CIHS – Centre for Integrated and Holistic Studies

Date/Time:

Academic Research or Hit Job?

Ashoka University paper deviously questions Indian electoral outcomes in the guise of research with very little basis or evidence Vinod Kumar Shukla It took over four years for Ashoka University to come up with 50-page research paper ‘Democratic Backsliding in the World’s Largest Democracy’ by Sabyasachi Das which terms 2019 Lok Sabha polls outcome as electoral fraud. The paper lacks objectivity when it outlines that polls were manipulated in closely contested constituencies. Manipulations at the time of voter registration, voting and counting are other findings that this paper boasts of. Insinuations that Muslims were deliberately de-franchised by removing their names from voter lists too figured in the report as one of the tools of manipulation. The research paper suggests that manipulation has its impact on nine to 18 seats with victory margin of three to seven per cent. Even if one were to believe that the data and findings were on dot, the outcomes would not have been tilted or would have remained unaffected as BJP had won 303 seats out of 543. BJP would have still formed the government even if it had lost all 18 seats as the paper claims. Another twisted argument claims that BJP won a disproportionately higher number of closely contested seats where it was in power. State cadre officers’ credentials have also been questioned in the report, They have been squarely held responsible for votes manipulation by charging that observers from state services of BJP-ruled states were in large numbers. Now, the interpretation that all state level officers resorted to manipulating outcomes to ensure a BJP victory was neither backed with evidence nor data or facts. This conclusion is more imaginary rather than being a fact. It’s libellous too. Let’s do a fact check on closely contested 98 seats with less than five per cent victory margins of which BJP had won 43 seats (roughly 44 per cent). Out of these seats, the BJP won 22 in states that it was in power. The paper in guise of research ignores the fact that BJP won equal number of seats from opposition parties ruled states. Ashoka University paper does not have any plausible explanation to insidious job in the name academic research.   Contrary to what Ashoka University academic claims, 2019 elections were not at all closely contested as BJP led by its mascot Narendra Modi had secured over 50 per cent votes share in 224 seats. This constitutes about 75 per cent seats that BJP garnered. Why does Ashoka University paper set aside a glaring fact that BJP bagged more seats in Uttar Pradesh in 2014 Lok Sabha polls at 71 when SP was in power. This is against 62 seats won in 2019 when it was in the saddle. In 2019, there was a Congress government in Madhya Pradesh but BJP had won 28 seats out of 29; it had won all seats in Rajasthan while nine out of 11 in Chhattisgarh. Karnataka too was ruled by the opposition when BJP and its ally had won 26 seats out of 28 seats. West Bengal, Odisha and Telangana were such states where BJP did well despite opposition governments. The Quint was quoted in the Ashoka University paper to point out variance in votes polled through Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) and votes counted. The paper claims that there was variance in 373 seats but was able to provide examples of 11 seats where it purportedly found discrepancies. Of these, five were won by the BJP and six by others. Actually the author needs basic lessons in politics and election dynamics as closely contested seats won by any political party by no means suggest manipulation. They have won with organisational strength, social engineering, compatibility of alliance partners, campaign strategy, strength of economic and development agenda, star campaigners and benefits provided to people by the government. In closely contested elections, taking voters to booths on polling day matters the most and BJP is good at it. Election management in BJP is done with such precision that it goes for person to person, door to door contact with volunteers or party people marked to each voter or the family. So, BJP predictions on victory or outcomes made periodically is based on its extensive campaign machinery inputs and not conjecture, predictions made by media outlets or hear say. Asoka University paper also talks about deletion of Muslim votes from electoral lists thereby questioning the very basic electoral credential in India that has been hailed as ‘biggest festival of democracy’ by international agencies as well. The report commits another big blunder by completely ignoring notices given to parties like Samajwadi Party of Akhilesh Yadav to provide proof in support of his allegations on deletion of muslims names from the electoral lists. Actually, the case of Muslim vote banks is the other way round as Bangladeshi and Rohingya infiltrators are illegally getting inducted into voter lists not only changing demographies but are a threat to democracy. So, Ashoka University report is not academic work but a hit job done on behalf of certain political parties.  Report findings or observations in such cases are predetermined and arguments, data points or methodology is designed to such false narratives. Such reports are later amplified by leaders like Arvind Kejriwal and Mamata Banerjee to drive their own nefarious agenda. They have always been questioning Election Commission of India, Electronic Voting Machines and voter verified paper audit trail (VV PAT) whenever they lost elections or people rejected them. If non-BJP parties were to be elected, then these very parties hail such ‘electoral outcomes’ as ‘victory to democracy’.  As if in second thought, Ashoka University meanwhile distanced itself from findings in the paper commission by the institution. But question remains, who assigned the project? Who funded it? The university must come clean as it puts a big question mark on credibility of constitutional bodies of the country like Election Commission of India. Ashoka University in any case is known in academic circles for debunking alternative socio-economic

Read More

Trudeau goes Khalistan, Pakistan way!

Latest reshuffle in his council of ministers may not have addressed concerns on Canadian soil becoming fulcrum of anti-India elements Rohan Giri Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has recently reshuffled his council of ministers ahead of the upcoming general elections. This reshuffle involved making change of portfolios and work responsibilities of ministers along with four Indo-Canadians. As Canada reconfigured its leadership, discerning and assessing its implications for the country’s partners like India becomes pertinent. Evolving political dynamics in Canada and resulting strategic adjustments warrant careful consideration in the global arena. In specific, four Indo-Canadian ministers’ responsibilities were changed or promoted: Anita Anand, Kamal Khera, Harjit Sajjan, and Arif Virani. Notably, Anita Anand was promoted as President of Treasury Board, transitioning from her previous role as the Minister of National Defense. Similarly, Kamal Khera moved from a senior portfolio to become Minister for Diversity, Inclusion, and Persons with Disabilities. Harjit Sajjan, having served as International Development Minister, now holds the position of Minister for Emergency Preparedness. Arif Virani, another Indian-Canadian and the representative of Parkdale-High Park in Toronto made his cabinet debut as the Minister of Justice and Attorney General. Understanding their influence and engagement within the sizeable Indo-Canadian community and Indian affairs becomes crucial owing to the significant role overseas Indians play in influencing New Delhi’s relations with Ottawa. Professor-turned-politician Anita Anand is particularly vocal about her Indian heritage taking immense pride in her grandfather, freedom fighter VA Sundaram, who worked alongside Mahatma Gandhi during the freedom struggle. Anand’s involvement extended to assisting the panel in investigating tragic 1985 Air India Kanishka bombing. On 35th anniversary of the bombing, she tweeted, “The victims of the bombing of Air India 182 and their families are in my thoughts today and always. I am privileged to know some of you and honour the memories of your loved ones with you.” Anita Anand also held a position on advisory board of the Canada India Foundation, an organisation established in 2007 to bolster bilateral ties. During the cabinet transition, Kamalpreet Khera, representative for Brampton West in the House of Commons has taken on significant role of Minister for Diversity, Inclusion, and Persons with Disabilities. Khera’s Indo-Canadian background goes back to her ancestors from Ropar in Punjab. She is known to have close ties with Navdeep Bains, a former Canadian politician who served as Minister of Innovation, Science, and Industry during 2015 – 21. There have been reports pointing to strong links Navdeep Bains has with Khalistani movement. Bains has allegedly been groomed by World Sikh Organization (WSO), a pro-Khalistan hard line organisation accused of radicalizing Sikh community and fostering divisions apart from piloting anti-India propaganda. Relationship between Navdeep Bains and Kamalpreet Khera is said to be more than just acquaintanceship. Bains is regarded as mentor and guide to Khera. Indian authorities have expressed their concern to the Canadian government multiple times regarding separatist activities on the latter’s soil. Prime Minister Trudeau’s cabinet reshuffle also sparked reports on Harjit Sajjan, his association with Khalistani elements and his tacit support for their radical activities. Hitherto Punjab Chief Minister, Captain Amarinder Singh had publicly ostracised Sajjan as a “Khalistani supporter”. Singh had been a proponent of imposing sanctions on Canada for its ‘open and covert’ support to Khalistani terrorists. Captain Singh had called for global pressure on Canada to prevent the use of its soil for perpetrating terror against India, particularly the Sikh community targeted by Khalistani terrorists. Reports pointed to Harjit Sajjan’s parents, Kundan Singh Sajjan and Vidya Kaur Sajjan’s long term membership of WSO. Another notable Indo-Canadian that figured in the latest cabinet reshuffle is Arif Virani, who spent 15 years as human rights and constitutional lawyer before entering politics. Virani is vocal about purported Islamophobia and remained deeply committed to the trumped up issue. Since his initial election, he consistently advocated against Islamophobia, both on the ground and within the Parliament. Notably, he sought inputs from Muslim groups on how to tackle online hate faced by Muslims before Liberals introduced Bill C-36 in June 2021. Primary objective of this bill was to combat online hate with focus on addressing Islamophobia that Virani thinks is prevalent. Arif Virani was involved in a study on M-103, a non-binding motion in the 42nd Canadian Parliament urging the government to condemn Islamophobia and all forms of systemic racism and religious discrimination. Additionally, he is associated with the Aga Khan Foundation of Canada, an organisation working in various countries. The foundation faced accusations of involvement in money laundering Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s decision to include Khalistani and Pakistani jihadist elements in his council of ministers may not go well with New Delhi. Comprehensive research conducted by veteran journalist Terry Milewski titled, “Khalistan: A Project of Pakistan” unequivocally demonstrates that the Khalistan movement poses not only a threat to India but also significant concern for Canada. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s undeniable link with anti-India elements underscore the risk it poses to bilateral relations and global security environment. (Author is operations manager at Centre for Integrated and Holistic Studies, non-partisan think tank based in New Delhi)

Read More

India, smart power in the making!

G-2 – US and India – super power grouping may not work for either side. Emerging and critical tech at fulcrum of bilateral engagement K.A.Badarinath The very talk of stitching up G-2 super power group between US and India during Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s state visit is rather an unforgettable moment. In a fluid global situation, whether G-2 would finally be reality or not is something for geo-strategic experts to analyse, separate grain from chaff and derive the implications. US press has been abuzz with possibility of President Joe Biden ably assisted by secretary of state Jake Sullivan to bring focus to the idea of G-2 – US and India – forming a super power group. This is akin to what was talked about in early ‘80s by the US security establishment that attempted such a grand grouping with the then reluctant and recalcitrant China. Later, there were reports that President Barack Obama had revived this G-2 grouping with China when Hu Jintao was the powerful general secretary of Chinese Communist Party and country’s President. This grand idea of US – China group gained popularity after two major think tanks, Center for Strategic and International Studies and the Peterson Institute for International Economics had revived the conversation in 2011. Pomp and show that surrounds Prime Minister Modi’s visit as globally most popular leader, forming a G-2 – US and India – is something that needs deeper understanding and analysis. US, world’s largest economic power and strategic powerhouse thinking of India as a G-2 ally is elating. Jack Sullivan is reported to be harbinger of this idea, if at all it works for both sides. As G-2, identifying common rivals, partners and competitors, may not after all be a good idea for both US and India in an ever evolving world order. From US perspective, depending heavily on its allies like Japan, Australia and India to checkmate China in Asia theatre and elsewhere including Asia Pacific is a calculative move. At the same time, complete breakdown of relations between China and US is not a feasible preposition. In fact, this complex security matrix explains why democratic white house under President Joe Biden is interfacing with all the three – Japan, India and China – this week to finalize its Asia strategy. US being a great ‘strategic ally’, the first to go to, may continue to work for India. That does not allow Indian foreign affairs establishment under Subrahmanyam Jaishankar to shed the ‘independent policy’ stance that has come to smart focus in recent past. India’s independent policy stance gained credence for New Delhi’s stand on Russia – Ukraine conflict, Covid-19 management, multi-faceted engagement as G-20 President. Not becoming part of a military alliance has been stated policy of India and there’s little or no scope for a change in this stance. It’s in this backdrop that India not joining NATO forces should be viewed notwithstanding the standing invitation from US. In the Russia – European Union standoff, India refused to side with one group or the other unlike China and US taking respective sides. As G-20 President, batting for African Union’s full membership speaks volumes. At the same time, engaging with Shanghai Cooperation Organization and Quad with equanimity brought was recognized by world powers as a responsible way for the 1.4 billion strong India as the largest growing economy for two consecutive years and hat trick to be hit. In this backdrop, emerging and critical technologies, removing export controls on transfer of this knowhow by US to its most trusted partner India could be the starting point to taking bilateral relations one notch above. Artificial intelligence, quantum computing, space, semi-conductors, dedicated telecom infrastructure for strategic heft, biotechnology, aerospace are among areas where export controls may have to be lifted and shared with India. For instance, buying ‘predator’ drones to enhance surveillance and ‘jet engines’ must make technology transfer integral to the two governments level defence deal. Refurbishing and servicing the US Naval ships in India should become more of a common practice rather than one off events. Areas like education, affordable healthcare, vaccines, medicines; solar energy and green hydrogen as well as joint defence production deals can be the next big step for the two large democracies that are open, flexible and transparent in their relations. Independence in foreign policy engagement at bilateral level and multi-lateral issues is something that India takes pride in. And, this independence in policy will have to be assiduously protected, cherished and propagated for India to play a larger, responsible and compassionate power to reckon with. Smartness with soft power image of India goes well to realize her dreams of ‘Vasudaiva Kutumbakam’, world as ‘one big happy family’ that’s humane. (Author is Director and Chief Executive, Centre for Integrated and Holistic Studies, non-partisan think tank based in New Delhi)

Read More

Is China’s paradigm on ‘mutual success’ real?

Beijing has to come clean on larger issues, shift in outlook welcome. India never lost its ‘eastern wisdom’ while engaging with Western partners. Rohan Giri In an editorial, Chinese Communist Party’s mouthpiece, Global Times on May 30 indicated a possible shift in its India outlook. For a change, it captioned the edit, “We morally, emotionally support India’s de-colonization”. This comment on inauguration of a new Parliament building getting rid of the British colonial re definitely reflects Chinese establishment’s intent to go a wee bit soft on India. It has also garnered the attention of leaders across the globe. This change of heart, if it bears out in reality, cannot be ignored. Pleasing gestures like this editorial as exhibited by China present an intriguing subject for examination. As per reports from Chinese embassy and consulates, over 60,000 visas have been issued to Indians visiting China in first five months of this year. Furthermore, Chinese missions globally have affirmed their readiness to grant more visas for purposes such as business, studies, tourism, work, and family reunions, should the need arise. Global Times editorial last week emphasized India’s commitment to de-colonization and self-reliance. It applauded India’s efforts to remove vestiges of colonial authority, such as renaming iconic buildings and limiting English usage. The article advised India to focus on its national strengths rather than seeking legitimacy through techniques and accolades from outside sources. Rational interpretation to ‘outside sources’ would be India’s multi-nodal foreign policy engagement with western powers. While congratulatory editorial in Global Times is in order, its caution against Western manipulation is old communist line seeking exclusive engagement with India. Global Times asking India to embrace the Eastern Wisdom is possibly a benign attempt to wean India away into its fold. Its emphasis on ‘mutual success’ of China and India is yet another line that many in India’s Left and centrist political discourse also subscribe to. The editorial does not mince words while warning India to stay away from US with the standard communist dogma that US was fueling enemity between India and China. In this context, there are big questions that Chinese communist leadership will have to come up with plausible and convincing answers. President Xi Jingping and his cronies may have to come straight on Galvan border mis-adventurism that led to troop’s deployment on either side of Indo-Chinese borders. China will have to offer an explanation on its collaboration with Pakistan on terrorism in the United Nations (UN) and mutual prosperity pitch with India which may not go hand in hand. Continued expansionist bids in Eastern Ladakh and Arunachal Pradesh, opposition to G20 conferences in Indian state Arunachal Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir, providing Chinese names to Indian cities and towns is something that China will have to justify.  Can this be the template for China’s Paradigm of mutual success? Tsinghua University’s Center for International Security and Strategy in 2022 report on “Chinese Outlook on International Security” has toed a different line on India. The study has bracketed India on par with US vis-à-vis threat posed to Chinese interests.  India’s threat to China has also been compared what was perceived in Japan vis-à-vis China even today. China has come up openly on its stand towards India rather than sending out mixed signals that confuse its communist cadres and their counterparts in India.   Global Times editorial also said, “In Chinese society, few people believe that India’s economic and social development will become a threat to China. The vast majority of people believe that the two countries can succeed together. We hope India can demonstrate more clarity and confidence in its dealings with China and the West.” In last three years, India’s position on Chinese threat perception has been consistent. It has in no uncertain terms said on more than one occasion that threat from China has risen multifold. Global Times editorial exhorting India to stay away from Western manipulations has come ahead of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Washington DC for a state visit later this month. China’s expectation that should not protect its defensive and offensive interests is rather unrealistic. India’s right to pursue an independent foreign and economic policy formulation, choice of friends in sync with its view seeking global peace needs to be respected. (author is operations manager at non-partisan think tank, Centre for Integrated and Holistic Studies based in New Delhi)

Read More

Much ado about something

Digital India bill should democratize information highways, digital ecosystem, address stakeholders concerns & not limit benefits to a big few Prachi Mishra In a few days from now, Narendra Modi government is likely to come up with first draft of the much-awaited Digital India Bill. If one were to go by officials, the bill is intended at strengthening information technology, security and information infrastructure in India. The Bill, when finally adopted by Parliament and enacted, will complement the Digital Personal Data Protection Bill, 2022 and Indian Telecommunication Bill, 2022. In last two decades, after IT Act, 2000 became operative there have been astronomical developments in technological innovation. To keep pace with these innovations, the act’s regulatory framework was amended. The IT Act Amendment of 2008 and IT Rules 2011 were rolled out to define cyberspace and provided ground for handling of digital activities in India. But, the Act was inadequate to address present-day concerns of cyber security, crime and do justice to privacy concerns of Indian people. Emergence of Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning, Quantum technologies, Metaverse, Big Data, Block chain, etc has thrown up new challenges in the regulatory framework. Given the limitations within the existing IT Act, a separate act has been in the work for a few months to address the growing digital and cyber demands of Indian people. In this backdrop, India’s economic interests can be furthered when the technological development and innovation apart from related regulatory framework is aligned. With growing penetration of digital technologies and increasing vulnerabilities of cyberspace, there is a need to ensure India’s national security was primacy. Reportedly, Digital India Bill, 2023 is intended at catering to India’s rising aspirations and become a catalyst in her growth and development while upholding people’s fundamental rights and country’s security concerns. Given the delicate balance that needs to be achieved through the new framework, the expectations from various stakeholders may have to be enlisted. Firstly, the Bill may have to address ethical concerns that are emerging as a consequence of disruptive technologies. Technological development will have to be seen as being morally correct, legitimate, and ethical. For instance, India should be able to address and counter adverse impact of artificial intelligence like deep fakes and misinformation. The new framework may evolve a robust and holistic mechanism to address issues related to cyber security. In 2022, as per CERT-in data, there were over 1.39 million cyber-attacks on India. This roughly over 253 per cent more than suck attacks reported for 2018. Hence, the Bill should put in mechanisms to resolve high volume and velocity of these cyber-attacks seen across sector, be it finance, banking, security establishment to political theatre.  Also, with highly disruptive Quantum technologies round the corner, the Bill must suggest ways to ensure cyber security in the new environment. The proposed bill may have to find solution to tackle the manifold rise in misinformation, hateful content and fake news that’s become the new normal in India. In last couple of years, big technology firms like Facebook and Twitter have been at loggerheads with the government on dealing with mis-formation on their respective platforms. The Bill will have to reflect a possible consensus of all stakeholders on dealing with misinformation, disinformation and fake news that’s rampant. The bill’s provisions should be aligned with innovation. At present, India’s patent tally is dismal and most technology is imported from the Western countries. Be it hardware or software, India’s patents fall behind big time. The Bill should give impetus and incentivize innovation in digital technologies. Additionally, it should augur well for all the stakeholders of digital ecosystem and not restrict the benefits disproportionately to a handful tech firms. The new dispensation may have to address issues like liability, accountability, and ownership of data and its usage. Of late, there have been cases where social unrest resulted in violence and arson because content guidelines for these platforms were amiss. Or, even the existing norms were violated. The Digital India Bill, 2023 will be discussed at a time when India has moved many notches above in many different fields of technological and digital innovation. Being home to 113 unicorns and third largest start-up economy, India’s innovation ecosystem is booming like never before. Also, with the Semiconductor Mission, the strong impetus on adopting digital technologies, and the National Quantum Mission in place, India is bound to grow steadily in the coming years. Stakeholders expect the bill to empower them, democratize the information high way and digital ecosystem, aid other relevant economic policies. India should ensure that all voices of the entire stakeholder ecosystem are heard and it is enacted in time. (Author is Research Consultant at Centre for Integrated & Holistic Studies, New Delhi based non-partisan think tank)

Read More

Kashmir on way to new vistas

G-20 summit next week will showcase India’s commitment to transform the valley into cradle of human peace, tourism and economic activity Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida showcased Hiroshima as harbinger of peace, fulcrum of development and civilizational connect by hosting G-7 summit. This high level global engagement happened 77-years after it was devastated by atomic bombs detonated by United States on August 6 and 9 in 1945 killing about 226,000 civilians. Change and makeover is law of life. And, Kashmir aligns perfectly well in India’s decision host the G-20 tourism working group next week in Srinagar. This provides perfect opportunity for India to showcase development, democratic transition, peace and tranquility brought to the paradise on earth in less than a decade. The decision to take G-20 to Kashmir may not be palatable to India’s adversaries that rake up non-issues. Showcasing Kashmir’s potential to become part of global tourism circuit cannot be missed by India’s friends and foes alike. Terror, islamist jihad and across the border meddling by non-constitutional actors is virtually a thing of the past as Jammu & Kashmir picked up pieces and moved on. Perceptible change that has dawned on Kashmir following the exodus of over 150,000 Hindus in 1990 is something to write home about. India’s decision to G-20 in Kashmir is part of its larger strategy to fully leverage its Presidency of the most influential global group this year and pep up the valley’s local economy and cater to upwardly mobile aspirations of the youth that have firmly said ‘no’ to violence, mindless killings in the name of jihad. The 200-odd meetings under India’s G-20 presidency have been spread to over 50 cities from Humpi in Karnataka to Siliguri in Assam moving away from the usual Delhi and Mumbai based engagements. Normally, cities spotlighted globally become big tourist destinations globally and that’s perhaps the idea in taking G-20 tourism summit to Kashmir. Let us not forget that Reykjavík, the capital city of Iceland turned into a global tourist hotspot after the US President Ronald Regan and General Secretary of Communist Party of Soviet Union Michael Gorbachev held their summit level talks in run up to nuclear power treaty between the two countries way back in October1986. Similarly Marrakesh, the western city of Morocco emerged as topline city for holidaying and tourism after it gave birth to the World Trade Organisation in 1994. Bringing new cities, locales and areas to global attention has not limited to leaders elsewhere. Historic summit level talks between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Chinese President Xi Jingping held in Ahmedabad after landslide victory of the Indian leader in 2014 has etched in the memory of global tourism circuit. In fact, as reports suggest, this gave idea to President Xi to host Modi in Chinese province of Shaanxi. Shaanxi also being the birthplace of President Xi’s father emerged as a regular tourist destination for both domestic and international travellers. From being friction point between India and Pakistan since 1947, Kashmir has moved on unrest and violence. India’s significant focus to restore peace and stability, political changes in 2019  has begun pay off dividends in the form of development, attracting investments, and enhancing tourism opportunities. On August 5, 2019, Union Home Minister Amit Shah piloted a proposal in Parliament to end Jammu and Kashmir’s special status and this also led to bifurcation of the state into two Union Territories. The amendment in Article 370 of Indian Constitution also turned out to be the turning point for positive changes and integration that paved the way for prosperous future, including economy, infrastructure, governance, and social welfare. Massive makeover of road networks, bridges, tunnels, and power infrastructure and enhanced connectivity with rest of the country is just one part in Kashmir returning to normalcy. Completion of the Zojila tunnel, the Ujh multipurpose Project and the engineering marvel Chenab rail bridge — the world’s highest railway bridge — are among major infrastructure projects that provided heft to transportation as well as unlock the region’s immense economic potential. Revival of grassroots democratic institutions, such as Block Development Councils leading to delegation of governance enabled people to have direct say in their affairs. This decentralization of power fostered inclusivity, accountability, and efficient utilization of resources, ensuring that development reached every corner of Jammu and Kashmir. While showcasing the development thrust, India may also go overboard to sell Kashmir as cradle of peace ready to host the international travelers seeking to find an alternative to Swiss Alps. Hosting G-20 meetings in Kashmir is also a tight slap on anti- India propagandists, jihadists and their handlers globally. G-20 tourism summit should be seen as just a beginning in transformation of the Kashmir valley.

Read More

China’s Camp David Moment?

Weaponizing economic prowess, military might and expansionist doctrines may limit China’s role notwithstanding Saudi Iran deal Dr Amritpal Kaur Camp David Accord of 1978 was a diplomatic coup for President Jimmy Carter. It was an Accord that brought open hostilities between Israel and Egypt to an end and peace in Sinai Peninsula. Though President Sadat of Egypt had to pay for the Accord with his life, it was an unprecedent moment in West Asia when a major Arab country concluded a pact with the Jewish State. It was also an exhibit of American diplomatic heft, a stroke of politics in optics where Muslim and Jewish states could be brought to the negotiation table. One assumption of world power is its belief that its mediation would be welcomed by parties engaged in disputes to break the stalemate as well as find a solution. Camp David is also an example to bring currency to the idea that a powerful mediator could possibly bring seemingly antagonist parties together and alter the tone of international relations. It also emphasizes psychological acceptance of the greater power by other nations. It is announcement of the superpower on global stage. Though US superiority could be contested even then, Egypt and Israel were forced into the accord. What perhaps could not have been denied is USA’ ability to project itself as an accepted world power.   Recently, China sought to enact its own Camp David moment through a deal between Saudi Arabia and Iran. Saudi Arabia is the leading Sunni country and Iran is an undisputed Shia leader. For decades these countries have been at loggerheads stemming from their alternate Islamic belief systems and competitive bid to be undisputed leader of the Islamic world. The deal between the two would be a milestone if it enables the two warring countries to better manage their differences better though permanent solutions are nowhere in sight. If this happens, then there’s outside chance to ring in peace across MENA region with direct implication for Yemen war that has been going on for years now. On the other hand, USA bid to broker a diplomatic deal between Saudis and Israel has not worked till now. US failure may be attributed to chilly relations between Washington DC and Riyadh since Democratic White House under President Joe Biden took charge. Also, Saudi Arabia seems to have played the China card deftly to counter-balance US, its long standing ally. Given the changing global power equations, countries seem to be playing one power against the other to secure their respective interests. In this melee, China has upped the diplomatic ante. By leaving East Asian shores and engaging with West Asia, China seems to be testing waters. Saudi Arabia – Iran deal may be an opportunity for China to attempt shifting its positioning globally more as a deal maker rather than being seen as a global encroacher. However, there are limits to Chinese capacities to act as a credible global power broker of first resort. Since 2013 there has been a sense of urgency in Chinese set up to project itself as an acceptable global power. But then, turning a global power may not be easy and has to turn a ‘magnanimous player’ rather than limiting itself to Chinese interests under Xi’s new doctrine. For long, West Asia, especially Saudi Arabia was seen as a close USA ally. Geographical location of Israel along with its security challenge, another close ally of USA, the need for petroleum products had necessitated good relations between the Saudis and the West. From Saudi perspective also, allowing China to broker a deal with Iran may tantamount to ‘testing waters’ with the dragon state, at the same time signaling to USA of diversification of its interests. Increased Chinese assertiveness and aggression coupled with ambition is the phenomenon which has taken the western world off-guard. Wolf Warrior diplomacy coupled with expansionist military posturing on the borders, both territorial and maritime points demonstrates Beijing’s intentions vis-à-vis it’s much sought after branding of a ‘peaceful negotiator’. ‘Image makeover bid’ of China has been seen through as it weaponised its economic power to coerce other countries across the oceans. Diversification of Supply Chains, Friend-shoring, Near-shoring, China plus One are the strategies adopted by several countries to hedge against the Chinese coercion.  Bonhomie between two communist powers China – Russia is something that worries to no end most global community that believes in free and open democratic order. This bonhomie got cemented in the wake of Ukraine crisis and their noise on ‘possible alternative global order’. Given the limitations, Saudi – Iran agreement may not translate into a Camp David Moment as the deal may not translate into gains for either of countries. Resumption of diplomatic relations between the two has been put on a tentative timeline which only suggest that there is a tip-toeing around the idea of lasting peace between leading Shia and Sunni countries. The acceptance of Chinese mediation has not convinced them to shed their differences unlike the accord between Israel and Egypt in the bygone era. The world has clearly moved away from cold war mentality of bipolar world order. Each country has its calculations in place of the blind camp following. For example, Saudi Arabia has accepted Chinese mediation because of its stressed relations with USA in aftermath of Jamal Khashoggi murder and pricing of petroleum products in the wake of Ukraine crisis. Same is the case with Iran. Crippling sanctions placed by USA under the Trump regime has pushed Iran into a tight corner with an acute economic impact felt across the country.  Covert role of Russia in the deal takes the number of mediators to two. China and Russia, it is argued, were busy enlisting anti-USA countries as friends. Apart from Iran, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia were others to be brought into the orbit. Will China manage to create one such group in the near future where world order gets altered? What would be Russia’s standing given that its

Read More

Unsettling Judicial Overreach

K.A.Badarinath Open debate on legalizing ‘same sex’ marriages, stakeholders consultation must precede Parliament enacting a law. Courts have no role This is not the first time that courts have gone on an overdrive with judicial over-reach. Supreme Court’s stand on legalizing same-sex marriages is yet another example of its bid to trample on powers of the executive and Parliament. While demarcation of powers between the three is clear, repeated bid by the courts to stamp on someone else’s toe is making things worse for an already chaotic but working democratic setup that India has evolved over 75-years. During the ‘Amrit kal’, the intervening 25-years to the centennial, this transgression by judiciary has to change in New India. At one point of time, Honourable Lordships were trigger happy to sit on judgment as to whether a girl or woman can avail menstrual leave not leaving it to states, governments or stakeholders to decide. Supreme Court made attempts to assign itself the task of appointing three commissioners to Election Commission of India which is crass. When the Covid-19 pandemic was at its peak in 2021, Supreme Court and High Courts expected Central Government and states to report on ‘virtual day to day basis,’ as to who were getting vaccinated and who were not. Latest is Supreme Court taking upon itself to decide on legality of same-sex marriages. Should this key socio, cultural, religious, dharmic and economic issue be left to courts? Erroneously, Article 21 and 19 (1) (a) of Constitution of India were invoked citing right to expression and dignity of those that favoured same sex marriages. There seems to have been temporary loss of memory that application of Section 377, Indian Penal Code was turned unconstitutional. And, thereby dignity and expression of homosexuality or lesbianism was restored giving men and women their right to sexual preferences in relationships. These relationships have been decriminalized My Lordships! Should courts be allowed to decide how one lives or marries? Do courts have the mandate to tamper with the institution of marriages in India that is not limited to just two individuals of opposite sex but the families and society at large? On the other hand, power to legislate on a delicate issue like marriages is definitely in the domain of the Government, Parliament, elected policymakers and definitely not with judges that do not support openness in their own appointments. Otherwise, there’s no reason why National Judicial Appointments Commission bill of 2014 was vetoed. Incidentally, Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh has rightly pointed out that marriages and related rituals were very sacred and sacrosanct in Hindu way of life that largely define and provides distinct face to Indian society. There’s awareness among stakeholders on deep divide and complexity in accepting same-sex marriages. In majority countries globally, same-sex marriages have not been legalized even if such relationships have been. In fact, in Indian context decriminalizing the same sex relationships in 2018 was humane in approach. In this backdrop, referring the same-sex marriages to a five-judge bench invoking Section 145 (3) of Indian Constitution needs closer scrutiny by stakeholders. Instead of making desperate attempts to hog headlines day after day, courts and honourable judicial officers should put their own house in order. Administering justice to common man or woman should take primacy in the way our judicial institutions function and not the urge to hog headlines next day, come what may. Reform in judicial system should be top priority of this elite club of judges that seek to run affairs of the country from precincts of their chambers. Phasing out adhocism, bringing in accountability, removing corruption and lobbying in courts that normally goes unreported or under-reported should be primacy of the Chief Justice of India who leads a pack of wise men and women. Administering justice in time is an issue that’s time and again flagged by several commentators including some top judicial minds. Over 4.9 crore out of five crore cases are pending in district courts across the country without respite to the commoners as per figures quoted by law minister Kiran Rijiju. As per the National Judicial Data Grid, over 93 crore cases were pending in subordinate courts, 49 lakh cases in High Courts and 57,987 cases in Supreme Court as of December 2022. Instead of restricting itself to constitutional issues, Supreme Court turning itself into regular court of appeals may be just one reason.  More than that, the top court unwilling to play its role in reforming the system is the second reason. Thirdly, indulging in issues that may or may not be of its concern like the ‘same sex marriages’ could be yet another possible reason. During ten years of policy paralysis of United Progressive Alliance regime of 2004-13, judicial overreach got into high gear. Fledgling era of coalition governments and dirty political bickering etched out ground for judicial mis-adventurism by extension too. Highest judicial officers led by his Lordship Chief Justice Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud should take the first step towards making courts and related institutions relevant to 1.4 billion Indian people. My Lordships give judicial system a chance!   (Author is Director & Chief Executive of New Delhi based non-partisan think tank, Centre for Integrated and Holistic Studies. Views expressed are personal)

Read More

Explainer: Recognition of same-sex marriages

On March 13, 2023, Indian apex court transferred a plea for recognition of same-sex marriages to the constitutional bench. Justice DY Chandrachud, PS Narasimha and JB Pardiwala listed the hearing from April 18, 2023. In an affidavit, Indian government has opposed the plea seeking legal recognition of same-sex marriages. Indian government said that marriage is accepted ‘statutorily, religiously and socially’ only between a biological man and a woman. The affidavit argued that any deviation from this accepted form could only be voted by lawmakers and not ruled by courts.

Read More