New India must understand that maximum power is also about maximum embrace, not about threats but reassurance

The nation turns 73 today, ripe-old considering its milestones that have mapped impossible dreams to catching them and literally going to the moon. Young, considering its evolutionary experiments as a post-Independence democracy, one that is still churning with ideologies to find its place. Yet, it is also an age where the old order is fading away and a new one is filling the vacuum, desperate to shake off the shadow of the past and create its present moment in the sun. And it is in this transit moment that we must stop and introspect, where the tidal gush of a Naya Bharat tends to swamp the old, which laid the course in the first place, and understand that time and contexts decide our human responses, that everything is relative and history is a timeline of phases and considered action taken, not about comparative records. And so it is that the nation is on the threshold of a time where the conflict worldwide is over patriotism and nationalism, the former, in the words of Charles De Gaulle “is when love of your own people comes first” and the latter “when hate for people other than your own comes first.” Sadly, we are lumping our “own” as “others.” In a post-globalised world of sameness, where institutional systems and thought processes of the West have colonised mindsets and policies as the prescribed liberal doctrine, identity politics has been simmering, erupting and is now hyper-assertive. Therefore, muscular nationalism as an emerging credo has not left us untouched either. The Goliathic right-wing phenomenon is a product of this sentiment, one that wants to wave billowing flags at every street corner than put a mini Tricolour replica on the car dashboard.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi has addressed an inner angst of Hindu identity and majority stakeholdership, one that has been projected to be diluted or rewritten, first by invasions and imperialism, second by colonial hangovers of liberalism. Despite 80 per cent of the population being Hindus, politics in our democracy has been defined by accommodating segmented votebanks, be it of caste or religion. Truth be told, secularism has never been treated as syncretism or absorbing religiosity of all kinds but more like an overt propagation of sectarian interests. The Right wing has just turned years of denial of Hindu rights, rather emotions, and preferential molly-coddling into a plank to build a brand of a socialist republic called One India, pivoted on an Indic consciousness. The “India First” aggression, of course, has had its positives — holding our own to global bullying, thwarting external threats, increasing global stakes, carving an Oriental counterpoint to prevalent Western cliches, protecting our national well-being, fuelling space-age goals and building ethnic pride. This craftsmanship has indeed worked in breaking the status quo and encouraging paradigm shifts, acceptable simply because of the transformative persistence it comes with. And though there’s much to be desired on economic indices — industrial slowdown, lack of innovation, the agricultural crisis and joblessness — the new regime has bridged the traditional class cleavage and the dole economy by pivoting economic criteria as deciding benefits, where the battle would be to equalise the haves and have-nots. A massive electoral mandate has followed the simplicity of these binaries and a redefinition of the socialist economy. But one cannot overlook the social ramifications. And India has flourished only when it has appreciated the complexity of our delicate diversity. People have to be taken along in a consultative partnership and not as an asset base that can be weaponised or victimised at will. Maximum power is also about maximum embrace, not about threats but reassurance, not about undoing wrongs but avoiding making new ones. One where consolidation of power, howsoever strong, shouldn’t run counter to the spirit of Constitutionalism or consider it a stumbling block. Indian secularism is not simply a product of politics but is ingrained in our civilisational DNA as a social grace that had us on the frontline of world trade as it existed through the Silk and Spice Routes. Neither should the enlightened few abdicate their responsibility to raise questions. Undoubtedly, we have the leadership needed to take the country along. Now only if we could follow Swami Dayanand Saraswati’s philosophy —  “No human heart is denied empathy. No religion can demolish that by indoctrination. No culture, no nation and nationalism, nothing can touch it because it is empathy.”

Writer & Courtesy: The Pioneer

One reason why China has not been able to chide India on Article 370 is because it is facing a crisis in Hong Kong

Diplomats will tell you that China bristles at any perceived ‘interference’ in its ‘internal affairs’ and for years the fear of hitback has meant that it has been able to get away with gross human rights violations without even a slap on the wrist. Whether it is brutality against the Tibetan population with crackdowns in Lhasa, the long-standing assault on  members of the Falun Gong sect or even the current repression against the Uighur community in northern Xinjiang, none has elicited a  unified condemnation. Ever since 1989, when China was roundly lambasted for the military crackdown in Tiananmen Square, where hundreds are estimated to have died, it has not taken kindly to being warned about its actions. Meanwhile in the 30 years following the military action in Beijing, it has become such a global economic powerhouse that it punishes those nations that criticise it with a breath of dragon fire to their existing trade deals.

The problem with Hong Kong though is a bit more complicated. The territory, which China got from the UK in 1997, is still nominally autonomous. So when it made an attempt to subjugate it by seeking to extradite criminals from Hong Kong to the mainland, which has its own laws, this predictably outraged several locals, who have grown to love their special status and the far more liberal justice system. Coming on the back of intense protests last year, popularly called the ‘Umbrella Movement’, to other proposals made by Carrie Lam, Hong Kong’s Chief Executive, a governor appointed by Beijing, these protests were destined to be intense. But nobody could imagine just how widespread they would be or how they would be a culmination of long-held oppression. Thanks to the fact that Hong Kong still has a lot of expatriate workers and a free Press, China has not been able to crack down on the protesters without the world knowing. The impact has been devastating with Hong Kong Airport, one of the region’s biggest hubs, shut down after protesters effectively barricaded it and the central business district. There have even been reports of violence, mainly by the police and some unknown ‘thugs’ whom many suspect are Chinese agents. China has not been happy to see the protests beamed on live television across the world and while itching to press the trigger finger realises it cannot. It has reacted angrily to suggestions by countries, particularly Hong Kong’s former rulers, the UK, to calm the situation. But for India, this also allows China to be more pragmatic when it comes to our position on Kashmir.

Writer & Courtesy: The Pioneer

Now that Sonia Gandhi is the Congress Chief, she has an array of challenges to tackle including building a grassroots base, boosting the morale of workers, fighting the assembly, and bringing the old and young camps together.

Sonia Gandhi has her task cut out. As the Congress chief, she has to build a grassroots base, boost the morale of its workers, fight the Assembly elections and most importantly, bring the old and the young camps together

Sonia Gandhi is back again as the Congress’ chief after almost a break of two years. She had taken a back seat during this period, leaving the field entirely to her son Rahul Gandhi in 2017. But now, she will be at the helm of affairs until the party holds the next organisational elections.

After going through the motions of the consultation process, the Congress Working Committee (CWC) has ultimately brought back Sonia Gandhi. But it is not clear whether she will be able to restore the party back to its health. Sonia had made her political debut in 1998 when the grand old party was in bad shape and she was able to check erosion. She even brought the party to power twice (2004-2014). Now that she is reluctantly back as the chief, what would be her challenges in the coming days and months?

The first daunting challenge for Sonia will be to restructure a demoralised organisation. She commands respect, trust and loyalty from party leaders and workers across the generational divide. After the Congress’ humiliating defeat in the 2019 Lok Sabha polls, where it won just 52 seats, as also the leadership crisis it faced for the past 75 days after Rahul Gandhi stepped down as party president, the morale of party workers is down. Many disgruntled partymen have left the grand old party. She needs to give a pep-talk to the workers, who may have confidence in her, and boost their morale. 

Second and more importantly, Assembly elections are due in the States of Maharashtra, Jharkhand and Haryana in the next two months and the Congress is still not ready to face them. On the other hand, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) is all set to win the three States. Sonia has to put the right people for the right kind of job and strengthen the party organisationally. There is factionalism and erosion of workers and leaders. She has to appoint strong general secretaries who can oversee election preparedness. Even if the party can win just one State, it will go a long way in boosting the morale of the cadres.

Third, Sonia has to keep her flock together. The old guard has had its way, she must make sure that the disappointed younger lot do not look for greener pastures. Already, there are rumours that some of the younger leaders are in talks with the BJP. She should be able to persuade them to remain in the party and give them importance.

Fourth, it is important to check the erosion. Sonia was able to do so in 1998 when she took over from Sitaram Kesri. She did so at a time when the party was in the Opposition and many senior leaders were leaving the party. The scenario is the same now. MPs like Sanjay Singh and Bhubaneswar Kalita have joined the BJP. More are likely to go. In most States, including Maharashtra, Goa and Telangana, several Congressmen are leaving the sinking ship. The question is whether she will be able to stop them.

Fifth, she should restore the position of the Congress as a challenger to the BJP. For this, the need is to repackage the party. She was successful in doing so earlier by holding conclaves in Pachmarhi and Shimla with brainstorming sessions involving party leaders. The same zeal is needed now, especially after the party’s humiliating defeat in 2019 polls. The party is yet to introspect and come up with corrections.

Sixth, she must define the roles for her children, otherwise there will be three power centres. Rahul Gandhi has said that he will continue to work for the party. Priyanka Gandhi Vadra is already the general secretary from Uttar Pradesh but she is not just another general secretary because of her access to her mother.

Seventh, she must re-work her coalition strategy and States where the Congress is not strong, she must look at alliances with smaller and regional parties. The party must realise that this is the only way it can improve its chances.

Last but not the least, it is imperative to concentrate on reorganising the party and re-connect with the voters. The Congress scored zero in 17 States in the 2019 polls. In the past five years, the BJP has considerably expanded its base and won even those States where it never won in the past and has now emerged as the principal pole of national politics, replacing the Congress.

The Congress has to come up with a new plan to revive the party in the northern and eastern States. There are five years to do this until the 2024 polls although the intervening Assembly polls are also important. The party should work with a missionary zeal to achieve this. For all these, Sonia Gandhi needs a good team. While the coterie might expect to grab all the power, she must have a mix of old and young Congress leaders in her core team. All these have to be taken up with utmost urgency as there is not enough time before the ensuing Assembly polls.

(The writer is a senior journalist)

Writer: Kalyani Shankar

Courtesy: The Pioneer

Tackling the over-development in eco friendly zones is a must after the damaging floods across the western coast. 

Nature can be devastating as the recent floods across the western coast from Gujarat to Kerala have proven. However, it is becoming apparent that no matter how brutal it might be, human activity has become  a force multiplier, worsening its impact. Rampant and often illegal construction across many parts of the ghats, particularly in the ecologically-sensitive areas of Karnataka and Kerala, are blocking natural flow paths and in the absence of new channels to divert overflow, the raging waters are running amok and inundating settlements. Elsewhere, the montane forests have been denuded blatantly, loosening the soil and leading to massive mud and rockslides, burying men, women and children under tonnes of rubble. Mangroves have been uprooted in the name of development, leading to tidal surges as bad as tsunamis. And all of this coupled with the clear and present danger — man-made global warming — has made these annual rains deadlier. The prevalence of micro-climate and intense bursts of showers even in lean phases have stressed existing infrastructure further. On August 8, Karnataka received nearly five times the rainfall it normally does. Mysuru in south Karnataka received 62.2 mm absolute rainfall in a day — 3,176 per cent, or 32 times, the long-term average for that day.

But we ought not to be surprised as floods and other natural disasters have been continuing since time immemorial. Our earliest history mentions them as does almost every major religious text. As a civilisation, we have done much to mitigate the risks. Even in India, over the past few years, proper planning and better rescue and relief operations have meant more people are being rescued and fewer lives lost to post-disaster hunger and disease. For this, we must thank the officials and foot soldiers of the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) and the armed forces. Navy and Air Force pilots often fly helicopters to rescue and send relief in extremely trying conditions. Even the process of relief collection and distribution has improved thanks to social media and funds. But disaster preparedness means factoring in evacuation drills, riverine overflows and predictive scenarios of destruction rather than short-term structural solutions like construction of embankments or digging of canals and spurs.

An entire settlement disappeared because a hill collapsed in Kerala. Shocking as it is, blame the politicians and even the Church who protested the Gadgil Committee and Kasturirangan Reports on the Western Ghats that wanted to protect several areas from a rush of development. Across the southern state, hillside construction has worsened matters than before. It was only a matter of time before a devastating rainfall would make the chickens come home to roost. It is, therefore, ironic that Kerala has been hit by floods two years in a row. It is now imperative that the State Government seriously explore how to implement the reports and if need be, demolish constructions. Kerala’s successive plight should be a lesson for the rest of India where unplanned development and political ineptitude to act against those who encroach forest areas, often because they are politically-connected, continue unabashedly. Politicians would then actually have blood on their hands because people are dying thanks to their greed.  Man can no longer control nature but can control how it will impact us.

Writer & Courtesy: The Pioneer

Revocation of Article 370 has had an impact on Kashmiris. There is nothing that can compensate for what the Kashmiris have lost – autonomy and special status. 

Government agencies have reported that Friday prayers and Eid prayers were held in Jammu & Kashmir without incident. NDTV’s Srinagar correspondent Nazir Masoodi wished his mother and friends Eid Mubarak via his channel as other means of communication were blocked. He also reported that Eid celebrations were markedly subdued while Government reports indicated they were robust.

Normalcy is being projected. National Security Advisor (NSA) Ajit Doval has deployed himself in the Valley, boosting the morale of the police and fraternising with people, portraying a rosy picture. Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Union Home Minister Amit Shah, Jammu &Kashmir Governor Satya Pal Malik and industrialists Mukesh Ambani and Uday Kotak have all made big promises of turning Jammu & Kashmir into a land of milk and honey. Why should the Kashmiris, who have been betrayed, believe any of them? After all, they have heard of economic packages several times earlier. In the loud din of the lockdown, all one can see are concertina coils of barbed wire, soldiers and pigeons.

During a debate in the Rajya Sabha over the abrogation of Article 370, Minister in the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO), Jitendra Singh, reported that there was jubilation in Srinagar whereas television channels showed deserted streets. Four days later, at an Observer Research Foundation (ORF) conference in New Delhi, a Special Secretary to the Government of India referred to the situation in Kashmir as a “crisis.” A young Kashmiri researcher with ORF predicted that insurgency has been given a new 30-year lease of life. Normalcy and lockdown are a contradiction in terms.

Tomorrow, the Bakshi Stadium in Srinagar will be filled with police and officials when the tricolour will be unfurled and the State flag consigned to the dust-heap of history. What will resound in the Valley are Shah’s misplaced words that terminating Article 370 will end terrorism and usher in development. This is a patently false narrative.

On terrorism, post Burhan Wani, new militancy acquired an indigenous and religious colour: From Sufi to Salafi. Of the 250 militants in the Valley, 60 per cent are local lads. The Army’s ‘Operation All Out’ has gained an upper hand but its valuable hearts and minds campaign is absent. Last week, the Army announced that 83 per cent of the terrorists have a history of stone-throwing and advised mothers that if their wards were throwing stones for `500, they were “tomorrow’s terrorists.” The Army has dramatically reduced life-cycle of terrorists to “ten days to one year” from “six months to three to five years” a decade ago. The double whammy of eradicating special status and diminution from State to a Union Territory will produce a backlash — a virulent form of alienation.

Pakistan will not let go this opportunity to add fuel to fire. It has upped the ante by taking a number of political, diplomatic, people-to-people and military steps. While fidayeen squads have been infiltrated and more are in readiness, the use of IEDs and even classic suicide bombing a la Pulwama should be expected.

Stephen Cohen, the American India-Pakistan expert, had prophesied that  wars between the two countries will go on for a hundred years before there is light at the end of the tunnel. The ORF researcher’s forecast about longevity of militancy is spot on. The Indian Army in Jammu & Kashmir since 1947, whose mandate is to create conditions for political outcomes — which it has many times — will remain stuck fighting limited wars triggered by inept politics.

Development in Jammu & Kashmir is a chimera. It’s the chicken and egg story about violence and development: Which comes first. As long as the roots of militancy are not addressed, socio-economic development plans will be hollow. None of the past promises by India Inc and PMO’s economic packages were implemented due to violence and political instability. In 1995, when militancy was endemic, Field Marshal Sam Manekshaw, who was chairman of one of the companies in Jammu & Kashmir, made this tongue-in-cheek offer to a retired Major General: “Look sweetie, there’s this sick sawmill in Srinagar. It has no power, no labour, no wood, no security. But I want you, with your contacts in the Army, to operationalise it.” Even the Sam magic could not revive it.

Dr Haseeb Drabu, who was Jammu & Kashmir’s Finance Minister recently, said in a TV interview last week that linking Article 370 to the lack of development was misplaced. He asserted that the lack of public and private investment was due to militancy and violence. The powers for lease of land for 90 years and extendable have always been there: That’s how Hotel Oberoi, ITC and others came in. There is a big opportunity. For example, India is the fifth largest producer of apples in the world, of which 2.5 mn tonnes are from Jammu & Kashmir. Drabu said the situation will get worse due to uncertainty from the State’s demotion to a Union Territory, Finance Commission award and Goods and Services Tax.

In the external domain, there is misplaced optimism about having outflanked Pakistan. While Russia, the UAE and Maldives have called the Constitutional re-adjustments as an internal matter, others are sitting on the fence. The US said it was not consulted, counselled restraint and referred both countries to resolving outstanding issues through bilateral dialogue. The UN, while rejecting mediation, called for maximum restraint, affirming Jammu & Kashmir is governed by the UN Charter and applicable UN Security Council Resolutions and advised guidance by the Simla Agreement, which states that “the final status of Jammu & Kashmir is to be settled by peaceful means….”

UN High Commission on Human Rights in its July 8 report had painted a grim though exaggerated picture of violation of civil liberties in Jammu & Kashmir. UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of expression has called the present crackdown as draconian. The China story is one of shifting stance. Initially, Beijing called “parties concerned to exercise restraint and caution”, especially actions that unilaterally change status quo. Later, it noted that creating Ladakh as separate Union Territory could alter status quo along the India-China border and damage China’s territorial sovereignty by unilaterally modifying domestic law, which was unacceptable. Still later, after the visit of Pakistan Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi to Beijing, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi referred both countries to the Simla Agreement, UN Charter and UN Security Council resolutions. All-weather allies agreed to work on a joint UN strategy. This could be the beginning of a two-front diplomatic offensive.

The Government is in for a long haul in Jammu & Kashmir. Winning the hearts and minds of Kashmiris can alone facilitate their integration into India. Modi and Shah’s promises of development will not compensate Kashmiris for what they have lost: Autonomy and special status.

(The writer is a retired Major General of the Indian Army and founder member of the Defence Planning Staff, currently the revamped Integrated Defence Staff)

Writer: Ashok K Mehta

Courtesy: The Pioneer

India and China’s contradiction at the RCEP summit does not stop their cooperation for another endeavor.

The latest round of the 16-member Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) negotiations has yet again exposed frictions between Beijing and New Delhi, this time over the India-China trade deficit and market access.

New Delhi’s trade deficit with the RCEP grouping and China amounted to $105 billion and $53.6 billion in 2018, respectively. The tariff elimination under the RCEP may deal an additional blow to India’s economy, bolstering its trade deficit with the nations. In addition, New Delhi argues that it needs further access to the Chinese market for its key sectors, including IT products and services, pharma and agriculture.

Indian Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal backed out of the group’s ministerial meeting in Beijing, which was largely seen as a symbolic gesture, according to The Hindu. As a result, India was represented by Commerce Secretary Anup Wadhawan, who outlined the country’s demands at the meeting on August 2-3. Despite speculations of India’s possible withdrawal from the bloc, the country signalled on August 6 that it would continue the talks, according to the Hindu Business Line.

Amid the simmering US-China trade war, Beijing is pushing ahead with the RCEP, a proposed free trade agreement between the 10  member states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) as well as China, Japan, India, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand that was formally announced in 2012.

Why India snubs China’s Belt and Road initiative?

The RCEP is not the only China-led economic initiative prompting India’s concerns. The Beijing-led Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), a multi-billion infrastructure investment endeavour unveiled by Chinese President Xi Jinping in 2013, also raises questions in New Delhi.

While neither clearly rejecting nor endorsing the initiative per se, New Delhi boycotted the first Belt and Road Forum (BRF) for International Cooperation in 2017 over the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) project. The proposed corridor passes through the Pakistani-administered Kashmir areas of Gilgit and Baltistan, claimed by New Delhi. The implementation of the Chinese-Pakistani initiative is tantamount to the recognition of Islamabad’s sovereignty over Gilgit-Baltistan in the eyes of India.

“The BRI, which seeks to alter extant political geographies and economic models, is China’s most potent tool in this regard. India is not part of this due to the violation of its sovereignty in CPEC passing from Pakistani-occupied Kashmir”, explains Amrita Dhillon, the founding editor of a New Delhi-based magazine, The Kootneeti.

On April 26-27, 2019, India did not attend the second BRF that took place in Beijing amid the simmering India-Pakistani conflict following the Indian Air Force’s Balakot operation in February 2019. For its part, India triggers China’s unease with its growing involvement in joint drills with the navies of Japan, Vietnam, Singapore and the Philippines as well as the US-led freedom of navigation operations (FONOP) in the disputed South China Sea, about 90 per cent of which is claimed by the People’s Republic.

Nevertheless, Beijing is seeking India’s participation in its endeavours: Being the world’s seventh-largest economy by nominal gross domestic product (GDP) and the third-largest by purchasing power parity (PPP), India could give a significant boost to China-led projects.

Thus, in July, Yang Yanyi, a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, called upon India to join the BRI, arguing that “bilateral problems with Pakistan should not be turned into an India-China issue.”

Simmering contradictions do not mean that India and China are heading towards a stalemate, according to Adam Garrie, director of the Eurasia Future think-tank and Tom McGregor, a Beijing-based political analyst and senior editor for China’s national broadcaster CCTV.

AIIB is a way to soothe India-China contradictions:

Observers believe that the China-based Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank’s (AIIB) initiatives may facilitate soothing of India-China relations.

Being founded in 2014, the bank is largely seen as a part of the Belt and Road project, although the two endeavours are not formally associated.

While the Modi Government has made it clear that it is not inclined to participate in the China-led BRI, India remains the bank’s founder. New Delhi enjoys the second-largest voting share in the financial institution after China. Additionally, India is one of the largest recipients of AIIB funds.

In February 2019, India and the AIIB inked a $455 million loan aimed at improving rural connectivity in Andhra Pradesh. According to the Indian Ministry of Finance, the project will “connect some 3,300 habitations with a population of more than 250, and benefit around two million people.”

“India’s rural regions remain largely impoverished and for the entire nation to succeed that requires more balanced regional development alongside urbanisation, industrialisation and modernisation campaigns”, McGregor presumes, adding that the AIIB “can play a crucial role to help eradicate poverty in the country.”

Having mentioned anti-China sentiment among Indian nationalist parties, the Beijing-based journalist opines that the improvement of India-China ties could become a win-win solution for both nations.

“Should [Indian Prime Minister Narendra] Modi choose economic expansionism, he must improve trade and investment ties with China and the US”, McGregor believes.

Adam Garrie echoes McGregor: “Although India has been opposed to membership in the Belt and Road initiative, India can and likely will benefit from closer cooperation with the AIIB”, the UK-based geopolitical analyst notes.

“It makes logical sense for India to work with the AIIB just as it does for countries like Turkey, Russia, Indonesia and Thailand”, Garrie says. “As such, the old expression ‘money talks’ is apropos when it comes to India’s position via-a-vis the AIIB. As things stand, India already participates in some BRI related projects but for political reasons will not likely ever sign up to BRI on the whole. That being said, AIIB is one important area where India and China can minimise tensions through win-win financial arrangement.”

According to Amrita Dhillon, “India is not opposed to China.” “In fact, it has always wished to promote mutual trade and shape relations between the two and join hands in focussing on innovative solutions for the Asian problems”, she points out.

However, the Indian journalist notes that China, for its part, needs to take India’s geostrategic interests into account in order to facilitate the development of the region.

“China and India share a long history of cooperation and AIIB is one of the important roads which connects Beijing and New Delhi”, Dhillon emphasises. “As of now, AIIB has approved six projects worth $1.2 billion in loans to India for infrastructure-related projects and an additional $1.9 billion is under review. Similarly, India’s cooperation in the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) with China is growing, rapidly making it a platform to tap the potential of the relations India carries with the Central Asian Countries.”

(Courtesy: SputnikInternational)

Writer: Ekaterina Blinova

Courtesy: The Pioneer

Only the future knows if the revocation of Article 370 will be a success or failure. Although one must hope for good to come out of it.

In my last opinion piece in The Pioneer on August 3, I had concluded my piece with a plea for the real Narendra Modi to please stand up. Well, the Prime Minister answered my question quite definitively the very next day. Whatever may be his faults — undoubtedly there are many — self-confidence and the willingness to take risks are certainly not among them.

Undoubtedly, the high-stakes gamble in Jammu & Kashmir is one such. Whether the Prime Minister’s actions will turn out to be a grave miscalculation or a hugely successful one only time will tell. But whatever the future may hold, nobody can fault him for lacking in courage for his “bold” attempt to cut the “Gordian Knot” ie, the Kashmir dispute, which has strangled peace and progress in the sub-continent for over seven decades now ever since independence.

While the unholy pact between the National Conference (NC) and the Congress to suborn the 1987 local elections in the State resulted in insurgency, that continues to haunt us to this day, it was the British meddling — the true unfinished agenda of Partition — that has finally been laid to rest. The only dispute that now remains and requires early resolution — either bilaterally or through third party mediation — is for the return of Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) to us.

Though in the interest of peace and goodwill in the region, we should be willing to forego our claims in exchange for recognition of the Line of Control (LoC) as the international boundary. Then, open borders in the not too distant future, something that many on both sides crave, could be a distinct possibility.

Every counter-insurgency practitioner knows well and understands that no insurgency can ever be successfully defeated through just military means. Insurgencies are political in nature and, thus, can only be resolved through political initiatives. Yet, over the past three decades that this insurgency has ebbed and flowed in Jammu & Kashmir, never has any Government expended the necessary political capital required to resolve the issue satisfactorily.

Thus, we have seen repeated cycles of violence that have adversely impacted developmental activities in the State. Moreover, given the law of diminishing returns, controlling violence and returning the State to relative calmness after each successive cycle of violence has got much more difficult and complex. Thus, undoubtedly, this initiative of the Prime Minister will be wholeheartedly welcomed by the security forces, especially the Army, as the goal of winning hearts and minds has a more substantive focus.

Whether the manner in which Article 370 has been employed to supersede the Presidential Order of 1954 with a new order of August 2019 — which allows for the supersession of Article 35A as well as the application of the entire Indian Constitution in the State — is unconstitutional or not is for the courts to decide. But clearly, as a temporary provision that it was stated to be, it had long outlived its utility. By no stretch of imagination did it protect the Kashmiri identity or culture, Kashmiriyat, as many suggest.

It had instead become a potent weapon in the hands of vested interests, which allowed them to exploit the State for personal ends. The truth that Kashmiriyat died the very day the Hindu minority in the Valley was targetted and forced to flee, most of who continue to languish in refugee camps, cannot be wished away.

In this context, therefore, those, who allege that this initiative of the Government was against our “secular” framework and aimed at further marginalising the Muslim minority, are being parochial in their outlook apart from being extremely hypocritical, given that they have done little or even shown any concern or compassion for those rendered homeless within their own country.

Pakistan’s reaction to all of this has been along expected lines. For its Army to respond in any other manner, given that its primacy within the country is directly linked to the situation in Jammu & Kashmir, is simply not viable. If this dispute were to be somehow resolved, the importance of the Pakistan Army would be greatly diminished, which would hurt not only the ego of many Generals but also their extensive business interests.

Yet, their room for manoeuvre is severely constrained, especially given Pakistan’s economic situation. Nevertheless, the threats of war emanating from there need to be taken seriously and bankruptcy has never stopped warmongers.

Obviously, given the meticulous manner in which this political initiative has been planned, one can be certain that the Government is well prepared to deal with any foolishness the Pakistan Army may decide to indulge in.

In a just-concluded conference organised by the Observer Research foundation (ORF) on ‘Tackling Insurgent Ideologies 2.0’, a speaker made a pertinent point that while a compromise on financial issues is a relatively easy possibility, given that both sides can negotiate to reach a middle ground, it is not so easy to do so when negotiations involve the politics of identity, which tend to be seen as a zero-sum game.

A seemingly intractable problem that has been around for seven decades is not going to just disappear and it will require much patience and understanding before the general population comes around and accepts the new reality. In the interim, the possibility of sporadic street violence cannot be ruled out.

But what probably scares Pakistan and even more local mainstream political and separatist leaders the most is the possibility that the general population in the Valley may not respond with violence to the new scheme of things. This could well be because they have, over a period o time, realised that the price

paid by successive generations for such opposition has been extremely high; while its fruits have only been enjoyed by those who have instigated the mobs.

Moreover, given the thorough preparations made by the Government, the large quantum of force deployed will also be a very big deterrent as well.

Finally, the optimistic view could be that the average Kashmiri is quite tired of the way things have gone in these last few decades and would be willing to give this game-changing initiative a try.

Whatever be the reason, if that were to happen, the credibility of the Pakistani Generals and local politicians alike would be badly hurt, which in turn would certainly decimate the business of insurgency in quick time.

One can only hope and pray that good sense will prevail and the course of events turns out just this way. That would not only be a victory for the country but also for the long suffering people of Jammu & Kashmir, who have been held hostage by circumstances for far too long and have been forced to pay a very high price in blood. We all deserve better.

(The writer, a military veteran, a consultant with the Observer Research Foundation and a Senior Visiting Fellow with The Peninsula Foundation, Chennai)

Writer: Deepak Sinha

Courtesy: The Pioneer

Returning to her former role, the Congress matriarch may now find difficulty in handling disputes within the party. 

The Congress is a grand old party indeed, so set in its ways that it sticks by them as it fears anything that’s new wave. In the process, India changed and slipped out of its hands. Still the altered reality that has clearly denounced all that the Congress has so far been known for — chief among them dynastic entitlement, minority politics, coterie culture and social welfarism — has failed to shake it up from inside. There was a chance this time to turn the poison of electoral irrelevance of a decade into a real cure with revival but the battered ship has left the harbour to sail in choppy waters again. Not that there weren’t winds of change within. Rahul Gandhi’s leadership may not have delivered results that matter but under his stewardship, a sizeable rank of Young Turks has emerged. Chastened by political wisdom and most importantly, seeking personal legacies with their voluntary performance than gifted family posts, some of them have not only made a difference on the ground but also challenged old world cliquism by showing that they, too, could chart a new course that could work despite the BJP juggernaut. Nobody understood this better than Rahul himself, who was at the receiving end of the worst kind of assaults on his lineage, and was, therefore, willing to break through by disowning party positions that came courtesy it and work like an ordinary partyman. And though there was no open revolt, the divide became more and more apparent, particularly when the young brigade approved the revocation of Article 370 in Jammu and Kashmir. Many feel that the gradual divergence, besides Rahul’s aversion to continuing as chief or letting any family member continue at the helm, was to force the inevitable, a new order. One which even gathered some encouragement from practical minded old-timers like Amarinder Singh and Karan Singh. But the rigid old guard, which has built its political legitimacy by virtue of the party’s top positions, cosying up to the leadership and becoming its filter and sieve for the grassroots, scuttled the chances of Young Turks by bringing back Sonia Gandhi as the interim president. The only shift that the new leaders could effect was to get state units have a say in electoral committees of those headed for new Assemblies and a promise of organisational elections. While the Rahul camp sincerely threw names like Jyotiraditya Scindia for Congress presidentship, the old guard threw around decoys when they were actually working on his mother, convincing her the situation was desperate enough for herself to be more voluble.

Sonia Gandhi has always been a reluctant leader, even after Rajiv Gandhi’s assassination. And though she has overseen two UPA governments as Congress chief, she is not in a position to make any dramatic difference now. But she has always given in to persuasion and interpretation of the old guard, some of whom have convinced her that the party would split or wither away if it didn’t have the family seal. And given the traumatic existence of the Gandhis’ political life or the burden of legacy that was thrust upon her, she surely doesn’t want to be seen as driving the party to extinction. Her loyalists know this and except senior leader AK Antony, who said Sonia should not be saddled with party affairs again because of her health, everybody else welcomed the status quo. Sonia Gandhi has been the face of compromise for much of her political life, holding all UPA constituents and allies together at one time with her personal intervention and gravitas. Not only that, she can bind the Opposition. This was one of the reasons why alliances with regional partners failed during the Rahul regime and no UPA 3 could emerge before the Lok Sabha election. Though that’s lost, as interim Congress president she can unite both the old and new in the party. Even Rahul wouldn’t have an objection to that. On the face of it, there has been a smooth transition of power within the cocoon of family warmth that the Congress is scared to part with. Politically, the reformist young lot, who are in their middling years now, may not like to fight senior hawks and lose again. They may retreat or chase new horizons rather than being “alone.” The Congress matriarch may not be able to assuage her son and his vision, saying they would have their time, but may be compelled to give something to loyalists given Assembly polls are around the corner. While the BJP may gleefully scream “I told you so”, Sonia’s biggest worry is the raging emotions despite her calm visage. Her party needs to buck up now.

Writer & Courtesy: The Pioneer

The revoking of Article 370 caused many leaders demanding the repeal of the revocation. However, Congress failed to make any such moves. The union of Modi-Shah duo enabled J&K to stand together. 

It appears as if every prominent leader of the Indian National Congress (INC) is running around like a headless chicken after the momentous decision taken by the Narendra Modi Government to abrogate Article 370 and fully integrate Jammu & Kashmir into the Indian Union.

That the INC is no longer “national” or “nationalist” is now obvious going by the utter confusion at top-level decision-making but the party was not always like this. It had robust and patriotic leaders in the past and there is sufficient evidence of this in our parliamentary records. Here is a sample of what tall leaders of the party, including K Hanumanthaiah, Member of the Constituent Assembly, former Chief Minister of Mysore and later Union Minister for Railways, had to say in the Lok Sabha on September 11, 1964, on abrogation of Article 370 and of their disillusionment with the pusillanimity of the Congress:

Hanumanthaiya (Congress): “Not merely Members of Parliament from Kashmir but irrespective of parties — from the extreme right to the extreme left of this House — we are all of one opinion that this Bill (abrogating Article 370) should be made into a law. To go against it or to say anything against this unanimous opinion of this House is to disown Constitutional responsibility in a convenient manner. Article 370…stands in the way of full integration.”

Hanumanthaiya also dealt with the constant fear in the Government about world opinion. Referring to the Western nations he said, “They are not our masters. It is not they, who have to dictate…It is the responsibility of this House to direct this…”. He said he would appeal to the Government “not to be nervous about world opinion or about opinions expressed by the UK, the US, Soviet Russia or any other power.” The Government, he said, should shake off “inferiority complex” that it had inherited from the British days and stop worrying about the response of foreign powers.

He said, “Here is a case where we could show equal determination and courage and solve the problem once and for all.” He told his Government to stop being so modest and realise that India was stronger and more influential than most countries in the world…”.

Considering how Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Union Home Minister Amit Shah executed the plan to abrogate Article 370 — with quiet determination and the virtual endorsement of it by many nations, thanks to Modi’s sustained, calibrated diplomatic contacts with global leaders over the last five years — it appears as if they were following the advice given by Hanumanthaiya to his own party 55 years ago.

In fact, some parts of Hanumanthaiya’s speech sound like he was delivering them on August 5, 2019. He said, “This is the unanimous opinion of this House (to abrogate Article 370) and it is applauded by the whole country. Therefore, I want the Government to take a determined stand…”

In conclusion, he thanked Prakash Vir Shastri for bringing the private Bill for repeal of Article 370, which had won the admiration of members across the political divide.

Many other Congress stalwarts forcefully demanded repeal of Article 370 during this debate.

Bhagwat Jha Azad (Congress): The Government must fearlessly declare its policy on Kashmir. From Kashmir and across the Gangetic plains and the Narmada to Kanyakumari, people want to see full integration. No Government or party can go against the wishes of the people.

Ram Sahay Pandey (Congress): He blamed Jawaharlal Nehru for rushing to the United Nations to complain about infiltration of Pakistani troops into Kashmir after it acceded to India. He said by seeking UN’s intervention and accepting its ceasefire order, Nehru had squandered away a fine opportunity to recapture the territories, which were in illegal possession of Pakistan. Gen Thimayya, who was handling the military operations, had pleaded with the Government for just two more days to recapture these territories but Nehru’s move and the ceasefire wrecked the Indian Army’s plans. 

Gopal Dutta Mengi (Congress): I support this Bill. All over India, people want Jammu & Kashmir to be fully integrated with the country. Constitute a committee of legal experts to extend the Union Government’s power to the State.

Inder J Malhotra (Congress): I…agree that Article 370 be omitted. The people of the State have no special liking for Article 370…and we shall be very happy as soon as this is omitted. I request the Home Minister that this Bill should not be opposed.

These sentiments were echoed by MPs across parties, including MV Kamath (Praja Socialist Party) and Ram Manohar Lohia (Socialist Party).

But the clincher came from DC Sharma, an Independent MP. He said, “Our Article 370 has disfigured our Constitution. This Article is nothing more than a Constitutional anachronism. I say that for the good name of India, for the Constitutional propriety of India, for the legal correctness of this country, this Article should be scrapped forthwith without any hesitation, without any doubt…this Article refers to those conditions, which no longer exist and which are not operative now. Therefore, this Constitutional impropriety, which is embedded in…370, must go.”

When we reflect over the advice Sharma gave to the Congress Government way back in 1964, which was not acted upon, the clarity of thinking in the present Government on such a tangled issue and the precision with which Prime Minister Modi and Shah have acted at this juncture, we realise the yawning gap between the Congress and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) on critical issues pertaining to national integrity and national security. Here is another example.

DC Sharma (Ind):  Wisdom consists in settling unsettled things. The act of statesmanship is an act of boldness, firmness and decisiveness. But I do not know what has happened to my country that instead of settling unsettled things, we have unsettled settled things.

Finally, the clincher: “Article 370…is not a wall…it is a big mountain, which stands between India and Jammu & Kashmir. I feel this mountain should be blasted with dynamite, with the dynamite of goodwill, firmness and decision. That way lies the salvation of India and that way lies the good and welfare of the people of Jammu & Kashmir.”

Thanks to Modi, India no longer suffers from an “inferiority complex” that Hanumanthaiya lamented about. Also, Modi and Shah have acted with “boldness”, “firmness” and “decisiveness” — the qualities that MPs wanted the Congress Government to exhibit in 1964, “to settle unsettled things” and to blast the mountain called Article 370 “with the dynamite of goodwill, firmness and decision!”

(The writer is an author specialising in democracy studies. Views expressed are personal)

Writer: A Surya Prakash

Courtesy: The Pioneer

Post article 370 revocation, the government aims at working toward managing conflict and peace in Kashmir.

There’s something inherently reassuring about the return of normalcy in the daily rhythms of life, people moving about in the streets, shopping for rations, visiting places of worship, children going to schools and the elderly taking their walks. Life, as it happens around us in its mundane beats, gives a strange sense of continuity and status quo. The Valley, which was traumatised into silence after heavy security deployment, the abrogation of Article 370 and its declaration as Union Territory, came out on the streets despite the overturning of what had so far underpinned its political existence. At least, people attempted to resume their social life as they knew it with the relaxation of restrictions, albeit under strict vigilance. Some of them even managed to speak to the Press despite the presence of security personnel, even sharing their repressed views and fears. Others lamented the lockdown had thrown life out of gear. Yet others went about shopping for Bakr-Id, hoping their sincere prayers would be heard and bloodshed would stop in the Valley. This is an uneasy truce, something they have lived with for years, but the inevitability of a changed status is new to them. And they do not quite know how to react. This is where Naya Bharat’s Kashmir doctrine will be put to test, whether the healing touch of socio-economics will win over the people’s hearts or not, whether the muscularity of a bold move will be complemented by an empathetic understanding of people’s needs, where majoritarians understand that yielding space and listening may deliver greater returns than expected and that a tectonic policy shift also entails a mindset change.

Of course, Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s outreach does talk about issues that matter to the ordinary Kashmiri — boosting growth, powering MSMEs, developing a tourism hub, opening institutions of excellence, marketing Kashmir’s heritage crafts, creating jobs and so on. Now translating them on the ground must be done judiciously. While Jammu might feel that it has been denied resources because of the special status to Kashmir for too long, it shouldn’t be seen as being rewarded so much that Kashmir feels the integration was just a political punishment. As a State, which was undoubtedly under-served economically and infrastructure wise, it still had been able to maintain some healthy growth indices. Because, though buying land as promised may seem like a whole new world, the fact is the 99-year lease model has worked for setting up existing businesses. While the nature of industries may be limited given the region’s Himalayan terrain and climate concerns, it can become a major pharmaceutical, medical and research hub with more knowledge-based units. The educated Kashmiri youth could become a national asset as they have proved their excellence, particularly in scientific disciplines, in the rest of India and abroad. Harnessing them properly and absorbing them in jobs could undoubtedly give us a talent pool but it’s a tough act considering there is joblessness in the rest of the country. It is difficult to demonstrate short-term gains in Kashmir where reclaiming peace will undoubtedly be a long journey. And without that stability, investment will just not come in. For starters, the re-organisation has pushed the civil society further away from us. And tainting politically-elected leaders as the nation’s disruptors and arresting them have distanced any hope of a return to consultative and consensual dialogue. They need to be coopted, not distanced, considering they have always chosen to side with democracy. Even the educated elite have through generations invested their faith in the idea of India than separatism, and so the Government must take care to ensure that trust is not misplaced. For the sense of betrayal could result in unimagined hitbacks. This requires a velvet glove approach considering the abolition of statehood has also meant a denial of their identity as they knew it. The mass protests by ethnic Muslims from Kargil are warning bells that bifurcation could trigger demands for further division and autonomy, resulting in unrest. The Government needs to have its ear stuck to the ground to anticipate implications and have a redressal mechanism in place. The panchayat model of devolution of power should now be systematically built up to local governance structures. Unrealistic imposition can never transplant realistic grace.

Writer & Courtesy: The Pioneer

India on a hot tin roof as both US and China lay terms for Huawei’s entry into 5G trials

It’s not the best time for diplomacy with China following the reorganisation of Jammu and Kashmir and the declaration of Ladakh as a Union Territory. It is the latter that has riled our eastern neighbour as it immediately changes the dynamic on Aksai Chin. China has so far argued that its claim there is contingent on the final resolution of Kashmir. Now that it is part of the UT of Ladakh and cannot figure as an adjunct of the old State, China is refusing to accept it and upping the ante. However, if observers are to be believed, it is show-boating its anger by dilly dallying on visas for Mansarovar yatris while working on Premier Xi Jinping’s informal visit to India. It is also staying away from making sweeping statements on the abrogation of Article 370, asking both India and Pakistan to exercise restraint. Trade is its bigger concern. So its threat to block Indian firms operating on its soil, if we stop Huawei Technologies from doing business here and participating in 5G trials under US pressure, is serious.

India is in a bit of a cleft stick here as Huawei is the pivot of a geo-political slugfest between  China and the US. The Donald Trump administration put the company on a blacklist in May, citing national security concerns. It has asked its allies not to use Huawei equipment, which it says China could exploit for spying. Given Trump’s transactional nature of dealing and knowing that India needs his support in the background of tectonic administrative changes in Modi 2.0, we are in quite a pickle about accommodating Chinese interests without upsetting the US and risking trade-protectionist hitbacks there too. And now that Chinese officials have threatened “reverse sanctions,” India must frame a reasonable response. Besides, Huawei has already operated in India before, so denying it fair trial now would be inimical. A potential conflict over Huawei can end up inflaming emotions and jeopardising the long-standing territorial status quo. At the same time, India desperately needs to address a $53 billion trade deficit during Xi’s visit and can ill-afford trust issues at this point. A high-level group of officials, which has been looking into whether to open the 5G trials, has so far found no evidence to suggest Huawei has used “back-door” programmes or malware to collect data in its current operations here. On the face of it, one can’t reject Huawei simply because it is Chinese. After all, it has 20 per cent  patents, 50 per cent market share and is cost-effective. But what the government can do indeed is to get wireless carriers who will be rolling out 5G services to use India-made software. And then  drive equipment supplied by gear makers. We cannot overlook security concerns either but considering Huawei entry is conditional for Chinese looking the other way in matters diplomatic, we have to step our way around it.

Writer & Courtesy: The Pioneer