Gujarat Government on Friday announced five new schemes for education and self-employment opportunities to economically weaker members of non-reserved communities.

The schemes designed in lines of aid being provided to reserved category would cover around 1.5 crore people in the State belonging to 58 non-reserved communities, claimed Gujarat’s Deputy Chief Minister Nitin Patel adding that all these schemes are formulated in a manner that reserved communities would continue to get their quotas as per the Constitution.

Notification for these schemes would be issued next week, said Patel. Last year Gujarat Government had initiated procedure to form Gujarat non-reserved category Commission as well as Gujarat Non-reserved Category Education and Financial Development Corporation. Both these bodies have now established with their own fully functional offices in the state capital Gandhinagar with an aim to roll out programmes for the unreserved communities in Gujarat who are not getting the benefits of reservation despite weak economic condition. On suggestions of these two bodies, the State Government announced the new schemes which according to Patel would benefit nearly 1.20 crore students across the State.

Elaborating on the schemes, Dy CM said that under these schemes financial aid including interest subsidy would be extended to students from non-reserved categories whose family income is less than Rs 3 lakh per annum. The aid would be in form of interest subsidy on educational loans as well as soft loans up to Rs 15 lakh, including for studies abroad, tuition fees of Rs 15,000 for Class X students who have scored more than 70 per cent marks, Rs 20,000 for preparation of national-level competitive exams and food subsidy of Rs 1,200 per month for 10 months to students living in hostels.

The Government has also made provisions for providing self-employment loan of up to Rs 10 lakh to buy auto rickshaw, loading auto rickshaw or taxi, open a laboratory or office. While women would get the loan at 4 per cent interest, men would be given a loan at five per cent interest.

The commission had recommended giving all the benefits to students or candidates belonging to non-reserved category communities, on par with those available to OBCs under various schemes, including age limit relaxation for a job, among others. However, the State Government was silent on this issue.

Writer: Nayan Dave

Courtesy: The Pioneer

The recent Pakistan polls are a clear example of how the military interfered and rigged them to catapult Imran Khan to power.

Few things in recent times has surprised this writer more than the breathtaking claim, even by Indians who ought to have known better, that the parliamentary elections held in Pakistan on July 25, 2018, were completely free and above board. The fact is that they were not, and were blatantly rigged in favour of Imran Khan, chairman of Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI), who is set to become the Prime Minister.

Some have argued that they saw candidates of all parties campaigning freely and people voting without any interference by the Army or any other agency. Just because there was no such visible interference during polling, means nothing. The intimidating presence of 370,000 troops throughout Pakistan on polling day was more than a reminder that the Army called the shots and the presence of troops, even within polling booths, conveyed the impression, rightly or wrongly, that uniformed men would know which individuals voted for whom. It was also common talk that the Army wanted Imran Khan to win. People in Pakistan know one can pay a very heavy price for ignoring its writs.

The argument that one indication that the elections were free and fair was that candidates could be seen campaigning freely, ignores the fact that not all were allowed to become candidates. One of them was none other than former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif who was debarred from holding any political office by an eyebrow-raising judicial verdict. Not just that. More than 100 candidates of the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N), Sharif’s party, were made to change their allegiance or stand down. Criminal cases were slapped on more than 17,000 activists of the (PML-N) for violating “election rules.”

Any argument that changing of party loyalties mean nothing because it is frequent in India as well, is laughable. India is a vibrant democracy in which the Army has never played any political role; neither it nor any other agency can force candidates in any election to change sides or desist from contesting. The Army’s role in Pakistan, where it has run dictatorships for long spells, is well-known.

When not running Governments directly, it has been puppeteering elected civilian Governments from behind the scenes, and staging coups to assume power when its dictates went unheeded. In the case of the recent elections, it had made life, to say nothing of contesting, difficult for PML-N candidates who refused to heed it orders by sabotaging their campaigning and hindering their movements.

Third, vendors of the theory that recent elections in Pakistan were free and fair, play down the Army’s scarcely-secret role in compelling a section of the country’s electronic media to launch a vicious campaign against Nawaz Sharif and his family. While it can be nobody’s claim that the Sharifs are pure as driven snow, a significant part of the offensive comprised gross exaggerations and even blatant lies like Nawaz Sharif receiving $400 million for allowing Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s emissary, Navin Jindal, to arrive in Pakistan sans a visa. And this lie was spread just on the eve of the elections — in fact, after the campaigning had ended — when there was not time to shred it before polling.

The media blitzkrieg against Nawaz Sharif and family appears more than a bit odd because there is virtually no political party or leader in Pakistan which or who has not been accused of corruption. The knight in shining armour with a blazing sword, the great crusader against corruption, Imran Khan, is no exception. On August 7, 2018, he appeared before Pakistan’s National Accountability Bureau (NAB) which asked him 15 questions regarding his alleged misuse of Mi-17 and Ecureuil helicopters owned by the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa provincial Government which is run by his party, PTI. The resultant loss to the State exchequer was Rs 2.17 crore.

The NAB ordered a probe in February after Geo News had reported the matter. While Imran needed time to campaign for the general elections held on July 25, 2018, he could have been asked to appear in May or the first half of June without affecting his electioneering. This did not happen; nor did the media go to town over the massive corruption marking the functioning of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Government.

The argument that the Army did not intimidate but let out a few subtle hints and the media observed “self censorship”, suggesting that the media caved in needlessly, ignores the Inter-Services Intelligence’s role in dealing with journalists who had invited its ire. The most shocking, of course, is its abduction, savage torture and murder in May 2011 of the outstanding journalist, Syed Saleem Sahzad. The crime, which has gone unpunished, had sent out a clear message: You will have to pay a heavy price if you cross our path.

One could then hardly expect the media to ignore the Army’s “subtle hints” to its bidding.

It is, thus, an election thoroughly rigged by the Army that has hoisted Imran Khan to power. Instead of swinging the cherry, he will now swing to the dictates of the men in Khaki. The sooner this is realized, the better.

Writer: Hiranmay Karlekar

Courtesy: The Pioneer

The poll results in Pakistan speak volumes about how polarised the polity there is. There is very little reason for Imran Khan’s PTI to have won the elections if there were free and fair elections.

Just like most elections in Pakistan, the 2018 poll have been marred by allegations of rigging. Nevertheless, even though numerous cases of bungling in this context can (and have) been highlighted, there is scant reason to believe that had the election been entirely free and fair, Imran Khan’s centre-right Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) would not have been able to win.

According to the final tally announced by the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP), PTI grabbed 115 National Assembly seats. However, I believe that in a more free and fair election, PTI would not have bagged more than 90 to 95 seats. But it would still have managed to win more than the Centrist Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N), and certainly, the Left-liberal Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP).

No matter how marred the elections actually were, they did correctly reflect the highly polarised nature of Pakistan’s polity. The bulk of the votes were split between PTI, PML-N and PPP, with PTI receiving approximately 32 per cent.

Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) voters decided to stick with PTI and voted overwhelmingly for the party. The main reasons for this are PTI chief Imran Khan’s continuing popularity in that Province; the police reforms that the last PTI Government in KP initiated; and, interestingly, the de facto positive image the party’s provincial Government in the Province enjoyed due to a considerable decrease in extremist terror attacks in the region.

I have used the word de facto because, ironically, PTI was against the military operation that was eventually launched by Pakistan’s armed forces and the PMLN-led federal government in 2015. The relative peace that followed just happened to emerge during a period when PTI was ruling KP.

This time, Punjab — Pakistan’s most populous Province — was split in half between PML-N and PTI. The former had swept it in 2013. But in 2018, whereas the ousted PML-N chief Nawaz Sharif’s narrative of him being a victim of ‘establishmentarian intrigues’ bagged PML-N some massive wins in much of central Punjab, the more conservative areas of the Province — mainly in the northern and the hilly Pothwari regions — largely switched to PTI. The more feudal-dominated southern Punjab region, too, mostly went to PTI.

Balochistan was as mercurial as ever. As has been the case for decades, its votes were distributed among the ever-splintering and ever-changing secular Baloch nationalist outfits and religious groups.

Sindh was once again swept by the PPP which notched a number of huge wins here, proving to be an unmatched electoral force in the province. A majority of Sindhis have continued to see the PPP as their bridge to the larger politics and economics of the country.

However, the most stunning results emerged in Sindh’s large, chaotic capital, Karachi. Karachi does not have a Sindhi majority. Approximately 41 per cent of its enormous population is made up of Urdu-speaking Mohajirs. The city’s second-largest ethnic group is Pakhtun (approximately 22 per cent) followed by Punjabi, Baloch, Sindhi and Seraiki groups.

Between 1988 and 2008, the secular and once radical Mohajir nationalist Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) was an overwhelming electoral force in this city. But its vote bank began to slowly dwindle from 2013 onward. The party split into three factions in 2017, leaving the city open for other parties to sneak in.

The PPP, on the other hand, had remained strong in Karachi’s Baloch, Kutchi and Sindhi majority areas, such as Malir and Lyari.

But the party that eventually managed to sneak in was PTI. It nearly swept the city. The PTI had received the second-largest number of votes here in 2013. This time it was able to effectively neutralise the MQM, rather its largest faction, MQM-Pakistan. On the other hand, PTI also evicted the PPP from Lyari, a PPP bastion in Karachi since 1970.

Again, despite all the discrepancies of the election, one can still somewhat explain the stunning results in the city. The voter turnout in Karachi was low (38 to 40 per cent). During the last couple of years, the city has witnessed a concentrated police and Rangers’ operation against extremist outfits, criminal gangs and also against so-called militant wings of the now splintered MQM.

But whereas a majority of Karachiites had hailed the operation and the comparative decrease in the city’s once bulging crime rate, MQM and PPP were critical of the way the operation was being conducted. This gave the impression that both the parties were against the operation.

There was thus not much protest when the operation also targeted so-called MQM militants; and members of the Peoples’ Aman Committee (PAC) — a clandestine outfit patronised by the erstwhile PPP minister Zulfiqar Mirza. The PAC was made up of hardened Baloch gangsters from Lyari. Even though the PPP regime in Sindh eventually distanced itself from PAC, it seemed helpless in controlling Lyari’s vicious gang wars.

Both MQM and PPP began to be perceived as parties which were trying to roll back the Rangers’ operation in the city. Interestingly, the PML-N Government at the centre enjoyed a brief wave of popularity here, when it claimed that it was former Prime Minister Sharif who had initiated the operation. It was when Nawaz Sharif had a falling out with the military establishment that most Karachiites decided to side with the establishment.

As a consequence, in 2018, the political party which was seen as being closest to the establishment received the most votes. That party was PTI. As in KP, here too PTI benefitted in a de facto manner from an operation that it had nothing to do with.

The most striking aspect of the 2018 election was the manner in which the once obscure far-right Sunni Barelvi outfit, Tehreek-i-Labbaik Pakistan (TLP), managed to bag the sixth-largest number of votes. Most of these votes were cast in Punjab and in Karachi.

The TLP is seen as a more militant reaction against the rise of Deobandi and Salafi outfits in Pakistan. However, in the last couple of years, as militant Deobandi outfits begun to be pushed back by the state, the once non-militant political Barelvi segment not only saw resurgence but got radicalised by the execution of Mumtaz Qadri, the murderer of former Punjab governor Salman Taseer.

The TLP got the bulk of its votes in Punjab where many low-income Barelvis saw the PML-N as the ruling party which okayed Qadri’s execution — even though it was the former military chief, Gen Raheel, who had pushed for it the most.

In Karachi, much of the TLP votes were cast in the city’s large working and lower-middle-class industrial area, Korangi, and in the low-income Lyari area.

Low-income and lower-middle-class Mohajirs have continued to belong to the Barelvi sect. Before 1988, they used to vote for Shah Ahmad Noorani’s Jamiat Ulema-i-Pakistan (JUP). In the event of MQM’s split, many Barelvi Mohajirs from this economic segment switched to TLP.

In Lyari, the stage for TLP was set by apolitical Islamic evangelical outfits who found many takers there during the deadly gang wars in the area. Consequently, the large Baloch, Memon and Kutchi segments who had already been attracted by the Barelvi evangelical organisation Dawat-i-Islami, saw in TLP a more assertive expression of their reinvigorated religiosity.

But one should keep in mind, the TLP in Punjab and Karachi received the protest vote. Protest votes are largely short-lived. Also, TLP as an outfit cannot survive without street agitation. It is bound to face eventual resistance from the state just as the once patronised Deobandi outfits did.

Writer: Nadeem Paracha

Courtesy: The Pioneer

Trafficking of women and prostitution, which are rampant in shelter homes, must be tackled without sweeping the issue under the carpet.

The cases at Muzaffarpur and Deoria are just the tip of the iceberg, well-connected crooks running children and women’s shelters and abusing, torturing and sexually assaulting those under their care. This has happened with a sickening degree of regularity in this country and is not just isolated to the northern States. And every single time a case like this makes headlines, we argue that we must do something to prevent future cases from happening and talk about registering non-governmental organisations and doing regular audits of such institutions and whatnot. Yes, the owners and operators of these ‘shelters’, whether they are people like Brajesh Thakur or officials like Manju Verma should be prosecuted and it is shameful that Nitish Kumar is too scared to fire an incompetent minister for caste considerations. But to make a difference, to really act tough, action needs to be taken against those who used and abused the residents of the shelter. In many cases it is a statutory case because they raped a minor and in India right now that is a penalty that is punishable by death. Whatever your reservations about the death penalty, people who abuse children should be put far away from children and behind bars for a long time. This will undoubtedly open a Pandora’s Box, it is almost certain that those who were ‘customers’ are bureaucrats, politicians, policemen and reputable businessmen. These people knowingly indulged in their perversions, safe in the knowledge that nothing will ever happen to them. Only, and only if these individuals are found, and with call detail records, some of them will almost certainly be found, and then prosecuted can such crime be brought under check. Because removing a source will not take away the problem, it will only create an alternate source, the authorities must attack the clientele. And this will require a level of determination by the authorities from the very top, the work of honest and diligent officers because some of those who will be nabbed will be extremely powerful individuals at least in the local areas.

Action should be taken those who enabled these abuses to take place either by turning a blind eye or actively conniving in it. Action does not mean a cursory two-week paid holiday masquerading as ‘suspension’, it means proper jail time. Of course, even if strong investigation and prosecution is mounted, it will be foiled by our molasses-like judicial process, and one in which safety and security of the abused girls and women cannot be guaranteed. These cases must make us hang our heads in shame and demand that our elected representatives do something, otherwise the only solution would be an Indian Batman.

Writer & Courtesy: The Pioneer

India and Korea not just share history, but also have immense shared business interests. Samsung plant in NCR is just a beginning, a lot more is to come…

The South Korean President Moon Jae-in paid a four-day visit to India in July (7-10) and held delegation-level talks with Prime Minister Narendra Modi and other senior leaders on a wide range of bilateral, regional, and global issues of mutual interest with a view to further strengthen the special strategic partnership between the two countries. This was Moon’s first visit to India after he took over as the President of South Korea in 2017. It was one of the most productive visits to India by a foreign leader as the talks ended with a big-ticket investment announcement that would further deepen bilateral ties between Asia’s third and fourth largest economies, particularly in the economic sphere. Prime Minister Modi also took the opportunity to mention how India is concerned about North Korea’s nuclear weapon development programmes, and appreciated Moon’s initiative to address this issue. For India, Pyongyang’s nuclear link with Pakistan has remained a matter of concern for a long time.

A brief history

India-South Korea relations are not recent but for reasons other than economics, bilateral relations remained in a state of “strategic disconnect”. India’s policy of “non-alignment and economic autarchy” and the perceived closeness with the then Soviet Union were seen by the US and its allies, such as Japan and South Korea, with suspicion. Under the circumstances, there was little prospect for India-South Korea relations to develop. even the important role played by India in dispatching the 60th Parachute Field Military Ambulance Platoon — a mobile army surgical hospital that treated more than half of the wounded soldiers and an average of 250 to 300 civilians a day, during the UN operations in late 1951 following the Korean War — though remembered with gratitude, did not substantially help remove political barriers to forge a partnership that could have fetched mutual benefits.

There are civilisational linkages between the two countries too. It is popularly believed in South Korea that the legendary Korean King Suro married an Indian princess from Ayodhya centuries ago and mothered the Kim dynasty. Almost 80 per cent of the present generation bearing the name Kim traces their ancestry to the ancient dynasty. So, there is an emotional connection between the people of the two nations.

even Nobel laureate Rabindranath Tagore’s evocative poem that Korea will be the lamp bearer for the illumination of Asia could not translate to concrete construction of an India-South Korea partnership until the ideological gulf remained. The collapse of the Soviet Union and India’s Look east policy, rechristened now as Act east policy, dramatically altered the perceptions in reviewing India-South Korea bilateral ties in a different light in which economic, defence, and strategic dimensions were found enmeshed. The strategic history of India’s ties with this Northeast nation, that remained disjointed for almost four decades since the end of the Korean War, has been successfully recast now.

Put briefly, India-South Korea relations have developed in stages. The years since diplomatic ties were established in 1973 until early 1990 was the first stage or the ‘budding period’. Though some efforts were made by both, they could not realise the potentials because of their “inherent ideological incongruity and differences in their policy orientation”. While India adopted a socialist, secular, democratic government at home and pursued the policy of non-alignment of the third world in international affairs, South Korea remained tied in a security alliance with the US. So, both saw each other as belonging to different camps and “were blinded by the blinkers of the global block politics of the time”.

India’s choice of inward-looking import substitution model of development sharply contrasted with South Korea’s outward-looking export-oriented development path prevented the growth of economic ties between them. Though the diplomatic and other bilateral interactions continued smoothly, not much headway could be made in expanding the economic ties.

The second stage of the bilateral ties between 1991 and 2009 can be called the phase of ‘economic and commercial cooperation’. Both countries discovered a convergence of interests in many areas during this period. In the third stage, the bilateral relationship was elevated into a ‘strategic partnership’. This strategic partnership could be achieved because India’s of the convergence of India’s Look east Policy and Korea’s New Asia Diplomatic Initiative described as “policy rendezvous”. First, the bilateral relationship was catapulted into a higher gear when President Roh Myun-Hwan visited India in 2004 and a “long-term cooperative partnership” was established. This served as the bedrock for bilateral relations. This relationship was elevated to the level of strategic partnership when President Lee Myung-bak paid a historic visit to India in January 2010 as the chief guest of the Republic Day celebrations. The Comprehensive economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA) signed in 2009 was also implemented and entered into force from January 1, 2010, thereby jump starting the dormant economic component of the bilateral ties. The CePA — which came into force on January 1, 2010 — was the first deal of its kind which India signed with an OECD country and South Korea with a BRIC nation.

Subsequently, several top level visits have taken place between the two countries: Former President Pratibha Patil’s visit in July 2011, former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s visit in March 2012, and others. Defence and
Foreign Ministers from both countries have also visited, each time elevating the relationship to a higher level.

Significance of Moon’s visit

Against this background as the relationship evolved, Moon’s recent trip to India is another milestone in the bilateral ties. Firstly, the timing of the visit is significant as it coincided with the changes taking place with breathtaking rapidity in the geopolitical landscape of Northeast Asia. The architect of the changes is none other than President Moon whose peace overtures — which started with North Korea’s participation in the PyeongChang Winter Olympics and subsequently led to a summit meeting with Kim Jong-un on April 27, and later paved the way for the first ever summit between Kim and US President Donald Trump in Singapore on June 12. India-South Korea relations were elevated to ‘special strategic partnership’ after Modi visited South Korea in May 2015, seeking investments in many flagship programmes of the Government, including Skill India and Make in India. The South Korean Government earmarked a whopping $10 billion as “financing arrangement for infrastructure development in India”.

Moon’s dynamic leadership aside from his efforts to solve the nuclear dilemma of North Korea became demonstrably clear, or at least his intent, even during the presidential election campaign in 2017 wherein he pledged that he would elevate ties with India to the level of Korea’s relations with four major powers in and around the Korean Peninsula — China, Japan, Russia, and the US. This aside, he intended to craft India prominently in his “new Southern policy” and include the 10-member ASEAN group in its ambit. This is a significant departure from Korea’s traditional foreign policy and possibly could be, as some analysts suggested, a hedging strategy amid the US-China stand-off, coupled with the desire to forge a robust India-South Korea partnership in the interest of building peace and stability in the region. Though for India, South Korea is a valued partner, bilateral trade is below its potential. Bilateral trade in 2017 totaled $20 billion and investment has shown an upward trend. Both sides have pledged to increase it to $50 billion by 2030. There are about 300 Korean companies which have invested about $3 billion, employing about 40,000 workers. The only aberration in the bilateral ties seems to be that the POSCO project in Odisha did not take off despite that it was the single biggest foreign direct investment project to the tune of $12 billion, owing to land acquisition problems.

This 12-million capacity steel plant was floated in 2005 and POSCO had the patience to wait for close to a decade to see the project become functional. In the process, the company invested a lot of money in the social sector, including the CSR. But despite strong governmental support to the company to make the required land available for the steel project to be set up, the efforts failed and POSCO was forced to pull out of the project in 2017, after waiting for 12 long years as public resistance continued with no sign of ending.

Though POSCO was an unhappy experience for South Korea, this did not deter it to halt investment in India in other projects, such as by firms like Kia and Samsung, in recognition of the Indian market and the buying power of the urban middle class estimated to be to the tune of 350 million plus. Though the main driving force in the bilateral relations remains economic, the strategic dimension including defence cooperation is becoming equally important. The two sides are looking at defence hardware procurement and manufacture. India is looking for minesweepers for the Navy, and South Korea could be a possible source. India has also sourced artillery guns from South Korea and is looking to manufacture them in India under the Make in India programme. In this light, Moon’s India visit shall pave the way for expanding bilateral ties in multifarious dimensions, upgrading business ties to the level Korea has with China. Indeed, Moon has been pushing Korean majors to raise their investment in India.

The reason why the economic dimension in the partnership is significant can be deciphered from the address Moon made to the India-Korea Business Forum organised by the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry. It was attended by top management of the major business houses or large family-owned mega-conglomerates from Korea, such as Samsung, Hyundai, and LG. The three companies command large chunks of the export and domestic consumer and industrial markets in Korea. This was the second such event in less than five months. In February, Modi had addressed a mega delegation of 150-odd Korean companies, wherein he had exhorted the chaebols to further expand the $2.7 billion worth of investment mainly in the automobile and engineering sectors. Consumer products of Korean companies, such as Samsung and LG, are household names and therefore important players in the Indian consumer market. In the automobile sector, Hyundai competes equally with Japanese products, such as Toyota, Honda, and Mitsubishi.

There are some trade and tariff issues that need to be sorted out. For example, India seeks zero duty on items such as sesame and motor parts. Korea is reluctant to accede to this request. South Korea imports 630 per cent duty on Indian sesame, while imports 24,000 tonnes a year from China at zero duty, and therefore, India’s request is legitimate. Korea feels that opening tariff lines to a country ensures zero custom duty to importers of the country to which it is opened. The duty is applicable for products under those tariff lines. From the strategic perspective, the importance of South Korea in India’s Indo-Pacific strategy came out clear in Modi’s keynote address at the Shangri-La Dialogue on June 1, 2018, when he mentioned South Korea was an important component of the Act east policy.

During Modi’s visit to South Korea in 2015, the two sides sought amendment to the bilateral Air Services Agreement to enhance flight connectivity covering more cities. As Korean business in Indian cities expands, Korea would be interested in increasing direct flights from the existing six in a week. That time, an MoU was inked on cooperation in audio-visual co-production, paving the way for co-production of films, animation and broadcasting programmes. This time during Moon’s visit, five MoUs in the field of science and technology were signed. Science and Technology Minister Harshvardhan and his Korean counterpart You Young Min signed three MoUs on Programme of Cooperation 2018-21, Establishment of Future Strategy Group and Cooperation in Bio-technology and Bio-economy. Two other MoUs were signed between the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) and South Korean National Research Council for Science and Technology and IIT Mumbai and Korea Institute of Science and Technology, to further accelerate future-oriented cooperation.

During his visit, Moon inaugurated a Samsung manufacturing unit, the largest in the world, in Noida in which the company has invested $760 million, demonstrating the trust and business confidence in Indian market despite the unhappy experience of POSCO. This is going to be the world’s largest mobile phone manufacturing facility, touting Modi’s pet Make in India to propel India to become the world’s second-largest manufacturer of mobile phones as the number of factories soared to 120 from just two, four years ago. Apart from creating four lakh direct jobs, 30 per cent of the phones manufactured at the factory — built at a cost of Rs 5,000 crore — will be exported to the Middle east and Africa. India was already the R&D hub for Samsung, now it will be a manufacturing base too.

Would India be the next China for South Korea, as claimed by Korea’s Trade Minister Kim Hyun-chong? It may be recalled when South Korea deployed the THAAD US missile defense system in 2017, a decision taken by Moon’s predecessor, a diplomatic row broke out between South Korea and China as the latter felt that THAAD breached into China’s security. China adopted a series of economic retaliatory measures against Korean products, thereby severely affecting the Korean economy. South Korea is yet to recover from this. Moon now seeks to enhance economic and trade relations with the ASEAN and India, thus announcing his southern policy.

Moon’s strategy is laudable but not without difficulties. Many bilateral economic issues concerning trade and tariff need to be sorted out. Moreover, if Moon targets the ASEAN grouping as a single package, that would be difficult, as a strategy that fits all countries may not be possible as the characteristics of each country could be different. For example, if South Korea wants to expand the market presence of its car makers in Indonesia — the largest car market in Southeast Asia where Japanese vehicles enjoy 98.6 per cent market share, but the Korean cars take up only about 0.1 per cent — the challenge could be huge. on the other hand, India holds the greatest potential for South Korea and has the least risk, which is why India is a priority destination for Korean businesses. The absence of any sensitive issue, either historical or geographical, also works in India’s favour to be a preferred partner for South Korea. The Moon Government has, therefore, prioritised India to deepen and strengthen multidimensional relations.

With its population expected to reach 1.5 billion in 2030, India has the potential to emerge as the world’s single largest market. In view of this, any nation doing business with another country may find it irresistible to overlook India to be a partner in pursuit of economic prosperity. Moon is aware that India is eyeing the tag of the world’s third largest economy by 2030, after overtaking France as the sixth largest economy and coming close to the UK, which is at the fifth place. Indian economy is at the take-off stage and is expected to be the world’s third largest by 2030 with the GDP worth $10 trillion. This means India is aiming to overtake the UK, Japan, and Germany by 2030, to be behind only the US and China. As far as doing business is concerned, India presents tempting prospects for any country, and South Korea is well aware of this.

Rajaram Panda: Writer is former Senior Fellow at the IDSA, was until recently ICCR Chair Professor at Reitaku University, Japan. rajaram.panda@gmail.com I Courtesy: The Pioneer

As BJP gears up to defend its citadel at the Centre, here is a ready reckoner to follow

The Bharatiya Janata Party led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi had comfortably secured the majority to form the government at the centre in 2014. BJP and PM Modi’s win in 2014 was historic and the decisive mandate made it clear that the people really wanted to see PM Modi in power. Four of the five year term of the BJP
government has now come to an end. There has been multi-faceted growth in India in these four years. even though the country is progressing at a never seen before pace and there is a definite increase in how Indians and outsiders look at India today, something seems to be lacking. The urgency of the voters to get rid of Congress in 2014 had played an active part in BJP’s landslide win. That scenario has changed today.

People and even the BJP are appearing complacent today. Although, the recently held state elections have mostly went in the favour of BJP the 2019 Lok Sabha elections will be a different game altogether. BJP cannot afford to show laxity today, especially since there are talks of a united opposition doing the rounds in the political circles today and the country has seen desperate opposition parties putting together rag-tag coalition to stop the juggernaut of the BJP in various by-polls.

From Mayawati and Akhilesh Yadav’s SP-BSP in Uttar Pradesh to Lalu Yadav’s RJD in Bihar, leaders who have faced losses at the hands of BJP in state and Lok Sabha are trying to join hands. Congress too has been trying to get a piece of the united opposition game which has been going on for quite some time now. There definitely are visible differences between the united opposition leaders but there is also the chance that the collective fear against PM Modi led BJP could drive them towards joining hands for the polls to be held in 2019.

BJP as a party should remain active in the public sphere and keep doing activities which resonate with the public on ground levels. Their focus should be on settling the Ram Janmbhoomi Temple issue before the elections. BJP should keep pushing forward for early judgment from the Supreme Court with no further delays in the hearings if it wants to fulfill its election promise. The development of Hindu pilgrimages and a nationwide religious tourism circuit starting from Ayodhya would give them an added advantage. The Ram Janmbhoomi issue has been raging on for quite long now and political parties have taken benefit from stretching the matter for as long as possible. Congress, very recently, tried to put a stay on the hearings of the Ayodhya Temple case. Successful completion of the issue will repose the faith of the people in BJP and its promises.

BJP could try to bring about big policies to give further boost to the economy. The government could think of something along the lines of Demonetisation or creation of Special economic Zones in all states of the country to boost manufacturing and trade. one step that Modi government could push for is bringing the petroleum products within the purview of GST. Granting of special status to states like Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu in the south could also improve chances of BJP’s win from these states. TDP is likely to come back again to BJPs side following the grant of special status while Tamil Nadu is a swing state at the moment and BJP could gain massively from these
decisions. Implementation of Uniform Civil Code throughout India could also do the trick for BJP, UCC is necessary in a diverse country like India to provide equal treatment to the citizens.

After the surgical strikes, the government has somewhat softened its stance towards Pakistan. It should switch back to offensive mode and suspend direct talks with Pakistan until it takes substantial action against the terror groups operating from its soil. Ceasefire violations from the Pakistani side of the border have been going on for the longest possible time in Kashmir and other areas, a decisive surgical strike could be carried out once again to put an end to the terrorism in Pakistan. This message will go on to prove that BJP has not softened its stance on terrorism and is not looking forward to appeasement politics on the international level as was done by Congress in UPA II regime.

There are many ongoing cases against prominent Congress leaders like, Congress President Rahul Gandhi and Sonia Gandhi’s National Herald case or P. Chidambaram’s 2G spectrum case and Aircel-Maxis case. BJP should push for expediting the judicial process in these cases and make sure that the guilty get their comeuppance
in a timely manner, preferably before the 2019 elections. It will clear the clouds over what BJP has been accusing the Congress leaders of doing over the years. The corrupt Congress leaders will be face public humiliation and it will further embolden the BJP workers who have fought for a corruption free India. The party needs to keep pushing forward just like it did in the Lalu Yadav fodder scam case.

The party will benefit immensely if the economic offenders like Vijay Mallya and Nirav Modi could be brought back to India before the elections in 2019. Kingfisher and Punjab National Bank incidents had its seeds in the Congress led UPA II regime but BJP could send a strong message by doing a decisive crackdown on them. Bringing them to justice would send a strong message that the BJP is not going to let the economic offenders relax under its rule. Fugitive Economic Offenders Bill has enabled the government to get hold of their properties inside and out of the country but their arrest and deportation will give the symbolic final stamp of crackdown. Public faith on BJP will be reinforced and it will show in the elections of 2019.

The coalition against our PM is hinged on following points:

1. To counter combined hindu fold, create caste divides.

2. Since many Muslims have been traditionally voting against B.J.P and Modiji especially, opposition wants to further create a vote bank by promoting and aligning Muslims with caste- dominated parties.

3. Opposition thinks that polarization on hindu muslim basis, will harm them therefore they do not want open polarization as they think that silent polarization of muslim in their favor is a good situation. opposition further thinks that open polarization of hindu votes will be adversely impacting them.

4. The opposition led by congress wants that Hindus should remain divided among caste based parties like SP and B.S.P etc to weaken the composite vote base of B.J.P.

5. Opposition further wants that backward castes and dalits should remain separated from hindu polarization and remain aligned with Muslim vote seeking parties.

6. Opposition is funding and promoting anti establishment agitations like breaking of Ambedkar statue, defacement incidents and kisan riots to depict that Govt is elitist. It expects that state forces to control law and order will further breed anti BJP feelings among people. In case majority BJP states use force against backward caste and dalit caste affiliated kisan leaders during riots and agitations, it will create Anti Dalit and anti backward image of B.J.P.

7. Jignish Mavani of Gujarat and Hardik Patel were nurtured by congress to spread caste divides to weaken the B.J,P vote base in Gujarat.

8. Similarly academic institutions like JNU, Jadavpur University are being systematically planted with such student leaders to create student unrest in the country.

9. Congress wants that small issues of student and farmers should be bloated out of proportion and there should be loots and arson on the roads so that people start loosing faith in the government and governance.

10. In the coming months congress will try to create law and order issues, kisan agitations, rail agitations and labour unrests to bring down the economy to discard the claim of good governance and growth .

11. Since the congress coalition comprises of tarnished image leaders from all corners, Congress will not like to be challenged and contest elections on issues of good governance and growth centric policies.

Congress will like to derail the election agenda on non-issues and to blow them out of proportion to disrepute the Modi led BJP Government.

What next for B.J.P.

1. To divide the coalition by wooing potential leaders so that coalition remains confused and suspicious about some leaders.

2. Too woo other leaders of backward and Dalit castes to support the B.J.P. or form the coalition like apna dal etc in U.P.

3. To divide important coalition of leaders like Mayawati, Naveen Patnaik, Mulayam Singh Yadav, OP Chauthala, Jagan Reddy and other South Indian leaders so that the coalition is not able to polarize opposition votes against B.J.P.

Main forces of Indian Politics which must be kept in good control.

1. Pro kisan measures, the government should not only do but appear to be doing that.

2. Pro business policies fixing aberrations and other such problems in the implementation of G.S.T.

3. Creating more jobs on contract models so that huge chunks of people can be benefited.

4. Keeping good control on university campus politics and issues.

5. Keeping goods control on cow vigilantes to avoid issue less media controversies.

6. Expediting the Ram Janam Bhoomi issue so that a huge wave of Hindu self respect may be generated to counter the caste divides.

7. Expediting infrastructural and rural development projects.

8. Creating good infrastructure and eco system to help farmers to double up their income and ensuring health insurance and crop security to all farmers of India.

9. Keeping the price under control specially with regard to oil and fertilizers.

10. Better media management to keep motor mouths of BJP silent.

11. To expose people and media about the ground governance initiatives

12. Flogging political representatives to work among people to show case the achievements of govt.

13. The coalition of opposition parties has been broadly engineered by congress against Modi led B.J.P. However congress is ready to concede the state space to these parties . But many regional parties are themselves competitors of each other and are afraid of pan India expansion of BJP in all states. Now BJP should rethink about conceding regional space in lieu of central politics.

14. Many regional parties have been fighting against regional parties like SP with BSP , DMK with AIDMK etc. and their alliance will remain intact only till Lok-sabha elections. After Lok-sabha elections their alliance will shatter upcoming assembly elections. If BJP does the master stroke of Ram Janam Bhoomi temple, increasing the retirement age of supreme court judges,government employees and elections of state and center at one time then the opposition coalition can collapse much earlier.

15. Congress is trying to sacrifice regional ambitions to negotiate for lok sabha elections. Congress is not bothered to make its own chief ministers in many states but to make Rahul as the Prime Minister . In case both elections happen together the divides among regional parties will be too much to reconcile and that can very well be exploited by BJP to make reasonable deals with them to stop the vote polarization against BJP. In this process, BJP may have to give up certain states to the regional parties and become second fiddle as congress has done in Karnataka. BJP should think that centre is more important and states may have broad coalitions with alliance partners to share the power. These regional parties have no ambition for centre and that’s why they were alluded by congress smoothly.

16. Another strategy of BJP should be creating better acceptability among other backward castes by giving leadership opportunities to their leaders also so that some regional caste based parties with OBC strong holds, may not be able to blame BJP as an upper-caste dominated party.

17. With these strategies and better selection of candidates keeping in mind the caste profile of constituencies and making of constituency wise manifestos, BJP with its great brand Modi image can form government at Center in 2019. I am sure that each every nationalist person who thinks that nation is first, fully supports the idea that modi should at least be given one more chance to form govt and implement the policies and programs started by his government.

(Abhishek Tiwari: A law student in Amity University mntiwari@hotmail.com 7011988964)

New Delhi needs to clearly understand that Imran Khan, hoisted to power by the Pakistan Army, will do what the Generals ask him to, particularly when it comes to Kashmir

Fatima Bhutto cites two horrific incidents in a searing piece titled, ‘Imran Khan is only a player in the circus run by Pakistan’s military’ in The Guardian of July 24, 2018. On July 17, supporters of his party, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), “tied a donkey to a pole and punched its face till its jaw broke, ripped open its nostrils, and drove a car into its body, leaving the animal to collapse, having been beaten to an inch of its life. Before they left, they wrote ‘Nawaz’ (the name of the former prime minister) into its flesh, seemingly inspired by their leader, Imran Khan, who has taunted Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) workers as ghadday or donkeys. The donkey was rescued by the ACF Animal Rescue Team, a private organization, who noted that, even days later, it could not stand up on its own because of the ferocity of its torture. It soon succumbed to its injuries, an innocent creature beaten to death for entertainment.”

Bhutto further states in the article that another donkey was mercilessly attacked the day after. In her words, “the skin on its face was ripped off, the flesh on its forehead was ripped apart till all that remained between its eyes was a pulpy, bloody hole. The RCF did not say whether the animal was a victim of the same party but, in a landscape of venomous online trolling, people are afraid to say very much these days.”

One had expected Pakistan’s playboy cricketing icon, now set to become the Prime Minister, to at least come out with a strident, public condemnation of the savage torture of the two donkeys and remove the culprits from his party. There is no indication that he has done either or both. Any argument that compassion for animals, and anger over cruelty to them, are personal attributes and have nothing to do with governance will not wash. Compassion and sensitivity to cruelty are indivisible. The overwhelming majority of those who are kind to animals are also kind to humans and vice-versa. Compassion for the poor and suffering and anger over cruel suppression of the rights of people and legitimate, peaceful protest, is central both to the ethos of a liberal, democratic society, and the framing of policies that define a just and fair Government. Compassion for trees — sentient living beings — is important to the protection of forests, which is a critical component of efforts to save the environment. Not surprisingly, Ar-ticle 51-A(g) of the Constitution of India, states in the context of the Fundamental Duties of citizens, “It shall be the duty of every citizen of India to protect and improve the natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers and wildlife and to have compassion for living creatures.”

If Imran Khan has not acted severely against those who have savagely tortured the two donkeys, then the fact underlines the allegation by many that he is utterly insensitive person who is not moved to anger by savage, wanton cruelty. The incident provides an equally damning commentary on his followers’ characters. A large section of them clearly comprises the dregs of Pakistan’s society. The question is: How does this country deal with a person like him, particularly given the kind of supporters he has?

While the dregs have played a significant role in Imran Khan’s rise to power the others who have contributed include members of Pakistan’s urban middle class with their hope for a cleaner politics and better governance, fundamentalist Islamist organisations to which he has been pandering over the years, and pious Muslim moved by the growing religiosity that he has been publicly displaying.

The enabling, over-arching support has, of course, been the Army which did everything it could to ensure PTI’s victory. The process began long before the elections. The Army manipulated the movement launched by three fundamentalist organisations — Tehreek-i-Labaik Pakistan, Tehreek-i-Khatm-i-Nabuwwat and Sunni Tehreek Pakistan — demanding the dismissal of Pakistan’s Law Minister, Jahid Hamid, holding him responsible for alleged changes in Pakistan’s Election Act 2017 altering the Khatm-i-Nabuwwat (Finality of Prophethood) oath compulsory for electoral candidates. They were not moved by the Governments attribution of the change to a “clerical error” and amendment of the Act to remove it. Finally, the Government had to surrender following a three-week siege of Islamabad and other cities; Hamid resigned on November 27, 2018. The Army’s role became clear when, despite being ordered by the Interior Ministry to restore law and order, the Army chief, General Qamar Javed Bajwa, suggested peaceful handling of the protestors. After Hamid’s resignation, the Labaik chief, Khadim Hussain Rizvi, thanked General Bajwa’s for his help in ending the stand-off.

Earlier, the Army had played a dubious role in relation to the movement accompanying the “Azadi March” which lasted from August 14 to December 17, 2014. The march was a synchronized campaign, albeit with different agendas, by Imran Khan’s Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf and Muhammad Tariq-ul-Qadri’s Pakistan Awami Tehreek, for the removal of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif. It led to much violence before Imran Khan called it off on December 17, 2014, following Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan’s attack on the Army Public School in Peshawar on December 16, which had caused 141 deaths, 132 of which were of school children. The Army’s role had become clear almost at the very beginning of the march when it had issued a statement calling for restraint by the police. There was no condemnation of the agitation which sought to remove an elected prime minister, whose party, the Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz) had won 190 of the 342 seats in Pakistan’s parliament in the 2013 General Elections, through street upheavals.

As the July 25 parliamentary elections approached, a number of measures like Nawaz Sharif’s disqualification from holding political office, his and his daughter’s arrest, intimidation of his party’s candidates into not contesting or changing sides, and massive, intimidatory Army presence on election day, were part of an all-out effort to defeat PML-N and ensure Imran Khan’s victory.

Imran, who, in 2014, demanded Nawaz Sharif’s resignation on the ground that the latter had become Prime Minister by wholesale rigging of the 2013 elections, has now become Prime Minister on the basis of an election widely considered rigged. While this, the underlying irony is engaging, critically important for India is that he has been put in office by the Pakistan Army and will do its bidding on all issues, particularly ties with India and Kashmir.

(The writer is Consultant Editor, The Pioneer, and an author)

Write: Hiranmay Karlekar

Courtesy: The Pioneer

The Opposition is in discussion with the EC to consider replacing EVMs with paper ballots to prevent tampering.

On the face of it, the plan of the 17 Opposition parties including the Congress to meet the Election Commission and press for the re-introduction paper ballots alleging Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) can/have been tampered with by the ruling dispensation is a classic example of neo Luddite behaviour. This move has also been described variously as a case of sour grapes, ignorance of the Constitutional mandate for the conduct and monitoring of elections which is with the EC and expressly not the Government of the day and a political manoeuvre reflecting sheer desperation as the Narendra Modi juggernaut threatens to flatten them electorally. All the above are correct in large measure. But there is something deeper underlying this move. The fact is that a large section of the Opposition has decided to run a campaign against the BJP in all spheres of political activity based on questioning its intent. And intentionality, as anyone who knows anything about the law, is notoriously difficult to prove. Their line of attack is clear, the EVM versus paper ballot issue has just been added to this list. It may, however, may just give the BJP the platform it needs to bring all the issues raised by the Opposition to attack its intent together and debunk them at one go. Nothing irritates voters more than sore losers.

Those who remember how in the 1980s a small town in Haryana called Meham became the symbol of the violence and ballot-stuffing associated with paper ballots would also remember the popular demand that arose as a consequence for electronic voting machines to be used. Across vast swathes of India from 1947 till the purchase of EVMs in 1989-90 and their introduction in 1999, paper ballots were stamped by the sack-full by toughs in favour of their candidate of choice; vote-rigging was easier, not more difficult, for the locally powerful. The BJP is sure to argue that this is precisely the reason nearly all regional parties save Biju Janata Dal and Telangana Rashtra Samithi are in favour of paper ballots.

For the Election Commission, which the Opposition is to approach next week with its demand and which has repeatedly and in a transparent manner thrown upon EVMs to hackers to prove their reliability, it’s a no-brainer to continue with them unless demonstrable proof of their widespread manipulation is provided. The cost and logistical factor too will be of great import to the EC. The long-term savings by using EVMs despite initial outlay being high — the first batch purchased in 1989-90 cost Rs 5,500 per unit and the additional buys in 2014 came at Rs 10,500 per unit — are not insubstantial when compared to the cost of production and printing hundreds of crores of ballot papers. Logistics regarding the collection, transportation and storage of ballot papers and the many more officials, who will need to be reimbursed, needed to count them by hand must also be taken into account. Bogus voting reduces substantially with EVMs because the vote is recorded only once. And with the decision to ensure voter-verified paper audit trail or VVPAT-enabled EVMs are deployed as widely as possible, doubts should be laid to rest, unless of course those opposing EVMs now are happy to step down from the elections they won were not conducted with paper ballots.

Writer: Pioneer

Courtesy: The Pioneer

The ‘friendship pillar’ placed in Lhasa reads: Tibetans to be happy in the land of Tibet and Chinese in the land of China. The authorities seemed in China seems to have forgotten to provide a translation of what it reads.

In 821 AD, Tibet’s great emperor, Tritsuk Detsen and his Chinese counterpart entered into an agreement “seeking in their far-reaching wisdom to prevent all causes of harm to the welfare of their countries now or in the future.”

The Peace Treaty signed between Tibet and China was carved in Tibetan and Chinese language on a stone pillar which was placed in front of the Jokhang Cathedral in Lhasa, the Tibetan capital. A few years ago, the Chinese decided to restore the pillar describing the grand alliance; the communist authorities, however, forgot to give the translation of the ‘friendship’ pillar.

Last week, when the Chinese Premier Li Keqiang visited Lhasa, he walked down to the stone pillar and affirmed that the monument was a model for unity between the Tibetans and the Chinese. Li probably did not read the Treaty: “Tibet and China shall abide by the frontiers of which they are now in occupation. All to the east is the country of Great China; and all to the west is, without question, the country of Great Tibet. Henceforth on neither side shall there be waging of war nor seizing of territory. If any person incurs suspicion, he shall be arrested. …Tibetans shall be happy in the land of Tibet, and Chinese in the land of China. Even the frontier guards shall have no anxiety, nor fear.”

This was forgotten when the communist troops walked into Tibet in October 1950. Today, Tibet is an ‘unalienable’ part of China (and the frontier guards have shifted to the Indian border). The ‘unalienable’ part was highlighted by Premier Li during his visit. It is the art of rewriting history with Chinese characteristics.

Interestingly, it was the first ever visit of a Chinese Premier to the Roof of the World. It is usually the Chairman of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, also a Member of the all-powerful Standing Committee of the Politburo (presently Wang Yang) who visits Tibet, not the Premier. The head of the United Front Work Department also regularly ‘inspects’ the Roof of the World. One reason for this unexpected change might be that President Xi Jinping (who was then travelling in Africa) finally tries to delegate some of his responsibilities to Li Keqiang; rumors to this effect have recently been circulating in China.

The coverage of the visit is another sign that all is not smooth in the Middle Kingdom.

Usually such an important visit would be announced after the VVIP is back in Beijing; only then reports would appear in Chinese and later the English version would come out, tailored for the foreign public. This time, it was rather chaotic; some English websites broke the news on the first day of the visit, while Xinhua kept mum till Li was back in Beijing. Are there two voices of China?

Remember in March, after the legislative and consultative meetings, China decided to unify its voice. The State Council announced that the Government had formed the world’s largest media group called Voice of China, combining the existing China Central Television, China National Radio, and China Radio International under one unified umbrella and name. It was the responsibility of the publicity (ex-propaganda) department to manage it. But in the case of Li Keqiang’s visit to Tibet, China spoke incoherently. While the media affiliated to the State Council covered it nearly ‘live’; Xinhua waited for Li’s return to Beijing to report.

What were the visit’s highlights?

The atheist Premier went to the Jokhang Cathedral in Lhasa, he told some monks in attendance that he hoped that “Tibetan religious patriots could learn from the eminent monks in history, and devote themselves to maintaining the unity of the state, ethnic solidarity, a harmonious society and smooth religious affairs.”

All the monks are obviously not good ‘patriots’, a fact which worries Beijing. Li also urged “religious circles to continue to make contributions in safeguarding national unity and promoting ethnic solidarity as well as social harmony.”

China Tibet Online had reported earlier that Li Keqiang visited Southern Tibet on July 25. Apparently, Li went directly to Nyingchi prefecture, bordering Arunachal Pradesh where he visited a village in Mailing County; this is a new village inhabited by Monpas, who have been ‘relocated from impoverished areas’, located next door. Metok County is situated on the Yarlung Tsangpo (Brahmaputra), north of Upper Siang district of Arunachal Pradesh.

Li went to a newly-built house of a Tibetan named Kunsang; he sat with the ‘migrant’ family and talked to the six members of the household about their daily life. Kunsang told Li that his family moved from Metok County, where “road travel is fairly difficult”. This is rather surprising considering that since 2013, when a tunnel was opened, the Chinese propaganda has been stressing the ‘changes’ in Metok, principally mentioning better communications. So why move people to a nearby County, if the situation had improved so much in the first place?

Li was said to have been really pleased “to see that the villagers have cast off poverty through the relocation programme and lived a prosperous life.” The Premier wished the family an even more prosperous life in the future.

It is difficult to understand why this family was ‘shifted’ from Metok to Mainling County in the first place. Were they creating problems for the Chinese government near the Indian border? It is possible. Metok, like several other places on the border, has been the focus of very generous investments from the Central Government, the local Government as well as different Provincial Governments. It is doubtful if ‘poverty alleviation’ was the reason for this transfer of population.

For the Tibetans, it should be worrying, considering that the Premier’s visit takes place just days before the yearly summer retreat of the party’s top bosses in Beidaihe, which is always the occasion to discuss ‘new’ policies. Will reallocation of Tibetans within Tibet (like it is happening in Xinjiang) from border areas be discussed?

Incidentally, Li met with the hard-core Old Guard: Phakpala, Raidi, Jampa Phuntsok, Legchok and Passang, who served in Tibet for decades; he praised their past work for the ‘stability’ of Tibet.

Has Beijing decided to return to ‘pure’ communist policies of the old days, symbolised by these cadres? It is quite frightening.

(The writer is an expert on India-China relations and an author)

Writer:  Claude Arpi

Courtesy: The Pioneer

A “game changer” for coastal Konkan region and State’s economy, the 103-km long Kolhapur-Vaibhavwadi line on Konkan Railway will soon witness its beginning.

The decision on the launch of Rs 3,ooo crore project was taken at a review meeting of Konkan Railway Corporation (KRC) that Union Minister for Industry and Civil Aviation Suresh Prabhu held in New Delhi on Tuesday with the Chairman of Railway Board, the KRC Chairman & Managing Director and other officials.

Prabhu said that the construction of this railway section would be a game-changer not only for the KRC, but also for the coastal Konkan region and the state’s economy.

Sanjay Gupta, Chairman and Managing Director of KRC informed the minister that in order to improve services of the KR network to cover more villages and towns, said that 10 new stations were being built along the 103 km Kolhapur-Vaibhavwadi route. The first station would be inaugurated in January 2019. The Centre and Maharashtra government will bear 50 per cent of the total expenditure to be incurred on the project. Slated to link coastal Konkan region with western Maharashtra, the proposed railway line will boost tourism, lead to development of ports and harbours, including the Jaigarh and Dighi ports and allow flow of goods from the hinterland to the coast

Writer: TN RAGHUNATHA

Courtesy: The Pioneer