Herr von Tschirschky, a diplomat and politician in imperial Germany, said on New Year’s Day 1906 in Hamburg: “Germany’s policy always had been, and would be, to try to frustrate any coalition between two states which might result in damaging Germany’s interests and prestige; and Germany... would not hesitate to take such steps as she thought proper to break up the coalition.” Tschirschky, who would become Foreign Secretary in two weeks, was referring to the Franco-British Entente and Germany’s growing concerns about it.
The security situation in Europe was undergoing massive changes. The Russian power had collapsed in its far east after the war with Japan in 1904-05. Faced with the erosion of Russian influence and the rise of Wilhelmine Germany, which together threatened to alter Europe’s balance of power, France and Britain, competing colonial powers, came together. France had already reached an alliance with Russia. The three would later form the Triple Entente, triggering a dangerous security competition in Europe with the Triple Alliance (Germany, Austria-Hungary and Italy), which would eventually lead to the First World War in 1914.
Similarities from the past
There are similarities between events in Europe today and what happened in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. What triggered the great power security competition in the run-up to the First World War was the phenomenal rise of Wilhelmine Germany as a military and industrial power and the regional hegemons’ response to it. When Otto von Bismarck became the Minister-President of Prussia in September 1862, there was no unified German state. Prussia was part of the loose, ineffective German Confederation. Bismarck adopted an aggressive foreign policy, fought and won three wars — with Denmark, Austria and France — destroyed the confederation, established a stronger and larger German Reich that replaced Prussia.
In the last 20 years of Bismarck’s reign, Germany, and Europe at large, saw relative peace. That was not because the Chancellor had turned a peacenik but because he was constrained by the geopolitical realities of Europe. Bismarck stayed focused on transforming Germany internally in his last two decades. It was on the foundation Bismarck built that Wilhelmine Germany turned toweltpolitik in the early 20 century, seeking global domination.
If Bismarck inherited a weak, loosely connected group of German speaking entities in 1862, Russian President Vladimir Putin got a Russia in 2000 that was a pale shadow of what was the Soviet Union. Russia had lost huge swathes of territories, its economy was in a free fall, its currency had crashed, the living standards of millions of Russians had collapsed and the global stature of the country, which had been one of the two pillars of the post-War global order for almost half a century, had fallen. Bismarck spent his years in power expanding the borders of Germany and building a stronger state and economy. His successors took it further to challenge the existing great powers in Europe. The post-Cold War Russia initially stayed focused on the restoration of the state and the economy, and then sought to expand its borders and challenge the continent’s balance of power — first the Crimean annexation and now the Ukraine invasion.
The existing great powers in Europe saw Germany as a threat to Europe’s balance of power and joined hands to contain its rise. Germany, on the other side, saw the formation of the Entente as an existential threat and took steps to weaken the alliance (The 1905 and 1911 Morocco crises and the German intervention in the Bosnia crisis in 1908). The parallels are hardly to be missed. If Germany was seen as a revisionist power back then, Vladimir Putin’s Russia is today’s revisionist power in Europe. If Germany felt insecure by the Triple Entente, as Tschirschky warned in 1906, Russia has constantly voiced concerns about the eastward expansion of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). If the Entente countries looked at the rise of Germany as a threat to European power balance, the western alliance continued to see modern Russia as a security challenge, even after the collapse of the Soviet Union. While NATO’s expansion deepened Russia’s security concerns, driving it into aggressive moves, Russia’s aggression has strengthened NATO’s resolve to expand further into Russia’s neighbourhood.
On ‘offensive realism’
The behaviour of 20th century Germany and 21st century Russia can best be explained using what John Mearsheimer calls “offensive realism”. Offensive realists argue that “revisionist powers” tend to use force to rewrite the balance of power if they find the circumstances are favourable, while the status quo powers, or the existing regional hegemons, would seek to thwart any new country attaining more power at their expense. The result of this type of competition is permanent rivalry and conflict. Look at Mr. Putin’s offensive moves. He sent troops to Georgia, practically ending that country’s NATO ambitions. He took Crimea without fighting a war. He sent troops to Syria not just to save the regime of Bashar al-Assad and protect Russia’s Mediterranean naval base in Tartus but also to neutralise Turkey and Israel, both Syria’s neighbours. He reinforced Russia’s primacy in Central Asia by bringing peace to the Nagorno-Karabakh and dispatching forces to restore order in Kazakhstan. These successes probably raised the confidence of Russia, prompting its leaders to believe that it was finally strong enough to change Europe’s balance of power forcefully. Then, Russia invaded Ukraine.
But one major difference between the era of Wilhelmine Germany and modern Russia is that there were no well-defined international laws in the 19th and early 20th centuries. The international system has evolved ever since. But its basic instincts, as realists would argue, have not changed much. Mr. Putin’s Russia is not the first country that violated the sovereignty of a weaker power and flouted international laws in the “rules-based” order. Nor will it be the last. As the Athenians told the Melians during the Peloponnesian War, “the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must”.
Security competition
As the Ukraine war grinds into its fourth month, there are no clear winners in Europe. Russia apparently had two strategic objectives in Ukraine — one, to expand Russian borders and create a buffer. And two, to reinforce Russia’s deterrence against NATO. While Russia has succeeded, though slowly, in expanding its borders by capturing almost all of Ukraine’s east, the war has backfired on its second objective — Russia’s inability to clinch a quick outright victory in Ukraine and the tactical retreats it has already made have invariably dealt a blow to the perception of Russian power that existed before the war. This has strengthened NATO, driving even Sweden and Finland into its arms. Besides, the economic sanctions would leave a long-term hole in Russia’s economy.
But a Russia that is bogged down in Ukraine and encircled by NATO need not enhance Europe’s security. Russia’s advances in Ukraine may have been slow; it seemed ready to fight a war of attrition like the long wars European countries fought against each other in the past. And despite the strong resistance it faced in Ukraine, Russia remains too strong a military and geopolitical power to be brushed aside. As Henry Kissinger said at Davos, Russia had been and would remain an important element in the European state system.
The prospects are bleak. There will not be peace in Europe unless either Russia accepts its diminished role and goes into another spell of strategic retreat (like it did after the disintegration of the Soviet Union), or Europe and the West in general accommodate Russia’s security concerns. Both look unrealistic as of today. This means that even if the war in Ukraine comes to an end, the security contest in Europe would continue. The post-Cold War period of relative peace and stability in Europe, anchored in liberal internationalism, was an aberration rather than a norm in the continent’s long history of conflicts. And what makes the latest round of great power rivalry more dangerous is that there are nuclear weapons on both sides.
stanly.johny@thehindu.co.in
Learning Mandarin in Hong Kong in 1971 soon after he joined the Indian Foreign Service opened “a whole new and fascinating world” for Shyam Saran. “I was coming face to face with a civilization with a long and varied history, a philosophical and cultural heritage of enormous richness, and a view of the world quite distinct and indeed different from others,” he writes in the introduction to his new book, How China Sees India and the World.Saran spent six years in China in two stints and witnessed its “rapid and far-reaching transformation”. China is today the world’s second largest economy after the U.S., and is already a leader in new-age technologies like artificial intelligence, quantum computing and space exploration. He explains why despite India and China being roughly at the same economic level once, India is now a “retreating image in China’s rear-view mirror.” An excerpt:
India and China were roughly at the same economic level in 1978, with similar GDP and per capita income. Though China began to grow much faster thereafter, the gap between the two countries was not very significant even a decade later, when the Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi paid a historic visit to Beijing in December 1988. It was then possible for Deng Xiaoping to declare that there could not be an Asian Century without India and China growing together and playing a resurgent role. The surge in India’s GDP growth as a result of its own economic reforms and liberalisation policies adopted in the early 1990s expanded India’s political and economic profile. At the turn of the century, India was behind China but was seen as shrinking the gap. In the period 2003–2007, India’s growth rate accelerated while China’s began to slow down. This was the brief period when India’s diplomatic options multiplied. It was able to leverage the advance of its relations with one major power to promote its relations with other major powers, thereby expanding its strategic space.
Border dispute
During the visit of the Indian Prime Minister [Atal Bihari] Vajpayee to China in 2003, two important decisions were taken. One, the two countries agreed to seek an early political solution to the India–China border dispute, instituting regular negotiations at the level of Special Representatives of their respective leaders. The Chinese side also conveyed its recognition of Sikkim as a State of India. It had not accepted the accession of the State to the Indian Union in 1975 and its maps had continued to depict it [Sikkim] as an independent country. The backdrop to these important decisions was the recognition that relations between the two large emerging economies had now acquired a global and strategic dimension, going beyond their bilateral relations. It was, therefore, important to resolve the long-standing border issue in order to enable the two countries to cooperate more closely in the shaping of the emerging regional and global architecture.
This development was carried forward during the subsequent visit of Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao to India in April 2005. As Foreign Secretary, I was closely associated with the visit. The Chinese were already aware that India was negotiating a civil nuclear cooperation agreement with the U.S., which would greatly enhance India’s diplomatic profile and significantly strengthen the India–U.S. partnership. This encouraged the Chinese to balance this development by upgrading their own relations with India, and this increased India’s room for manoeuvre vis-à-vis China. At their meeting, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and [Premier] Wen Jiabao reached a broad consensus on the following lines: One, that China was not a threat to India and India was not a threat to China; Two, that there was enough space in Asia and the world for the simultaneous growth of both India and China; Three, that India was an economic opportunity for China, and China likewise an economic opportunity for India; Four, that as two large and emerging economies the two countries, by working together, could exercise significant influence on the existing global regimes in different domains and could shape new global regimes in emerging domains such as climate change, cyber space and outer space; Five, that India-China relations having thus acquired a global and strategic dimension and in order to enable them to work more effectively together, it was important to resolve the India-China border issue at an early date.
Impact of financial crisis
The global financial and economic crisis had a major impact on the further development of India-China relations. Just as the asymmetry between the U.S. and China began to shrink in the aftermath of the crisis, the asymmetry between India and China, which had been shrinking earlier, began to expand once again. India’s GDP growth decelerated and has averaged about 6-7 per cent per annum since then. China has maintained the same rate of growth as India, but on a much larger base than India’s. This asymmetry of power began to be reflected in China showing less sensitivity to India’s interests, its steady economic and political penetration of countries in India’s periphery and a lower threshold of tolerance to closer relations between India and the U.S. In conversations at non-official meetings, Chinese scholars would often draw attention to the fact that China’s economy was five times the size of India’s and this could not but reflect in the nature of India-China relations. The implication of such a statement was that India should accept its diminished ranking in the Chinese perception and defer to Chinese interests.
Stepping out of line – a line drawn by China – would invite punitive reactions, and that too is evident in the more recent Chinese moves against India, including its more aggressive posture at the India-China border, where relative peace and tranquillity had prevailed over the past several decades. In 2005, China was willing to make some concessions to India in order to forestall an incipient Indo-U.S. alliance that could be threatening to China. Its reaction to the Quad, which is a coalition of India, Australia, Japan and the U.S., which could constrain China in the Indo-Pacific, is to dismiss its relevance and to adopt an even more threatening posture towards the coalition partners.
In the aftermath of the global financial and economic crisis of 2008, the Chinese assessment is that the U.S. is a declining power, that its credibility is eroded and, importantly, that its will to exercise power has also diminished. It is a power in retreat and, therefore, allies and partners of the U.S., the Chinese assert, cannot count on U.S. power to deter China. A narrative is being built on the inevitability of Chinese regional, and eventually global, dominance, which it would be futile to resist.
Excerpted with permission from Juggernaut Books
As an old Chinese saying goes, nothing can separate people with common goals and ideals; not even mountains and seas. Sixteen years after its creation, BRICS has become an important platform for win-win cooperation among China, India, Russia, Brazil and South Africa, and a significant force for the evolution of international order, the improvement of global governance and the promotion of common development.
Since China took over the BRICS chairmanship at the beginning of this year, we have worked together with BRICS partners to press ahead with cooperation in political security, economy and finance, people-to-people exchanges, public health and other realms. More than 50 important events have been held, contributing to significant progress in various cooperative fields.
On May 19, Chinese President Xi Jinping delivered a video address at the virtual meeting of BRICS Foreign Ministers. The BRICS Foreign Ministers issued a joint statement. And the first dialogue of Foreign Ministers between BRICS and emerging markets and developing countries was held.
The world today witnesses increasing factors of instability, uncertainty and insecurity. It is of great significance for the BRICS Foreign Ministers’ meeting to reach consensus and outcomes on multiple important issues concerning global security and development, which made political preparations for the 14th BRICS summit.
The BRICS Foreign Ministers’ meeting indicated that BRICS countries will strengthen solidarity and cooperation in the face of challenges with firm conviction, and take real actions to promote peace and development, and uphold fairness and justice. We will inject more BRICS strength into global development, and speak with a louder BRICS voice to uphold the common interests of the developing countries.
Upholding universal security
BRICS countries should be builders of universal security. Cold-war mentality and bloc confrontation pose grave threats to world peace and security. Seeking one’s own security at the expense of others’ will only create new tensions and risks. President Xi Jinping put forward the Global Security Initiative, pointing out the way to make up the peace deficit and solve the global security dilemma. It is important to respect and guarantee the security of every country, replace confrontation and alliance with dialogue and partnership, and promote the building of a balanced, effective and sustainable regional security architecture.
BRICS countries need to strengthen political mutual trust and security cooperation, maintain communication and coordination on major international and regional issues, accommodate each other’s core interests and major concerns, respect each other’s sovereignty, security and development interests, oppose hegemonism and power politics, and work together to build a global community of security for all.
BRICS countries should be contributors of common development. The COVID-19 pandemic threatens to derail the world economy. The irresponsible macro-economic and monetary policies of certain countries have aggravated the uncertainties and imbalances of economic recovery. President Xi Jinping’s Global Development Initiative gives priority to development, embraces the people-centered core concept, and calls for more robust, greener and more sound global development. It provides a Chinese solution to global development problems and has been widely echoed by the international community.
Facing the rising tide of de-globalisation and the increase of unilateral sanctions and technology barriers, BRICS countries should enhance mutually-beneficial cooperation in supply chains, energy, food and financial resilience, take solid steps to implement the Global Development Initiative, foster an open world economy and create a favourable environment for common development.
On health
BRICS countries should be pioneers of cooperation in COVID-19 pandemic management. The international pandemic response is at a critical moment, and we should not give up half way. President Xi Jinping has called for accelerating the building of a global community of health for all, and has advocated a coordinated international approach to the pandemic and the improvement of global health governance. India’s vision of ‘One Earth, One Health’ also contributes to multilateral cooperation on public health. BRICS countries should fully leverage their respective strengths, and jointly promote the development of global health governance in a direction in favour of developing countries. We should make good use of the BRICS Vaccine Research and Development Center, establish a BRICS early warning mechanism for preventing large-scale infectious diseases, and provide high-quality public goods for global health governance cooperation.
A governance philosophy
BRICS countries should be leaders of global governance. Global challenges are emerging one after another. Only by coordinating global actions can we properly cope with them. “Small circles” cannot solve the “big challenges” facing the whole world. BRICS countries should firmly safeguard the international system, with the United Nations at its core and the international order underpinned by international law, and ensure that international affairs have participation by all, international rules are formulated by all, and development outcomes are shared by all. We should embrace a global governance philosophy that emphasises extensive consultation, joint contribution and shared benefits, enhance unity and cooperation with emerging markets and developing countries, and increase the voice in global governance.
It is especially commendable that the first dialogue of Foreign Ministers between BRICS and emerging markets and developing countries sent out the message of supporting multilateralism, supporting anti-pandemic cooperation, supporting common development, and supporting solidarity and cooperation. All parties to the dialogue support and advocate the ‘BRICS plus’ cooperation model, which is a platform born for cooperation and thrives on development. We should explore the ‘BRICS plus’ cooperation at more levels, in more areas and in a wider scope. China proposes to launch the BRICS expansion process and discuss standards and procedures for expansion in order to build consensus step-by-step. This will increase BRICS countries’ representation and influence and make greater contributions to world peace and development.
As an old saying goes, if you want to walk fast, walk alone. If you want to walk far, walk together. Since the establishment of the BRICS mechanism, it has been closely connected with the destiny of emerging markets and developing countries. China is always a member of the family of the developing world, and will always stand alongside developing countries. We will endeavour to translate the BRICS spirit of openness, inclusiveness and win-win cooperation into concrete actions, deepen the BRICS partnership centering on the theme of ‘forming a high-quality partnership to jointly create a new era of global development’; we will make unrelenting efforts to build a community with a shared future for mankind.
Sun Weidong is China’s Ambassdor to India
The Quad (the U.S., India, Japan and Australia) held its second in-person leaders’ summit in Tokyo on May 24. It has emerged stronger and clearer in its strategy and goals for the security and prosperity of the Indo-Pacific. The efforts by the Quad countries should be viewed not only from the prism of the summits, but also from the wider context of international developments and the continuing process of consolidation of the bilateral relations within, especially U.S.-India ties.
Beyond Ukraine
This is the second interaction of the Quad leaders held after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. That war has no end in sight. With India abstaining from most anti-Russia voting in multilateral bodies, experts in India worried about the impact of Ukraine on the Indo-Pacific region, particularly U.S.-India ties. Some feared that Prime Minister Narendra Modi would face new and intense pressure in Tokyo from the U.S. to condemn Russia. Others argued that the U.S. understood India’s nuanced position on Ukraine and may refocus on China’s strategic game in the region.
The latter interpretation proved correct. India and the U.S. agreed to disagree on Ukraine, but showed full readiness to further strengthen the Quad and their bilateral cooperation, which, U.S. President Joe Biden said, he was “committed to making…among the closest we have on Earth.” With China, he has moved beyond the traditional U.S. stance of ‘strategic ambiguity’ and pointedly referred to Ukraine to stress that China's armed action against Taiwan would be unacceptable and attract a military response.
The central driving force of the Quad is to counter China’s growing expansionism and belligerence. The grouping’s diplomatic device of defining its raison d'être without ever using the word ‘China’ was best reflected in the ‘Quad Joint Leaders’ Statement’ which reads, “We reaffirm our resolve to uphold the international rules-based order where countries are free from all forms of military, economic and political coercion.” Thus, China is not only the glue that holds the Quad together; it is also the fuel that may, through Beijing’s bad behaviour in the future, drive the grouping’s inner consolidation, as shown by an expanding agenda.
The Quad agenda now covers nine sectors: vaccine partnership and health security, climate action, critical and emerging technologies, cooperation on infrastructure, cyber security, space cooperation, education and people-to-people ties, maritime domain awareness, and humanitarian assistance and disaster relief. The Quad claims to have established “a positive and practical agenda” in year one; in year two, it will focus on “delivery.” This needs to be watched.
Not all commitments have been met. The promise of making available at least one billion COVID-19 vaccine doses to Indo-Pacific countries has fallen short. Excluding what the Quad countries contributed to COVAX, just 25% have been delivered to the region so far. This needs to be expanded rapidly. Meanwhile, Quad experts have begun planning ways to enhance capacity for early detection and monitoring of “new and emerging pathogens with pandemic potential.”
On infrastructure, a new commitment was made at Tokyo for the Quad to extend over $50 billion in investment and assistance to the Indo-Pacific countries over the next five years. While the focus is on the ASEAN countries and the Pacific Island States, a part of this funding should perhaps reach the Indian Ocean region too, with its touch points in Africa. The Common Statement of Principles on Critical Technology Supply Chains is significant, as it concerns cooperation on semiconductors.
The atmospherics of the summit improved significantly after the launch of the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity (IPEF) a day earlier. The joint announcement was made by the Quad, seven ASEAN member-states (excluding Myanmar, Cambodia and Laos), South Korea and New Zealand. The plan is to prepare their economies for the future by conducting negotiations on the pillars of trade; supply chains; tax and anti-corruption and clean energy; decarbonisation and infrastructure. The IPEF is ambitious, but doable.
India’s plan
India’s constructive participation in the Tokyo summit and agreement to join IPEF demonstrated commitment to strengthening its strategic partnerships in order to push back China’s dominance. At the same time, New Delhi has agreed to the expansion of BRICS membership. This simultaneous engagement with the Quad and BRICS is New Delhi’s strategic autonomy in full play. India’s presidency of the G20 in 2023 and the likelihood of India hosting the Quad summit in 2024 will ensure that it follows a calibrated policy and stays on track, as every major step will attract international attention.
Rajiv Bhatia is Distinguished Fellow, Gateway House and a former Ambassador
Konaseema, which was carved out of the erstwhile East Godavari district, is a sleepy agrarian district. It is said to be the granary of Andhra Pradesh. But on May 24, Amalapuram, the biggest town in the district, burned as hundreds of members of organisations dominated by the Other Backward Classes (OBCs) and the upper castes, such as the Konaseema Parirakshana Samithi and Konaseema Sadhana Samiti, took to the streets opposing the State government’s order directing that the name of the district be changed from Konaseema to Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Konaseema. They broke prohibitory orders and set ablaze the residences of Transport Minister P. Viswaroop and Mummidivaram MLA P. Satish. They also torched buses and threw stones. About 20 policemen, including the district SP and DSP, were injured in the violence. While the government blamed the Opposition parties including the Telugu Desam Party (TDP), the Jana Sena Party, and the BJP for the riots, the Opposition in turn blamed the ruling YSR Congress for the failure of the police in stopping them.
History has shown that the nature of the farming class in this area changes when there is Dalit assertiveness. In Konaseema district, the numerically dominant castes are the Kapus, who are upper castes, the Settibalijas, who are OBCs, and the Dalits. While the Kapus and Settibalijas have a major share of the landholdings and constitute about 60% of the demography, the Dalits are farmhands and account for over 30%. If we consider the whole region of the erstwhile East Godavari district, two statues dominate the landscape. One is of Kapu leader and Congress MLA Vangaveeti Mohana Ranga, who was killed in 1988 during TDP rule, and is considered a ‘Kapu Knight’; the other statue is of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar.
The show of dominance by the Kapus and the Settibalijas has been recorded since Independence. The most number of cases filed under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, in the State are from this area. In most of the cases, the Kapus and the Settibalijas are the accused. For instance, on December 29, 1996, the then independent MLA of Ramachandrapuram, Thota Trimurthulu, a Kapu leader, had allegedly tonsured the heads of two Dalit youth, Koti Chinna Raju and Dandala Venkata Ratnam, and beaten up three others from Venkatayapalem village. The reason reportedly was that the Dalit youth had asserted their rights. After almost 20 years, the case came to trial at a court in Visakhapatnam in 2017. The judgment is still awaited.
All the parties vie for the Kapu, Settibalija and Dalit votes. Every party has members and leaders from these communities. Mr. Viswaroop is from the Dalit community.
All the parties agreed with the State government order of May 19 directing a change in the name of the district to Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Konaseema district. A few days before the order was passed, TDP national president Chandrababu Naidu had visited the area and had promised to change the name of the district once he came to power. Immediately after Mr. Naidu’s visit, Chief Minister Jagan Mohan Reddy visited the area and promised the people that the demand would be accepted. But the Kapus and Settibalijas saw this development as an acceptance by the government and the Opposition of Dalit assertiveness. Their anger erupted. Senior police officers who were at the scene of violence say the incident had nothing to do with changing the name of the district but and everything to do with the fact that the demands of the Dalits were being met by the government.
sumit.b@thehindu.co.in
Shoddy investigation is one thing, but a malicious and motivated probe is quite another. The probe conducted by former Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) official Sameer Wankhede into a purported tip-off about consumption of drugs on board a cruise ship, in October 2021, seems to fall in the latter category. The raid on the vessel resulted in seizure of narcotic substances and the arrest of several people, including Aryan Khan, son of Bollywood star Shah Rukh Khan. Even though nothing was seized from Mr. Khan, the agency made sensational claims in court about his being part of an international drug trafficking network and, quite strangely, cited messages purportedly exchanged on WhatsApp as ‘evidence’. By the time he obtained bail weeks later, the case had all the makings of a witch-hunt. A special investigation team from Delhi, which took over the case after allegations of extortion surfaced against Mr. Wankhede, has now cited lapses in the initial investigation and the lack of prosecutable evidence, and absolved Mr. Khan and five others and excluded them from the charge sheet filed recently. The lapses include failure to video-graph the search of the ship, not conducting a medical examination to prove consumption, and examining Mr. Khan’s phone and reading messages on it without any legal basis.
It is good that the agency made amends for the mischief done by the initial set of investigators by applying the standard of ‘proof beyond reasonable doubt’ while presenting its final report. At the same time, the NCB has to re-examine its priorities. It is an elite agency in the fight against international trafficking in narcotic and psychotropic substances. Its primary focus ought to be on trans-national smuggling networks, while the job of pursuing drug peddlers and raiding rave parties must be left to the local police. While strict disciplinary action is warranted if any officer is found involved in ‘fixing’ someone, it is also time that the Government came out with a legal framework for compensating those jailed without proof. The country does not have a law on the grant of compensation to those maliciously prosecuted. However, constitutional courts do exercise their vast powers sometimes to award monetary recompense; the remedy of a civil suit is also available in law, but it is time-consuming. The Law Commission of India has recommended enactment of a law to make compensation in such cases an enforceable right. Currently, Section 358 of the Cr.P.C. provides for a paltry fine to be imposed on a person on whose complaint a person is arrested without sufficient grounds. Such provisions should be expanded to cover just compensation by the state for unnecessary arrests. It is a sobering thought to note that even people with celebrity status and vast resources are not insulated from the misuse of police powers, even while recognising that it is still possible to vindicate one’s innocence and force the establishment to adopt a course correction.
In three weeks since the first case of monkeypox infection was confirmed on May 7 in the U.K. in a person who had just arrived from Nigeria (where the outbreak has been continuing since September 2017) the virus has spread to at least 21 countries and infected 226 people, mainly in Europe and North America. The U.K., which is the hardest hit, has reported 106 lab-confirmed cases as of May 26. As per WHO, more cases can be expected as surveillance expands; scientists believe the virus has been spreading under the radar for some time. For instance, a person in Canada had symptoms of monkeypox on April 29, though it was not tested at that time. Similarly, the monkeypox genome sequence first shared by Portugal was from a sample collected on May 4 but was not tested for monkeypox till the U.K. reported the first case. All the 21 countries that have reported at least one case are non-endemic for monkeypox, raising concerns about the fast spread of the virus, by far the largest outbreak in humans outside Africa. Two rave parties in Spain and Belgium have been super-spreader events. Nigeria has reported 231 confirmed cases and eight deaths since 2017, with 15 cases reported this year till April 30. There have been a few instances of exportation to non-endemic countries from Nigeria since 2017, and eight such instances in all from the endemic countries in Central and West Africa. However, human-to-human transmission in non-endemic countries has been very limited, if at all, in the past.
Despite the first case in humans being reported in 1970, and the virus becoming endemic in about a dozen countries in Africa, very little attention has been paid to study the virus characteristics, the host animal, and the modes of transmission. However, in September 2019, the FDA approved a vaccine, and two antivirals approved for treating smallpox have shown promise in animal studies. It is unclear how long it would take to contain the outbreak. Meanwhile, there is a potential risk of the virus jumping from humans to animals, which may make it endemic in these countries. While China was rightly criticised for keeping the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak a secret for weeks, the developed countries have paid scant attention to stop the outbreak in Nigeria. The low mortality rate of about 1% for the virus clade now in circulation in Europe and North America, the slow rate of mutation, the relative ease of stopping the virus spread, and the availability of vaccines should not be a reason once more to ignore the virus spread in Nigeria. Instead, it should spur more research on the virus and make vaccines and antivirals available in Nigeria and other endemic countries in Africa.
Bombay, May 29: Mr Prithviraj Kapoor, veteran film and stage actor, died here to-day after prolonged illness. He was 66. He is survived by his wife, three sons, all noted actors, the famous of whom is Raj Kapoor, and a daughter. Prithviraj had been admitted a month ago to the Tata Memorial Cancer Hospital. Prithviraj Kapoor had the distinction of acting in the first Indian talkie, “Alam Ara”, and later in several hits, “Moghul-e-Azam,” being the one in recent times. Honoured as a fellow of the Sangeet Natak Akademy, Prithiviraj had to his credit a special award of the National Academy of Arts and Muses, Czechoslovakia in July 1966 for acting in “Aasman Mahal”. Born in 1906, Prithviraj was educated in Samundari, Lyalipur and Peshawar. He was associated with the film industry from 1931. He worked with the New Theatres, Ranjit Studios and ran his own Prithvi Theatres for 16 years. His earlier films include Vidyapati, Manzil, Sikandar, Awara, Seeta, India Today, Visha Kanya, and Pagal while the plays he produced include Shakuntala, Ahooti and Ghaddaar.Late Prithviraj Kapoor was a nominated member of the Rajya Sabha for eight years. He was an active supporter of the freedom movement.
Forget, for a moment, the many problems between India and Pakistan that have persisted into the 75th year of Partition and Independence. For anyone in South Asia and beyond interested in Pakistan as a major state — it has the world’s fifth largest population, a valued geopolitical location, a leading role in the Islamic world, and a powerful army equipped with nuclear weapons — the real question is whether Pakistan can redeem itself. As the seven-week-old Shehbaz Sharif government turns to the International Monetary Fund to arrest the macroeconomic crisis, seeks uninterrupted support from the armed forces until the next elections in the summer of 2023, and tries to reboot its regional and global policies, few can bet on Pakistan’s prospects.
Admittedly, Pakistan has muddled through many crises in its history. But can it manage those that confront it today? Consider, for example, PM Sharif’s bet that by turning to the IMF, he can stabilise the economy that many are convinced is headed Sri Lanka’s way. Pakistan has been to the IMF before, 22 times to be precise. But none of the attempts to stabilise the economy with the IMF’s help have been accompanied by a serious effort to reform and remove the deeper constraints on it. The story this time is unlikely to be any different. Sharif’s decision to raise fuel prices and risk popular anger has been viewed as a “bold” move. His predecessor Imran Khan had walked out of the agreement with the IMF a few months ago to prevent a political backlash at home. Sharif’s calculus appears to be based less on a credible strategy to revitalise the economy than a bid to appease the army leadership and win its support for staying on in power. But the army is not known to be kind to civilian leaders. There is speculation that it will pull the plug on the Sharif government once it implements the hard and unpopular IMF demands.
On the face of it, Sharif leads a broad-based coalition that has brought together both the Pakistan Peoples Party and the Pakistan Muslim League alongwith a host of other parties. But the army, which has never let a civilian government function effectively, is unlikely to give a free hand to Sharif. It has just dumped Imran Khan after installing him in power in 2018. What is new, though, are the divisions within the army on a range of issues — on managing the domestic political order, rebooting the economy, and rearranging regional and international relations. Imran Khan, who had defied the GHQ on all three fronts, appears to enjoy considerable support among the middle classes as well as within the ranks of the army. To make matters worse, Pakistan’s regional and international standing has been in steady decline. This does not augur well for either Pakistan or its neighbours. But Delhi must persist with the engagement of all key formations in the Pakistan polity to prevent bilateral relations from turning worse in the coming days and to forestall unwanted crises.
Last week, the Union power ministry proposed a new scheme to help cash strapped power distribution companies (discoms) clear their mounting obligations. In 2020, finance minister Nirmala Sitharaman had announced a Rs 90,000-crore liquidity infusion scheme (this was subsequently raised to Rs 1.2 lakh crore) for discoms to settle their debt. Similar schemes in the past have failed to address the structural issues that plague the power sector, the distribution segment in particular. Rolling out another scheme is unlikely to help.
Discom dues are currently estimated to be around Rs 1 lakh crore. Six states — Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh, Telangana and Tamil Nadu — account for a significant share of the dues. Under the new proposed scheme, discoms will be allowed to pay off their obligations over 48 installments. The proposal also involves freezing the principal and the late payment surcharge on the date of the notification of the scheme. States such as Tamil Nadu and Maharashtra are expected to benefit the most from this restructuring. Considering that discom payments have on average been delayed by 4-6 months across 15 states as per CRISIL, these payments would offer some relief for the generating companies.
The financial position of discoms continues to be dragged down by a combination of inadequate and irregular tariff revisions, delayed subsidy payments by state governments, inadequate reduction in aggregate technical and commercial losses (a combination of technical losses, inefficiency in billing and power theft), and rising power costs. Successive attempts over the years to tackle these issues have failed to bring about a turnaround in the financial and operational position of discoms. With each passing year, the funds required to plug the gaps are only increasing. But, with the pandemic stretching government finances — both the Centre and the states have witnessed a steep rise in their debt levels — continuing financial support to discoms will become fiscally challenging. The reluctance to raise tariffs or bring down AT&C losses signals a lack of resolve at the state level.
The Narendra Modi government completing eight years is a moment to pause and look back — and ahead. When it came to power in 2014, a large swathe of Indian voters saw in the slogan of “achche din”, and in the BJP’s energetic bid to wrest power at the Centre under the leadership of a man who had made himself a name, and controversy, as chief minister, a promise for a break from the status quo. In the first five years, from rethinking the language of welfare to recasting nationalism and reworking foreign policy, the Modi government made an impact that led to its re-election in 2019 with a decisive majority. Looking back, the eight years of Modi’s rule so far have been dominated by the last three. And in these, the government’s record has been two-toned — it has shown resolve, boldness, and a capacity for navigating complexity in some areas but it has been stiff and unmoving in others.
The signal that the second term would be more change-making than the first was sent by the abrogation of Article 370 in Kashmir in August 2019. Only months after that, came the enactment of a law that made religion a criterion for citizenship for those in the neighbourhood seeking refuge. The next year, the government inaugurated the construction of the Ram temple at Ayodhya. But if the Modi government took these large, contentious steps, it also faced steep challenges. While the over a year-long farmers’ agitation on Delhi’s doorstep could be traced back to the farm laws it enacted in September 2020, the public health emergency that began with the Covid outbreak earlier that year, and this year’s Ukraine war, are problems it has been forced to step up to. On balance, the Modi government has shown a mature head in crisis, coming back after a period of paralysis during Covid’s second devastating wave, to set in motion a strikingly successful vaccination programme. It resisted pressures to provide more direct support to a people lacking in safety nets, but ran a comprehensive free rations programme, ensuring efficient and mostly corruption-free delivery. Amid the continuing economic slump and joblessness, it has signalled a recommitment to its privatisation programme, with the sale of Air India and the LIC IPO. With China, after the face-off in Galwan, and 15 rounds of talks later, it shows firmness and resolve. With the US, it is strategically — and boldly — strengthening areas of convergence in the Indo-Pacific, even as, on Ukraine, it has negotiated a position keenly conscious of competing priorities. All this, under the leadership of a prime minister whose popularity is burnished more strongly than before.
And yet, the maturity and nuance that the Modi government shows in the areas outlined above seem to elude it when it comes to others — be it its heavy-footed handling of the agitation against the CAA-NRC, its attempt to forcibly join the dots between those protests and the communal violence later in northeast Delhi, its use of the IPC to tar dissent, its weaponisation of Central agencies to target political opponents. Its ringing silence amid the bid to reopen the faultline that now stretches from Ayodhya to Gyanvapi and its failures to restore the political process in Kashmir are part of the same problem. A government capable of thinking afresh seems trapped in stale resentments when it comes to the imperative that lies at the heart of democracy: Trust between communities and a respectful place for minorities. With the Opposition weaker than it was, and not many countervailing institutions, the Modi government will need to find it in itself to course correct. For, the challenges of inflation and recession, Ukraine war, China’s sabre-rattling, expectations of the young — these call for a governance that includes all, that does not let ghosts of history hijack spirits of the future, that heals old wounds without rubbing them in. Eight years on, that’s the hope.
The formation of the second Left Front Ministry of West Bengal has run into rough weather with the CPM and RSP taking opposite views on the question of bifurcation of some of the portfolios. Jatin Chakrabarty, the RSP leader who was sworn in as one of the few ministers told newsmen that his party’s stand was that the bifurcation should be deferred by three months. If the CPM insisted on bifurcation right now, he would leave the ministry. But RSP ministers would continue to sit in the treasury benches. Earlier CPM leader and Left Front chairman Pramode Dasgupta said that his party would like to bifurcate the portfolios of health, PWD, House, Agriculture and Irrigation.
The Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Sheikh Abdullah has said that Gilgit, Hunza, Nagar, Yasin, Ponial, Chitral and Skardu are inalienable parts of Jammu and Kashmir and Pakistan President Zia-ul-Haq’s claim that these areas were never part of the state had no historical backing. The Kashmir leader said that India and Pakistan should come to the negotiating table to discuss all matters including Kashmir. The CM has said that the Kashmiris and the Government of India cannot wash its hands of these areas just because Zia claimed they are Pakistani territory.
President Sanjiva Reddy’s observations on the Haryana governor’s actions have created stir in the Congress (I) leadership. Informed sources say that Reddy had sent a strong note to the government on the Opposition leaders’ memorandum and also personally told the PM that the governor’s action is unconstitutional. Government circles are reading a lot into Reddy’s remarks and there are speculations of what else he might have told Opposition leaders.
Written by Bijayani Mishra and Sabiha Mazid
On May 19, the Supreme Court of India (SC) made headlines by giving directions for recognising prostitution as a profession and emphasising that sex workers, like any other professionals, are entitled to dignity and constitutional rights. Prostitution (or sex work), a taboo topic of discussion, was recently brought into drawing-room conversations by the Bollywood movie Gangubai Kathiawadi (directed by Sanjay Leela Bhansali and said to be based on the life of Gangubai Harjivandas, a much-celebrated social activist of Kamatipura). The question that the film successfully raised was: Why isn’t sex work seen as any other kind of work?
Interestingly, prostitution is not illegal in India, per se. According to the Indian Penal Code (IPC), however, several activities under prostitution are punishable by law — pimping, renting out property for running brothels, etc. In 1956, the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act emphasised that sex workers can practice their profession but any person who makes an earning from prostitution is to be punished. This involves procuring. abducting or inducing a person for prostitution; a move significant enough to ensure trafficking for the sex trade was under check. Further, the Act states that to lawfully participate in prostitution, sex workers have to maintain a distance of at least 200 metres from any public place, preferably in an isolated area with no public institutions in sight. In other words, sex work is to be done in secrecy, away from the gaze of the larger, “normal” society.
This isolation works into othering sex workers, putting the legality of their profession in ambiguity. Indeed, a simple legal status for prostitution wasn’t enough to ensure sex workers are not pushed to the margins of society. Presently, it is estimated that there are approximately 3 million sex workers in India, an overwhelming majority in the age group of 15-35.
There are around 15 countries in the world that have various degrees of regulations related to sex work, mostly legalising and ensuring safeguards for sex workers. Countries like New Zealand, Denmark, Germany and Greece have very progressive measures regarding sex work ensuring that the workers’ health and financial situations are taken care of. Despite regulations and degrees of bans, it is imperative to identify that prostitution exists as a promising industry, especially in situations of poverty and social inequalities. In India, it is nowhere close to becoming extinct. The problem, however, is not in the work per se. It is in the way the work is perceived.
The major issues that sex workers in India face stem from the fact that despite not being illegal, the secretive nature of sex work presents an illusion of it being a crime. The police, legal system and legal personnel also contribute to sex workers being seen more as the perpetrators of crime than being at the receiving end of it. The possibilities of rape, violence and trauma that clients can cause to sex workers have been neglected. Moreover, since the work is seen as “immoral” or “dirty”, any disease caused by poor sexual hygiene and menstrual hygiene — most significantly HIV-AIDS and cervical cancer — does not receive proper medical attention. Additionally, due to a lack of ration cards or them not being recognised as valid, sex workers fail to avail any subsidised resources earmarked for the lower socio-economic sections. It is a vicious cycle of segregation, deprivation and, ultimately, marginalisation. Children born in brothels are not easily accepted into schools. Many of them do not get valid identification proofs to claim entitled state support. The progressive ladder of mobility which seems to be so easily available for everyone in our democratic society based on merit, is far from reality for the children of sex workers. Many continue working in the same profession as their mothers.
Legalising sex work, however, could change all of this. It could open up the doors to legal protection for sex workers against sexual harassment. According to the SC’s directions, the police have to take the complaints of sex workers seriously. The callousness with which the police generally approach the complaints of sex workers as “normal occupational outcomes” would no longer be acceptable. Our country already has a law against harassment at the workplace recognising any form of distress — physical, emotional, sexual — preventing a woman from doing her work as a punishable offence. With the latest directions from the SC, any sex worker who is a victim of sexual assault will be given all of the same services as any other survivor of sexual assault, including immediate medical attention. Moreover, being acknowledged as a profession could also help improve the poor condition of healthcare facilities and the resultant vulnerabilities that sex workers endure. In the near future, medical benefits and many other benefits that employed people in our country enjoy could also be a reality.
The directions of the SC constitute only the first step towards removing some of the limitations that sex workers have long faced. In a country like India, which is severely marred by poverty, destitution, hunger and inequalities, survival is the top priority. The morality/immorality of the nature of any work does not and should not count as a factor in constructing hierarchies amongst vocations. India as a democratic nation constitutionally enshrines justice, equality and liberty for every section of the society. Unfortunately, sex workers have been structurally kept outside the dimensions of “equal opportunities”. It is time that such grave disregard for human rights and dignity comes to an end.
The writers teach at Maitreyi College, University of Delhi
The 75th edition of the Cannes Film Festival has just concluded and, as ever, that vexing question has arisen. Why didn’t India have a winner in the competition section, which had Indian actor Deepika Padukone as part of the jury this year? Why does a nation which makes the maximum number of films fall so far behind on the metrics that decide the winners?
As ever, the answer is complex. It lies hidden under the collective self-belief of a film industry whose innate robustness has prevented significant penetration of cinema from any other part of the world. Thirty years back, Hollywood’s presence counted for a mere three to four per cent of the market. Even today, despite a huge leap in appetite for dubbed-and-subtitled globalised content, Hollywood’s best bet in India remain those familiar tentpoles, the “creature features” and superhero shenanigans. But no Batman or Superman or humungous dinosaur is about to give Indian filmmakers, with a RRR and a KGF under their bulging box office belts, sleepless nights. In India, Indian films, with their penchant for spectacle, song-and-dance, melodrama, are invincible, so who cares about the Croisette?
What those asking “why-not-India-in-the-competition” tend to forget is that India is not known for the kind of cinema which appeals to the selectors-cum-gatekeepers to that coveted section. This is not to say that other countries like South Korea or Romania or Belgium (each of which had an entry this year) make their movies solely keeping a possible Cannes berth in mind. These are not countries that can claim as established a film-making tradition as India, but what films like Park Chan-wook’s Decision To Leave, Cristian Mungiu’s RMN, and Lukas Dhont’s Close reveal is a fierce commitment to stories set in very specific locations, with characters who can only come from those milieus, yet whose situations are gloriously universal.
Look at Swedish director Ruben Ostlund’s riotous black satire, Triangle Of Sadness, which has just won the Palme d’Or. The film is a savage, merciless send-up of the mega-rich, as well as the proliferation of “influencers” and their greedy adjuncts in the billion-dollar beauty industry. Each stroke of that film has a profound truth that cuts across linguistic and cultural borders. With a very few exceptions, this kind of filmmaking has proved financially counter-productive in the Indian context. A combination of audience preference, which has been fed on escapist cinema for decades as the sole “entertainment” option, and a fear of rocking the boat has kept Indian filmmakers far from the kind of realism that leads to finding a Cannes competitive pew.
Between 2010-2015, Vikramaditya Motwane’s Udaan, Anurag Kashyap’s Gangs Of Wasseypur, Ritesh Batra’s The Lunchbox, Neeraj Ghaywan’s Masaan premiered at Cannes sidebar sections. Each film came from the lived experience of the directors of these films, and each felt like a marker for New Age Bollywood. What happened after that? Are there no takers for realistic cinema anymore, or is hewing close to the truth even more unprofitable in today’s Bollywood, struggling with pandemic-and-censorship woes?
But if our fictional outings haven’t made the cut, our documentaries have more than made up for it. Shaunak Sen’s brilliant All That Breathes, about Delhi’s frighteningly foul air and the love of fowls that that two brothers exhibit, has won the Golden Eye, the top documentary award. The film is a cogent examination of the ecosystem that nurtures both man and beast: Why are kites, those magnificent predatory birds, falling from the skies in increasing numbers, becoming prey themselves? And how will the humans who live and work in one of the world’s great capitals, survive the twin blows of pollution and polarisation? The film is sharp and moving, balancing dystopia with shards of optimism, its ecological and political concerns clearly visible.
Sen’s film derives power from its authenticity. It is the kind of film that spoke to official selectors at Cannes, as it did to the Sundance film festival jury, which also gave it a top award earlier this year. It might even appeal to an Oscar jury, if the Indian selectors are smart enough to nominate this film if, of course, it finds a theatrical release.
Are Indian producers ready to back even a handful of independent, truth-seeking films, those that may give us a chance to compete with the best at Cannes? Till then, we will have to be content with flaunting our wares on the red carpet, or in sections where we can buy our way in.
shubhra.gupta@expressindia.com
Soon after the public sacking of health minister and Mansa MLA Vijay Singla for alleged corruption, the Bhagwant Singh Mann government in Punjab finds itself in another political firestorm for the killing of popular singer Shubhdeep Singh Moosewala, a day after it withdrew his security cover.
Coming a month after the violence in Patiala and weeks after a rocket attack on its intelligence headquarters, it gives more ammunition to the opposition that has been accusing the AAP government of political inexperience. Slogans against the Mann government suffused the air as Moosewala’s body reached the hospital at Mansa, the heart of the Malwa belt of Punjab where AAP had swept 66 of the 69 assembly seats in the recent Assembly elections.
With the police chief calling the killing a result of inter-gang rivalry, the spotlight is once again on the law and order situation in the state. Police investigations into the blast at the Mohali intelligence headquarters may point to the growing nexus among gangsters, militant elements and inimical forces from across the border, which doesn’t bode well for a state that spent a decade in the shadow of militancy not too long ago.
The withdrawal of security for a large number of clergymen and heads of deras on Saturday — the police said this was done to beef up forces in the run-up to the Operation Bluestar anniversary on June 6 — appears to have left the government with egg on its face. Acting Jathedar of the Akal Takht, Giani Harpreet Singh, whose security was first withdrawn and then restored, all in the space of a day, refused the protection. The move came days after Mann took to social media to chide Giani Harpreet Singh, head of the temporal seat of the Sikhs, for suggesting that citizens should get arms licences.
While the opposition had supported Mann on this issue, Moosewala’s killing has given it a fresh handle with leaders saying it exposes the fragile law and order situation in the state. Political observers say it will strengthen the perception of insecurity. Whether or not this killing is the result of an inter-gang rivalry, the insecurity it generates is far-reaching.
Historically, Punjab is not an easy state to govern, and this is all the more true today when so many forces would like to see the newly-elected government fail. Much before the AAP came to power in the state, leaders of traditional parties would try to run it down as a disruptor and a political novice that would be unable to keep the peace in the state. The AAP government has to fight this bogey even if it means shoring up its intelligence network and working twice as hard on all fronts without succumbing to the temptation of playing to the gallery.
I begin with a confession and an apology to the non-Hindi readers of Ret Samadhi by Geetanjali Shree, translated by Daisy Rockwell into English as Tomb of Sand. I have resisted reading the translated version, the winner of the International Booker Prize, because even though it must be very good, it may not replicate for me the resonance of the original. Writers in languages other than English face tough choices today. But the sheer brilliance of Geetanjali’s art leaps over a digital world that is forever pushing us to settle for a uniform, universally-understood voice: Loud, full of hyperbole and easy comparables. Her protagonist defies all efforts to generalise — language, gender, mother-daughter relationships and the partition of nations. Throughout, she speaks in one voice to her rambling, widowed mother Chandra Prabha, in another to her bureaucrat brother, yet another to his wife and, of course, the working classes who visit the home.
Then, suddenly, the novel playfully decides to defy linear time. It leaps back some eight decades to when the Subcontinent was partitioned. At this point, she casually informs readers that her mother was married to a man from another community, before she married the one who was their father and whose death plunged her deep into depression. In comes Rosie, a transwoman, who coaxes Ma out of her bed and reintroduces her to her daughter’s world. As she moves out of her son’s house to her daughter’s, Ma crosses a boundary and begins to speak. Together, through rambling conversation, the mother and daughter travel back and forth in time, occasionally even stepping onto the Silk Route, where tribes from all over Asia met and traded goods, and tales, and smoked their hookah in companionable silence.
What this brilliant piece of time travel is reminding us of is that if a writer wishes to find his or her own voice, she/he must refuse to stay put. A creative mind must remain nomadic, so that art remains polyphonic, unpredictable and porous, just like the human race. Life, the little tales and sub-tales in Ret Samadhi tell us, is not a linear, predictable progression of events. Time implicates both the oppressor and the oppressed, brutalising men and the nations they build through violent acts. Life poses harsh questions here about the monuments that history will create and erase mercilessly.
But racial memories don’t die easily. Ret Samadhi leaps over the current dominance of a hard political Hindutva when the Mother’s memories transport her and her daughter to a dusty no man’s land. The ret samadhi or the burial mound blends with ancient lore about Indra (in Aitareya Brahmana): “Behold, I am The Truth. Study me closely for your own good. I have killed Tvashtra, the creator of the Vajra. I fed the band of Aroormaga monks to Salavrik (dogs or wolves). I have broken up countless treaties made on earth, in the sky and further up in the heavens. But not a hair on my head was disturbed. If after receiving this wisdom from me, you can fathom the whys and wherefores of my acts, even if you go and murder your kin, you shall cease to hesitate and not allow any emotions to cross your face ever again.”
We have yet to understand fully the peculiar past of a polyphone Hindi heartland of north India where multiple races came and fought and mingled. In the last seven decades, English as the language of rulers has slowly been losing much of its authority in the Delhi Durbar, which is today presided over by those who loudly proclaim they are all for Hindi, Hindu, Hindustan. But the Hindi they are opting for has ignited fratricidal, regional rages against India’s proposed rashtra bhasha (national language).
Geetanjali Shree’s has always been a strong and vibrant voice against homogenisation. In her earlier works, too, her language pulls readers in various directions and eras and their unsettled debts. In Mai, she writes of three generations of women spanning well over a century. In Hamara Shahr, she writes about small towns convulsed by communal fires that have raged underneath and erupted suddenly like lava gushing out. Ret Samadhi arrives like a resonant fugue, summing up its various kinds of histories, without denying the centrality of doubt and duality in life.
All writers in Indian languages harbour many languages within themselves by the time they come of age. There is the simple mother tongue. Then comes college, with classes taught uniformly in English. Here, a writer is faced with a choice — do a straight swap with English, the language of the well-educated in India’s upwardly mobile, or say that not all of the well-educated must speak in a received voice. Geetanjali has chosen the latter. In India, it is an act of bravery to write in what is your natural voice without apologising for its rusticity, varied tonal registers or reducing it to an exotica or a political weapon or to win superficial, feminist brownie points.
Ret Samadhi brings to us honest, even if painful, glimpses of life in non-English speaking India. It is not one flat land but a series of cultural republics. The mother and daughter in the novel appear in this landscape. Together they turn into birds and flowers, move with Rosie and are reunited with Anwar, the lost lover, through music. All around them heaves and fades the Anglophile, upper-crust India, a land that still writes and administers unequal laws into what they consider a savage society.
The novel crosses frontiers of caste, race, gender, and languages as easily as migratory birds do. Their lives and conversations cut across time: When thumris and khayals were created by rulers who were losing power to marauding Marathas and the East India Company, but remained secular and discerning patrons of hybridised arts. Nothing in their world is erased. Nothing in it spells permanence. That is human life for you, according to Ret Samadhi where even memorial tombs are destined to turn to dust one day. It reminded me of my mother’s favourite couplet by Nazeer Akbarabadi, an 18th-century fakir who witnessed the fall of empires:
Flowers, dust, fire, wind, water and mud, we’ve seen them all/ And eventually, that’s all there is to this deceitful mirage you call your world.
(Gul, shor, bagula, aag, hawa, aur keechad pani mitti hai/ Hum dekh chuke iss duniya ko, duniya dhokhe ki tatti hai)
Under the stewardship of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, the government has heralded a renewed age of “nari shakti” in the run-up to Azadi ka Amrit Mahotsav. Programmatic interventions in this age attest to India’s achievements in gender mainstreaming, not only in letter but in spirit. No longer are women subjects of unimaginative policies that target them in limited roles as mothers and wives. Women are now prolific leaders, useful hands in the labour force and the nerve centre of Indian society.
The Modi government has made women’s empowerment a sine qua non for attaining holistic national development. This has been achieved by constructing a range of mindful policy interventions. The ration card’s exclusionary logic of identification — with its issuance to the usually male head of the household — was replaced by unique identification for all, Aadhaar. The Rashtriya Swasthya Bima Yojana (RSBY) was revamped to offer a greater range of services for women-centric ailments; its unwarranted, male-preferential cap of five beneficiaries per family was removed and supplanted by the Pradhan Mantri Jan Arogya Yojana (PM-JAY). PM-JAY extends healthcare services to households without any adult male members, bearing no prejudice to the household size. In the larger scheme of things, an identity independent of husbands and fathers is a massive exercise in self-assurance, self-possession and “aatmanirbharta” for Indian women.
The government is catalysing a systematic overhaul of India’s employment and labour architecture. The entrepreneurial acumen of women has taken flight under the auspices of the Pradhan Mantri Mudra Yojana, with such women comprising 68 per cent of the Mudra account-holders. Mudra loans awarded against aspirations for income-generating activities have expanded opportunities for women.
Sizeable financial obstacles have been removed from the lives of women with loans against aspirations for greenfield enterprises in manufacturing, services and agriculture-allied sectors under Stand-Up India. Further, 10 per cent of the Startup India funds — to the tune of Rs 1,000 crore — in SIDBI-operated funds have been earmarked for women-led startups. The contribution of women in agriculture — a comparatively masculinised vocation — has been called to the fore with the annual observation of Mahila Kisan Diwas celebrations and a mandate of earmarking 30 per cent of funds in governmental, agricultural beneficiary-related interventions for female farmers.
Women have been put forward as foot soldiers of change. While Business Correspondent Sakhis are extending basic banking services to Self-Help Groups under the Deendayal Antyodaya Yojana-National Rural Livelihoods Mission (DAY-NRLM), Mahila Swachhagrahis are bringing sanitation services closer home under the Swachh Bharat movement. Where lacunae have been uncovered, they have been bridged through capacity-building. The capacity-building programme for Elected Women Representatives (EWRs) of Panchayati Raj institutions is one such intervention that trains women representatives to deliberate constructively on issues pertaining to women and children and enables them to be change agents. Steps have also been taken to reconcile the male-female digital divide through a digital literacy drive under the Pradhan Mantri Gramin Digital Sakasharta Abhiyan (PMGDISHA).
Recognising that better-educated women make well-informed social, economic and familial decisions, the government has invested in this virtuous future. Beti Bachao Beti Padhao (BBBP) — a national campaign for the survival, protection and greater educational participation of the girl child shepherded by the PM — appears to be yielding social gains through monitorable targets. The sex ratio at birth (SRB) has improved by 29 points from 991 (2015-16) to 1,020 (2019-21) as per NFHS-5. Gross enrolment ratio (GER) of girls in schools at the secondary level has improved from 68.17 per cent (2012-13) to 79.46 per cent (2020-21) as per UDISE-data; in fact, between 2012-13 and 2019-20, the GER for girls at both secondary and higher secondary level has increased more than that of the boys.
The road from women’s selflessness to selfhood has been supported by an all-around enabling socio-political and legal environment. Female literacy programmes, capacity building modules and livelihoods-oriented schemes have been but some strategies to remove barriers to the entry of women into Indian society, polity and economy. The government introduced the National Crèche Scheme for Children of Working Mothers in 2017 to address barriers created by care gaps. To further support working women, a liberal revision over the erstwhile 12 weeks stipulation was offered by way of 26 weeks of paid maternity leave for expecting mothers.
The government has also, in unequivocal terms, expressed a resolve to equalise the otherwise inequitable distribution of assets and resources. The Pradhan Mantri Ujjwala Yojana promises concessional LPG connections to women beneficiaries in vulnerable households, thus according them greater dignity by way of ownership of an amenity. Simultaneously, the Ujjwala Yojana affords women a smoke-free environment and alleviates the drudgery of collecting fuelwood, lifting them from the poverty of time and health. With the recent announcement by the finance minister to subsidise up to 12 gas cylinders by a sum of Rs 200, qualms about the future affordability of refills stand assuaged. Coupled with the slashing of fuel prices, amid a global political climate of soaring energy inflation, this move promises greater ease of living for women.
Similarly, the Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana too specifies a preference for women beneficiaries. In fact, approximately 75 per cent of homeowners under Awas Yojana are women. The Awas Yojana remedies the well-chronicled, historical, disproportionate gap in asset ownership that deprives women of social security and “fallback” options during crises.
According women’s autonomy a central place in public discourse, the government has, in three masterstrokes, made Indian women the architects of their own destiny. To this effect, the undignified practice of instant triple talaq has been nullified through the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019; the permissible gestational age for abortion has been revised to 24 weeks — up from 20 weeks — for vulnerable women through the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (Amendment) Act, 2021; and the legal marriage age for women has been proposed to be raised to 21 years, at par with men, under the provisions of the Prohibition of Child Marriage (Amendment) Bill, 2021. Such a legal edifice ensures women’s self-governance and procedural independence.
This genuine commitment to women’s empowerment has augmented women’s ability to make decisions. Between NFHS-4 (2014-15) and 5 (2019-21), nearly 89 per cent of married Indian women participated in major household decisions, a 5 per cent improvement over the previous survey. Markedly, more women than ever before owned houses (43.3 per cent) — alone or jointly — and had bank accounts (78.6 per cent) that they themselves used.
The Modi government has led by example in visibly respecting “nari shakti” in its eight years. There are eleven women in the current Council of Ministers, holding key portfolios and serving as a pleasant reminder of the repositioning of the nucleus of administrative initiatives. Amrit Kaal has signalled a tectonic shift from narratives of reinforced, gendered stereotypes and powerlessness to imagining new roles for Indian women that flex “nari shakti”. Women have donned new hats in the past eight years — as deciders of the nation’s destiny in the capacity of strong-willed voters exercising their democratic rights, as opinion-makers, as foot soldiers of behavioural transformation and as social change agents. In Amrit Kaal, the future of nation-building is unquestionably “female”.
In 2014, a country tired of six decades of the Congress’s politics of a dynasty, motley coalitions and corrupt governments, voted Narendra Modi to office as Prime Minister of India. He promised change and a new direction in governance. The last eight years have seen him steadily progressing towards building this New India.
Before 2014, the India narrative was just about the country being a big market opportunity. This opportunity came with accepted caveats — governance dysfunction, corruption, nepotism, policy inconsistency, red tape and crony capitalism. This state of affairs was accepted as normal as far back as the 1980s when the then PM Rajiv Gandhi said that for every one rupee that leaves Delhi, only 15 paise reaches the citizens.
In pre-Modi India, a few politically connected families and groups cornered all the opportunities and capital. For instance, a Credit Suisse report, ‘House of Debt’, divulged that 98 per cent of the net worth of India’s entire banking system was cornered by 10 influential families. Entrepreneurship and successful startups were rare exceptions. India was colloquially referred to as an elephant — big, slow-moving and unwieldy. Our revenues from tax collection remained low and our tax-GDP ratio was abysmal compared to other major developing economies.
In 2014, citizens of India voted for change and gave a resounding mandate to Modi, who had worked his way up from a poor family to becoming the CM of Gujarat. In Gujarat, he had already demonstrated the contrast in his political and governance model with a focus on medium to long-term transformations rather than short-term populism with projects like the Sabarmati Riverfront development. He received another, stronger mandate in 2019 as well as in many state elections.
PM Modi spent the first 3-4 years in office addressing the deep damage to the economy and institutions of governance and rebuilding the lost trust of citizens in the government. He inherited a shattered economy. He steadily rebuilt the financial sector, investor confidence and trust in the government. He has transformed the work culture within the government, making public service a relentless crusade for change and prosperity.
There are several reforms and governance initiatives that have successfully steered India to its current strength. But his commitment to technology from very early on is a testament to PM Modi’s vision and instincts about opportunities for India and Indians. The Digital India programme is one such example. Digital India was launched with three clear objectives: To transform citizens’ lives, governance and democracy; expand the digital economy, create jobs and attract investments; and make India the leader in the realm of technology — a provider rather than a consumer of technology.
A report carding of Digital India’s performance shows impressive progress. Every rupee released from Delhi reaches the bank accounts of beneficiaries without any delay or corruption. Thus far, the government has transferred more than Rs 17 lakh crore through DBT while saving Rs 2.2 lakh crore. Today, India has the world’s fastest-growing and most vibrant startup ecosystem with close to 70,000 registered startups and around 100 unicorns, with a unicorn coming up every week. The growth trajectory of these startups was determined by their hard work, passion, ability to innovate and availability of capital — not by political connections or family background.
Thanks to the most significant reform in indirect taxation through the GST and tax compliance, India has registered its highest ever collections. Revenue increased from Rs 22 lakh crore in FY 21 to Rs 27 lakh crore in FY 22 — a whopping 22 per cent growth. This year alone, the Centre is investing over Rs 7.5 lakh crore in infrastructure building.
The Covid-19 pandemic was a litmus test for leaders across the globe. The global superpowers continue to grapple with third and fourth waves but India, under PM Modi, emerged as a resilient nation. It successfully delivered over 200-crore vaccination shots by pulling off the world’s largest voluntary and technology-driven vaccination programme. India protected its small businesses and the poor – the latter continue to receive foodgrains under the world’s largest distribution programme launched during the pandemic, the PM Garib Kalyan Anna Yojana (PMGKAY). And even as economies falter and stumble, PM Modi’s policies have resulted in India being the fastest-growing major economy, attracting the highest ever FDIs ($ 83.57 billion). India also set new records for goods ($400 billion ) and services ($254 billion) exports.
Digital India played a significant role in India’s response to the pandemic. It ensured that the government could reach people in remote parts of the country. Health, education and other essential services migrated swiftly to the online mode. It would not be an aberration to say that post-Covid, India emerged as a preeminent nation in the use of technology for governance.
Thanks to the relentless hard work and focus on the future of New India by PM Modi, India post-Covid has emerged as a trusted partner to the international community. The rapid digitalisation of the world along with a new focus on trust in the global supply chains for digital products and services presents tremendous opportunities for India and its youth. PM Modi has referred to the coming decade as New India’s Techade. Young Indians and startups are presented with opportunities like never before as a result of the last eight years of dedicated work by the PM. It is now up to all of us to engage in a collective “sabka prayas” to realise New India’s economic potential.
Eight years is a long time in which to measure a government’s performance.
The impact of policies and tent pole reforms start to become apparent, and the electorate can make an honest assessment of the leaders they elected. In countries such as the US, Canada and Brazil, eight years marks two presidential terms and the maximum term limit for an elected head of government/state. For Narendra Modi and his strawman cabinet, this is a significant milestone for three reasons.
First, no one is under any illusions about the Modi government now. In 2014, the then Gujarat chief minister Modi campaigned on promises of reform, growth, job creation, controlling inflation and equitable distribution of wealth, summarised in the slogan “achhe din”. In the last eight years, people have painfully suffered the exact opposite. Run-away inflation has singed the lives of common people. Wholesale inflation is at a 30-year high and food inflation has made the life of the middle class and poor unbearable. The unemployment rate is officially touching 8 per cent, and could be much higher. Instead of creating the promised 2 crore new jobs every year, over 12 crore jobs have been lost. This government has turned the demographic dividend into a demographic disaster. Boisterous sloganeering and advertisement-driven rhetoric are not a substitute for sound economic vision.
One must recognise that the falling rupee, flight of capital, plummeting GDP and a sharp drop in manufacturing activities are the result of a series of economic policy failures. This is called policy paralysis. It started with the body-blow of demonetisation, which failed in every single one of its stated objectives — curbing black money in circulation, combatting terrorism, reduction of forged currency and increasing taxation. The deeply flawed GST and 1,100 amendments since 2017 have made the taxation structure cumbersome for medium and small businesses. The bank frauds of Rs 5,35,000 crore over the last eight years and gross NPAs of 21 lakh crore have further eroded the credibility of the banking system. To top it, the surge in the Union’s debt from Rs 55 lakh crore in 2014 to 135 lakh crore now reflects a debt trap.
The vulnerable sections have faced the brunt of this policy paralysis. Fourteen crore people have been pushed below the poverty line in the last eight years. So much so that the subsidised ration guaranteed under the Food Security Act enacted by the Congress is the only source of sustenance for millions. About 62 core farmers and farm labourers have also fallen prey to this malady with the BJP government’s clandestine attempts at diluting the UPA’s 2013 Land Acquisition Act and failure to double farmers’ income.
The last eight years have witnessed attacks on India’s sovereignty and territorial integrity with the Modi government largely remaining a mute bystander. The devastating terror attacks at Uri, Pathankot and Pulwama and calling the dreaded ISI to Pathankot for an investigation are still fresh in every Indian’s memory. China has brazenly occupied our territory in Depsang Plains, Gogra Hot Springs, Pangong Tso Lake and other places for the last two years. From a PM who rode to power on the promise of showing “lal ankh” to China, the inaction is startling. Meanwhile, China has converted the entire LAC into a militarised zone.
Second, the Modi government has realised that it cannot stay in power if democratic institutions remain vigilant. So, it began the task of subordinating crucial institutions to its purposes. The timing and targets of actions by the CBI, ED and Income Tax Departments are so painfully obvious that states had to take the drastic step of withdrawing permissions to investigate. On the other hand, when someone defects to the BJP the charges mysteriously disappear.
Judges who acted in ways that incur the displeasure of the government are transferred swiftly to remote parts of the country. From a Supreme Court that had maintained a studied distance from the government, judges began to shower praises on the PM. One called him a model for the youth and another was nominated to the Rajya Sabha.
Third, it is now clear that the Modi government does not have the best interests of the public at heart. Modi prematurely declared the end of Covid-19, boasting about exporting vaccines, when the second wave hit. It was devastating. Hospitals and doctors were overwhelmed, people died senselessly waiting for oxygen and hospital beds.
So, whose interests does the Modi government serve?
The BJP has become staggeringly rich. It declared assets worth Rs 4,847 crore in 2019-20. And apparently, this wasn’t enough. An RTI response revealed that the Modi government spent close to Rs 5,000 crore of public money in just four years (2014-2018) on publicity and promotion, more than double what the UPA spent in 10 years. Then there are the numerous attempts at curtailing the right to privacy and expanding state surveillance.
Consider the ultra-rich, the 142 richest Indians who saw their net worth soar by 30 lakh crore during the Covid years. All the while the average person saw petrol and diesel prices rise to over Rs 100 per litre. Cooking gas, oils and pulses all rose to exorbitant rates squeezing the already beleaguered middle class.
After eight years, those that claim their support for this government is based on good governance are engaged in a remarkable act of self-deception. It is propped up on three pillars — incessant propaganda, a distorted brand of nationalism to keep the population divided and the rampant misuse of investigative agencies.
Their greatest fear is that history will remember their sins. Thus, no matter how many layers of propaganda, rewritten history and false news they deploy to distract us we must never cease to hold a mirror to them. To paraphrase Thomas Jefferson, eternal vigilance is the price we pay for our democracy. The truly patriotic can do nothing less.
The writer is general secretary, Indian National Congress
It was fitting that the IPL final took place between Gujarat Titans and Rajasthan Royals. If there was a common thread running through them, it is that both at different points emerged as the most unlikely winners, with Royals winning the inaugural edition in 2008 and Titans capping a fairy tale run with the 2022 IPL crown. In sport, invincibility on paper doesn’t always carry the day.
Two unfaniced teams, led by players at the periphery of India’s national teams, knocking out pre-tournament favourites backed by large support staff and data analysts influencing auction choices is what makes cricket riveting. All the number crunching and pre-tournament records were overwhelmed by the two most cohesive units which proved the whole is always greater than the sum of its parts.
Hardik Pandya, a player with enormous potential who has had a chequered career, emerged as a natural captain. This was part of the many surprising aspects of the Gujarat Titans’ journey as Pandya had not been talked about as a potential captain earlier. The manner in which he moulded a bunch of players who were not among pre-tournament favourites into a winning team will certainly make Indian selectors reassess the resources at their disposal as the Virat Kohli era draws to a close.
The highlight of IPL 2022 is that it showcased the sheer depth of India’s bench strength. The younger Indian players in the tournament, particularly the fast bowlers, showed why the current era in Indian cricket is unlike anything seen in the nine decades since India played its first test match.
Shortly after a report from the Prime Minister’s Economic Advisory Council (PMEAC) that recommended the rollout of an urban employment guarantee programme, Rajasthan launched its own version of the scheme. India is not new to state-level urban jobs programmes as Kerala launched one over a decade ago. The advent of the pandemic built up cross-party support for it and a few other states followed suit. At the Union level, this idea gained momentum last year when the parliamentary standing committee on labour recommended it. Besides Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Odisha, Himachal Pradesh have a shorter experience in the area.
There’s a case for GoI to join in for two key reasons. In India, CMIE jobs data shows that monthly unemployment has fluctuated between 6.56% and 11.84% over a year, with urban employment exceeding rural in 10 of those months. At India’s stage of development, this is relatively high, particularly in urban centres. Second, state-level initiatives are geographically limited and also at a nascent stage. It is difficult to gauge how useful they are for workers from UP, Bihar, Rajasthan and West Bengal – states that were destinations for more than 60% of the 11.4 million returning migrant workers during the first lockdown. As in the case of GoI’s health insurance scheme that was synchronised with similar state-level initiatives, it’s possible to design an overarching national urban employment guarantee programme.
That leaves two key questions, on cost and design. One estimate by researchers at Azim Premji University showed that 100 days of guaranteed work for 20 million workers with wages fixed at Rs 300 a day, and the overall wage bill capped at 50% of the total outlay, would cost GoI Rs 1 lakh crore. For perspective, the latest GoI annual budget is pegged at Rs 39.4 lakh crore. GoI’s existing urban employment schemes can be subsumed into an urban job guarantee scheme to control costs. As for design, it’s prudent to take an intermediate step such as ‘Duet’ (decentralised urban employment and training) proposed by economist Jean Dreze. It envisages using public institutions initially to introduce the scheme. Instead of going all out, it will allow GoI a chance to observe its working in smaller settings as urban governance capacity across India is uneven. But it’s worth sorting out these details because an urban employment guarantee plan can help those most hit by recent economic shocks.
It’s a truism to state that public policy today is heavily data-dependent. India’s no exception, with copious data being generated by its statistical system. However, it’s the quality of data that needs urgent attention as it influences the efficacy of public policy. The 2020 report on medically certified cause of deaths (MCCD) released some days ago was based on the civil registration system set up in the 19th century. The key takeaway of the report is that a mere 22.5% of the 8.1 million deaths in 2020 were medically certified.
It is an improvement over the previous year’s 20.7% but the overall proportion is low. Some populous and poor states are reporting abysmal numbers, which makes crafting a sound public health policy a matter of chance. For example, it’s 3.4% in Bihar, 6.1% in Jharkhand and 6.7% in MP. Despite infrastructural limitations, there’s scope to improve registration levels quickly. The MCCD report observed that not all hospitals report data. For instance, only 30% of Tamil Nadu’s medical institutions with in-patient facilities are covered by MCCD reporting requirements. Such gaps hamper policy making.
To illustrate, the International Diabetes Federation estimates India accounts for one in seven adults living with diabetes. But when adjusted for age, India fares better than Sri Lanka and Bangladesh. With better data, such debilitating health problems can be tackled early, improving the quality of life. All hospitals with in-patient facilities must be mandated to report MCCD. Once this is done, it will be easier to identify key weaknesses in the registration system: paucity of doctors and health facilities in rural areas or forbidding medical expenses for those seriously ill. Panchayats and grassroots medical workers can then be roped in for facilitating hospital access. Manipur leapt from 50% medically certified deaths in 2018 to 100% in 2020. Follow Manipur’s example.
GoI has rightly withdrawn a May 27 notice by the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) under the aegis of the ministry of electronics and information technology (MeitY), warning Aadhaar-holders not to share photocopies of the UID, and, instead, share images masking the Aadhaar number. The withdrawal came after the notice caused some amount of public confusion and panic. Public communication gaffes of this kind can erode confidence and trust in the Aadhaar ecosystem, a key identity document to avail welfare benefits and operate bank accounts. Aadhaar-holders have now been advised to exercise usual prudence while using or sharing numbers. UIDAI must develop a well-thought-out standard operating procedure for public communication. This means a separation of roles and responsibilities between UIDAI and MeitY.
RBI routinely issues guidelines cautioning the public on the dos and don'ts of online banking and payments through apps. Two-factor authentication is used as an extra security measure. As phishing is a rising threat, the citizenry is cautioned not to share PIN (personal identification number) or password with anyone, including bank officials. Digital banking has promotional measures and is not mandated on citizens, unlike Aadhaar that is mandated for many crucial services.
The growth and success of the Indian digital ecosystem critically depends on Aadhaar, and is the springboard for innovations like India Stack and Unified Payments Interface (UPI). This calls for enabling institutions and processes to attain maturity and stability. UIDAI is a critical piece in the cogwheel, underscoring the need for robust governance with systemic checks and cross-checks. India must also swiftly enact a robust data protection law.
( Originally published on May 30, 2022 )
Read in source website
The murder of Punjabi singer and Congress leader Sidhu Moosewala, 28, highlights a growing law and order challenge for the young Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) government in the state. Moosewala, whose real name was Shubhdeep Singh Sidhu, was gunned down while driving his car in the state’s Mansa district, a day after his security was scaled down as part of an austerity measure by the administration.
The killing of Moosewala, which comes after a rocket attack at the headquarters of the state police’s intelligence unit, violence in Patiala during a pro-Khalistan rally, and controversial comments by a Sikh clergyman, indicates that tensions may be rising in a state that spent a decade under the shadow of militancy and paid a wrenching price to end organised insurgency. If gangs are growing more strident and stitching together a web of crime with extremist elements — as has been hinted by previous investigations — the government would do well to focus its attention on nipping this problem in the bud. The daring murder triggers serious questions about the manner in which the singer’s security was assessed. The government has ordered a probe into this process. It must unearth if the decision to reduce his security was taken after adequate deliberation and discussion or based on political considerations, and whether the decision to publicise the move was a mistake. A Canada-based member of a dreaded gang has assumed responsibility for the incident and said the murder was retribution for the yet unsolved killing of a Shiromani Akali Dal leader last year. The state police and agencies must probe how the gang was able to orchestrate a smooth operation when its leader, Lawrence Bishnoi, is currently locked up in the high-security ward 8 of Tihar Jail in Delhi, and why repeated acts of gang violence continue unabated.
Considered a more down to earth artiste than his contemporaries, Moosewala was a hero to many young people who were drawn to his songs that sometimes glorified guns, violence, and caste pride. It is unfortunate that the same culture of violence has now claimed his life and is an ominous portent for a state that shares an international border with Pakistan, and where civil and political unrest has claimed a heavy toll in the past. The state government would do well to get a handle on the law and order situation quickly.
Over the weekend, the government issued and withdrew an advisory cautioning people on sharing their full Aadhaar numbers in a hard copy with “unlicensed” organisations. The initial release was by the Bengaluru office of the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI), which manages and maintains the Aadhaar database. Soon, it went viral on social media. The government then withdrew it, citing “possibility of misinterpretation” in a separate release on Sunday. Aadhaar cardholders, the second statement said, are “only advised to exercise normal prudence”. The U-turn brings with it several questions: Why was the advisory issued in the first place? What happened? Who was involved? And most importantly, what constitutes “normal prudence”?
For years now, the Aadhaar programme has been upheld as an example of how technology can improve speed and access of citizen services. But it sits at the centre of a conflict between security, scale, and universality — focusing on one creates vulnerabilities in the other two domains. Until now, the government focus on security and universality has not kept at pace with its thrust on scale. The likelihood of being asked for a photocopy of an Aadhaar — instead of being verified via an OTP or a fingerprint scan – to access a service is higher than the correct method via the Aadhaar-authentication protocol. This poses a security risk, of the nature the first advisory warned, and ties into the larger challenge of universality, the principle that all sections of users are technologically literate of what is and isn’t prudent. The government must review Aadhaar processes and compliances of stakeholders, licensed and unlicensed, and come out with detailed advisories for its users, and its service providers too.
Almost 10 months since the Taliban took over Kabul, India is steadily increasing its engagements and outreach with the group. Over the past few months, New Delhi has tested the waters with the Taliban by making calculated and low-key moves to engage with the group’s interim government, while continuing discussions with regional and international actors alike. Talks about reopening a section of the embassy in Kabul have been reported while a regional summit on Afghanistan orchestrated by India was held in November 2021. The criticality of the Afghanistan crisis within the international community suffered setbacks in the face of the ongoing war in Ukraine. However, Delhi has tried to keep the issue on the frontburner in almost all its engagements with international partners.
For the ambit of this article, three major events conducted by New Delhi illustrate the kind of outreach India has conducted with the Taliban, and their outcomes.
First, days after the fall of Kabul, India’s ambassador to Qatar, Deepak Mittal, met Taliban leader Sher Mohammed Abbas Stanekzai in Doha. The meet was requested by the Taliban, and took place at the Indian embassy, and not on neutral soil. This was a message in itself, of India engaging, but on its own terms. Stanekzai is known to India as he completed his military training in Dehradun in the 1980s when part of the Afghan armed forces. This meeting also tested another major area of concern, that of domestic political reactions to engagements with the Taliban. In Kashmir, Mehbooba Mufti asked if India could talk to the Taliban, then why not to Pakistan? While strategically engaging with the Taliban is a realistic move, domestically, especially with the current government’s own ideological bend, it is a proposition easier said than done.
The second significant case of outreach went largely under the radar as it happened a few hours after Russia launched military operations against Ukraine. On February 26, wheat aid for the Afghan people provided by India reached Jalalabad by land via Pakistan. The route of this aid was a test case for Delhi itself, which clearly forced the Taliban to push Pakistan to allow aid trucks to use the land route. Upon the aid’s arrival, the Taliban posted pictures of the welcome ceremony with both the Indian and Taliban flags side by side.
This was not an impromptu or opportunistic decision forced upon us by the Taliban but had the Indian establishment’s approval. This overt display of access, humanitarian cooperation, and a level of organisational capability was a signal for India’s engagement and presence despite the on-ground reality. Over time, India committed to providing more than 50,000 metric tonnes of wheat to the struggling people of Afghanistan, continuing its traditional role of being a development partner. Since then, Taliban leaders such as Anas Haqqani, Qahar Balkhi, Zabiullah Mujahid have also been interviewed by Indian news channels.
The third notable event was seen in the recent visit of Abdullah Abdullah, who led the High Council for National Reconciliation (HCNR) and was previously the chief executive officer of Afghanistan, to Delhi – the first time he was allowed to leave Afghanistan since the Taliban took charge. While the trip was personal, the Taliban may not have allowed Abdullah to leave if it feared negative outcomes for its own interests. In fact, the Taliban could have used this opportunity to deliver communications to India. During his visit, other than in all likelihood meeting Indian officials, Abdullah also met US Special Representative for Afghanistan, Thomas West, adding more weight to a hypothesis that all these engagements were in concert, and not by chance. During this same time, the Taliban denied former president Hamid Karzai permission to visit Abu Dhabi to offer his condolences on the recent passing of the United Arab Emirates’ president, Sheikh Khalifa bin Zayed Al Nahyan.
From an Indian perspective, the approach to Afghanistan remains very fluid and led by a hard security posture than a diplomatic one. An uptick in seizures of narcotic shipments and filtration of weapons, including western ones, from Afghanistan into Kashmir remain areas of immediate concern. It is imperative to remember that engagement does not translate into recognition of this new reality and that every regional and international stakeholder continues to keep all their options open.
However, engagement at certain levels for India with the Taliban is inevitable and a need of the hour for its own geopolitical and strategic interests, as it was in the 1990s.
Kabir Taneja is fellow, Strategic Studies Programme, Observer Research Foundation
The views expressed are personal
Under the leadership of Prime Minister (PM) Narendra Modi, the Union ministry of agriculture and farmers welfare has rolled out innovative schemes to reform the farm sector and empower farmers. Thanks to these schemes and programmes, the livelihood standards of farmers are improving, central grants are reaching their bank accounts in a transparent manner, and farming is emerging as a viable business proposition.
In the last eight years, the budget allocation for the ministry has increased by almost six times. This fiscal’s allocation, ₹1.32 lakh crore, is a reflection of the Union government’s focus on the welfare of farmers. The record production of food grains and horticultural crops also proves that the increased allocation is being spent properly. According to the third advance estimates (2021-22), the production of food grains is estimated at about 315 million tonnes, while the output of the horticulture sector is also estimated at 334 million tonnes, the highest ever. It is no small matter that despite the pandemic and the Russia-Ukraine crisis, India has emerged as a major food grains supplier to the world.
The Union government has also consistently increased the Minimum Support Prices (MSPs) for kharif, rabi and other commercial crops. As a result, MSP of paddy rose from ₹1,310 per quintal to ₹1,940 per quintal in 2013-14. Similarly, in 2013-14, MSP of wheat was ₹1,400 per quintal, now it is ₹2,015 per quintal.
During the rabi marketing season (RMS) 2021-22, 43.34 million metric tonnes of wheat was procured at MSP, the highest ever. Punjab, Uttar Pradesh (UP), Rajasthan, Uttarakhand, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh and Jammu and Kashmir have seen the highest procurement of wheat. Data also reveals that ₹85,604.40 crore was credited to 4.9 million wheat-producing farmers during RMS.
The Union government has credited around ₹1.82 lakh crore to 115 million farmers under the Pradhan Mantri Kisan Samman Yojana ( ₹6,000 per annum in three equal instalments). This is one of the key schemes of the Union government and a symbol of its vision to improve the social and economic status of the farming community. The soil health card scheme makes farmers aware of better farming techniques for better yield. The government has also made special provision for organic farming and natural farming in the budget. Under this, special attention is paid to soil health, natural farming and conservation of resources and the environment. In Uttarakhand, UP, Bihar, Jharkhand and West Bengal, five kilometres on both banks of the river Ganga will be brought under natural farming.
The government has also constituted a committee under the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) to include syllabus related to natural farming in undergraduate and postgraduate teaching courses. Chemical-free natural farming is being supported by the ministry and ICAR. Keeping in view the contemporary nature of natural farming, ICAR has issued special guidelines to agricultural universities to include research and allied subjects related to natural farming. Natural farming has been led to an increase farmers’ income and improved their quality of life.
The dedicated approach of the Union government towards the farming community is also reflected in the ₹1,00,000 crore allocated for the agricultural infrastructure fund and the government is committed to provide basic facilities such as godowns, custom hiring centres, primary processing units, sorting and grading units and cold storage. Furthermore, through these basic facilities, the government is committed to providing remunerative prices to farmers for their produce.
Under the Atmanirbhar Bharat Abhiyan (Self-Reliant India Campaign), the Union government is also promoting the national bee-keeping and honey mission. Similarly, the government is committed to using platforms and schemes such as the National Agricultural Market (e-NAM), Pradhan Mantri Krishi Sinchai Yojana and Agricultural Mechanisation and Cluster Development Programme to benefit farmers.
Under the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana, farmers are insured against natural calamity. In order to bring more and more farmers under the scheme, the Meri Policy, Mere Haath campaign has been launched. The importance of the PM Crop Insurance Scheme can be gauged from the fact that farmers have deposited about ₹21,000 crore as premium. They have been reimbursed ₹1.15 lakh crore as claims against crop damage.
The kisan rail scheme is another important concept put forward by PM Modi for faster transportation of agricultural produce; special trains are being run for quick transportation of perishable agricultural produce. So far, 2,500 train trips have been conducted on about 175 routes across the country. In this year’s budget, special emphasis has been given agricultural start-ups and agri-entrepreneurship. Work is being done very fast in this direction, and the results are also visible. Many hopes and expectations rest on the agriculture sector, which the government, under the leadership of our generous and able PM Modi, understands well and is chugging full steam ahead towards its destination.
At present, the government and the citizens are celebrating Azadi ka Amrit Mahotsav, marking 75 years of Independence. All central ministries and departments and state governments have been mobilised to celebrate this grand festival. As part of the celebrations, the agriculture ministry recently (April 25-30) celebrated Kisan Bhagidari, Prathmikta Hamari Abhiyan (Partnering farmers is our priority) with great enthusiasm.
During this campaign, all departments of the ministry, organisations and institutions under it, including ICAR and 725 Krishi Vigyan Kendras, organised kisan melas, kisan sammelans, seminars, workshops, webinars and round tables. In this way, when the nation celebrates the 100th year of Independence, the country will have a bird’s eye view of the evergreen agricultural sector. With this dream, we are all moving towards building an Atmanirbhar agriculture-Atmanirbhar India (Self-Reliant Agriculture - Self-Reliant India).
Narendra Singh Tomar is Union minister of agriculture and farmers welfare
The views expressed are personal
United Nations (UN) human rights chief, and twice President of Chile, Michelle Bachelet, knows a thing or two about incarceration and torture in prisons.
In 1973, her father, Chilean Air Force General Alberto Bachelet, was arrested and tortured in one such prison under the direction of a certain General Augusto Pinochet.
The reason was that the general supported the democratically-elected President Salvador Allende’s government. He died a year later of a heart attack in custody, said to be triggered by the torture.
Bachelet, then a student, and her mother, Angela Jeria, were also rounded up and tortured before they fled to Germany.
Bachelet and her mother did not commit any crime.
But were held and tortured anyway because they were the daughter and wife of General Bachelet.
That’s been one of the primary accusations against the Chinese government in Xinjiang: Rounding up hundreds of thousands from Muslim minority communities, the majority from among the Uyghurs, despite having no criminal records. Rounded up only because of one reason: Their religion.
Rights activists say as much: They were taken away, often in the dead and silence of the night, because they were Muslims. Or for sporting a beard. Or for not smoking or drinking. Or maybe because her husband’s phone had passages from an Islamic religious scripture.
Basically, not for committing any crime, experts say, a charge denied by Beijing, which says its policies target terrorism, extremism and separatism.
If Xinjiang was China’s most heavily policed region until about a decade ago, the security noose tightened like a tourniquet after terror attacks in Beijing, Kunming and Guangzhou in 2013 and 2014; the mass knifing at the Kunming railway station, which left 34 dead and nearly 150 injured in March 2014, was the worst.
Officially the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region (XUAR), it is the largest region in China with a population of some 25 million people, around the same as Shanghai, China’s financial hub.
The region has international borders with Mongolia, the Russian Federation, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Afghanistan, India, and Pakistan-occupied-Kashmir.
The size and the remoteness of the region with its sparse population have helped China, critics say, to set up heavily guarded re-education camps, especially in Xinjiang’s southern part where the main city with its once distinct culture, cuisine, architecture and an unofficial time zone is Kashgar.
On September 9, 2021, Bachelet had said her office was finalising a report on the allegation of “serious human rights violations” in Xinjiang after China released its National Human Rights Action Plan of China (2021-25).
“I regret that I am not able to report progress on my efforts to seek meaningful access to XUAR,” Bachelet had said.
Bachelet finally did manage that access but at the end of her tour, there’s a big question mark on how “meaningful” it was.
Critics said her tour ended up being quite meaningless following the press conference she addressed on Saturday night (May 28) after finishing her tour, which took her to Guangzhou and Urumqi and Kashgar in Xinjiang.
Bachelet, who made it a point to say her trip wasn’t an investigation, said she had urged Beijing to review its counter-terrorism policies to ensure they comply with international human rights standards.
It was an opportunity to engage with the Chinese government, she said much to the chagrin of rights groups.
“I have raised questions and concerns about the application of counter-terrorism and de-radicalisation measures under broad application, particularly the impact on the rights of Uyghurs and other predominantly Muslim minorities,” she said, adding that she was taken to a jail where most inmates she saw had committed non-terror related crimes.
Bachelet’s opaque tour, the online press conference at the end of it, and her neutered statement have left activists and victims’ families fuming.
Even before her visit, activists, according to global rights advocacy group Human Rights Watch’s Maya Wang, had low expectations.
That’s exactly how it has turned out to be.
Ironically, the top global official for human rights’ visit lacked transparency in terms of her meetings except with President Xi Jinping and foreign minister Wang Yi.
It was only revealed by the Chinese government late on May 28 that she had also met handpicked government officials from the judiciary, police, and the women’s federation.
The Chinese government — which had clearly finalised and dictated the terms of her chaperoned visit — put out a lengthy statement after her meeting with Xi, even contradicting the version later put out by Bachelet's office.
“Overall, her visit has been a disappointment, and particularly painful to the families of those who remain arbitrarily detained and imprisoned in Xinjiang and China,” Wang said, noting that Bachelet had essentially become a “photo op'' for the Chinese government.
What infuriated activists was that Bachelet not only said she was “unable” to assess Uyghur human rights abuses in Xinjiang, but also framed allegations of abuses in the context of “anti-terrorism” and “de-radicalisation” measures taken by the Chinese government.
Rights groups found it troubling that Bachelet adopted Chinese official terminology like “Vocational Education and Training Centres (VETCs)” to characterise the camps, which were said to be used for mass incarceration of Uyghurs in Xinjiang, estimated to be at least one million.
“The HC’s remarks offered comfort not to victims and survivors of Chinese government’s human rights abuses including crimes against humanity but rather to their perpetrators,” HRW’s China director, Sophie Richardson said.
“Surely, in this time of human rights crisis in China, the High Commissioner’s visit cannot just be a listening and sharing of concerns exercise,” said Sharon Hom, Human Rights in China, said in a statement.
Activists also point out that the Xinjiang report compiled by her office has not yet been made public.
The release of the report is important.
“Numerous UN experts through various special procedures have detailed allegations of abuses in Xinjiang for several years, but this report will be the first issued by OHCHR (Office of the High Commissioner of Human Rights),” wrote Mercedes Page for the Lowy Institute’s, The Interpreter, in late April.
“As the organisation with principal responsibility for human rights in the UN system, the report will influence how member states, many of which have been quiet on allegations coming out of Xinjiang, approach China and the tragedy unfolding against the Uyghurs,” Page wrote.
As her visit ended, China made it clear to Bachelet that it was against the report's publication.
“China has made clear its stern position on the so-called Xinjiang report, and resolutely opposes smearing and attacking China with lies and disinformation,” vice foreign minister Ma Zhaoxu said in a statement even before the High Commissioner had left China.
In November 2014, during Bachelet’s second stint as President of Chile, two retired Chilean military officers were sentenced to prison for torturing to death Bachelet’s father four decades after they had committed the crime.
“This sentence… is a step forward precisely to advance in the truth and justice Chile needs,” was how her government had reacted to the verdict.
Unfortunately, many feel that Bachelet has failed to make any forward movement in voicing the injustice and severe human rights abuses faced by many in China’s Xinjiang.
Sutirtho Patranobis, HT’s experienced China hand, writes a weekly column from Beijing, exclusively for HT Premium readers. He was previously posted in Colombo, Sri Lanka, where he covered the final phase of the civil war and its aftermath, and was based in Delhi for several years before that
The views expressed are personal
The Forest Advisory Committee (FAC) of the Union environment ministry may soon give its nod for forest clearance to the Etalin Hydroelectric Project (HEP) in Arunachal Pradesh’s Dibang Valley. Since the proposal came up for forest clearance in 2020, several wildlife experts and scientists have raised concerns, since allowing such a project could lead to severe biodiversity loss in the region.
Dibang Valley is among the most ecologically fragile areas in the Eastern Himalayas supporting several unique and endemic species of flora and fauna. According to a note put together by Conservation India in 2020 based on inputs from ecologists, Dibang Valley is home to a genetically distinct population of tigers, over 75 species of other mammals, and 300+ species of birds, including many endangered ones, The valley is part of the Eastern Himalayan Global Biodiversity Hotspot, which is one of only 36 such hotspots in the world. In addition to tigers, the greater region of Dibang Valley harbours mammals like the clouded leopard, Asiatic golden cat, Asiatic wild dog, red panda, Mishmi Takin, red goral, and Gongshan Muntjac.
I have been following this case since 2020 through FAC’s meeting minutes and official documents, notes, communications and so on, that have been shared on the project. The government is aware of the ecological importance of this region.
For example, an April 21, 2020 factsheet on the project contains some contradictory statements about the location. “It is reported that no rare and endangered species were sighted during the inspection/enumeration period, the adjacent/fringe areas are the habitat of some of the rare/endangered/unique species of flora and fauna, and therefore, there presence is not ruled out. But the diversion will have a negligible impact on the species. The distance of the proposed site from the boundary of the notified forest area (Dibang Wildlife Sanctuary) is around 12 km,” it states. If adjacent or fringe areas of the location are home to rare, endangered species as mentioned in the note, how can forest diversion here have negligible impacts?
The 3097 MW Etalin HEP is proposed to be developed as a combination of two “run-of-the-river” schemes having diurnal storage. It will involve the construction of concrete gravity dams on the Tangon and Dri rivers and divert the water through two separate waterway systems to utilise the available head in a common underground powerhouse located upstream of the confluence of the Dri and Tangon rivers. The heights of dams at Dri and Tangon will be 101.5 m and 80 m respectively. The installed capacity for the scheme proposed on the Dri limb is 1861.60 MW, comprising of a small hydro scheme of 19.60 MW while the installed capacity on the Tangon limb is 1235.40 MW, including a small hydro scheme of 7.40 MW at the toe of the dam on Tangon river.
Apart from the massive impact on biodiversity, the project will also involve the felling of over 2.8 lakh trees in a subtropical evergreen broad-leaved forest and subtropical rainforest. Here is what the official factsheet says about the forests meant to be diverted for the project: “The vegetation is of multi-strata and can truly be said to be irreplaceable. While treading through the forests, it is seen that many of the areas are inaccessible due to the thick vegetation and the terrain of the area varying from gentle slopes to very high slopes from 450 to almost vertical. While such [an] area may be ideal for the dam axis location and construction of the dam but the access to such [an] area is very difficult.” I find it conflicting that the government finds the forests “irreplaceable” and yet wants to do away with them for the Etalin HEP. These conflicts need resolution.
In April 2020, conservationists and wildlife biologists, Nandini Velho and Umesh Sreenivasan wrote to the FAC drawing their attention to the presence of tigers outside/adjacent to the Dibang Wildlife Sanctuary. They referred to a camera trap-based study that had found tigers to be widespread in Dibang Valley, both in Dibang WLS and in the community forest. Under this study, 283 camera traps were placed throughout Dibang Valley, half in Dibang WLS and half in the community forest. Data obtained by these camera traps yielded photographs of 12 individual tigers, eight of which were found in community-managed lands outside Dibang WLS. They had also pointed out that apart from tigers, Dibang Valley supported outstandingly rich biological diversity. “The most notable are the six different colour variations of the Asian golden cat (Schedule I) which are found throughout the district. Dibang Valley hosts the highest colour variation of any wild cat species in the world, making it a globally significant area both for conservation, and to study ecological adaptability and evolution,” they wrote. Several other conservationists drew FAC’s attention to various peer-reviewed papers, and research work that underlines that diverting these forests could spell disaster.
26 scientists from 16 scientific institutions also flagged that a Wildlife Institute of India report on the biodiversity of Dibang Valley (based on which the Etalin HEP would be assessed) has several “scientific biases” and doesn’t reflect a true picture of the biodiversity of Dibang Valley and ignores the fact that the region supports a distinct tiger population.
The minutes of FAC’s latest meeting held on May 11 states that the Wildlife Institute of India and National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA) have suggested that FAC take cognisance of certain safeguards for better conservation of wildlife in the area while considering the approval for the project. I find it shocking that both these institutions with their sole focus on conserving biodiversity managed to ignore the findings of several scientific institutions and research works on the importance of Dibang Valley. HT reported on Friday that the power ministry and impact assessment division of the environment ministry have both approved the project which is now only awaiting approval from the FAC. A four-member committee has been formed by the FAC to address all apprehensions and representations by various environmental groups on the project’s impact on wildlife and biodiversity. It has been directed to submit a report in this regard within three weeks for the FAC to decide on the forest clearance for the project.
There are larger concerns about the economic viability of the project which need to be addressed before FAC takes a call. FAC on April 23 last year sought comments from the power ministry on the Etalin HEP given the following: the project is delayed by six years and the country’s energy plan may have changed during the period; a large number of hydro-electric projects are pending due to environmental and forest clearance concerns, and the tariff structure of the project was already high when proposed in 2014. Power ministry’s responses were not shared. The May 11 minutes only state that the Power Ministry has approved the project.
The developers of the Etalin HEP are also likely to change. PSU, Satluj Jal Vidyut Nigam Limited is in the process of signing a memorandum of understanding (MoU) with the Arunachal Pradesh government to take over five hydropower projects in the Dibang basin including the Etalin project.
SJVN Ltd will sign a memorandum of understanding with the Arunachal Pradesh government for the transfer of these projects. “But we have referred back certain points to the Arunachal Pradesh government. Paying an upfront premium is not economically viable for hydropower; the joint venture model is also not sustainable; the commercial viability of the project needs to be studied and we prefer a ‘build-operate-manage’ model rather than a ‘build-operate and transfer’. Once these points are resolved, we can take over these projects,” said NL Sharma, CMD, SJVN Ltd during an interview. He also told me for some hydro projects the tariff is too high like ₹7-8 per unit making them unviable. Once the MoU is signed, Jindal Power Limited, the present developer, may quit the project.
There is hardly any information on the economic viability of the Etalin Hydroelectric Project. FAC’s nod to the project could have serious impacts on the indigenous Idu Mishmi community in the region who have a unique and deep relationship with nature and wilderness, as documented by several researchers in the past. FAC’s committee may need to meet the Idu Mishmi community members to document their views on the loss of forests here. FAC has made no reference to the community so far. The process of appraising this project appears half-hearted so far.
From the climate crisis to air pollution, from questions of the development-environment tradeoffs to India’s voice in international negotiations on the environment, HT’s Jayashree Nandi brings her deep domain knowledge in a weekly column
The views expressed are personal
An official believed to be a favourite of the high command dismissed the implications of Kapil Sibal’s adieu to the Congress with a cryptic one-liner: “People come and go from our party.” Akin to a haughty judge’s obiter, the remark left one wondering whether the Congress that once was the chosen destination of practising politicos has been reduced to being a platform where they await the next train.
The official’s sardonic tone was hugely misplaced, more so because Sibal, a weighty advocate rated among the country’s foremost parliamentarians, ended his association with the Congress way more soberly than another party veteran, Sunil Jakhar. The Punjab leader had vent spleen repeatedly in public before crossing over to the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).
One isn’t counting here the exit of Gujarat’s Hardik Patel, a laterally inducted freshman who also marched out within days of the party’s Udaipur brainstorming session meant to set its frayed house in order. His parting-fusillade against Rahul Gandhi was reminiscent of the acerbic idiom of the BJP’s Assam chief minister Himanta Biswa Sarma, who rebelled after the 2014 Lok Sabha debacle to help his new party subsequently steal the whole of the Northeast from under the Congress’s nose.
One can argue with some conviction that Sibal’s decision to re-enter the Rajya Sabha as an Independent Member of Parliament (MP) supported by Akhilesh Yadav’s Samajwadi Party has left scope for a future rapprochement. But the Congress leadership’s couldn’t-care-less approach to losing precious human resource in a torrent does not bode well for a promising tomorrow. Irony dies many times over when rootless loyalists question outward bound leaders’ mass base amid serious questions about their own masters’ dwindling charisma.
It’s shocking to see the party founded in 1885 miss the wood for the trees in not recognising that politicians serve multiple roles and purposes: Electoral, tactical, organisational, parliamentary, and technocratic. Members such as Sibal, or for that matter P Chidambaram and Abhishek Manu Singhvi, fell in the category of those who could defend the party in courts and represent it forcefully in legislatures. Often compared with the Congress’s Pranab Mukherjee, the BJP’s main battle tank, the late Arun Jaitley was a better-rounded politician and organisation person. But the Sibal-Chidambaram-Singhvi trinity matched his wits every step of the way in the Rajya Sabha. Their debates were of a high order; a definitive silver lining in a grimy phase of our parliamentary system.
Akhilesh’s support for Sibal: A leaf out of Mulayam’s textbook
For his part, Akhilesh Yadav has taken a leaf out of his father Mulayam Singh Yadav’s political textbook in accommodating Sibal on the latter’s terms of being an Independent voice unencumbered by party positions in Parliament. At his prime, the senior Yadav showed similar regard for former Prime Minister (PM) Chandra Shekhar, who he’d help get elected to the Lok Sabha from Uttar Pradesh’s Ballia.
As was often the case in that era of politics, they kept their friendship despite charting different political paths after the abrupt demise of Chandra Shekhar’s short-lived, Congress-backed regime in 1991. “Mulayam didn’t just help him for old times’ sake. He did so to ensure the presence in the House of a leader who spoke his mind on big issues facing the country,” recalled Narbadeshwar Rai, a veteran journalist and a long-time associate of the former PM. Chandra Shekhar led a small party in the 1990s, but was respected for his plain speak across political divides. He firmly believed a leader’s task was to lead rather than be led by public sentiments on key national questions that are best left to debate, discourse and resolution in democratic institutions.
Chandra Shekhar’s cerebral combat with his close friend, the BJP’s Bhairon Singh Shekhawat (on the majority community’s duties towards religious minorities) at a meeting of the National Integration Council under the then PM, VP Singh, is the stuff of political folklore. He said the Hindu majority not only has to safeguard but also provide leadership to the Muslims as their political elite chose Pakistan over India during the Partition.
The purpose here isn’t to place Sibal on the same pedestal as the veteran socialist who, as a member of the original Congress ginger group called Young Turks, fought the influence of monopoly capital tooth and nail as a party person and a parliamentarian before joining the fledgling Janata Party as its president on being imprisoned in the 1975-77 Emergency period. Unlike the jurist-politician who, as a vocal member of a recently minted ginger group of 23, battled an electorally enfeebled yet organisationally entrenched Gandhi family, Chandra Shekhar fought the all-mighty Indira Gandhi; getting elected against her wishes to the Congress’s central election committee in 1971. The intra-party challenge he mounted to her came barely a year after he told a gathering of Congress colleagues that “the party was free to change its leadership if it felt that it could not deliver the goods.”
In a replay of the Chandra Shekhar act of five decades ago, Sibal too asked the Gandhis to vacate leadership positions to give “someone else a chance” after the party was pulverised in the February-March elections to five assemblies. In vastly different circumstances dictating their politics, they acted similarly by refusing to be the leadership’s choirboys.
One Sibal can’t make a summer
The purpose of this anecdotal interlude is to underscore the need for sending erudite, independent thinkers into our elected forums where debates are restricted by political/electoral expediencies of parties big and small on issues of grave concern and import. Those in the Opposition are unwilling or seem incapable of standing up to popular opinion to show the flip side of the ruling dispensation’s take on a host of religious, cultural, economic and national security questions. Leave alone a counter, they haven’t yet authored a cogent corrective to the BJP’s Hindutva.
The result of it is the near-total absence of an alternative narrative for rallying people. The Congress is failing as the principal Opposition, and so are the regional outfits with the exception of Mamata Banerjee who not only wove compelling arguments but had the Bengal electorate lapping them up in the assembly polls she resoundingly won.
One swallow, or Sibal, cannot make a summer in such an overwhelmingly grim ambience. The polity needs more people of heft and learning in Parliament who aren’t held back by organisational whips while stating their piece. The indirectly-elected Upper House is the best platform where a team of public intellectuals can be assembled, their re-election guaranteed by parties, for debating matters beyond conventional parliamentary barricades.
The project is worth serious experimentation. Sibal will need more shoulders to the wheel to realise Majrooh Sultanpuri’s famous lines: Main akela hi chala tha jaanib-e- manzil magar, log saath aate gaye aur karwan banta gaya (I began the journey by myself, others joined along the way to make it a caravan).
HT’s veteran political editor, Vinod Sharma, brings together his four-decade-long experience of closely tracking Indian politics, his intimate knowledge of the actors who dominate the political theatre, and his keen eye which can juxtapose the past and the present in his weekly column, Distantly Close
The views expressed are personal
Like her globally-renowned but differently-spelt namesake, Gitanjali, a collection of poems whose English translation, Song Offerings, won Gurudev Rabindranath Tagore the Nobel Prize for literature in 1913, Delhi-based Hindi novelist, Geetanjali Shree’s novel, Ret Samadhi, led to her becoming the first Indian to receive the International Booker Prize, with its translation, Tomb of Sand.
She deserves only as much respect as Sir Salman Rushdie, who became the first Indian to win the acclaimed Booker Prize in 1981 for his world-changing Midnight’s Children; her international recognition being on a par with the pioneering achievement of Rushdie. Her conquest of a new plane is bound to give Hindi, and all other Indian languages, a big dash of attention.
Translated by Daisy Rockwell, with whom Ms Shree will split the 50,000 pound ($63,000 approximate) prize money, the novel’s external and internal quest of its octogenarian protagonist, Ma, who must cross the border to Pakistan, has captivated readers, best expressed in the winning announcement of Frank Wynne, the jury chair of the prize, who applauded “…the power, the poignancy and the playfulness of the polyphonic novel of identity and belonging, in Daisy Rockwell’s exuberant, coruscating translation”.
Sadly, not too many of us knew of the 64-year-old writer, whose oeuvre consists of three novels and several collections of short stories, before her win. Not even those who wished to impose Hindi on the entire country had an inkling of her “spellbinding brio and fierce compassion”, whose literary weave has portrayed “…a family and a nation into a kaleidoscopic whole”.
The best things closest to us must still be revealed to us in translation. And with her international recognition, Ms Shree has, perhaps, created a possibility of getting recognised at home, too.
For a nation that barely can distinguish between the annual Booker Prize given to an original English novel, and the International Booker Prize, earlier known as the Man Booker International Prize, given out once in two years for a body of work published in English or available in English translation, it will perhaps be a bit of a wake-up call.
A lot alike the Dreyfus affair, the political scandal that divided France from 1894 for the next 12 years, going on to symbolise miscarriage of justice in the modern European legal system concomitant with then-rampant anti-Semitism, the Aryan Khan drugs case, has exposed a deep, systemic rot in which the common citizen has little power to protect themselves against abuse of power, a rabid media and a brutal society.
After keeping Aryan Khan in custody for 26 days before he finally got bail, a second investigation by the apex drugs-related crime-fighting agency, the Narcotics Control Bureau, finally exonerated Aryan Khan, son of Bollywood superstar Shah Rukh Khan, and five others charged of possessing and using drugs after they were caught during a raid on a yacht in Mumbai on October 2 last year.
The irony of it being the birth anniversary of Mahatma Gandhi, a designated “dry day” across the country in honour of the father of the nation, aside, it was a day when the State and its men in uniform, brutally smothered truth and all notions of fairness when they decided to have a go at Aryan Khan.
No doubt, Aryan Khan was guilty on three counts — firstly, he is young, handsome and rich, caught in a setting of luxury; secondly, he is the son of one of India’s biggest celebrities; and finally, however squeamish and in denial we may opt to be about the ugly truth, he is a Muslim.
The media, especially the electronic media with its farcical prime time debates, had a ball of greater vulgarity and excess than any yacht party could boast of. A perception was created with lies, suggestions, innuendoes and miscontextualisation that he was part of a very large global drug conspiracy and trafficking syndicate. The severe doubts in the prosecution’s case, the denial of bail for so long and the serious irregularities in the procedure raids were totally obfuscated in the people’s court.
Too many people in India too easily believed that they were at a greater threat from an innocent teenager at a party than a system that could frame any citizen at will. Not enough people in India felt that efforts by law enforcement officers and agencies trying to extort money — openly offering threats to “fix” a citizen unless protection money was paid — in a case with no shred of evidence is a larger danger to our democracy.
A special investigation team, which re-looked at the case, has now concluded fairly that there was no evidence for the case against “Master Aryan Khan”, and noted the serious breach of procedure, the calls for extortions and misuse of power.
An NCB team, headed by police officer Sameer Wankhede, which relied on intercepted digital info primarily from WhatsApp chats, went for the kill. Let India know this — if it can happen to Aryan Khan, it can happen to any one of us. We could wake up any moment to run into another extortionist officer, who would create smokescreens and a flimsy case, to be fuelled and amplified into an atmosphere of hatred by a feral media.
It was Alfred Dreyfus over a century ago in France, and Aryan in Mumbai yesterday. Tomorrow, it will be you, anywhere.
The recent stormy Sri Lanka protests reminded me of the near takeover in 1971, which India prevented. Sadly, this successful intervention has been forgotten, possibly because it was overshadowed by the bigger Bangladesh war that year. It was my first foreign assignment.
In April 1971, known only to a small group, an Indian frigate sailed to guard Sri Lanka’s coastline against “foreign” reinforcements to help the JVP, or Sri Lankan National Liberation Front, which had virtually taken over the island. Umesh Mathur was one of the eight pilots to man six helicopters, needed desperately by the island to ferry ammunition to areas where insurgency was intense.
Anuradhpura, the Buddhist heritage site in the middle of the island, was sending desperate messages to the Indian forces’ control room at Galle Face Hotel, where I had also checked in. In those days, Colombo had two premier hotels, Galle Face and Taprobane in the Colombo Fort.
I am kicking myself for having forgotten the name of the brigadier who led the Indian contingent. I tried, but no general I know, including those who served in the Indian Peace-Keeping Force in the 1980s, seemed to remember the occasion when India saved the island. There were other Army officers who helped the brigadier draw up a list of military hardware and details of a contingent to train 5,000 troops. The brigadier was a kindly man who quickly spotted a greenhorn reporter of The Statesman, a newspaper revered by the Army’s top brass. He understood that I was on assignment to cover the insurgency but was confined to the hotel because of a strict 24/7 curfew with shoot-at-sight orders.
He put his finger on the button. I was worried as hell. My first foreign assignment, if covered well, would boost my seniors’ confidence in me and more such assignments would follow. Remember, I am talking of the days when there was considerable fairness in journalism.
To dispel my gloom appeared the figure of the cheerful Mangalorean brigadier approaching me from the far end of the verandah. “In 15 minutes, a helicopter is taking off for Anuradhpura”, he said. “It’s a two-seater and he will fly you”, pointing to the pilot. It was like manna from heaven.
The pilot, Umesh Mathur, tall and fit, was good company because, in the absence of conversation because of earplugs to muffle cockpit noise, he kept pointing out interesting locations below -- police stations under JVP control, for instance.
In about 45 minutes, we were hovering over Anuradhpura, where heavy showers obstructed vision. Suddenly, there was a loud report, like a balloon bursting. The helicopter begins to hurtle down. There was a brisk manoeuvre on Mathur’s part. He tilted the rotors to cushion the air. I say my last prayers just in case. The helicopter came down not with a crash but a thud. It had sunk in the slush created by heavy rains. We survived. But the suspense was not yet over. How near are we to the insurgents. Mathur made radio contact. Within minutes a IAF helicopter is hovering overhead. The Calcutta edition of The Statesman, trained never to lose balance, lost it in this instance. The front-page headline was: “A Copter Crash and I Was in Insurgent Country”.
The drama had begun in Sri Lanka (then called Ceylon) on April 5. When it erupted, it had all the trimmings of an international whodunit. Détente was going badly for the Americans. Stand-up comedians in Washington had their own take: détente was like going to a wife swapping party and returning home alone. Ceylon was not central to the competition of the two superpowers.
In 1971, Richard M. Nixon was US President. He was busy with bigger things, creating Beijing-Washington-Moscow triangular power balances. In totally different circumstances, is that not what the West is attempting now -- to distance Beijing from Moscow as their “friendship without limits” is the West’s nightmare?
The JVP cadres, in their late teens and 20s, fell back for training on an unexpected source: North Korea. The North Koreans had built a cultural centre in Colombo, which was larger than many embassies. On April 5, boys and girls tutored in Korean cells, among others, their ranks swelled by an assortment of bandwagon revolutionaries, graduates and semi- educated unemployed peasants armed with shotguns, bombs, pistols attached police stations across the country. They captured 91 of the 250 police stations. Railway and telecom links were disrupted. That night the insurgents controlled one-fourth of the country.
Why did the JVP not succeed? As often happens with such underground operations, not all the conspirators were of the same stern stuff. There is always a Judas. In this instance, a group of insurgents, told to attack the Wellawaya police station, jumped the gun and launched an attack a day earlier than scheduled -- April 4. This alerted the police.
Prime Minister Sirimavo Bandaranaike told a shocked Cabinet that the insurgents had a plan to assassinate her or, preferably, kidnap her. At 11 pm, about 50 insurgents were to assemble at Temple Tree, the Prime Minister’s residence, storm it and assassinate the PM or kidnap her. This operation was to coincide with the attacks on the police station.
Among the first diplomats to be asked for instant help was India’s high commissioner, Y.K. Puri, the last of the ICS breed. An offer of troops in brigade strength was shouted down by the Opposition. Indian troops in such large numbers would be resented by the people, they felt.
The JVP’s ire, it turned out, was directed against “Western imperialism, Indian expansionism and Soviet revisionism”. In those years, a youth upsurge of diverse hues was the flavour of the season, from Paris to Patna.
From Rahul Gandhi to Amit Shah and Narendra Modi, top national politicians have been making their presence felt in Hyderabad this past month, even as Telangana’s chief minister K. Chandrashekhar Rao was busy testing the national political waters and the city’s poster boy, K.T. Rama Rao, was wooing global investors at the World Economic Forum in Davos. Hyderabad has been in the news across the worlds of politics and business.
The experience is not new. Hyderabad has been used to attracting national and international attention for a long time. However, today it’s on a roll and at the threshold of challenging competing cities like Bengaluru and Chennai, having shot past Kolkata long back as a centre of business, education and research.
Moving from Hyderabad to New Delhi three decades ago I had suggested to the corporate leadership of a national economic daily that had editions coming only out of the four metros, that they should launch a Hyderabad edition. A senior executive was dismissive. “Hyderabad gets the Bombay edition by lunchtime. There isn’t enough advertising and readership in that sleepy city for us to print locally.” It only took a couple of years more and the rise of P.V. Narasimha Rao as Prime Minister for the company to re-examine its decision and launch a city edition.
By the turn of the century, Hyderabad had begun to make its mark in the rapidly emerging businesses of information technology and pharmaceuticals. Till the 1980s, Hyderabad used to be home to many manufacturing industries but had lost ground to Pune and Chennai. More recently it is once again attracting new industries, especially in defence and aerospace.
Sometime in 1998 I received a call from the state’s finance secretary, Duvvuri Subba Rao (later to be governor of the Reserve Bank of India) requesting me to vet a draft of the “Andhra Pradesh: Vision 2020” report prepared by the global consulting firm McKinsey. I was impressed by the boldness of their vision for Hyderabad, but drew attention to the absence of any recognition of the unbalanced nature of the state’s development. By focusing far too much on Hyderabad and neglecting the development lags within the state, the report may well have contributed to the growing feeling of alienation in parts of the erstwhile state of Andhra Pradesh that contributed to its eventual break-up.
The AP Vision 2020 strategy was primarily focused on restoring to Hyderabad its status as a business hub. A status it had enjoyed for centuries. But it ignored the backwardness of the hinterland around. Even today, within the state of Telangana, it is necessary to disperse development to new growth centres, like Warangal and Nizamabad, reduce spending on subsidies but increase public investment in the state’s social and educational development, improving human capability indicators.
The credit for Hyderabad’s emergence as a major urban centre has to be accorded to a succession of state leaders, beginning with Jalagam Vengala Rao, who laid the foundation for business development in and around Hyderabad.
N. Chandrababu Naidu and Y.S. Rajashekhar Reddy built on that foundation. Having decided to focus on Hyderabad’s development, it was natural that the state government built an impressive ring road and a new airport. I was pleasantly surprised when, over two decades ago, I first heard the plan for a new airport at Shamshabad from then chief minister Chandrababu Naidu. We were seated together on a flight from
New Delhi to Hyderabad and the conversation through that journey was centred around Mr Naidu’s plans for the city.
“Draw a straight line from Dubai to Singapore,” Mr Naidu said to me. “Hyderabad is in the middle. We will compete with both cities and both airports. A new airport near Hyderabad will not just be an airport. It will be a business hub.” Two decades later, Mr Naidu’s vision is being fulfilled. The expansion of an already busy airport and the rapid growth of Cyberabad are already taking the Greater Hyderabad metropolis ahead of the peninsular competition.
Every time someone visiting the city asks me where they could buy good pearls I would first ask them whether they had wondered why a land-locked city in the middle of the Deccan plateau had become famous for pearls? The simple answer is that Golkonda-Hyderabad was for centuries a global trading hub. I have elaborated on this theme in my Waheeduddin Khan Memorial Lecture 2007, on “the local and global in Hyderabad’s development”, delivered at the Centre for Economic and Social Studies, Hyderabad.
The more recent and visible spurt in business activity is a tribute to the reassuring vision of both chief minister K. Chandrashekhar Rao and minister K.T. Rama Rao, who set aside their prejudices against what were called “outsiders” and imparted renewed confidence to investors, professionals and workers from across the country that the new state of Telangana was open to all for education, employment, investment and development.
While the Greater Hyderabad region is set to grow into a metropolis, the city needs much better urban governance and municipal administration. It desperately needs green and open spaces, better drainage and traffic management, preservation of heritage buildings and planned development free from the stranglehold of real estate and land mafias that tend to entrench themselves in most rapidly growing cities.
While New Delhi and Mumbai may continue to be at the top, being the political, business and finance capitals of the country, Hyderabad is on the threshold of emerging as the country’s third most developed metropolis, remaining true to its name as the country’s second capital. Not surprisingly, therefore, the Congress Party, that once dominated the region, and the Bharatiya Janata Party, that now dominates national politics, have cast their eyes on Hyderabad, seeking to challenge the Telangana Rashtra Samiti.
Hopefully, the intense three-way political competition between a resurgent Congress, an assertive BJP and a defensive TRS will not further vitiate the city’s largely inclusive culture and liberal environment. While Hyderabad has in the past experienced communal tensions and regional politics have been impacted by caste loyalties, this rising metropolis will hopefully retain its charming cosmopolitan character, that has for centuries contributed to its openness to global talent and opportunity.
India’s Union of States has now reached a critical impasse. Its diversity bound together by the Constitution that was meant to make us a modern, democratic and secular state based on equality and the equal availability of justice, education, healthcare and social services, and division of government based on functions is now under a grave challenge. India was never intended to be a saffron-hued monochromatic state, but a multi-ethnic, multi-cultural and multi-lingual state whose diversity made it a nation as never before. Its demographics compound its problems by threatening to swamp the non-Hindi/Hindutva belt into a saffronised dominion.
Each state in India is a veritable nation and hence maintaining the balance of political and economic power between them is critical. The delimitation exercise that is now underway will reduce the weightage in Parliament of the states that did better on giving their people a better quality and standard of life, and hence curbed the population. States which performed poorly by relation will be rewarded by the delimitation with more places in Parliament.
We need a permanent freeze of all parliamentary constituencies. The delimitation must stop. We have entered the new technologically driven age and the quality of education will determine the outcome of societies.
The centrally administered system of higher education has largely failed and the quality of education is now left much to be desired. The whole of education must be made a state subject. The jurisdiction of the AICTE and UGC over the states should end. The national need is for upgraded medical, legal and social sciences education. The states must be made to compete with each other in the quality of education and not be bound down by a centrally administered mediocrity.
True federalism can only be achieved when the states achieve greater fiscal autonomy. This simply means the states must have more financial means. At present the states are supposed to get about 42 per cent of tax revenues, as per the Finance Commission’s recommendations. There is a tendency towards a greater concentration of resources with the Central government. The ratio of tax revenues should progressively go up till it reaches 66 per cent of the tax revenues gathered. The allocation to the states must be made on a composite index of revenue contributed, population and distance from the mean. We also increasingly see the Central government withholding the sums due to the states, and using legitimate state incomes to finance itself. We need to evolve a system of pay at source to ensure that the states fulfil their plans and commitments to the people in time. Delayed payments to the states should also entail interest charges at the RBI’s prime lending rates.
Our nation has a varied history and each of our regions have unique historical and cultural resources. These are largely expressed in our monuments and art treasures. The Central government through the Archaeological Survey of India has done a poor job of protecting and maintaining them. Vandals have destroyed ASI protected sites with impunity. Since all our states and regions have their own distinct culture and history, the protection and maintenance of connection with the past should be the responsibility of each state. The state resources of the ASI must be transferred to each and every state immediately. There is also a visible tendency of the ASI and the ministry of culture to focus on certain regions for narrow ideological reasons.
The procurement under MSP is now restricted to a few states and regions. This procurement, which actually amounts to a subsidy, should be allocated to the states based on their agricultural acreages.
Since cereals account for the bulk of our foodgrain production and are nationally grown, at the first stage a guaranteed MSP procurement should be assured to all states. If the Centre thinks that proportionate procurement under MSP may not be feasible for all states, it should make compensatory grants in lieu of it.
Hydrocarbon fuels contribute to a fifth of air pollution now. In addition, the indiscriminate use of cheap plastics for packaging and disposals irretrievably damages natural water resources, clogs natural and man-made water drainage.
A new tariff regime is called for on raw materials for single use and disposable plastics. We must also encourage the conversion to electric and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles for personal transportation with a tax-free regime to incentivise their use.
The non-Gangetic regions are rich in mineral resources such as coal, iron ore, alumina, copper, zinc, nickel, etc. These natural resources naturally belong to the people below whose land they exist. Therefore, all mineral exploitation rights and revenues should devolve to the states.
Recruitment into the armed forces and paramilitary forces tend to get concentrated into certain regions. The military, in particular, with its limited tenures, followed by lifetime pension and benefits tenure, delivers concentrated benefits to the so-called martial nationalities.
The oldest infantry regiment of the Indian Army is the Madras Regiment, headquartered in Wellington in the Nilgiris, with 21 battalions. Its catchment area is the whole of South India, comprising almost 270 million people or 22 per cent of all Indians.
The Sikh Regiment, which is a one-class regiment drawn from a population base of about eight million, has 22 infantry battalions. If you add up all the essentially Punjab-based regiments, we will have almost 74 battalions drawn from a state which has a population of about 30 million.
This is a disproportionate representation in an institution that offers our rural youth the finest employment. The nation needs to increase recruitment into the armed forces from other regions.
Both print and electronic media are capital intensive and are controlled by the Central government and big business interests. Radio news, which still reaches the majority of Indians, is still entirely controlled by the Central government. We must open this up to local players, particularly on the FM bands. What can’t be understood is that when news can be got on print and television from private and public sources, why can’t the large numbers who depend on radio for information not get it from private channels and state governments?
India’s unity must be based on equal respect to all its nationalities and denominations. Any attempt to transform a political bouquet of states bound together by the Constitution, giving voice and space to each of its peoples instead of turning it into a monochromatic and centralised monolith, will only lead to the collapse of the original idea and the breakup of the Union.