China rules out setting up ADIZ near India border

Such zones are set up only by littoral countries in international airspace: Qin Gang

China on Thursday said there was “no question” of it establishing an air defence identification zone (ADIZ) near its border with India. It pointed out that such zones are set up only by littoral countries in international airspace.

On Saturday, China announced the setting up of its first ADIZ — an area in international airspace within which countries monitor aircraft — which extends over the disputed East China Sea islands that are at the centre of a dispute between China and Japan.

The Chinese government said that aircraft that enter its ADIZ — which overlaps with parts of the ADIZ set up by Japan in 1969 — will be required to notify the authorities in advance about their flight plans. Failure to do so could trigger “emergency” responses from defence forces.

Following the setting up of the East China Sea ADIZ, China has said it will establish other zones “at the right time after necessary preparations” are completed. The announcement has generated wide attention in the region, prompting Japan and South Korea to voice concern, as the ADIZ overlaps with both countries’ zones. Chinese officials have, however, defended the move, pointing out that many countries, such as the U.S., Japan and South Korea, have long established similar zones to track aircraft heading towards their airspace.

The Foreign Ministry here on Thursday said there was no question of such a zone coming up beyond China’s land boundaries in the west — where it shares a disputed border with India — as an ADIZ, by definition, refers to international airspace beyond littoral countries' territorial airspace.

“I want to clarify that on the concept of an ADIZ, it is an area of airspace established by a coastal State beyond its territorial airspace,” Foreign Ministry spokesperson Qin Gang said at a regular briefing. “So the question does not arise.”

No provision in TN Act to rein in drivers on mobile phone

Those caught using their phones while driving get away with relatively lesser fines here because the Motor Vehicles Act that governs road safety does not have stringent sections to discourage mobile phone usage.

The Central Motor Vehicles Rules contain a provision to cancel licence of motorists if found using mobile phones. However, there are no specific provisions in the Tamil Nadu government’s Motor Vehicles Act, 1989. The police could take serious action only if a case is booked under Section 184 of the Motor Vehicles Act which covers the offence under the larger spectrum of ‘driving dangerously’.

Recent studies have shown that a whole generation of digital natives has been hooked to constantly checking its smartphones for regular updates, especially for Apps (applications) that give out real-time push notifications.

Countries like Singapore have taken the lead in identifying the behaviour. Its government, in its general provisions relating to road traffic, has a specific rule under the sub-head ‘use of mobile phone while driving’, which invites penalties and imprisonment up to six months.

Palanquins to the aid of pregnant women

Health Ministry will set up the homes close to healthcare centres to improve access, institutional deliveries

The Ministry of Health and Welfare has planned to set up “birth waiting homes” close to healthcare centres to enable pregnant women in remote areas to gain access to prenatal care as their due date nears. Palanquins or carts are to be used to transport pregnant women across difficult terrain in the bid to improve institutional deliveries. “We have already started hiring palanquins to take women from their homes to healthcare facilities under the National Rural Health Mission and the government pays the men who carry the palanquin,” Anuradha Gupta, Mission Director, NRHM, told The Hindu .

The “birth waiting homes” will be constructed within or near the compounds of a health facility.

The pregnant woman would be provided all support and incentives to move into these facilities at least a week before her delivery date.

Pregnant women can move into the home a week before her due date

Centre bears cost of men carrying the palanquins across tough terrain

Emperor Akihito’s visit not linked to nuclear cooperation

India sought to play down the impression that the visit of Japanese Emperor Akihito’s was in any way linked to the gathering tensions between Tokyo and Beijing over China’s Air Defence Identification Zone in the East China Sea or with the state of play over India-Japan negotiations over a civil nuclear agreement.

The Emperor arrives here on Saturday and during his six-day stay in India, he will retrace some of the steps he took as Prince when he first arrived here 53 years ago. Accompanied by his wife Empress Michiko, the Emperor will also visit places such as Chennai that symbolise the growth in India-Japan ties in recent years.

“Visits by the Japanese Emperor are very rare. The essential practice is for the Emperor to be studiously away from political and contemporary issues,” said Shambhu Kumaran, Director (East Asia) in the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA).

Asked whether Prime Minister Manmohan Singh will receive the Emperor at the airport and whether this meant a departure from the standard practice, officials said the standard norm of having senior officials and a Minister (in this case External Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid) would be at the airport and the issue of Dr. Singh being present was being finalised. “There might be a possibility of this. If this happens it will not be the first time. There are a couple of instances such as the Prime Minister going to the airport to receive U.S. President Barack Obama,” he said.

“We will try and make this visit as important as can be. Please be certain that every aspect of protocol will be followed to ensure this would be a memorable visit,” said MEA spokesperson Syed Akbaruddin.

Down memory

lane

In their varied schedule, the royal couple will visit Buddhist sites around Bodh Gaya.

In Delhi, the Emperor will go down memory lane when he tours the India International Centre, whose foundation stone he laid on November 30, 1960, in the presence of Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru.

But he will be breaking new ground on his visit to Chennai, which has emerged as the second largest concentration of Japanese expatriates after the National Capital Region, thanks to liberalisation and development of greater Chennai as a hub for the software and automotive industries.

For India and Japan, whose relationship remained correct and cordial during the Cold War years and took another decade-and-a half after that to reach the strategic sectors, the Japanese Emperor’s visit is a huge indicator of the closeness in ties both countries are aiming to foster, said a MEA official.

Both sides are poised for cooperation in sectors such as infrastructure development to defence cooperation and nuclear, each of them with investment potential of billions of dollars. In some areas such as the proposal to transfer an amphibious aircraft with military applications, Japan has made an exception for India.

Interactions to be formal

As another official pointed out, all interactions would be of a formal nature with virtually no matters of state expected to come up on the table when the Emperor meets President Pranab Mukherjee and Dr. Singh besides other senior Ministers and politicians. But “the visit will immeasurably expand and strengthen the India–Japan strategic and global partnership,” said the MEA.

Japanese emperors usually try stay away from political and contemporary issues: Shambhu Kumaran

Interactions to be of a formal nature with virtually no matters of state expected to come up

India keen on developing Iran’s Chah-bahar port

‘It will provide access to Afghanistan, Central Asia’

India indicated its plan to move decisively on developing a port in Iran that would ensure connectivity with Afghanistan and Central Asia even though the recent Iran-P-5+1 interim agreement does not seem to offer a big relief from the sanctions.

Speaking in the wake of Iran Deputy Foreign Minister Ibrahim Rahimpur holding extensive talks with Foreign Secretary Sujatha Singh and National Security Advisor Shivshankar Menon on Monday, Ministry of External Affairs spokesperson Syed Akbaruddin said India felt the development of Chah-bahar port — barely 80 km away from Pakistan’s Gwadar port and providing access to Afghanistan — doesn’t get affected by sanctions.

Besides providing a detailed briefing on Iran’s assessment of the situation following the interim agreement, Mr. Rahimpur said the situation needed to be watched as there are series likely through the joint commission.

“India has always held that it would like to engage Iran economically and any issues in other parts of the world should not impact our legitimate economic interaction such as energy which is a major area of cooperation and we intend to pursue that. Similarly, we have been interested in Chah-bahar port and sanctions, even unilateral, do not impact port-related activities,” Mr. Akbaruddin said.

India has already said the two-stage deal on Iran’s nuclear file was in conformity with its position over the issue.

Campaign for universal pension to gain speed

Congress, BJP and Aam Aadmi Party leaders back its demand

Following up on its “indefinite dharna,” Pension Parishad will intensify political mobilisation to demand universal old-age pension.

On Thursday, leaders from across the political spectrum, including the Congress, the BJP and the Aam Aadmi Party, backed the demand, terming universal pension a matter of entitlement and an honourable monthly payment.

Unorganised labour groups, under the banner of Pension Parishad led by Aruna Roy of the Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan (MKSS) and Baba Adhav of the Hamal Panchayat, will organise a dharna during the winter session of Parliament.

The BJP’s chief ministerial candidate, Harsh Vardhan, assured the voters of Delhi that if put in, his party would establish a commission to consider universal pension.

Aam Aadmi Party leader Prashant Bhushan acknowledged that the issue was not in the party’s manifesto now; but he promised to add this demand to his party’s agenda.

“The winter session of Parliament is possibly the last opportunity we are likely to get to push for universal pension before the [Lok Sabha] elections are announced,” Nikhil Dey of the MKSS told The Hindu .

Despite a commitment from the Union government, the timeline for implementation is uncertain. “After two rounds of discussion between Jairam Ramesh, Minister for Rural Development, and Pension Parishad, on March 7 2013 we were informed that the Ministry for Rural Development would send to the Cabinet for approval the appropriately structured National Social Assistance Programme for immediate implementation,” said Pension Parishad’s letter to the Prime Minister. In the meantime, many States have made a significant progress towards universal pension.

The most critical thrust of Pension Parishad’s campaign is the demand that pension be universal, especially for women because of their high level of dependency on it for daily sustenance. The sum should be either Rs. 2,000 or half the price of the minimum wages, whichever is higher. Currently, the Centre provides a pension of Rs.200 a month to those who are in the Below Poverty Line (BPL) category.

Another key demand of Pension Parishad is that the pension be indexed to inflation, so that the sum will keep pace with inflation every six months. It also wants the amount paid to the recipient on a fixed date. At present, some States pay every quarter. As a consequence, the elderly are not sure when they will get their pension. Furthermore, the delivery system should be transparent, and the list of recipients in each State must be displayed on the website in order to avoid misappropriation.

The organisation also seeks a system for redressing pensioners’ grievances.

India is home to more than 14 crore elderly (aged above 54 years), with 70 per cent of them living in rural areas and 55 per cent in Six States alone.

PTI reports:

Shankar Singh of the MKSS said that though the pension scheme worked in different States, only Rajasthan, Goa and Haryana had the universal pension scheme. Of these, Goa gave the highest of Rs. 2,000 a month to its elderly people, Haryana Rs.1,500 and Rajasthan a mere Rs. 500. In all these schemes, the Centre contributed Rs. 200, with the States bearing the rest.

‘Anti-poverty programmes are leaky’

An analysis done in the Planning Commission reveals that the anti-poverty programmes are leaky and inefficient, unable to lift Indians out of poverty. It shows India can close the poverty gap by spending just a fraction of its annual anti-poverty budget.

“The analysis shows our anti-poverty programmes are so leaky and inefficient that even after spending crores year after year, millions of Indians remain below the poverty line,” a highly placed official, associated with the analysis, told The Hindu .

“The government might as well lift everybody above the poverty line by simply giving them cash.”

Poverty gap is the amount of cash given to a household to lift it above the poverty line. It is the difference in the level of consumption of the households below the poverty line and those on the line.

The analysis uses the Tendulkar Poverty Line, according to which a household of five people subsists with a monthly consumption of Rs. 874.50. This poverty line is very close to the World Bank Poverty Line of an income of $1.25 a day (on a Purchasing Power Parity basis). Households with lower consumption levels are said to be below the poverty line or living on less than the bare minimum required to subsist.

India does not use household income levels for defining the poverty line for lack of official payroll data.

Over 2,400 endangered turtles seized

More than 2,400 live softshelled turtles — an endangered species under Schedule I of the Wild Life Protection Act, 1972 – being taken to Bangladesh, were seized near the city airport on Thursday, a senior forest official said here.

“Of the seized turtles 2,453 were alive. There were also some dead. Those alive have been kept in the rehabilitation centre of the forest department,” N.C. Bahuguna, Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (Wildlife) and Chief Wildlife Warden told The Hindu .

Three arrested

Three persons have been arrested in connection with the seizure.

Acting on a tip-off, personnel from the airport police station intercepted trucks heading towards the India-Bangladesh border.

According to sources, the turtles might be sourced from Uttar Pradesh as the trucks bore number plates of the State. Though considered endangered, softshelled turtles are used in preparation of various delicacies and consumed in different parts of the world.

Only a few months ago customs officials had seized a huge consignment of star turtles, used for making decorative items, from the city airport.

The city police had also seized turtles from a bus depot in the northern parts of the city weeks ago and arrested two persons in the case.

Instances of smuggling of endangered species of animals, particularly turtles, into Bangladesh have come to light in recent times with the Border Security Force also making such seizures when people try to take them illegally into the neighbouring country.

Alive turtles have been kept in the rehabilitation centre of the forest department

The trucks carrying the turtles were heading towards the India-Bangladesh border

The evidence of circumstances

“Proof beyond reasonable doubt does not mean proof beyond a shadow of a doubt. The law would fail to protect the community if it permitted fanciful possibilities to deflect the course of justice.” (Lord Denning in Miller vs Minister of Pensions — 1947)

Although Lord Denning, the iconic English judge, gave his ruling 60 years ago on the proof required in civil litigation, the standard laid down by him then has begun to impact criminal proceedings as well. This is in the context of growing complexity of modern crime that eludes easy detection. There cannot be a more appropriate occasion than now to recall his words of pragmatism.

The long awaited Ghaziabad (Uttar Pradesh) Special Court judgment in the sensational May 15, 2008 Aarushi murder case is out. The Talwars, parents of the unfortunate 14-year-old girl, have been convicted for murdering their only child and their domestic help, Hemraj, and also causing disappearance of related evidence. They will undergo life sentence as well as five years of rigorous imprisonment on the two counts of charge. The father, Rajesh Talwar, has been additionally found guilty of filing a false first information report.

Inhuman crime

Immediate relatives of the dentist couple and the defence lawyer have described the conviction as a miscarriage of justice and expressed their resolve to take it on appeal. In recent memory, no other case of murder has possibly received greater media publicity. And rightly so because the crime was inhuman beyond belief and shrouded in deep mystery for a long time.

The Talwars certainly received painfully adverse media attention. It would be naïve for anybody to claim that Judge Shyam Lal, who is retiring shortly and has a reputation for integrity, was totally unaffected by this. A careful reading of the 210-page order does not, however, suggest that he succumbed to any manipulative press or television story.

I am impressed with his logic in arriving at the tragic conclusion that the parents had, in fact, murdered their only child and a living-in domestic servant. The only possible irritant in the order is that citations are far too many for a lay member of the public to absorb. We should remember that his constituency is not us, but the two higher courts of the land, which could rip his order apart if the matter went up before them on appeal. What I am most impressed with is his practical and honest approach to the problem of filling in the glaring gaps in the prosecution story.

The entire case is built on a few clinching circumstances. There are no eyewitnesses, something true of a few other sensational cases the world over. But then, when the evidence put forward on the basis of facts immediately surrounding a crime and the responses of the principal actors to it are solid, how can you ignore such evidence? This is the judge’s stand in a case which could well have been shut before any trial if only the CBI’s closure report (after two of its teams had investigated the case) had been accepted. It is a matter of conjecture whether Judge Lal’s predecessor, who first heard the case, would have acted so if the Talwars had not protested at the insinuations against them in that report.

This is a lesson for many investigating agencies. If they cannot arrive at definite conclusions of guilt or innocence, and therefore opt for a closure, they should simultaneously be prepared for an intrepid magistrate/judge who could reject their stand and take the next logical step of ordering a regular trial on the same facts. I am happy that in this respect, the CBI rose to the occasion and was ably aided by an industrious Special Prosecutor.

Crucial points

In the ultimate analysis, certain crucial facts went against the Talwars. There is unassailable evidence (corroborated by the driver who was the last person to leave the house on the fateful night) that only the doctor couple and the two deceased were in the house (a modest 1300-sqft apartment with a terrace) when the lights were switched off. There was no evidence of any forcible entry into the house between the night and when the domestic servant, Bharti, turned up for work the next morning. Also, when the police arrived at the scene after being alerted in the morning, Aarushi’s body and her bed had been nearly thoroughly cleaned up. No perpetrator of crime would conceivably ever do this. Proof of the Internet connection in the house having been accessed most of the night put paid to the Talwars’ claim that they were fast asleep right through and hence could not hear the movements of a possible intruder who, in their view, had committed the crime. (I look upon this as a smart piece of investigation that greatly undermined the credibility of the accused.)

Domestic servant Bharti who arrived in the morning did not find the mother of the girl in any grief or complaining about the occurrence, although by that time, Aarushi’s death had been well established. This was unnatural to say the least. Finally, there was no evidence that Aarushi’s bedroom which, once closed, could be unlocked only from outside, had been broken into, disproving the mother’s version that she locked the room from outside and took hold of the key when she retired to bed in the adjoining room the previous night.

Judge Shyam Lal derives support from many Supreme Court decisions. His endeavour has been to emphasise that the absence of direct evidence is not a handicap to establishing facts against a suspect. Nor was it always necessary to pinpoint a motive for the offence under examination. He rightly points out how, in the history of crime across the globe, many judges confronted this phenomenon and still went ahead to convict those arraigned. It is significant however that Judge Lal endorsed the CBI’s position that this was, in all probability, an instance of honour killing. This is a point that many critics of the judgment have missed.

In describing the Talwars’ conviction as grossly unfair, the defence team has been vociferous that the judge erred in placing undue reliance on circumstantial evidence. This ignores many landmark rulings in the history of jurisprudence as it has evolved. Those who are exercised over the Aarushi decision conveniently cast aside many past decisions of eminent judges who were unswerving in their belief that a conviction, even in criminal cases, did not always require either “conclusive evidence” or proof “beyond reasonable doubt.” In their view, criminal conviction could rest on strong circumstantial evidence, as long as a prudent man would believe it to be credible, and that no conclusion other than guilt could be arrived at from the circumstances cited. Of course, there is the requirement that the chain on which the prosecution relies should be so complete that no human agency could have unearthed anything more than that projected and which could throw even a reasonable doubt on the presumption of guilt. The only stipulation is that such presumption should rest on facts, not mere conjectures. This is a practical view of human affairs taken by the English criminal jurisprudence over the ages, and which we have inherited. Judge Lal rightly draws comfort from a 1973 Supreme Court judgment ( Bobade and another v State of Maharashtra ), which highlighted the social perspective that courts should keep in sight. The Supreme Court on this occasion said rather eloquently: “The dangers of exaggerated devotion to the rule of benefit of doubt … demand especial emphasis in the contemporary context of escalating crime and escape.”

The logic of this warning applies without reserve to the Aarushi case. One must compliment Judge Lal for his clarity, courage and forthrightness. I am sure many in his fraternity are watching and will learn from his example by standing up to calculated attempts to derail the course of justice, especially when people in high places are arraigned.

I feel it would be unfair to stop with such a clinical and cold analysis of a judgment that would be discussed for many years to come. I feel I should dwell a little on the misfortune of a couple, who not only lost their only child but have also to languish in jail for most of their remaining lives. My heart goes out to them. However heinous their acts may have been, they are not common criminals to be hounded or despised. There is already information that they are going to be usefully occupied in prison: the husband treating inmates who need dental attention and the wife imparting education. In this process, it is hoped they will imbibe values which perhaps did not govern their lives until they erred grievously five years ago.

(The writer is a former CBI Director.)

Those who criticise the Aarushi verdict

cast aside decisions of eminent judges who believed that a conviction did not always require “conclusive evidence” or proof “beyond reasonable doubt.”

Iran, the next stage

Now that the Obama administration has won its breakthrough first-step nuclear deal with Iran, officials are planning strategy for the decisive second round that over the next six months will seek a broader and tougher comprehensive agreement.

This “end state” negotiation, as officials describe it, promises to be more difficult because the U.S. and its negotiating partners will seek to dismantle parts of the Iranian programme, rather than simply freeze them. Another complication is that negotiators will be fending off even more brickbats from hardliners in Israel, the U.S. Congress and Tehran.

If the interim deal was reached largely in secret, through a back channel provided by Oman, this one will have to be negotiated in the diplomatic equivalent of a circus ring, with hoots and catcalls from bystanders.

As administration strategists seek a comprehensive deal, they have several priorities. All will be harder to negotiate than was the limited six-month freeze on the Iranian programme agreed last weekend. Given the arduous bargaining ahead, the U.S. will need the leverage of the sanctions still in place after release of $7 billion in frozen Iranian assets — and the threat of more sanctions if negotiations break down.

The negotiators’ agenda:

First, the U.S. wants no heavy-water reactor at Arak, rather than just a halt in supplies for it. Because this reactor would generate plutonium that could be reprocessed for a bomb, it is seen as inherently destabilising and dangerous, and unnecessary for a civilian programme.

Second, the U.S. will press Iran to dismantle a substantial number of its roughly 19,000 centrifuges, perhaps more than half. Washington has already conceded that in a comprehensive deal, Iran will have a “right” to civilian nuclear effort with “a mutually defined [uranium] enrichment program.” But negotiators will seek a tight cap on the number of centrifuges, at a level that’s consistent with a limited civilian programme.

Third, the U.S. will urge closure of Iran’s enrichment facility at Fordow, dug into a hillside near Qom, arguing that this fortified location isn’t consistent with the civilian effort that Iran insists is its only goal. The Iranians may seek to convert Fordow to some other use, which would present tricky monitoring issues.

Fourth, the U.S. will aggressively pursue Iran’s commitment in the interim deal to inspection of possible weaponisation and military activities at Parchin and other bases. As inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency gain access, they may discover other issues for negotiation.

Finally, the U.S. will have to craft with its negotiating partners a structure for the next round of talks. A “joint commission” of experts will supervise compliance with the six-month interim agreement. Meanwhile, the comprehensive negotiations will begin with the so-called P5+1 group, which includes the U.S., Russia, China, Britain and France, plus Germany. But it remains to be seen whether the U.S. will also have a parallel structure for secret bilateral talks with the Iranians, as in the interim round. Secrecy will be harder this time, because of protests from nations that were excluded.

Officials don’t see any sign yet that Iranian President Hassan Rouhani or Foreign Minister Javad Zarif wants to expand negotiations beyond the nuclear file to include regional issues, such as the sectarian fighting in Syria, Iraq, Bahrain and Lebanon. U.S. analysts believe this regional agenda is controlled not by Rouhani, but by Gen. Qassem Soleimani, the commander of the Quds Force of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps. Whether the Revolutionary Guard genuinely accepts Iran’s turn toward negotiation, and is ready to cease its destabilising covert action, is crucial but hard to assess.

As Washington pushes ahead with engagement of Tehran, U.S. officials understand they must reassure their traditional Sunni Arab allies that they haven’t tilted toward Shiite, Persian Iran. The U.S. message, not well communicated so far, is that it seeks an equilibrium in the Sunni-Shiite schism. Regaining this balance means aggressive outreach, especially to Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. As part of this effort, Mr. Obama spoke on Wednesday with Saudi King Abdullah, and more such contacts are planned.

A wild card in these negotiations is Israel. Mr. Obama has asked Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to take a breather from his clamorous criticism and send to Washington a team that can explore with U.S. officials a sound end-state strategy. Perhaps the U.S. and Israel need a back channel, outside the bombastic pressure campaign by Israeli advocates.

Giving life to aspirations of a backward region

The demand for a separate Telangana state is passing through twists and turns. The protracted political process of claims, counter-claims, movement and countermovement, coupled with electoral calculations by almost all political formations, have complicated the issue beyond a reasonable and satisfactory solution. The issue is on a chessboard. Every political move is dependent on the move of the other, and does not address the basic problems or ask where the political process went wrong.

While a crisis of conflict of this kind calls for creative and constructive politics, manipulative politics has occupied its place. Politics, conceptually, is the science of analysing the problems of society and the art of solving them. This institutionalised form of collective power is an invention of society to resolve the contradictions that are thrown up in the course of change. Indian politics has remained premature, and too pragmatic, rendering the problem-solving mechanism difficult. The issue of Telangana and the way it has been handled is testimony to this.

After considerable procrastination, the Central government moved a step forward towards the formation of the State of Telangana. But it has been accused of not taking both regions (Telangana and Seemandhra) into confidence, not making efforts to bring about a consensus, and imposing a unilateral and arbitrary decision. Further, it is argued that whatever the decision, it should be fair and just to both regions, without suggesting what such a solution is. This is being oblivious to the historical process and the political failure to intervene at an appropriate time to avert the present situation. A blame game is on, forgetting that the seeds of the present crisis were sown at the time of the merger of the two regions itself. The fact that there was a Gentlemen’s Agreement at the time of the merger is reflective of the intrinsic tensions. After entering into the agreement on six conditions to fortify the merger, the leaders of Andhra Pradesh soon forgot the conditions. It is not only that the conditions were not honoured; legal battles were waged to subvert them. The Telangana people felt let down. Those who are more powerful believe that they are at liberty to do whatever they wish, forgetting that such violations lead to cumulative anger that flares up at one time or the other. It requires a deep sense of history and strong commitment to the unity of the people to avoid committing such mistakes. Rulers who lack vision always get trapped and start blaming history.

The issue of water

Apart from the violations, the model of development that the rulers of Andhra Pradesh opted for has these trappings. One of the major causes for the present crisis is the technological choice made in the name of the Green Revolution in the mid-1960s. This technology, which was essentially irrigation-centric, proved to be counterproductive to all drought-prone regions across the nation, accentuating the regional imbalances. Indian socio-political history would have been different if only there had been a simultaneous technological breakthrough in water scarce, dry land cultivation. If one believed that this policy choice was inevitable to meet food scarcity, agriculture in the backward regions ought to have been heavily subsidised. Farmers who were dependent for centuries on open well or minor irrigation started tapping groundwater beyond capacity, spending huge private resources on borewells and electric pumps without any subsidy on electricity which landed them in a debt trap. The situation was further aggravated as the State started withdrawing subsidies under the pressure of global economic forces as a part of structural adjustment. This was so disastrous that more than two lakh farmers committed suicide. There were no instances of suicide in the irrigated belt. All suicides took place in water-deficit regions, sharpening subregional consciousness. One can see the manifestation of this phenomenon in multiple subregional demands for statehood, based on the logic that political power is a correction for regional imbalances and distortions of development.

It is perhaps keeping in view such possibilities that the makers of the Constitution provided the simplest procedure for the formation of a new state. The flexibility built into the Constitution reflects not only the historical times but also a profound understanding of an evolving polity in a multiethnic, multi-linguistic, multicultural, multi-caste, and multi-class Indian society. Realising that it would be the backward and smaller regions that would demand statehood, approval by the State Assembly was not made mandatory. Referring the matter to the State Assembly is more a gesture to federalism than a constitutional requirement.

To pit Article 371D against Article 3, as is now being done, is more to litigate the issue than solve it. Article 371D is a provision made to divide the State into six zones to protect public employment for locals in the State of Andhra Pradesh. How can a provision meant for government employment in one State supersede a provision that forms a part of the basic structure of the Constitution? Article 3 of the Constitution acquired critical significance in the wake of the neo-liberal model of development that accentuated the subregional imbalances and shifted development from being state-centric to ruthless market force-driven, with no qualms about pursuing profit. The market would rather put up with any level of human sacrifice than concede democratic aspirations.

Claims on Hyderabad

It is in the very nature of capital that it always moves to greener pastures and already developed industrial-friendly urban centres, widening the gap between the rural and the urban, leading to claims and counterclaims on urban spaces, forgetting that a huge population continues to live in rural areas. Hyderabad was not the bone of contention in the 1972 Jai Andhra agitation. Since huge investment went into the city, neglecting agriculture in both the regions, Hyderabad has become a lucrative site. The farming community which suffered on account of this perverted development is not inclined to share the water or agree to the legitimate claims of a backward drought-prone region. Instead of fighting for reasonable prices for agricultural products, the focus is on more water for irrigation and the claims on Hyderabad. Both these claims widen the gulf rather than bridge it.

The leaders of the bigger region are using pressure tactics to stall the decision, forgetting that they are the cause of the crisis. Telangana’s political leadership too has to share the blame, whatever its present political position. Added to it is the process of globalisation, and an obsession with growth and expansion of the service sector at the cost of industrial and agricultural development, creating an illusion that everybody’s future is tied to the city. One should realise that this flawed development reduced the share of agriculture to a mere 13 per cent of GDP and of industry to 16 per cent. This is an economic volcano which may explode at any point. Rulers are looking for a fascist alternative which can suppress all democratic aspirations and pave the way for rapacious global capital and callous market forces. Subregional demands are a historic search of backward drought-prone regions for a way out.

Subregionalism

This is the context in which the rise of subregionalism needs to be understood. Not that a separate state of Telangana is a panacea for all the problems of the region. But nor is keeping Andhra Pradesh together. The aspiration for statehood has been simmering in Telangana for a very long time. It got expressed violently in 1969 when 360 youth died in police firing. Indira Gandhi took a tough line at that point of time. Surprisingly, in 1972, the Andhra region wanted a separation. That was perhaps historically the right time to divide the State; it would have been a bloodless solution. This time, the Telangana movement has gone far deeper. Hundreds of young people tragically took their lives as a form of protest. As the movement was picking up, the political leadership of both regions took it very lightly, underestimating the political aspirations of a backward region. It has reached a point where the truth has to be faced. It is too late to think of alternative solutions. There is no single political force either in Andhra Pradesh or at the national level which can perform the miracle of keeping the people together or facilitate a friendly separation. That is the tragedy of Telugu-speaking people and the Indian political system.

(Prof. G. Haragopal is ICSSR national fellow, Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Hyderabad.)

Those opposing statehood for Telangana

are being oblivious to history

National interest should override sectional interest

Serious national policies need serious, critical and rational thinking. Crowds and political pressure, ad hoc gains and myopia can destroy carefully nurtured systems. The unseemly haste in trying to push through a division process of Andhra Pradesh hides more than it reveals. This was not how States were formed earlier. As for the States Reorganisation Commission, clear guidelines were laid out for the formation of states. Yes, the issue has been hanging fire for a few years. Yet, the way it has been handled smacks of Machiavellian manoeuvrings. When Andhra Pradesh was formed, leaders from different regions sat down to discuss and solve disputes. This has not been properly attempted now. Supposedly open agreements have not been openly arrived at. A centrally brokered opinion was sought to be created. It was like growing an artificial organ around a pre-designed matrix. Free suppression of opinion was not tolerated in some places. People talked under duress. Intellectuals were silenced by threats. This was the case in the 1969 Telangana and the 1972 Andhra agitations. This is usually the aetiology of any hysterical mass movement. So, fake saints prod on people, calling for unleashing ‘the dogs of war’.

The problem has become a tangled web; will the decision be unnecessarily hastened? It moved on to a fast track without serious thought or expert deliberations. It looked as if the Group of Ministers was given a tailoring job to be finished in a month’s time. Even stitching a coat to a design takes longer. Water disputes, for example, require specified study by experts, engineers, hydrologists, environmentalists, etc. The division of the High Court implies redistribution of lakhs of pending civil and criminal cases, which definitely is bound to delay justice. Pension problems are dime a dozen with several government and autonomous government organisations requiring division too. The general populace is bound to suffer. Service problems would mutate into court cases requiring legal solution. The recent Supreme Court directive to Bihar and Jharkhand on salaries of some employees not being paid for several years is a pointer. While politicians and partisan interests can brush aside these things, they are definitely not minor issues. If these are not addressed properly, what is governance for? If waters get divided, revenue goes down, politically, both probable States get weaker and the riverine deltas get damaged threatening food security and pushing up food prices, why opt for it? If new states increase insecurity and threaten national security and integration, what is the rationale for creating them without a serious parliamentary debate on the requirement or without a new States Reorganisation Commission? You have to work out abscissio infiniti for a solution. The present exercise is hopelessly inadequate.

The peculiarity of the situation emanates from the almost callous, ad hoc and visionless short-sightedness of the Congress think tank. They have landed themselves in the proverbial “monkey’s tail in the wedge” situation of their own making. The party has to rethink its national policies — whether to go in for more states or not. It is time that all national parties rework their policies on the issue of new states and the process to be adopted. A nation cannot be kept in a labour room to deliver states on demand, long past its age of conception. Developmental and human aspects of progress need attention and nurturing. India cannot and should not remain a stone pelting, hate-mongering, petty politicking nation, if it has to move forward. That kinetic energy cannot be wasted; it should address the bigger issue of hunger, poverty and illiteracy and gender discrimination among other such pressing human problems.

It is morally and electorally improper and wrong to divide a state before elections. It goes against all tenets of a free and fair election. The Srikrishna Report should have been elaborately discussed in Parliament. It should be at some point of time. Demonstrations and crowds should not be the deciders of policy in a democratic system. Electoral outcomes or provisions for constitutional procedures like a referendum alone should decide policy on crucial issues like a state’s division.

The way the entire process was handled looks synthetic and artificial, almost a mockery of all democratic procedures. It is evident that a lot of hectoring was involved. The so-called core committee has none who represent the two disputants or protagonists. It does not even have the semblance of an honest broker. The members are drawn from all the other South Indian States, competing for industry, investment and river waters. Some represent the upper-riparian river areas with vested interests. Since the talk of division, thousands of crores of rupees of investment has moved out from Andhra Pradesh to Karnataka, Tamil Nadu and Maharashtra. Andhra Pradesh Ministers queue up before New Delhi to present their cases. The Antony Committee has turned into a farce. None of the members ever visited the different regions of the State. It looks like a Hamletian mock play; like a royal court with the defendant absent. This is in stark contrast to the Prime Minister’s decision to not visit Sri Lanka, when Mr. Chidambaram protested. It hurts you bad and hurts you deep.

Legal hurdles

The court battle has not yet started. But it will. There are legal hurdles, not just Article 371D and E. There are procedural hurdles. Even if they can be overcome, the division cannot happen before the elections. There is absolutely no need for such a hurried caesarean. People on both sides are fed up. Fed up with politics and politicians. The 2014 election may throw up a strange mix of results. The Congress may or may not remain divided. Some parties may fade away. Some leaders will vanish too. In an undivided state, the Telangana Rashtra Samithi (TRS) may turn into a Shiv Sena lookalike. The scenario is unpredictable now. But elections are the only democratic way to solve this issue. You either accept the Constitution and democracy, or you stay out of it.

Only through another States Reorganisation Commission constituted by Parliament should States be divided. National interests should override sectional and subregional interests. India can ill-afford expenditures on bureaucratic infrastructure and new capitals, as against the intense requirements of increasing food production and increasing water storage through environment-friendly methodologies. Creating new states is an ad hoc way of tackling unemployment or hunger or improving education or science and technology. There have been apprehensions whether all this is to weaken the quasi-federal nature of the Constitution and whether this is to ensure that only some States have an edge over who rules from New Delhi. It is time that these misgivings and doubts were dispelled and democratic procedures and national integrity upheld.

(Ravi Komarraju is emeritus professor, Andhra University.)

If new States increase insecurity and threaten national security and integration, what is the rationale

for creating them?

Beyond the here and now

The note of caution from the Oxford Martin Commission for Future Generations on the risks of a short-term approach to global governance merits consideration. Of paramount importance is the call in its report, “Now for The Future,” to build global institutions fit to purpose for the 21st century. Currently, countries with a diminishing stake retain disproportionate power, while four times as many states, not to mention civil society groups, sit around decision-making fora, it points out. Drawn from leading figures in politics, business and academia, the authors of the report cite approvingly the Group of 20 countries as a contemporary model of inclusive multilateral cooperation. Accounting for 80 per cent of the world’s gross domestic product, a two-thirds of the global population and 80 per cent of world trade, the G20 countries demonstrated their collective influence during the Asian and global financial crises. The 1989 Montreal Protocol, which led to a complete phase-out of chlorofluorocarbon production and contained ozone depletion, is the other example of realising shared interests. Global leadership in the public health arena was demonstrable also in the 2003 ratification of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control.

The unprecedented achievements of the previous century could increase global uncertainty and systemic risk in the absence of a comprehensive and broad vision for the future. For instance, frequent opinion polls, longer election campaigns, and pressures from vocal lobbies are constraining governments in terms of thinking and articulating a vision beyond the electoral term. A focus on current stock prices rather than value creation over the longer term, quarterly earnings targets and the perverse system that rewards short-term investors are also equally instances of the preoccupation with the immediate and the here and now. To address the gap between available knowledge and possible action on critical global challenges, the Commission has recommended the creation of a 20-30-40 coalition to counteract climate change and to break the gridlock on multilateral negotiations. Besides the G20 nations, the coalition should comprise the 30 cities affiliated to the World Business Council for Sustainable Development and the existing C40 Cities initiative. CyberEx, an early warning platform to understand common threats to data security, to benefit governments, businesses and individuals, is the other. The scepticism articulated in the report over the capacity of existing institutional arrangements to deliver results for the future is perhaps warranted. That should be read in the right spirit by all nations, particularly those that wield influence in shaping the global architecture.

A fresh opportunity in Nepal

The results of the elections to Nepal’s second Constituent Assembly are yet to fully come out but there is little doubt that the Nepali Congress is set to become the single largest party, followed by the Communist Party of Nepal (United Marxist-Leninist). The Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist), which won a majority of the seats in the 2008 election, has been routed and is expected to win fewer than a hundred places in the 601-seat House. The first Constituent Assembly had to be dissolved after it failed in its task of framing a Constitution even after its tenure was extended four times. Last week’s election was originally scheduled for November 2012 but was postponed repeatedly. The instability in Nepal belied the promise of the peace process that ended the Maoist insurgency and brought the rebels into the political mainstream. The Maoists have blamed their defeat in the election on electoral fraud and have demanded a probe. But the extent of the rout shows that it is more likely an expression of popular disillusionment and anger against the former rebels. Seen as the establishment of the past five years, they took the brunt of the blame for the dismal governance and inability to deliver a Constitution to the people, even though this was a collective failure of all parties. Nepali voters had rewarded the Maoists in 2008 because they were unhappy with the nepotism, opportunism and corruption of the traditional forces. With the Maoists copying the worst of these tendencies, voters saw no reason to give them another chance. The 2012 split in the party also cost the Maoists heavily.

The challenge for Nepal’s fractious political forces now is to make the fresh start provided by the election work. It is encouraging that after an initial threat to boycott the new Assembly, the Maoists have been more conciliatory; the victorious NC and the CPN (UML) have enough seats between them for government formation but they have expressed the readiness to consider the Maoist demand for a “government of consensus”. If Nepal is to go down this route again, the power sharing negotiations will hopefully avoid last time’s pitfalls. A national unity government will certainly help the Assembly’s main task of Constitution making, which Nepal’s political forces have agreed must be based on consensus. The last Assembly unravelled over the Maoist proposal, supported by Madhesi parties but opposed by the NC and the CPN(UML), to divide Nepal into identity-based federal units. This time, the parties have promised that they will ready a Constitution within a year. This can be achieved only through mutual accommodation. If there is a role for India, it should be to counsel the victors against triumphalism and the losers against playing the spoiler.

xaam.in

Relevant News / Current Affair for UPSC CIvil Service Exam 29-11-2013