconditions for widespread pogrom-type violence are now in place in India. You almost dread the thought that India has reached a point where the question is not “if” but “when.” What else would you call the widespread acceptance of vile prejudice, the dismantling of any semblance of conscience, the alignment of the state with majoritarian power, the complete effacement of the individual by imposed communal identification, the self-justification of the majority that has cloaked itself as the victim, the total contempt for rights, the glorification of violence, the search for the slightest pretext for revenge, and the radical othering of minorities?
Even Hanuman Jayanti is not the deliverance from evil but us hurtling into it, with eyes wide open.
This column first appeared in the print edition on April 21, 2022 under the title ‘With eyes wide open’. The writer is contributing editor, The Indian Express
It would be a profound injustice to recognise Babasaheb Ambedkar, whose 131st birth anniversary was recently celebrated, as only a Dalit leader. He also worked hard for the cause of women’s rights, believing that a society’s political, economic and social aspects can only be ameliorated when men and women have equal rights. This piece is therefore a tribute to all the women from the periphery who have either not been heard of or written about but are important. We can’t celebrate Ambedkar without giving due respect and acknowledgement to these women.
The historical and cultural narratives of India have failed to acknowledge the contributions of the women from the margins, as they are either androcentric in approach or reflective of the dominant castes. Remembering unsung Dalit women heroes and their stories of struggle and bravery from across the centuries, will broaden these narratives and help address the institutionalised discrimination Dalit women have faced for centuries.
The story of Sabari from the Ramayana has been used as an example of acceptance, selflessness and unconditional love, and adapted into bhajans and poems. The coming of bhakti saw the emergence of women from the Mahar caste, such as Sant Nirmala and Soyarabai, questioning Hindu orthodoxy. Nangeli fought against the cruel “breast tax” system, which imposed a tax on women of the lower castes who covered their breasts. She cut off one of her breasts and presented it to tax collectors, inspiring other women in the community to cover their breasts unapologetically.
Every section of society attempted to combine social and political liberation during the freedom struggle. Kuyili, who commanded the army of Velu Nachiyar, the queen of Sivaganga in Tamil Nadu, was a Dalit woman who fought against the British around 1780. Jhalkaribai, another fearless Dalit warrior, played a pivotal role in what is known as the First War of Independence in 1857, as the most trusted companion and advisor of Rani Laxmibai of Jhansi. Born in Ujirao, Lucknow, Uda Devi formed a battalion consisting of Dalit women under the leadership of Begum Hazrat Mahal.
Among social reformers, there was Savitribai Phule, a pioneer in education for Dalits, who started a school in 1848 with nine girls. By 1851 this became three schools with around 150 girl students. She also started a school in 1849 with her friend Fatima Sheikh, the Mahila Seva Mandal in 1852 to raise awareness about women’s rights and the Balahatya Pratibandhak Griha, where widows and rape survivors could deliver their babies. Born in the Kaibarta caste community, Rani Rashmoni, protested practices like sati and child marriage and atrocities against lower caste people and even submitted a plea against polygamy to the Company. Moovalur Ramamirtham Ammaiyar fought against the exploitative Devadasi system. In 1936, she published a Tamil novel on Devadasis and wrote the fictional series Damayanthi in 1945.
Dakshayani Velayudhan was the first and only Dalit woman to be elected to the constituent assembly in 1946. She was also a part of the provisional parliament from 1946-1952. Her contribution in civil disobedience and satyagraha is a story that needs to be told.
The bravery of Dalit women has not only been visible in their deeds but also in the words they wrote. In Maharashtra, writers like Shantabai Kamble, Mallika Amar Sheikh and Kumud Pawde shone a light on Dalit feminism through their autobiographies. In Tamil Nadu, writers like Bama and P Sivakami explored gender discrimination as a two-fold oppression. Marathi writers like Urmila Pawar and Meenakshi Moon worked to make Dalit women visible in women’s movement and, through their research and testimonies, brought out the grim reality of the missing voices. Dalit women like Dulari Devi and Mayawati also need to be celebrated. Her conviction and social engineering skills made Mayawati chief minister of UP four times, and through her art, Devi, a Mithila painter from Bihar, tracks the interplay between meaning and power within the hierarchical structures of religion, caste, gender and politics.
This column first appeared in the print edition on April 21, 2022 under the title ‘Unsung Dalit women heroes’. The writer is assistant professor, Maitreyi College and founder of DAPSA
In Gujarat today as part of his two-day visit to India, UK PM Boris Johnson has said that he hopes to see a free trade agreement between the two countries completed by this year’s end. India of course has earlier this year signed the Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement with UAE and then the Economic Cooperation and Trade Agreement with Australia. Plus, alongside the UK FTA negotiations India is also pursuing an FTA with the EU. The world is watching with great interest as the country’s trade policy moves into a welcome higher gear.
It is against this backdrop that the UK is expected to refrain from lecturing India on the Russia-Ukraine crisis, even though the two countries have sharply divergent positions on it today. Indeed Johnson traveled to Kyiv earlier this month, in a high-profile show of support to President Zelensky. And now in India he will be signing agreements in sectors ranging from education to defense and security. This is evidence of countries in the western camp accepting that they cannot force Indian foreign policy as they desire. Instead, it is economic logic and the force of democracy that have a much better shot at prying India away from Russia.
Boris Johnson India visit: Live updates
The season’s first long range forecast for the 2022 southwest monsoon conveyed a mixed message. The forecast of a normal monsoon was reassuring, particularly given that its accuracy in the last decade was better than the preceding one. However, the long period average rainfall that serves as the monsoon benchmark was lowered a bit to 87 cm. It’s a reminder of larger forces at play in the climate system and the need to adapt to both warmer conditions and a possible decline in precipitation. Southwest monsoon is the mainstay of India’s agricultural cycle and through it the entire economy.
This year’s monsoon needs to be located in the backdrop of three important developments. A transient one is the fallout of the Russia-Ukraine war as the two countries jointly account for about 30% of global wheat exports. Therefore, India, which exported Rs 74,491 crore of cereals in FY 21, will have an outsized impact on the global market this year. Two other developments are the escalating annual mean land surface temperature and the water stress in northwest India, which will have a long-term impact on Indian agriculture.
India’s yields on most essential crops have improved over the last decade. Consequently, even though the extent of agricultural land has shrunk marginally, both cereal and vegetable output have increased. However, the worsening environmental stress calls for fairly large changes in Indian agriculture. To begin with, there’s a need to find a durable solution to our overflowing granaries. India’s buffer stock norm for foodgrains at the beginning of the financial year is 21 million tonnes. The actual holding has been over two times the required level in the recent past. GoI needs to work out effective ways to offload the excess as elevated global cereal prices can influence domestic market prices through the trade channel.
The long-term solution is to find ways to shift the balance of output towards horticultural products. A good development has been that the area under vegetable cultivation increased by 10% over the last five years. We need patient reform in the logistics chain if this environmentally sound trend is to intensify.
Bulldozers had continued to raze alleged encroachments in Delhi’s Jahangirpuri – scene of rioting on Saturday – yesterday, forcing Supreme Court to expeditiously communicate its stay order to North Municipal Corporation of Delhi. This is enormously troubling, even by recent standards. Some authorities seem to have no qualms using any law or agency for various motives – here the subliminal messaging appeared to be payback to “rioters”. Only SC and high court judges with their constitutional protections can ensure that political and permanent executives apply laws wisely and humanely. Courts must step in to prevent this mindless deployment of bulldozers; the Constitution is getting bulldozed as well. Razing of homes and shops hurts entire families, and even if there are family members who allegedly rioted or even if structures are illegal, there’s due process – innocent until proven guilty and adequate notice, respectively – to be followed.
From its slums to posh areas, Delhi is overrun by encroachments, as are most Indian cities. Bureaucratic hair-splitting on illegal structures was therefore thoroughly unconvincing when Jahangirpuri was singled out. And even if one were to look at it in terms of legality, the MCD Act has clear provisions: Under Section 317 the Commissioner is supposed to issue notice to remove projections (structures or fixtures) onto streets, Section 343 allows demolition of buildings with a minimum notice period of 5-15 days. Only Section 322 doesn’t require issuing notice, because it involves removing temporary structures like stalls encroaching into public streets. There’s also an appellate tribunal under the Act to hear appeals against notices.
Those who faced demolitions in Delhi and MP got no time to appeal, contravening principles of natural justice. Despite the Constitution’s prescription that the state can deprive the right to life only under “procedure established by law”, SC rightly recognised the tendency of authorities to arbitrarily act under cover of law. Under the sanctity SC has accorded to fair, just and equitable procedure since 1978, even demolishing temporary structures like a juice stall or a ragpicker’s shed that support livelihoods without notice, cannot evade this due process. Turning the bulldozer into political theatre and the sword arm of instant ‘justice’ must stop. Constitutional courts located in national/state capitals must respond fast enough to localised cases of overreach. Hopefully, they will prevail.
Turkman Gate 1976 or Jahangirpuri 2022, the questions related to encroachment - illegal intrusion into and subsequent possession of public or private spaces - remain unhelpfully the same. Is encroachment, despite Section 447 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) that outlaws it, really treated as a legal offence by enforcers, considering its rampant prevalence, and not just in Delhi? And, is action against it taken - when taken - in a pell-mell or even a vindictive manner? The bottom line is compliance to norms for buildings and construction is critical if India is to urbanise in a manner that ensures well-being of its citizens, even if that well-being is ignored by many of them.
The collective disregard for norms needs a more serious intervention than demolition, the local authorities' instrument of choice to force periodic compliance after having turned a blind eye to violations. Also, state laws to tackle encroachment can't work on the principle of the roulette or that all encroachers are equally guilty, but some encroachers - whether identified by class or community - are more equally guilty than others. Encroachments and illegal constructions create a mismatch between supply and demand for services like water supply and sewerage, not to mention free movement for emergency service vehicles such as ambulances and fire tenders. The law sets out ways by which to tackle these 'naturalised unnatural' intrusions - giving the encroacher prior notice, alternatives, etc. These need to be implemented.
It is not enough to destroy (some) illegal constructions. Accountabilities must be fixed. Authorities must act against those who fail to implement the rules. Penalising those who violate norms and those who let it happen is the fair option.
<
Read in source website
On Wednesday, the Delhi Disaster Management Authority (DDMA) took a slew of measures to contain the spread of Covid-19, after weeks of a small but sustained increase in new infections. It has made masks mandatory for people, asked for random testing in public spaces, and announced a ₹500 fine for violators. However, DDMA has kept schools open with mandatory Covid-19 protocols. In addition, it will release a set of operating procedures for schools for better management and prevention of Covid-19 cases. All schools in Delhi returned to in-person classes from April 1.
The decision to keep schools open is welcome. It takes into account scientific data, which shows that children below 12 (currently not eligible for vaccines) are unlikely to suffer symptomatic infections, and even more unlikely to require hospitalisation, and reports that have said that the sudden and prolonged lockdowns and subsequent closing down of schools (one of the longest in the world) have brought about significant changes in the lives of parents, teachers, and students. School closures have hit unprivileged students harder since many families had no access to mobile phones/computers and the internet. In addition, many families suffered income losses, forcing them to deprioritise personal investments in the education of their wards. Even in a city such as Delhi, the digital divide is so acute that in September 2020, the Delhi High Court directed private and government schools to provide gadgets and internet packages free of cost to poor students for online classes. Despite best efforts, many teachers and school staff also could not help the students much because the teachers themselves had to suddenly adapt to the digital mode without any prior exposure, training, and access to online-specific educational material.
In such a scenario, it was always essential to open schools quickly. Unfortunately, that did not happen. It is now critical to keep schools open and allow teachers to assess the present learning level of students and commence remedial measures to ensure that children don’t suffer further.
British Prime Minister Boris Johnson is the latest in a growing list of foreign leaders making a beeline for India against the backdrop of the Ukraine crisis, though his visit has been in the pipeline since early last year and had to be called off twice because of the Covid-19 pandemic. The conflict in Ukraine is a priority for the United Kingdom (UK), which has taken the lead in imposing sanctions on Russia’s leadership and financial system and in providing military support to President Volodymyr Zelensky so that Ukraine can fend off the invasion. But British officials have been at pains to position Mr Johnson’s visit in the context of the UK’s ambitions to play a bigger role in ensur-ing an open Indo-Pacific region free from coercion, and the push for the expeditious conclusion of a free trade agreement (FTA) with India. Thus, Mr Johnson will certainly raise the Ukraine crisis but in a more subtle manner, especially when compared to his allies across the Atlantic and other European nations. His focus will be more on coping with the fallout of the Ukraine crisis on the global economy and international security, and more specifically, ensuring Russia’s invasion of Ukraine does not inspire similar actions in territorial disputes within the Indo-Pacific.
And it will be more on trade. In the post-Brexit era, the UK has been in a rush to stitch up trade deals with leading economies to shore up London’s position as a financial hub and an FTA with India will be a crowning achievement for Mr Johnson, who is grappling with the “partygate” controversy and faces a possible inquiry by the Commons Privileges Committee into whether he misled MPs about violating pandemic lockdown rules. Differences on the mobility of professionals and market access for British goods are expected to be taken up when trade negotiators meet in New Delhi next week and talks between Mr Johnson and his Indian counterpart Narendra Modi are expected to produce guidelines for taking matters forward.
The UK side has also talked up new investments worth £1 billion to drive home India’s importance in its long-term economic plans. Unlike other recent international engagements that included some touchy elements related to the Ukraine crisis, India is more comfortably placed for Mr Johnson’s visit though the pressure is growing to ensure that any India-UK trade deal opens up real opportunities and gives a boost to the Indian economy.
Several years ago, while in the midst of a formal interview with then Pakistani Prime Minister (PM), Nawaz Sharif, his younger brother, Shabaz strode into the room, listened for a few minutes and then started to pitch in with answers, unasked. Each interruption was more strident in tone, even as the older, more charismatic and diplomatic of the two, tried to calm him down.
Speaking of the unfinished business of 1947, Shabaz Sharif asked, “Why only Kashmir? What about Hyderabad?” On request, the tape recorder was switched off and the interview was rescheduled for the next day.
Shabaz is now the PM and heads an unwieldy coalition that has its task cut out for it. Has the burden of the top job mellowed him down? Will he, with the help of his older brother — openly predisposed to the idea of better ties with India — be able to take a few steps to untie a relationship that has consistently nosedived since the terror attacks in Uri and Pulwama, and the momentous events of August 2019, when the history and geography of Jammu and Kashmir were altered?
A new dispensation usually comes with some space for new beginnings. PMs Shabaz Sharif and Narendra Modi have exchanged messages on social media and written introductory letters to each other, but that is the diplomatic norm. The same was done when Imran Khan took over as Pakistan’s PM.
Shabaz has inherited not just a troubled legacy on the India-Pakistan front but has also become PM — a long-standing dream — at a time when the country’s economy is drained under the burden of subsidies. For example, can Shahbaz unfreeze the subsidy on petrol announced by the Imran Khan government? Technically he can, but he will be acutely aware of the uneasy fact that the anti-incumbency will swiftly switch to him. Perhaps aware of this, he announced some early populist measures: An increase in minimum wages and a hike in pension rates.
“The burden of anti-incumbency will shift very quickly and Shahbaz Sharif, who was in favour of trade with India as the Punjab chief minister, may look at opening up trade and travel,’’ says Sharat Sabharwal, who served as India’s high commissioner to Pakistan. He warns against expecting any grand gestures because “Imran Khan is being very aggressive and will dub any pro-India move as a sell-out”.
There were several big moves in the past when Nawaz was the PM. He came for Modi’s swearing-in in 2014, much against the wishes of the all-powerful army establishment. Modi reciprocated by dropping in at his home for his granddaughter’s wedding and even agreed to allow a team, comprising the ISI, to visit an out of bounds Indian Air Force facility in Pathankot that had been struck by terrorists who came across the Line of Control from Pakistan.
But 2022 is vastly different. Nawaz, currently in London, has been barred from contesting elections for life by a Supreme Court order. His immensely popular daughter, Maryam Sharif, too, is barred for 10 years. Shabaz is facing money laundering charges and is currently out on bail. He has taken charge and announced a team of ministers but has at least eight coalition partners and several independents to juggle and please. All of them face the prospect of an election — that can take place any time between seven to about 16 months from now. Each party is aware that they are essentially political rivals and have to face the electorate sooner rather than later.
Also coming up in November, is the retirement of army chief Qamar Bajwa. Appointing army chiefs is always a very tricky proposition. No one knows this better than the Sharifs. Nawaz chose General Pervez Musharraf and faced a coup and several years in exile, after a short, but sharp, war in Kargil. Bajwa, of late, has been speaking of better ties with India but as a former diplomat, Sabharwal said, “The talk of peace is tactical. It has helped lower the heat and the army is busy with America and Afghanistan.”
Imran Khan burnt Pakistan’s bridges with the United States by alleging a foreign conspiracy to his ouster and the army is busy trying to repair that relationship. India will be lower down in the army and Shabaz’s list of things to do.
“The establishment and Shabaz’s space for manoeuvre on India is limited due to domestic compulsions. It remains to be seen if they will be willing to open a little on the trade front,” says Vivek Katju, former diplomat and veteran Pakistan watcher.
In his first speech after being sworn in as PM, Shabaz talked about Kashmir — as every Pakistani PM must do for domestic reasons — and blamed Imran Khan for not fighting a diplomatic battle after Jammu and Kashmir’s special status was nixed in August 2019.
The near breakpoint in the India-Pakistan relationship came in 2019 when Imran Khan withdrew the high commissioner to India. He also put a halt to trade with India, a step that hurts Pakistan more than it does India.
While India is firm on its “terror and talks can’t go together” position on Pakistan, it did agree to a cessation of hostility along the Line of Control, in February 2021. What is important to remember, however, is that this was negotiated through backchannel contacts and concluded with help from the United Arab Emirates (UAE). It was not a bilateral exercise. A UAE diplomat acknowledged as much.
India is closely watching the Line of Control as the snows melt. This is the time when infiltration picks up and the heat is directly felt in the Valley. While India has noted the 31-year jail term for Hafiz Saeed, the conspirator behind the terror attacks in Mumbai in 2008, the view in the government is that this is aimed more at the Financial Action Task Force which has grey-listed Pakistan.
According to Ayesha Siddiqa, a military historian and political commentator, “India and Pakistan have arrived at another moment. We have the moment but we don’t have the time.”
Caught between an economical meltdown, a strident Imran Khan, and an impending election, India probably knows there is little room for any breakthrough in the India-Pakistan détente.
As Sabharwal said, “The only hope should be for a few steps back from where the relationship nosedived.” The steps could include the restoration of high commissioners and the opening up of trade. Or, “cricket and commerce,” as Mushahid Hussain, chairman of the defence committee in the Senate said.
Small, incremental steps are, indeed, the only way forward.
The views expressed are personal
You can get quite far in a democracy if you can convince a majority that they are victims of a minority, and that only you can protect them, Garry Kasparov said once. The chess legend was referring to America in 2016, but a striking parallel can be drawn with India in 2022. Just look at the toxic narrative playing out in the aftermath of a week of bruising communal flare-ups across more than half-a-dozen states: Viral videos of Ram Navami and Hanuman Jayanti processions being pelted with stones have fed into an ominous storyline of “Hindus as victims” of a violent minority which must be “taught a lesson”.
The truth is somewhat more complicated: Religious processions marked by abusive sloganeering and open threats from Hindutva groups being confronted by angry Islamist sections threaten to wreck Narendra Modi’s well-spun “new” India dream of “sabka saath, sabka vikas [inclusive development for all]”. The chickens have come home to roost from years of “normalising” hate politics with the so-called “fringe” now firmly and truly mainstream.
The geographical arc of violence is revealing, having spread from the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-ruled Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka and Gujarat through Opposition-ruled states such as Rajasthan, Bengal, Odisha and Jharkhand to the national capital where the police report to the Union home ministry. In BJP-ruled states, there is an election on the horizon as there is in Congress-ruled Rajasthan while Delhi too is poised to hold a crucial municipal election later this year. This may partly explain a rise in the communal temperature and resurgence in divide-and-rule politics.
A deliberate attempt is being made to find polarising issues aimed at othering Muslims — hijab, halal meat, azaan, the list is growing. Congress Member of Parliament Shashi Tharoor has dubbed these as weapons of mass distraction, designed to keep the communal pot boiling to divert the public mind from the deepening crisis of falling incomes and rising prices.
Tharoor may be right, but only up to a point. Because the religio-cultural war that lies at the heart of the Sangh parivar’s Hindu rashtra mission has been ascendant for a while. If anything, eight years in power have convinced many Hindutva zealots that the time to strike has come. The stunning victory in the key state of Uttar Pradesh (UP), where chief minister (CM) Yogi Adityanath has emerged as a strident Hindutva icon, may have emboldened the Sangh leadership. When Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh chief Mohan Bhagwat boasts of an Akhand Bharat vision being realised with a “heavy stick” within the next 15 years, he is only reaffirming an enduring fantasy of a unified Hindu supremacist subcontinent.
The aggressive celebrations of Ram Navami and Hanuman Jayanti with a warrior-like display of weaponry are part of this playbook, meant to send out an unambiguous message that Hindu cultural revivalism is now an unstoppable force. In the late 19th century, Lokmanya Tilak recast Ganesh Chaturthi celebrations into a mass public event to unify society against British colonial rule. In the 21st century, the saffron brotherhood wants to use Ram and Hanuman as symbols of religious machismo that go well beyond traditional rituals of prayer and devotion. What else explains playing loud DJ music outside mosques during a Ram Navami procession? The signalling is clear: If Muslims are allowed loudspeakers for azaan, Hindutva groups will assert their identity by blaring songs with an even greater frenzy in Muslim-dominated mohallas.
This tit-for-tat militant religious politics are lifelines for the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) and Bajrang Dal. Having played a crucial role in the early years of the Ram Janmabhoomi movement that first propelled the BJP into national prominence, these Hindutva foot soldiers have felt marginalised by the relentless Modi election juggernaut. Now, they seek their moment in the arclights, unhindered by any legal or governance constraints.
The impunity of their actions in recent times — be it organising hate-spewing dharam sansads, spearheading violent gau-rakshak movements or commanding divisive love jihad campaigns — are aimed at resurrecting their political equity in the crowded Hindutva marketplace. That the VHP-Bajrang Dal chose to defiantly go ahead with a shobha yatra on Hanuman Jayanti in Delhi, despite not having police permission, stems from their conviction that their benefactors in power will ultimately protect their interests.
Polarising election campaigns haven’t helped — and only served to reinforce the perception that demonising minorities has the top leadership’s tacit endorsement. Nor can a heavily compromised police force read the riot act to those rabble-rousers who are well-connected to a hyper-partisan regime. So much easier then for State authorities to sidestep due process and bulldoze the “illegal” houses of alleged rioters from the minority community rather than ensure the even-handed enforcement of law and order. Just as the “Hindu as victim” narrative is galvanising majoritarian co-religionists, the “Muslim as victim” counternarrative is providing fresh ammunition to radical Islamist hotheads who are spreading their extremist beliefs. For a country with “vishwa-guru” superpower pretensions, that is an alarming situation to be in. India at the moment needs bridge-builders, not bulldozers.
Postscript: Prime Minister Modi has been conspicuously silent in the face of mounting hate speech and communal violence cases as has home minister Amit Shah. A senior RSS leader explains it as a “political compulsion”, pointing to Gujarat elections later this year. Ironically, it is Yogi Adityanath as UP CM who has been talking tough on reigning in all religious processions that disrupt peace and harmony. Is this strategic positioning or clever optics aimed at consolidating a tough on law and order image?
Rajdeep Sardesai is a senior journalist and author. The views expressed are personal
Covid-19 seems to have a particular jinx on United Kingdom (UK) Prime Minister (PM) Boris Johnson’s visit to India. It put paid to two trips last year, and has again locked him in a serious controversy at home even before his current visit to India. The delay, however, has only deepened the geopolitical significance of the visit. In addition to reformulating the bilateral relationship post-Brexit, the two countries will also have to find common ground in the strategic jostling triggered on the global chessboard by the Ukraine conflict.
While Ukraine will undoubtedly figure significantly in the bilateral discussions, it would be incorrect to regard the visit as one more diplomatic push from the West to influence India. No doubt Johnson will say his piece on this; his pre-visit remarks that “it is vital that democracies and friends stick together” indicate as much. Undoubtedly, he will be effectively answered in terms of India’s self-interest and strategic autonomy, as foreign secretary Liz Truss was on her recent visit to India.
But the focus of the visit will squarely be on bilateral relations, and the larger picture is encouraging. Post-Brexit, the United Kingdom (UK) has made no secret of its desire to transform its ties with India; a successful India outreach would be the best advertisement for a Global Britain, unshackled from the European Union. An ambitious Roadmap 2030 was launched last May after the relationship, often hobbled by legacy issues, was elevated to a Comprehensive Strategic Partnership. It is logical that the current visit too would focus attention on at least four areas, broadly reflecting agreed priorities.
Prime among these would be trade and investment. Presently pegged at $25 billion, trade is targeted to double by 2030. The Free Trade Agreement (FTA) negotiations have progressed well in the two rounds held this year; a third round is scheduled from April 25 to May 6. The summit could fast-track these negotiations towards an early harvest deal. India’s recent efficiency in concluding FTAs and the UK’s keenness to expand markets beyond Europe bode well for the prospects. The UK is also expected to announce fresh investments, particularly in infrastructure and green energy projects. For its part, India remains the second-largest foreign investor in the UK and the second-largest job creator; 850 UK-based Indian companies employ 116,000 persons.
Second, the UK has shown keenness to upgrade its defence and security relationship with India. Two factors have contributed to this: One, the impressive growth in India-US defence ties and trade, including the conclusion of foundational agreements, and second, the realisation, post- Ukraine, that conditions need to be created to reduce India’s defence dependence on Russia. To that end, the UK has indicated a willingness to participate in Atmanirbhar Bharat and Make in India programmes.
Closer defence and maritime security cooperation with India also segue into the much-publicised “Indo-Pacific tilt” set out in the UK’s Integrated Review published last year. The most visible demonstration of India’s key role in the UK’s strategic foray into the Indo-Pacific was the visit of the new aircraft carrier, HMS Queen Elizabeth, as the spearhead of the Carrier Strike Group to Mumbai last year and the holding of complicated tri-services exercises with India. The UK’s decisions to join India’s Indo-Pacific Oceans Initiative (IPOI) and to be the co-leader of the maritime security pillar are also early signs of a growing strategic convergence. China predictably will remain a significant factor in creating a closer bonding; currently, the challenges posed by an authoritarian China to economic security, critical supply chains, and a rule-based order for trade and technology outweigh the economic blandishments that attracted the UK in recent years. Sanctions and counter-sanctions on the Uighur issue and China’s hardline on Hong Kong have sent relations plunging south.
The fourth area of focus is climate and clean energy. The two countries are already partners in the “Green Grids Initiative — “One Sun, One World One Grid” and the “Infrastructure for Resilient Island States” initiative; India has also joined the Glasgow Breakthrough Agenda that extends support to various green energy sectors. Several significant green financing initiatives, particularly the pledge from British Investment International to invest $1-billion in green projects over the next five years, and cooperation in offshore wind generation and electric vehicle manufacturing are other areas of promise.
Undeniably there are problems, and there are contradictions. The burden of colonial excesses, the pain of the Partition, the perceptions of a pro-Pakistan tilt, the extra oxygen in London’s atmosphere for anti-Indian elements, the meshing of India’s domestic matters with the UK’s domestic politics can all weigh heavily on the relationship.
The counter to all this is that India is a significant and familiar presence for the people of Britain. For the most part, there is great comfort in the relationship, and unmatched instinctive understanding. When both sides are approaching the relationship afresh, this moment is ideal for cementing a strategic logic that can envelop the niggling irritants and take the conversation beyond the Commonwealth, curry, and cricket.
Navtej Sarna is a former high commissioner of India to the UK, and ambassador to the US
The views expressed are personal
The All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS, Delhi) was established to be a national institute of excellence, in medical research and for training doctors. A secondary expectation was that AIIMS-trained doctors would create new centres of excellence in healthcare delivery. AIIMS has partly achieved the first objective: The institute’s faculty publishes more research papers than their counterparts at peer institutions within India although not as many high quality papers as the best institutions in the world. The second aim was never met since the elitist ideals imbibed by AIIMS-trained doctors meant that they were unlikely to go anywhere else in India except to another elite institution or overseas. Instead of being a pipeline for qualified talent, AIIMS sequestered some of the best medical talent away from the mainstream.
AIIMS’ reputation makes it a magnet for patients from outside Delhi: AIIMS sees more than 7,000 patients each day of whom a large chunk comes from Delhi’s neighbouring states. If AIIMS is such a magnet for patients, it makes good sense to set up more AIIMS-like institutions. This is the logic driving the establishment of 25 AIIMS clones across India. But this may inhibit the progress of primary health care and district hospitals. Which patient would want to be treated at a district hospital when an AIIMS is a bus ride away? Which doctor would want to work in a district hospital that has neither equipment nor status when a job at an AIIMS can provide both?
When a foundation for basic public health care does not exist, then constructing a costly super-speciality tertiary health care facility will deal a death blow to any attempt to push the agenda of public health. First, it will soak up resources (capital and personnel), leaving only leftovers for public health. Second, it will accelerate the race among private hospitals to build sophisticated and costly infrastructure to compete with the nearby AIIMS. The private hospitals will then use all means available to fill the capacity, leading to a ballooning of wasteful care and costs. Finally, plonking an AIIMS all across India will act as a strong disincentive for local governments to build primary and secondary care infrastructure. Yet another unintended consequence of establishing these islands of excellence and plenty is that they will concentrate large numbers of patients within their premises, impairing quality of service and increasing problems such as antibiotic resistance and iatrogenic morbidity.
It is not that we do not need AIIMS-like institutions. But we may only need four to six such institutions across the country. Like AIIMS, Delhi, they must be designed specifically to carry out advanced biomedical research and preferably operate as postgraduate institutions that focus on the introduction of cutting-edge methods in health care. Co-locating them with engineering and science research institutions such as Indian Institutes of Technology and Indian Institutes of Science can have a synergistic effect.
To deliver health care at scale without compromising quality, we need a different kind of hospital. First, we need our hospitals to be embedded in and seamlessly integrated within a network of health care providers from primary to tertiary care. A system of referrals should determine who needs to go to a tertiary care facility for treatment. Plain vanilla multi-speciality hospitals should give way to a mix of focused care facilities (e.g., hospitals that specialise in a single speciality, like cardiac care), emergency care facilities and community hospitals (that can take on the workload of highly routine procedures). Only such a differentiated and yet fully integrated health care network can provide high quality care close to where the patients live at a cost the national budget can bear.
For a big chunk of our population, quality health care is a luxury. Giving them access to a super-speciality hospital when their basic health needs are not met is like Mary Antoinette asking starving Parisians to eat cake. Instead of asking them to go to a distant AIIMS, the State should discharge its responsibility in providing them seamless end-to-end health care that starts close to their home at a primary health centre.
Swami Subramaniam is currently CEO, Ignite Life Science Foundation. Aparajithan Srivathsan is managing director, Intent Health Technologies
The views expressed are personal
Last week, India heaved a sigh of relief when the India Meteorological Department and Skymet, a private forecaster, predicted a normal monsoon. If all goes well, this will be the fourth consecutive monsoon that has been “normal” or “above normal.” A good monsoon will ensure sufficient yield in agriculture (40% of India’s net sown area is rain-fed), replenish 100 large reservoirs critical for drinking water, irrigation and power generation, and keep the pressure on retail inflation low.
Unfortunately, citizens, especially in urban areas, take the monsoon rains for granted, and fail to conserve the bounty. Last year, while launching the Jal Shakti Abhiyan, Prime Minister Narendra Modi urged the nation to take up water conservation. Unfortunately, people’s participation in water conservation continues to be weak.
This is imprudent and reckless behaviour for a country facing a terrible water crisis and climate crisis, which could make the monsoons erratic and volatile.
According to the Central Ground Water Board, as many as 256 of 700 districts of the country have reported “critical” or “over-exploited” groundwater levels. A NITI Aayog report in 2018 stated that 600 million people, or nearly half of India’s population, face extreme water stress.
Home to a fifth of the world’s population, India has only 4% of the world’s water. But the country is the largest extractor of groundwater globally, with 90% used for agriculture. The water stress also leads to increasing protests and clashes over the crucial natural resource. Many experts have said that the country’s deepening water crisis was at the heart of the farm protests that rocked the country last year.
India’s water conservation legacy
India has a strong legacy of judicious water use and conservation.
I recently came across an inspiring and exciting effort by Pallavee Gokhale of IISER, Pune. She has been documenting the water supply system of Pune built during the Peshwa Period (18th century).
“It is a testament to exemplary engineering, administration and city planning,” she says.
As a schoolgirl in the 1980s-1990s, water cuts and water shortages were routine events for Gokhale. “As a kid, I enjoyed it because I used to get a chance to go across the street, fetch a few buckets of water from a mysterious small cistern, called the Kala Haud,” she adds.
Today, this abiding childhood memory has become her research interest, and Gokhale is mapping and uncovering the Peshwa-built complex system of cisterns/ reservoirs (Haud), dipping wells (Uchchhwas), and underground human-made aqueducts (Nal/ Nahar).
“This magnificent system with more than 20 km long network and 200+ outlets are part of the rich water heritage of Pune. However, accelerated urbanisation over the last few decades has left many components of this system either abandoned or destroyed,” says Gokhale.
India’s legacy water harvesting network is diverse: There are khadins (harvest surface runoff), talabs (ponds), johad (percolation pond), and baoli (man-made step well) and ahar-pynes (traditional floodwater harvesting system). But, like what is happening in Pune, we are losing them at a fast pace due to development pressures, lack of knowledge and disinterest of governments to restore and maintain them.
Water literacy is crucial
To save such traditional water sources and networks, citizens must be made water literate.
A water literacy campaign can comprise three significant steps, says the 2001 Magsaysay Award winner Rajendra Singh, who also pioneered the concept of water parliaments. I attended two of them in Alwar, Rajasthan, back in 2000, and witnessed how communities joined hands to revive River Arvari, which originates from the Aravallis, by restoring its catchment areas.
First, Singh says, citizens must understand water, which means learning about all water sources, from glaciers to groundwater and the water cycle, the flora-fauna, and the socio-economic landscape dependent on these water sources.
The second is practising water conservation through various measures, including rainwater harvesting and wastewater management.
The last step, he adds, is making other people understand and save water.
To end on a positive note on the eve of Earth Day, which is tomorrow (April 22), many local communities across the country are revitalising and protecting these traditional water harvesting structures across India.
But this is not enough.
It’s important to start a large-scale nationwide campaign to make every citizen aware of India’s strong legacy of water conservation, build their capacity to take care of local traditional water harvesting systems, and encourage them to take up water conservation at an individual level.
These steps will be crucial to offset a water crisis in an era of the deepening climate crisis and revive the deep relationship between water bodies/structures and communities.
The views expressed are personal
India’s Supreme Court was making a point before the republic’s rulers about the importance of the rule of law when it ordered the status quo in Delhi’s Jahangirpuri area on Wednesday, as the North Delhi Municipal Corporation (NDMC) was busy with its demolition drive. The directive of the highest court of the land, however, was apparently not enough to halt the bulldozers as the authorities claimed they were yet to receive the court order, and went on with the business for another one-and-a-half hours, razing houses and buildings. They also refused to listen to CPI(M) politburo member Brinda Karat, who reached the demolition site with a copy of the order. It took repeated interventions by Chief Justice of India N.V. Ramana and Ms Karat’s physical presence in front of the bulldozer to ensure that the Supreme Court’s writ ran in the national capital.
The NDMC was purportedly acting on a communication by the president of the Delhi unit of the BJP that illegal houses and buildings occupied by the accused in the violence associated with the Ram Navami procession in the area must be demolished. This was not the first time that BJP-run governments and other authorities have found a useful ploy in the “illegality” of the structures when it chose to take on its adversaries. The first victim of the series was perhaps dismissed Gujarat cadre IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt, parts of whose house were razed. The Gujarat authorities were armed with a court order, but the Yogi Adityanath government in Uttar Pradesh did not even bother about it before making it a norm in its first term to run the machines over the houses and properties of people who were accused of committing heinous crimes. The BJP government in Madhya Pradesh has recently followed suit after the violence during the Ram Navami celebrations earlier this month.
India is a constitutional democracy and the rule of law forms the basis of all governance. As per our constitutional order, there are legal means to punish people who violate the law. If people disturb communal harmony, they must be punished as per the law; if they destroy public property, they must be compelled to pay compensation as per the law; and if they occupy illegal structures, they must be made to vacate, again, as per the law. It is fully in the domain of the judiciary to pronounce a person guilty and prescribe a sentence; and the executive comes nowhere in the picture. When governments -- whether at the Centre or in the states --arrogate to themselves the roles of investigator, executor and judge, it could well sound the death knell of the rule of law.
Article 21 of the Constitution and the international covenants that India has signed have assured every human being of a life with dignity; any disruption must be according to the law. Any attempt by the executive to abrogate that right must be resisted through democratic means; and the courts play a very important role in it. The Supreme Court’s intervention in the Jahangirpuri case must be taken by all courts across the country as the gold standard whenever the rule of law is questioned anywhere, and the fundamental rights of the people are challenged.
The last thing Sri Lanka needs during a crisis that has been exacerbated by the first death at the hands of the police controlling demonstrators is a power struggle. But that is precisely what seems to be happening among the only two Rajapaksas retaining power after sacking others of their clan who were also members of Parliament.
It was predictable that the elder brother Mahinda, who could not become President in 2019 because of a term restriction on the island’s top post, would attempt to take over the task of addressing the economic problem in a visible way as the strongman who had ended the insurrection by LTTE’s Tamil militants under Velupillai Prabhakaran that had festered for close to four decades.
Mahinda is only Prime Minister now, his role reduced by his brother Gotabaya, with his military past, introducing an amendment in 2020 after the 2019 polls that reduced the PM to a ceremonial figure. While the opposite would be true in most nations that vest all executive powers in a Prime Minister working nominally under a ceremonial President, Sri Lanka’s history has been pockmarked by personality clashes between those in the highest seats of power.
In the time when Maithripala Sirisena was President with Ranil Wickermasinghe as his Prime Minister the PM’s powers were expanded and Mr Sirisena magnanimously accepted lesser powers. Of course, the current power struggle in which Mahinda will be approaching Parliament to revert to an empowered PM can only be termed as either a diversionary tactic or an egotistical Mahinda move to be seen taking the reins as the island’s saviour who once saved it from militancy and who can also tackle this grave economic meltdown.
The public angst, meanwhile, has been stoked by the use of policing powers to control the rising demonstrativeness against the Rajapaksas who are seen as the prime cause of the crisis though it should, in all fairness, be said that a concatenation of circumstances, from the Easter blasts of 2019 to the Covid pandemic of the next two years, flattened the global economy itself and not just that of Sri Lanka.
The prominent Rajapaksa siblings should sort the executive powers issue between themselves and get down to addressing the problem of the economic crisis and the pending $7 billion payments this year alone on Sri Lanka’s national debt. Otherwise, they will be in danger of worsening the situation.
Way back in 1959 when the world’s first elected Communist government led by E.M.S. Namboothiripad in Kerala was dismissed, purportedly on the recommendation of then governor Burgula Ramakrishna Rao, DMK founder C.N. Annadurai questioned the need for the post of one in a democracy. He equated it with that of a goat’s stubble, saying, in Tamil, “Aatukku thaadium nattukku governorum thevaiillai (a state does not need a governor just as a goat has no use of a beard)”, setting the tone for the DMK and its breakaway party, the AIADMK’s, subsequent opposition to governors.
The scene has not changed much though as a democracy India has strengthened its institutions and stabilised them over the decades. Governors continue to exert undue influence over the decisions of elected governments even though high courts and the Supreme Court have intervened several times to assert the primacy of the council of ministers in matters of governance. Often they act as agents of the Union government, especially in states which are run by political dispensations opposed to that in the Centre, and frustrate the state governments’ plans. In Telangana, the governor says it is difficult to work with the chief minister; in West Bengal, the two top constitutional functionaries spar in public and in Maharashtra, the governor comes out criticising the state government over which he presides. Kerala’s governor is known for throwing tantrums at will.
The latest stand-off in Tamil Nadu, however, has spilled on to the streets with public protests against the governor sitting on bills passed by the state Assembly.
The DMK which criticised the interference of the earlier incumbent of the gubernatorial post, Banwarilal Purohit, in public affairs even as an Opposition party in 2017, did not take kindly to the appointment of R.N. Ravi, a former intelligence officer, as governor in 2021. Though the ruling party did not openly express resentment, the DMK’s alliance partners went out all guns blazing against Mr Ravi, anticipating trouble for the elected government. The governor, too, lived up to the apprehension by being a stumbling block for the government in the implementation of its schemes.
As of now, the allegation is that he has put 19 bills passed by the Tamil Nadu Assembly in cold storage. One of them is the bill seeking exemption of the state from NEET for admission to medical colleges run by the state government with a view to enabling poor and rural students from disadvantaged sections of the society to realise their dream of becoming doctors on the basis of their marks in the school final examinations, a criteria that had produced generations of medical professionals in the state. Another bill relates to the restructuring of cooperative bodies in the state.
The state government is anxious over the bill being held back for 210 days, despite it being passed for the second time after the governor first returned it to the Assembly for reconsideration since medical admissions are round the corner and poor and rural students might miss out on their opportunities for one more year.
The Constitution makers envisaged no critical role for the governor; least of all, on sitting in judgment over the wisdom of the legislature, elected by the people. The governors would do well to stick to constitutional propriety instead of seeking a role outside it.
The Central government has released the numbers of the Wholesale Price Index (WPI) for March 2022, which had shot up to an insane figure of 14.55 per cent, while the retail inflation — also known as the Consumer Price Index (CPI) — was still hovering at around half the wholesale inflation. The retail inflation, which stood at 7.68 per cent in March, was in tune with the changing global business environment which was disturbed by higher crude oil prices and supply disruption caused by China’s lockdowns. The wholesale inflation numbers, however, appear to hurl us back into the socialist heyday in the pre-liberalisation era, or the final months of the United Progressive Alliance-2. One wonders why such divergence, and with such a wide range? The answer lies in the make-up of both indices. The retail inflation index is designed based on people’s consumption patterns, which also includes essential services. The wholesale price index, on the other hand, is focused only on goods, where manufactured products have a two-thirds weightage.
A closer look at the March WPI data shows that though fuel prices had, at 34.52 per cent, risen the most, it was manufactured products that contributed the most to the spike in wholesale inflation. It also indicates that manufacturers are passing on the impact of high fuel prices and global supply shortages to consumers. Unless the rise in inflation is arrested immediately, it will have a spillover effect on wages, which ultimately results in a higher cost of services.
One of the tools that RBI employs to tame inflation is the higher interest rate. However, it cannot drop its accommodative monetary policy, because higher rates cannot address supply-side inflation. All that the government could do is wait till Russia and China decide to salvage the global economy with the former ending its Ukraine war to let fuel prices cool down, and the former stopping its Covid lockdown to allow global supply to be restored. Until then the government could continue the free supply of food grains to the poor while praying to God to protect it from the wrath of the middle classes, who would be the most affected by inflation.
To address the deficit of SP- and DIG-level police officers in the Central Armed Police Forces and Central police organisations, the ministry of home affairs (MHA) has now proposed that IPS officers who do not come on Central deputation at the SP and DIG levels may be barred from a Central posting for the rest of their careers!
Sounds pretty harsh but with more than a reported 50 per cent vacancies at both these levels at the Centre, it seems like a desperate move by the ministry. But coming close on the heels of another proposal to amend the civil service rules that would allow the Centre to summon any IAS, IPS and IFoS officer on Central deputation with or without the state’s consent, this move, too, is unlikely to win the Centre any kudos from the states.
That the move is bound to face stiff resistance from the states is obvious, given that they accuse the Centre of trying to weaken their powers. The MHA babus argue that under existing rules, most IPS officers come on Central deputation only at the IG level, which has led to the current shortage of SP- and DIG-level officers at the Centre. But even senior IPS officers feel that the Centre is taking this step as a short-term measure but one that will harm the service in the longer run. There will surely be a fightback from the states on the proposal, but surely the MHA has worked out its plan for that eventuality.
Kerala babu behind CM-Governor tussle back in old job
Senior Kerala IAS officer K.R. Jyothilal who was moved out as general administration department (GAD) secretary in February has reportedly been brought back to the same post. The babu had been amid an unprecedented tussle between chief minister Pinarayi Vijayan and the state governor Arif Mohammed Khan, as reported earlier in this column (DKB, February 22, 2022).
Apparently, a letter written by the babu for allegedly appointing a political person in the Raj Bhavan had angered Mr Khan to the extent that he refused to sign the governor’s address to the state Assembly. The letter at the heart of the controversy and written by Jyothilal had been sent to the Raj Bhavan with the appointment order of Hari Kartha, a BJP leader, as an additional PA to the governor. Sources informed DKB that while this letter mentioned that the government had approved the appointment of Mr Kartha as per the governor’s wish, it also conveyed the displeasure of the chief minister stating that there was no precedent of appointing political leaders in Raj Bhavan. Mr Khan took umbrage at this. At the time, Mr Vijayan prudently removed Mr Jyothilal from the post and defused a potentially ugly constitutional crisis.
But two months later, the babu is quietly back in his old post, his name tucked in between the names of several IAS officers who were recently transferred. Does this mean that the “truce” between Mr Vijayan and Mr Khan is over? Or will Mr Jyothilal’s second coming revive the tensions between the state government and the governor?
While the governor’s office has not commented on this, future actions of the CM may hold the key to this key relationship, which has seen some rocky moments.
Post-retirement bonanza in jobs for top haryana babus
Several retired babus in Haryana have reason to be pleased with state chief minister Manohar Lal Khattar. After all, Mr Khattar has re-employed more than a dozen IAS and IPS officers on important posts after their retirement. Most recently, two former IAS officers Vijai Vardhan and S.S. Phulia were appointed as chief information commissioner and information commissioner, respectively, of the state information commission. Mr Vardhan has retired as chief secretary in November last year. He has replaced former IPS officer Yashpal Singhal, a former DGP in the state. Earlier in January this year, former IAS officer Jyoti Arora who is also the wife of home secretary Rajiv Arora, was also made an information commissioner after her retirement.
But the list of such appointments is long, say sources, and goes back several years. Mr Khattar is reportedly unwilling to let senior babus go off into retirement and keeps bringing them back to serve the government. Former chief secretary Keshni Anand Arora was similarly made chairperson of the Haryana Water Resources Authority. And so, it goes. While quite kosher, no doubt, it does seem to suggest that some babus do get a better deal than many of their cohorts!
Food security is the measure of availability of food and people’s ability to access it. As a corollary, food insecurity is marked by disruptions in food intake or eating patterns because of lack of money and other resources, either on a long-term or short-term basis. Food insecurity is a major growing concern in India with its large percentage of poor people.
A variety of factors can impact food security. These include income, jobs, religion, caste and physical or mental handicap. When money to buy food is scarce, or unavailable, the risk of food insecurity is high. Unemployment also has a detrimental impact on a household’s food security. High unemployment rates among low-income communities make meeting basic food needs of a family all the more challenging.
Children with unemployed parents are more likely to be food insecure compared to children with employed parents. Food security data also shows racial and ethnic differences.
Prevalence of Moderate and Severe Food Insecurity (PMSFI) estimates show there were about 43 crore people in India suffering from moderate to severe food insecurity in 2019.
Research shows that if at least one member of a family is a migrant worker, its food insecurity is likely to be higher by 35 per cent. Religion, too, has an effect on food insecurity. Jains, Christians and Hindus have low or average food insecurity, while Buddhists, Muslims and Sikhs have more food insecurity. Muslims have 44 per cent more food insecurity than Hindus.
Men, on an average, are less food insecure, partly because in most rural areas it is they who earn money for the household rather than women.
The Covid-19 pandemic has exacerbated food insecurity leading to negative public health repercussions worldwide. The pandemic also jeopardised India’s long-standing food security index (FSI). It impacted all four dimensions of the index -- food supply, access, stability and use.
The dire consequences with regard to food security during the pandemic was best witnessed when over 100 million migrant labourers had to trek hundreds of miles on empty stomachs. No one could have predicted such a scenario.
Nevertheless, the production of foodgrains does not appear to have been hit. The country had sufficient reserves of food grains (58.4 million tons) and pulses (three million tons) on March 1, 2020. This, however, could not be said for fruits and vegetables, eggs, meat, milk and sugar, which account for 78 per cent of total food consumption.
Supply chain disruptions and a drop in demand have resulted in a massive loss of productivity and money for farmers, merchants and consumers.
Agriculture has undoubtedly demonstrated greater resilience than other sectors of the economy. Winter harvests have been collected successfully by the country’s farmers. Despite difficulties in timely deliveries of inputs at acceptable costs, planting of summer crops has gone off satisfactorily.
While the cost of wholesale food supplies decreased for a while, retail customers have seen price increases as a result of interruptions in food supply networks (FSCs). The stability of food availability and access will be determined by how quickly the infection is contained in order to enable free movement of products and people in order to rebuild food supply systems.
Currently, the National Food Security Act (NFSA) provides free and subsidised rations to 67 per cent of the population. The figure has just been raised to 800 million individuals.
Unaffordable retail pricing for non-grain food items, along with a reduction in purchasing power, drove the average person to focus on calories rather than nutritional energy.
During the early lockdowns in 2020, a huge number of Indians returned to their native villages from metropolitan areas in order to evade lockdowns and find work. This exodus from cities has had two negative consequences.
An enormous influx of people in many rural communities, along with concomitant rise in demand for labour, led to a fall in salaries. As a result, the money obtained from working in agriculture impacted the viability of employment in these locations.
Yet various villages, on the other hand, had an opposite difficulty. With vast numbers of people trapped in urban areas, a major section of the migrant worker population which normally travels to rural regions for employment during the harvest season were unable to do so. Many farmers were left without labourers to produce or transport commodities.
According to Save the Children India, the epidemic has already undone much of India’s gains in reducing poverty. Children are increasingly being compelled to drop out of school and enter the labour market. In the long run, this leads to a drop in educational attainment and an increase in the problems associated with low educational attainment, such as child exploitation.
Food insecurity affects about 820 million people worldwide, and no region is immune. Because food insecurity is a worldwide issue, governments and international organisations have used every available tool to combat it.
The United Nations established 17 Sustainable Development Goals to be met by 2030. Here are a few potential solutions to the problem of food insecurity. Food wastages can be eliminated by addressing insufficient storage spaces. Many farmers are unable to get their goods to market due to inadequate infrastructure. The produce rots rather than be distributed to people in need.
Concentrating on a single food crop or staple can also have disastrous consequences. In order to promote food security, teaching the necessity of cultivating diverse and balanced diets for improved nutrition is required. With more food types and better-informed populaces, there will be enough staple foods available in markets.