Editorials

Home > Editorials

Editorials - 29-03-2022

It is still too early to answer whether the party can threaten the BJP-dominant system or contribute to upholding it

Under a Bharatiya Janata Party-dominant system, most political parties have struggled to hold on to, let alone expand their political space. There are only two exceptions. The first is regional parties in the east and the south whose appeals to linguistic identity or sub-nationalism have found a renewed resonance among the electorate. The second exception is the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), a centrist populist party which has matured under the Narendra Modi-era into a party of emerging national prominence.

AAP has done this by skilfully negotiating the opportunities and threats inherent in the BJP-dominant system. It has geared itself to occupy the political space that has opened with the steady discrediting of the Congress party under the Modi era. In the recent Punjab Assembly elections — where it swept to power, winning 92 of 117 seats — it rode the anti-establishment mood that was partly prepared with the unrest over the farm laws bulldozed through by the central government. At the same time, it has sought to neutralise the ideological threat of the BJP by operating within the boundaries set by the BJP’s larger ideological framework.

Strategy after 2019

This second strategy was crystallised after its drubbing in the Lok Sabha election of 2019, when it effected a decisive shift in its route to expansion. Before that election, AAP attempted to expand through high-profile attempts at occupying the oppositional space by attacking the central government and the Prime Minister. In the three years since, it has pivoted away from the national arena, focusing instead on localised issues in the pursuit of a gradual State by State strategy.

The focus of this article is to answer one central question: would the rise of AAP threaten the BJP-dominant system or would it contribute to upholding it? The answer cannot quite be straightforward as it depends on the particular strategic positioning of AAP with respect to the BJP-dominant system: a spectrum ranging from acquiescence to disapproval to confrontation. Being a dynamic variable, this strategic positioning would vary with time and context. The only constant is that AAP would seek to take the positioning it calculates to be most advantageous to its rise.

The BJP-dominant system comprises three elements: the ideological dominance of Hindu nationalism; the unparalleled popularity of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, and the unchecked power of the central government machinery.

After 2019, AAP has consistently shied away from challenging the BJP on each of these elements. In line with the party’s State-wise strategy, AAP has preferred to take on State-level BJP governments by decrying their corruption and inefficiencies, and presenting its own ‘Delhi model of governance’ as an alternative. Going by the results of the Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand and Goa Assembly elections (which were held along with the Punjab and Manipur polls), this plan has not worked out well.

It must be borne in mind that AAP’s spectacular triumph in Punjab is, in many respects, an anomaly. It does not in itself prove or disprove the strategic worth of AAP’s positioning in the BJP-dominant system. Punjab was peculiar in it being a State where all the traditional parties were discredited — a dream scenario for AAP. It was also a State where the BJP was not a major player and the central government was highly unpopular. These conditions are unlikely to be replicated in the other States AAP has set its eyes on; therefore, Punjab does not provide a reliable map for future expansion.

The next stage for AAP

AAP’s next phase of expansion would run through States with a largely bipolar competition between the Congress and the BJP — States such as Himachal Pradesh, Gujarat, Haryana, and possibly Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan.

To succeed in this terrain, AAP has more to learn from its failures in Goa and Uttarakhand (States with a similar political dynamic) than from its successes in Punjab. And it is these failures, precisely, which has informed the latest tweaking in the AAP’s political strategy, manifested in AAP leader and Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal’s speech in the Delhi Assembly.

AAP has now seemed to modify its strategic positioning in the BJP-dominant system from acquiescence to disapproval. Breaking several self-imposed shibboleths, Mr. Kejriwal underlined a shift in his party’s approach by attacking Mr. Modi personally (with dramatic references to ‘56-inch chest’ and even ‘Hitler’); implicitly criticising the Hindu nationalist propaganda of the BJP represented by the film,The Kashmir Files ; and condemning the Centre’s control of independent institutions as reflected in the deferral of the Delhi municipal elections.

Many observers have put down Mr. Kejriwal’s new avatar to AAP’s renewed ambition to fast-track itself into the primary national opposition to take on the BJP, on the back of its electoral victory in Punjab. This would, however, be a misreading of both the rationale and the nature of AAP’s strategic shift.

First, let us come to the rationale. As mentioned earlier, this shift has less to do with the success in Punjab than to the failures in Uttarakhand and Goa. Both these States were marked by high levels of anti-incumbency against the State governments, and AAP expected its alternative model of governance to catapult the party into becoming a major player. In Uttarakhand, specifically, AAP hoped that its centre-right platform (positioning itself between the Congress and the BJP) would help it attract disillusioned voters of the BJP. Yet, in both the States, AAP stopped well short of a double-digit vote-share, failing even to open its account in Uttarakhand.

On pro-incumbency

One big takeaway from this round of State elections is that the trend of de-linked State and national elections has been reversed. This trend was reflected in a poor run for the BJP in State elections between 2018 and 2021. However, these elections mark a sharp break, where the popularity of the central government and Mr. Modi buoyed the BJP in all the four States it won. In Uttarakhand and Goa, the pro-incumbency for the central government more than neutralised the high levels of anti-incumbency against the State governments. The result was the BJP romped back home in both the States while largely holding on to its vote-share from the previous elections.

For AAP, this presented two lessons. One, the party’s State-specific strategies against the BJP cannot afford to ignore the larger national appeal of the BJP. In other words, AAP cannot maintain an agnostic stance toward Hindu nationalism and Mr. Modi if BJP voters continue to vote for them over the governance model presented by AAP. And two, AAP’s cautious and limited opposition to the BJP also hurts it from the other end as anti-BJP voters flock toward the more aggressive posture of the Congress. Since both pro-incumbency (Mr. Modi, Hindutva) and anti-incumbency (unemployment, inflation) in State elections increasingly have national provenance, AAP’s localised strategies seem to be missing a larger national element.

An outlook

Does this mean that AAP is about to resurrect its pre-2019 phase of frontal confrontation with the Modi government, or become part of a broader oppositional alliance against the BJP? The answers are probably in the negative. The party is unlikely to drop its carefully planned State-by-State strategy in favour of another premature dart to occupy the national oppositional space. As a fleet-footed party adept at learning from its mistakes, one would not expect AAP to forget the lessons of the last two general elections in a hurry.

The actions of AAP over the last few years have demonstrated that it has accepted the durability of the BJP-dominant system. The results of the recent State elections would have only reinforced that notion. The long-term strategy of AAP is to replace the Congress as the alternative pole to the BJP. Towards that end, the strategic positioning of AAP in the BJP-dominant system might sway between acquiescence and disapproval. The phase of confrontation with the BJP-dominant system might only come after this long period of, to paraphrase Deng Xiaoping, hiding its strengths and biding its time.

Asim Ali is a political researcher and columnist based in Delhi



Read in source website

The Ukraine conflict has complicated talks on the Iran nuclear deal

The talks in Vienna to revive the nuclear agreement with Iran, referred to as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), entered “the last stage” at the end of February. Participants then confidently said that only some “small sticking points” remained to be resolved. However, a U.S. official cautioned that “nothing is agreed until everything is agreed” and that the remaining issues were “extremely difficult”.

The effects of the war

The war in Ukraine commenced on February 24. Despite efforts to place a firewall between the Ukraine war and the Vienna talks, the conflict bled into the conference room: on March 3, the Russian ambassador at the Vienna talks demanded U.S. guarantees that the sanctions imposed on Russia due to the Ukraine conflict would not affect its role under the JCPOA. The Russian diplomat was referring to the JCPOA provisions under which Iran was required to export its excess enriched uranium to Russia, while Russia would help Iran to downgrade its Fordow enrichment plant into an isotope manufacturing centre to be utilised for medicinal purposes.

Western commentators said that the Russians were deliberately trying to delay the finalisation of the agreement to thwart the U.S.: the latter, it was said, was anxious to relax sanctions on Iranian oil exports so that millions of barrels of oil would enter the market and bring down the soaring oil prices, thus moderating the impact of the U.S.’s own sanctions on Russian oil exports.

In public, the U.S. took a tough stand, asserting on March 13 that it would not provide exemptions to Ukraine-related sanctions just to save the Iran deal. But this was all bravado. A day later, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov announced that Russia had received written guarantees from the U.S. affirming that Russia’s role in the implementation of the JCPOA would not be affected.

With the dialogue back on track, U.S. officials said on March 16 that only “a handful of issues” were left and an agreement was within reach. Iran said an agreement was “closer than ever”, but insisted its “red lines” should be accommodated. However, no agreement has materialised so far. While Iran has been insisting on the removal of all sanctions imposed during the Donald Trump administration, the deal-breaker at present is just one — the removal of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) as a U.S.-designated Foreign Terrorist Organisation (FTO), a tag placed on it by the Trump administration in August 2019.

The principal reason why this has remained unresolved so far lies in U.S. domestic politics. The Vienna talks are taking place when the U.S. is deeply polarised at home, with the Republicans and some Democrats, backed by their cohorts in the Israel lobby and the media, spouting venom on Iran and opposing any concessions to achieve a deal. U.S. President Joe Biden has low approval ratings at home: he is being held responsible for the failure of his domestic agenda due to opposition from within his own party, as also the U.S.’s ignominious withdrawal from Afghanistan last year. Hence, it is almost impossible for the president to remove the FTO tag from the IRGC, even though this is largely a symbolic issue since there are several other U.S. sanctions on the organisation.

Outlook for the region

There is no indication as yet that the JCPOA will be finalised. U.S. negotiator Rob Malley said recently that an agreement is neither imminent nor inevitable. U.S. anxiety to get Iranian oil into the market is tempered by the challenges Mr. Biden faces at home — if the opposition gets its way, the November elections could make him a lame duck President and possibly even pave the way for a Republican President in 2024.

However, the JCPOA carries much less significance for Iran now than it did in 2015. In this period, Iran has mastered the nuclear enrichment cycle and is capable of defending its technological achievements. Again, its resilient population has survived the worst nightmares of economic privation. Now, prospects of national rejuvenation are already apparent: in December 2021, Iran sold about 1.2 million barrels/day (mpd) of oil, as against 0.4 mpd in 2020.

The International Monetary Fund projects that Iran will have a GDP growth of 2% in 2022, following an average 3% growth over the previous two years. This will place Iran within 95% of where its economy was when Mr. Trump induced a recession in 2018-19, shrinking the economy by 12.4% through sanctions.

Iran’s problems with the U.S. are not based on technical issues pertaining to uranium enrichment; they were political and relate to its domestic order and regional role. However, successive U.S. administrations, under pressure from hostile domestic lobbies, have not had the required domestic support to address these matters successively. Iran has now moved on, with deepening ties with Russia and China, and robust engagements — political, economic, military and logistical — with regional partners. Iran is rebuilding relations with Azerbaijan, is a partner with Turkey in Syria, and has had four rounds of dialogue with Saudi Arabia.

Meanwhile, the U.S. itself has lost much of its credibility as a security provider in the region, aggravated by signals of disengagement from West Asian affairs from the Biden administration. This has encouraged regional players to pursue multiple diplomatic engagements amongst themselves — the UAE, for instance, is in dialogue with Iran, while building close ties with Israel and Egypt, and economic cooperation with Turkey. Iraq is pursuing a cooperation network with Egypt and Jordan, while Turkey has reached out to the UAE, Saudi Arabia and Egypt, while retaining close ties with Qatar and Iran.

The spoiler in the region is the ongoing Israel-Iran hostility – Israel under Prime Minister Naftali Bennett remains firmly opposed to the nuclear deal and continues to attack Iranian assets in Syria, Iraq and even Iran itself. But Israel also needs Russia to guarantee the security of its northern border with Syria by controlling Iranian presence and, on occasion, greenlighting its attacks on Iranian targets. Not surprisingly, not one West Asian country, besides Kuwait, has condemned Russia over the Ukraine conflict or imposed sanctions on it.

Ukraine is the arena where the U.S. is seeking to affirm the resilience of the ‘Western’ alliance, but further south, the nations of the Trans-Caucasus and West Asia are already shaping new alignments amongst themselves, in partnership with Russia and China. This will form the basis of a new multipolar order in international affairs.

Talmiz Ahmad, a former diplomat, holds the Ram Sathe Chair for International Studies, Symbiosis international University, Pune



Read in source website

BIMSTEC is in need of a framework to tackle the specific challenges confronting the Bay of Bengal region

As world attention remains focused on the war in Ukraine, leaders of the Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation (BIMSTEC) will attend a summit meeting of the regional organisation. The meet, which is to be held in virtual mode, will be hosted by Sri Lanka, the current BIMSTEC chair.

Founded in 1997, the seven-member BIMSTEC, which includes the littoral states of India, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Myanmar (Thailand is a member too) and the land-locked states of Nepal and Bhutan, has identified 14 pillars for special focus. These are trade and investment, transport and communication, energy, tourism, technology, fisheries, agriculture, public health, poverty alleviation, counter terrorism and transnational crime, environment and disaster management, people-to-people contact, cultural cooperation and climate change. While each sector is important, the segmented approach has resulted in omnibus end summit communiqués full of aspirations rather than action. The upcoming summit is an opportunity for BIMSTEC leaders to go beyond generalised statements and take concrete steps to address critical challenges confronting the region.

A Bay of Bengal Maritime Dialogue (BOBMD) organised recently by the Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue and the Pathfinder Foundation brought together government officials, maritime experts, and representatives of prominent think tanks from Sri Lanka, India, Bangladesh, Myanmar, Thailand and Indonesia. Participants called for stepped up efforts in areas such as environmental protection; scientific research; curtailing illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing, as well as the development of standard operating procedures that could govern interaction between fishing vessels of one country with maritime law enforcement agencies of another.

Rich marine ecosystem

Presentations made at the BOBMD highlighted the fact that the Bay of Bengal is home to a large network of beautiful yet fragile estuaries, mangrove forests of around 15,792 square kilometres, coral reefs of around 8,471 sq.km, sea grass meadows and mass nesting sites of sea turtles. The annual loss of mangrove areas is estimated at 0.4% to 1.7% and coral reefs at 0.7%. It is predicted that the sea level will increase 0.5 metres in the next 50 years. Moreover, there have been 13 cyclonic storms in the last five years. The Bay is an important source of natural resources for a coastal population of approximately 185 million people. The fishermen population alone is estimated to be around 3.7 million, with an annual fish catch of around six million tonnes, constituting 7% of the world’s catch and valued at around U.S.$4 billion. Around 4,15,000 fishing boats operate in the Bay and it is estimated that 33% of fish stocks are fished unsustainably (Source : presentation in February 2022 by E. Vivekanandan, senior consultant, ICAR-Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute). According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the Bay of Bengal is one of IUU fishing hotspots in the Asia-Pacific.

The pressing challenges that confront the Bay of Bengal include the emergence of a dead zone with zero oxygen where no fish survive; leaching of plastic from rivers as well as the Indian Ocean; destruction of natural protection against floods such as mangroves; sea erosion; growing population pressure and industrial growth in the coastal areas and consequently, huge quantities of untreated waste flow. Security threats such as terrorism, piracy and tensions between countries caused by the arrests of fishermen who cross maritime boundaries are additional problems. It also needs to be kept in mind that the problem of fishermen crossing into the territorial waters of neighbouring countries affect India and Sri Lanka and Bangladesh and Myanmar (also Pakistan on the west coast).

Need for regional interaction

The blue economy potential of the Bay of Bengal is huge. There are many opportunities to develop maritime trade, shipping, aquaculture and tourism. However, tapping these opportunities requires coordinated and concerted action by governments, scientists and other experts. The BIMSTEC Summit must create a new regional mechanism for coordinated activities on maritime issues of a transboundary nature. This mechanism must initiate urgent measures to strengthen fisheries management, promote sustainable fishing methods, establish protected areas and develop frameworks to prevent and manage pollution, especially industrial and agricultural waste as well as oil spills. There is also a need for greater scientific research on the impact of climate change in general and on fisheries in particular. At present, there is limited cooperation between countries of the region in marine research. Most BIMSTEC countries have premier institutions and excellent scientists but their interaction with the West is far more than within the region. The use of modern technology and improved fishing practices can go a long way in restoring the health of the Bay.

This should be a priority area

Marine environmental protection must become a priority area for cooperation in the Bay of Bengal. Enforcement must be strengthened and information shared on best practices. Regional protocols need to be developed and guidelines and standards on pollution control established. Decision-making must be based on science and reliable data, information and tools.

There is a need for home-grown solutions based on capabilities of local institutions and for mutual learning through regional success stories. There is a need to create regional frameworks for data collection. Participatory approaches must be evolved for near-real-time stock assessment and the creation of an regional open fisheries data alliance. The Bay of Bengal Programme (BOBP), an inter-governmental organisation based in Chennai, is doing good work to promote sustainable fishing.

A Bay Of Bengal Large Marine Ecosystem (BOBLME) project is also being launched by the FAO with funding from the Global Environmental Facility (GEF) and others. The BIMSTEC summit must express full support for both BOBP and BOBLME. The summit must mandate officials to come up with measures to curtail unsustainable as well as IUU fishing. These could include setting up an international vessel tracking system and making it mandatory for vessels to be equipped with automatic identification system (AIS) trackers; establishing a regional fishing vessel registry system and publishing vessel licence lists to help identify illegal vessels; increasing monitoring, control and surveillance in IUU fishing hotspots; establishing regional guidelines on how to deter and prevent IUU practices; improving the implementation of joint regional patrols, and regional fishing moratoriums and outreach programmes targeted at fisherfolk. Laws and policies in littoral states must be harmonised and the humanitarian treatment of fishermen ensured during any encounter with maritime law enforcement agencies.

The challenges that confront the Bay of Bengal region brook no more delay. BIMSTEC must arise, awake and act before it is too late. The summit must set in process regular meetings of officials, supported by scientists and experts, to tackle illegal and unsustainable fishing as well as prevent the further environmental degradation of the Bay of Bengal.

Venu Rajamony is Professor of Diplomatic Practice, O.P. Jindal Global University, Senior Adviser, Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue and the former Ambassador of India to the Netherlands



Read in source website

Atmanirbharta is neither protectionist nor isolationist; it refers to a self-reliant India dealing with the world on its own terms

Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s call in May 2020 for an Atmanirbhar Bharat (self-reliant India) highlighted the reality that in a post-COVID-19 world, India cannot exist in isolation. It is clear that the world is small and connected. In just the last one month, the ripple effects of the war in Ukraine on our economy and democracy make it imperative for us to continuously engage with the world around us. As Rabindranath Tagore said, it is not possible to remain behind “narrow domestic walls”. The pandemic has shown us that whether it is the stressed economy or human rights, rural development or climate change, defence or foreign policy, we need to re-imagine the way forward for India and its relationship with the world.

The way forward

Atmanirbhar Bharat is Mr. Modi’s framework for India’s way forward. A recent book,Atmanirbhar Bharat: A Vibrant and Strong India , edited by noted ideologue S. Gurumurthy and Arvind Gupta, is a thoughtful and comprehensive conceptualisation of a wide spectrum of policy issues which are the building blocks for an Atmanirbhar Bharat. Atmanirbharta is neither protectionist nor isolationist; it refers to a self-reliant India dealing with the world on its own terms.

Mahatma Gandhi’s call for Swadeshi galvanised our nation. Atmanirbhar Bharat is Swadeshi tailored to India in 2022. The ideational foundation of this concept is not just relevant to today’s India; it also addresses existential challenges in the country and challenges in its engagement with a tension-filled world order. Within the country it is even more important that the conflicting aspirations and expectations of States are managed and harmonised to present a united, confident and self-reliant India. For example, the aspirations of the Dravidian model of development and other regional-specific aspirations should synchronise with the holistic concept of Atmanirbhar Bharat. If India does not evolve a harmonious national model, only chaos will result. The emphasis on unity rather than diversity in our polity becomes vital. In the absence of cooperation, fundamental issues such as the sharing of Cauvery waters and coal for energy will remain unresolved. Former Tamil Nadu Chief Ministers C.N. Annadurai and M. Karunanidhi ensured that their politics were regionally distinct while staying uncompromisingly nationalistic. Significantly, in the 1967 Tamil Nadu Assembly elections, Dravidian icon Periyar actually supported and endorsed the Congress party and not the DMK, while C. Rajagopalachari supported the DMK. To learn from history and introspect on how these stalwarts responded dynamically to emerging situations is vital for political leaders today.

As Francis Fukuyama said, national identity is pivotal to the fortune of modern states, especially when states are built around liberal democratic political values and the shared experiences of diverse communities. In fact, national identity makes liberal democracy possible and is critical to maintaining a successful modern political order.

A human-centric model

Mr. Gurumurthy writes how, like Swadeshi, but also different from it, atmanirbharta is a model for a rising India. It is based on civilisational pride, experience and a self-belief that will help India be a contributor to the world rather than only a consumer. He forcefully argues that no one-size-fits-all Western model can work for a country as diverse as India, as evidenced by the catastrophic financial crisis of 2008. Social capital, family and communities are now at the centre of a development model, which was earlier not human-centric. This is an unassailable premise on which to base a growth model based on equity and humanity.

Defence, human rights, climate change, agriculture, the rural-urban divide, economy, governance and federalism are all addressed in the five pillars of Atmanirbhar Bharat expounded by Mr. Modi. The time has come to seriously absorb the ideas explained in this important book and discuss with an open and non-partisan mind the concept of Atmanirbhar Bharat. There will always be differences. Indeed, in those differences lies the vibrancy of our democracy.

The world today is reeling under an economic crisis. The war in Europe has grave consequences for the entire world. Leaders should realise that this is not a time for narrow political gains, but a time to come together for the sake of the nation. Atmanirbhar Bharat is a human-centric way forward based on our own civilisational ethos and values. It envisages a self-reliant India working forVasudaiva Kutumbakam . This is a time when the legitimate aspirations of the diverse peoples of our country need to be reconciled, and differences overcome.

Jayanthi Natarajan is a former Union Minister and a political activist and lawyer



Read in source website

Once again there is tension between the Secunderabad Cantonment Board and the Telangana government

Secunderabad Cantonment Board, the second-largest cantonment among the 62 cantonments in the country, spread over 40.17 sq. km with two-thirds of it under Army control, is caught in a war of words between the Telangana Rashtra Samithi (TRS) government and the Bharatiya Janata Party-led Central government. Recently, while accusing the Local Military Authority (LMA) of causing inconvenience to residents by blocking roads and refusing to cooperate on development works, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Minister K.T. Rama Rao threatened to cut off power and water supply to the cantonment.

The immediate provocation for this threat is the tussle between the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHMC) and the LMA over the construction of a storm water channel through the military area to prevent flooding of a colony. The military authorities want a commitment from the municipal officials that they will let only excess rainwater and not domestic sewage to pass through their land. The municipal officials are unable to do this, as it requires the construction of a major sewage network involving crores of rupees.

The twin cities of Hyderabad and Secunderabad have grown extensively over the years. Suburbs such as Sainikpuri, A.S. Rao Nagar, Malkajgiri, and Neredmet have a high population density. Easy access for these places is through the cantonment roads. This is why protests broke out when the LMA sought to restrict the movement of civilian traffic on main roads citing “security concerns”. Citizens claim that 21 roads have been closed, while the LMA says only two have been closed.

But the tension between the government and the cantonment goes beyond this issue; in fact, it has been simmering for years. Earlier, the TRS government had sought defence or railway land for the construction of two-bedroom houses for the poor, but was unable to secure this. It had also sought Bison Polo Ground and Gymkhana Ground for the construction of a new Secretariat and Assembly, but was forced to rethink its plans when the Defence Ministry sought compensation for the land and annual payments that were too high for the government.

Over a decade ago, the LMA had nixed a proposal to widen seven main roads with government funding. The GHMC, which was tasked by the High Court to develop alternate roads, failed to do so, ostensibly due to the high cost of land acquisition. Another proposal by the State government to build elevated corridors to connect the Karimnagar highway and Nagpur highway through the Secunderabad Cantonment Board continues to be on paper due to lack of consensus on compensation. The suburban rail network MMTS Phase II was not commissioned for two reasons: the TRS government did not release its share of funds of Rs. 631 crore and the LMA delayed permission to lay the line between Sanat Nagar and Ammuguda.

However, there have been instances of cooporation too. Several roads in Mehdipatnam and other military areas were widened. The elevated PV Expressway to the international airport at Shamshabad could be built only after the LMA allowed acquisition of land, since key sections of the Expressway were constructed through military areas.

Therefore, defence sources said, holding negotiations is the trick to getting work done. The traditional annual liaison meetings between the State government and the LMA are not taking place, indicating the communication gap between both the parties. Holding the meetings and amicably solving these issues at the earliest would serve the government, the military and the citizens well.

geetanath.v@thehindu.co.in



Read in source website

Imran Khan will find survival as PM difficult now that he is not the Army’s favourite

Prime Minister Imran Khan showed on Sunday that the passionate base of his Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) remained intact when tens of thousands of people turned up at Islamabad’s Parade Ground to attend his rally. But his long speech also indicated that the cricketer-turned-politician has finally come to terms with the political challenges he is facing. Mr. Khan, who is facing a no-confidence vote in Parliament, used his carefully worded speech to defend the performance of his government, reiterate the PTI’s “Islamic welfarist” ideology, and set the tone for the future political battles. Drawing parallels between himself and Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, the former Prime Minister who was overthrown in 1977 by General Zia-ul-Haq and later executed, Mr. Khan alleged that there was an international conspiracy against his government. Whether his allegations are true or not, his coalition government is in trouble, surviving on a razor-thin majority in Parliament. At least a dozen lawmakers from his party have revolted against him. Some coalition members have hinted that there could be an early election. Mr. Khan’s invoking of Bhutto’s fate is also seen as veiled criticism of the military establishment. He had been a close ally of the Generals from before the 2018 elections. But the establishment appears to have gone cold on him.

While Mr. Khan has fiercely defended the track record of his government, all is not well at the ground level. There is widespread resentment against the government’s handling of the economy, which the Opposition has tried to capture by mobilising support for the no-trust motion. The crisis is so deep that even government officials are reportedly not paid their salaries on time. On Sunday, Mr. Khan said he would continue his crusade against “white collar crimes”, referring to corruption charges against Opposition leaders. He calls his opponents rodents and has brought dozens of corruption cases against them in the past four years, but none has resulted in a conviction. On the other side, his hardline approach has galvanised the Opposition, including the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz and the Pakistan People’s Party, which joined hands with Maulana Fazal-ur-Rehman of the Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam to form the Pakistan Democratic Movement, an umbrella organisation whose sole goal is to bring the PTI government down. While crises piled up one after another, Mr. Khan’s approval rating started slipping. According to a Gallup poll in January, Nawaz Sharif, currently living in exile, was 19 points ahead of Mr. Khan in popularity. Whether Mr. Khan survives the no-trust vote or not, his run as a clean anti-corruption crusader with a mission to build ‘Naya Pakistan’ has come to a halt. His political survival would depend on how he is going to adapt himself and the PTI to the new political environment where he faces a united Opposition without the direct assistance of the military establishment.



Read in source website

The relevance of movies dealing with toxic masculinity was in evidence at the Oscars

Everything fromThe Power of The Dog winning only one of its 12 nominations to the silent applause and standing ovation for Troy Kotsur’s Best Supporting Actor win inCODA was swept off the table in the face of Will Smith’s altercation with Chris Rock. Smith, who went on to win the Best Actor Award for his role as Richard Williams inKing Richard , slapped Rock when the actor and comedian made a ‘joke’ about Smith’s wife, Jada Pinkett Smith’s hair loss. The neo-western,The Power of the Dog , based on Thomas Savage’s eponymous novel, apart from other things, deals with toxic masculinity, which is what the Smith-Rock confrontation was at one level. In other Oscar news, the heart-warming coming-of-age story,CODA directed by Siân Heder won all three awards it was nominated for. Denis Villeneuve’s exquisite adaptation of Frank Herbert’s science fiction classic,Dune , won the maximum awards. Of the 10 nominations,Dune: Part One (as it is titled onscreen), won six. The golden man went to Hans Zimmer’s score, sound, editing, visual effects, cinematography and production design.

Drive My Car from Japan, co-written and directed by Ryusuke Hamaguchi, had four nominations, which it won ahead of Paolo Sorrentino’s intensely personalThe Hand of God from Italy and Bhutan’sLunana: A Yak in the Classroom . Smith’s fellow nominees for the best actor included Benedict Cumberbatch as the closeted, conflicted rancher inThe Power of the Dog , Javier Bardem’s eye-popping turn as Desi Arnaz in Aaron Sorkin’sBeing the Ricardos , Andrew Garfield as Jonathan Larson in Lin-Manuel Miranda’s biographical musicalTick, Tick... Boom! and Denzel Washington as Macbeth in Joel Coen’s black-and-white take onThe Tragedy of Macbeth . Jessica Chastain’s win in the best actress category forThe Eyes of Tammy Faye faced some stiff competition from Olivia Colman in Maggie Gyllenhaal’sThe Lost Daughter and Kristen Stewart as Lady Diana inSpencer . The supporting actress category was also closely fought with Ariana DeBose fromWest Side Story winning against Jessie Buckley (The Lost Daughter ), Judi Dench (Belfast ), Kirsten Dunst (The Power of the Dog ) and Aunjanue Ellis (King Richard ). Paul Thomas Anderson’s delightfully comfortingLicorice Pizza was yet another coming-of-age film with a strong presence at the nomination stage, but did not win. While Jane Campion’s best director win forThe Power of the Dog follows Chloé Zhao’s win last year forNomadland , making her the second woman to win in as many years, the Smith-Rock spat proves that there are miles to go before show business could come of age. Bad jokes, like bad cinema, are best ignored and not put down with violence.



Read in source website

New York, March 28: Albert Einstein’s inability to speak until he was three years old helped him to break new ground with concepts of space, time and energy, the New York Times said yesterday. This opinion came in the first of three articles in the paper on a collection of thousands of the physicist's letters, notebooks, and manuscripts to be published by the Princeton University Press. The papers told of Einstein as a child, whose inability or unwillingness, to speak led to the development of an extraordinary capacity for non-verbal conceptualisation, the Times said. Such use of abstract concepts, rather than words, enabled him to break free from methods of thought that prevented others from seeing the limitations of concepts rooted in direct human experience. While at school in Munich in the 1880’s, his teacher reported that “nothing good would ever come of the young Einstein.” By the time he was 26, Einstein had already published his first paper on the Theory of Relativity and was laying down the foundation of the Quantum Theory. At this time, he applied for a teacher’s post at a secondary school in Berne, Switzerland, saying he was qualified to teach physics. He was turned down.



Read in source website

While using a stern ultimatum to five former ministers to surrender within 72 hours, the military regime of Lt General H M Ershad on the fifth day of the crackdown in Bangladesh rounded up 250 persons, including six former ministers and the mayor of the Dacca Municipal Corporation, Abul Hasnat.

While using a stern ultimatum to five former ministers to surrender within 72 hours, the military regime of Lt General H M Ershad on the fifth day of the crackdown in Bangladesh rounded up 250 persons, including six former ministers and the mayor of the Dacca Municipal Corporation, Abul Hasnat. The arrest of Hasnat, considered to be a strong man of Dacca since the days of Ziaur Rahman, and who became a minister for public works in the Sattar cabinet before being sacked on February 11, when Sattar dissolved on corruption charges was announced by Radio Kashmir.

CPI’s line

The 12th Congress of the concluding session of the Communist Party of India has ended with a call for adopting a new political line for a left and a democratic alternative to the Congress (I) government headed by Indira Gandhi and electing a 138-member council to guide the party. A senior member of the party said that the party was never so united. The ghost of Dangeism has been laid to rest.

Cracker mishap

Three persons, including an eight-year-old girl, were killed and seven injured in an explosion in Bangalore in a house where crackers were stored. The explosion blew off the roof of the house and battered an adjacent building.



Read in source website

Will Smith won best actor. But he proved himself to be a poor artist.

For a moment, it almost seemed like it was part of the gag — a scripted bit of levity to make a stuffy evening more fun. Will Smith, the amiable Hollywood A-lister, jumped up on stage after comedian Chris Rock made a joke about his wife. The actor slapped the comedian. As it became clear that the moment wasn’t scripted, the audience — the celebrities at the Oscars and those watching around the world – struggled to come to terms with the shock. Smith, as he accepted the Academy Award for best actor for his performance in King Richard, offered a tearful justification — protecting his family from the slur — and an apology to the Academy.

On social media, there have been justifications and expressions of support for the slap. Rock’s joke can certainly be seen as insensitive — he made fun of Jada Pinkett-Smith’s alopecia, which causes hair loss. Then there are Smith’s traumatic experiences witnessing domestic violence in his home as a child, which, many conjecture, have made him more sensitive to words he perceived as bullying towards his wife. It is possible, of course, to have sympathy for Smith’s anger. But that sympathy should not obfuscate a glaring truth: On a stage that is meant to celebrate art and freedom, one man hit another, tried to subdue and silence him.

Smith could have just let the joke slide, or responded with words of his own. Rock is known as a comedian who pushes the boundaries of what is socially acceptable and he may well have crossed a line. In the end, however, the Oscars, which have been struggling to retain an audience, were overshadowed by an act of violence — the art of cinema, which it professes to celebrate, be damned. Will Smith won best actor. But he proved himself to be a poor artist.

This editorial first appeared in the print edition on March 29, 2022 under the title ‘What’s in a slap’.



Read in source website

By listening to its students, NALSAR University has set a good example of how promising words can be translated into meaningful action.

On Saturday, NALSAR University of Law in Hyderabad announced that a floor in one of its hostels will be a gender-neutral space for students who self-identify as LGBTQI+. In doing so, it has become one of a minuscule number of educational institutions in the country that have tried to create inclusive, safe public spaces for gender and sexual minorities. In 2018, the Tata Institute of Social Sciences had established a gender-neutral space in its girls’ hostel and Ashoka University inaugurated gender-neutral washrooms. NALSAR, however, plans to go further. The university plans to eventually set up a gender-neutral hostel — its vice-chancellor told this newspaper that more changes, applicable to student bodies, faculty members, support staff and academic curriculum and reading material, are on the cards.

NALSAR University’s initiative is much-needed and enormously welcome. It demonstrates the kind of change that other educational institutions can also implement in order to create campuses that are safe and welcoming for all students. It also shows how, very often, the most important changes come not through top-down fiat, but through conversations and movements on the ground. At NALSAR University, active engagement with the student community led to the draft Policy on Inclusive Education for Gender and Sexual Minorities. Apart from ensuring students “reasonable accommodation in alignment with their preferred gender identity”, the interim policy, which is currently in place to address concerns of LGBTQI+ students, also states that name and pronoun changes shall be available to anyone. In addition, self-identification would only require a self-attested declaration and would be the basis for recognition of gender identity and sexual orientation in the university. By thus honouring its students’ wishes in relation to how they self-identify, and prioritising this over the rigid lines that are enforced elsewhere, NALSAR University shows a commitment to inclusivity that is still all too rare.

Following the NALSA v Union of India judgment of the Supreme Court in 2014, which recognised transgender people as the “third gender”, the University Grants Commission had issued a circular in 2015 to the vice-chancellors of all universities that “TG-friendly infrastructure like washrooms, restrooms etc” be built. But movement even on the basic suggestions in this circular — which made no mention of gender-neutral accommodation — has been far too slow, raising concerns that “inclusivity”, which is also one of the goals mentioned in the National Education Policy, remains, in many areas, a mere buzzword. By listening to its students, NALSAR University has set a good example of how promising words can be translated into meaningful action.

This editorial first appeared in the print edition on March 29, 2022 under the title ‘Open in deed’.



Read in source website

Delhi, more than Beijing, has stepped in now to help Colombo resolve its economic mess. Besides extending a credit line, Delhi has started work on a series of joint projects including the Trincomalee Oil Tank Farms, renewable power projects, and a cultural centre in Jaffna.

The arrival of refugees from Sri Lanka in Rameswaram last week has only underlined the serious economic crisis playing out in the island nation. Since the three-decade long civil war ended in 2009, this is the first time refugees have arrived on the Tamil Nadu coast. Those who landed in Rameswaram said they were forced to flee the country because food and work had become scarce in towns and villages. Newspapers have suspended publication due to shortage of newsprint and food inflation has shot up dramatically. Reports point to a bleak scenario with the Rajapaksa government forced to deploy security personnel at petrol pumps to manage the fuel ration: Street protests have become a regular feature as people struggle to make ends meet. India could expect an influx of economic refugees if the situation deteriorates. This is the backdrop of Foreign Minister S Jaishankar’s Sri Lanka visit that began on Monday — both countries are expected to sign agreements, including in defence and maritime security. This is a follow up to the $2.4 billion financial aid India has extended over the past few months.

At the heart of the crisis is Sri Lanka’s mounting debt, which has drained the country of foreign currency, so much so that it can’t even pay for fuel and foodgrain imports. Tourism, the bedrock of the Sri Lankan economy, was hit badly, first by the Easter bombings in 2019 and then, the Covid pandemic. The war in Ukraine has disrupted supply routes, leading to shortage of essential goods. An ill-timed plan to promote organic farming has fuelled fertiliser shortages and a fall in output. All these have contributed to the making of the perfect storm. During the Mahinda Rajapaksa presidency between 2005 and 2015, the country had borrowed heavily, particularly from China, to build infrastructure, including a mega port city in Hambantota. These capital-intensive projects did not deliver the expected returns, which has left the economy reeling under a mountain of debt: Colombo owes Beijing around $3 billion, for instance.

Delhi, more than Beijing, has stepped in now to help Colombo resolve its economic mess. Besides extending a credit line, Delhi has started work on a series of joint projects including the Trincomalee Oil Tank Farms, renewable power projects, and a cultural centre in Jaffna. However, considering the complex history between the two countries, India should tread cautiously in this moment in Sri Lanka. While the two countries share centuries of spiritual, political, economic and cultural ties, Sri Lanka is extremely sensitive about anything that impinges on, or is seen to impinge on, the autonomy of its foreign and domestic policies. It must also be made clear that Delhi’s involvement is for the sake of the Sri Lankan people, not to bail out the ruling Rajapaksa clan.

This editorial first appeared in the print edition on March 29, 2022 under the title ‘Besieged Colombo’.



Read in source website

Atishi writes: The Centre's decision to unify Delhi municipalities only postpones the MCD elections to a time when the BJP would have better electoral prospects

On March 9, the State Election Commission (SEC) sent an official invite for a press conference at 5 pm to announce the dates for the upcoming MCD elections. The very same day, the SEC received a letter from the Ministry of Home Affairs that the Centre was planning to unify the three MCDs and therefore the announcement should be postponed. This letter was followed by a slew of media stories and interactions with BJP leaders. Many reports speculated about a series of reforms that would be a part of the bill; these included the possibility of direct mayoral elections, direct transfer of funds from the Centre to the local bodies and how an empowered cabinet-like structure would be created to do away with the obsolete structure of standing committees.

It is a fact that the highest amount of fund transfers to MCDs was done under AAP’s tenure. Data for the past few years show that funds given to MCD by the Government of Delhi in 2010-11 under Congress rule was Rs 1,465 crore, in 2014-15 it was Rs 4,380 crore under the President’s Rule and in 2021-22 it was Rs 6,172 crore under AAP. Contrary to this data, the BJP ruled MCD has claimed that the current financial crisis of the municipalities has been caused because of the Government of Delhi. Therefore, the expectation from the new bill was that it would also provide greater financial support to these MCDs. It was also speculated that the number of wards might be increased as the voting population of each municipal ward is between 60,000-70,000 voters, which is bigger than assembly constituencies in some of the smaller states.

The Delhi Municipal Corporation (Amendment) Bill (2022), was tabled in the Lok Sabha on March 25. This bill can be described as underwhelming at best. The bill contains none of the speculated reforms. It proposes only three changes in the governance structure of the municipal corporations. First. it unifies all three MCDs — north, south and east — into one single Municipal Corporation of Delhi. Second, it reduces the number of wards from 272 to 250. Third, it has a provision for creating a viceroy like structure, a “special officer” who will be responsible for running the government until the next election is held.

It is clear that this bill doesn’t bring any substantive governance, administrative or financial reforms in the MCD. The only thing it effectively does is to indefinitely postpone the MCD elections. The reduction in the number of wards from 272 to 250, means that the population per ward will broadly remain the same. However, to change the number of wards, delimitation will be required. The previous delimitation which had taken place before the 2017 MCD election had taken approximately 18 months. Therefore, it wouldn’t be wrong to assume that the elections might get postponed by 16 to 18 months. It is also noteworthy that unlike the previous bill that clearly specified which year’s census should be used to carry out the delimitation exercise, the current bill is silent on the use of specific census data which gives scope for further postponement of MCD elections if the government decides to use the 2023 Census data for delimitation. During this period, the MCD will be ruled by a nominated “special officer” instead of democratically elected representatives. This is akin to introducing a President’s Rule in a state.

This also raises a question on the agency of an autonomous body such as the Election Commission, whose prima facie job is to ensure free and fair elections in the country. The body has become a puppet in the hands of the central government.

It is difficult to find one substantial change in the bill that could be considered as a rationale to introduce it at this time. It is also pertinent to ask that if unification is like a silver bullet to all of MCD’s problems then why wasn’t it done in the more than seven years the BJP has been in power at the Centre? Why was it proposed on the day of the announcement of the election date? The bill does not solve any policy problems related to governance in Delhi. It only seems to work for the postponement of MCD elections.

In the 15 years of the BJP’s rule, rampant corruption and three garbage mountains at the entrance of Delhi have become a hallmark of its MCD tenure. From the dilapidated conditions of government hospitals to selling away government property at throwaway prices, the BJP ruled MCD has failed to deliver on any of the areas that come under its prerogative. There exists a strong sentiment across Delhi to remove the BJP from the municipal corporations and elect AAP. Therefore, the BJP wants to postpone the elections to a time when they would have better electoral prospects. This is what makes the bill so dangerous. Today, the MCD elections are being postponed. Tomorrow, if the BJP is losing the Gujarat elections scheduled in the month of December, can they not bring a bill to unify Gujarat and Maharashtra and thereby postpone the elections? In the future if the BJP is losing the parliamentary elections, they may even propose an amendment to the Representation of the People Act, (1951) and bring the entire country under the rule of a non-democratically nominated administrator. The Delhi Municipal Corporation (Amendment) Bill could be the beginning of a vicious cycle of abuse of power by the central government, which, if not opposed now, could lead to a situation where the elections in this country will be held at the behest of the ruling party.

This column first appeared in the print edition on March 29, 2022 under the title ‘A bid to control’. The writer is an MLA from Delhi and a senior leader of Aam Aadmi Party.



Read in source website

Rajeswari Sengupta writes: Inflation is best addressed by the central bank using monetary policy, not by the government adjusting taxes

RBI is an inflation-targeting central bank. It is legally mandated to keep inflation in check. Yet it has persisted with easy monetary policy, even as inflationary pressures have increased. We need to understand why, and what could be the repercussions.

Let’s first ask: Is inflation a problem in India? Indeed, it is. For most of the past two years, CPI (consumer price index) inflation has been hovering close to the 6 per cent upper threshold of the RBI’s target band. Inflation averaged 6.1 per cent during the pandemic period (April 2020 to June 2021), despite a massive collapse in aggregate demand. It then dipped somewhat as food prices eased, but underlying inflation (core inflation which excludes food and fuel items) has remained around 6 per cent in the past 12 months. Then in January 2022, as food prices recovered, headline inflation once again crossed the upper threshold of the inflation targeting band.

Inflationary pressures do not seem to be diminishing either. Instead, they continue to build up. The standard measure of inflation “in the pipeline” is WPI (wholesale price index) inflation, since price increases at the wholesale level tend to translate into retail inflation in due course. And the WPI is sounding a loud alarm. Between April 2021 and February 2022, WPI inflation averaged 12.7 per cent — the highest in more than a decade.

The problems do not stop there. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has resulted in a sharp increase in global commodity prices, including prices of crude oil, edible oils, and fertilisers. At the same time, a resurgence of the pandemic in mainland China and Hong Kong has led to shutdowns that will further constrain supplies of raw materials. Even if the war and the pandemic in China subside soon, their effects will not.

Indian firms are already adapting to this situation, passing on commodity price increase to retail prices. We have reports of double-digit increases in the prices of consumer goods as well as in the real estate sector. Even though the government continues to suppress domestic pump prices, prices of petrol, diesel and cooking gas have gone up in major cities.

Standard economics gives us a guide for how central banks should react in a situation like this. It says that monetary policy should accommodate the first round of commodity price increase, but only under certain conditions, notably that inflation is initially on target, and expectations are firmly anchored. But neither condition holds at present. Inflation is already too high, and so are expectations. As of January 2022, 68 per cent of households surveyed by the RBI expected prices in the 1-year ahead period to increase more than the current rate, up from 63 per cent one year ago.

In some quarters, an argument is nonetheless being made that monetary policy should not be tightened when inflation is driven by supply-side factors, as it can adversely impact growth. This is fallacious. When there are supply constraints, using easy monetary policy to boost demand is not going to boost output. It will only create a situation of excess demand, pushing up prices even further. And if firms are expecting high inflation, this will send things into a vicious spiral, as they will increase their prices even more in advance of any input price pressures.

Surely the RBI is aware of all of this. So why is it still not acting on it? To answer this let’s take a step back and look at what is happening globally.

The RBI is not the only central bank that is not reacting to inflation. The US Federal Reserve has been slow to raise rates even as inflation has reached a four-decade high. The European Central Bank has been even slower to react. The problem seems to be that governments all over the world are worried about growth. They are hoping that central banks can somehow solve this problem since government debts are at exceptionally high levels. Until governments accept that reviving growth is their responsibility, not that of the central banks, — especially not when inflationary pressures are on the rise — these banks will not be able to focus on inflation.

In India, monetary policy also suffers from a strong fiscal dominance. As a result, not only is the RBI expected to support growth, it is also expected to keep the government’s borrowing costs in check, which is in direct conflict with its inflation targeting objective.

What are the repercussions of the RBI ignoring inflationary pressures? A decade ago, we were in a similar situation where inflation had started increasing but the RBI delayed its response because it was focusing on growth. When inflation subsequently took off, it reached double digits and the RBI had to raise interest rates aggressively to bring it down. That was a very painful adjustment. We do not need a repeat of that episode now. In other words, we need to recognise that high inflation is the real threat to growth, not prudent monetary policy tightening.

In addition, if the RBI does allow inflation to take off, there will be long-lasting repercussions for its credibility. Inflation control requires anchored inflation expectations. But if the public sees the RBI consistently ignoring inflation, expectations can rapidly get unanchored, and then it becomes very costly to bring it down.

To conclude, inflation is best addressed by the central bank using monetary policy, not by the government adjusting taxes. The RBI needs to urgently revisit its inflation forecast and its monetary policy stance in order to avoid potentially painful adjustments down the road.

This column first appeared in the print edition on March 29, 2022 under the title ‘Why RBI must heed inflation’. The writer is Associate Professor of Economics, IGIDR.



Read in source website

C Raja Mohan writes: Unlike a divided Germany that did not have full sovereignty and was troubled by its status as the fulcrum of the Cold War, Poland has risen to the occasion

As President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine turns into a “total war” between Russia and the West, Poland has emerged as the new geopolitical node of Europe. At the end of his visit to Europe last week, US President Joe Biden delivered a major speech in Poland’s capital, not only condemning Putin’s aggression but also calling for his ouster from the Kremlin. “For God’s sake, this man can’t remain in power”, Biden concluded his fiery speech in front of a medieval Polish castle in Warsaw. Biden’s comments at the very end of his speech also reinforced the repeated US affirmation that the West has no quarrel with the Russian people and that the problem is Putin’s overweening ambition and unprovoked aggression.

White House officials sought to walk back Biden’s remarks by “clarifying” that he was not calling for “regime change” in Russia and that his remarks were not part of the written text. But it is not easy for leaders to take back powerful words, once they are uttered. Biden’s remarks will only confirm the Kremlin’s fear that Washington is bent on regime change in Russia. There is no doubt now that the prospects for any near-term political reconciliation between the West and Putin’s Russia have dimmed significantly.

The Kremlin was quick to remind that the US president does not decide who rules Russia. It also sent even a more powerful message by bombing Lviv, the western city of Ukraine close to the Polish border. Many European allies are flinching at Biden’s idea of a total war with Putin’s Russia. French President Emmanuel Macron was among the various European leaders to dissociate themselves from Biden’s remarks. But as Biden sets a bolder, and highly risky, agenda for the confrontation with Russia, some in Europe are certainly cheering him on. Most of those seeking a decisive confrontation with Russia are in the belt of European states running down the spine of Central Europe from the north to the south. They also form the eastern flank of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation.

The Central European nations have long been viewed as peripheral to European geopolitics. They were treated as passive buffers between Russia and Western Europe. The Central European peoples were forever at the mercy of more powerful neighbours to the east and west, especially Russia and Germany, that repeatedly invaded, divided, annexed, and subjugated them.

Not any more. The Central Europeans are now finding their voice. The Russian war on Ukraine has now given the central European states an unprecedented political role in shaping the region’s future. They no longer accept a secondary status to the traditionally dominant West European powers in the regional hierarchy. Nor are they willing to accept Russia’s claim for a veto over their national security orientation.
For the Central Europeans, the Russian invasion is a “we told you so” moment. Unlike the establishments in Western Europe and North America that saw Putin as a rational actor and Russia as a weak regional power, the Central Europeans never stopped warning about Moscow’s abiding geopolitical ambitions. The source of their caution was deep-rooted suspicion of Russian intentions based on their own tragic experience with Russia’s regional hegemony over the centuries.

Last June, for example, they shot down a move by Macron and the German Chancellor to have a European summit with Putin after Biden met with Putin in Geneva to explore a broad political understanding with Russia. They feared that any accommodation between Russia on the one hand and the US, France and Germany on the other, will inevitably be at the expense of Central Europe.

They have long objected to Germany’s deep commercial and deep energy ties to Russia, as empowering Putin and giving him strategic leverage over Europe. In the last few weeks since the Russian invasion, they have sought to shame Germany for its reluctance to provide military assistance to Ukraine. They are egging on NATO to raise military support for Ukraine and calling on the US and EU to expand the scope of economic and other sanctions on Russia.

If Germany was at the epicentre of the Cold War divide in Europe, it is Poland that occupies the hot seat today. Unlike a divided Germany that did not have full sovereignty and was troubled by its status as the fulcrum of the Cold War, Poland has risen to the occasion.

Poland has already taken more than two million refugees from Ukraine in the last month. With a long and shared history with the people of Ukraine, the Poles have opened their homes and hearts to the Ukrainians. Most of the weapons supplies to Ukraine flow through Poland. Warsaw is also eager to transfer more advanced weapons like fighter aircraft to Ukraine to blunt the Russian offensive. If the Poles do not hide their deepest resentments of Russia’s historic domination — whether Tsarist or Communist — over Central Europe, the Kremlin can’t temper its condescension towards Poland. On the eve of Biden’s visit to Poland, Russia’s former president and a trusted aide of Putin, Dmitry Medvedev, lashed out at the Polish elites as a “community of political imbeciles” afflicted by “pathological Russophobia”. Russia, of course, has its own memories of the Polish-Lithuanian imperialism. Medvedev reminded Poles of Russian success in rolling back the occupation of Moscow by the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth 400 years ago.

Even before the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the Poles and Central Europeans have been enthusiastic supporters of a stronger role for the US and NATO in Europe. They have had little faith in the visions for European “strategic autonomy” from Washington; they had no confidence in the will and capability of Western Europe in standing up to the Russian challenge.

The Trump administration had sought to exploit the differences between “old Europe” in the west and the “new (central) Europe” liberated from the Russian sphere of influence at the end of the Cold War. The Democrats, however, scoffed at Trump’s enthusiasm for the socially conservative Central European elites. But the Russian invasion of Ukraine has seen the Biden Democrats embrace Central Europe and elevate Poland to the centre of their European calculus.

In Warsaw, Biden predicted that the conflict over Ukraine will be a prolonged one between Russia and the West. If that assessment is right, the strategic significance of Central Europe at the heart of this confrontation will endure. Russia’s war in Ukraine is also bound to propel Poland to the front ranks of European powers. Warsaw’s impressive economic performance in the last three decades and its leadership in shaping the sub-regional institutions in Central Europe have steadily elevated the geopolitical salience of Poland.

For far too long, Central Europe has been a blind spot in India’s worldview. The east-west framework that defined India’s European policies had little room for “Mittle Europa” — or Middle Europe — that straddled this divide and defied the Cold War certitudes. There have been efforts in the last couple of years in Delhi to end the neglect of Central Europe.

As the “New Europe” regains its political agency, Delhi needs a better appreciation of the persistent political cleavages in the heart of the continent. These contradictions will not only shape the outcomes of the war in Ukraine but also the long-term evolution of European geopolitics.

This column first appeared in the print edition on March 29, 2022 under the title ‘At the centre, Poland’. The writer is Senior Fellow, Asia Society Policy Institute, Delhi and a contributing editor on international affairs for The Indian Express.



Read in source website

Ambreen Agha writes: Polarising politics over clothing robs women of agency, absolves state of responsibility

The ongoing hijab controversy — with the state and its institutions as equal participants – is another manufactured event that indicates the deepening of cultural tensions between the Hindu majority and the Muslim national minority. Stridently embracing a masculinist approach of “rescuing” Muslim women, the Karnataka High Court’s judgment pronounced that the hijab is not an “essential religious practice in Islam”. In doing so, the court seemed to ignore two interrelated ideas: Firstly, the primary human impulse of seeking freedom (guaranteed in and safeguarded by the Constitution), and secondly, that this freedom can be realised from the fluidity that lies in the practice of Islam, a point implicit in its own verdict. If the religion doesn’t sanction punishment for not wearing the veil, why is the state determined to deprive a whole generation of young hijab-wearing Muslim girls from pursuing education?

If the state continues to exercise prejudice against the hijab-wearing girls, depriving them of their fundamental rights, it will be the beginning of a new chapter of “historical disadvantage” in the political history of modern India. What is ironic is the glaring dissonance between India’s global aspirations and pursuit of collaborations, internationally, and a steady slide into inequality, domestically.

In this sweep of insidious currents of hostility towards the largest minority of the country, the state and its institutions seem to be on a path to systematically disempowering the community. This is, arguably, a fallout of the failure of liberal feminist politics and its longstanding view of the hijab as a sign of “increasing Arabisation” and an “instrument of oppression”. This biased and ill-informed view of liberal secular feminists led to the creation of a figure of an undesirable “other”, which rigidified the liberal and the conservative binaries within the mosaic of Islam and its followers. It is these mythical categories of the liberal and the conservative that has made the latter an easy target of Hindu authoritarianism in successive years of its ascendancy.

The retreat of the secular in India lies in the liberal gaze on the undesirable “other” – the hijab-clad Muslim woman – inescapably imbued with hostile perception and a “saviour complex”. In fact, the hijab has lived out its literal meaning (a “separation”) in Indian society, acting as a wall, or a medium to disengage, distance, and, subsequently, alienate. As a “central axis of difference between Muslim and non-Muslim societies” (Leila Ahmad, 1992), hijab has been made to function as a universal signifier of “backwardness”. However, in critiquing the Hindu right’s brazen violation and criminalisation of fundamental rights of Muslim women and holding accountable the liberal politics of policing [Muslim] bodies to impose their conception of “modernity”, I do not want to overlook the structures of patriarchy that exist and operate within Muslim societies that have over decades imposed “modesty” either through conformity or coercion.

What is lost in this contestation between “modernity” and “modesty” that embody two forms of patriarchies is the history of the changing meaning of the veil in different times and contexts — as a symbol of power, ideology, and identity, a commodity reinforcing capitalist production of desire, and a metaphor for the visible/invisible female body. Moreover, the polarising politics over clothing and mundane sartorial dilemmas — to change or continue with the practice — denies the existence of an assortment of Muslim bodies, negates Muslim women’s agency, and absolves the state of its responsibility to protect and empower its minorities – both national and immigrant.

The diverse history of the hijab is indicative of the relationship that exists between political transition and the construction of gender in any Muslim society. The bodies of women have been sites of political transformation — the change in the clothing of women reflects the change in politics. To view the practice of veiling with prejudice is nothing short of robbing the faith of its alternative histories and an expression of Islamophobia — subtle or blatant. The women’s rights movement, with and without the hijab, is a legitimate part of the larger political struggle for dignity and integrity in both contemporary Muslim majority and non-Muslim majority societies, like India.

It is in India that sartorial politics has reached its nadir. It started with the anti-CAA protests where the (Muslim) protestors could be “identified by their clothes” to the recent incidents where Muslim women were forced to remove their hijab. This prejudiced external behaviour (of the state and the society) can impact the mental life of the Muslim community with far-reaching effects.

As collective trauma among Muslims builds up and transforms into collective memory, it is important that the Indian state plays the role of an emancipator, and not an oppressor. Now that the hijab case waits to be heard in the Supreme Court, what needs to be seen is if the state will triumph in preserving the long tradition of social diversity amidst the global wave of anti-Muslim prejudice?

This column first appeared in the print edition on March 29, 2022 under the title ‘Veil and prejudice’. The writer is Associate Professor & Assistant Dean for Academic Affairs (Undergraduate Programmes), O P Jindal Global University



Read in source website

Avijit Pathak writes: To transform education we need to work on the quality of schools and pedagogy, honest and fair recruitment of teachers, relative autonomy of academic institutions and learn to value the uniqueness of each child.

It is not easy to take a categorical position on the UGC’s latest move to introduce the Common University Entrance Test (CUET) for admissions in undergraduate courses in 45 central universities in the country. True, no one can negate its immediate appeal. In a country like ours, because of the uneven quality of different school boards — from the much-hyped CBSC and ICSE to not so rigorous regional boards — there is a huge trust deficit and suspicion about the academic quality of even the “toppers”. No wonder, a centralised mode of ranking and evaluation through the CUET is bound to have its appeal; it promises an “objective” and “value-neutral” measurable index for selecting and eliminating young aspirants for different courses. Furthermore, this centralised test would free the tension-ridden youngsters from the pressure of writing multiple entrance tests in different colleges/universities. Likewise, the supremacy of the CUET score/ranking in the selection process would invariably eliminate the pathology of absurd and inflated cut-offs for admissions in “branded” colleges.

This is like saying that one need not necessarily get 499/500 in the board exam to study psychology in Lady Shri Ram College in Delhi University! The only thing that would matter now is one’s performance in the CUET. Moreover, the proponents of a standardised test like this would always argue that there is no other way to filter people when the number of aspirants is too high; and this is possible only when we avoid “subjective biases”, cherish “objectivity”, and quantify and measure with mathematical precision one’s mental aptitude and domain knowledge in a specific discipline.

Yet, despite these practical arguments, we should also acquire the courage to see the limitations of this sort of standardised test. First, the dominant structure of education prevalent in the country is essentially book-centric and exam-oriented; either rote learning or strategic learning (a gift of coaching centres) is its essence; and far from learning and unlearning with joy, wonder and creativity, young students become strategists or exam-warriors.

Weekly tests, monthly tests, mock tests, and all sorts of standardised tests — NEET, JEE, and mathematics or science Olympiads — invade the mental landscape of our students. Under these circumstances, true learning suffers. Is it, therefore, surprising that for an IIT aspirant, physics tends to become primarily FIITJEE physics, or mathematics is nothing more than what the coaching centres at Kota consider worth teaching? The question is: Will the CUET alter the scenario? Or, will it be yet another addition in the list of tests our children have to prepare for with stress and anxiety? And will it be possible for teachers in our schools to teach history or literature, and geography or chemistry with joy and creative surplus? Or, will they be further pressurised to teach only for these standardised tests? Will they find themselves insignificant and irrelevant as educators amid the “experts” who control the National Testing Agency? Is it that, in the coming years, schools are going to lose their relevance as students and parents are likely to rely primarily on gigantic coaching centres and fancy Ed Tech companies?

Second, we should not forget to ask yet another pertinent question: Is the tyranny of the MCQ-centric “objective” tests diminishing what every genuine learner needs — creative exploration, interpretative understanding and self-reflexivity? Even if the proponents of scientism assert that physics or mathematics is purely objective, and free from ambiguities associated with subjective interpretations, is it applicable to the domain of humanities and social sciences? Take an illustration. Can there be one and only one “correct” answer to a question like this: Was Swami Vivekananda a Hindu nationalist? Or, for that matter, was Jawaharlal Nehru a western modernist? These are complex questions with nuanced and diverse interpretations.

And if, in the name of “objective” tests, our young students are deprived of the hermeneutic art of interpretation and skill of argumentation, and compelled to reduce everything —be it an algebraic equation or the curved trajectory of the freedom struggle — into an “objective” fact, we would do great damage to their creativity. Definitely, there is something more in Gandhi than, say, the hard fact relating to the date of his birth or assassination, or the year of publication of My Experiments with Truth. If nothing matters more than these “objective facts” in standardised tests, our children would lose the enchanting power of creative articulation, and culture of debate and contestation.

Meaningful learning is not just about exams; nor does meaningful teaching aim at transforming young students into reckless strategists and hyper-competitive exam-warriors. And textbooks — including the NCERT books sanctified by the CUET — are not sacred. In fact, truly meaningful learning takes place outside the parameters of the official texts and curriculum. The techno-managers of the National Testing Agency might not go beyond the NCERT texts. But who knows a young learner’s worldview might undergo a process of radical transformation simply because an enabling teacher has inspired her to see beyond the “syllabus”, and read a short story by Saadat Hasan Manto, a poem by Walt Whitman, or a conversation between Albert Einstein and Rabindranath Tagore?

Hence, for real transformation, we have to see beyond the CUET, work on the quality of schools and creatively nuanced life-affirming pedagogy; and we must think of honest and fair recruitment of spirited teachers, and relative autonomy of academic institutions. And above all, we must learn to value the uniqueness of each child — the possibility of her inner flowering. Will it ever be possible?

This column first appeared in the print edition on March 29, 2022 under the title ‘An answer called CUET’. Pathak writes extensively on education and culture



Read in source website

The Bengal assembly witnessed bedlam yesterday as Trinamool and BJP MLAs traded blows, prompting the speaker to suspend five BJP members. The brawl started when BJP MLAs stormed the well of the assembly demanding that CM Mamata Banerjee make a statement on the recent Birbhum killings. They were confronted by Trinamool MLAs which led to fisticuffs. 

This is certainly condemnable. Legislative assembly sittings are meant to discuss substantive matters, not turn into a venue for wrestling matches. As it is assembly sittings across states have been reducing over the years. This not only makes a mockery of democratic norms but also inevitably reduces the quality of law making. That in turn leads to poor governance. And all of this comes at the expense of taxpayers’ money. 

At the heart of the problem is the intense political polarisation being witnessed across the country. Electoral politics today is all about winning at all costs. And this involves not only opposing whatever rival parties propose but also demonising political opponents. Hence, the ground for reasoned discussions has shrunk dramatically. Bengal, given its highly politicised society, is a classic example where both the governing Trinamool and opposition BJP appear to be relying on muscle power to retain or capture political space. The trend now seems to be affecting the conduct of top leaders themselves. Unless this changes and legislators revert to the traditions of democratic debate and discussions, Indian politics will soon resemble a collection of political gangs and strongmen.



Read in source website

Data presented by a parliamentary standing committee show that vacancies in the IAS, earlier only thought to be at the central government level, are affecting state governments too. GoI had mooted an amendment to service rules to ensure more officers are available for central deputation by making states’ consent immaterial, triggering stiff pushback from opposition-governed states. GoI was unhappy that though the number of IAS officers had increased from a decade ago, officers on the central deputation reserve had reduced by 27%. Now the parliamentary committee has revealed that over 1,500 sanctioned IAS officer posts (22%) at the state level lie vacant with some states reporting greater gaps than others.

This is despite quick fixes like conferring IAS on state civil service officers or temporarily appointing other central or state cadre officers to posts reserved for IAS. The last review of IAS cadre strengths in 2012 had fixed the annual intake at 180 officers. The parliamentary committee has remarked that a panel constituted to revise this number for 2022 onwards can “significantly” increase the intake to fill sanctioned posts. But alongside quantity, bureaucracy is also battling a crisis of quality.

Recent GoI initiatives like Mission Karmayogi and Capacity Building Commission must lead to a performance management system that can reward the best and brightest and deter young officers from sliding into mediocrity. Underperformers must be retired prematurely so that they don’t drag down governance. Currently, talented officers, sandwiched between mediocrity and officer scarcity, are heavily overworked. This is not a sustainable path. Unlike pyramidal hierarchies in typical organisations, central cadres like IAS and IPS have “cylindrical” structures because of assured promotions. For instance, Punjab police has around 30 DGP/ADGP-level officers. This top-heaviness isn’t contributing to governance: look at Punjab’s entrenched drug and liquor mafia. Meanwhile, GoI’s efforts at lateral entry have struggled because unlike many IAS officers who rise to the mid- and senior-levels with deep-rooted knowledge of the terrain and strong support networks, lateral entrants face the outsider tag despite industry or research or grassroots experience they may possess.

But where quantity or quality won’t fix the “bureaucracy deficit” that the parliamentary committee observed is the role of bad politics. There’s no political incentive to review the number of officers parked in non-essential departments, commissions, corporations and schemes that symbolise big government. This would be a starting point to cut governance flab at not just the personnel level. Maybe GoI can show the way to states.



Read in source website

The two-day Bharat Bandh called by a joint platform of central trade unions got off to a very uneven start across states yesterday. The agenda of the protesting unions include both staple fare such as an end to privatisation and also higher budgetary allocation for MGNREGA. The patchy response to a wide agenda aimed at canvassing broad support tells a tale. It’s that the unions represent a sliver of the workforce. Their irrelevance to the larger workforce – organised sector workers are just about 13% of the total labour supply – is only matched by GoI’s 14-year legislation to provide social security for unorganised workers.

The long trek home for millions of migrant workers after the imposition of a harsh national lockdown at short notice two years ago symbolised the precariousness of their jobs. Tragic worker deaths in incidents like factory or godown fires speak of their job conditions. The pandemic has worsened their lot despite GoI’s attempts beginning October 2020 to provide limited-duration fiscal support to create jobs with social security benefits. A year into the policy, the majority of urban jobs were either casual labour or self-employed. About 51% of urban employed, according to latest GoI data, belonged to these two categories in the July-September 2021 quarter. This is a higher proportion than the pre-pandemic level.

CMIE’s jobs data for the September-December 2021 period indicated that India’s labour force is 436 million strong. Of it, 32 million were unemployed and actively seeking work. It’s the age composition of the unemployed that is striking. Of 32 million, as many as 30 million were the 15-29 age group. Unemployment rates suddenly collapse for older age groups. It’s a proxy indicator that many Indians willy-nilly end up in jobs with poor work conditions and low pay. Only sustained high economic growth and investment in enhancing human capital will help. As for GoI’s fiscal support, which will end this week, it helped about 5 million people, a little over 1% of the labour force.



Read in source website

China is increasingly under threat of being overwhelmed by a surge in infections caused by the BA.2 strain of the Omicron variant of the Sars-CoV-2 virus that causes Covid-19. The surge, which once again brings into question the nation’s controversial Covid-zero approach to managing the pandemic has already resulted in significant restrictions across provinces, with more in the offing, and will likely be followed by the sort of information blockade the country put in place when the disease first emerged in Wuhan.

There is reason for Beijing to lose sleep: The country has a significant number of old people (264 million are over the age of 60), and many of them (52 million, according to Nature magazine) have not been vaccinated. The proportion of those above 80 who have been fully vaccinated and received a booster, according to the magazine, is around 20%. Some experts believe that China could well see a surge in infections that is as brutal as the one Hong Kong did — and for similar reasons, an infectious variant, a low-level of vaccination among the elderly, and a Covid-zero approach, which involves suppressing infections, even through draconian measures. An additional worry for China is the relatively low efficacy of the primary vaccine used in the country, Sinovac (just over World Health Organization’s mandated 50%, according to a large field trial in Brazil).

India has played it smart by not following the Covid-zero approach; its strategy has been focused on living with the pandemic, an approach that has scientific basis. But the surge in China does highlight the need for India to continue with mask mandates; screen samples for new variants of the virus; and administer booster doses to the entire adult population. That will help us live with the virus, stamping which out isn’t just impractical, but also downright impossible.



Read in source website

After decades, refugees fleeing Sri Lanka are once again arriving on the shores of India, this time triggered by what is possibly the island nation’s worst economic crisis. There are reports of severe shortages of food and fuel, the country’s foreign exchange reserves fell to just $2.3 billion last month with debt payments for the rest of the year pegged at $4 billion, and the government of President Gotabaya Rajapaksa struggling to pay for imports of essential commodities. Foreign exchange reserves were also hit because of Covid-19. The government’s tax cuts and switch to organic agriculture further squeezed revenues and increased pressure on the indebted economy. The crisis was in the making for almost a decade, largely due to the country’s excessive dependence of imports and borrowings for a raft of massive infrastructure projects. Sri Lanka’s external debt stands at $45 billion, including about $8 billion owed to China, and outstanding international sovereign bonds worth $12.55 billion. There have been protests against the government, which has been forced to turn to India and China for bailouts.

The crisis has come at a time when there has been an improvement in bilateral relations, especially after the containment of the fallout of Sri Lanka’s decision last year to scrap a trilateral agreement with India and Japan for the development of a terminal at the strategic Colombo port. Sri Lanka’s finance minister Basil Rajapaksa has worked closely with his Indian counterpart Nirmala Sitharaman and external affairs minister S Jaishankar to fashion an aid package for the island country. India has so far extended assistance worth $2.4 billion, including a recent $1 billion concessional loan for food and medicines and Prime Minister Narendra Modi has pledged to stand by Sri Lanka. This assistance is a perfect example of how India’s “Neighbourhood First” policy can benefit the region.

The crisis highlights how unbridled borrowing for big-ticket projects, such as those under China’s Belt and Road Initiative, can lead to complications for smaller countries that have signed on for Beijing’s flagship project. The crisis, however, could also be an opportunity for India and Sri Lanka to firm up plans for beneficial integration of their economic and energy sectors to ensure long-term stability.



Read in source website

When the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) won Uttar Pradesh (UP) in 2007, it was considered a historic moment for marginalised communities because it underlined the transformative potential of social justice politics. But the party’s complete rout in the recent assembly elections belied that hope. It is possible that the BSP might face a fate similar to Maharashtra’s Dalit political movement.

The BSP was born out of Babasaheb Ambedkar’s vision, which envisaged social justice as not merely an institutional practice for the economic welfare of the poor, but a dynamic tool to generate revolutionary political consciousness among marginalised communities. In the later stages, it was Kanshi Ram, the BSP’s founder, who re-imagined the agenda of social justice as a transformative political ideology. Kanshi Ram showcased that national political parties retain their domination over legislative bodies by relegating lower caste groups to passive vote banks. He proposed the replacement of the conventional ruling elites by Dalit-Bahujan collectives and forged alliances between Scheduled Castes (SCs) and backward groups.

By 2000, the BSP had risen as a maverick force and introduced Mayawati as a contender for Delhi’s throne. Her time as chief minister in UP expanded the representation of Dalits and Other Backward Classes (OBC) and worked against caste discrimination with law and order enforcement and social justice policies.

For sustained growth of the party, forming social and political alliances was a foundational requirement. However, stiff social divisions and cultural ruptures between Dalits and OBCs disallowed this possibility. Further, Mayawati showed little interest in crafting independent Dalit-Bahujan leadership in other states. Her defeat in the 2012 assembly elections first ignited criticism that the party was getting attached to the Jatavs, the largest SC group, whereas other worse-off social groups were not given space.

In consecutive elections, the party became increasingly dependent upon the Jatav social base and the capacity of individual candidates to mobilise support from their own castes and communities. The party’s limitation to engage with the vulnerable and economically poor sections within Dalits, OBCs, and Muslims, later forced the party to look for the dominant castes (mainly Brahmins) for electoral victories.

By the 2017 assembly elections in UP, the party was failing to project itself as a primary opposition to the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), instead investing its energies to challenge the Samajwadi Party (SP). This rivalry created more chasms between Dalit and OBC groups — which couldn’t be bridged by the time the two parties came together before the 2019 general election — allowing the BJP to mobilise socially vulnerable sections. It allowed the BJP to paint the Opposition as caste-based parties.

The BSP showed no organisational grit or ideological merit in challenging the Right-wing juggernaut. Instead, it was left hallucinating about its conventional social engineering tactics and assumed that its traditional vote base would remain committed to the party. The party looked unaware about the BJP’s growing might in the state. On the electoral turf, the party appeared lethargic, its leadership looked unconvincing, and there was lack of zeal among activists.

The party continues to have an ideological agenda but needs to regain the ability to provide a voice to the grievances of the deprived masses. It needs to rise above old electoral calculations based on the conventional arrangement of caste and communities and challenge the BJP on its core competence — election management, perception-building, and availability of capital. Defeating the BJP on a cultural turf is difficult now. Proponents of social justice politics must demonstrate sincere accountability towards worse-off social groups and ensure their dignified presence in the mainstream political process.

This is possible only if the Dalit-Bahujan movement promotes a dynamic mass leader, offers a populist slogan to unite the diverse deprived groups, and builds a sustained democratic struggle of Dalits and OBCs against the Hindutva regime.

Harish Wankhede is an assistant professor at Jawaharlal Nehru University 

The views expressed are personal



Read in source website

Some two years into the military standoff along the Line of Actual Control (LAC), Chinese foreign minister Wang Yi paid a short visit to India last week. The India leg of his trip was shrouded in secrecy even as other parts of the itinerary — Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Nepal — were well publicised. In diplomacy, secret visits are sometimes intended to break long-standing logjams and demonstrate a commitment to the resolution of conflicts. But this was no such visit. It was primarily aimed at testing India’s resolve and to assess if changing global geopolitics made New Delhi more amenable to giving in to China, much like in the past.

There used to be a time when railing against western imperialism with “like-minded” powers such as China and Russia used to be the high-watermark of India’s global footprint. The Russia-India-China (RIC) trilateral emerged in the context of the American unipolar moment in the immediate aftermath of the end of the Cold War. This RIC then morphed into Brazil, Russia, India, China (BRIC) and then added

South Africa (BRICS) as the global economic order underwent a transformation with the emergence of China and India as key economic powers. As part of these platforms, India tried to forge a partnership with China based on shared global outlooks. It was argued that this global convergence would eventually lead to a bilateral convergence as the two nations with divergent interests would be able to reconcile them by focusing on international challenges. It was another matter that China’s global interests were far more expansive than India’s and that there was hardly any hope beyond some tactical coordination at the global level. In the process, not only did Sino-Indian bilateral ties continue to suffer but India’s global footprint was also weighed down by the contradictions in the Sino-Indian global engagement.

But myths, once forged, attain a life of their own. And, Indian foreign policy continued to perpetuate this mythology till it was once and, hopefully, forever shattered by the bloody clashes of June 2020 in the Galwan Valley, leading to the deaths of 20 Indian soldiers. Since then, New Delhi has been steadfast that normalisation of ties with China won’t be possible without peace and tranquility along LAC. As external affairs minister S Jaishankar suggested: “Our [India’s] relationship (with China) is not normal, given the presence of a large number of troops in contravention of the 1993-96 agreements.” This message was also reiterated by national security adviser Ajit Doval who was invited by Wang Yi to visit China to take forward the Special Representatives talks on border issues only to be told that this would be possible only after disengagement and eventual de-escalation at LAC.

Wang Yi was fully aware of Indian demands. He was in regular touch with Indian interlocutors over the last two years. Beijing is fully aware of the sensitivities of India on this issue. But being sensitive to Indian concerns is not a priority for the Chinese. Just before he landed in India, he weighed in on the issue of Jammu and Kashmir at the meeting of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) in Pakistan, knowing full well how this would be received in India. When Wang Yi said Beijing “heard the call of many Islamic friends” over the Kashmir issue, adding that it “shared the same aspiration”, the Indian reaction was swift and pointed. It named the Chinese foreign minister in rejecting his reference to India, reminding him that not only does China have no locus standi on the matter but also that India refrains from public judgment of its internal issues.

Still, Wang Yi landed in New Delhi. The atmospherics were all wrong, the optics terrible and the underlying factors that make for a successful diplomatic trip absent. He came for a specific reason. Beijing has no interest in normalisation of ties. Its unprecedented military mobilisation along LAC is a sign that China is not likely to relent in its long-term goal of trying to make India bend to its will. But it has a short-term problem with the BRICS summit meeting approaching and it views the Russia-Ukraine crisis as an opportunity to lure India into making some grandiose assertions about Russia, China and India standing up to the West.

China is worried about the trajectory of the Ukraine crisis. After having embraced Putin during the Winter Olympics with a “no limits” partnership, it can’t afford to ignore him now. At a time when Xi Jinping’s focus should have been on the economic revival of China post-pandemic, there is a Covid resurgence and a global conflict. China is far more exposed to the global economy than Russia ever was and the vulnerabilities for China are readily apparent. The West has not given any indication that it is willing to shift its focus away from the Indo-Pacific any time soon even as it has been more understanding of the Indian position on the Ukraine crisis. As the Chinese position gets ever more precarious, wooing India to seek a common ground remains an option for Beijing which it is trying hard to operationalise.

But New Delhi only has to look at this visit to see that there is no fundamental reassessment in Beijing about its India policy. It’s still about targeting India’s vulnerabilities — be it making common cause with Pakistan on Kashmir or with the Taliban in Afghanistan. Wang Yi’s visit would seem curious only to those who have no understanding of how China operates. There was a method to this madness. Only this time, Indian policymakers seem to have kept their own sanity. Hopefully, there won’t be any going back.

Harsh V Pant is director, studies, and head, strategic studies programme, ORF 

The views expressed are personal



Read in source website

On February 24, when Vladimir Putin invaded Ukraine, India was hit by a geopolitical crisis, not of its making. It had close ties with actors involved in the conflict — and these actors were now at odds with each other. It also had little leverage to shape the course of the war, let alone stop the conflict.

There were also institutional divergences within India’s national security apparatus. All internal players agreed that Putin’s action wasn’t good for either global stability or Indian interests; they also agreed that Delhi had to continue engaging with Moscow.

But beyond that, assessments and conclusions differed. Some believed that the war would leave Russia unstable, weak, isolated, and more dependent on China. To them, the economic response to the invasion had shown the West’s power. It was time to begin a long-delayed conversation on strategic autonomy from Moscow, continue the structural shift towards the West, and be on the right side of the debate on State sovereignty.

Others believed that while Russia was facing military setbacks, it would eventually attain, partially, if not wholly, its objectives in Ukraine — and it would also remain a formidable player in its wider periphery. To them, it was imperative that Moscow did not tilt towards Beijing when it came to matters involving Indian security, and that Delhi maintains some distance from the western narrative on the issue.

This internal churn produced a synthesis in India’s policy approach.

Take Russia.

With its acquisition of the S-400 missile systems, Delhi had already shown Moscow its ability to take an autonomous position. With its abstentions at the United Nations (UN), India has once again sent a signal to Russia, and others, that it retains the ability to take decisions on its own, in its own interests.

But, at the same time, Delhi has ensured that Moscow cannot take it for granted. It has let it be known that Russian actions have imperilled Indian interests. It has directly engaged with Putin’s bete noire, Volodymyr Zelensky, and offered Ukraine humanitarian aid. And by pointing to the UN charter and the need to cease violence, India has told Russia that its actions violate established norms and the current path isn’t sustainable.

Delhi’s challenge is in preserving this balance — of making it clear that Russian actions don’t have support here, yet retaining Moscow’s support or neutrality when it comes to Delhi’s core security interests.

Take the United States (US).

In its private engagements in Washington, and with its explanation of the vote, India has made it clear to the US that it does not stand with Russia but also explained its predicament in the language of interests — a language that the US understands quite well. The measured statements from both the White House and State Department on India’s position, the US’s offer to offset Indian dependence on Russia with deeper defence ties, its repeated commitment to the Indo-Pacific, and its fairly aggressive approach to China has shown that what binds the India-US relationship is stronger than what divides it.

Delhi’s challenge is in taking its message — and here the language of interests alone won’t suffice — to a wider audience, for public opinion and the mood on the Hill is driving the executive’s policy on Russia. India should avoid actions that can alienate these already disenchanted constituencies.

And take China.

India watched as a debate played out in Washington DC between those who saw Beijing as a part of the problem or a part of the solution. Eventually, China’s actions strengthened those who saw it as a part of the problem. Beijing is now saddled with an ally (Russia), which has made a mess of an invasion, an adversary (US) which has warned it of economic and diplomatic consequences, and a hedging bloc (Europe), which is slowly overcoming its illusions about China. In the run-up to the party congress later this year, this external climate has forced a temporary reset in China’s approach from belligerence to accommodation — which explains Wang Yi’s uninvited visit to Delhi.

By engaging with him, but also making it clear that a return to the diplomatic status quo wasn’t possible with the existing military status quo, India — after two years — finally has the upper hand in the diplomatic duel with Beijing. This may be temporary and may not translate into concessions, but it expands Delhi’s options. Delhi’s challenge is to make the most of the moment while remaining clear-eyed about Beijing’s intentions and capabilities.

In sum, Delhi has managed to secure its basic interests. It has crafted a diplomatic position that allows it to shift to any side depending on circumstances. And it has even emerged as a potential peacemaker — with United Nations secretary-general Antonio Guterres, in his meeting with foreign secretary Harsh Vardhan Shringla, emphasising how important a role India can play with its equities on all sides.

A month ago, India ran the risk of being at the receiving end of all its key relationships — with an upset Washington which would wield the stick, a more belligerent Beijing, and a Moscow feeling betrayed. Today, Delhi is dealing with a moderately grateful Moscow, a temporarily tame Beijing, and a Washington which is converting its disenchantment to carrots. But precisely because the situation is so fluid, India must not be complacent, continue its internal policy adjustments, sustain its external outreach, and keep its ambitions aligned with its abilities.

The views expressed are personal



Read in source website

The phenomenal growth of unicorns in India, led by young entrepreneurs, is inspiring thousands of aspirational startups in the country. After the United States (US) and China, India has emerged as the world’s third largest startup ecosystem, and the way college students are preparing to join this carnival, it seems nothing can stop them from realising their dreams. In 2021, India has added three unicorns (startup firms valuing more than $1 billion) per month, bringing the total to 51, ahead of the United Kingdom (32) and Germany (32).

Though it is remarkable that five among these unicorns in India are led by women, there are many reasons why Indian women entrepreneurs should come forward in large numbers to join the startup rally. India is predicted to remain the fastest-growing economy in the years to come and India’s market capitalisation is growing even faster than its nominal Gross Domestic Product. Market segments such as consumer durables to textiles, food to footwear, agro-products to automobile, all are expected to have double-digit growth as the economic recovery is gaining momentum.

Given the market demand, startups need three basic ingredients: Idea, mentorship and finance. All three of them are available like never before to aspiring women entrepreneurs in India. Most of the colleges are offering mentorship programmes to women to encourage startup ideas by female graduates. Incubation and acceleration support is available through the Women Entrepreneurship Programme (WEP) offered by NITI Aayog. Special category benefits are available under the Pradhan Mantri Employment Generation (PMEG) programme of the ministry of small and medium enterprises (MSME).

The Government of India and many state governments are running schemes to improve financial inclusivity for women. Mudra is one such high-potential scheme for women because it offers collateral free loans.

The Dena Shakti Scheme provides loans up to 20 lakh for women entrepreneurs in agriculture, manufacturing, micro-credit, retail stores, or small enterprises. The scheme also provides a concession of 0.25% on the rate of interest.

Stree Shakti Yojana and Orient Mahila Vikas Yojana support women who have majority of ownership in the business. Women who want to enroll themselves in catering business can attain loan via the Annapurna Yojana. Under this scheme, which has now been merged with the national old-age pension scheme, offers business loans up to 50,000.

Bhartiya Mahila Bank (now merged with State Bank of India) offers Shringaar loan, which enroll women or homemakers planning a startup or meeting their daily business expenses and Parvarish loan where the upper limit of loan can be 1 crore (without any collateral) under the Credit Guarantee Fund Trust for Micro and Small Enterprises (CGSTSM) scheme. Other than government schemes, various venture and angel investors are also keen on putting their money behind the ideas of bright Indian women entrepreneurs. A robust ecosystem of micro-financing Self Help Groups(SHGs) is also being created at village level by social-preneurs.

Now over 80% of Indian women have bank accounts. About 200 million of them were added under the Jan Dhan Yojana. Data under MSME has shown that women have shown a surge in startups in the domain of fashion, textiles, and homemade accessories.

This indicates that the path for a more inclusive and empowered society is being paved. Since women have several financial options to avail from, it needs increased risk appetite in Indian women before they leave behind men in the startup race. Women in India should grab the golden opportunities arising out of this unicorn utsav to start their own business and lead the journey towards Atmanirbhar Bharat.

Rajesh Gupta is director, NITI Aayog, and Harshita Duggal is intern at NITI Aayog.

The views expressed are personal.



Read in source website

The recent five-state assembly elections have thrown up an urgent question for the nation’s future. India needs a strong Opposition to rescue the country from getting sucked deeper into a despotic polity. Despite many willing to sing its requiems, the Congress is the party most suited to play the role of the rescuer.

The trouble is that the Congress has been going down the hill. Today, it seems, to have little political clout, diminishing intellectual capital, ineffective leadership and a lethargic organisation to take up the responsibility.

According to a report by the National Election Watch (NEW) and the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), 222 electoral candidates have left the Congress to join other parties during polls held between 2014 and 2021, whereas 177 Members of Parliament (MPs) and Members of Legislative Assembly (MLAs) quit the party. These defections led to the loss of the party governments in Arunachal Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Goa, Karnataka, Puducherry and Manipur. The Congress has only two state governments: Rajasthan and Chhattisgarh. Besides it is sharing power with the Shiv Sena (SS) and the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) in Maharashtra.

So a huge amount of effort is needed to resurrect the Congress. The first thing it needs to do is to believe in itself. It has to recognise the task at hand and convince itself that it is equipped to handle the responsibility. The party can take strength from the fact that after all setbacks, it still has 87 MPs -- 53 in the Lok Sabha and 34 in the Rajya Sabha. Moreover, the party has 753 MLAs in different states, which is only second to the Bharatiya Janata Party, which has 1,443 MLAs.

The big question, though, is whether the present leadership of the Congress can rejuvenate the party? Most people outside the party are convinced that someone other than the Gandhi family should lead the party. As a result, some political commentators have gone to the extent of asking the Gandhi family members to retire from politics.

At the first Congress Working Committee (CWC) meeting held after the massive defeat of the party in the state elections, president Sonia Gandhi had offered that she and Priyanka Gandhi Vadra would resign from the party posts (Rahul Gandhi does not hold any post in the party at present). The highest decision-making body of the Congress, however, unanimously rejected Sonia’s offer.

Ghulam Nabi Azad, who has become the centre of dissident activities in the party, had a one-on-one meeting with Ms Gandhi a few days back, and was categorical in saying that no one in the party had any objection to her continuing as the president till the organisational elections, scheduled to take place in August, are held.

But August is four months away and the issues debilitating the party need to be tackled immediately.

Second, Sonia Gandhi should also be looking at the challenges faced by the Opposition. She needs to initiate a dialogue with other Opposition parties to evolve a consensus on a joint candidate for the post of the President of India, for which elections are scheduled to be held in July. Even if there is little chance for a joint Opposition candidate to win against the ruling National Democratic Alliance (NDA)’s candidate, the Congress president must attempt to put up a strong Opposition candidate such as NCP president Sharad Pawar.

If Pawar is willing to contest, he can put up a formidable challenge to whosoever would be the NDA’s nominee. Pawar can rustle up decent numbers as he has a good equation with Congress members as well as non-Congress leaders such as Mamata Banerjee, Naveen Patnaik, MK Stalin, Jagan Reddy, Chandrashekar Rao, Tejashwi Yadav, Akhilesh Yadav, Arvind Kejriwal, heads of the Left parties, and, of course, Uddhav Thackeray.

If this Opposition unity can be brought about, it can also serve as a good beginning for working out anti-BJP electoral alliances for the 2024 parliamentary elections.

The Congress president should also constitute a “shadow cabinet” on the lines of the British system, even though there is no legal sanction for such an entity in India. The Congress has leaders who have served as chief ministers and Union ministers. In consultation with senior party leaders, Ms Gandhi can find 30-odd party leaders who can track the performance of the Modi government on several crucial fronts such as the economy, foreign policy, infrastructure, health and education and come out with white papers to highlight the government’s shortcomings.

If the Congress has to play a meaningful role in the national politics, it would have to rededicate itself to its ideological beliefs of secularism, nationalism, social justice, and empowerment of women, minorities, Dalits, and tribals.

The Modi government has faulted on many fronts in the recent past – the mishandling of the Covid-19 pandemic and the vaccination drive, abandoning migrant workers and forcing them to walk back hundreds of miles to their homes during lockdown, loss of jobs and livelihood for lakhs of people, downgrading of India on global human development indices, security lapses on borders with China, the Pegasus spyware imbroglio and purchase of Rafale fighter aircraft – to name just a few.

Rahul Gandhi and some other Congress leaders have raised these issues and several others in order to build pressure on the central government. They also demanded that the suffering masses be urgently given food rations directly along with monetary help. But they failed to negate the government’s false claims.

The primary reason for this seems to be the lack of effective communication.

First, the party would have to frame all such issues in a language that is understandable to the masses and then have a nationwide network of dedicated workers to take the message to the grassroots.

Second, the party would also have to stop factionalism within the organisation and improve internal communication so that the party’s stand on issues and programmes, decided by the top leadership, is effectively conveyed to the party workers at the lowest levels.

To improve communication with the outside world and across the party organisation, the leadership should not shy away from engaging management agencies that specialise in these areas.

The party would also have to have a clear position on the increasing role of religion in politics – so assiduously promoted by the ruling party -- and shift the conversation to people’s welfare and development. For that it would need to regularly interact with NGOs, civil right groups, Adivasi activists, and academics in order to frame messages for the electorate. It would also have to use media, including social media, in an effective way to take the messages to the masses.

Askari H Zaidi is a senior journalist

The views expressed are personal



Read in source website

These days, luxury hotels treat private swimming pools as the new big thing. Once upon a time, hotels put smaller pools into their top suites and treated those suites as more luxurious. When Jaipur’s Oberoi Raj Vilas opened (in 1997, I think) three suites had their own pools and this was such a big deal that the industry could not stop talking about it.

Now pools are much more common. Every resort of consequence in the Maldives has private pools with every room. And the big success in Jaipur is the Leela Palace which works as a destination in itself mainly because it has around 50 villas with pools. Guests drive down from Delhi for a break with their families to enjoy the pool villas. Other hotels are planning to add private pools to upgrade their properties and luxury properties no longer treat pools as fit only for the top suites. The Oberoi Sukh Vilas, the newest of the Vilas hotels has a far higher proportion of pools than Raj Vilas or the early Vilases.

I am all for pools for those who can afford them. But frankly, I wish hotels would concentrate on something more basic as well: The bath tub.

There was a time when nearly every hotel had a bath tub in its bathroom. Even the shower was an add-on, placed on top of the tub. Then, hoteliers noticed that a new generation of guests was complaining about how awkward it was to have a shower while standing in a bath tub. They wanted real showers, the angry guests said.

ALSO READ | The Taste With Vir: Why do people go for off-the-peg look?

So, a whole orthodoxy developed over what hoteliers liked to call four point and five-point bathrooms (no, I don’t know what that means either) which had separate shower stalls and bath tubs. This pleased guests so much that many migrated to the shower stalls, leaving the tubs unused. My wife, for instance, will not stay in a hotel room unless it has a standalone shower stall. We once had to turn down the offer of a wonderful suite in a historic, heritage hotel in Spain because the only shower was placed on top of the tub.

I got it. Most people do not have the time to luxuriate in a bath tub. They prefer the efficiency of the shower. And perhaps showers are much more hygienic because the water flows off you while in a tub you lie in water tainted by the dirt that has come off your body. (Horrible image!)

It has now got to the stage when surveys show that in India at least, something like 95% of guests prefer to use the shower over the bath tub. (I am sure that there are similar figures for the United States though tubs may be more popular on the Continent).

As a consequence, new hotels are now built with joke bath tubs. Hoteliers still feel obliged to put in tubs (though not necessarily at three star and budget properties) but they know, even as they are approving the designs of their bathrooms, that so few people will use these tubs that it is not worth taking trouble over them.

ALSO READ | The Taste With Vir: Is Batman a super hero or is he someone who is much darker?

Many tubs are so small that even a five-year-old child would have difficulty stretching out in one. Some are so narrow that they feel like fiberglass straitjackets. And a few are so shallow that you could not drown a rat in one.

Nor are they looked after. I have stayed at five-star hotels where there are dirty yellow streaks around the walls of the tub (from the minerals in the bathwater) only because housekeeping could not be bothered to clean them every day. Something like 40% of hotel tubs have stoppers that do not work so you can’t really fill them up. Nobody ever bothers to check the tubs when they are turning the rooms around.

I always judge the calibre of a hotel’s housekeeping by how the tub’s hand shower is treated. At nearly every hotel, the hand shower will be used by housekeeping to clean the tub. Which is fine. But once the housekeeping guy has finished with the cleaning, he should re-adjust the controls so that water starts flowing out of the faucet again. At around 70% of five-star hotels, housekeepers do not bother to do that. Nor do they replace the hand shower correctly. So, when you turn on the tap, water flows into a badly placed hand shower and then spurts out to hit you in the face. I used to complain about this sloppiness. Now I don’t bother because it happens all the time and, in any case, hoteliers think I am some kind of weirdo to want to use the tub and not the shower.

For all the lack of attention to bath tubs, luxury hotels still spend a lot of money on them presumably because they think that a fancy bath tub makes the bathroom seem more premium. But even then, the utter lack of attention remains. I have seen luxury bathrooms with high, massive bath tubs that no guest can climb into unless they have won Olympic medals in the high jump or at least, the hurdles.

I have seen bath tubs with fancy jacuzzi nozzles that don’t work — again, the management doesn’t notice because the tub is there only for show.

And in keeping with the global trend of turning the taps at every hotel bathroom into spaceship controls, it is getting more and more difficult to work out how to use the tubs. (What is it about hotel designers? Do they think that guests will be delighted if there are really complicated controls for the showers and bath tubs? Are they all frustrated rocket scientists?)

If you are a tub fan as I am, then staying in a hotel can be a frustrating experience. I have stayed at hotels where it takes over 20 minutes for the tub to fill up. I have stayed at others where the water is not particularly hot to begin with so, by the time you fill the tub up, your only option is a cold bath, because the water has gone cold.

The Oberoi is the only chain that pays attention to bath tubs. Right from the sunken baths in the Raj Vilas bathrooms in the 1990s to the stand-alone tubs in other properties, they have thought their bathroom through. But it can’t have been easy. I remember asking the expat chief executive of the company why they placed their shampoos only in the shower stalls and not near the tubs. “Ah, but nobody washes his hair in a tub”, he said. I asked him if he ever had tub baths. It turned out he was a shower man and had no clue about tub baths.

All of the above may lead you to ask the obvious question: Why am I so obsessed with tub baths? Is a fetish of some sort?

So, I’ll tell you. I grew up in an India where we had small geysers in our bathrooms. You got, at the most, a bucket of hot water out of those geysers. It meant that baths were possible but were never fun.

I went to boarding school in India where hot water was a luxury. Most baths were cold water affairs. Even in the Ajmer winter (which could be chilly) all you were entitled to was half a bucket of hot water. I then went to boarding school in England where, in the 1970s, at least, nobody had a bath in the mornings. The only time you could have a bath was the afternoon and even then, it was twice a week. I was regarded as an oddball because I wanted to bathe every day.

So, whenever I went to a hotel, I treated a bath as part of the luxury experience. That’s still true. I create bubbles in my bath. I use fragrant bath salts or bath oils and I spray the bathroom with something nice. (A fragrance meant for human beings not some rubbish air-freshener.) For me, a bath becomes a way to destress, to relax and to let my mind wander. (I apologise to all of you macho men if you think that this sounds too childish or even girly.)

As I grew older, I realised that I did my best thinking when immersed in a bath tub. Sadly, this coincided with the time when builders began constructing smaller and smaller bathrooms in flats. But in the last three apartments we have lived in, we have managed to install bath tubs along with geysers that are large enough to ensure that we have enough hot water.

It isn’t that I get into the bath tub every day. If I have a busy morning or if I have meetings when I am travelling then of course, I will take a shower. But if I don’t then there is no substitute for soaking in a warm bath and using the time alone to think. Nearly everything I write (including this column, of course), first comes to me in the bath. And once I have thought it through, the writing is quick and easy.

So, hoteliers, I love that you are building so many private pools. But hey guys, would it be such a big deal to pay a little attention to your bath tubs?



Read in source website

It’s not the ghar wapsi that some Indians love to celebrate. Archbishop Visvaldas Kulbokas, the papal envoy to Kyiv, is urging suffering Ukrainians to convert not to a religion but to a cause. “Conversion means to become a real human person, living the solidarity and fraternity among people”. That includes the followers of all religions as well as the thunderingly aggressive Russians who are now devastating Ukraine.

Mikhail Gorbachev, who started it all, lamented 10 years after the Cold War that the opportunity of building a new world order had been squandered. He squarely blamed the United States. “Every US President has to have a war.” The question now is: Will Joe Biden’s need to prove himself prevent Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy making peace as the Turkish and Israeli mediators grapple with Vladimir Putin’s demand for a neutral, demilitarised Ukraine that abjures Nato membership, recognises the fait accompli in Crimea, makes concessions to Russophile Donbass and agrees to “de-Nazification”?

What cannot be overlooked is that despite the nostalgia for Catherine the Great’s Greater Russia in Mr Putin’s essay “On the Historical Unity of the Russians and Ukrainians”, Ukraine has always been fiercely independent. Waiting at Kiev (as it was spelt then) airport in the Soviet era, I had to suffer a lecture from a man who had stopped to admire my elastic-sided boots -- a luxury in the USSR -- because I assumed he was Russian. “Russians”, he repeated, placing both palms side by side on his left, “Ukrainians”, and he repeated the gesture on his right. I had forgotten my father’s friend Obaidur Rahman, whose “Russian” wife always insisted that she was something called Ukrainian which no one in Calcutta (as it was then) had heard of, and whose daughter, I learnt accidentally many years later, had married the well-known journalist Willie Lazarus.

Mr Biden’s “For God’s sake, this man cannot remain in power” only confirmed that, like George W. Bush and Saddam Hussain, he seeks regime change. As for evidence of Mr Putin’s misdeeds, one recalls US secretary of state Colin Powell solemnly telling UN Security Council members of incontrovertible proof about Saddam’s nuclear bomb. The frantic denials of White House officials only mean he hopes God will be the executioner. We don’t know what God thinks of the assignment but an exhausted Almighty supposedly murmured during the Second World War: “God save England, God save the King. God this and God that, and God the other thing. ‘Oh God!’ says God, ‘my work’s all cut out!’”

It’s the Cold War all over again, the Great Game that never ceases day and night. The silver double-headed eagle stopper of a cut-glass bottle that I picked up in a European antique shop says it all. The 15th century Tsar Ivan III had adopted the design as his coat of arms. Russia’s Presidents, ardent nationalists and monopoly capitalists, made it their own in 1992. Republican qualms obliged them to first plead the emblem was unofficial; then, that the imperial crown joining the two eagles would be removed. However, it became official and the crown in all its glory is Mr Putin’s insignia. He, too, has a penchant for larger-than-life statuary and has promised Muscovites a giant figure of Volodmyr the Great, the Kyivan Rus monarch whose 988 baptism was an epochal event in Slav history.

US Presidents have nursed hopes of regime change ever since the Soviet Union’s collapse prompted Richard Nixon to crow that the time had come for America to reset its geopolitical compass because “we have a historic opportunity to change the world”. The attempts to grab that opportunity by drawing Ukraine into the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation and the European Union turned the “Breadbasket of Europe” into a haggling bazaar. When the EU dangled a $838 million loan, Russia promised Ukraine $15 billion. When the EU demanded major changes in rules and regulations, Russia offered cheaper gas.

When Nato made overtures, Russia invaded Georgia. Coups, mass demos, revolutions and leader-toppling, the Crimea’s annexation and Moscow’s recognition of breakaway Donetsk and Luhansk warned of the perils ahead. Used to Arab and Asian refugees, Europe is for the first time besieged by destitute white, Christian women and children.

God not having helped out, the US in its lofty concern for democratic government and human rights turned to the probably more powerful and certainly more amenable Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia. Forgotten is the American intelligence report that he personally approved the 2018 murder of the Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi. Forgotten, too, is the March 12 execution of 81 people -- the largest mass execution in modern history -- provoking worldwide outrage. The revered Franklin D. Roosevelt had famously made it obligatory to treat “our son of a bitch” differently from anyone else’s.

Saudi Arabia’s oil and gas will reduce dependence on Russian fuel as another coalition of the willing challenges the evil empire, this time from a safe distance. The Crown Prince has already promised to invest even more in American arms so that the US doesn’t feel the pinch of imposing sanctions. Mr Biden restored relations with Venezuela (oil again) and upped ties with Cuba. True, Saturday’s tirade dredged up Tiananmen Square, but an awareness that sanctions against China would hurt American voters far more than the Chinese persuades him to look away while Xi Jinping plays footsie with Mr Putin. With the Crown Prince and God on his side, Mr Biden might even accuse Prime Minister Narendra Modi of being more than “somewhat shaky” if he doesn’t reciprocate Chinese foreign minister Wang Yi’s recent overtures.

Sadly, some dyed-in-the-wool pseudo-secularists in the Madras high court may have cramped God’s style with a recent judgment cutting divinity down to size. “Courts cannot be hoodwinked by encroaching and constructing a temple in the name of God”, intoned the learned judge, whose literal interpretation of the injunction to “render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s” ignored Winston Churchill’s warning that every law has loopholes. Any rustic mahant knows that the trick is to parcel property into little plots and register each in the name of the 33 million deities in the Hindu pantheon. “God’s in His heaven, (and) all’s right with the world!”, as Browning said, when land ceilings are respected.

But even God knows that peace will remain elusive until Russian demands are conceded. Ukraine’s Russian-speaking Jewish President may not have too much difficulty agreeing to most of them. But his mentors?



Read in source website