AI or Artificial Intelligence is suddenly the global trend. It took almost six decades for AI to become a revolution but it seems it is here to stay. What will then be left of HI or Human Intelligence? A big question that needs to be pondered over. Let us also consider if AI will actually bring the “Robocalypse” as coined by someone too apprehensive of the growing trend of robotisation along with corporatisation and mathematicisation that is becoming an obsession world over. There are two distinct schools of thought on the subject. One school opines that AI will make HI redundant and will replace humans in a big way or rather completely in the long run. The other school, however, the conservative one, believes that the AI is being overhyped and humans will remain in charge. But between these over-enthusiasts and conservatives, there is a reasonable band of opinion which is closer to the truth. AI can only do certain things and not all. Yes the computational ability of AI is much more than the human mind. For that matter even a 500 rupee pocket calculator is much more sophisticated than human mind as far as calculations are concerned. But are human beings only for calculations? Coming to deep learning, it has a much wider band of functions and has the ability to recognise patterns and provide solutions. It is being argued that they can be much better than human beings in making decisions based on interpretation of those patterns. Similarly, they can be much better at taking decisions because they can store, manipulate, infer and disseminate astronomically large quantum of data which is an impossibility for humans. Now comes the crucial question. Do humans take decisions only on be basis of data? Human decisions are a combination of information, emotion and values or else it would have been impossible for the Pandavas to kill Bhishma in the battlefield of Kurukshetra. And for some who may be sceptical about the Mahabharata, there is this story from the Silicon Valley. It was at the Bay Area Leadership Conference at San Francisco on June 15 that this columnist had an opportunity to interact with John Thomson, the Chairman of Microsoft, which is on the forefront of the current AI revolution. In his deliberations John had talked about the qualities that made him recommend Satya Nadella as CEO of Microsoft. But those qualities were not technical or computational skills. They were empathy, sensitivity and the emotional ability. On asking whether those qualities could be engineered in AI, John very candidly replied in the negative. Human nature is beyond the scope of even the most advanced of the algorithms to replicate. In the Indian philosophical thought the supreme quality of humans is the blend of Intelligence Quotient, Emotional Quotient and Morality Quotient. The one word in which this quality can be summed up in Hindi is viveka. Human sensitivities are developed through a long chain of evolution that is a result of a complex interaction of the Biological, the Psychological and the Sociology factors. Interestingly, none of these can be inculcated into the machine through AI. Deep learning, contrary to the popular assumption then, is not all that deep.

Pathak is a professor of management, writer, and an acclaimed public speaker. He can be reached at ppathak.ism@gmail.com 

Writer: Pramod Pathak

Courtesy: The Pioneer

The Hyperloop promises to revolutionise travel but questions remain about its economic viability

The world is littered with expensive transportation infrastructure projects that are barely used and even abandoned after a few years. There is the famous example of a brand new airport near Madrid, Spain, which was abandoned after a few months. In 2002, China inaugurated a magnetic levitation train between the Pudong airport and the outskirts of Shanghai, the harbinger of a massive network of space age connectivity. While that train remains the world’s fastest commercially operating train, with speeds touching 500 km per hour, it is nothing more than a tourist attraction today. The 30 km rack cost an eye-watering $1.2 billion in the early-2000s and it should serve as a cautionary tale for those who want to make India a hub for the new ‘Hyperloop’ technology. In essence, Hyperloop is ‘Maglev Plus.’ Magnetic levitation lifts a ‘shuttle’, which travels through an enclosed pipe. It operates ideally, in a vacuum, but  realistically with very low air pressure, allowing the shuttles to move without any air resistance at up to 1,000 km per hour. Such a system would make immense sense then as a transportation system between urban agglomerations located close to each other. Such as Mumbai and Pune, and it is no surprise that those who back the technology feel that this will make for a great test track. Sure, reducing the three-four hour travel time by road between Maharashtra’s industrial hubs will be welcome but there are several caveats. First, there is little certainty on who will fund this extremely extravagant programme. While the Maharashtra government has given it ‘infrastructure’ status, the State government and the Centre  are not investing any money. The estimated project’s price is a truly sky-rocketing $10 billion, and that is before the inevitable cost escalations, since the technology itself is currently in its testing phase.

Would the money be better spent on developing a regular high-speed train track between the two cities that tunnels through the Western Ghats instead? Or should money be poured into a unproven technology with immense potential but possibly still years, possibly decades away from commercial application? Will the Hyperloop in India end up like the Maglev track outside Shanghai, a tourist attraction that showcases the future that might have been? It is one thing to look at the future, but practicality should also come into consideration. Massive, futuristic infrastructure projects and technologies get politicians goggly-eyed but running headlong into something without thinking it through is plain silly. Has anyone asked the question on who will use the ‘Hyperloop’ between the two cities? If the project costs a bomb, then only the very rich or tourists can use it. After all, in Shanghai, locals prefer taking the regular, slow subway train instead of the Maglev. We do not have the luxury of building infrastructure to make a point, we have to build infrastructure to be used by a billion people.

Writer & Courtesy: The Pioneer

With an eye on Assembly polls, the AAP govt offers free electricity but will it be enough to get Kejriwal another term?

They may look jaded slogans but when it comes to governance in Delhi, it is the classic bijli, sadak and paani (power, roads and water) issues which have worked in local elections. Particularly, the city’s power supply has been the most crucial swing factor for the continuity of regimes. Power reforms were the reason the Congress, then led by Sheila Dikshit, got mass acceptability between 1998 and 2013. Her focus was on improving the quality of power supply through privatisation of the electricity distribution sector. And when that frayed at the edges, the mess was a fertile ground for the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) to emerge as a champion of people’s right to a good life. The party questioned the privatisation model, alleging financial irregularities by distribution companies (discoms) and suggesting a collusion between the Congress government and the discoms to keep tariffs artificially high at public expense. In fact, power reforms have found mention as a key plank and a promise of an affordable living index in all its manifestos. Not only that, AAP has consistently detailed its rationale for the tariff, revenue and distribution to justify its claims and ensured execution to gain popular vote. Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal intends keeping it that way and as he seeks another mandate; he has not changed Delhi’s power tariff, calling it among the lowest in the country, and even announced free electricity for those who consume less than 200 units a month and a 50 per cent subsidy for those who consume till 400 units. The Delhi Electricity Regulatory Commission (DERC) also reduced fixed charges for most domestic connections by up to 84 per cent. The subsidy has, of course, been criticised many times about its broad-based nature that allows many of the privileged to claim benefits but that was revised last year to benefit the low consumption end. And Kejriwal has sweetened his latest announcement saying he has equalised free power for the poor with that of the city’s political elite. Some observers also point out that in the absence of a tariff hike, how is it possible to manage discoms with subsidy payments that will cost about Rs 1,700 to 2,000 crore additional expense. Despite these naysayers Kejriwal has admittedly scored on power infrastructure, improving the revenues and funds for power companies, eliminating red tape and ensuring almost zero power cuts. But this toggling between populism, vision and institutional viability can prove costly if exuberant enthusiasm is not curbed by rational discretion.

The AAP regime has consistently built social capital that has strengthened its electoral traction. Its improvement of the public school infrastructure, teaching standards and student performance has revolutionised the way we look at Delhi’s government schools. The “Happiness Curriculum” and the construction of new classrooms in government schools have received accolades globally. The doorstep delivery of services, the primary healthcare centres offering free consultations, the mohalla clinics, some regularisation of unauthorised colonies have all worked for the “common man’s” agenda. This despite AAP’s consistent run-in with the Centre on allocation of full statehood powers and constant delays on infrastructure projects pending clearance. But AAP is desperate for consolidation of its votebase, which has slipped to a dismal 18 per cent in the May Lok Sabha polls from about 33 per cent previously. It has even slid to third position in five Lok Sabha seats behind the Congress this time. The BJP’s vote percentage is at 56 per cent and following victories in the municipal corporation, it is hoping for a short-term cascading impact on the Delhi Assembly polls. But worryingly for AAP, the BJP, in its bid to end a power drought in Delhi, is intensively promoting a Mission 2020 campaign to ensure that the underprivileged pockets, slum clusters and the Muslim community are provided with the benefits of the Modi government schemes. It is this aggression in AAP territory that needs a far stronger counter-script from Kejriwal than just power reforms.

Writer & Courtesy: The Pioneer

From an asthmatic sickly boy, the journey to becoming a Guinness world record holder in mountaineering was riddled with hurdles but Satyarup Siddhanta refused to give up, says Sakshi Sharma

A journey from being an asthmatic kid, who could barely run 100 metres, to being the youngest Guinness world record holder for climbing the seven summits and seven volcanic summits, Satyarup Siddhanta has fought against all the odds and made India proud by inspiring young talent.

But Satyarup knows how to crawl out from the depths. While climbing the Everest, which he considers his most challenging expedition, he fell into a  deep crevice after a snowbridge broke enroute to camp. He was stuck in the middle and it was so deep that he could not see its bottom. But he was lucky enough to be alive and tell the tale.

He says, “On my death bed, I won’t remember how much bank balance I have or what contract I won or lost.” Rather, he wants to feel content that he touched lives. But to battle the odds, tough conditions and extreme weather needs a special kind of motivation. He says, “Every step that I put on the high altitude, fills me up with gratitude. It’s like a miracle, as I never thought I could climb any mountain. The joy in surpassing my own limits, breaking the barriers and shattering the self limiting belief makes me feel unstoppable.” He realised human potential is unfathomable and the discovery of this strength served as the greatest motivation for him.

Adventurous since childhood, Satyarup says, “I never dreamt of mountaineering, but I was always adventurous in my thought process. I used to read a lot of  novels and imagine that I am the central character. People often saw me on the treetop or climbing on the parapets or the boundary walls.”

Sharing about his initial years, he says, “Because my college was in the Himalayas, I had intense asthma attacks because of the high altitude.” The turning point came when he had an asthma attack and had forgotten the inhaler in his room. He says, “I was rolling on the ground to breathe and get some oxygen. I tried everything possible to regularise my breath but nothing worked. After 10 minutes, it automatically became normal.” This incident changed Satyarup’s life. He became contemplative and saw the incident through a broader perspective. He realised how dependent he was on his inhaler and wanted to get rid of that helplessness for which he started training his body by eating food that he was allergic to.

It was when he joined a job at Bengaluru in 2005 that the seeds of mountaineering were sowed. His boss showed him his trekking pictures at Parvathamalai hill which gave him an insight into the world he was not aware of. He says, “For a moment I was shocked because I always used to think that treks were possible only in foreign countries because the adventure novels that I read were mostly set abroad. I asked my boss if I could also do this, and he counter questioned, ‘if I can why can’t you?’” This excited him to the core but he knew that it would not be easy for him on account of his asthma. But, he decided to chase his dreams and went on a trek to Parvathamalai hills. He says, “When I reached the top, I not only had the joy of climbing the hill but also of the fact that I didn’t use the inhaler during the whole journey. I felt liberated. That moment instilled confidence in me and I realised that I could achieve all my dreams if I am dedicated.”

Since then there has been no looking back. Satyarup decided to fight with his problems and fulfill his wildest imagination. He says, “Every weekend, people saw me on the Western Ghats trekking, diving and skydiving. I never thought that I would become a mountaineer.” Things took a 360 degree turn in 2010 when he went for the Everest base camp trek in Nepal. He says, “The highest mountain stood there casting a spell on me. I did not know what mountaineering was, I just knew it is yet another mountain, a little high but I could definitely do it. So, I promised Everest that I am going to come back.” But, he soon realised that mountaineering was not like normal trekking and was a different game altogether. But he clung on to his dream and started preparing for it.

He then went to Kilimanjaro, the highest mountain in Africa and came to know about the concept of seven summits. (The 7 summits represent the highest point on each of the seven continents). Satyarup says, “I was blown away by the idea and started dreaming about it. But, soon realised that I didn’t have money for climbing even one and here I am thinking about seven mountains.”

Talking about the challenges of his journey he says, “ I went to Mt Denali, the highest mountain of North America in Alaska, unsupported and unguided because of its heavy cost.” But the good part was that he completed the journey and this boosted his confidence for Everest. But financial constraints held him back, so he collected funds  from  his college, friends, parents and crowdfunding. But in 2015, there was an earthquake in Nepal which killed more than 10,000 people and all expeditions were closed. Talking about the tough time he says, “I lost my four friends, I was shattered. Our dreams were crushed but I did not lose hope. I held together all the broken pieces of my dreams and started rebuilding it.”

Mountaineering involves challenges in all aspects, be it physical, mental or financial. A mountaineer should be strong enough to combat these in order to turn their dream into a reality. Satyarup says, “You have to be mentally very strong because it’s not easy to see someone falling from the cliff in front of your eyes but then you have to walk ahead without feeling anything. This needs a lot of guts.” One needs to be patient in order to handle the uncertainties. Talking about the financial challenges, he says, “I had to leave my job because there was no policy for such long leaves in my office. So, I had to choose between Everest and my job and I chose the former because I had no idea whether I would come back from the climb or not. I thought there was no point bothering about the job? The Everest climb cost `20-25 lakh and Antarctica `76 lakh.” He has run up a loan of 45 lakh for which he works at two jobs — morning and evening — to pay his EMIs. Therefore, he is trying to get the government’s support. He feels that India is not mature enough about mountaineering. He says, “There are consistent efforts to encourage sports which has shown results as we have been breaking records. My request is to extend this to mountaineering as well.” He hopes that the government understands his situation and reverts with a positive response.

“It will be a failure on part of our country if the potential and passion of mountaineers is held back because of financial constraints. I could have used this money to buy a house or a car and lead a settled life but I wanted to make my country proud. Nobody asked me to, but I felt an urge to be instrumental,” adds he. He repeatedly urges the government to support mountaineers who silently bring glory to the country but are suffering terribly.

Writer: Sakshi Sharma

Courtesy: The Pioneer

For better prosperity of the agriculture sector, the Government must allow farmers market access and promote Indian varieties globally

India is a biodiversity-rich country. We are the centre of origin for many crops, fruits and vegetables. Along with a rich bio-heritage, we have been blessed with all types of climate and soil. Our nation’s hard-working farmers, seed savers and plant breeders, along with mother nature, have co-evolved thousands of varieties to provide us with nutrition and also prepared us for drought, floods and climate change. In recent times, public institutions, along with the Indian private sector, have aggressively pursued this goal, too. Unlike other sectors, they have not only taken from mother nature but have also added to her bounty. Today, each Indian can proudly showcase to the world that we have achieved food sovereignty, while also conserving biological diversity in the sui generis way under the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) ambit.

India has the sixth largest domestic seed market in the world. The size of the industry is over Rs 20,000 crore and it will continue to grow at six to seven per cent. But we are far from the saturation point. Restrictions on export of seeds weigh heavy on growth. In 2017, the Indian seed exports were valued at $101 million, a paltry sum when compared to the global seed export market of $11,924 million. This was due to the lack of both harmonisation with international regulations and a strong national seed export policy. The Modi Government has the mandate to clean up the clogs and facilitate the development of mutually beneficial ties between national, regional and world seed markets.

Since 2008, India has been a participant of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) Seed Schemes, which open up seed trading potential with over 60 countries. Our hybrids in corn, paddy, forage crops, millets, vegetables and cotton are popular in many countries due to their productivity and resilience. Indian farmers and plant breeders will find new markets from Vietnam to South Africa. Apart from bringing economic prosperity to the Indian farmers, this push may also help farmers of Kenya, Egypt, South Sudan and Uganda among others, double their incomes. India needs to promote its indigenous R&D and seed export as part of its economic diplomacy. Indian seeds should become part of all aid programmes given to countries so as to popularise them.

ASEAN countries such as Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia and Myanmar also present a ready market for Indian seed exports. Currently, we are trading vegetable and fruit seeds with them, but there is a huge potential for expansion. Take the case of Vietnam and India, both countries have huge coastline, which are threatened by salinity due to climate change. We have to work on a governmental level to share our seeds and biodiversity to counter these threats. India has many paddy varieties for salinity; we should encourage cross-breeding to climate-proof our rice production. 

Closer home, Bangladesh, Nepal and Sri Lanka can be the top three destinations for all Indian hybrid seeds. Overall, Bangladesh reported 57 per cent, Nepal 88 per cent and Sri Lanka 83 per cent gap in supply in 2018-19. For paddy seeds in 2017-18, Nepal reported a gap of 701,398MT, Sri Lanka 104,000MT and Bangladesh 75,957MT. Similarly for wheat, Nepal reported 78,720MT and Bangladesh 33,490MT.

Our agro-climatic zones provide an opportunity for Indian farmers and breeders to be the leaders in seed production. We can become seed home for the world. We can exponentially increase our Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and bring prosperity to rural India by sharing our superior varieties with other nations.

We can also increase this share by creating agriculture economic zones along the lines of special economic zone (SEZs). This can be done under  the “Make in India” scheme so that companies and Government agencies can get tax benefits and indulge in rigorous R&D. This step will strengthen the Indian agriculture sector by breeding superior seeds and preparing the crop for climate change. This scheme can be used to boost our FPOs, too.

Farmers and village clusters can be encouraged to grow seeds in partnership with various companies and the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR). This will ensure that the target of doubling farmers’ incomes is achieved by 2022 as they will have ready buyers for their produce. Additionally, growing seeds will fetch farmers a price far beyond the Minimum Support Price (MSP).  

The Government should also create an Indian seed standard and certificate that should be trusted across the world. We should rely on international standards and learn from their procedures. But to establish India as a strong force, we need to develop an indigenous standard through which we can smoothen seed exports and build regional trust.

The Government can further provide financial assistance for exporters under the “Market Access Initiative” scheme to encourage seed export business. States, which record good export growth, can get financial assistance to promote export-related infrastructure. Telangana has already shown much initiative for promoting seed exports.

Further, to promote export of seeds, the Government can form an autonomous body ie,  the seed export council. This council can have representation from the public sector, the Indian seed industry and plant breeders. It can work under the Ministry of Agriculture. This will be a novel step by Agriculture Minister Narendra Singh Tomar to double farmers’ income. 

In addition to all these, we can institute a single point for quarantine testing and clearance for export of seeds. The Government can undertake these steps to facilitate seed exports from the country. Further, we can harmonise our biodiversity laws and create a special provision within the National Biodiversity Authority (NBA) to smoothen regulations for the export of seeds. The NBA can play a key role in drafting these new regulations.

Our Intellectual Property Right (IPR) laws are also complementary to most African and Asian nations, who don’t recognise patents on seeds and they, too, follow the sui generis system under the World Trade Organisation. The Modi Government has a unique opportunity to take the lead in creating a universal system based on breeder rights and the philosophy of Vasudev Kutumbhakam, which also protects commercial rights of our plant breeders. Through this policy, we can allow Indian farmers and FPOs to enter seed breeding contract with farmers across the world.

As we chase the goal of becoming a $5 trillion economy, India needs a firmer grip on the globalised market. But will we allow our farmers to reap the benefits of globalisation? In the rush to fill our PDS schemes with cereals, we have asked them to sacrifice for nation-building, now are we willing to reward them? It is not late, the Government can make the start by extending the “Make in India” scheme to  Indian farmers and not double but maybe quadruple their incomes by 2022. We need to allow the farmers market access and promote Indian varieties across the world. It is now time for India to not only feed but also seed the world.

(Indra Shekhar Singh is Programme Director for Policy and Outreach at the National Seed Association of India (NSAI) and RK Trivedi is executive director, NSAI)

Writer: Indra Shekhar singh Rk Trivedi

Courtesy: The Pioneer

Ahead of Chinese President Xi Jinping’s visit, India will do well to complete its homework — from symbolism to business

On July 22, an amusing news item caught everybody’s attention. The visit by the Communist Party of China leader and state President, Xi Jinping, to India in October depended primarily on the runway length of the Indian airport. “A runway big enough for the aircraft carrying Chinese President Xi Jinping and his large high-powered delegation to land directly from Beijing is believed to be one of the key parameters when the Indian and Chinese sides jointly decide the venue for the second informal summit in India between President Xi and Prime Minister Narendra Modi,” said the report.

Several points, therefore, emerge on the runway alone. First, if it becomes one of the prime issues regarding the visit and venue of the Sino-Indian bilateral, then it’s up to the host nation, India, to take the call  because once a sovereign nation hosts a top dignitary of another sovereign nation, it’s the duty and responsibility of the former to take care of and fulfil all parameters of safety, security, hospitality and protocol among other things. Second, if the guest raises the airport runway length of the host as an issue three months before the visit, then the bilateral looks more like a logistics-centric exercise than a serious diplomatic discussion. Third, does the unusual “runway length” shift the focus on to poor airport infrastructure in India’s backyard, which the Chinese guest would like to see as a business opportunity for “upgradations?” Fourth, is it a Chinese ploy to play with and point out the vulnerability and backwardness of the host? To show India in poor light in front of the world? Through wide media coverage?

If so, understandably the airport “runway” has its ancillaries, too, under the scanner. Leave road, hotel, transport, communication, media facility, security and hospitality aside. There is a need for ample room for VVIPs to move around and stroll in solitude. There are expectations of an informal, intimate and private set-up with spacious arena, beyond the gaze, or radar, of the “excessively inquisitive” media, being in tune with the philosophy and standard set long ago by disciples of the Marx-Lenin duo.

Coming back to the Indian airport and Chinese aircraft for the Sino-Indian bilateral, it may not be far-fetched to visualise Xi alighting from a four-engine US-made Boeing 747 as there is nothing else in the vicinity, notwithstanding the existence of the sole four-engine Airbus 380 of Europe.

Assuming again that Airbus 380 could be one of the options for the flight of the Chinese leader, as reportedly China Southern Airlines operates five such aircraft, in reality, it’s highly unlikely. Only four Indian airports of Delhi, Mumbai, Bengaluru and Hyderabad have the facility and capability to handle super-jumbo Airbus 380, the maximum take-off weight of which is between 510 and 575 tonnes.

Hence, it’s almost certain that only a fully-laden four-engine US Boeing 747 will be the preferred aircraft with a maximum take-off weight between 362.875 tonnes and 442.250 tonnes (depending on the model and date of manufacture). That takes us to the possible Indian venue of the meet, which has to be the same city for the foreign dignitary. Thus, whereas there exists more than 30 international airports in India’s map, handling aircraft of various size, shape and capacity for diverse destination, only the top 10 longest airport runways could be considered for visiting Chinese dignitary.

These 10 are New Delhi 4,430 metres (14,534¢); Hyderabad 4,260 metres (13,976¢); Bengaluru 4,120 metres (13,517¢); Chennai 3,662 metres (12,020¢) and 2,935 metres (9,629¢); Kolkata 3,627 metres (11,900¢) and 2,790 metres (9,150¢); Ahmedabad 3,599 metres (11,807¢); Mumbai 3,445 metres (11,302¢) and 2,990 metres (9,760¢); Kochi 3,400 metres (11,154¢); Amritsar 3,289 metres (10,790¢) and Thiruvananthapuram at 3,400 metres (11,154¢).    

We can now say with a reasonable degree of confidence that the Boeing 747 of Xi will land at one of these 10  airports. Why? Because a fully-laden Boeing 747 (a VVIP like Xi arriving in India cannot come in an aircraft without full load owing to various obligatory safety, security parameter and protocol) takes anywhere between 7,000¢ and 8,000¢ length runway for landing and between 9,950¢ and 10,600¢ for take-off. That said, every flight also requires an additional 2,000¢ to 3,000¢ length for manoeuvring, in case of an aborted take off or emergency landing. And one simply cannot take any chance with high-profile visit of an important head of state.

So, once decided, one would like to ask: Which airport would be preferred for Xi’s October visit? Here, I dare suggest, if I was there, I would unhesitatingly suggest Kolkata as the venue for the Indian Prime Minister to welcome the Chinese President for an “informal bilateral visit.” Absurd? Impossible? Hallucination? No. Not at all. It’s real. Practical. Art of turning impossible into possible.

Too much political bickering between Delhi and Kolkata is reaching an unacceptably high decibel, thereby creating an irreparable rift between the Centre and the whole of the East and North-East. Perennial neglect and snubbing of the East and the North-East is creating a cleavage with potential long-term damage. Hence, hold the meeting in Kolkata to equalise its strategic value as a gateway to our Look east policy, China having already consolidated its economic hold on Southeast Asia. The distance between the Kolkata airport and Raj Bhavan can be covered through the aerial route. Dum Dum to Race Course, under Eastern Army Command, is six-eight minute flying time, and Race Course helipad to Raj Bhawan would be a maximum three-four minute drive for VVIP motorcade.

The river-front of Hooghly, from Eden Garden to Princep Ghat, could easily be spruced up again under the Eastern Army Command. Hotels of Taj Bengal and Oberoi Grand could be had for the entire entourage. Those coming by road from airport to hotels could easily cover the distance through fly-overs in 30 minutes, under controlled protocol of traffic guards.

Politically and diplomatically, it can very well be a win-win situation for all. Delhi could show political sagacity. Kolkata its traditional magnanimity. And the Chinese guest could have a reunion with those Chinese who made Bengal their home almost 100 years ago when China (especially Shanghai) was on fire, from May 4, 1919. There still are Chinese, who do Durga Puja in China Town and have even written slogans in Chinese language during the last parliamentary elections.   

There, however, is one knotty issue: The date of the visit. If it’s Durga Puja/Nava Ratri, it has to be between October 2 and 8.  The only thing which, perhaps, needs to be avoided is that it may not be between October 20 and 31. October 20 because India was attacked by China on that day in 1962. Hence, all 11 days from October 20 to 31, when India was being mauled by the PLA, may not give politically the right signals. October 1  will be the 70th birth anniversary of the People’s Republic of China. We all compliment China on its 70 years, but Beijing, too, needs to understand the sentiment of Indians for mutual reciprocity pertaining to goodwill and harmony. Hence, to my mind, a visit between October 6 (Ashtami) and October 8 (Dussehra) could be ideal. Both diplomatically as well as internally. It reminds me of the book by General William Slim, Defeat into Victory.

(The writer, an alumnus of National Defence College of India, is author of China in India. Views are personal.)

Writer: Abhijit Bhattacharyya

Courtesy: The Pioneer

Nikolay Kudashev, Russian Ambassador to India, says that the history of World War I teaches us many universal lessons, which are still relevant

As the world marks the 105th anniversary of World War I (1914) and remembers the beginning of the war, we recall how it led to an implosion of great empires — Russian, German, Ottoman and Austro-Hungarian — devastated the European continent, drastically reshaped the erstwhile global order and ushered in a period of instability, which finally resulted in the outbreak of the second World War in 1939.

Russia, during the time, was not prepared to enter the war. Nevertheless, when Saint Petersburg’s sincere diplomatic efforts to prevent the conflict failed, Russia completely carried out its commitments to the allies — Serbia, France and Great Britain.

On August 1, 1914, Germany had declared war on Russia. Within the next few days, France and Great Britain were drawn into the warfare. In no time, the Reichswehr was beating against the gates of Paris. St Petersburg took up the ally’s call to attack the opponents immediately and thus began the fateful offensive in Prussia. The subsequent crush of the advancing army, led by General Samsonov, was the price that Russia had paid for saving the French capital — the sacrifice that Supreme Allied Commander, Ferdinand Foch himself had admitted.

That was indeed the first but not the last instance when Russia had come to the allies’ rescue. In 1916, after suffering a number of setbacks, it launched a large-scale assault, led by General Aleksei Brusilov, supporting French efforts. Soon Russia had reacted to a request from the French for help by sending in 45,000 troops to the Western front, where they stood against the Germans alongside with the Indian Cavalry Corps.

Overall, the Russian entry into the war prevented the early rout of the Western allies, thus forcing Germany and Austro-Hungary into a warfare they were doomed to loose.

In 1914, German, Austro-Hungarian and Turkish armies lost more than 10 lakh troops at the Russian front while lost 9.8 lakh at the Western and Serbian fronts. In the course of the war, the Germans and the Austrians deployed almost half of their troops against Russia.

After the break out of hostilities, St Petersburg concentrated on strengthening the bonds within the Entente, isolating the Triple Alliance, searched for new allies, worked on future settlements, but was unable to reap any of the benefits. A war period of two and a half years led to an overstrain of Russia’s economy, breakdown of its army, a series of political turmoils, collapse of its monarchy, the 1917 October Revolution and the civil war.

The history of the World War I teaches many universal lessons, which are relevant even today. One of the most important is that of inadmissibility of imposing one’s own sense of exceptionalism upon others with blind use of force. It reminds us of tragic consequences of excessive ambitions of political leaders as well as of importance to firmly uphold the hard-won principles of sovereign equality of states, non-interference in their internal affairs and collective methods for settling crises by political and diplomatic means.

(The writer is a senior journalist)

Writer & Courtesy: The Pioneer

Though the present US-Pak bonhomie is Afghan-specific, India will have to be watchful and tread its path carefully in case Khan succeeds to placate the Taliban

Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan’s recently concluded three-day visit to the US and his one-on-one meeting with US President Donald Trump have evoked mixed reactions in India not only due to the latter’s controversial statement but also due to a lukewarm concern displayed by American authorities with regard to terrorism. Relations between Pakistan and the US have been strained ever since the Trump Administration assumed power due to Islamabad’s support to the global jihadi terrorist organisations and its involvement in cross-border terrorism in India and Afghanistan. Though Pakistan’s involvement in cross-border terror in Iran is also well established, the US does not show much concern due to its strategic concerns in the Gulf region.

Pakistan’s continued support to the Taliban and the Haqqani network operating in Afghanistan irked the new US Administration, which put it on notice, threatening to suspend all aid, including the package to its Army. Islamabad failed to read the US’ intent. In the past, it got away playing the nuclear card. The Western world, particularly the US, is scared of the nuclear arsenal falling in the hands of jihadi terrorists operating from Pakistan’s soil and succumbed to its black mail, dishing out doles to it. Trump, however, is different.  

“The US has foolishly given Pakistan more than $33 billion in aid over the last 15 years and they have given us nothing but lies and deceit, thinking of our leaders are fools. They give safe havens to the terrorists we hunt in Afghanistan, with little help. No more!” — this is what Trump tweeted on the first day of 2018. Pakistan went to the extent of blaming Trump for “flinging accusations at Pakistan,” as he was disappointed at the “US’ defeat in Afghanistan.” Trump responded by blocking American aid of approximately $3 billion that also included the $300 million for the Pakistani Army. The Army-to-Army contact between the two nations was suspended. It was a big setback for Pakistan, which was already going through an economic crisis. Islamabad did try to put up a brave front initially but its dwindling economy, India’s diplomatic offensive in exposing Pakistan, the firm stand of the US Administration and the strictness of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) compelled the Imran Khan Government to take stern measures against the terror industry. Whether these measures are a “show window” to win the trust of Trump and the US authorities (a prelude to Khan’s visit to the US) or is there a sense of seriousness or permanency, only time will tell.

Meanwhile, the US has begun preparations for the next presidential election and Trump has also thrown his hat in the race. He is desperate to have one major diplomatic victory about which he can boast to the American people. His initiative in the Korean Peninsula is not making much headway. The strained relations with Iran are harming him more than helping him boost his image. His high-handed tactics of dealing with other countries have got him more enemies than allies. Both China and Russia also have tense relations with America. Although India is likely to be granted the status of the most-favoured non-NATO ally and is already designated with special STA-1 status, the relationship between the two countries is blowing hot and cold. Many in India perceive the US as a fickle ally. In a nutshell, Trump has more negatives to his credit than positives as far as foreign and strategic relations are concerned. He is desperate to win the Afghan tangle, which is not possible without placating the Taliban. The US also knows that only Pakistan can exert the desired influence on the Taliban. This forms the background of Khan’s visit to Pakistan as far as American perspective is concerned and unblocking the US aid.

Let’s first discuss Afghanistan. India has emerged as a major soft power in Kabul and has a big stake in whatever final settlement takes place. The Taliban has been recognised as the key impediment to the end of conflict in Afghanistan. Earlier, India was elbowed out of the direct negotiations with the Taliban, as claimed by a section of the media. To my mind, it is a deliberate decision by the Government to stay away from direct negotiations with the terror group due to adverse ramifications back home. India, however, cannot be ignored. Sooner than later, we will be involved in the final settlement. India remains steadfast on its traditional position of supporting only an “Afghan-led, Afghan owned and Afghan controlled” process, which includes the duly elected Government in Kabul.

With Pakistan forming a key partner in Trump’s South Asia strategy for achieving a political settlement in Afghanistan; defeating Al Qaeda and IS-Khorasan; providing logistical access for US forces and enhancing regional stability, it certainly has gained an upper hand. That is why Pakistan was included for the first time in the trilateral consultations with Russia, China and the US on the Afghanistan peace process held in Beijing in July.

The entire focus of the US was concentrated on Afghanistan during Khan’s visit, which included the Pakistan Army Chief and the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) chief in the entourage. While Khan has agreed to work with Trump to prod the Taliban to strike a peace deal with the aim of extricating the US Army from its longest war, the latter has dangled the offer of unblocking $3 billion aid to Pakistan if Khan succeeds. Khan said, “I want to assure President Trump, Pakistan will do everything within its power to facilitate the Afghan peace process. The world owes it to the long-suffering Afghan people to bring about peace after four decades of conflict.”

There is no doubt that the US is desperate to exit from Afghanistan but is the negotiation with the Taliban the best solution? The terror organisation has not been reformed and its five-year brutal rule is still fresh in the mind of the Afghans. It certainly suits Pakistan because this will help it achieve its aim of achieving strategic depth and the use Afghan territory to promote terrorism. It will also end the hope of a democratic Afghanistan, disappointing millions who are holding out still for a brighter future. India must, therefore, press for its involvement in the peace talks and ensure that the Taliban does not elbow out the elected Afghan Government. Trump’s desperation can be gauged from this statement, “I could win that war within a week, and I don’t want to kill 10 million people. Afghanistan could be wiped off the face of the earth. I don’t want to go that route.”

India has lot at stake because Afghanistan holds significant economic, security and strategic implications for it. We cannot be a mute spectator  and have to ensure that democracy survives in Afghanistan. As far as counter-terrorism is concerned, not much time was devoted to the same possibly to avoid public embarrassment to the visiting premier, whose services are badly needed by the US in view of its leverage over the Taliban, thanks to the safe havens it provides to the group’s leadership. But as admitted by Khan himself, with more than 40 terror groups existing in Pakistan, the situation is very fragile. Any terror attack in Afghanistan or India with mass causalities with proven links to Pakistan will reverse the new-found relationship between the US and Pakistan. The latter will have to tread the path very carefully.

Khan was successful in raising the Kashmir issue during the one-on-one meeting with President Trump. It was a spin-doctored question asked by a correspondent to prevent difficult questions on Pakistan’s involvement in terrorism, which would have caused a lot of embarrassment to Pakistan. The question successfully diverted the topic to Kashmir, when Khan lost no time in seeking Trump’s mediation and assistance in resumption of Indo-Pak dialogue. India has made its stand very clear by stating that talks and terror cannot be held together.

Trump surprised everyone with his signature trademark off-the-cuff remark. He has developed a habit of speaking or tweeting without preparation or proper briefing. His remark stoked a controversy, to which New Delhi reacted promptly and set the record straight. Fearing a strain in Indo-US relations, a number of American bureaucrats and leaders also jumped in to save the situation from worsening. But Trump is Trump and his remark should be seen in the light of his desperation for an early Afghan exit.

But Khan has succeeded to once again to internationalise Kashmir after numerous failed attempts by past Governments. India has to be careful and thwart the ISI’s design to portray home-grown terror groups in India by promoting the proxies of IS like ISJK, Al Qaeda like Ansar Ghazwa-ul-Hind, Hizbul Mujahideen and other IS-affiliate/inspired terror outfits. The ISI will certainly attempt to influence Left-wing extremism as has been exposed by the Pune Police disclosing links between urban Naxals and HM.

Khan’s attempt at reviving bilateral trade, as was evident from the large number of businessmen and traders that formed his entourage and unblock the US aid, has failed for the time being and is in no way going to help him to come out of the current economic mess. It may force him to persist with various counter-terrorism mechanisms put in place, including the arrest of Hafiz Saeed. More arrests are likely provided the Army and ISI permit. The imminent danger of being placed in the blacklist by the FATF may tie the hands of the ISI and Army. So the axe is likely to fall more on Afghan-specific terror groups like the Taliban and the Haqqani network.

The visit has been significant as far as bilateral security cooperation and military-to-military relations are concerned. There is a bright chance of resuming suspended military training programmes for Pakistan. At one point during President Trump’s meeting with Khan, the former also hinted at resumption of the security assistance for Pakistan depending on what both countries achieve concerning Afghanistan. The major plus point was the personal rapport established between the two. There is a great likelihood of a direct tele-line between the two leaders to further cement their bonhomie and smoothen any bureaucratic hiccups that may erupt. Islamabad would like to use such an opportunity to sort out other issues in the bilateral realm.

Will there be a change in the Indo-Pacific strategy of the US? Will Pakistan succeed in elbowing out India from the US equation in the region? Indian diplomats will have to work hard to ward off any such possibility. Though the present bonhomie between the two is Afghan-specific, what shape it takes in the future in case Khan succeeds to placate the Taliban, will have to be watched carefully.

(The writer is a Jammu-based political commentator, columnist, security and strategic analyst)

Writer: Anil Gupta

Courtesy: The Pioneer

While the Modi Government lauded the daring, determination and raw courage shown by our soldiers in Kargil, it failed to walk the talk on several issues pertaining to them

It was ironic that speaking to serving and retired armed forces personnel at the grand finale of the 20th anniversary of the Kargil Vijay Diwas, Prime Minister Narendra Modi emphasised on the need for modernisation  and jointness, the two pivotal issues on which he has done little. Appointing a Chief of Defence Staff (it was approved by the Cabinet in 2003), ordering the integration of the Armed Forces Head Quarters with the Ministry of Defence and increasing defence capital outlays — at present barely sufficient for committed liabilities — will transform the ad hoc defence and national security system into an effective military mechanism. This is precisely what the Kargil Review Committee (KRC) report, From Surprise to Reckoning, had recommended in 1999. Modi’s script-writers must read the KRC and its sequel, the Group of Ministers (GoM) reports.

The catastrophic intelligence failure that permitted massive Pakistani intrusions  led to monumental confusion. Troops hurriedly brought in from the Valley had to be re-oriented from counter-insurgency to conventional war-fighting. Loss of two fighters and one helicopter chastened the Indian Air Force (IAF). Strategic constraint of not crossing the Line of Control (LoC) proved avoidably costly. The   jointness was absent in the Army-waged Op Vijay, IAF Operation Safedsagar and Navy Operation Talwar. Acute shortages of high-altitude clothing, equipment and ammunition forced the then Army Chief, Gen VP Malik, into saying, “We will fight with what we have.” Kargil became a test-bed for uphill infantry assaults, never witnessed before or after in any war. The re-capture of jagged peaks took 83 days and cost 527 lives with nearly 1,400 brave men wounded. Brave infantry commanders, junior leaders and soldiers, with the help of IAF, turned around the situation in Kargil from ‘defeat’ into ‘victory’, much like Field Marshal William Slim’s second Burma campaign in World War II.

The theme for this year’s Kargil Vijay Divas was ‘Remember (sacrifices), Rejoice (victory) and Renew (resolve to protect tricolour)’. Missing was the fourth ‘R’: Review lessons of Kargil. I commanded my triple Victoria Cross, winning Gorkha battalion in Kargil after the 1971 war. My World War II vintage Brigade Commander made me walk from Batalik to Dras — the extent of the incursions — so that I write a threat appraisal paper. I did not visualise like many before and after, and at different headquarters of command, that Pakistan could do what it did. KRC called it irrational and said it could have been avoided with Siachenisation of Kargil, which it did not recommend. Operation Badr (also called Koh-i-Paima) by the Kargil clique of four Pakistani Generals, while tactically brilliant, had blistering strategic consequences.

KRC reported that Kargil was complete and was a total surprise for the Government, the Army and the intelligence services. The uncorrected  intelligence deficit led to attacks on Parliament in 2001 and Mumbai in 2008. Twenty years on, Pulwama happened. On February 14, for the first time in Jammu & Kashmir, a local suicide bomber rammed a Maruti packed with 60 kg of RDX smuggled from Pakistan into a Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) convoy, killing 40 troopers. The National Investigation Agency (NIA) is still investigating the case.

KRC has a full chapter on defence budget and modernisation, lamenting the decline in defence outlay from 3.85 per cent in 1987-88 to 2.09 per cent of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in 1999-2000. It stressed that infantry modernisation be given the highest priority. Sadly, this process started only last year with Infantry combating CIS “with what it has.” The KRC noted: “Many grave deficiencies exist in India’s security management system” and recommended a thorough review of the national security environment and national security system in its entirety.

It also added that the Government, Parliament and public opinion should determine the security shield required to meet the challenges of the 21st century.

Never in the country’s history has a review of the national security environment been done — neither a White Paper on defence nor a strategic defence and security review. Instead, piecemeal defence reforms have been attempted by the likes of Krishna Rao and Arun Singh Committees and Naresh Chandra Task Force, among others. The Army has tinkered with the reforms to enhance tooth to tail ratio.

Gen Bipin Rawat had cut Army by 50,000 soldiers to muster Rs 500 crore, which the Government never added to the Army’s capital outlay. Similarly, it was overlooked by the Shekatkar Committee. Now, the Army is on the threshold of implementing operational and structural reforms without an overall review of national security, environment and the system.

Despite the Government making national security its flagship programme, defence outlay this year was 1.5 per cent of the GDP, the lowest since 1962. The modernisation account allocation was even insufficient for the payment of old programmes. Still, the service Chiefs have painted a rosy picture. Both the Army and Air Force Chiefs are retiring shortly and vying for either CDS or governorship/ambassadorship. Gen Dalbir Singh, the architect of the Uri surgical strikes, was belatedly rewarded with ambassadorship to the Seychelles. Air Chief Marshal BS Dhanoa deservedly is eyeing his dividend from Balakot, which decisively swung the Modi Government’s vote tally to 303 seats.

Dhanoa, who commanded a MiG 21 squadron in Kargil, is euphoric. Once, he had compared fighting a two-front war to playing a T20 cricket match with seven players. Now the assertion is that an attack on an IAF installation like Pathankot in 2016 is a greater threat than two-front war and that 42 combat squadrons are required only in a two-front war. He also claimed that the IAF has all-weather capability, including during clouding for precision strikes. The IAF’s post-Balakot internal report leaked to the Press said: “Because of bad weather, the Crystal Maze-AGM 142, which video records the target strike, could not be used after Spice 2000 missiles…”

Defence Minister Rajnath Singh said on Kargil Day that he will ensure no harm comes to the pride and honour of the soldiers, conveniently forgetting that as the Home Minister, he let the Delhi Police rough up veterans protesting One Rank One Pension (OROP) and evict them from Jantar Mantar. On national security, the Modi Government has excelled in symbolism and rhetoric. While it lauded the daring, determination and raw courage of soldiers in Kargil, it is playing hide and seek on Non Functional Financial Upgrade (allowed to almost all central services), disability pension and full OROP (matter in court).

Modi, who has become the darling of most veterans, must walk the talk: Ban anyone saying “we will fight with what we have”; apply dil maange more, which he quoted from brave-heart Vikram Batra, to defence modernisation; order review of national security system in its entirely; and bestow genuine izzat auriqbal (honour and respect) as engraved on the gunners’ cap-badge and as Rajnath Singh has promised. Kargil has shown that India has become impervious even to crises to usher in reform.

(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

We must get out of the trap of labelling hate crime critics as anti-nationals and look at the bigger picture of Hindu thought

It is good that in the digital swamp of opinions, the epistolary tradition is back as a serious tool for getting heard and making a point above the chaos. Open letters have been a part of the political protest movement down the years, often to force a wider dialogue on a particular issue or compel the recipient to act on it if the establishment of the day has been intransigent or deliberately ignorant. That’s the reason why about 50 eminent personalities, including Anurag Kashyap, Aparna Sen, Mani Ratnam, Ramchandra Guha, Soumitro Chatterjee and Shyam Benegal, decided to lend heft to what has been known for some time. But by collectively writing a letter to the Prime Minister as concerned citizens who do not want further polarisation of the society or labelling of free thinkers as enemies of the nation, a Constitutional right one may add, they have relied on National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) records to make their case. Highlighting that hate crimes are on the rise, they have pleaded that the lynching of Muslims, Dalits and other minorities be stopped immediately. The decline in the percentage of convictions in such cases has worried them further as has the use of “Jai Shri Ram” as a provocative political slogan to justify majoritarian arrogance and display of power. Benegal, who has been a bard of independent India by documenting social change through his films, even clarified that the sacredness of Ram was dear to the Indic consciousness and was being defiled as much violence was being perpetrated by wrongfully invoking his name. But the trouble with the discourse that has been simplified into binaries of nationalists and traitors is rationality itself. So instead of taking it in the right spirit or even countering it with the argument that the Prime Minister has anyway expressed his discomfort in Parliament, a public forum, the pro-establishment brigade has predictably engaged in comparative one-upmanship. They have now questioned the dissenters as to why they never see atrocities against Hindus instead. Now this debate between Left-liberal domination of civil discourse through decades and the new-found assertion and inclusion of Rightist thought is not new. Yes, there should be all shades of opinion and interpretation in the plural matrix of India but does that behove we won’t look at their distortions, some of which indeed challenge the expansive aura of the Vedic civilisation?

It is true that the rallying cry of “Jai Shri Ram” has been long politicised and has been the reason for the Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP’s) rise since the days of the Rathyatra and Ayodhya. Considering Ram temples were historically built as an assertion of Hindu identity in the Mughal and colonial era, what was once a holy chant became a popular slogan in the political space. But what many forget is that the original chant of “Jai Siya Ram” has been appropriated to suit man-made agenda and is not true to our civilisational DNA. One where Siya is Sita, the shakti or the energy of the super-consciousness we embody as Lord Ram, the sacred feminine to the divine male. “Jai Siya Ram” was always meant to be about inclusive fullness of forces, and not celebrating one over the other. Clearly, the newly-evolved “Jai Shri Ram” sounds more muscular in comparison, predicating its iconic value on a demonstrative appeal. This then is the real problem, the Hindu-ness of our civilisational thinking being challenged as “anti-national.” Simply because the blame-game is easier than deep introspection. If the ruling BJP indeed wants to rescue Hindu pride, the long-standing demand of its ideological chaperone, the RSS, it is best placed to do so now, when it has a mammoth majority. Does it really need to keep to the agitationist ways of the Opposition? Also, civilisationally, we have had ancient city-states that functioned in the spirit of democracy. So there should be space for dissent, not incarceration, the Opposition as competition, not criticism. The BJP leadership must realise that it certainly is the ruling party but does not rule the cultural ethos. Besides, greater Hinduism has survived despite its many offshoots. Politicians should remember that if they reject the larger definition, they will end up suffering the most.

Writer & Courtesy: The Pioneer

Be it mob lynching or bank fraud, there are threads of commonality between both. To rein in the problem, structural reforms as well as public and media support are the need of hour

Around March last year, a prominent businessman defrauded Indian banks of more than Rs 11,300 crore. Nirav Modi grabbed everyone’s attention due to the sheer magnitude of his fraud and the ease with which he managed to escape  the clutches of the Indian Government and probe agencies. Fast forward a little more than a year and we found on June 18, 2019, that Tabrez Ansari, a 24-year-old Muslim boy, was attacked by a mob in the Seraikela-Kharsawan district of Jharkhand on suspicion of theft. What binds these two crimes together? At first glimpse, the two crimes could not be more far apart. One involves the enduring image of a multi-millionaire in a Rs 9 lakh ostrich leather jacket and the other, the abhorrent image of a young man being beaten to death by a mob while begging for mercy. On closer inspection, however, there are threads of commonality that run through both crimes.

Anonymity: Sunlight is said to be the best disinfectant. It is an established fact that humans are more likely to do the right thing when the likelihood of them being recognised for kindness is high. In an experiment to showcase this interesting aspect of human behaviour, people were asked to submit their donations to a worthy cause anonymously. In another scenario, a set of people were asked to write down on a public notice board their names and how much they would be donating for a particular cause.

It turned out that people were more likely to be “kind” if they are aware that their actions are being watched in a social setting. The corollary of this principle is true as well: People are more likely to commit crimes if they believe that there is no way to identify them. This is what typically works in case of mob lynching where large groups of people believe that they are protected by anonymity. In order to prevent such instances of mob violence from happening, the police must adopt and use technology for their benefit. For example, in instances where a video records an instance of mob violence, the police could use the footage to identify the offenders and instigators of such mob violence and establish a pattern from these crimes.

In the case of economic crimes like the bank fraud committed by Nirav Modi and Co, the benefit of anonymity works differently. Each crime involves some moral compromise, especially so when the victim is visible and is affected directly by an action. In such instances, the perpetrator of a crime has more reason to not commit the crime because there is a higher moral cost or compromise.

However, in cases of economic crimes, the criminal act is often facilitated by anonymity of the victim rather than the perpetrator. For example, in the case of the bank scam, Nirav Modi did not individually ‘steal’ money from an individual but took it away from the banks — hence, he effectively stole money from all of us. In such cases, it is easier for criminals like Nirav Modi to live with the consequence of their actions. In order to prevent such crimes from happening in the future, it is important for banks and other institutions, who deal with such potential offences, to build necessary safeguards. These safeguards can be in the form of stricter audits or by publicising a particular firm’s repeated payment defaults.

Influence: Another common element between these two types of crimes is the important role ‘influence’ has in making such crimes possible. Influence comes in many forms — criminal intimidation or bribery or political pressure. In the case of Nirav Modi, for example, the scam was allegedly enabled by bribing certain bank officials. In the case of mob lynching or hate crimes, influence may not take such proactive forms. Instead, perpetrators of such crimes look at the environment around them and the messaging that they receive, which lend credence to their belief that their acts are not actually crimes or are somehow acceptable.

Such messages may take the form of TikTok videos that talk about mob violence openly without any prosecution or a former Union minister garlanding convicts of lynching. Whatever the form, both these crimes rely on influences that are available to them and use it to justify or enable their crimes. Some of these influences like bribery can be restricted by enforcing stricter laws like the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and the Right to Information Act (which the present Government has, unsurprisingly, sought to weaken). Other influences, like the messaging that our leaders send, can be weakened much more easily.  For example, by not garlanding individuals accused of crimes.

No fear: While all of the factors highlighted above enable such crimes to occur in our country with unenviable regularity, the absence of any fear of consequence for their crimes provides criminals like Nirav Modi and perpetrators of mob violence with an added incentive to act with impunity. A look at the performance of our agencies is indicative of this.

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), which is deemed to be the elite investigative agency, is reported to have a strike rate of just 3.96 per cent while dealing with major crimes. This is an appalling strike rate. In the case of the police, too, the strike rate is not very encouraging. Moreover, poor statistics exclude the fact that a number of crimes are not even recorded as FIRs by the police in the first place. It is not rocket science to tackle this problem.

There is no denying the fact that with enough pressure from the public and a strong glare by the media, the instruments of the state are more likely to be better at their job. However, it is ridiculous to expect the media and the public to raise its arms in every case. Instead, what is needed are structural solutions. These can come in the form of police reforms (which the Supreme Court has mandated for each State to adopt) or by way of introducing stricter laws such as a stern legislation to tackle mob lynching. A great start, however, would be if the present Government shuns its “hugs and garlanding approach” and comes out strongly against such crimes, whether it is mob violence or a bank fraud.

(The author is president of Jharkhand Pradesh Congress Committee) 

Writer: Ajoy Kumar

Courtesy: The Pioneer