The CPI(M)'s decision to ally with a Maulvi-led party in Bengal is ironic. Is the party trying to make Marx stand on his head?
The Congress and the CPI(M)’s decision to ally with the Indian Secular Front (ISF) in West Bengal has scandalised many. Despite its paradoxical nomenclature, the ISF is headed by Pirzada Abbas Siddiqui, a cleric of the Furfura Sharif shrine in the State. It is, however, not a novel experiment for the Congress, which catapulted the Ulema into mass politics during the Khilafat movement in the 1920s.
However, for the CPI(M), Siddiqui appears a strange bedfellow. The communists, in principle, abhor any transaction with religious groups. We have all grown up hearing the Marxist adage “religion is the opium of the people”. However, it is true that MN Roy formed the Communist Party of India (in exile) in Tashkent with a group of Mohajirs (those who tried to emigrate from India to Afghanistan, the nearest Dar-ul-Islam) at the onset of the Khilafat movement. “Most of them transferred their fanatical allegiance from Islam to communism,” Roy wrote. One doesn’t know how much of his claim was actually true. However, there was at least an attempt at communist conversion.
The instant case is different, where the alliance partner could retain its essentially religious character. This brand of secularism might be tolerated by the Congress, which can form alliance with the Muslim League and the Shiv Sena with equal ease. While secularism for the Congress is only self-certification of non-communalism, for the CPI(M) it must also be strict non-religiosity.
In this regard, one should recapitulate an episode in India’s parliamentary history. It was the undivided CPI which had sought a ban on political influence of the Catholic Church in India. While one might expect such bravado from the BJP (or its predecessor Bharatiya Jana Sangh), they actually took no such step. It was actually the communists who seriously questioned the political role of the Church.
On April 1, 1960, CPI leader T Nagi Reddy (Anantapur) introduced a private member’s Bill, viz; ‘Catholic Church Premises and Ecclesiastical Order (Restriction of Political Activity) Bill’, in the Lok Sabha. The Bill, originally registered in the name of his party colleague TB Vittal Rao, was an outspoken document. The statement of objects and reasons stated: “It has been noticed that the Catholic Church and its ecclesiastical personnel are engaging in political activities. This is contrary to the concepts of a secular State. It has become necessary to restrict such political activities in the paramount interests of the secular State. Restriction of such political activities is also provided for by Article 25(2)(a) of the Constitution.”
The Bill had its origin in the politico-spiritual power struggle between the Catholic Church and the CPI in Kerala and Andhra Pradesh in the 1950s. The Church was issuing edicts against communism as a political ideology and excommunicating those Christians who had joined the CPI or Revolutionary Socialist Party.
Sadhan Gupta, a communist leader from Bengal, flagged the ex-communication threat as alarming. While speaking in the Lok Sabha on March 14, 1960, he did not contest the right of the clergies to dissuade people from voting for the communists. However, he rated the excommunication threat as dangerous to the morale of a Christian.
Gupta observed: “To a devout Catholic, Hell means much more than to a devout Hindu. Among Hindus, there is a spirit of penal reforms in Hell; a term in Hell is not indefinite; after five years, 10 years or 50 years or 100 years or even 1,000 years, he can have the life of a worm or a dog or, perhaps, a man and then go back to whatever he deserves…. That is not the Catholic doctrine. If a Catholic does not secure the aid of the Church in this life, he is condemned to be eternally in Hell. That is a very serious matter for a devout Catholic.”
Neither Reddy nor Gupta was critical of Christianity in general. Yet, they showed the courage to take on an ecclesiastical institution which could issue a spiritual veto against an individual’s political conviction.
The Gupta-Reddy episode has a special lesson for the present-day CPI(M). Can they accommodate a theology diametrically opposite to their godless ideal? The February 28 rally at Kolkata’s Brigade Parade Ground is already reminding some people of Comrade Jyoti Basu’s decision to be present at the Direct Action Day rally convened by the Muslim League on August 16, 1946. The end of the rally marked the beginning of the Great Calcutta Killing (August 16-18), 1946.
Karl Marx, in his article titled ‘Declaration of War — On the History of Eastern Question’ (New York Daily Tribune; April 15, 1854), makes no bones of Islamic theology. He writes: “The Koran and the Mussulman legislation emanating from it reduce the geography and ethnography of the various people to the simple and convenient distinction of two nations and of two countries; those of the Faithful and of the Infidels. The Infidel is “harby,” i.e. the enemy. Islamism proscribes the nation of the Infidels, constituting a state of permanent hostility between the Mussulman and the unbeliever.” Will the CPI(M) “excommunicate” Marx to appease Siddiqui?
(The writer is an author and independent researcher based in New Delhi. The views expressed are personal.)
Caution dampened neither exuberance nor devotion in Isha’s all-night Mahashivratri celebrations, a spectacular display of music and dance that was interspersed with immersive meditative experiences in the presence of Adiyogi. “Let this night not just be a night of wakefulness, let this night be a night of awakening for you,” Sadhguru said while speaking about the immense spiritual possibilities of the auspicious night.
A smattering of a live audience, a fraction of what Isha hosts annually attended the all-night event in person. With strict distancing norms, hygiene protocols and medical screening procedures, this was one of the most cautious and unusual Mahashivratris at Isha. But it did little to dampen the celebratory mood of the audience, volunteers and performers whose lung power and high-voltage energy belied their numbers. Sadhguru entered to a roaring welcome.
The event was preceded by the Linga Bhairavi Yatra to Nandi at the Isha Yoga Center. Fiery and passionate, the Yatra is a representation of the Devi’s qualities and culminates in the Maha Arati. The Yatra was followed by the Panchbhuta Kriya performed by Sadhguru. The ritual helps to better integrate the five elements into one’s body. Sadhguru planted a sapling and lit the Mahayoga Yagna that symbolizes his wish and Isha’s mission to bring one drop of spirituality to everyone on the planet. With the lighting of the Yagna, millions of Isha volunteers (Yoga Veeras) pledge to teach a simple form of Yoga that can be easily integrated into one’s lifestyle, to as many people as possible.
It was then time for some serious fun as a gala cultural menu unfolded at the venue led by Isha’s homegrown music and dance troupes – Sounds of Isha and students of Isha Samskriti. With an impressive roll-call of artists; discourses, chants and meditation sessions with Sadhguru; and the dazzling Adiyogi Divya Darshanam on the cards, this Mahashivratri at Isha probably kept more people awake online than in the past.
The Midnight Meditation with Sadhguru lived up to its promise as did Sadhguru’s discourse and Q&A. Artists performing through the night seemed to be infused with superhuman energy that spilled over to their charged audience. Staying within their safe zones, performers and audiences alike nevertheless made a memorable night of it. The Thappu drummers worked up a rhythmic frenzy that proved irresistible for the enthusiastic audience. Parthiv Gohil & his troupe, regulars at Isha’s Mahashivratri celebrations, jammed with familiarity and ease with Sounds of Isha. Sandeep Narayan’s soulful and intense renditions drew much cheering from an appreciative audience. Kutle Khan, Kabir Cafe, Mangli and Anthony Dass added versatility and panache to ensure there was never a dull moment. Adiyogi Divya Darshanam, the spectacular sound and light show, left the audience spellbound. Keeping with tradition, Sadhguru felicitated farmers and made offerings to their bedecked bovine partners who seemed to have soaked in the celebratory mood as well.
The event was live streamed and telecast across 100 channels. Apart from English and 11 Indian languages, it was also streamed in Nepali, Russian, French, Portuguese, Traditional Chinese and Simplified Chinese reaching a worldwide audience of millions of viewers. The event was held in strict adherence to government directives on social gatherings. All participants were required to produce a COVID-negative test report to be eligible to participate in person. In addition, temperature checks, medical screening, masks and social distancing were made mandatory for the event. Isha volunteers made elaborate pre-determined seating arrangements which the participants were required to comply with for the duration of the event.
The advanced industrial economies are set to move towards zero per capita emissions by 2050. India should try to achieve it by 2047
The prognosis on averting disaster due to global warming had been very bleak till last year. Global warming should be restricted to 1.5° Celsius and the commitments under the Paris Agreement aiming at 2° Celsius were inadequate and these too were not achieved.
Former US President Donald Trump took the country out of the Paris Accord even though the International Panel for Climate Change (IPCC) had been highlighting that time was running out for mankind.
However, the situation changed with President Joe Biden as he made tackling climate change one of his major challenges. On his first day in office, he decided that the US would rejoin the Paris Agreement.
To fight global warming, governments were earlier expected to act by spending more of the taxpayer’s money or by getting consumers to pay more for the transition to a fossil fuel-free energy economy.
This was politically difficult. Fortunately, technology has evolved dramatically in the last decade and a net carbon neutral economy now appears both technically feasible as well as affordable. Biden is positioning this energy transition as one which would strengthen economic recovery in the US, create millions of jobs and bring greater prosperity.
Therefore, there is now some cause for optimism as Biden and Prime Minister Narendra Modi have agreed to work together on climate change.
The US and the European Union (EU) are moving towards becoming net carbon neutral by 2050. France and the UK have already made this their national goal. The key drivers of this transition would be to first have electricity generation only from renewable sources, giving up the use of coal, oil and gas for producing electricity altogether.
The Biden campaign had envisaged achieving the target in 15 years, while Germany is already getting around half of its electricity from renewable sources. The sun and wind have become the cheapest sources of electricity generation and the costs of electricity storage are also falling rapidly with batteries being the front runner for storage today.
The next major transition would be to get all transport to become fossil fuel-free. Electric vehicles have arrived and they are cheaper to use on a per km life cycle cost basis. With all electricity coming from renewable sources and all transport becoming electric, over two-third reduction in carbon emissions would take place. Norway has taken the lead and would permit the sale of only electric or other zero emission vehicles from 2025. The UK has decided to implement it by 2030.
Most industries can use electricity from renewable sources and hydrogen instead of coal and gas. However, technological challenges remain for substituting fossil fuels in some industries. But given the progress that has already been made, there is cause for optimism.
India has surprised the world by its achievements in increasing the share of renewables. The initial target of 20 gigawatt (GW) of solar power capacity by 2022 has been raised to 100 GW. As many as 90 GW of renewable capacity has already been achieved and its share in electricity generation is about to cross 10 per cent. A much higher goal of 450 GW has now been adopted. India is set to achieve more than its Paris commitments.
A study by The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI) has found that raising the share of renewables in electricity generation to 40 per cent is the least cost option for India. Domestic manufacturing of solar panels and batteries has been included in the Production Linked Incentive (PLI) Scheme, hence being self-reliant at the technology front should be feasible in this decade.
A ‘Hydrogen Mission’ has been announced, too, and we could position ourselves on the frontiers of the hydrogen economy.
Our traditional position was to adopt a low carbon growth trajectory and ensure that our per capita emissions would not cross those of the developed countries as they decarbonised their economies.
The advanced industrial economies are now set to move towards zero per capita emissions by 2050. The implication is that we should also aim at having zero per capita emissions by then. Going by our extraordinary success, this could well be feasible and affordable. India could leapfrog as it is now doing in many sectors.
We can assume a leadership role and choose to move shoulder to shoulder with the US, Europe and Japan in saving ourselves and mankind. It would be altogether befitting if we set ourselves the goal of becoming net carbon neutral by 2047, the centenary of our Independence. That would be a fitting tribute to our nation.
The writer is Distinguished Fellow, TERI. The views expressed are personal.
The Govt should boost ecotourism and promote local arts and handicraft to improve Khajuraho’s economy
The UNESCO world heritage site Khajuraho was in the news recently for hosting the world-famous Indian classical dance festival. A treat for the senses at any given time, what made the festival even more special this time was the fact that it was held under the shadow of the Coronavirus pandemic and was organised in the temple complex after a gap of 44 years. The Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) gave special permission to the Madhya Pradesh (MP) tourism department for this. Consequently, the temple complex resonated with the sound of music as the dancers and their troupes performed various Indian classical dances that ranged from Kathak to Kathakali; Kuchipudi to Odissi and Mohiniyattam. The Khajuraho group of temples was built by the Chandela rulers of Bundelkhand in their capital Khajuraho between 885-1050 AD. These Nagara-style Hindu and Jain temples spread over an area of six sq km are a prime example of North Indian art and temple architecture. The temples were built from locally-available sandstone in interlocking style with a granite foundation. There were 85 temples in the area but now only 25 stand as the rest were destroyed during the Sultanate period.
However, this unique temple town was not widely known until 1950 when one foreign journalist made it famous. After that there was no looking back as tourists began flocking to the area. The spurt in tourism resulted in the local economy and the infrastructure growing exponentially. Now there are good roads and other infrastructure like five star and budget hotels along with good connectivity.
In the last 10 years, the tiny town of Khajuraho has grown in prosperity with almost ever family in the area involved in tourism and allied businesses. During 2018-19 more than 60,000 foreign and 3,61,594 domestic tourists visited Khajuraho and almost each household benefitted economically. However, the ban on international travel due to the covid-19 pandemic in 2020 has left the local economy in tatters as the flow of foreign tourists stopped. Even domestic travellers became scarce as train, bus and regional air services were suspended due to the countrywide hard lockdown and all shops, cinema halls, restaurants, bars and hotels were closed. Consequently, staff from these establishments and the local people, especially the local craftsmen and vendors selling their wares to tourists, were rendered jobless. The festival was a means for the Government of MP to revive the State’s sinking tourism and hotel industry. It was also used to expose the visitors to the rich cultural traditions of Bundelkhand. There were exhibitions on local art and craft forms, a dialogue on arts, a fair on indigenous arts, films focusing on art, artists and art traditions, an exhibition of terracotta and ceramic-ware and a Bundeli food festival too.
While these are good endeavours to boost the economy, the ASI which maintains the temple complex needs to restore the temple architecture to the original style and not the way they are doing now with cement and mortar. It is good that the ASI is creating more infrastructure for visitors like toilets and more entrances, but it has to be in harmony with the architecture of the place. Hopefully, tourism will pick up once the covid situation improves and the Government must promote it in cooperation with the Tourism Ministry and embassies abroad and hold road shows. Till that happens, the Centre and State Government should announce some relief for the people engaged in tourism. The MP Government should boost ecotourism and promote local arts and handicraft among other things to improve the local economy.
(The writer is Chairman, Centre for Resource Management and Environment. The views expressed are personal.)
India and Pak should sign a formal ceasefire pact with strict protocols to check infiltration, cross-border terrorism, narco-terrorism and ceasefire violations
An unexpected announcement just 24 hours prior to the eve of the second anniversary of the Balakot air strike on February 26, 2019, that had brought two nuclear neighbours to the brink of war, brought cheers on both sides of the Line of Control (LoC). The joint statement by India and Pakistan pertaining to cessation of ceasefire violations, which had peaked beyond 5,000 in the preceding year, was justifiably welcomed by dwellers on both sides of the border. However, the telephonic consensus reached between the two Director-Generals of Military Operations (DGMOs) is being wrongly reported as a “Ceasefire Agreement.” It is in fact nowhere near an agreement as per international protocols, it is just an announcement as no one has signed on the dotted line.
The announcement came in the wake of the statement made by the Pakistan Chief of Army Staff General Qamar Javed Bajwa on February 3. He had said, “It is time to extend a hand of peace in all directions.” His statement was hailed by Pakistan’s Foreign Office as reflective of the country’s desire for peace and security in the region. The statement surprised many because it came at a time when the diplomatic ties between the two countries were at the lowest and Pakistan’s Prime Minister Imran Khan had announced that there would be no negotiations with India till the restoration of Article 370 in Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) by the latter.
Thus, the offer of honouring a ceasefire and cessation of ceasefire violations from the DGMO of Pakistan Army confirmed yet again that peace on the LoC and the foreign policy of Pakistan are decided not in Islamabad (the seat of political power) but in Rawalpindi (the seat of military power). It has also established the fact that among the “3M” troika of mullah, militants and military that rules Pakistan, the military yields the maximum power.
What is perplexing defence analysts is the reason for a sudden U-turn by the Pakistani military which survives at home on the basis of an anti-India bogey created through the notion that India is an existential threat and the Pak Army is the nation’s sole saviour. Has Pakistan lost the battle in J&K and realised the futility of meddling in its affairs? Was Pakistan under any obligation to China to keep the LoC active in support of the standoff in Eastern Ladakh and now that the disengagement between the People's Liberation Army (PLA) and the Indian Army has taken place in the most volatile Pangong Tso sector, Islamabad has also been asked by Beijing to go easy? Is the American decision under President Joe Biden to not abandon Afghanistan in a hurry upsetting Pakistani calculations? One immediate trigger which comes to mind is the valiant response of the Indian Army to Chinese belligerence in Eastern Ladakh. The professionalism and mettle displayed by the Indian Army not only surprised the PLA and the Chinese Communist Party’s leadership but its all-time ally Pakistan as well. Pakistan has realised the futility of competing with India and its military might. Coupled with this is the strong international support garnered by New Delhi through its subtle diplomacy, resulting in a bitter experience for Pakistan where even the majority Muslim nations refused to side with it on the issue of Kashmir.
The latest move could also be a ruse to get the much-needed breather to improve its defences. The sudden change in the mindset of Pakistan Army is very difficult to digest, while on the Indian side other than the desire to have peaceful relations with its neighbours, there appears to be no other visible indicator.
The Indian Government has been consistent in its stand of Pakistan divorcing itself from cross-border terror and dismantling all terror-related infrastructure. No such indicators have emanated from Pakistan and launch pads are full, infiltration attempts continue, jihadi training camps are being re-established under a new organisation called the Tehreek-e-Lebek. The cosmetic actions taken by Islamabad against the established terror leadership to dodge the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) are not very significant and it has decided to keep Pakistan in the ‘grey list’ till June. All in all, Pakistan still continues with terrorism as an instrument of State policy and has not taken any serious measures to divorce itself from terrorism that could please India.
The statement of Imran Khan’s advisor on security affairs, Moeed Yusuf, coming on the heels of Gen Bajwa’s statement did give a slight indication of what was brewing in Pakistan when he said, “If you want peace, we have to move forward. If we want to move forward, everybody has to be rational and not ideological.” But his statement immediately after the announcement of the ceasefire claiming it as a “win-win” situation for Pakistan, denies all logic and puts a question mark on Islamabad’s intent. Will the current consensus be any different from similar exercises on numerous occasions in the past which after a brief lull had been violated by Pakistan with impunity? The 2003 ceasefire, which was also not an agreement, lasted the longest: For five years. The 2003 ceasefire was announced unilaterally by the then Pakistan Prime Minister on the eve of Eid-al-Fitr and was received positively by then Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee, a great votary of peace between the two neighbours. But unfortunately, the agreement was not formalised and it could also last for five years only because it was backed by the leaders of both the nations.
Plus, it had the approval of Pakistan Army because of the humiliating defeat it suffered at Kargil and because the military was shifting the focus towards Afghanistan through Taliban insurgency. Such attempts have always remained fragile in view of the absence of a structured protocol to ensure their enforcement.
An almost identical statement was made by the two DGMOs in May 2018 as well. But it lasted only for a few months and the LoC became volatile once again after the Pulwama terror attack and the subsequent Balakot air strike by India.
Efforts made by Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif in 2015 did not find a favourable response from India on two counts. First, Islamabad wanted the ceasefire to be monitored by the United Nations Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan, which was not acceptable to New Delhi since it violated the spirit of the Shimla Agreement. Second, India insisted on Pakistan proving its sincerity by dismantling all terror infrastructure, to which Islamabad showed no inclination.
But times have changed now. India has successfully exposed Pakistan as a fountainhead of terror and it is globally recognised as such. Islamabad’s isolation on the world stage has compelled it to act against terror on its soil. The FATF’s role in compelling Pakistan to abandon terror is also critical. The downward spiral in the country’s economy and its realisation of the need for peaceful coexistence with India are drivers of a mindset change in the Pakistani establishment.
India should now go ahead and sign a formal ceasefire agreement with strict protocols to check infiltration, cross-border terrorism, narco-terrorism, ceasefire violations including drone dropping or tunnelling, attack on civil areas and maintenance of peace and tranquillity. This agreement, if proved successful, could become the stepping stone for a lasting peace between the two neighbours. In international relations there are no permanent friends or foes, only permanent national interests. Peace in the subcontinent is in the national interest of both countries. Pakistan has to accept that the ‘non-zero sum game’ approach with India is in its best interest while New Delhi will have to mould itself to play the key role of an elder brother.
The author is a Jammu-based political commentator, columnist, security and strategic analyst. The views expressed are personal.
Poignant images of a nun trying to save protesters in Myanmar tell a story, as all great pictures do
There are extraordinary moments in history that etch themselves on film rolls, from where they are conveyed by sight to the mind and leave a lasting imprint. But such instances are separated by years, or even decades, for catching these on film is a matter of perfect timing, positioning and an element of luck. One such picture has recently surfaced from the north Myanmar town of Myitkyina, where large-scale protests are taking place against last month’s coup by the nation’s military. It shows a nun sitting on her knees in the Buddhist-dominated country, pleading with the heavily armed police to stop shooting the unarmed protesters. Identified as Sister Ann Rose Nu Tawng, she is seen speaking to two policemen who are also kneeling in front of her, apparently in deference. Ultimately, however, she did not succeed. But that’s just the backstory; our focus here is how powerful images of even everyday, mundane incidents can have a wide-ranging impact in shaping global opinion about an issue.
There are several cases in point. Who can forget Raghu Rai’s iconic picture, ‘Burial of an Unknown Child’, which brought the horrors of Bhopal’s midnight gas tragedy in full focus of the world? Ditto, the ‘Tank Man’, which is the nickname of an unidentified Chinese man who challenged a column of tanks in Tiananmen Square in 1989. Then there are the heart-rending images of three-year-old Syrian boy Alan Kurdi, lying face down on a beach after drowning in the Mediterranean Sea in the hope of getting asylum in Europe. But the most hair-raising and distressing of these tales belongs to Kevin Carter, who shot ‘The Vulture and the Little Girl’ in Sudan and won the Pulitzer Prize for Feature Photography in 1994. The picture showed a vulture waiting patiently for the frail, famine-stricken child (it was known later that it was a boy), collapsed to the ground and with face pressed to the scorching earth, to die so that the bird could feast on it. Depressed, Carter took his own life four months after winning the Pulitzer but the boy is reported to have eventually survived. In this age and time when people don’t have the time, inclination or attention to go through articles in the long form, however beautifully these may be written, an expressive picture is worth a lot more than the space it is printed on or the pixels it comprises. After all, they don’t say “a picture is worth a thousand words” for nothing.
The AAP Govt plans to spend public money in other States, ostensibly to increase its footprint
A mere Rs 90 crore of the proposed Rs 69,000 crore, just 0.13 per cent, is the Delhi Government’s planned outlay for patriotic activities in its ‘Deshbhakti Budget’, the annual financial statement for 2021-22. Imbibing the figures, one might wonder by what yardstick can it be termed “patriotic” and whether there is such a thing like “non-Deshbhakti Budget”? The Arvind Kejriwal-led Government will spend Rs 45 crore of the Rs 90 crore earmarked for “Deshbhakti” activities for installing 500 high-mast Tricolours across the Capital. It will keep the sentiments of patriotism and national pride alive among Delhiites, argues Finance Minister Manish Sisodia. True, in a country where nationalistic fervour often transforms into jingoism, and sloganeering and flag-hoisting are considered a litmus test of one’s patriotism, a Government making it the central theme of its Budget should not surprise anyone. However, what prompted the Government to keep nationalism at the helm is the moot question, the answers to which are implicit in the financial spreadsheet of the AAP Government. These nationalistic activities include a curriculum on patriotism in schools, organising cultural events on the lives of Bhagat Singh and Babasaheb Ambedkar and appointing yoga instructors in community parks. While presenting the Budget, Sisodia said that these “nationalistic initiatives” will be held not just in Delhi but across India.
Does it behove a Government to spend part of its Budget in other States? Well, it is perfectly in tune with the AAP’s ambition to expand beyond Delhi. In pursuit of its ambition, the party is striking the very note that its arch-rival, the BJP, has been accused of hitting till now: “Deshbhakti”. The BJP came to power at the Centre in the 2014 Lok Sabha elections riding the wave of nationalism and the emotion paid it rich dividends in 2019, too. The Congress, which had played a prominent role in the Freedom Movement, was voted to power for several decades following India’s Independence. An entire generation and many subsequent ones were swayed by the idea that many leaders of the ‘Grand Old Party’ gave up their lives to break away from the shackles of colonialism and that the nation can progress only under the Congress’ rule. However, slowly and gradually, this notion turned into disillusionment, thanks to the widespread corruption within the ranks of the Congress party and its Government. Further, “historic blunders” by its leadership over the years cost the party dear. Political pundits opine that the BJP has filled this void by milking nationalism. Now, the AAP seems to be planning to beat the saffron party at its own game. The think-tank of the BJP must be putting their heads together to find an antidote for the AAP’s “nationalism” and also to convince people that its brand of nationalism is superior to the AAP’s patriotism. On the other hand, the Kejriwal-led party has certainly taken a giant leap in trying to impress voters in the name of “Deshbhakti” but the latter must exercise prudence. We cannot let politicos fool us forever.
As nationalism started replacing religion, the concept sprouted and it gradually became important to treat all citizens as equals
The birth of secularism may be owed to what Martin Luther and John Calvin perceived as Vatican imperialism. Each year, 3,00,000 gold pieces had to be sent from the German-speaking areas to Rome. This, as the reformers saw, for no benefit to the Germans. In fact, they suspected that the gold was mostly misused in luxuries indulged in by the senior priests at the Vatican.
Nevertheless, Christianity vaguely provided the ideology to the monarchies in Europe. At the time, meaning the 16th and 17th centuries, neither capitalism nor Marxism nor even fascism had been theorised. Therefore, when the French Revolution broke out in 1789, there were three Houses of the National Assembly; the Lords or Counts, the Commons or the Merchants, and the Abbots and Bishops. The Church owned up to a third of the farming land.
As nationalism began to provide an alternative to religion, the concept of secularism sprouted and gradually became important so that all citizens could be treated as equals. As a theology, or rather non-theology, secularism is an Abrahamic need. All the three religions that treat Abraham as the first prophet, begin with God, then provide a detailed prescription of how to lead life and, in the early times, ended with slaves and how to treat them.
There was thus so much of religion in the social sphere and, in Islam, even in political life that secularism is necessary to neutralise this influence of faiths and enable civil society and democracy to function. In some Islamic countries, the Constitutions begin by ascribing the sovereignty to Allah the Merciful. This is the 1973 document of Pakistan. The earlier ones, I believe, also had the same provision. How can secularism or democracy coexist in such a Constitution?
“Whereas sovereignty over the entire Universe belongs to Almighty Allah alone, and the authority to be exercised by the people of Pakistan within the limits prescribed by Him is a sacred trust.” This is how Pakistan’s Constitution begins.
Before going further, we need to record a modern definition of secularism. The old one was merely the separation of the Church from the State. Bernard Stasi was commissioned by the French Government of Jacques Chirac to report on what precisely is secularism. The last was defined in the French Constituent of 1905 when the country became strictly secular. To quote Stasi briefly: Freedom of conscience; Equality in law for spiritual and religious belief; and Neutrality of political power.
In other words, there are in any modern State three sets of relations: (a) Religion and the individual; (b) the State and the individual; and (c) the State and religion.
The State is excluded from the relationship at (a) above. In (b), the State views the individual as a citizen and not as a member of a religious group. The implication of (c) is that religion and the State function in two separate areas of human activity. Donald Smith has compared the above relations as three sides of a triangle. And the integrity of (a) and (b) is largely determined by the third relationship which separates them. Therefore, for any State to function as a secular State, it is of the utmost importance that there is a wall of separation between the State and the Church.
The French law had attempted to implement these principles. It did not abolish the wearing of either Jewish skull caps or Muslim headscarves. All that it had ordained was that the students attending Government schools or employees working in Government offices must not display religious symbols of a conspicuous nature, which would include a large cross. There is no restriction on wearing any form of dress or display of any religious symbols in the country at large.
The State, however, has to maintain absolute neutrality between one religion and the other. The French insistence on secularism or the absolute separation of religion from the State goes back to December 1905 when a Republican law was passed by the National Assembly. Its Article 1 assures the liberty of conscience. It guaranteed free exercise of religious beliefs. The only restrictions were decreed in the interest of public order.
Messrs Pracha and Jaffrelot, in the former’s article in this journal of March 1, developed a creative memory while claiming that Sir Syed Ahmad Khan formed the Muslim League. He did not. What he did form was the Aligarh Muslim University. It is no use bringing him into a discussion on secularism for, in 1887 and 1888 at Meerut and Lucknow, he declared Hindus and Muslims were separate nations. Sir Syed was exclusively a Muslim leader. In the summer of 1906, 35 eminences led by Sir Aga Khan formed a delegation to submit a memorandum to the Viceroy at Simla. In December 1906 at Dacca (now Dhaka), the All India Muslim League was formed. To get local support, Nawab Salimullah was given a loan of £10,00,000 by the Viceroy. There was nothing secular about Muslim politics before or after the Partition.
The only occasion when a secular tune was played in Pakistan was by the Qaid-e-Azam on August 11, 1947, in his address to the Constituent Assembly. He said Hindus, Muslims and others can pray freely but they all are henceforth Pakistanis first.
(The writer is a well-known columnist and an author. The views expressed are personal.)
There is no evidence of community spread of P.1 in other countries yet, but it is only a matter of time
If I were a world dictator, I would immediately place Brazil under total quarantine: Nobody gets in, nobody comes out. And I would keep it isolated until they arrest and jail President Jair Bolsonaro, impose a strict countrywide lockdown for at least two months and vaccinate everybody in the country (all 2,13,584,556 of them). And then we’ll see. They’d have to lock Bolsonaro up first because he flatly refuses to do any kind of lockdown. He also regards vaccines as sissy and will not support a national programme to vaccinate the population. Some State Governors are trying to buy vaccines for their own local populations, but he publicly berates them as cowards for worrying about “a little flu.” Bolsonaro is Donald Trump on stilts and is largely responsible for Brazil’s sky-high Covid-19 death rate: More than a quarter-million dead. The US still holds the lead with half a million deaths — 1,600 per million compared to Brazil’s 1,250 per million — but the US’ Covid death rate is falling fast since President Biden took over, whereas Brazil’s is still rocketing up. Because Brazil’s infection rate is so high, it is an ideal pressure-cooker for new and sometimes more dangerous versions of the Coronavirus. It already has two named variants of concern. The more recent and more worrisome one, P.1, probably emerged in Manaus, and is now rampant across the Brazilian Amazon. P.1 is also starting to move out into the rest of the world. Six cases got off the same plane from Brazil in London recently, causing a nationwide scare until they were all tracked down.
What makes it so frightening is that it spreads twice as fast as earlier Covid versions and it seems able to reinfect people who have already had the virus. If it can do that, it can probably also get around the immunity conferred by existing vaccines. There is no evidence of community spread of P.1 in other countries yet but it is only a matter of time unless people stop travelling to and from Brazil. And what does Jair Bolsonaro say? As Brazil recorded its highest-ever Covid death toll last Thursday, he said: “Stop whining. How long are you going to keep crying about it? How much longer will you stay at home and close everything? No one can stand it anymore. We regret the deaths, but we need a solution.” And his “solution” is to man up, accept half a million or even a million deaths, and to impose that solution on everybody else in the world too, because he’s certainly not going to shut foreign travel down. Bolsonaro cannot be reasoned with and Brazilians cannot really be expected to remove him. Like the sane American majority under Trump, they’d rather endure the madman’s blunders and crimes until the end of his term than use force against him and wreck the Constitution. But if P.1 spreads, that could mean that everybody else in the world gets lockdowns until the end of the year at least.
Nobody is going to invade Brazil to remove Bolsonaro, although he does pose a big, very real threat. But what everybody else can do is quarantine Brazil. No national or international law stops other countries from banning flights coming out of Brazil from landing on their territory. So do it. Now. No exceptions. Happily, there are very few heavily travelled road routes out of Brazil and the country’s neighbours have every incentive to shut them down. Maritime trade could continue, so long as every ship leaving Brazil spends at least two weeks at sea before calling at another port. Even air cargo could be allowed, so long as no passengers are allowed and air crew are strictly quarantined. Nobody wants to punish Brazilians, who are suffering under Bolsonaro already. We just don’t want him to kill our parents too. How long should the quarantine last? At least until we understand the real threat from P.1 and other emergent Brazilian variants, have developed vaccines against them, and have had time to inoculate our own populations elsewhere.
(Gwynne Dyer's new book is 'Growing Pains: The Future of Democracy and Work.' The views expressed are personal.)
China managed to get the strategic Chushul heights vacated on the cheap but India is portraying the partial disengagement as victory
With five State elections planned over the next few months by accident or design, India might have hit a strategic sweet spot: Defusing its two-front standoff against China and Pakistan. With a partial and selective disengagement secured on China’s terms, India is portraying this as victory in sync with its policy of “resolute response” to force the Chinese withdrawal from heights astride the Pangong Tso, leaving other People’s Liberation Army (PLA) intrusions from Depsang to Demchok intact. Last Thursday MEA spokesperson Anurag Shrivastava, sounding abundant caution, said it was India’s expectation that China will work with it to complete disengagement in the remaining areas which will lead to de-escalation in East Ladakh. That alone will lead to peace and provide conditions for progress in bilateral relations. Last Sunday, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi was singing an old tune on the rights and wrongs of the standoff, blaming India and reiterating that neither country was a threat to the other.
After the standoff, China has adopted a substantially different position by not placing the border dispute as central to bilateral relations. On February 25, Wang informed Foreign Minister S Jaishankar of “some wavering and back-pedalling” affecting “practical cooperation between the countries”. This is reason enough to delay future meetings to defuse other friction points. It is fair to assume that for China, the disengagement process is over with Beijing managing to get the strategic Chushul heights vacated on the cheap. The reference to “difficulty in practical cooperation” will make future military and civilian dialogue on restoration of status quo ante April 2020 highly unlikely — certainly not before July 1, the Chinese Communist Party’s centenary conclave. India’s readiness to make concessions to China comes straight out of Jaishankar’s book ‘The India Way: Strategies For An Uncertain World’.
No one knows the numbers involved but approximately 2,000-3,000 troops (a brigade) from each side have pulled back, not pulled out. Both sides have 50,000-70,000 soldiers posted on the front lines. The additional deployments and capital costs as well as maintenance and logistics put together for one year are estimated to be nearly Rs 30,000 crore (Rs 21,000 crore in capital expenditure alone). Then there is the cost of re-posturing troops from Pakistan to China’s front which is work in progress. This level of additional expenditure has never been incurred on the Line of Actual Control (LAC) and the revenue cost will further undercut modernisation. China’s defence budget has crossed $200 b, roughly four times India’s. Its internal security bill is even higher as it is the main driver of internal cohesion. The India-China capability gap can be measured from the investment differential and willingness on the part of China to use the power quotient for coercion on the LAC.
Indian Generals’ prominent reference to Chinese disengagement from the lakes as “loss of faith” was seen as insulting (and beginning of practical difficulties). The PLA’s withdrawal from the Fingers area was traded for vacation of the strategic Chushul heights they had occupied for the first time since 1962. Yielding the key bargaining chip for an immediate political imperative — provincial elections — may prove costly. But this give-and-take was necessary for the Narendra Modi Government to depict the disengagement as victory against China. The Government has utilised the military’s strategic prowess — Uri (2016), Doklam (2017), Balakot (2019) and now Ladakh (2021) — as political success stories against China and Pakistan.
The backchannel talks with Pakistan’s NSA Moef Yusuf, which India has denied, took place after the Galwan clash because the two-front situation began to hot up. It was a wise move, coming as it did after Indian security planners decided to switch four divisions facing Pakistan towards the North. The ceasefire could lead to a new India-Pakistan normal. Suddenly, pieces of the two-front puzzle are seen coming together despite the absence of a national security strategy. That says something.
New Delhi is on the threshold of major defence reforms: ‘The India Way without an Integrated Review’ or ‘Strategic Defence and Security Review’. Military commanders in charge of these reforms must not trivialise the process by allowing symbolism and politicisation to creep in to please the political elite. Last week the tri-service commanders were lined up in Gujarat for their review meeting in front of the towering statue of “Iron Man Sardar Patel”, when that photo-op should have been with the images of military icons like Field Marshal Sam Manekshaw and Air Chief Marshal Arjan Singh, because the PMO wanted it. Regrettably, military ethos and traditions are alien to most Indian politicians and civil servants.
But the partial disengagement deal, achieved by the Foreign Ministers under conditions of power asymmetry, reflects India’s willingness to accept that the “price of a pragmatic settlement (with China) will be less than the cost of a difficult relationship”.
(The writer, a retired Major General, was Commander, IPKF South, Sri Lanka, and founder member of the Defence Planning Staff, currently the Integrated Defence Staff. The views expressed are personal.)
Why not give the capital directly from the Budget instead of following a circuitous route, setting up new institutions and adding to administrative and overhead costs?
In the Union Budget for 2021-22, Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman has proposed setting up of a bad bank. Crafted as an asset reconstruction company (ARC), it will bundle up all the non-performing assets (NPAs) of banks, buy these at a negotiated (albeit discounted) price and sell them to investors such as private equity funds, alternative investment funds (AIFs) and so on, by putting a turnaround plan in place. An asset management company (AMC) will work on a detailed turnaround-cum-execution plan.
The banks plan to transfer nearly Rs 2,00,000 crore of bad loans to the ARC. Every loan (albeit bad) account involving Rs 500 crore plus will be considered for transfer. In return, the ARC will provide 15 per cent upfront cash to banks and issue security receipts for the remaining 85 per cent, to be guaranteed by the Government. The ARC will require a capital infusion of at least Rs 10,000 crore. A majority share holding in the entity will be held by public sector banks (PSBs); though some private banks will also be involved.
According to the 22nd Financial Stability Report (FSR) released by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) on January 21, the gross NPA (GNPA) ratio of all scheduled commercial banks (SCBs) is projected to increase from 7.5 per cent in September 2020 to 13.5 per cent by this September. Even as the Coronavirus pandemic gripped the economy from the beginning of March 2020, its impact on the bad loan scenario did not reflect till September 2020 in view of the RBI’s decision to grant moratorium on loan repayments (March 1-August 31, 2020) and exclude the moratorium period for the purpose of declaring an account as an NPA.
Meanwhile, the Government had made an amendment to the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) to ensure that proceedings against bad loan accounts by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) are not initiated until March 24 this year. Once this embargo is removed (for now, the powers that be are in a wait-and-watch mode but they will have to decide sooner than later), there will be a spike in NPAs as then the banks will be forced to reflect the real position. This is what worries the Finance Minister.
Having already infused close to Rs 3,00,000 crore of capital in PSBs during the last four financial years, and given its precarious budgetary resources, the Government is in no mood to pump another Rs 2,00,000 crore or so needed to prevent erosion in their capital. At the same time, it wants to unshackle the banks from the burden of bad loans so that they are in a position to increase credit availability required for achieving 11 per cent plus growth during 2021-22 and put the economy on a sustained growth path of seven-eight per cent till 2025-26.
To wriggle out of this dilemma, Sitharaman has resurrected the idea of a ‘bad bank’ that was mooted in 2018 by a committee under the former Chairman, Punjab National Bank (PNB), Sunil Mehta, to be named ‘Sashakt India Asset Management’ for fast-track resolution of large bad loans. In May 2020, this was reiterated by the Indian Banks Association (IBA) with a stipulation that the Union Government should anchor the bad bank with majority equity holding. Accepting this proposal would have meant that eventually, the responsibility for handholding would have come on the latter. Therefore, the Finance Ministry rejected that suggestion outright.
Under its new incarnation, the bad bank will be majority owned by PSBs which tantamounts to ownership and control vesting with the Government itself — though indirectly. But the more crucial point is that the security receipts issued by the bad bank to cover 85 per cent of the transfer value of the loan will be promised sovereign guarantee. As a result, while on one hand, the banks’ balance sheet will be fully shielded against any default in redemption on maturity (they need not make any additional provision which otherwise would have been required as per the RBI’s circular dated September 1, 2016), on the other hand even the bad bank need not worry too much about recovering it.
If it is unable to recover, then also the guarantor (the Government of India) will pay up. In short, the bad bank has been crafted in a manner such that it will be a win-win for all stakeholders like the banks, the bad bank, defaulting borrowers and so on, except the taxpayer whose money the Union Government will eventually be using for bailing out the banks.
If, that is the real intent, why not give the capital directly from the Budget instead of following a circuitous route, making things non-transparent, setting up new institutions and adding to administrative and overhead costs?
It is ironical that each time banks are faced with erosion in their capital due to delinquent borrowers, the Government takes recourse to cosmetic solutions that are often laced with fancy nomenclature to make them look credible. This approach should be abandoned. Instead, it should adopt and build on sustainable solutions to the problem of increasing NPAs.
In this regard, the IBC framework offers the best bet. This, together with the amended Banking Regulation Act (this gives the RBI the necessary powers to force the banks to act), provides a foundational basis for successful resolution of NPAs.
As per the RBI’s circular dated February 12, 2018, for accounts with aggregate exposure greater that Rs 2,000 crore, as soon as there was a default in the account with any lender, all lenders — singly or jointly — shall initiate steps to cure the default by preparing a resolution plan. The resolution plan approved by all lenders had to be readied within six months from the default date. If the deadline was missed, proceedings under the IBC would be initiated by referring the case to the NCLT which would get six months to complete the resolution process.
The banks got six months to come up with a resolution plan; if they didn’t, the NCLT would have to do it within six months. Therefore, at the outer limit, it was one year to get the resolution kicking (wherever delays happened, those were due to the cases being taken to courts — either by the promoter or competing suitor).
The best part was that the tribunal was to facilitate selling of the defaulter’s firm as a “going concern” to fetch maximum realisation. The results are there for all to see. Under this arrangement, the lenders were able to recover about Rs 3,00,000 crore which resulted in lowering of the GNPA ratio from a high of 11.2 per cent as on March 31, 2018 to 8.5 per cent as of March 31, 2020.
However, as per the directions of the Supreme Court, the RBI came out with a revised circular dated June 7, 2019, which gives lenders 30 days to enter into an inter-lender agreement to decide on a resolution plan. After this, they get 180 days to come up with plan; if they don’t, they are only required to make an additional provision of 20 per cent.
If they don’t finalise it within 365 days, they have to make an additional 15 per cent provision. In short, unlike the February 12, 2018 guidelines, banks are not obliged to refer the case to the NCLT in a time-bound manner. This has literally rendered resolution under the IBC process dysfunctional.
There is an urgent need to revitalise the process and make it robust instead of looking for short-term solutions.
The writer is a New Delhi-based policy analyst. The views expressed are personal.
FREE Download
OPINION EXPRESS MAGAZINE
Offer of the Month