Even though, environment is significantly responsible, what is of pressing concern is the reason why some people and not others, go on to exploit that permissive atmosphere and commit sexual crimes
The horrific mass molestation of students at Gargi College — where over 30 men forcibly entered the women’s college — is symptomatic of an atmosphere which is permissive of sexual intimidation. No doubt, sexual harassment is a universal phenomenon, though it may differ in its manifestation, depending upon how a society takes it. Sexual harassment of women in educational institutions is one of the most common and largely underreported forms of gender-based violence, often inflicted by male colleagues, teachers or perpetrators from outside. In a significant number of cases, women adopt a culture of silence as they have learnt to “ignore” certain forms of predatory behaviour of men, like passing lewd comments, wolf-whistling, staring and so on.
Sexual harassment infringes upon the fundamental right of a woman to gender equality under Article 14 and her right to life with dignity under Article 21 of the Constitution, which includes the right to a safe working environment.
Before the Vishaka Guidelines came into existence in 1997, sexual harassment at the workplace was dealt with under Indian Penal Code Section 354, (assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty) and Section 509, punishing the guilty for using a “word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman.” However, the interpretation of the provisions on “outraging a woman’s modesty” was left to the police officer.
On the basis of the Vishaka Guidelines, the Sexual Harassment of Women at the Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 was enacted to ensure safe working spaces for them. Consistent with the Vishaka judgment, the Act provides a civil remedy to women and is in addition to other laws that are currently in force to pursue a criminal case. Consequently, any woman who wishes to report sexual harassment at the workplace has the right to take recourse to both civil and criminal proceedings.
While there is no denying the importance of legal protection against sexual harassment, its public health aspects and their therapeutic interventions are no less important. They need to be examined and addressed to restore the physical and mental health of the victim and go into the reasons for the deviant behaviour of the perpetrators. Even though, environment is significantly responsible, what is of pressing concern is the reason why some people and not others, go on to exploit that permissive atmosphere and commit sexual crimes.
By nature, some people are more hostile, authoritarian and sexist, which might make them more prone to becoming an aggressor. The complexity of the interaction between an aggrieved woman and the perpetrator needs to be understood and the personality profile of the aggressor requires to be examined in depth to evolve effective measures to prevent the occurrence and reduce the prevalence of sexual harassment at the workplace.
Psychological studies show that sexual predators lack a social conscience; they are callous about their social commitments and have a tendency to exaggerate the situation. They justify their misdeeds and legitimise their aggression, particularly against women when it is related to the endorsement of sexually- coercive behaviour.
Studies also show that the psychopathic traits of exploitation of others and lack of empathy, are both commonly associated with rapists, stalkers and molesters. When sexual harassment escalates, it poses a potential risk of a more serious sexual crime like rape. This link highlights the fact that sexual harassers are potential rapists and to prevent rapes, those indulging in harassment need to be treated for their deviant behaviour.
Sexual harassment not only results in strained interpersonal relations and an hostile working environment, it adversely affects the productivity of the organisation, leading to financial losses. But more than anything else, it affects the mindset of the victims, causing a wide range of mental health issues. And as physical health and emotional well-being are inter-related, victims often suffer loss of appetite, headaches, weight fluctuations and sleep disturbance. The commonly-reported negative effects included fear, concerns for safety, and post traumatic stress disorder.
No other form of discrimination has such a wide impact on the physical and mental health of the victims. Sexual harassment has emerged as a major public health problem with long-term physical and mental health consequences for the victims. However, the impact is not restricted to their health and seeps into the victim’s social and professional life. This aspect often gets ignored and victims mostly remain preoccupied with legal remedies. Clinicians have described case histories, symptom profiles, stress factors and attempts at intervention. Theoreticians working in the fields of women’s development, cognitive functioning and gender-based trauma have generated a parallel body of relevant information, applying their theories to the field of harassment.
Sexual harassment presents significant challenges to a victim’s internal and external stability. Primarily recognised as a legal or organisational management issue, it belongs to a clinical continuum with other gender-based abuses. If untreated, it can cause psychiatric illness and long-term negative changes in the victim’s internal perception of self, others, and the world and severely hinder her potential. Appropriate clinical interventions for both, the victims and the perpetrators, can provide an opportunity to assess the seriousness of the crisis and make the workplace free from sexual harassment.
(Writer: RC Jiloha ; Courtesy: The Pioneer)
The ILP requires all the finesse, ingenuity and statecraft of the Government to constitutionally balance competing demands of various segments of the population among the eight sisters
As the situation in northeast India continues to be one of anxiety, the more or less forgotten Inner Line Permit (ILP) regime appears to be poised to assume centrestage in the coming months. For the first time when I reached Itanagar early in 1997, on a posting as the Chief of Police of Arunachal Pradesh, I must confess, I had not even heard of the Inner Line and its importance for the State.
Familiarising myself with the affairs of the State, I had been advised to read Verrier Elwin’s book and some others, too. Though Elwin was not around when the Inner Line regime was conceived, he is considered to be an authority on the subject. He has explained the concept very succinctly. According to him, the significance of the ILP can be understood as: “It was a two-fold attempt to protect both the tribal people and the settlers in the plains. On the one hand, it prevented encroachments on tribal land. On the other, by checking irritations that might incite the tribesmen to rebellion and raids, it protected the tea planters and their labour.” A pressing need for such a regulation was particularly felt after a violent incident with some tea planters of British origin.
Way back in 1873, when the present State of Assam and, in fact, the entire North-eastern region, was a part of Bengal, the then Lt Governor had issued regulations known as the “Bengal Eastern Frontier Regulation.” These were applicable to the erstwhile territories of the districts of Kamrup, Darrang, Sivasagar, Lakhimpur, Garo Khasi and Jaintia Hills, Naga Hills and Cachar. Later, these were also extended to Sadiya, Lakhimpur and Balipara frontier tracts and other such tracts covering the entire territory of NEFA (now Arunachal), Nagaland and Lushai Hills (now Mizoram).
Manipur being a princely State, it never came under its purview. Subsequently, the territories of Assam and Meghalaya (Garo Khasi and Jaintia Hills) were taken out of the purview of these regulations. At the time of their original promulgation, according to Section 2, all citizens of India or any person residing here was prohibited from crossing the Inner Line unless permitted. Similarly, as per Section 7, outsiders were barred from acquiring any interest in land or the products of land beyond the Inner Line. Though not applied in most cases, there is a provision for stringent penalties for violation of these regulations.
For all these years, a continuation of the Inner Line regime has been justified on grounds of preservation of tribal culture and language. Now, in the wake of protests related to the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), this regulation that dates back to 1873, has once again occupied the centre stage. The long-standing demand of the State of Manipur has since been accepted and the provisions of the Bengal Eastern Frontier Regulation, 1873, were notified to be extended to the entire State with effect from December 2019, while exempting it from the provisions of the CAA. The Meiteis constitute about 55 per cent of the Manipuris while the tribals account for 35 per cent.
The tribal communities are themselves divided into several factions and have been at loggerheads with each other for a long time. However, they are together as far as opposition to the Meiteis is concerned. Their fear is that the Meiteis might try to get the benefits of the Scheduled Tribes after the ILP is extended to the entire State and not to the tribal areas alone. Extension of ILP to the entire State of Manipur can be validated only if it is treated as a tribal area. Otherwise, it would get invalidated being violative of Article 19 (1) (d)(e) of the Constitution.
There are other reasons, too, for such suspicions to have gained strength. The earlier Government in Manipur had passed a few legislations like the Manipur People’s (Protection) Bill and the Manipur Land Revenue and Land Reforms Amendment Bill without taking the tribal communities into confidence. These Bills were reserved by the Governor for the consideration of the President, who did not give his assent. The current scene is one of wait and watch.
The attitude of the tribal communities of Manipur towards the extension of ILP to the State would also depend on the provisions of the Central Government’s accord with the Nagas. In case the calculated risk taken by the Government for the introduction of ILP in Manipur succeeds, then such demands from Tripura and Meghalaya may also have to be accepted.
Simultaneously, the demand for the enforcement of ILP in the entire State of Assam has gathered momentum. Clause 6 of the Assam Accord pertains to the constitutional, legislative and administrative safeguards to protect, preserve and promote the cultural, social, linguistic identity and heritage of the Assamese people. The responsibility for its implementation being with the Government of India, a committee had been constituted by the Ministry of Home Affairs to suggest measures to be taken for the implementation of Clause 6.
This committee, chaired by BK Sharma, a former judge of the Guwahati High Court, has reportedly submitted its report to the State Government, though technically, it should have come to the Ministry. There appears to be a distinct possibility of an emerging discord between the Ministry of Home Affairs and the committee as the latter had recommended the implementation of the ILP for the entire State of Assam and the former has some reservations.
Constitutionally, it would be difficult to justify such a measure as tribal areas of Assam and Meghalaya, besides Mizoram, are all covered under Schedule VI of the Constitution with full-fledged autonomous district councils already functioning there. The autonomous Bodoland Territorial Council was recently inaugurated by the Prime Minister.
The North-eastern region has always given a lot many anxious moments to the nation. This cauldron is at present almost on the boil and would require all the tact, finesse, ingenuity and statecraft to constitutionally balance the competing demands of various segments of the population among the eight sisters.
(Writer: KK PAUL ; Courtesy: The Pioneer)
It is an irony of our times that the very Government, which promised to protect the country from any divisive internal or external force, has failed to fulfill its duties
When the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) was voted to power in 2014 and then even more resoundingly in 2019, one of the pillars that the party sought to stand on was its claim that Prime Minister Narendra Modi will represent a strong Government and that it will protect the country from any divisive internal or external force. It is this assurance that forms the backdrop of the now-infamous belief that the Prime Minister’s “56-inch chest” will provide India with a protective shield. Events that unfolded in Delhi over the past week, where clashes broke out between communities that led to the killing of 35 people (at the time of writing), have thrown cold water over the Prime Minister’s hollow claims of leading a strong Government.
In fact, there will be few instances in the history of independent India where a citizen has felt more unsafe than he/she does right now. Delhi is in the midst of its worst riots since 1984. And as relevant authorities examine who exactly is to be blamed for the violence that has been unleashed, there are some issues that are indisputable and require some tough answers.
The first is, how did such a riot take place, that, too, in the capital city? Delhi is not just the capital of this country but is also home to India’s most well-funded and trained police force. Let this sink in. Theoretically speaking, this means that the Delhi police, which functions under the Central Government that is controlled by the BJP and more specifically comes under the direct supervision of Union Home Minister Amit Shah, is India’s best equipped police force. This means that in terms of numbers and assistance, compared to other forces across the country, the law and order situation in Delhi could not have been better protected. Well, hypothetically speaking, at least.
In addition to this, Delhi is also the centre for all intelligence agencies in the country. It is home to several intelligence bodies, whose job includes to be alert about all possible acts of violence or riots that may erupt in the country. But the intelligence bodies and the police force have failed to prevent violence in not more than a 10-km radius from Parliament. How does this make those residing in other parts of the country feel? If the Government could not stop acts of mass violence in places where its base is the strongest, how exactly does it plan to protect the rest of the country?
Let’s once assume that this is not true. But the element of bias cannot be denied because as per reports, the Delhi police was sent at least six alerts on Sunday (February 23), asking for deployment to be stepped up after BJP leader Kapil Mishra called for a gathering in support of the Citizenship Act at Delhi’s Maujpur. Why then was the police so helpless in preventing violence? This is a greater cause for concern because if the Delhi police is better equipped to tackle violence than any other police force in the country, why did it fail to deliver?
These are not the only questions over the conduct of the Delhi police. Why are videos of police personnel destroying CCTV cameras doing the rounds? The only way to get answers and to ensure that such riots do not happen again is to dig deep and find out as to what exactly happened. But how will the destruction of CCTV cameras help answer that question?
What I am concerned about and what should concern all of us is the establishment of truth and the delivery of justice to all those people who have been affected by this senseless violence. This can be done only by taking appropriate action against those involved in the violence. Perpetrators include leaders of political parties of every hue and any official, who allowed such violence to go unabated for three days.
The more serious concern is that slowly but steadily, we have reached this shameful place. There are a few reasons for this. One is the lack of resistance by the bureaucracy. I have some sympathy for the bureaucrats here though. Governments of the past have often shown — and the BJP Government has mastered — how adept they are in the art of abuse, twist and wrangle. This is in contrast to Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel’s vision of the civil services being the “steel frame” of good governance.
Bureaucrats are now routinely being threatened with transfer orders, raids by income tax authorities or the Enforcement Directorate or any other agency which is at the Centre’s disposal with a degree of reckless abandon. I don’t think we would have to go more than a few weeks behind to find an instance of such abuse. It has permeated all institutions, including the Election Commission of India.
More recently came the brazen example of Justice S Muralidhar of the Delhi High Court, who received a presidential order transferring him to the Punjab and Haryana High Court. This order came a day later after he pulled up the Solicitor General and the Delhi police for inaction during the riots in north-east Delhi. Coming down heavily on the Delhi police, he pulled it up for its failure to register FIRs against alleged hate-speeches by three BJP leaders, Anurag Thakur, Kapil Mishra and other usual suspects from the BJP.
While pressure by a Government on the bureaucracy and the judiciary is not an invention of the BJP — there are obvious examples of the Emergency, 1984 and 2002 — rarely has there been as concerted an effort by a Government to undermine all institutions, all at once. Circumstances are not helped by members of these institutions either. So often, we see bureaucrats being asked to jump and respond back with, “How high?” In the judiciary, too, we have recently seen a sitting Supreme Court judge lavish heavy praise on the Prime Minister even as serious allegations of abuse of State power were being examined by the very same court.
Such acts and comments by individuals in positions of authority — whether in the bureaucracy or in the judiciary or any other institution — have chilling effects on the citizens. It erodes their faith in the institutions and the Constitution. This poses a greater risk to India’s democratic health in the long term than individual acts of abuse of power by the BJP that I have highlighted in this article.
So what do we do? If the State machinery is failing us and institutions are displaying a lack of backbone, the answer and burden (unfortunately or fortunately) fall on everyday people. Unfortunate because this is a great burden that the civil society must now discharge when its institutions appear to be found wanting. Fortunate because there is rarely a time in history when any Government or institution can suppress the will of the people. The only thing we must make sure is that we fight, not with violence, but with vigour, voice and vote to uphold the rule of the law and the Constitution. Victory then will be undeniable for everyone who wants to live in a unified, peaceful and prosperous democracy.
(Writer: Ajoy Kumar ; Courtesy: The Pioneer)
The Delhi violence is serious because it shows that binaries have been deep-set and a panic economy has taken over
The story of the Delhi violence lies much beyond the headlines or the number of the dead. The terrifying visual of a man, whose photo of being beaten up by a violent mob simply because he wore a certain kind of clothes and sported a beard went viral, validated the pogrom-like sequence of events as the new normal and its casual acceptance in normal life. It’s something as statistical as an accident on the crime charts. It is serious simply because it happened in Delhi, the nation’s capital no less, and not in a far-flung town in India clouded by obscurantism. It is a test case that could get copied elsewhere and worse, be passed off as another law and order situation that can be tamped down by Section 144. When a judge like Justice Muralidhar, whom junior lawyers call an inspiration, gets transferred overnight for daring to question the Delhi police, then we should worry, with deep furrowed brows. Simply because an independent judiciary is the only hope for citizens seeking justice and rights that the Constitution guarantees to them. If this institution is broken, then our statute books mean nothing at all and public morality simply spins out of the orbit of our nation as we knew it. Till now. If north-east Delhi, where various communities have literally lived cheek by jowl for decades and more, is torn asunder by blood-curdling rage at the mere remark of an extremist, it shows that Indians, as a people, are harbouring a tinder box in their minds. This is a separatism that has nothing to do with the unresolved wounds of Partition. But an otherisation propaganda that has been bred systematically on a fertile ground of insecurities and economic denial. The polarisation of the mind is a far deadlier poison for it blunts the edge of humanity. It also means a subterranean conflict, which may bubble up any moment and because of its smouldering nature, engulf every other human possibility of reason, wisdom and compassion. If BJP motormouth and “go and kill” instigator Kapil Mishra has not been reined in despite protests from within his own party, it legitimises the politics of hate as a yielder of fast dividends and delegitimises public service. Politically, socially and culturally, there is a sudden vacuum which nobody wants to plunge into or commit to. That explains why the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), despite winning a solid verdict, seems uncertain about the public stance it should take. It cannot stick its neck out simply because nobody, including the BJP, knows what shape panic can acquire in a vacuum. Prejudice has taken over national pride to such an extent that everybody listens to it, not without it.
The only certainty about these uncertain times is that it is not the best time to seek our place in the world. US lawmaker Bernie Sanders has expressed reservations and concern as has the US Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF). Even UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres was “very saddened” by the casualties in Delhi. He called for maximum restraint and violence to be avoided. Although the Modi Government sought to describe such comments as “factually inaccurate and misleading,” truth is the world doesn’t expect India to indulge in genocidal politics. Especially, when we use the optics of the Sabarmati ashram for visiting dignitaries but forget the non-violence mantra preached by its original resident. When it comes to the Opposition, the BJP anyway wins the battle on competitive whataboutery. So when senior Congress leaders, led by party chief Sonia Gandhi, met President Ram Nath Kovind to demand the resignation of Home Minister Amit Shah over his “abdication of duty”, the party reminded it of the anti-Sikh riots of 1984. BJP MP Pragya Singh Thakur, another motormouth who hasn’t been reined in, asked the Congress to review its role during that period. Only RSS general secretary Suresh “Bhaiyyaji” Joshi advised the BJP that nobody had the right to take the law into their hands and that the Centre should ensure that peace is restored in Delhi. Placatory, high-sounding terms that are abstract enough to spare the BJP’s extreme elements, all of whom have been birthed by its ideology. In the end, it is time for the civil movement to free itself from the piecemeal appropriation of causes and issues by political parties. Or be exploited by them. For Delhiites, who have found a new identity in a city that is a melting pot of all migrants, the time for denial is over. We cannot be sporting identity cards like a curfew pass. We must stand up and be counted.
(Courtesy: The Pioneer)
South Asian nations face a water crisis which poses a threat to agriculture and industries. Given its increasing influence, is India willing to become a provider of water security in the region?
On May 23, 2013, while speaking at the foundation stone-laying ceremony for the Indian National Defence University, Gurugram, the then Prime Minister Manmohan Singh exuded confidence that India was well-positioned and willing “to become a net provider of security” in its immediate region and beyond. In 2015, the Institute for Defence Studies and Analysis (IDSA), New Delhi, came out with an assessment report titled, India as a Security Provider. The report highlights India’s growing military capabilities and its proactive responses to the human and non-human threats to the littoral nations of the Indian Ocean, which corroborates the country’s image and positioning as a benign power and net security provider in the region. But the question here is: Is India also willing to play the role of net security provider when it comes to ensuring water security in the region? The above-mentioned IDSA report points out, “While traditional security threats limit India’s role; cooperation on non-traditional threats opens up a new opportunity for India to play a regional role.” Thus, it is a geostrategic imperative for India to focus on non-traditional security threats in the region emerging from sectors such as water and energy.
Today all the nations of South Asia face a water crisis in one form or another due to a range of factors — population growth, urbanisation, inefficient use, bad management and lack of governance, among others. The unfolding water crises pose a serious threat to sustainable development, agriculture and industries, poverty reduction and the ecosystem. Climate change has exacerbated the brewing water crises like never before. The United Nations Secretary General António Guterres has termed climate change as “the most systematic threat to humankind.”
Water is a common resource and managing and governing it has always been a challenge at any scale, be it local or regional. A participatory robust institutional architecture for water governance is needed to manage and govern resources in a systematic and efficient way. Many of the important water bodies in South Asia are transboundary and thus their basins spread in more than one country. Integrated basin management would not be a reality without regional cooperation at the South Asian level.
Most of the water treaties in South Asia are bilateral in nature, which form the core of the South Asian political ecology of governance. Be it upper or lower riparian, nations in the region are apparently not content with the existing treaties. For example, India, an upper riparian nation, does not seem to be happy with the Indus Water Treaty with Pakistan, a lower riparian nation in this case. Between Bangladesh, a low riparian nation and India, the Teesta river issue still remains unresolved, with Dhaka asking for an increase in water share. People in Nepal, an upper riparian nation, think water treaties with India produces environmental injustices to the riverine people of Koshi river. Along with this kind of political ecology of the region, the issue of sovereignty in South Asia is a very sensitive topic. South Asia represents a typical case of the Westphalian concept of sovereignty, where each nation has exclusive sovereignty over its territory and the natural resources, including water. No nation would like to be seen as compromising its sovereignty. However in reality, in the face of globalisation and trade integration, each nation is bargaining its sovereignty with the other nations and regional and international actors. These two factors — the existing South Asian political ecology and the power politics played out in the name of sovereignty — both hinder and open up opportunities for regional cooperation at the same time. Some may think that regional cooperation compromises on the sovereignty of a State. However, the notion of sovereignty can be broadened to accommodate and facilitate the idea of cooperation, which is not about imposing suzerainty of one nation on another.
India has been quite active in the region in terms of coming to the rescue of its neighbours when they are in trouble. A case in point is when Maldives faced a water crisis in December 2014, India launched Operation NEER to immediately provide Maldives with it. The people and the Government of Maldives were appreciative of India’s quick response and help. Having said that, one must be mindful that those were more of a response to a crisis that emerged and similar exercises could be useful to tackle future contingencies of that sort. However, water woes coupled with the effects of climate change have resulted in a distinct set of challenges that call for India’s proactive role in the South Asian region. What is required today is a continuous regional cooperation in providing water security, which is at present marred by the absence of an institutional architecture for water governance in South Asia.
India should play a lead role in institutionalising regional cooperation by establishing a robust architecture. It has already set an example with the launch of South Asian Satellite in 2017, which Prime Minister Narendra Modi in his tweet termed as a “symbol of South Asian cooperation” and “a journey to build the most advanced frontier” of regional cooperation and partnership. With India looking for a larger regional role, it cannot afford to be a security consumer. It has to metamorphose itself into a credible security provider. Benjamin Kienzle, a faculty member of Defence Studies at King’s College London, elucidates, “A security provider has a stronger interest in the immediate security of a third party, rather than in direct security gains for itself…the action of a security provider easily lead to a win-win situation…A security consumer, on the other hand, is primarily interested in its own security and is largely indistinct towards the security needs of third parties…In general, security consumers create easily win-lose situations…” Notwithstanding, he makes it clear that a security provider in no way compromises its own security interests.
Domestically India has made some progress to improve water governance. The then Ministry of Water Resources, River Development and Ganga Rejuvenation (now Ministry of Jal Shakti) constituted a committee led by Mihir Shah to suggest institutional reforms for water governance to deal with the water challenges that India faces in the 21st century. In July 2016, the Committee came out with a report titled, A 21st Century Institutional Architecture for India’s Water Reforms. The report makes a number of critical suggestions to strengthen the governance of India’s water resources. One of them is about its shape and structure. The report underlines that “polycentric governance regimes characterised by a distribution of power but effective coordination structures perform better.” Considering water as one of the sectors most vulnerable to climate change, the report stressed that the ability to respond to it is strengthened by polycentric governance regimes.
The existing political ecology of South Asia makes the space of water resources a geopolitically contested zone. Governance is needed to protect the environment, to save the ecology and to manage water resources in an integrated and holistic manner. Polycentrism is inherent in South Asia and by default distribution of power is effected by the very nature of South Asian sovereignty. What is missing essentially is the effective coordination to realise and unlock water governance potential in the region. Effective coordination can be established only through a well-structured institutional architecture involving all the actors and stakeholders. With the emergence of non-State environmental actors and groups in the region, the role of governments has receded in water governance and self-organised governance networks have found prominence.
In their article “Reflections on Actor-Network Theory, Governance Networks, and Strategic Outcomes”, Ludmilla Meyer Montenegro and Sergio Bulgacov caution that, “self-organised governance networks can impede (policy) implementation…or they can enhance the efficiency of policy implementation…Thus, it is important to determine how these networks are formed, who forms them and how they function, since they have such direct impacts on governance. The more we know about networks, the better we understand governance dynamics and its relationships with the Government, informal mechanisms, and private actors.”
India should painstakingly study the governance networks that exist today in South Asia for conceptualising a regional institutional architecture for water governance in the region, to not repeat another SAARC which is failing under its burden.
(Writer: Sandeep Kumar dubey ; Courtesy: The Pioneer)
In times when the Government is talking about oppressed minorities in neighbouring nations, should we be harassing Tibetans who have sided with India even in difficult times?
India prides itself on its traditional systems of medicine that have now received the Government’s support, too. In a major push to the healthcare sector, a separate Ministry of Ayurveda, Yoga & Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha, Sowa Rigpa and Homoeopathy (AYUSH) was set up in November 2014 “to ensure the optimal development and propagation of AYUSH systems of healthcare.” It was earlier known as the department of Indian System of Medicine and Homeopathy (ISM&H). Its objective was to focus on the development of education and research in indigenous systems of medicine. Later, Sowa-Rigpa (the art of healing), a traditional Tibetan system of medicine practiced in the Himalayan belt, was added to it.
Men-Tsee-Khang, the Dalai Lama’s Tibetan Medical & Astro institute based in Dharamsala, Himachal Pradesh, is the main training and research center for Sowa-Rigpa. The institute recently prepared a “precious pill” called the Chulen Rilbu, which could allegedly prevent the spread of infectious diseases, including the dreaded Coronavirus (a concerned Dalai Lama had earlier given mantras for the purpose).
It is in this background that a shocking incident took place last week in Dharamsala. Dr GD Gupta, the local chief medical officer, decided to stop the distribution of Chulen Rilbu that was being sold for `5 to those interested. Local authorities cited reports of public disturbance and commotion created by the public demand for the pill. Though the Rimsung Rilbu is distributed in other centers all over the country, it is true that there were long queues at Dharamsala.
On February 16, the CMO visited the McLeod Ganj branch of Men-Tsee-Khang and verbally issued orders to stop the sale of the pill. He even threatened the Tibetan institute that non-compliance may result in fines up to `10 lakh and closure of clinics. This, obviously, was not in the CMO’s power as the Ministry of AYUSH and the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare are two separate Government entities. Further, the CMO does not have the capacity to judge the potency of the pill, which needs to be used as an amulet (the smell prevents the infection, according to Tibetan doctors). Did the CMO then possess special competence in law and order problems to act?
Under pressure of insensible local authorities, Men-Tsee-Khang’s director, Tashi Tsering, had no choice but to issue a public notice, saying that the pill would not be sold at Tibetan clinics in Kangra district (it is still being sold in Delhi and elsewhere).
According to The Tibet Sun, Tashi maintained that the institute had never made any claim regarding the pill having properties to prevent contagious diseases. He said, “The pill having prophylactic properties is prepared as per formulations given in the ancient Buddhist texts and has been around for centuries.”
Many believe that the CMO’s actions were only an act of jealousy. Men-Tsee-Khang is a reputed institution established in 1916 in Tibet. It was re-established in Dharamshala by the Dalai Lama in 1961 and its main objective is to preserve, promote and practice Sowa-Rigpa.
Tibetan doctors are no quack. Dr Yeshi Dhonden, who recently passed away at the age of 92, was awarded the Padma Shri award by the President of India in 2018 for his contributions to Sowa-Rigpa. For years, Dr Dhonden served as Men-Tsee-Khang’s director and from 1963 to 1980 as personal physician to the Dalai Lama.
Sowa-Rigpa is today famed across the world. According to the AYUSH Ministry’s website, it is “one of the oldest, living and well documented medical tradition popular in the world. It is an ancient Indian medical system which was enriched in the entire Trans-Himalayan region.”
The medical treatise, the Gyud-chi or four tantras, written in Sanskrit, was enlarged between the 8th and 12th Century by scholars with inputs from China, Turkestan, Persia and Greece.
The implications of the threats uttered by the CMO are multiple. First, Sowa-Rigpa is popular all over the Himalayan belt, particularly in Ladakh, Himachal Pradesh (Lahaul, Spiti and Kinnaur), West Bengal (Darjeeling and Kalimpong), Sikkim and Arunachal Pradesh. It is also practiced in countries like Bhutan, Mongolia and Russia. It is an insult to the beliefs of the populations of these areas.
The greatest irony is that China is extensively using this system in its fight against the dreaded Coronavirus. Xinhua, quoting an official in Qinghai province said: “Tibetan medicine has played an active role in the virus treatment.” The news agency said that the Chinese authorities are using Tibetan medicine “to help fight the Coronavirus in northwest China’s Qinghai province.”
Huang Licheng, an official with the provincial health commission, confirmed that “of Qinghai’s 18 confirmed cases, 17 have received treatment involving traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) and Tibetan medicine has played an active role in the treatment.”
The province has officially incorporated allopathic and TCM treatments since the outbreak: “TCM doctors heavily participated in rescue work, especially those practicing Tibetan medicine.”
Xinhua further reported: “The provincial hospital of Tibetan medicine produced a batch of anti-virus medications featuring Tibetan medicine, with 1,000 of them already sent to the front lines in Hubei Province.” It added that “local Tibetan medicine hospitals have also produced medications to prevent virus infection and distributed them to the public for free.”
There is another larger implication of the intolerant attitude of the authorities in Himachal Pradesh. One can understand that with this type of behaviour, more and more Tibetan refugees want to leave India. At a time when the Central Government is taking up the defence of the oppressed minorities in neighbouring countries, why harass the Tibetans, who since they left their country, have sided with India even in difficult times? Remember the Tibetan Special Frontiers Forces’ participation in the Liberation of Bangladesh in 1971?
The situation is already dismal. The Tibet Sun wrote: “The demographic landscape of the Tibetans in exile has drastically changed, with more than half the population shown by survey to have moved from India to Western countries.” At one point, more than 1,35,000 Tibetans lived in India. The Central Tibetan Administration (CTA) recently confirmed that the number of Tibetans in India has reduced drastically (to 72,000 according to some sources).
Is it in India’s interests to antagonise a population, which already feels let down? No, it is not. Let us just hope that the local authorities will understand that, even if they are unable to grasp the larger political scenario, with China trying hard to attract the Tibetans back to Tibet.
(Writer: Claude Arpi ; Courtesy: The Pioneer)
The heroic stories of tenacious rural women scripting tales of success are great signs of a brighter tomorrow in the villages of India
In the last two decades, the gender landscape in rural India has been slowly greening and women are now on the cusp of a powerful social and political revolution. The harbinger of this change is a unique policy experiment in village-level governance that has brought transformative results for the weakest of the weak and the poorest of the poor: The village women. In 1993, India introduced the Panchayati Raj Act, mandating a three-tiered structure of local governance at the village, block and district levels with reservation of one-third of all posts in gram panchayats (village councils) at the bottom tier of India’s decentralised governance system, for women. The vision was that these women-headed councils would bring greater transparency and better governance in their villages. It revitalised an age-old system of rural local Government whose name “panchayat” is drawn from Sanskrit, meaning the council of five wise men.
This new law was a step towards the fruition of Mahatma Gandhi’s dreams of village-level self-governance with gender justice as a key pillar. Gandhi believed that, if implemented correctly, the Panchayati Raj system would alleviate the alienation of the common people from governance and also preclude the external intervention of higher-level civic officials, who might not be familiar with the concerns of local people. Earlier politics was considered a foul word and women were expected to keep a hygienic distance from it. However, development scientists and social activists now acknowledge that the modern development paradigm has a political salience and politics underpins all facets of development. It is politics which is the firing engine for all the cylinders of development. It is true that political power needs to be sanitised and has to be reinforced with ethical underpinnings in order to make it more benevolent. This can come about only when more educated and development-oriented individuals embrace politics as a critical arena for innovation and change. Politics is the fulcrum of governance and unless the quality of political timber is improved, governance will continue to limp.
Experience of this social and political experiment has shown that women are not just equal to the task but orientate public-good provision more towards the preferences of their gender, namely more water, health and roads. Though less politically-savvy and often only semi-illiterate, these women had an advantage in being actively mentored by the district bureaucracy. Several NGOs also designed programmes for skilling them in governance. Women face a host of difficulties handling political power: Cultural norms, social hierarchies and patriarchal practices — which together tend to favour and attract men and discourage the participation of women.
Several women who started their political careers as self-described “rubber stamp” officials are now asking questions about Budget allocations. They stride about in Government offices with polished informality sharing their concerns with officials in tones of supportiveness and also assertiveness. They are successfully challenging the traditional village male elite by defying petrified social codes of female bias and are now powerful aspirational symbols and role models. Women leaders today are more than just mouthpieces for their politically-savvy husbands. For most of them, reserved posts offer the only real opportunity to bring change to their communities. When these seats are coupled with new skills — from public speaking to development planning to budget management — they are better prepared to deliver development to their societies and negotiate within the political space that has opened for them. However, the path they have trodden after the initial euphoria of winning the elections has not been easy. There have been growing pains and many early entrants retreated, never to emerge again. The avalanche of social and cultural mores rained heavily on them. Although the resistance is whittling down, it is clear that achieving gender equality in leadership will require sustained policy actions that favour women over a long time.
The vision is truly not as romantic as many would like us to believe. But, as women have shown, they have all that is needed to ride out these storms. The men know this very well but they don’t want to concede that women possess the ability to be the better halves because they are afraid of losing their last refuge, politics.
In the long-term, the journey is going to be harder and tougher than policy wonks can imagine. The wait could potentially be eternal. But if bureaucrats can muster the will, they can succeed. They know from past lessons that they have the tools and they need to vigorously back reforms that can engender greater empowerment for women. For sustainable change to happen, women need to actively compete in the present political game. Legislation and policy pronouncements seldom penetrate the surface of social and political barriers. They are ultimately impotent against the grid of the established power structures inherent in most rural households and villages.
The great strength of democracy, according to Amartya Sen, lies in that, “it gives people in need a voice and, by so doing, plays a protective role against so many different forms of political and economic abuse”. The Panchayati Raj is just a beginning; it is only one step on the way, but it is the right step on the right ladder.
These women are reconfiguring gender and social dynamics and have started exploring their wider responsibilities as stakeholders as citizens of a polity. However, decentralisation is not easy. The skill levels in impoverished communities are very low. And, in a country where democracy has been established in a top-down manner, a feudal mindset may still prevail. The people may not be aware that the Government should be accountable to the people — not the other way around.
A lot of positive changes are coming in the better-governed villages. There are still large swathes where discriminatory traditions continue to dominate. Several factors constrain the effective participation of women leaders. Some of these relate to a patriarchal culture, which neither sees women as political entities nor allows them to develop their potential. The same cultural standards also prohibit women from envisioning themselves as political entities. Other related factors that constrain participation are a lack of basic familiarity of women with political governance and absence of legal literacy. Women need to be given adequate advocacy tools strengthening democratic engagement and gain control over local resources and influence over local governance. Village assemblies are a critical participatory institution in providing equal access to all members of the community to the deliberations and negotiations in local governance; but elite control of these bodies has prevented functional democracy from taking roots. It has been found that the average participants in such village assemblies are the less-poor households with the participation of the poor dwindling over the years. This is the reason why, in several remote and tribal pockets, Panchayat Raj has failed to enhance the social outcomes for most citizens.
The social pecking order of villages cannot be overturned easily and several challenges remain to fuller empowerment. Legitimately-elected women representatives remain vulnerable to manipulation and harassment and are often reduced to mere proxies, while the real decision-making authority remains with their husbands or power brokers from higher castes. There are also instances where a woman belonging to a Scheduled Caste or tribe has been elected as head of a panchayat but is at the mercy of her upper caste landlord in the village for her livelihood. In such cases, too, the reins of power and decision-making clearly lie elsewhere.
At the policy level, we must understand the structural impediments in the full evolution of Gram Panchayats as functional governance units remain. The Panchayati Raj Act created these bodies but did not endow them with various governance functions — like the financial authority on provision of education, health, sanitation and water. Instead the law simply enumerated the functions that could be transferred and left it to the State Legislature to devolve them. There has been very little devolution of authority and functions till now. Gram sabhas were expected to be the primary legislature of rural governance with responsibilities to catalyse local planning by conducting ‘needs assessment’ exercises and devising plans for development projects that would be aggregated at the panchayat level. When further aggregated and rationalised at the district level, these would become official inputs into the State Government’s annual budgeting process.
Gram sabhas did remain a pivotal institution in local planning; but had little real role in governance. Despite the noble intention, they have struggled to stay relevant. They continue to be plagued by low participation and frequent hijacking by influential interests and have not been able to mature into viable democratic units. The dip in popular participation and weak political will has had significant implications for the future of democratic decentralisation in India.
The heroic stories of tenacious women scripting tales of success are great signs of a brighter tomorrow. Women’s empowerment is a journey, not a fixed point that yields to simple policies.
(Writer: Moin Qazi ; Courtesy: The Pioneer)
Though Pakistan is unlikely to openly promote cross-border terror as long as the sword of FATF continues to hang over it, Islamabad would continue to back terrorism clandestinely
Despite intensive lobbying by Islamabad and cosmetic measures to convince the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) to take it off the grey list in which it was placed in June 2018, the international watchdog has once again placed Pakistan in the said list with a stern warning to be prepared to be placed in the blacklist if it does not complete the full action plan by June.
This was not the first time that Pakistan was being named and clubbed with countries like Ethiopia, Serbia, Sri Lanka, Syria, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia and Yemen. It had been similarly shamed in the past in 2008 and then again from 2012 to 2015. In June 2018, Pakistan was given an action plan, to be completed by October 2019, or face the risk of being blacklisted, the ultimate death knell for its shattered economy. The FATF’s reasoning is Pakistan’s “structural deficiencies” in anti-money laundering (AML) activities and combating financing of terrorism (CFT). However, Pakistan failed to implement the action plan to be able to negotiate an exit from the grey list. At the same time it successfully averted being Blacklisted with the support of China, Malaysia and Turkey and was given additional time to comply.
To understand the charter of FATF and why Pakistan is on its target list, it is necessary to understand the terms money laundering and terror financing. In simple terms, laundering pertains to disguising cash earned from a crime as funds earned through legitimate sources. The crime could be corruption, drug trafficking, fake currency, fraud or tax evasion. Terrorist financing involves collection of funds to support acts of terror or terrorist organisations. The key difference between the two is that, in money laundering, the source of funds has to be a crime. In the financing of terrorism, money may come from perfectly legitimate sources, such as donations from citizens, but the purpose has to be a crime. Pakistan has been charged with both and is accused of supporting terror groups like the Haqqani Network, Jaish-e-Mohammad, Lashkar-e-Toiba. Hizbul Mujahideen and the Taliban.
However, Islamabad denies this and plays the victim card. It quotes the Global Terrorism Index, 2017 by the Institute of Economics and Peace that ranks Pakistan as the fifth country most affected by terrorism, after Iraq, Afghanistan, Nigeria and Syria. Pakistan’s leadership feels that its placement in the grey list is far more political than financial. Nothing can be farther from the truth since Islamabad’s role as a fountainhead of terror has been exposed to the world on numerous occasions. Pakistan today is known the world over for not only producing global terrorists but also harbouring, training and financing various jihadi organisations, particularly those involved in cross-border terror against India and Afghanistan. Ever since its placement in the grey list, Pakistan has been seeing it as an attempt by the USA to put pressure on it to “do more” on issues related to terrorism, as had been openly demanded by the US President Donald Trump. Pakistan is also convinced that if the US can have it placed on the grey list, it can also make it easy for it to exit the list, if Islamabad is somehow able to contribute to American interests in the region. While it has been making cosmetic attempts to institute measures as per the plan of action suggested by the FATF, it has been concentrating more on lobbying and diplomacy to convince the US and other members through it, to remove it from the list of “not so good guys.”
In the absence of any visible and concrete measures to mend “structural deficiencies” in AML and CTF, it was widely believed that Pakistan would be blacklisted during its October 2019 plenary at the end of the 15-month notice. Due to its burgeoning debt and shattered economy Pakistan could ill-afford it. Pakistan was shocked when the FATF Asia-Pacific Group put it in the Blacklist in its meeting held in August 2019, when its members found that the country was non-compliant on 32 out of 40 parameters. Islamabad put its diplomatic machinery in action to garner the crucial three votes needed to prevent it from being blacklisted. With China in the chair, Pakistan felt assured of one vote. However, after Beijing agreed to list Masood Azhar as a global terrorist, it was widely believed that it would behave more maturely. But in the end China’s huge investment in Pakistan and the strategic relationship between the two nations tilted the balance in Islamabad’s favour. Ultimately, it succeeded in garnering the necessary three votes and continue in the grey list. Though it noted that Pakistan had addressed only five out of the 27 tasks given to it for AML and CTF, it asked Islamabad to act swiftly and complete the full action plan by February.
Since terrorism is an instrument of Pakistan’s national policy and the real power centre in the country is its Army which uses cross-border terrorism as part of its military strategy, it is well-nigh impossible for that country to divorce itself from terrorism. It once again doubled its lobbying and diplomatic efforts. Prime Minister Imran Khan dashed to the friendly member countries and the USA to garner support. This time it found the US to be more amenable than before, since it needed Pakistan’s assistance in Afghanistan and Iran. With China and the US on its side, Pakistan took a few measures including the arrest of Hafiz Saeed and custody of Azhar Masood. It got a shot in the arm when, during its three-day review meeting held in Beijing in January, the FATF noted that Pakistan had taken satisfactory steps against terror groups. It evaluated Islamabad’s compliance efforts in relation to AML and CTF as satisfactory. Member countries like the US, UK, Japan, Australia and New Zealand did not raise any concern this time. Pakistan’s game plan of successful lobbying at the cost of compliance was bearing fruit. The logic was simple. It was an election year in the USA and Trump needed Pakistan’s assistance. This appeared to have shaped the US’ stance to go soft on Pakistan during the February plenary in Paris. It accordingly convinced its allies and Pakistan, which was at one time facing the prospect of being blacklisted at the end of the October plenary, now began dreaming of an exit from the grey list also.
India, which knew the ground reality well as it has been the worst sufferer of Pak-sponsored terrorism, including money laundering and financing of the separatist movement in Kashmir, got a rude shock, as it was hoping that Pakistan would definitely be blacklisted. Having understood the US’ game plan, India began to act swiftly to minimise the danger by ensuring that Pakistan did not get off the grey list till its compliance was fully confirmed. New Delhi began to exert its influence to ensure that Pakistan was unable to garner the support of 15-16 member nations needed to remove it from the grey list. It provided dossiers and sufficient evidence to the FATF of Pakistan’s continued involvement in money laundering and terror financing. India was apprehensive that any such decision by the anti-terror body would provide oxygen to terrorist groups, leading to increase in terrorist activities in Jammu and Kashmir and Punjab, where Pakistan is desperately trying to revive militancy.
India keenly participated in the FATF plenary held in Paris which culminated on February 21. In order to ease the pressure on itself from the anti-terror body, Pakistan sentenced Hafiz Saeed for two terror crimes with the sentence to run concurrently a week before the plenary. While the US expressed satisfaction, India questioned Pakistan’s intent by pointing out the timing of the sentence and the fact that it was subject to appeal in the higher court. India also raised questions about Azhar Masood, Lakhvi and Dawood Ibrahim, who continue to enjoy the patronage of the Pakistani Government and roam freely. India also exposed Pakistan’s lie that Azhar Masood was “missing” by providing evidence that he was under Pakistan military’s safe custody at Bhawalpur.
Another area of concern for New Delhi was the fake Indian currency racket being run by Pakistan, as its prime interest is to promote espionage, destabilise the economy and finance terror. Hence, India continued to insist on complete compliance with the FATF action plan.
While Pakistan will aim to exit the grey list at the earliest, India must continue to press for total compliance. Despite, the FATF observing that Pakistan had largely addressed 14 of 27 action items, with varying levels of progress made on the rest of the plan, it decided to keep it on the grey list till June.
India is certainly disappointed with the outcome and Pakistan will take satisfaction from the fact that it has succeeded in avoiding being on the Blacklist. But one thing is certain, its strategy of lobbying at the cost of action has suffered a major setback and it has failed yet again. It will continue on the FATF grey list with its resultant repercussions. India can heave a sigh of relief for now since Pakistan is unlikely to openly support and promote cross-border terror as long as the sword of FATF continues to hang over its head. However it would continue to fuel unrest and back terrorism clandestinely.
India not only needs to keep its eyes and ears open but simultaneously up the diplomatic offensive against Pakistan to expose it to the international community. The risk of being blacklisted in June may restrain Pakistan to some extent but the prospect of continued support from China, Turkey and Malaysia along with tacit support from the US will encourage it to yet again depend more on lobbying than action. In the ultimate analysis, India will have to sort out cross-border terror from Pakistan on its own.
(Writer: Anil Gupta; Courtesy: The Pioneer)
After peaceful protests, the violence over CAA shows how polarities have now been weaponised politically
An ominous situation has been allowed to develop yet again in the national capital, rendering it unsafe, giving an impression of a rage-filled India at a time when a presidential visit is under way. Delhi’s north-east is now the new battleground over the pros and cons of a new citizenship law and in just three days, more than 10 deaths have been reported, more than 100 have been injured and a reign of terror continues with incidents of stone-pelting, torching of vehicles and houses. Democratic dissent is allowed and Delhi has shown how to keep it peaceful despite sit-ins. The citizenship protesters, who began the stir over the imposed classification of identities, were consistent in their single-mindedness to effect a change in civic discourse. Their resilience is no doubt politically uncomfortable but has inflammatory potential, too, one that is being encashed by the politics of the day and being swiftly turned into a communal war. Claims and counter-claims have been made about the protests being manufactured but will the blame-game change anything on the ground or will it compel the Government to tamp down tension? One of the loudest messages from the Delhi Assembly elections, where the BJP suffered a severe jolt, was that Indian voters reward those leaders who shun divisive politics. But the steep loss hasn’t forced a rethink in the BJP, which is now encouraging rabble-rousers to go all out in defending the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), which is pivoted on exclusion against the spirit of the Constitution, and though not in isolation, but in tandem with other profiling-based census, could legitimise the politics of otherisation. So there was Kapil Mishra, whose anti-CAA statements and videos did the rounds during the Delhi Assembly elections, egging on lumpens and encouraging hate rhetoric all over again. Such leaders have been so emboldened that they issued an ultimatum to the Delhi Police to clear the roads of anti-CAA protesters in the wake of Trump’s visit to India.
One expected the Delhi Police to recalibrate its approach in ensuring law and order but as has been the norm, it failed to restore calm. After a meeting with Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, Union Home Minister Shah assured him of every help, since police comes under his Ministry, but didn’t do anything to rein in flagrant party cadres. With a huge mandate, Kejriwal should not bother about his administrative powers but must use the Aam Aadmi Party’s (AAP’s) mohalla networks to address people’s concerns. That’s what is needed exactly till, of course, the Supreme Court takes the final call on the CAA. One hopes the national mindset isn’t poisoned till then.
(Courtesy: The Pioneer)
The Sena doesn’t want to burn bridges with either its State allies or the Central BJP leadership
Ever since the Maharashtra Aghadi Government assumed power as an unlikely coalition of divergent ideologies — the Shiv Sena, the National Congress Party (NCP) and the Congress — there has been much speculation about its lastability. Particularly, the BJP, which lost out the power race despite being the single largest party because of its refusal to accommodate the Shiv Sena, leaves no opportunity to rile up the inherent tensions in the alliance. Which is why Chief Minister and Shiv Sena leader Uddhav Thackeray’s flip-flop on some of the most contentious issues like the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and the National Population Register (NPR) feathers the split theory considering both the Congress and NCP are vociferously against them. But when both NCP chief Sharad Pawar and Shiv Sena leader Sanjay Raut have assured that the alliance government will last five years, it points to a rationalisation of politics at the grassroots level. So the three parties, realising each needs the other to stay relevant, have successfully dissociated the local contexts from the national one. And although they have been long-standing foes for over a quarter of a century over local issues, they are desperate to prop each other up to stay in governance.
The Shiv Sena, being ideologically on the Rightist end of the spectrum, cannot disown the moorings of what made it. It has already successfully rewired nationalism as a definition of Marathi pride. But not quite sure about its run in a convenient arrangement, it doesn’t want to exactly burn bridges with the top BJP leadership. To expect it to discard its Right-wing face completely would be wishful thinking. So though he had initial reservations on the CAA, Uddhav is siding with Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s interpretation of it not being against Indian Muslims. The NCP and the Congress are against the exclusionary intent of the CAA, which violates the Constitutional guarantee of equality of all religions. Similarly, Uddhav, while vociferously opposing the profiling-based National Register of Citizens (NRC), is going soft on the NPR, although that is largely being seen as a precursor to the NRC. By walking the thin line, Uddhav is also publicising that he is with the Centre on issues that wouldn’t hurt his State. Also, he probably wants to peg the Common Minimum Programme (CMP) on development rather than bringing in the national debate on Hindutva versus secularism. The illusion of calm within the Aghadi was blown off earlier with the Sena favouring an NIA probe into the Elgar Parishad case and NCP-Congress expressing strong dissatisfaction over it. His visit to Ayodhya and the Veer Savarkar issue was hugely discomforting for his partners, too. But such uneasy equations will continue and each party will clench their teeth and fists, knowing the importance of keeping the Government intact. The Sena knows the role of the Congress and the NCP in getting it the chief ministership. The NCP knows it can encash its role as the mediator from both sides. Letting go of the Government and risking the desertion by its regional leadership are the last mistakes the Congress would want to commit. If the alliance is to stay though, it is in the best interest of all three parties to stick to the CMP and not peak out of turn. Else, they could fall to the hawkish plans of the BJP, which loses no opportunity to embarrass the Sena among its core voters. And if they do not budge, they will turn the BJP’s dream of the Aghadi crumbling under its own weight into a reality. Unless its back channel diplomacies are making the Sena leaders have second thoughts.
No matter what the FATF says, India has to develop its own dynamic on the war on terror at a time of shifting alliances
Just when all the lobbying by Pakistan seemed to have softened up deciding powers at the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) — the global watchdog that tracks terror-funding States and can disqualify them from global aid — they have held themselves back, and rightly so, keeping our neighbour in the grey list. Though we have been lobbying hard, and had even at one stage argued convincingly enough for Pakistan to be blacklisted, its all-weather friends, China, Turkey and Malaysia, brought it back from the brink. It needed the support of 13 countries to get out of the grey list, and though it has taken a few compliant correctives, they weren’t proof enough. It may have finally imprisoned the 26/11 mastermind of the Mumbai attacks Hafiz Saeed and even booked his charities through which he funded money but is yet to cap the money trail to other terrorists or prosecute the financiers. Besides, it could deliver only on 13 of the 29-point action plan it had promised to implement during the last session. It now must show improvements in the next four months. For India, this comes as a reprieve considering at the last regional meeting of the FATF, it was the lone voice of protest with the US, EU and even Japan appearing convinced about Pakistan’s efforts to curb terrorism. But the US, while endorsing India’s position on Kashmir at the UN and proscribing Jaish chief Masood Azhar as a global terrorist, is too invested in stitching up a deal with the Taliban before it exits Afghanistan. That explains the clean chit in Beijing and even the acknowledgement of Pakistan’s “great efforts” at course correction. The US also thinks that freezing aid to Pakistan might just aggravate the economic instability in the region and have a cascading impact on politics. The US also needs a trade deal with India, which is why it will not overtly hurt our position vis-a-vis the FATF. China, which is increasingly looking at a strategic partnership with India while being Pakistan’s ally, has devised its own workaround. It now wants a renegotiation of the FATF brief itself, saying the grouping had no business to blacklist nations but should help them counter terrorist funding and networks. India must realise that the shades of the FATF list mean nothing in terms of threat levels ever since the blacklist was diluted as a “call for action” and the grey list was downgraded to “other monitored jurisdictions.” Besides, the FATF has just put Pakistan on an extended timeline to fulfil the technical criteria and not been exactly censorious about it. For our neighbour, this means a radical overhaul of its terror economy as it has to show visible proof of penalties against terror-financing, including sanctions and controls on international transactions.
In the end, India must remember that global penalties won’t impact Pakistan’s proxy war with India. Even while staying on the FATF watch, there has been no cessation of terrorist infiltration into Kashmir. Pakistan will continue raising Kashmir. India has to evolve its own dynamic regarding terror instead of focussing solely on isolating it diplomatically. For the fluidity of geopolitics means that each nation would work out its tactical advantage in an evolving context and might not prioritise India’s concerns. And global politics is but transactional and revolving stakes mean shifting alliances.
(Courtesy: The Pioneer)
FREE Download
OPINION EXPRESS MAGAZINE
Offer of the Month