Editorials - 04-09-2022

What is family? Is it the cousins you grew up playing with at grandparents’ homes but now see once in five years because life gets in the way? Or is it the neighbour you bonded with over two years of Covid, who came through at a terrible moment when no one else could?

In a verdict that held that a working woman cannot be denied her statutory right to maternity leave for her biological child just because she availed of it for her stepchild earlier, the Supreme Court made significant observations about changing family dynamics in India. The SC acknowledged that “atypical” families — single parents, unmarried partnerships and queer relationships — are deserving of protection under the law, and of benefits available under social welfare regulation. In a bench presided over by Justices D Y Chandrachud and A S Bopanna, the order noted, “The black letter of the law must not be relied upon to disadvantage families which are different from traditional ones. The same undoubtedly holds true for women who take on the role of motherhood in ways that may not find a place in popular imagination,” said Justice Chandrachud.

The stereotypical idea of a ‘complete’ family in India has always been a mother, a father and two children (ideally, a girl and a boy). Needless to say, this entrenched belief excludes a whole lot of citizens: singles, people with disabilities, divorcees and the entire LGBTQ community, who have simply accepted that it’s their lot in life to be treated like freaks. Growing up in the 90s, I’ve lost count of the number of people who would baulk in amazement when I’d tell them I don’t have siblings, so one can only imagine what somebody actually leading an alternative lifestyle is up against.

Perhaps, the enduring image of ‘family’ etched in our collective memories comes from the Hum Do Hamare Do population control campaign, plastered on the sides of buses and hoardings, all the way back when Mrs Gandhi was prime minister. Or, the fact that the joint family system (three generations living together) is still thriving. However, in our heads, it’s about time the definition of family was broadened to reflect modern realities, especially since legislation supports it: the apex court decriminalised homosexuality in 2018 and live-in couples in some states have legal rights.

What is family? Is it the cousins you grew up playing with at grandparents’ homes but now see once in five years because life gets in the way? Or is it the neighbour you bonded with over two years of Covid, who came through at a terrible moment when no one else could? Is it the colleagues you meet daily, or the buddies you make while you train together for marathons? For people who have moved cities for work, friends fill the space once occupied by siblings and may be just as important. As one gets older, a shared ancestry means nothing if that’s all there is in common.

A younger generation has made the startling discovery that the label of ‘family’ needn’t necessarily be limited to bonds of blood and sacrament (which in India, in any case, are contaminated by exhausting power differentials within the clan). It’s no surprise that young adults prefer the company of their contemporaries who wield no authority over them, whom they can meet as equals. That the Supreme Court recognises that deep connections can come after early missteps is important, even for those smugly ensconced in socially sanctioned relationships; because death and divorce can happen to anyone.

Postmodern sociologists have a more realistic approach to relationships and extend the concept of family to include anyone an individual feels close to, including pets. Let’s face it, the term ‘familial obligations’ came along because it’s questionable how much value long-lost relatives add to our lives. Besides, why should the people we gravitate towards naturally figure on a lesser plane? It’s interesting to note, two of the most memorable movies out of Bollywood, 3 Idiots and Zindagi Na Milegi Dobara are about best friends coming of age, with complicated parental relationships going on in the background. It’s a universal theme, rather fantasy, if only our family understood us like our friends.

The writer is director, Hutkay Films



Read in source website

P Chidambaram writes: The crucial question is what are the implications for the future, especially for employment. The status of farmers and farm labour will remain the same and there will be little movement to non-farm jobs

The NSO’s estimates of GDP for the first quarter (April-June) 2022-23 were released last Wednesday. The number that is prominent is the growth rate of 13.5 per cent. In terms of Gross Value Addition (GVA), the number is 12.7 per cent. Given that the estimates of rating agencies, banks and the RBI ranged from 13 per cent to 16.2 per cent (RBI), any number falling within that range would, I suppose, be enough to gloat!

However, there is a large world beyond statistics. This essay is about what the NSO numbers mean to millions of people who live in the real world and who will be happy and who will be unhappy.

I have constructed a Table (see box) containing the corresponding figures for 2019-20 and 2021-22 and added the numbers for the first quarter of 2022-23. Since 2020-21 was the pandemic-hit year that witnessed prolonged lockdowns, I have not included that year’s numbers in the Table. I may point out that 2019-20 was a normal year. 2021-22 was the year touted as the recovery-year. 2022-23 is the year in which one hoped there will be a full-fledged recovery. So, the focus should be on the numbers for 2019-20, 2021-22 and 2022-23.

Further, the numbers must be viewed from the point of the people who will be affected by the performance of the sector concerned.  For example, ‘Agriculture, Forestry & Fishing’ affects the lives of a majority of families in the country. ‘Mining & Quarrying’ and ‘Construction’ are important because the two sectors employ the largest number of workers who have low skills and little school education. ‘Financial, Real Estate & Professional Services’ is important because it employs the educated and skilled white-collar employees.

The bench mark year is 2019-20.  A country that is growing must grow at a brisk rate over and above the previous year and the bench mark year.

It is evident from the GVA figures that while the economy did recover in 2021-22 over the abysmal performance in the pandemic year (2020-21), sectoral growth did not reach the level of output in the normal year, 2019-20 — except in agriculture.

Therein lies a poignant lesson: pandemic or no pandemic, farmers and farm labour have no choice but to toil in their fields to earn for their survival. They do not have the luxury of Work-From-Home! (The marginal increase in ‘Financial etc.’ was statistically insignificant.)

Not Out of Woods

Therefore, the growth that we must look for in 2022-23 is not the growth over 2021-22, but the growth over 2019-20. The last two rows of the Table highlight the difference. While the growth in Q1 of 2022-23 is impressive when compared to Q1 of the previous year (2021-22), it is worrying when compared to Q1 of the bench mark year (2019-20). ‘Agriculture etc.’ seems to have retained its spirit. The pick-up in ‘Financial, Real Estate etc.’ is encouraging. But the other three sectors in the Table tell the story of an economy that is not yet out of the woods.

I had not put ‘Manufacturing’ in the Table because I did not want those numbers lost in a forest of numbers. The value addition in ‘Manufacturing’ in Q1 of the three relevant years were: Rs 565,526, 577,249 and 605,104 crore. In terms of growth, Q1 of 2022-23 recorded a growth of 7 per cent over 2019-20 and 4.8 per cent over 2021-22. My conclusion is that manufacturing growth is still sluggish because of inadequate new investment or low demand or both. Intuitively, I conclude that the MSME sector is still in the doldrums.

Slow Start

The crucial question is what are the implications for the future, especially for employment. The status of farmers and farm labour will remain the same and there will be little movement to non-farm jobs. Since ‘Mining etc.’ and ‘Construction’ are only slightly better than in 2019-20, unless there is a strong revival, unemployment among unskilled and low-skilled workers will be high. The steps taken by the government to boost manufacturing are apparently insufficient and have failed to revive the MSME sector. The opportunities for skilled, white collar workers are growing but a major part of the Services sector (‘Trade, Hotels etc.’) is yet to revive, thereby dampening job opportunities. (Note: the unemployment rate in August rose to 8.3 per cent.)

The RBI had estimated the quarter-wise growth in 2022-23 as 16.2, 6.2, 4.1 and 4.0 per cent. Note that it is a declining graph. We have started the first quarter with 13.5 per cent — lower than RBI’s estimate. What does this slow start foretell about the remaining three quarters?



Read in source website

The British started collecting censuses in 1871 and recorded Kunbi as a caste prevalent in Maharashtra. Later, the British government divided Indian society into three main classes -- Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, and the rest as intermediate classes.

Against the backdrop of the worst kind of social discrimination in the Hindu society, Chhatrapati Shahu Maharaj of Kolhapur made legally constitutional provisions for reservation in the state and private sector in July 1902. This was probably the first time a state ruler actively made social justice policies for his subjects. The base for this reservation was due to the prevalence of the caste system and its discriminatory structure supported by religious texts.

Chhatrapati Shahu Maharaj rejected this brutality premised on exploiting the poor. To create and strengthen social fraternity absent in Hindu society, he made laws that brought equality by giving reservations to the downtrodden. While doing so, he excluded those castes and classes who had enjoyed privileges and progressed based on the caste system. Thus Brahmins, Kayasthas, Shenvis and Parsis were excluded from the benefits of reservation.

The rest of the castes or classes from all the religions were included in the reservation list. This included the Maratha caste. This was the first reservation offered to the Marathas as a backward caste. It means Marathas and the rest of the non-Brahmin castes were treated backwards.

The British started collecting censuses in 1871 and recorded Kunbi as a caste prevalent in Maharashtra. Later, the British government divided Indian society into three main classes — Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, and the rest as intermediate classes.

On April 5, 1942, the Government of Bombay prepared a list of the reservation that recorded Maratha and Kunbi castes in the intermediate classes list. This list also included Mali, Teli, Lohar, Vanjari, Shimpi, and Dhangar, among a host of 228 castes presently included in Maharashtra State Other Backward Classes list. However, only Marathas were excluded from the list in 1950 without providing any substantial reason. Since then, many Maratha organisations have demanded reservations. In 1991, the Maratha Seva Sangh demanded an OBC status for the Marathas. From time to time, different commissions were also appointed to study the issue without any conclusive results. The reasons are mainly political and not social or legal. It is the misfortune of the Marathas that none of their strong leaders is in favour of the Maratha OBC reservation. I don’t blame any OBC leader for this. Marathas have been sequestered apart from OBC, which is unconstitutional. Presently, the issue of Maratha reservation is pending in the Supreme Court.

Who is a Maratha? Anthropologically, there is no singularity in Maratha as an isolated caste. Maratha is a confederation of several Marathi-speaking castes. In addition to the language, those people who lived in Maharashtra were defined as Marathas. The society was primarily agrarian. Thus, the ones who engaged in agriculture came to be known as Kunbis, Maratha Mali, Maratha Teli, Maratha Mahar, Maratha Kumbhar, etc.

Around the 16th century, Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj established Swarajya, which came to be known as Maratheshahi — the rule of the Marathas. This event led to the separation of Marathas as a ruling and socially and economically developed caste. However, the British government did not recognise them. They called them Kunbi till about 1920. Their status as peasant cultivators, landowners, and soldiers made a difference between a Maratha and Kunbi, while their ancestry was the same. The Mandal Commission kept Marathas away and recognised Kunbis as separate, preferring etymology as an identifier instead of social history.

The Indian Constitution has recommended reservations for SC, ST and OBC. Social and educational backwardness is the base for OBC reservation. Marathas are treated as socially forward. However, no special drive was undertaken to upgrade Marathas while doing so. Unfortunately, during the 1960s, a few Maratha leaders and organisations wrongly opposed the overall reservation system. This was purposely widely spread by the Opposition, leading to inculcating the anti-Maratha sentiment in the minds of intellectuals and the judicial lobby, which still works.

The division of agricultural land over several generations, increase in family members, reductions in land holdings, low prices of agricultural commodities and increased expenses have led to the worst social, economical, and educational status among Marathas and other agrarian communities.

The writer is the founder and president of Maratha Seva Sangh

Suraj Yengde, author of Caste Matters, curates the fortnightly ‘Dalitality’ column



Read in source website

Tavleen Singh writes: What really will be achieved by sending Congress leaders, old and young, on a long walk for the next five months? The answer is nothing that will bring it any closer to vanquishing the BJP juggernaut.

If you have read this column more than once, you must know that I am no fan of the Dynasty but to tell you the truth, these tweets and this ‘yatra’ have made me almost feel sorry for Sonia and family. It is hard to believe that with so many veteran political leaders available as advisors plus Rahul Gandhi’s ‘coterie’ of newbie politicians, something as outdated as a ‘padyatra’ was all that they could conjure up as an idea to help the Congress Party regain relevance. It is odd that they do not realise that in the five or six months that it will take for this journey to be completed, the Lok Sabha election will begin to loom ominously close.

Instead of wasting time walking around India, it would be wiser for senior Congress leaders to stay in Delhi and concentrate their energies on coming up with real ideas on how they can battle Narendra Modi’s electoral juggernaut next time around. If I am showing unusual concern about the revival of the Congress Party, it is because we badly need an opposition party that offers India a real choice between pluralism and secularism and the religiosity and angry nationalism that the BJP offers.

The ‘padyatra’ is an exercise in futility. I say this from the experience of having walked some distance with Chandrashekhar on his ‘padyatra’ in 1983. By the end of the day the leader was nearly always too tired to meet local people or try and understand their problems. This is bound to happen this time as well and at a time when the Congress Party is at its lowest point. Not for want of walking long distances but for want of real introspection. Only from introspection can come new ideas.

In the past eight years that the Congress Party has sat in opposition and despite having lost two general elections, there have been no more than cosmetic attempts to understand what led to these massive electoral defeats. Eight years should have been a long enough time for the party’s senior leaders to honestly examine the reasons why the people of India no longer show enough interest in their ideas or their leaders to give them their votes.

Here is a short list of reasons why. The Dynasty’s ‘charisma’ is not strong enough to lure voters because Indian voters no longer vote just because they like some political leader’s face. They vote for leaders they hope will be able to fulfil their aspirations. It is not for nothing that Modi’s election speeches are filled with the numbers of people who have been given toilets, gas connections, drinking water, bank accounts, free insurance, and homes. The reason why he won a second term was because voters were convinced that he had delivered on most of these fronts.

Congress leaders grumble that all he has done is run more efficiently welfare programmes that were devised by the party’s matriarch. This is true but have the party’s veterans sat down ever to work out why the party could not deliver on its own programmes? If welfarism and aggressive nationalism are Modi’s trump cards, then the Congress Party must relearn efficient welfarism and reclaim nationalism.

As the party that used nationalism to win India freedom, it is bizarre that it is the BJP that is now seen as the embodiment of Indian nationalism. It is not just new political ideas that the Congress Party needs but new economic ideas as well. Rahul Gandhi’s economic ideas are as outdated as the ‘padyatra’. He sounds like an old-fashioned Marxist when he abuses ‘Modi’s rich friends.’ Indian businessmen are not criminals but creators of wealth and jobs.

The Congress Party has one card with which Modi can never compete and this is the card of pluralism and real secularism. This is the giant chink in the BJP’s electoral juggernaut and while other ‘secular’ parties have made attempts to take advantage of it, the Congress Party’s attempts have been pathetically feeble. This has enabled Modi to change the subject and use the chink in the Congress Party’s armour to his advantage by banging on about ‘parivarvaad’. When the scions of the Dynasty are seen on this ‘padyatra’, the BJP will most certainly make more noise about hereditary democracy than ever before, and it is more than likely that the man sleeping in that container will be seen as an entitled prince instead of a modern politician.

So, what really will be achieved by sending Congress leaders, old and young, on a long walk for the next five months? The answer is nothing that will bring it any closer to vanquishing the BJP juggernaut.



Read in source website

The contempt petitions against Kalyan Singh and several others were filed in April 1992, months before the demolition took place. Aslam Bhure, the petitioner, had been flagging snowballing activity on the disputed site.

Last week, the Supreme Court drew the curtains on nearly three-decade old contempt proceedings arising out of the 1992 demolition of the Babri Masjid against officials of the Uttar Pradesh administration and some Sangh Parivar leaders, saying nothing survives in the matter. With the petitioner Aslam Bhure and several respondents, including former UP chief minister Kalyan Singh, dead, the three-judge bench headed by Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul asked itself why “flog a dead horse”. In the same breath, the court admitted its own failure and said it was “unfortunate” that the case was not taken up earlier. The acknowledgement is a reminder of the judiciary’s role in the Babri demolition.

The contempt petitions against Kalyan Singh and several others were filed in April 1992, months before the demolition took place. Aslam Bhure, the petitioner, had been flagging snowballing activity on the disputed site. Lawyers who appeared in the case, including M M Kashyap, Bhure’s advocate, recall that the case was heard on a daily basis between September and November 1992. Many of those hearings incidentally happened in the same Court number 3 where the case was finally disposed of last week.

On November 28, 1992, in a judgment passed on a Saturday, the bench of Justices M N Venkatachaliah and G N Ray allowed what the Uttar Pradesh government called in sworn affidavits as a “symbolic kar-sewa” from 6-12 December that year. Letters from BJP MPs Swami Chinmayanand and Vijayaraje Scindia, along with an affidavit from UP’s Home Secretary, were submitted to the court, allaying fears of any construction activity. Attorney General for India K K Venugopal, who was then the senior advocate representing the UP government, told the court of the “markedly reassuring and eminently appropriate progress in the mood of the situation”. It had also relied on reports of its own observer who had faxed a report to the court that there was no construction material on the site.

Despite the assurances, when the domes of the Babri Masjid started falling under the watch of the state government on December 6, lawyers and journalists rushed to inform Justice Venkatachaliah. At 5 pm that day, an urgent sitting of the Supreme Court was held at the residence of Justice Venkatachaliah that went on till 9 pm. The allegations made by the petitioners were not disputed by the state governments lawyers Venugopal and Adarsh Goel (later Supreme Court judge and now Chairperson of the National Green Tribunal). Venugopal then withdrew himself from the case. But with then Attorney General Milon Banerjee informing the judges that President’s rule was imposed in Uttar Pradesh, the court concluded the order with a line that “no further orders are required”.

On December 18, the SC suo motu issued contempt notices and was in a hurry to hear the case. It took three months for Kalyan Singh and six other respondents to file their replies. But after that, the contempt petitions were not taken up by the court. With the case being initiated by the court itself, copies of the affidavits remained with the court alone. Meanwhile, Justice Venkatachaliah took over as the CJI and on his last working day, on October 24, 1994, delivered a judgment holding Kalyan Singh guilty of “flagrant breach” of his undertaking to the Supreme Court and sentenced him to a one-day imprisonment. This was for allowing a platform to be constructed despite the status quo order in July 1992. The same day, the SC, in a 3:2 verdict, upheld the constitutional validity of The Acquisition of Certain Areas of Ayodhya Act, 1993, under which the 67.703 acres of land adjoining Babri Masjid was acquired. Justice J S Verma wrote the majority opinion which included CJI Venkatachaliah and Justice G N Ray. The two minority judges — Justices Sam Piroj Bharucha and AM Ahmedi — had struck down the validity of the land acquisition.

The contempt case for the Babri demolition was to be “taken up later” but was not listed even once between 1994 and 2000. Case records show that the contempt petitions did come up for hearing once in 2000 but were adjourned. When Bhure died in 2010, his lawyers had no instructions to even seek a date from the court. By then, the title dispute of the disputed land reached the Supreme Court and the hearings took a new direction.

When asked why the contempt for Babri demolition was never taken up for hearing, Venkatachaialah had cited problems of the office of the CJI in prioritising cases for listing. Thirty years later, the case saw its day in court as CJI UU Lalit made a bid to solve the listing issue.

The case is a sobering reminder that the Supreme Court has not stayed away from the tugs and pulls of the political realities of the day. In closing the case without a hearing at all, the SC left many questions unanswered.



Read in source website

Vamsee Juluri writes: Videos of Hindus being insulted and attacked for their identity expose outrageously false claims made by a section of American academia about the history of Hinduphobia

It is of course unsurprising that even as anti-Hinduphobia activists felt heard, at last, other academicians and lobbyists continued to prevaricate. Somehow, even the glaring video evidence that showed strangers assaulting Hindus for simply being Hindus with recognisable anti-Hindu slurs and slogans, was not sufficient to move them from their beliefs.

“Look, this (anti-Hindu hate) is what you (“Hindu Nationalists”) have given rise to,” is what their blame-the-victim reaction sounded like, with not a word of contrition for their own role in normalising severe anti-Hindu hate speech in social media all these years.

American academia, or at least the part of it which has made outrageously false claims about the history of Hinduphobia in the past, needs to change at least now.

First, the near-universal view in this group of academic experts (and their journalistic allies), that the term “Hinduphobia” is a recent coinage of the “Hindu Right”, has been shown to be incorrect. Sarah Gates, a doctoral student in cultural studies and founder of Hindu Human Rights Australia, has documented the use of the term “Hinduphobia” starting with anti-colonial writing in British newspapers as early as the 1860s — long before “Hindu Nationalism” was even a thing. “Hinduphobia” was always in use by writers (Western and Indian), to describe anti-Hindu prejudice as it existed, nothing more, either from British Christianity or South Asian Islam.

Yet, no South Asia studies scholar writing about Hindus or Hindutva has acknowledged this history of the term’s usage.

Second, while falsely attributing the origins of the term to the wrong century and to the wrong ideologies (“Hindu Nationalism” instead of “anti-imperialism”), defenders of this dogma have also continued a deplorable practice in academia of whitewashing the history of anti-Hindu hatred and violence through propagandistic tactics. (Tactics documented meticulously by Sitaram Goel and Arun Shourie among others, and rendered into a powerful story about the neo-colonial Indian state’s war on memory and indeed reality, in S L Bhyrappa’s novel Aavarana.)

From the words of the hagiographers of early Islamic iconoclasm to the words of the random South Asian American in a cafe who spews spit and anti-Hindu terms like “cow-piss” on a stranger, the evidence is obvious. There are ideas, words, phrases, and most of all, actions, that attest to the existence of specifically anti-Hindu bigotry in this world, whether the Hindu was despised as “Pagan,” “Kafir,” or more recently, as a mostly dishonestly constructed “Hindu Nationalist” bogey.

Simply put, the claim that apologists and enablers of anti-Hindu hate in the American academy hide behind, that Hinduphobia is used by Hindu nationalist groups to deflect valid criticism of the Indian government, is grossly exaggerated. Could an academician, or even a school child in today’s liberal, anti-racist educational culture, truly believe that a phrase like “cow-piss-drinker” somehow makes a distinction between an average Hindu and a politician or political party? How about “idol-worshipper”? Or “shrik” or “jahil”? Terms like this have been used by mass murderers and suicide bombers — and by academicians and journalists.

But I am not without hope for academia to mend its ways. I know many scholars who have ended up in this ignoble position out of a misplaced understanding about what it means to be in a “good fight” (against what they call Hindu nationalism but inevitably sounds like they mean just Hinduism). I think it would not be too difficult for anyone, in academia, university administration, government, or the US Hindu community, to cross-examine the lists and claims made about Hinduphobia and Hindu nationalism in recent times and arrive at something like a broad consensus in good faith.

There are now at least a few peer-reviewed publications (including one of my own) from scholars that have sought to engage with the idea of Hinduphobia, and to identify the tropes and conventions of anti-Hindu hate in media and social media. Surely, universities, schools, media houses, and even corporate HR divisions can use these works to operationalise anti-Hinduphobia policies along a three-fold division of terms and ideas: Language that is clearly expressed as a criticism of Indian government policies and positions (not Hinduphobia), language that is clearly using weaponised hate speech against Hindus for being Hindus/Kafirs/Pagans (Hinduphobia), and language or positions that are perhaps more ambiguous and in the middle.

This hasn’t been done until now because neither the gatekeepers of the ivory tower, nor, regrettably, some of the self-styled Hindu American organisations professing to fight Hinduphobia, have sought to build on scholarly work on Hinduphobia. Instead, each has proclaimed its own glossaries about either Hinduphobia or Hindu nationalism, without admitting the existence of the positions of the other.

To conclude, Hinduphobia is a reality, and Hindus’ concerns about it need to be addressed, as much by political groups that ride on such Hindu concerns as by their opponents (who seem lost in the incredible delusion that by spreading anti-Hindu hatred they will somehow make the “Hindu Nationalist” party they hate lose its appeal among Hindu supporters!)

I hope that both sides can broaden their minds, and their hearts, and see the bigger picture. Hindu survival in a world where almost every one of its 200 countries has turned its back long ago on its ancestral and indigenous religions, almost always under duress, is not a mere fictional grievance of either a demographic majority (in India) or an allegedly privileged minority (in America). It is a question that every Hindu, or at least every Hindu who notices temples, trees, deities, languages, cultural and artistic lineages, nature, life, everything, being destroyed, very, very quickly, is thinking about today.

The writer is professor of media studies at the University of San Francisco

This article first appeared in the print edition on September 5, 2022, under the title, ‘Minority Report’



Read in source website

As an emerging global player, India must find ways to reprise its role as a major power in South Asia and the Indo-Pacific. Playing a global role requires considering trade-offs and increased influence. While that does not mean sacrificing national interests, it does require taking a broader perspective.

India-Pakistan relations are complicated. However, the current situation - one-third of Pakistan under water, thousands dead, millions displaced, and a conservative reconstruction estimate of $10 billion - calls for some out-of-the-box thinking. Narendra Modi's outreach, and calls from within the Pakistan establishment to reach out to India, have not exactly found favour with Pakistan's PM Shehbaz Sharif, despite the growing need for India's involvement.

As an emerging global player, India must find ways to reprise its role as a major power in South Asia and the Indo-Pacific. Playing a global role requires considering trade-offs and increased influence. While that does not mean sacrificing national interests, it does require taking a broader perspective. Modi's outreach to flood victims in Pakistan provides India that opportunity of taking the higher road, both morally as well as diplomatically. India should approach the idea of providing aid and assistance to Pakistan at this critical juncture not as a measure that will normalise bilateral relationships - it won't - or for Pakistan to stop providing haven for terror activities against India. Instead, New Delhi should act because that is what great powers do at moments of humanitarian crisis.

Taking a leaf from its own past and from its partners in the West, India can act through international agencies involved in providing assistance and addressing the crisis in Pakistan. India did this during the pandemic, when it supplied vaccines to Pakistan via the global vaccine alliance Gavi. India can also contribute to the effort by drawing international attention for a just and equitable tackling of the impacts of climate change. It must not be seen as sitting this one out.

<

Read in source website

Engineering goods and textiles continued to be under pressure amid a global economic slowdown, although refined petroleum and drugs improved their performance. Electronics exports have also been holding out.

Merchandise trade may have reached a point of inflection with exports, imports and the trade deficit all declining from recent peaks. Official figures released for August last week show exports at $33 billion declining after revised data for July set right a marginal contraction. Imports also posted their first sequential decline during the month at $61.68 billion while the trade deficit eased to $28.68 billion from $31.02 billion in July.

Exports shrank 1.15% in August over the same month a year ago. Imports, on the other hand, continued to clock strong growth rates at 36.78%. In the five months of this fiscal year, imports have grown 45.64%, year on year, to $317.81 billion while exports have clocked 17.12% to $192.59 billion, with the trade deficit more than doubling to $125.22 billion.

Engineering goods and textiles continued to be under pressure amid a global economic slowdown, although refined petroleum and drugs improved their performance. Electronics exports have also been holding out. Crude oil and coal imports kept up their eye-watering pace, but gold imports were down sharply. Inbound shipments of machinery, indicative of the demand recovery underway in India, grew marginally slower than in the prior month. The government expects its full-year merchandise export target of $450 billion to be met, and the widening of the current account deficit (CAD) during the fiscal year is seen to be within manageable levels. The rupee will, however, keep trending down if it continues to track trade fundamentals as capital flows seek refuge in advanced economy debt.

Expectations are rising about a set of trade facilitation measures to get around the adverse external environment. India has done well in merchandise trade through improved market access and incentives to manufacturing as the global economy emerged from the clutches of the Covid-19 pandemic. A policy push at this juncture could be a workaround for a controlled currency depreciation.
<

Read in source website

The first week of the new Chief Justice of India (CJI), Uday Umesh Lalit, has seen a flurry of activity in the Supreme Court (SC). The apex court, which was dogged by rising pendency of cases and irregular listing of some petitions, has disposed of 1,800 cases in the first four days of his tenure, this newspaper reported last week. In addition, CJI Lalit called a meeting of the full court — where all judges are present — where ways to fine-tune the justice delivery mechanism were discussed, constituted 25 Constitution benches to take up issues with far-reaching legal, social and political implications, and signalled that the top court was ready to not only reduce the pendency of cases, but also to take up any new matter that came before it expeditiously. “The Supreme Court will try to dispose of as much as you are capable of bringing before it,” CJI Lalit said in a lecture last week.

This is a welcome development. It shows that though pendency of cases is a chronic problem with India’s legal system that requires structural fixes and support from all stakeholders, gains can be made through more transparent, disciplined processes and administrative tweaks. This is especially important because during the tenure of the previous CJI, NV Ramana, the pendency of cases rose in the top court from 67,000 to 71,400, though this may be partially attributed to two pandemic-affected years. In a country where the courts often have to be the final arbiters of matters familial to national, a strong signal of efficiency, productivity and discipline from the top court is certain to percolate down the judicial branch and help citizens access justice better, and faster.

Three things merit notice. One, to sustain the momentum generated by this first week, CJI Lalit will need the help and support of not only his fellow judges but also the legal fraternity. Two, to achieve lasting change, the process of listing cases and the reasons behind them have to be freed from the shroud of opacity and arbitrariness. This need for transparency is urgent and important because clearer guidelines on how cases are listed will go a long way in helping citizens access justice. And three, a focus on administrative efficiency has to strike a balance with the careful deliberation that every case needs. India’s top court handles a multitude of cases that range from governments taking up constitutional issues to ordinary citizens who see the judiciary as their last recourse on matters of life and death. Its role as the final arbiter, therefore, demands that every case be given consideration and every petitioner their day in court.



Read in source website

The India-Bangladesh Summit this week will be a key opportunity for both countries to take stock of their relations following the disruption caused by the pandemic. Bangladesh occupies a key place in India’s “Neighbourhood First” policy and both the Indian prime minister (PM) and president visited Dhaka last year for the celebrations marking Bangladesh’s 50th anniversary of independence. The two sides have maintained their focus on connectivity initiatives, including those that benefit India’s northeastern states, and a host of projects aimed at boosting trade and investment. During Bangladesh PM Sheikh Hasina’s visit, the two sides are expected to finalise arrangements and sign agreements in areas ranging from defence cooperation to sharing of river waters and trade. Bangladesh is a key regional partner, not just for trade and transit arrangements but also for the security of the northeastern states, which were, in the past, troubled by insurgent groups operating from bases on Bangladeshi soil. Bangladesh has also emerged as India’s largest source of tourists, including tens of thousands of people who come to the country for medical treatment.

Indian and Bangladeshi leaders can often be heard referring to the current phase of bilateral relations as a shonali odhyay or golden chapter. But there is also a growing realisation on both sides of the need to take the relationship to the next level, especially ahead of the national elections in Bangladesh in 2023 and in India in 2024. Bangladesh’s economic achievements have served as an example to others in the region, though the country has turned to the International Monetary Fund and cut back on imports as part of the response to hardships brought on by the Ukraine crisis. India, on the other hand, still has much to gain from connectivity and trade initiatives with Bangladesh, but has to be careful not to give rise to an impression that such measures only benefit New Delhi. In striking a balance in this mutual agenda of interests will lie the path for further bolstering of ties.



Read in source website

It had been a rainy evening, and the downpour had soaked all of us deep inside. While this was going on, my friend’s literary and vivacious wife began to say, “How hypocritical are people here that they term suicide as an act of cowardice. How can people who put up with pain caused by their own actions be labelled cowards? For this, a lot of courage is required.” Her remark reminded me of the National Crime Records Bureau’s most recent report. The number of suicides in India has increased by 7.2% in the most recent year, i.e. 2021. During this time, more than 164,000 suicide cases were reported. The number of suicides has increased since 1967.

Were the people who died by suicide bravehearts?

A careful examination of the data reveals that this argument has no foundation at all. It is true that every human being has a proclivity for self-harm. According to the data, the number of men forced to end their lives due to financial difficulties has seen an unprecedented increase. Daily wage workers make up the majority of this group. This category accounted for more than a quarter of all suicides.

Not only that, suicidal tendencies have increased in people who want to achieve financial affluence through self-employment. This category accounts for 12.3% of the total cases, which is an astounding figure. Domestic violence and discord, too, have emerged as leading causes of suicide. Is the concept of a nuclear family destroying marriages?

Many sociologists agree that India has done an excellent job of eradicating poverty since 1991, but along with it there has also been a significant increase in aspirations. Since the agricultural system was unable to feed the large population of our villages, people were forced to migrate at an alarming rate to cities and metropolises for jobs. This continuous cycle upends the “value system” of a large segment of the population. This is also a major cause of the rise in depression. In mid-2020, a survey conducted by health platform GOQII using cutting-edge smart technology discovered that 43% of Indians suffer from depression for various reasons.

Doesn’t this figure amaze you?

It’s no surprise that people in more affluent regions have a higher rate of suicide. Four metros — Delhi, Mumbai, Chennai and Bengaluru — alone accounted for 35% of all suicides in the country’s 53 major cities. A large number of people have migrated and live in these metropolises and their suburbs. It is also worth noting that, despite having fewer suicides this year, Delhi remained at the top.

The people of Delhi, if they so desire, can learn from this fact.

Is this something that is happening only in India? No, the situation is even worse in other countries. According to the most recent global statistics, the number of suicides has risen even in affluent countries such as Belgium, Japan, China, Sweden, South Korea and Russia. Though Sweden ranks seventh in the Happiness Index, there are numerous suicides there. One reason for this is the statutory right to euthanasia for patients suffering from incurable diseases.

You might be surprised to learn that people from war-torn countries such as South Sudan, Afghanistan, Lebanon, Libya, Tunisia, Nigeria and Iraq are proving to be more resilient. They are in a better position than countries considered more developed and peaceful. Afghanistan ranks 146th on the Happiness Index, but there have been very few suicides there. However, terrorist groups there, on the other hand, believe in forming youth suicide squads.

This question may arise in your mind: If a large number of people on earth have the proclivity to destroy their own lives, why don’t governments devise measures to prevent this? According to a World Health Organization report, only 38 countries have arrangements in place to fight this disorder.

Just one more thing. The clouds of recession are gathering once more in the United States (US). As a result, sociologists have begun to be concerned about a new wave of suicide cases on this continent. As was the case after Lehman Brothers went bankrupt in 2008. As a result, there was widespread mistrust in the economy. Its negative impact was felt all over the world. According to one study, more than 10,000 people in Europe and the US died by suicide during that time period due to economic deprivation.

“The future belongs to those who believe in the beauty of their dreams,” said Eleanor Roosevelt, who was once the First Lady of the US. We must prevent our faith in the beauty of our dreams from being shaken. This is the only way to save us all.

Shashi Shekhar is editor-in-chief, HindustanThe views expressed are personal



Read in source website

To run a universal health coverage (UHC) programme successfully, inclusivity is key. This aim was bolstered when Prime Minister Narendra Modi launched the Ayushman Bharat Pradhan Mantri Jan Arogya Yojana (AB PM-JAY) on September 23, 2018. As we celebrate four years of AB PM-JAY, we will also recognise a landmark addition to the world’s biggest public health assurance scheme: The extension of benefits under AB PM-JAY to the transgender community through a collaboration between the National Health Authority (NHA, ministry of health and family welfare) and the ministry of social justice and empowerment under the Support for Marginalised Individuals for Livelihood and Enterprise (SMILE). This is in continuation of the objectives of the AB PM-JAY scheme for fostering equity and inclusivity in the delivery of health care services.

Through this collaboration, any individual holding a transgender certificate, issued by the National Portal for Transgender Persons, can avail of the health care benefits with dignity and self-reliance at any AB PM-JAY-empanelled hospital.

As per the 2011 Census, the transgender community has 487,803 members. To date, 8,172 certificates have been issued. Many more certificates will be issued in the days to come. However, transgender people have not been able to avail the benefits of health insurance schemes for various procedures such as facilitating gender-reaffirmation surgeries. In many instances, individuals undergoing such operations did so at their own risk, without any accountability from health facilities.

To enable individuals from the transgender community to lead a healthy life, the scheme will provide various services free of cost at empanelled hospitals. Apart from the treatment packages covered under AB PM-JAY, around 50 more packages have been defined specifically for the transgender community, including packages on sex reassignment surgery (SRS). The construct of the packages includes genital surgeries, hormone therapy, laser therapy, and follow-up packages for certain procedures to ensure the continuum of care for transgender persons. Additionally, health facilities that specialise in providing SRS have been identified and will be empanelled to give a bigger network for availing health benefits. The AB PM-JAY scheme simultaneously fulfils its primary objective of significantly reducing out-of-pocket expenditure (OOP) of beneficiaries and rapidly expanding its reach of providing health care benefits to people across rural and urban areas.

Since its implementation, AB PM-JAY has expanded its footprint across the country. As of August 29, 189 million beneficiaries have been enrolled under the scheme and provided with Ayushman cards. In addition, approximately 37.8 million hospital admissions have been authorised, with hospitalisation expenses of over 45,000 crore, under the scheme through a network of 25,000 hospitals.

AB PM-JAY also envisages the integration and consolidation of the insurance landscape in India. Henceforth, after the launch of AB PM-JAY, NHA started the convergence of health insurance/assurance programmes through the NHA IT platform, creating an ecosystem catering to different beneficiary categories like ESIS, Ayushman CAPF, BoCW, CGHS and PM CARES for children schemes.

With its vision of inclusivity and health care for all, NHA has embarked on its journey to help the communities which require the utmost attention. This momentous programme will be a significant step in that direction. Transgender social inclusion and equality is a pivotal path to developing the community, which will not only help gain community trust but shall also provide equity in health care services and reduce the social stigma attached to it.

RS Sharma is chief executive officer, National Health Authority The views expressed are personal



Read in source website

The arrest, incarceration and grant of interim bail by the apex court to Teesta Setalvad in a case related to attempt to implicate top political functionaries of the state in the Gujarat riots have marked the path people who pursue justice will be forced to take in the country. Ms Setalvad walked out of jail on Saturday, 70 days after she was arrested, thanks to the Supreme Court which was judicious enough not only to come to the aid of a citizen but also, in the course of the proceedings, exposed the power imbalance between the citizen and the state and its myriad instruments.

There is no gainsaying the fact that the whole episode has its roots in the references the apex court had made while dismissing a petition filed by Zakia Jafri, wife of former Congress MP Ehsan Jafri who was killed in the riots. The petition challenged the clean chit given by the special investigation team, appointed by the Supreme Court, to former Gujarat chief minister Narendra Modi and others in the 2002 post-Godhra riots cases. Ms Setalvad and her NGO, Citizens for Justice and Peace, were co-petitioners.

Legal brains are still in the process of figuring out the logic behind the judgment authored by now retired judge A.M. Khanwilkar, which declared that “the falsity of their (petitioners) claims had been fully exposed by the SIT after a thorough investigation” and advised the state that “all those involved in such abuse of process need to be in the dock and proceed in accordance with law”.
The state lost no time to comply with the advice; a day after it was pronounced, a crime branch inspector filed a first information report in Ahmedabad charging Ms Setalvad, former Gujarat director-general of police R.B. Sreekumar and former IPS officer Sanjiv Bhat with conspiring to fabricate facts and documents, tutor witnesses and abuse the process of law to frame people. A special investigation team, formed to probe the charges, arrested the three the next day. They have been under state custody from that date as the high court has put off the hearing of their bail petition for six weeks.   

width:468px;height:60px" data-ad-client="ca-pub-4179177184249048" data-ad-slot="3146043443">

That the Supreme Court, while hearing Ms Setalvad’s application for interim bail, did not hide its dismay in the high court for keeping the bail application pending for six weeks, and asked if it was standard practice for it to do so, signalled the apex court’s discomfiture at the way a constitutional court handled the case. That it chose to ask the prosecution if the investigating team has collected evidence in the case other than reproducing what was there in the Supreme Court judgment was a comment on the way the state police went about investigating the case, especially since the evidence was documentary in nature. The solicitor-general’s replies were more about the seriousness of the case than about the evidence the investigators have gathered against the accused. They succeeded not in impressing the court but in exposing the investigation.

The case illustrates the fact that pursuit of justice is too costly an affair for an individual in this country. The lucky ones can walk out of jails thanks to conscientious judges; the others, instead of seeing the guilty behind the bars, could perish there. A democracy deserves better options.



Read in source website

India has finally overtaken its erstwhile colonial master, the United Kingdom, in terms of the size of the economy — the first time after nearly 150 years. According to the International Monetary Fund (IMF), India is now the fifth largest economy, relegating the UK to the sixth spot in the global economic pecking order.

The Indian economy is now worth $3.5 trillion compared to Britain’s $3.2 trillion. It is now just behind the United States, China, Japan and Germany. The announcement, coming in the 75th year anniversary of Indian Independence, will offer an occasion to rejoice.

This proud moment, however, has come five years late as the country had almost poised to beat Britain in 2016. In October 2016, India’s GDP was $2.29 trillion compared to $2.34 trillion of the Brexit-mauled UK economy — a difference of just $50 billion — which was expected to be erased by 2017. But the demonetisation programme announced in November 2016 slowed India’s victory lap.

width:468px;height:60px" data-ad-client="ca-pub-4179177184249048" data-ad-slot="3146043443">

Having finally beaten the former colonial master, India must not become complacent about the economy as the fruits of economic growth will manifest only when the average income — as measured on per capita basis — of a citizen grows. India’s per capita income is $2,500 compared to Britain’s $47,000.

While the tag of the fifth largest economy is incredible, the country and its governments should not lose sight of the fact that a large number of people are still dependent on agriculture and manufacturing does not contribute anywhere close to what it does in the United States, China, Japan or Germany. As India’s strategic rival China’s economy stands at $19 trillion, India should aim at crossing the $10 trillion mark, if we wish to have any heft in the global community. Let’s hope this government takes steps to facilitate that.



Read in source website

Many of us were taught at school the wisdom of Robert Frost’s famous proposition: “Good fences make good neighbours”. The central message of much of the recent writing on India-China relations seems to be that good fences alone are unlikely to make for good neighbours. The border problem is not just about the border. Many analysts have come to agree with the views of Chinese American scholar Yun Sun that “Beijing sees the unsettled border as leverage to bog down India in the region and undermine its global potential”. So, even if the border problem is sorted out, the competition between Asia’s two giants will continue in a world that is in search of a new equilibrium in power equations.
What may settle this competition is not a military balance between India and China, but a closing of the yawning gap in what Chinese scholars have long defined as “comprehensive national power” (CNP). In his recent book, How China Sees India (2022), former foreign secretary Shyam Saran pithily observes: “India is a retreating image in China’s rear-view mirror.” For an India viewed as falling behind, catching up in terms of CNP is a necessary prerequisite for restoring stability to what is increasingly viewed as an unstable equilibrium between the two Asian neighbours.

When Prime Minister Manmohan Singh was preparing for his first interactions with the Chinese leadership, in 2004-05, he devoted considerable time to reading all the internal files on India-China relations from Jawaharlal Nehru’s days in office. He then sat down like a good student and diligently took notes in a tutorial offered over lunch by Singapore’s founder PM Lee Kuan Yew, someone who knew an earlier generation of Chinese leaders well. While Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, like his predecessors, sought to engage the Chinese leadership on resolving the border problem, the Chinese appeared less and less interested in doing so. Over the last five years they have in fact begun to question the very premises on which the border issue was sought to be resolved over the past three decades.

One of the problems at home, for a long time, in understanding the nature of India-China differences has been an absence of easy to read books written by knowledgeable Indian analysts. In 2004, when Dr Manmohan Singh began reading the confidential Nehru files, the only published books I could lay my hands on were Neville Maxwell’s India’s China War and John Garver’s Protracted Contest: Sino-Indian Rivalry in the 20th Century. Both Maxwell and Garver had their biases given the wider context of that time, when the West was having a love affair with post-Mao China.

width:468px;height:60px" data-ad-client="ca-pub-4179177184249048" data-ad-slot="3146043443">

To be fair, however, the Western view that India was as much to blame for the poor state of the relationship as China had a sound basis. But Indian scholarship was found wanting in making available an informed assessment. Fortunately, we now have several good books written by knowledgeable Indians that offer a balanced view of the bilateral relationship. Some of these books are based on government records now available to scholars. We did not like it when Maxwell and Garver told us that Nehru was as much to blame for the deterioration in China-India relations as Mao Zedong. But now we have distinguished Indian diplomats and foreign affairs analysts saying so.

Avtar Singh Bhasin’s diligently researched book Nehru, Tibet and China (2021), Maroof Raza’s Contested Lands: India, China and the Border Dispute (2021), Mohan Guruswamy and Zorawar Daulat Singh’s India China Relations: The Border Issue and Beyond, Nirupama Rao’s Fractured Himalayas: India, Tibet, China 1949-62 and the most recently published Manoj Joshi’s book, India-China Border: Understanding the Enduring Threat of War in the High Himalayas (2022), offer very balanced accounts of the origins of the border dispute and the likely consequences.

While these books are focused mainly, though not only, on the border issue, we now also have good books written by Indian scholars on the broader India-China relationship. Vijay Gokhale’s The Long Game, Ananth Krishnan’s India’s China Challenge, Kanti Bajpai’s India Versus China, to name just a few. The Indian political leadership can no longer claim ignorance of issues as an alibi for wrong decisions. The facts on the ground are well recorded and assessments of capabilities and intentions are available. Rather than fudge facts, it is necessary for the political leadership to keep itself and public opinion informed. Joshi’s newly published book offers a detailed account of recent developments along the northern border and concludes that the risk of unintended consequences has risen. While neither side may want border clashes to escalate into a war, concludes Joshi, both need to be aware that the “enduring threat of war remains high in the Himalayas”.

The power gap created by China’s meteoric rise in the first two decades of the twenty-first century has created a situation that is best described as an “unstable equilibrium”. It is unstable for all the reasons that generate mistrust between the two, but nevertheless actions and events seem to suggest that both countries wish to maintain some kind of an equilibrium. For example, the fact that bilateral trade has been going up despite the border tensions and the Chinese leadership continues to engage with their Indian counterparts would suggest that both sides wish to maintain some control over events and not allow accidents to determine the course of events.

To manage the power imbalance, India has closed ranks with other powers on three fronts. First, it has entered into a strategic partnership with the United States, Japan and Australia through the Quadrilateral Strategic Initiative (Quad); second, it has strengthened relations with Russia, despite the invasion of Ukraine, sending a powerful message across the world; third, it is engaging several “middle powers” like Germany, France, Britain, Brazil, Indonesia and so on. However, in the final analysis, what will count is the speed with which India can bridge the CNP gap.

How helpful these strategic partnerships would be, including the Quad, would depend on how effectively they help India bridge this gap, improving its domestic capabilities and external competitiveness.



Read in source website

Today is D-Day. Hurrah!

For many of us watching the endless hustings and debates from the sidelines — (as we are non-Tories) — it will be pure relief to know who the next Prime Minister of the UK will be, within a few hours. It’s a day many have been waiting for — but with un-bated breath, as the surveys have been fairly consistent in their predictions. And these projections overturned what many of us thought was a given, when initially the former Chancellor, Rishi Sunak, was the clear leader for Number 10 among the Tory MPs.

But along came Liz Truss, the foreign secretary, the favourite on the third place. And then suddenly, we all said, hang on! — the Tories in the heartlands were rooting for her and not the ex-Chancellor. So, like that improbable dark horse, she shot to the head of the race, and has remained there.

width:468px;height:60px" data-ad-client="ca-pub-4179177184249048" data-ad-slot="3146043443">

Of course, there is going to be much analysis on why she won (if the surveys are correct) but it became clear that while certain parts of the media were determined to dislike her (including, surprisingly, The Times, a right wing paper, which could have been less visceral perhaps) — the popular Tory media was on her side. Ultimately, as one commentator remarked — she is a canny politician and a survivor of many battles. This has proven essential and in her very unhurried, calm style of addressing issues — she looks the antithesis of the blonde bombshell (i.e., Boris Johnson) whom she is replacing. But no matter who succeeds Johnson, India will forge closer ties with Britain — as now it is more obvious that Indians and India will continue to shine.

I remember some years back when Meghnad had stood for elections for the Leader of the House of Lords. Again it was the first time that an Indian had decided to step forward for the post. It was a historic first— and undoubtedly he paved way for others, both by his entry into the House of Lords, more than 30 years ago, and his desire to lead it. Though he did not win, like Sunak, he opened the way for another Indian to come forward. There just has to be someone who is ready to break the glass ceiling.

Of course, it is always possible that the Russians will hack the results or that there will be an upset at the very last minute —but at the end of the day, the UK is looking forward to someone new at Number 10.

Meanwhile, the war does go on — between Ukraine and Russia — and Britain remains a staunch supporter of the former. The support shows itself in different ways. Not just by hosting Ukrainians in UK homes, but now even tying up literary festivals with them. The famous Hay Festival is now collaborating with Lviv Book Forum and putting their programmes online in the second week of October. It is rather amazing to think that a country at war is still conducting literary festivals. And one which viewers, thanks to the Hay Festival, can see all around the world. It is a wonderful step as literature does have the power to change perceptions. But it also is a strange feeling that the war we thought would be over in a few months still carries on and on… and is almost getting normalised, as many parts of the world media are not even commenting on it anymore. However, the UK has not forgotten, and that is something Boris Johnson, through his whirlwind tours to meet Zelenskyy, has kept in the forefront.

Well, we have all heard of downsizing. And to be honest, we just did it in London, as post-Covid it seemed easier to live in a small apartment where you do not need much house help. One never imagined that the Royals might be also entertaining the same thoughts. And so we are told that from this weekend onwards Prince William, Kate and their three children will live in their “small” four bedroom cottage called Adelaide. Basically, they say they would like to do the school run, from here — like normal parents for their kids — and the new school is just nine miles away. One may also add that the Queen is just another 10 minutes away by car.

Their city home at Kensington may now be used more and more as an office. Of course they do have other homes — but right now this is the one they will stay in, and from all accounts, it is going to be a simple lifestyle, at Adelaide Cottage.
Not like the one enjoyed by Harry and Meghan at Frogmore Cottage, close by, on which many millions were spent on renovation. This rivalry among neighbours, of course, will make a nice episode for a future series of The Crown, which has now found the actors to play “Kate” and “Wills”.

Soon it may be difficult to say who is real and who is playing a part.
But as the cost of living crisis hits ordinary Brits, it is definitely more empathetic to scale down, than scale up. Even for the Royals.



Read in source website