Modi's Foreign Policy Churn

 Modi’s Foreign Policy Churn

 Brookings Institute’s Bruce Riedel thinks it is now an India-America alliance  versus a Pakistan- China one. He says Obama’s America is once again showing a preference for India over Pakistan, like in fellow Democrat JFK’s time - in those 1,000 days between 1960 and 1963, nicknamed ‘Camelot’.

It is true enough that we disappeared conceptually behind the USSR’s Iron Curtain for many years thereafter, even though we tried to project ourselves as the champion of the post-colonial nations in the Non-Aligned Movement. But we only emerged, blinking in the free world’s sunlight in the eighties, after the fall of the Berlin Wall, and the dismantling of the USSR.

Riedel quite ignores however, the pressing American desire to contain China  in  2015. And its need to use sizeable and populous India for the purpose,  in the South Asian and Indian Ocean theatre certainly, but also as a soft power globally.

While there may an element of veracity in this scenario, with India and the US each looking at it from their own unique, and not necessarily common perspectives, it is far from the whole truth. India’s adversarial and mistrustful attitude towards China has changed under Modi, who seems willing to leave behind the humiliations of 1962 in the interests of ‘The Asian Century’.

As for the long-standing Western tendency to hyphenate India and Pakistan, and even the needs of SAARC versus those of India; even the US now, more often than not, looks at India and China together instead. The hostility of the West regarding India as a Soviet stooge is now truly gone.

Pakistan, failing, near bankrupt, troublesome, devious, and bristling with terrorists, seems to have disappeared into China’s armpit in strategic terms, particularly after the US pull-out from Afghanistan and more so after China’s recent $47 billion dollar embrace.

And though the Sunni  jihadis/mujahideen in ISIS is threatening the world by saying it is on the brink of acquiring a nuclear weapon from Pakistan, Western intelligence sees it more as a Saudi/Pakistani prompted ploy. A scare tactic designed to retard the normalisation of relations with Shi’ite Iran, and the lifting of cruel sanctions against it after decades.

But this ISIS boast could well turn out to be real, if its supporters go through with their plan to create a true Frankenstein. This could precipitate an unprecedented and sudden nuclear conflict with a savage ‘non-state actor’. But till then, it is a matter for the covert organisations like Mossad, the CIA, MI-6, the successors of the KGB, and others, to head off  the Pakistani ISI and ISIS nexus at the pass. Pakistan itself may have to be quarantined, and its nuclear weapons brought under firm international control.

And India’s relationship with Russia, though nostalgic about the vanished  alliance with the USSR, has much less going for it now, in a new, multi-polar world, in which India too aspires to become one of those poles.  

And this irrespective of earning a seat as a permanent member in the UNSC, because there will inevitably have to be other inductees such as Germany, Israel, Japan, perhaps even Pakistan,  in addition to the present five. But India is working on its wider responsibilities, even visiting the little staging points in the Indian Ocean to suit.

The expanded UN Security Council, should it happen, promises to become even more factional and unwieldy than it is at present. But the fact that there are multiple new contenders underscores the point that the world has turned de facto multi-polar. This, in the absence of US willingness to being globocop in perpetuity.

Apart from the ideological reservations it may have in this regard, even the US cannot afford the responsibility to keep the ‘free world safe from harm’, with its humungous associated costs; any more  than Britain could   keep up with any more than symbolic commitments to its erstwhile empire in the Commonwealth.

Therefore each nation must work out the terms of its coexistence, and the bilateral relationship is as important as any G-8, ASEAN, SAARC, and so on.

One obvious reason for us not necessarily getting under the eiderdown with America in any kind of tight embrace, is because India today is not comfortable substituting being a Soviet satellite with becoming an American one. There are unfortunately no guarantees in today’s world, even if we were to do so, as Australia under ANZACS and indeed NATO, is finding out.

In reality too, though we may need new friends and allies, we are not keen on playing a tied and hobbled foreign policy game for uncertain reciprocity with anyone.

China, on its part, is eager, now that Tibet is firmly in its grasp, and the erstwhile Middle Kingdom is clear and away the second biggest economic power in the world, to control the irritants of the colonial British McMahon Line. Instead, it wants to ramp up its business cooperation with India. China too hopes to exert a great deal of geopolitical influence on India in the process.

India, on its part, must consider its own advantages along its growth path, forging multiple and overlapping alliances as it does so. To an extent, working with China and Japan simultaneously already demonstrates this outlook.

Meanwhile, India is inching closer to oil rich and Shi’ite Iran, having signed an agreement to develop its Chabahar port at last,  (tacitly approved by the US,  which is doing some removal of obstacles in its relationship with Iran itself),  but much to the chagrin of both Saudi Arabia and Israel. This development will give us a new sea-land route to friendly and mineral rich Afghanistan , and help us pipe in Iranian/Omani gas as well, without involving access via Pakistan in both instances. 

The Indian move to close the gap with Iran has no doubt been noted by China, Pakistan, Afghanistan, the US, Saudi Arabia, Israel, amongst others. But, in today’s geopolitics, it will not get in the way of strengthening bilateral relationships with each country, and others such as Iraq and Oman in the region, as well.

Strategic new beginnings with Australia, Canada, Saudi Arabia, France, Britain, Russia, America, China, Mongolia, South Korea, Myanmar, Vietnam, Bangladesh, Nepal , Sri Lanka, Bhutan, Mauritius, The Seychelles, Fiji and so on, have all been undertaken over the last year. Between Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Foreign Minister Sushma Swaraj,  and other senior officials, a total of 102 countries have been visited.

While some quarters both at home and abroad have failed to grasp the significance of Modi’s great foreign policy churn, others see it as a classic manthan, bound to yield great benefits, not only in the second year of this administration, but for years to come.  

 For: The Pioneer

(1,108 words)
May 26^th,   2015
Gautam Mukherjee

How To Be Green And Prosperous Too

How To Be Green And Prosperous Too

Another World Environment Day will roll around on June 5^th . It will witness an ever more populous India, with major air, water, flooding, drought, avalanche, earthquake, forest cover, flora ,fauna, piscine, and waste management problems.  

The developed world, measuring these things in tradable green ‘credits’, may well focus on India’s shortcomings, having   already tackled many such red-letter issues  for themselves.

Nevertheless, it cannot evade culpability for the complex phenomenon of global warming, the cumulative bill for environmental ravages and neglect since the beginning of the industrial revolution; long after the apparent wounds have healed.

But for us in India, the causes of environmental degradation are not emanating from just industry and infrastructure development, but the pressures of a huge subsistence level population desperate for cheap water, fodder and fuel. Still, an emerging nation, cannot afford to be stymied.  We cannot stay backward paradoxically, because the developed world has gone too far forward!

Most people who champion the environment today, tend to take an adversarial attitude, with a blinkered view. They advocate putting a complete stop to anything that could damage the environment further. But, they rarely succeed in seeing this through, because there is no marriage of developmental aims with environmental objectives.

Besides, much of the alarming statistic and argument used by such organisations incite and outrage irresponsibly. Their conclusions tend to extrapolate too wildly from sample data, and are sometimes based on inaccurate hypotheses.

For example, even though nuclear power is clean, some militant environmentalists use the few leak or accident instances globally, to oppose further nuclear power plants anywhere, no matter how advanced, and how much better secured against accidents.

And again, a country like India with ample coal cannot wilfully ban its mining and use to generate much needed electricity. But modern mining techniques and scrubbing technology have come a long way, and can, if used, largely solve the problems.

Top end automobile companies too have improved their engines to drastically reduce fuel consumption and pollutants. So much so, that they have put a crimp in the commercial viability of the new-age battery operated vehicles, still in the early days of their own technology cycle.

India’s forest cover, after going downhill from 1947 to 1995, has started to reverse the trend. It has improved some 7% since 1995.

There is also a renewed emphasis on solar, hydro and wind energy. In myriad small ways too greater awareness and legislation is playing its part. There is mandatory water harvesting, ground water recharging and the like. Our garbage management is still poor but improving slowly.

And this Government, with its toilet building programme, and Swacch Bharat campaign, is also determined to finally stop polluting the arterial and culturally potent Ganga. It also plans to dredge it for use as a thriving inland water way.  There are also advanced plans to link up the major rivers to provide more irrigation and prevent floods. Implementation, of course, is the key.

The current Environment Minister Prakash Javdekar has been frenetically declogging many projects held up for want of environmental clearance under the UPA. Some involve national security, others are vital to the nation’s infrastructure or commercial needs, but these fly in the face of environmental orthodoxy. But surely, where a road, a port, an aerodrome, an industrial corridor, or one for railway passengers/ freight must go through a certain execution path, it must.

The damage to the environment, precious as it is, must be compensated by turning a corresponding, or larger, amount of wasteland or desert into an appropriate sanctuary. Every state could build new protected wildernesses covering thousands of square miles in aggregate under such programmes. 

We are by no means doing all we can for the environment, but it cannot be used to act as a developmental road block.  And so, as the impresario said to the songstress, filthy or clean, the show must go on.  

For: The Quint

(647 words)
May 25^th, 2015
Gautam Mukherjee

The Task Ahead

 

 The Task Ahead

 Now that the first, foundational year of the Modi Government is done with, what is the task ahead? Is the economy, which must enable and drive the desire for Vikas and transformation at tipping point yet?  But what does this mean, what level suffices?

Is the economy fulfilling its promise when it grows from a low of 4.4% of GDP, at its nadir under the UPA, to a near-time zenith of 7.4% this year, and on to almost double digits over the remaining four years? Is too much being made of the tag of having the fastest growth rate in the world today, when the rate itself, and indeed, the present overall size of the economy, is vastly inadequate to address our needs?

Is this 7.4% headed towards 9% of GDP, rosy as it sounds, enough to match the very grand ambitions projected for India? No, actually we need a much more explosive growth engine, a brute of a sports car as opposed to an elegant sedan, that must rocket ahead in double digits for the next two to three decades. Then, and only then, given our gargantuan population and rate of population growth, can we become a notable developed country, and decisively eliminate at least the most grinding poverty.

Another modest inflection point of sorts, a beginning, may indeed have arrived already, as we may see a soaring take-off in infrastructure and manufacturing projects in year two. This will be fuelled by billions in foreign investment, coaxed out of 18 foreign state visits made by Modi in year one. But will Modi’s far less energetic Government be able to iron out the wrinkles as promised, and in time to receive such intended largesse?

The present pattern of   incrementalism and gradualism is simply not good enough, except in comparison to a catatonic UPA between 2010 and 2013. It is at great variance to the bold promises routinely made by Modi that make us expect a lot more.

For a government with a historic majority not seen in 30 years, it has been dithering and unsure in practice, over cautious, diffident, and slow on every front, even as it hesitantly grapples with a tumultuous Opposition in Parliament. An Opposition that should have remained thoroughly demoralised if the Modi Government had hit the ground running.

The question is not whether this Government is making steady progress, as the one year celebrations are at pains to point out; but what great systemic changes can Narendra  Modi bring about, because he has not  done much on this front so far.

Not a lot, that is, beyond easing the logjam somewhat, and passing some key and long pending legislation, conducting some well-run auctions of national resources and getting things moving on the defence preparedness front. This is better than predecessor Manmohan Singh and the UPA, of course, but that is not saying very much.

Modi has, after all, systematically and wilfully fired the imagination of this nation of 125 crores of people, but delivered a damp squib in comparison. Where is the daring expected from him administratively, except in a few infrequent but characteristic flashes?

The loyal voting public that still gives him a minimum approval rating of over 60% in recent opinion polls, believes NaMo is a tall leader, a historic man of destiny, much taller than his Party and RSS backers, raised to the top job to realise India’s true potential at last.

The voting public, that third of the polity on average that is the solid Modi supporter, instinctively feels he can lead this country into an unprecedented renaissance, comparable only with Bharat’s legendary past. This lot is impatient with democratic process, and wants swift action to deliver prosperity and jobs.

But for this to come about, Modi has to show his true colours, assuming them to be that of a committed free-marketeer. The erstwhile dynamic Chief Minister of Gujarat seems to be somewhat lost in South Block and Race Course Road, and his team of cabinet colleagues appear to be inadequate to their tasks, thoroughly dominated by an ancien regime bureaucracy.  

Modi’s own  supposedly clear-cut and mercantile touch is missing from his governance across the board, all except for his personally superb handling of foreign affairs. In this, in a very short time, he has raised India’s profile around the globe as a place ready to do business and grow for mutual benefit. And this, without the constraints and ideological timidity of the past.

If this were a totalitarian system like China’s, Modi could perhaps have rammed his vision through, as Deng Xiaoping in his time did, giving China three decades of over 10% growth that continued year on year well after Deng’s death. President Xi Jinping of the present tense might be able to do the same too, despite the dictates and greater complexity of changed circumstances, and a very different geopolitical scenario.

But in a vibrant democracy like India’s, the undertow of the past, particularly  rich with the emotional rhetoric of a long running socialist script, the way forward can only come with an abrupt turn.

What Modi must do when he finds the political courage, is become a Kemal Ataturk style figure. He must engineer a veritable lurch to the right. A turn that is so profound, as to catch the entire political class by surprise and leave them scurrying to catch up to the brave new world of possibilities he opens up.

Instead the Opposition today has once again grown comfortable in mining its old shibboleths, its rhetorical accusations, hollow though they are, of a ‘suit boot Sarkar’ working only for its rich cronies, while the corrupt and disgraced Congress Party shamelessly affects to bleed afresh for the poor and the under-privileged!

The rump of a Congress presence has revived because of a mysterious hesitation in the Modi Government. Why is this? Is it afraid of being anything other than Centrist with a tinge of the Left based on political calculations for important Assembly elections coming up shortly? But will this wolf in sheep’s clothing act help it in Bihar and beyond?

Perhaps the hesitation is doing more harm than good, as the Modi Sarkar is looking lost and uncannily like the UPA extended, without, that is, the corruption and the paralysis. It needs to make dramatic moves however, because that is why it was elected, and attempting to be too much of all things to all people will not help its cause.

There must be drastic changes made in order to deliver second stage structural reform. Changes such as booting out the multi-layered taxation regime, gutting it to match the lowest levels of taxation in the developed world, and that too in  one fell swoop. Cutting, interest rates, not at the rate of a pathetic 25 basis points at a time, but lowering  it dramatically to 4% or lower at one go, right now. Not dithering on the side of a sterile caution that has served to only leave us behind, but making the rupee fully convertible this year.

The Government needs to eliminate restrictive labour laws in their entirety and let market forces prevail. This will signal the arrival of a bold and confident new India to the foreign investor and encourage it to take the plunge. Doing away with the concept of land acquisition and ‘land use’ as such, and buying land at market rates instead, based on demand and supply. Avoiding protectionism wherever possible. Cutting all subsidies and letting global commerce make up the difference.

Moves such as these, made en masse, will mean such a profound departure from present practice, that there will be no way back to the socialism of yore. This,  just as there has been no going back after the first stage reforms of 1991.

But even as things stand, the Land Bill, despite the lightning and thunder it has provoked as a flash in the pan, will pass in parliament very soon. So will GST and every other piece of legislation this Government proposes in future. This is because of the NDA’s combined strength in both houses in a joint sitting, enough to give it a comfortable majority, as long as it carries its own flock.  

In addition, the fact that it is working on both the AIADMK under Chief Minister
Jayalalithaa, and the TMC under Mamata Banerjee, is also of considerable significance going forward. And the Modi Government, keen on consensus and mindful of democratic traditions, is insisting on going through the niceties of building an accord with other elements and fragments of the Opposition too. This includes the BJD, the SP, and the BSP. The aim is to isolate the envious and contentious Congress in the process as well.

So, at a minimum, as we go into year two, the  Government knows that its  legislative agenda will pick up speed. This too is bound to make it more assertive in future as it listens to the clamour for delivery from all quarters.

 For:Swarajyamag

(1,496 words)
May 24^th, 2015
Gautam Mukherjee

Roll Over Or Make Over

 

Roll-over Or Make-over?

 

A year into Modi’s first term, the paralysis is gone. The main emphasis has clearly been on garnering billions in foreign investment to transform India. This even as all plans, tone, tenor, perspectives, indicate an ambition to stay on for at least two terms. Sadly, there are few green shoots visible as yet.

The GDP may be up, pulsing higher than a slowing but much bigger China, but it does not show. At best, its gone into the foundations. The improvement in the Gross Domestic Product (GDP), the Current Account Deficit (CAD), even the rate of inflation, is thought to be primarily because of an international halving of oil prices.

The captains of Indian business and industry however are murmuring their satisfaction. But this is praise from the patricians, always a dangerously elite demographic.

Foreign investors agree, and will certainly be the leitmotif of the first term when we look back in 2019. They are listening carefully to who is saying what, lining up their joint venturing strategies for the cornucopia to come.

There is defence manufacturing, railways, industrial corridors, ports, power, major infrastructure development, next stage farm modernisation, food storage and distribution back bones, nuclear power plants, a revamped equity and debt market, vehicles, solar, hydro and wind, electronics, software.  The list goes on.

The projected numbers are in billions, even trillions of dollars. India is the biggest potential opportunity on the globe today. But Modi must deliver: the land, the labour defanged, the environmentalists checked. He must buck the tide of an established socialist world-view.  

We do not need 60% of our population on the land. America grows more food than any other country using mechanisation, science, and just 5% of its much smaller population. But, much of our rural population have to be retrained and gainfully employed elsewhere. There is an obvious cart and horse conundrum here.

The ‘captains’, meanwhile, are amplifying Modi’s message better than the Government, saying that a very different outlook is now in power, and it is engaged in the formulation of far-reaching, unprecedented, change.  To the ordinary citizen, they are saying, in the face of a furious Congress - support Modi, be patient.  

But unfortunately there are go-slowers and doubters within as well. The RBI Governor Raghuram Rajan,  preaches a very unpopular caution in the face of an enormous pent up demand for roaring growth. Finance and I&B Minister Arun Jaitley, the virtual number two in the Government, could have been P Chidambaram because of the similarities between them. A bridgehead between the old Advani led BJP and the new Modi dispensation,   Jaitley is, of course, very familiar with the former  Government.  He is also full of a puzzling caution, bureaucratic  exceptionalism, and a damning continuity. 

Taxes continue to be high and foreign investment unfriendly. The Government’s messaging is feeble in comparison to the Opposition’s. The CBDT seems untethered and unsupervised.  In short, Modi’s much bolder economic vision appears to be subverted by his own Government.  

The public meanwhile has seen neither bread nor circuses over the year, and is definitely not amused. The opinion polls may still give Modi over 70% positive ratings, but the public is a little angry for perhaps being played for fools.  

The mangled Congress has seized upon this disconnect for dear life, taunting the Modi Sarkar for being anti-farmer ( big potential votes in 2019), promoting suited-booted pro-crony capitalism ( no impact on votes, but very important job creators),  being a manic global traveller with nothing to show for it, and running a Government  of One.

Whatever has passed the legislature or administrative muster on its way to implementation, are claimed to be UPA initiatives. But nobody is willing to give  Modi marks for shifting the logjam and setting the stage for deliveries in year two. So, undaunted, the Modi Sarkar is getting set to blow its own first anniversary trumpet very soon.

For: The Quint

(647 words)
May 21^st, 2015
Gautam Mukherjee

 Gautam Mukherjee, entrepreneur and former corporate executive, is an incisive economic and political commentator.

The Chinese Fandango

 

The Chinese Fandango

 As Prime Minister Narendra Modi goes on his much anticipated Chinese return State Visit, is China in the process of informally annexing Pakistan, in a sort of neo-USSR embrace? Are they building a dragon patterned Chinese Screen, to replace the old Bamboo Curtain of the Cold War years?

This, even as there is great potential of the India-China relationship being ramped up to unprecedented highs, involving billions in Chinese investment and infrastructure know-how. India is also simultaneously cooperating with Japan with equal ardour, ignoring long standing Sino-Japanese antagonisms. She is also joining hands with both Russia and America wherever possible, particularly on her ‘Make in India’ initiative. On this very trip, South Korea too may also get involved with helping India build warships.

In fact, the Modi foreign affairs doctrine that has emerged over the year, stresses bilateral progress with all who can be mutually benefited. This includes Australia, Canada, France, Israel, the UK, and Iran; the SAARC countries on our doorstep, even Pakistan, if only common ground can be found.

And all this, without the traps of Nehruvian non-alignment, and the geopolitical blocks it had created in the past. India is, under Modi, deliberately and pointedly side-stepping the bilateral antagonisms that may exist between some of our re-engaged friends and seeing its own way clear.

But, yes, a big brotherish Chinese move to become the dominant power is afoot in Myanmar, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bhutan, all part of a sinuous, metaphorical, new Silk Road dreamt up by President Xi Jinping. All roads do lead to the erstwhile Middle Kingdom.

Could India fall to becoming a Chinese client-state too? It seems highly unlikely, despite massive Chinese competitiveness, because of our size, our engineering and software prowess, our geopolitical importance to others, and the maturity of our democratic systems. We are militarily much weaker today than China, but may not remain so in the decades to come. And our GDP growth rate may be second to none for years going forward.

With Pakistan, there is no contest between itself and China. It has long been the recipient of Chinese largesse by way of infrastructure, nuclear and military hardware, and ‘most favoured nation’ treatment. This, even when it was partnering the US in the Afghanistan theatre.  

But what is the risk involved in an informal annexation of a country bristling with Islamic radicals?  It is one the Chinese seem willing to take, with the newly announced $ 47 billion investment corridor going right through the country in an explosion of fraternal affection. It boldly traverses Pakistan from China’s own restive Xinkiang Province, via POK, the capital Islamabad, and on, across, all the way to  Gwadar Port in Baluchistan, on the Arabian/Persian Gulf.  

The Chinese have earlier, already developed and modernised Gwadar Port to serve as their access to the oil rich Gulf region. And they are also mining for minerals in natural resource rich Afghanistan.

Is this massive ambition only fair and appropriate for a nation like China, with trillions in investible reserves, a slowing domestic economy and manufacturing export market? Why should it not build up its regional and strategic footprint when it has such a compliant ally in Pakistan?

Pakistan, which many call a failed Islamic State, besieged by its own radical fringe,   ever ready to be used for a price, long dependent on hand-outs from both the US and China, will receive vital economic life support, along with the implied military security from this investment.

India is seen to be not protesting the matter, partially because it would be futile. And partly because a Pakistan which is, in any case a semi-formalised satellite state of China’s, brought into a closer embrace, will probably make for a more stable neighbourhood.

It is even likely China will get Pakistan to behave if its India relationship demands it, though it is also free to use it as a pressure tactic, its cat’s paw, as always, through our being part of the Soviet block years. Isn’t North Korea serving a similar purpose for Beijing too, and what can any other country, including the mighty US, do about it?

Pakistan, despite its ever increasing nuclear arsenal, will not want to engage India in formal military confrontation. But it can be an influencer and conduit, even a proxy player in the West Asian region, smarting at the geopolitical shift of the US once again towards Iran, amongst the reduced clout of the oil rich region. The sulking is evident from the reluctant attendance at the forthcoming Gulf Cooperation Region Summit to be held in Washington and at Camp David.

The abiding worry and threat in Xinkiang and Pakistan alike, that won’t dissipate just because China seems undaunted by it, is from domestic, home-grown Islamic terrorism.

In Pakistan it seems to be growing wings, recently bringing down a helicopter with shoulder held missile launchers, downing two Ambassadors in the process. The target however was no less than the Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif himself.

These terrorists, grown powerful under Pakistan’s ‘non-state actors’ policy, are now Frankenstein monsters, with many sympathisers in the Pakistan political, armed, and intelligence establishments.

How long therefore, before these people get their hands on a nuclear weapon? And what will that mean for the Pakistani State and its Chinese patrons? India may be a declared target for being infidel and idolatrous, but it is not really the jihadi’s obstacle on the road to power and influence. And neither is the hoary- bug bear of Kashmir.

The highly militarised Pakistani State and its excellent intelligence organisation, the ISI, has long liked to believe it can use the Pakistani Taliban, the LeT and its affiliates, in Pakistan, across the border in India, and internationally, as a fifth column and to great effect. They are useful, per Pakistani covert policy, to wage guerrilla war and foment subversion wherever they want.

But, increasingly, as the terrorists have gained strength, they are less amenable to being controlled. The Pakistanis and their Chinese masters may be making a very big  conceptual and strategic mistake with regard these non-state actors. They are not bound by any code or protocol.

Kashmir is the flagged issue that these neo- jihadis are happy to keep alive, because it gives them freedom, money, arms, training, and political clout. But, as the time goes on, it is control of the State itself that they want. It is the bigger prize by far, a nuclear armed Pakistani State, won, not via the ballot but by the jihadi bullet; with the infrastructure building Chinese as partners by default.

For: The Pioneer

(1,091 words)
May 12^th, 2015
Gautam Mukherjee

NCMEI Needs To Integrate With The Mainstream

NCMEI Needs To Integrate With The Mainstream

Did the previous UPA Government, in the first flush of their unexpected 2004 victory, leaning, as usual, on its traditional minority vote- banks, go too far out on a limb on minority rights?

Did it pass a law with a possibly unconstitutional key provision? Did it over- do ‘intent’ in the drafting of the National Commission for Minority Educational Institutions (NCMEI) Ordinance of November 2004, and the subsequent Act of Parliament, promulgated in January 2005?

That the UPA was in a hurry to consolidate its minority favouring credentials, after languishing for eight years in the Opposition is understandable. And a law on the subject was indeed a promise made in its Common Minimum Programme (CMP).

The ordinance, and subsequent  law  was enacted on the basis of  Article 30 of the Indian Constitution, which in part states: ‘ All minorities whether based on religion or language shall have the right to administer educational institutions of their choice’.

So far, so good, as a solid common-weal provision, but to turn it into a  hermetically sealed fiefdom was probably a subversion of the constitutional aim. The question is, was it deliberate or unintentional?

The Indian Constitution does not expressly state that the regulatory board that oversees such minority educational institutions must also be peopled exclusively by the self-same minorities.

To do so would have implied that people belonging to the majority community of Hindus, are not to be trusted to oversee the workings of minority educational institutions. That the Hindu cannot do so in a fair, unbiased, and above-board manner. But this is shades of the Jinnah-led Muslim League that led to the creation of Pakistan!

This baseless slur was therefore  unlikely to have been the intention of the authors of the Indian Constitution, or the broader Constituent Assembly, that voted it into effect. But it is clearly, either by design, or oversight, or foolishness, how it turned out, in the letter of the NCMEI Act of 2005.

The danger of this provision enshrined in the NCMEI Act of 2005, that has only now been challenged, is that it legitimises the notion that a rank- and-file Hindu, a High Court Judge to boot, just because he belongs to the majority community, is somehow unfit to sit as a member or chairperson in the quasi-judicial NCMEI. This, even though the candidates may have been successful, even eminent, in the higher judiciary!

Watching the NCMEI in practice over almost ten UPA run years, is to see a clear pandering to the Muslim vote bank, by giving it control over its educational institutions, with the Government restricting itself to funding all newly created affiliates to its Central Universities.

But this key discriminatory and divisive provision, of excluding the Hindus from  an executive role in NCMEI, has come back into contention now, ten odd years after the Act became law.

The NCMEI Act itself has been recently challenged via a PIL in the Allahabad High Court, for being both unconstitutional, and in violation of the principles of secularism that the UPA otherwise vociferously espouses.

And not only has this PIL been admitted by the Honourable  High Court of Uttar Pradesh, but the Court has, in turn, asked for explanations from the University Grants Commission (UGC), the Government funding agency for educational institutions, and the Secretary, NCMEI, incidentally, a Hindu, to be filed before it shortly .

The alleged discriminatory anomaly,   could possibly be unintentional,  a consequence of weak drafting in the law, a common enough problem  with  quite a few  parliamentary bills. And this Bill, passed in haste by our legislature in 2005, is  nevertheless expected to be at least judicially examined, if not rectified, by order, now.

This can be done, either by passage of a parliamentary amendment, of its own volition, in recognition of its past error. This is not unprecedented, as this Act has been amended quite a few times already. It could also, of course, be changed as a consequence of the  Allahabad High Court’s expectedly favourable verdict.

However, should neither be forthcoming, the PIL filed by a group of 11 Hindu lawyers from Lucknow, will most likely go on appeal, all the way to a Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court, for final adjudication.

Is it constitutionally correct to exclude Hindus from sitting in the NCMEI on an unfounded presumption of their bias? The idea, if it is found to be true intent, is not only offensive, but flies in the face of  equity and justice for all citizens of India. How does our completely non-communal  military run so well? But if the Central Government starts making such pernicious distinctions where will it lead us and our unity in diversity?

In a sensitive and crucial area like education, that is, after all, meant to be open to all comers, this sort of cynical  affirmative action, gone wrong, can pervert the course of institutions financed and aided by the Central Government, leaving it without effective remedy.

Western countries, almost uniformly born out of the convulsions of the Christian faith, the centuries of bloody warring between Catholicism and Protestantism, pogroms against Jews and Muslims, have now become practically secular.  Sickened by this gory past, and the manipulations of the clergy through recent history, hardly 4%  of the Europeans go to Church or practice any form of active Christianity now.

But even then, in their bitterly acquired wisdom, and after two horrific world wars, they do not allow the minorities, whether they be new immigrants from the former colonies, or indeed historically embedded ones, to dictate the course of their own educational institutions. This irrespective of whomsoever may have set them up, or are presently running them, by excluding themselves, the majority, from a say!

The offensive provision in the NCMEI Act, as per the PIL admitted, bars anyone that does not belong to a minority, either by religion or language, to be a chairperson or a member off the NCMEI.

But, since it has the powers of a Civil Court, another, more understandable provision says that any member or chairperson appointed, must have been a High Court judge previously. This has not been adhered to, except for the first and one and only Chairman of the NCMEI, to date.

The Chairman of the NCMEI has been in place from inception in 2004. He is one Justice MSA Siddiqui, a retired Delhi High Court judge. In addition, there is only one member listed in 2015, Mr. Zafar Agha, a fellow Muslim and a journalist.

At other times, Sister Jessy Kurien, Dr. Cyriac Thomas, Dr. Naheed Abidi, even one  Mr. Singh, appear in sporadic reports as members of the NCMEI. None of their number appear to be former High Court judges, even though the NCMEI functions as a quasi-judicial body.

The purpose of the NCMEI, as it has worked out, is to facilitate direct affiliation of minority professional institutions to Central Universities. The NCMEI, under Siddiqui, has certainly been very active in this regard over the years, particularly with reference to Muslim institutions.

It has also famously designated the Capital’s Jamia Millia Islamia, already appointed a Central University by an Act of Parliament in 1988, a minority institution. This gave it the right to reserve 50% of its seats for Muslims, and leave the other 50% to the ‘others’. This, instead of the erstwhile 25% for Muslims, 22.5% for SC/ST students, 2.5% for the handicapped and 50% for the rest. Why exactly was this done is not too clear, as it clearly exceeds the brief, and then Union HRD Minister Kapil Sibal, was none too pleased with the change.

The NCMEI also passed an order in 2010, stating that minority institutions had to have 30% of its students from its designated minority, in order to qualify as a minority institution. This, much to the consternation of  Christian schools and colleges in the North East that did not necessarily have 30%  of their number as Christian students, and feared losing their autonomy. Sometimes arcane affirmative actions like this, with its reservations ethic, can be awkward; particularly when the prevailing tendency of the country as a whole is to mainstream everyone.

There have also been controversial if unproven charges that the NCMEI, under the long-reigning Siddiqui, has been helping channel black money and hawala funds to finance some of the quickly mushrooming minority institutions.

On the other hand, Justice Siddiqui has been felicitated by Mulayam Singh Yadav and the Uttar Pradesh Government for his ‘excellent work’ done with minority, meaning Muslim run institutions, as recently as last year.  But then the Samajwadi Party (SP), is no stranger to corruption charges itself.

The NCMEI theoretically  was meant to have a Chairman for a five year term, plus two members, also from the minority communities, nominated by the Central Government. But, in practice, it has largely been a solo act run by Siddiqui over the last ten years, with episodes involving some other members, including Christians, and  a lone Sikh. 

To truly make the NCMEI non-partisan, the Act will have to drop its apartheid provisions. And then, the new improved NCMEI, may well end up doing much better with Hindus on board.

For: Swarajyamag

(1,522 words)

May 11^th, 2015

Gautam Mukherjee

BOOK REVIEW: MARISSA MAYER AND THE FIGHT TO SAVE YAHOO!

BOOK REVIEW

Title:                                     MARISSA MAYER AND THE FIGHT TO SAVE YAHOO!

Author:                                NICHOLAS CARLSON

Publisher:                           JOHN MURRAY Publishers, HACHETTE India, 2015.

Price:                                    Rs. 599/-

BIG TIMING LITTLE START UPS

This book, by Business Insider’s Chief Correspondent Nicholas Carlson, is on the rise and fall of Yahoo!     

Marissa Mayer, its present CEO, since 2012, inherited a chaos of missed chances, but only in hind-sight. At first, in the nineties, under COO Jeff Mallet and co-founders Jerry Yang and David Filo, the company just grew and grew, creating ‘pod’ after ‘pod’.

Then, under Hollywood movie mogul turned Internet CEO Terry Semel, between 2000 and 2007, the company was doing well enough, but was not positioned for future shocks. And so, opportunities to buy Google, Facebook, and YouTube - outright, were passed up. This, even though they were going for a relative pittance. At the time, they were just start-ups after all. 

And Yahoo was already the biggest Internet Company in the world.

To wit, Yahoo, built on a few million in venture capital, was valued at $ 848 million, when it first went public in 1996,  $ 23 billion in early 1999, and $ 105 billion by the year-end. In January 2000, Yahoo had a market cap of $ 128 billion!

This book may be about the roller-coaster ride that Yahoo went on, but, at the same time, it is a fascinating interlinked memoir on many of the stars of the Internet.  It sets a crackling pace because a ‘quarter’ is a long time in the digital world. It tells us about the dramatis personae , what they thought, and how they worked.

There are many Indian and Asian names in this Silicon Valley narrative, some in ownership and key positions. And it is interesting to note that top executives, not just the founders, earned several hundred million dollars in compensation for their contributions. 

And the M&A activity, always swirling around the key players, supported by Hedge Funds and Investment Banks, were make- or-break for valuations and discovery. Valuations that were as much visionary and calculated gambles, as the innovative product development and organic growth in each Internet company and dot.com.

Yahoo also made one great bet of its own. One of the most prescient things  Jerry Yang, the co-founder of Yahoo did, in 2005, was to invest $1 billion in  Jack Ma’s Ali Baba and its e-commerce search portal Taobao. Back then, it was only a tiny start-up too.

Yang negotiated 44% of Ali Baba’s stock in return for Yahoo’s billion. In subsequent years this became worth a colossal fortune, over $ 30 billion for the Taobao portion alone, even before Ali Baba went public! 

 And this compared to Yahoo’s market cap in 2011, which had sadly declined to just $ 24 billion.  But, fortunately, Yahoo’s global asset valuation in 2011, including Yahoo Japan etc. but not including the core Yahoo.com business; was worth about $ 35 billion.

Carlson writes from a near insider’s perspective, in an intimate, Silicon Valley idiom, gossipy, mixing the personal with the psychological, the business with pleasure. He strives to provide insights, very much the investigative journalist, with excellent research, to back his flowing, jargon-free, style.

Marissa Mayer, the would-be White Knight, is a blonde, hard-driving diva, who made her reputation at Google. Mayer has a genius for orchestrating and creating user-friendliness, and did so, in all Google products. ‘It was ‘a triumph of empathy’ as Carlson puts it.

Mayer may have come to Yahoo too late to save it. Still, she was given a couple of years by the Ali Baba cushion, because it made Yahoo stock an attractive if undervalued buy. Besides, you couldn’t buy Ali Baba stock directly because it was Chinese and still private.

Ali Baba eventually went public in 2014, and its stock price soared along with its valuation. But Yahoo, assessed on its own, tanked. Its core business actually had a negative valuation in 2014.  So it is unclear where Yahoo is headed next, but the world of the Android and Apple smart phones beckon.  But can Yahoo App-up  fast enough to make the cut?  

For: Mail Today

(656 words)

May 5^th, 2015

Gautam Mukherjee