|
|
|
|
|
|
Economic Highlights
Pahalgam Tragedy: ECONOMIC TRIGGER NOT RELIGION?, By Dhurjati Mukherjee, 30 April 2025 |
|
|
Open Forum
New Delhi, 30 April
2025
Pahalgam
Tragedy
ECONOMIC TRIGGER
NOT RELIGION?
By
Dhurjati Mukherjee
The media’s portrayal
of the recent killing of 26 tourists in Pahalgam is a grim pointer to the
growing religious fundamentalism in a country where Swami Vivekananda spoke of
unity of all religions and Mahatma Gandhi advocated how different religions
point to the same path of truth, fellow-feeling and love. Sadly, today humanenessis
no longer a primary concern of religious doctrines; these are being used to
gain power on one hand and on the other political parties have weaved in religion
into politics for garnering votes! The Hindu-Muslim divide must be done
away with.
The present-day
radicalisation of Muslim youth is derived neither from the Quran nor from the
Hadith as politicians mislead them to believe that the community must regain its
supremacy using terror. The situation has arisen because the economy of
Pakistan has been completely shattered and there is massive unemployment and
inflation in that country. The disillusionment and negative thinking of some
Muslim radicals lead them to such heinous attacks of violence, which receive
condemnation from most philosophers and scholars.
The situation is not
much different in India where a large segment of youth is provoked by political
leaders to turn aggressive and invoke fundamentalism. They fail to understand
that the basic Hindu dharma is a confluence of various beliefs and intended to
unify people. Being half educated, they also do not have jobs and the capacity
to read interpretation of the scriptures to take a decisive stand on religious
matters. The growth of terrorism in the sub-continent may be attributed to the
economic distress affecting the common man. But these trends are affecting
society and do not augur well for the country.
Coming to the
question of political violence that has raised its head in many parts of the
world, it is worth referring to the political scientist, Murray Edelman who in
his remarkable book The Symbolic Uses of Politics made a very pertinent
observation at the very beginning. It stated: “Political history is largely an
account of mass violence and of the expenditure of vast resources to cope with
mythical fears and hopes. At the same time, large sections of people remain
quiescent under noxiously oppressive conditions and sometimes passionately
defend the very social institutions that deprive or degrade them.”
Looking back these
past few years, it may be said that India has achieved greater success in
containing Islamist violence. Its robust security apparatus ensured that terrorism
was on the backfoot, and that the separatist ecosystem became fearful of
repercussions should it provide any support to militancy. But this horrific
tragedy in Pahalgam, time, does point to intelligence failure as the terrorists
targeted a crowded tourist destination and escaped unscathed without a shot
being fired at them.
It is indeed
regrettable that a section of analysts is talking about India taking recourse
to attacking Pakistan. This is not desired at this juncture. The government has
already taken some firm steps that no doubt demonstrates the statesmanship of Prime
Minister Modi, and that the Opposition is giving full support to the government.
The abrogation of the Indus Water Treaty has been retaliated by Pakistan by
suspending the 1972 Simla Agreement, which was signed between then Prime Minister
Indira Gandhi after Pakistan’s defeat in the Bangladesh war.
The government is
firm that such terrorist attacks would not be tolerated, and the country will
give a befitting reply. Importantly, the Kashmiris have stood together and
condemned the killings, more so as targeting of tourists has been and was a
no-go. A busy tourist season ensured their bread and butter and are
apprehensive about the impact the horrific killings would have on it. The anger
against Pakistan is spilling on the streets.
At same time, it’s
vital that government increases vigilance and intelligence network. The
increasing prosperity of India, notwithstanding the inequality, has been an
eyesore for Pakistan which wants to create trouble by sending terrorists.
Moreover, since last year, the Valley has attracted record number of tourists
and its economy has been strengthened.
Meanwhile, on the
international front, Washington may face pressures from India to scale back
security ties with Pakistan that have inched forward in recent months with the
US releasing nearly $400 million to monitor its F-16s sold to Pakistan and the
planned resumption of bilateral counter-terrorism dialogue in June. Washington
will be sympathetic to New Delhi’s concerns, but the Trump administration will
not sacrifice the larger interest of arms exports, despite efforts to maintain
stability in South Asia.
While America wants
us to sell more defence equipment, the military in Pakistan wants to increase
the defence budget to assert its importance. Doesn’t this indicate that a
peaceful South Asia would go against interests of nations such as the US,
France, Russia. If military budgets are increased, these shall impact developmental
expenses, hitting lower echelons of society.
The observation of
PakistanArmy chief, Syed Asim Munir that his country would continue to support the
struggle in Kashmir in the name of Islam, has come into focus. He justified Pakistan’s
creation and referred to irrevocable differences between Hindus and Muslims but
didn’t admit the two communities had been living and working together. His calling
Pakistan a hard state was a clear reflection of the distorted imagination of
Islam that goes far away from its intrinsic values of community fraternity,
love and building relationships.
While Modi rightly
talked of bringing to book the perpetrators of terrorism, he stopped short of
elucidating the core values and attributes that defined the soul of Bharat and
India’s rich philosophical tradition and culture. When Norway faced the Oslo
attack in 2011, its prime minister had stated the country would stand firm in
defending “our values of an “open, tolerant and inclusive” society”. This response
to violence needs to be appreciated as it talks of more democracy, more
openness and greater fellow-feeling.
Religion is a
personal matter and should not be a hurdle in uniting people. It is difficult
to fathom the real reason for him making such comments and just before the
Pahalgam killings.
The taking away of a
human life for whatever reason must be condemned in the strongest possible
terms. When we talk of religion and Hinduism, such insane killings are nowhere
written in the scriptures of any religion.The civil society should stand up to
support the government in its endeavour to track the terrorists and ensure
peace in the Valley. More importantly, the people should go back to the Valley and
enjoy its beauty. This would be a befitting reply to the neighbour. ---INFA
(Copyright, India
News & Feature Alliance)
|
|
Rural Employment: CENTRE, STATES BLAME GAME, By Dhurjati Mukherjee, 23 April 2025 |
|
|
Open Forum
New Delhi, 23 April 2025
Rural Employment
CENTRE, STATES BLAME GAME
By Dhurjati Mukherjee
There were recent protests in the Lok
Sabha during the Budget session of Parliament regarding long delays in the
release of funds to some states under the rural employment guarantee scheme,
stressing that the livelihood of the poor has been badly affected. MPs from
various parties, including the main opposition party, Congress raised the issue
but the junior rural development minister alleged misappropriation of funds and
other irregularities in the implementation of the scheme.
A Congress MP from Kerala said workers
had not received wages for the past three months and the delayed payment and
low wages had led to a sharp decline in the MGNREGA workforce. Another member
from DMK claimed that funds to Tamil Nadu amounting to over Rs 4000 crore had
been pending for the last five months.
It is understood that over 40 lakh
claims for wage payments under the 100-day rural job scheme have been delayed
beyond the stipulated 15 days. In a written reply in the Rajya Sabha, the
minister for rural development Giriraj Singh highlighted the hardships faced by
poor rural workers, owing to the payment delay. According to the Centre,
the state governments have approved 49.18 lakh claims for delayed compensation
in 2024-25 till March 25 this year, of which 12.94 lakh claims have been
settled.
Delving into the matter, one finds
that in 90 percent of the cases, the delay happens at the end of the rural
development ministry in processing the FTOs (funds transfer order) but the
Centre does not pay any compensation. It may be mentioned here that a
parliamentary committee on rural development had recently expressed concern
over the delay in MGNREGA wage payment. The committee urged the government to
release funds in time and coordinate with the states to prevent delay in wage
disbursement. As of date the pending liability under the scheme is a massive Rs
27,000 crore!At the same time, the Committee had noted slow implementation of
projects by states, which had led to the accumulation of unspent balances. To
address the issue, Ministry of Finance has made approval of funds conditional
on utilisation of unspent balances.
The government cannot allocate
adequate funds and in time for the job guarantee programme though some renowned
economists have urged the need for starting a similar programme for urban and
semi-urban areas. But all this is not of primary concern for the government
which is more interested in subsidising land and other facilities to industry
so that they gain in wealth. Or is there any justification of a
resource-constrained country to exempt people drawing up to Rs 12 lakhs per
annum in the recent budget?
Economists and planners cannot fathom the
rural employment scenario sitting in a metro city like Delhi. The scenario is
indeed quite distressing as is revealed from NSSO facts. As per National
Sample Survey Organisation (NSSO, 2023), of the total rural workers, 63 percent
belonged to the category of self-employed, comprising their own account workers
and employers and helpers in household enterprises, earning a very low income.
Another 24.8 percent of workers are casual labourers, who only get a few days
of employment in a year due to the seasonal nature of their work.
Additionally, only 12 percent who are
salaried workers receive a regular income from rural employment. The earnings
of the self-employed are around Rs 11,612 on an average per month though males
get over Rs `13,800. Do the above figures in any way reveal that the country
will attain the status of a developed country within a few years?
While the government is turning a deaf
ear to the question of rural employment, it was indeed surprising that the Prime
Minister, speaking at the Artificial Intelligence Action Summit in Paris,
heralded the “dawn of the AI age”, noting that it will create more jobs than it
destroys with unprecedented opportunities for enhanced productivity and innovation.
Political leaders may have the liberty of making statements even though there
is no rationale behind it. It has been estimated that 23 percent of the working
population is possibly facing an axe in India by 2040 as stated by none other
than the Niti Aayog though this figure would rise to 69 percent in the World
Bank’s more realistic presumption.
It is well known that politicians in
the country, like in others are in the habit of making unjustified statements
and unrealistic claims. It is worth mentioning here that agriculture and
textile workers became redundant with mechanisation and factory automation in
the 19th century and later as robots were introduced to assembly
lines, electronics, computers and other appliances with many being left by the
wayside. In this connection, it needs to be asserted that the benefits of
productivity gains have not been widespread in most countries and alsoin India.
Rather, they have led to insatiability of material desires and widening
inequality.
However, it needs to be pointed out
that there is a need to understand each country on a case-to-case basis,
depending on its population and workforce. India with such a huge population as
also a very large workforce, most of whom are in the unorganised sector with a
very poor pay package, does not compare with the western countries. It has to
adopt its own strategy of labour utilisation and employment generation.
Why can’t the government impose an
employment cess of just 0.5 percent for those who earn more than Rs 10 lakh per
month? There is need to generate productive employment for at least 150 days in
rural areas and say 50 days in urban and semi-urban areas. The government
instead of seeking donations for their parties can also seek donations for
employment generation which would go a long way in helping the impoverished and
marginalised sections of society.
The Ministry of Rural Development
claims it aims to improve the quality of life in rural areas of the country and
acts as the nodal agency for most development and welfare activities in rural
India. The Department of Rural Development says it implements programmes to
provide employment in rural areas, support economic development through
enhanced connectivity, and ensure livelihood and social security for the poor
and vulnerable.Major schemes run by the Department include Mahatma Gandhi
National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGS), Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak
Yojana (PMGSY), National Rural Livelihoods Mission (NRLM), and Pradhan Mantri
Awaas Yojana-Gramin (PMAY-G).
In the present scenario, what is
needed is balanced development, that is, allocation of more resources to the
rural sector to create job opportunities. The priorities should include
modernising schools and health centres apart from ensuring more job
opportunities in rural areas. International organisations like Oxfam have been
urging the Indian government to impose a super-rich tax, say of just 1 or2
percent so that both social and physical infrastructure could be developed in
villages which, in turn, would create more employment opportunities. Why the
nagging delay? ---INFA
(Copyright, India News & Feature
Alliance)
|
|
SC On Governors’ Role: WILL CONFLICT WITH GOVTS END?, By Dhurjati Mukherjee, 16 April 2025 |
|
|
Open Forum
New Delhi, 16 April
2025
SC On Governors’
Role
WILL
CONFLICT WITH GOVTS END?
By
Dhurjati Mukherjee
The recent judgment
of the Supreme Court stating categorically that the constitutional head of a state
should be guided by the values of the Constitution and “not by political
expediency”is significant and much needed. The landmark ruling that the
governor must respect the will of the people, reflected by decisions taken by
elected representatives in the Assembly and must refrain from creating
roadblocks, is expected to end the stalemate over the powers of governors in
various states.
Justice Pardiwala,
who penned the judgment, observed as per Article 200 of the Constitution, the
governor has only three options when a bill is placed before him – grant
assent, withhold it and send it back for reconsideration or reserve it for the
President. It said a bill could be reserved for the President only at the first
instance.
Since long there has
been a deterioration in the system of governance, more so due to the role of
governors in playing their role in the states. The Court has fixed a time limit
of one month for the governor to give assent and a timeline of three months for
the President to take action. Meanwhile, all the pending 10 bills of Tamil Nadu
have been deemed assented by the order. Though the governor will continue to be
chancellor of state universities, he may not have any role to play in
appointment of vice-chancellors.
It may be pointed out
here that not just Tamil Nadu but in other states like Chhattisgarh, West Bengal,
Haryana and Kerala the Chief Ministers have been facing problems with
governors. Though commissions appointed earlier had recommended fixing a time
limit for governors to decide on a bill, the present Supreme Court judgment has
fixed it as one month. Even the Karnataka Law Commission’s 22nd
report exclusively dealt with ‘Assent to Bills – Problems of Delay (Articles
200 and 201 of the Constitution)’ chaired by Justice VS Malimath, categorically
stated that “it would indeed be anomalous and paradoxical if more time is taken
by the head of state to assent to a bill than for a legislature to pass it. It
is well-settled that every state action has to be reasonable”.
The impartiality of
the role of the governor has come in for attack as they have been found to
disturb elected governments. Political analysts have alleged that the governors
have not acted with necessary objectivity in the exercise of their powers or in
the role of a vital link between the Centre and the states.
Not that the states
are playing a judicious role as they tend to ignore the Governor in various
ways. This is specially evident in West Bengal where the governor was not
allowed to choose his nominee as the Vice Chancellor of the universities of
which he is the head. However, the well-established dictum of the governor
playing the role of a philosopher and guide to the Council of Ministers is no
longer been valid today. It has been alleged that, in recent years, the
appointment of governors is being done with the clear intent of keeping
Opposition-led states on the wrong foot.
The conflict between
the governors and the state governments is nothing new but has aggravated in
recent years. Obviously, the reason behind this is two-fold – one
centralisation of authority in the hands of the chief minister and the other is
the increasing politicisation and
corruption in the administration. All this has raised questions whether
the governor has any role in the state and whether the position should be
abolished.
The Sarkaria
Commission had recommended that a politician from the ruling party at the
Centre should ideally not be appointed as governor of a state which is governed
by an Opposition party or combination of parties. But in 2021, the BJP
appointed the Tamil Nadu party chief as Telangana Governor, and this resulted
in frequent conflicts with the BRS government. The delay in signing bills has
also been manifest by the governors of Tamil Nadu and Punjab governors, leading
to much confusion in the respective states.
There has not been
any clear guideline on the appointment of governors and the Centre’s choice
remains the only criterion. Much earlier, of course, persons of eminence and
retired bureaucrats, who were somewhat neutral, were appointed to the post. The
crisis in the state administration has placed the need to look at a different
way of appointing governors. The theory that states may appoint names may not
be conducive to overall governance as the need for creating counter-balances in
the power structure may be lost in the process.
While some believed
that forming a panel which includes the leader of the Opposition in selecting a
governor, this will not help as the Centre’s nominees will be in the majority
and have its way in choosing its nominee. The Leader of Opposition can only add
an additional layer of scrutiny. Thus, the procedure of appointment of
governors remains a big problem. However, it needs to be stated that doing away
with the position of governors is not advisable at this juncture as ideally
this role is necessary to keep a check on the governance system and report the
same to the Centre, from time to time.
It is also a fact
that governors have not been able to improve the governance of states. But
higher education has, to a certain extent, maintained some form of neutrality
due to the pro-active role of the governor, who is the chancellor of all
universities of the state. One of the major reasons for the clash with
governors is in this realm as states always prefer to control universities and
have their chosen men in pivotal positions. Obviously, this will not improve
the quality of education in the country and the governor should be given a free
hand to have eminent academic scholars to head universities.
Though one cannot go
against laid out principles in the Constitution, it needs to be stated that the
governor should be bestowed with more powers. Take for example, the pre and
post-poll violence that we see in some states, with West Bengal having a
notorious reputation, the governor should be given some powers. There is need
to form an expert committee at the national level to evolve what type of
intervention the governor can do when there is wanton violence and increase in
crimes all over the state.
As for governance,
which in most states is deplorable, the question arises that if an elected
government fails to run the state properly being enmeshed with corruption and
nepotism, what role should the governor play? Can the governor make
recommendations that the states have to follow? While most states are severely
stressed due to financial constraints, for which they frequently blame the
Centre, the governance of these states is poor due to lack of transparency and
judicious outlook.
If governors have no
role in ensuring good governance and guiding the state, what is the use of
having these titular heals? There is a need to re-examine the role of governors
by an expert committee and, if necessary, give them adequate powers to play an
effective role in ensuring good governance. This is not to belittle elected
governments but to give governors their due share in the administrative
machinery for effective functioning, provided they are neutral and not tilting
towards the Centre. ---INFA
(Copyright, India
News & Feature Alliance)
|
|
Tariff Wars: EFFECTS ON INDO-US TRADE, By Dhurjati Mukherjee, 9 April 2025 |
|
|
Open Forum
New Delhi, 9 April
2025
Tariff
Wars
EFFECTS ON
INDO-US TRADE
By
Dhurjati Mukherjee
The US has announced 26
per cent across-the-board reciprocal tariffs on India but these are substantially
lower than most countries. It was 34 percent levied on China (effectively about
54 percent), 46 percent on Vietnam, 49 percent on Cambodia, and 37 percent on
Bangladesh. This gives India some comparative advantage though estimates
suggest around two-thirds of India’s exports to the United States will bear the
impact of the tariffs.
One may point out
here that the Trump administration does not club India with countries like
China, Mexico and Canada. “The US has serious issues with China, Mexico, and
Canada related to currency manipulations, illegal migration and other security
concerns. But with India it has only tariff issue and there are high
expectations that negotiations would start towards arriving at a broad tariff
structure.”
Experts feel that US
tariffs have created a somewhat chaotic environment and there isn’t a
consistent strategy visible. Countries at the receiving end of tariff firing
have already responded differently. There have been counter retaliatory
measures with say the European Union and Canada targeting US political
constituencies and daily consumption items to put back pressure through higher
domestic prices.
Retaliation has also
come from China, which has imposed a 34 percent tariff on all imports from the
US, which will match the so-called reciprocal tariffs on Chinese products,
besides rolling out a slew of export control measures. The US and China, the
two biggest economies in the world, have a lot of interdependence though the
balance is tilted in favour of China. Experts think that Trump’s sweeping
tariffs will have a significant effect – around 2 percentage points -- of the
GDP of the Chinese economy.
Regarding the farm
sector, agriculture will be hit with a decline projected in
dairy products and marine products like shrimp while rice exports remain
largely unaffected. There are reports of India reforming its MSP system for
rice and wheat though this may take sufficient time and lower tariffs on farm
products. In
this sector, India’s average tariff on US imports is 41.8 percent compared to
the US tariff of 3.8 percent on Indian imports, with India exporting $7.1
billion versus US exports of $1.6 billion.
The Gem & Jewellery
Export Promotion Council (GJEPC) stated that in the short run “we foresee a
reshaping of global supply chains and anticipate challenges in sustaining
India’s current export volume of $10 billion for the US market”. After the
steep tariff hike, the jewellery market does not look bright as there may be a
sharp decline in demand in the US market. It could also lead to job cuts in the
industry that depend largely on manual labour for diamond cutting, polishing
and making expensive jewellery. Out of the total $33 billion worth of gems and
jewellery exports from India, a third was to the US. However, metal exporters
heaved a sigh of relief as the US exempted steel and aluminum from additional
27 percent duty. Last month, it had imposed 25 percent tariff on these metals.
However, the textile
sector holds out promise as India is at a relative advantage compared with
countries such as Bangladesh and Vietnam. “India competes globally for textile
exports with countries such as Bangladesh, Vietnam, Cambodia, Sri Lanka and
China. Compared with around 26 percent tariff for Indian imports, these
countries have been hit harder by US tariffs”, according to EY India
sources. The US imports around $10 billion of textiles and clothing from
India and there is a possibility of securing further strategic advantage by
including textiles in potential “zero for zero” trade deal. Regarding auto
components, it will be subject to a 25 percent import tariff in the US and the
list of items is expected to be finalized shortly.
Exemption of
pharmaceuticals and semiconductor industries from the ambit of tariffs, at
least for the time being, has been of great help to Indian exporters. Indian
Pharmaceutical Alliance stated that this decision underscores the critical role
of cost-effective, life-saving generic medicines in public health. India
exported $8 billion of pharma products to the US in 2024, which accounted for
40 percent of the generic drugs consumed in the US and this is expected to
increase this year. This shows the popularity and acceptability of Indian
generic medicines, more so due to the present drug shortages in the US. Though
some believe that the pharma sector is not out of the woods and that a tariff
is expected to be imposed later, it will not be big enough and the
manufacturers and consumers will be in a position to share the burden and
India’s export to the US market will not be affected.
Similar patterns
exist in transport equipment (Indian tariff: 14.9 percent, US tariff: 0.9
percent). However, though not automobiles but auto
components are a serious matter as India exports are around $2.2 billion to the
US. Tariffs may affect exports of auto components, but the bigger worry is
whether US manufacturers may produce more locally and outprice imports. With
labour costs quite low in India – even after 25 percent tariffs – it remains to
be seen whether labour-intensive auto components would be cheaper than those
produced locally.
A section of experts is
of the opinion that reducing the trade surplus with the US may be by curbing
exports with high import content such as smartphones, solar panels, gold jewellery
and diamonds. These goods make up over $15 billion in exports but out of this
money, the country has to pay a lot of foreign exchange. It is expected that in
the coming years, indigenous electronic manufacturing would be boosted up to
become competitive in the global market.
There are
expectations that there could be a high-level trip to the US by the Union Finance
Minister Nirmala Sitharaman sometime this month. The finance minister’s US
visit may build upon the on-going talks but may not be limited to trade and
tariff alone. India and the US are, no doubt, committed to strengthen their
overall economic relationship, both bilateral and multilateral, as strategic
partners.
The tariff has put an
extra burden on most Indian products to the US with marine products, dairy,
medical equipment, machinery and carpets being the hardest hit. Given that
these are all labour-intensive sectors, the government may evolve a strategy to
push them aggressively however, much depends on the proposed Indo-US Bilateral
Trade Agreement and, according to Niti Aayog’s experts, the final such treaty
will aim to enhance the potential gains during the next five years or so. Some
expect that the agreement may facilitate the possibility of increasing Indo-US
trade in the coming years and may strengthen the Indian economy.
Meanwhile, the tariff
war will drag down global investments and growth. The OECD has cut down its
growth projections, noting that trade disruption will take a significant toll
on the global economy, which is expected to slow down this year. Even the WTO
has forecast that world trade will shrink as a result of these tariffs while
the IMF has termed it sluggish. Obviously, the question before most analysts
the world over is whether Trump wants to destroy the global economic order. ---INFA
(Copyright, India News & Feature Alliance)
|
|
Executing Operation Sindoor: A VERITABLE PAUSE, By Prof. D.K. Giri, 16 May 2025 |
|
|
Round The World
New
Delhi, 16 May 2025
Executing
Operation Sindoor
A Veritable Pause
By
Prof (Dr) DK Giri
(Professor
of Practice, NIIS Group of Institutions)
In a powerful speech Prime
Minister Narendra Modi delivered some hard messages to Pakistan, and by
extension, to the world. He said, "If ever there is a dialogue with
Pakistan, it will be only on terrorism and PoK". That is a formidable
strategic step. So far, India's Pakistan policy has been defensive, asserting
the integration of the Indian part of Kashmir, not the whole of Kashmir,
meaning reclaiming PoK.
The second message is that
"blood and water cannot flow together". Unless Pakistan explicitly
delinks from terrorism networks existing in its soil, India should keep the
Indus Water Treaty suspended. This is a bold step, especially as it was signed
in 1960 by the World Bank etc. The treaty has not been disturbed ever since.
For India to take that step is a big departure from history. It is commendable.
The third signal to the
world is that Operation Sindoor is not called off; it is just halted, a
calculated pause. Pakistan should not assume that it is all over.In the past,
India was to absorb the shocks, public anger, and the bloodshed caused by
terrorists, in Mumbai, Uri, Pulwama, but no more. The Prime Minister has made
it amply clear that terrorists and their handlers will be chased, hunted down
and punished. India would retaliate. Remember the foreign policy formulation,
any act of terrorism will be construed as an act of war. The messages could not
be stronger. The taste of the pudding is in eating. So what matters is the
execution of the intent. The action part also is demonstrated through Operation
Sindoor.
Let us talk a bit about the
issues being debated before and after the 7th May, the date Operation Sindoor
was launched hitting 9 terrorist targets inside Pakistan.One strategic issue is
whether Operation Sindoor was inevitable, if there was no
other option. I have written in detail about this point in my previous pieces
in this column that it could not be avoided. It was necessary to dismantle the
terror network. Although they have not been done completely, a beginning has
been made and Islamabad is expected to finish it. In case, it does not, New
Delhi will have to clean it up by appropriate means.
The second issue is if India
should have gone for the ceasefire. That is debatable. Nehru made a mistake by
stopping the advancing army that was beating back the tribal intruders in
Kashmir in 1947. Strategists argue that Modi repeated the mistake by accepting
the ceasefire without liberating PoK etc. Well, the nature of military
confrontation has drastically changed since 1947. Like former General Navarene
said the war is not like a Bollywood movie, there are deaths and destruction on
both sides. So ceasefire if it was asked for by Pakistan should have been
accepted. Pakistan is crumbling under the weight of its own internal
contradictions. It can perish as a viable state even without a war with India.
India should ensure that Pakistan is no longer sponsoring terrorism into India.
New Delhi is fully conscious of ramping up
pressure on Pakistan. The Prime
Minister has assured the country on this. This is the beginning of the end
terrorism emanating from Pakistan. The third issue is the lack of international
support for India whereas Pakistan got it from China, Turkey, and Azerbaijan.
This is not new. Their collusion has been on the card for a long time.
But there is a point in this
argument. Except Israel, no country in the world has openly and actively come
out in support of India. That perhaps is because India prefers to remain
neutral, non-aligned or multi- aligned. India therefore has no friends on
board. This again has been argued in my articles where I suggest that you
should reach out to partners and recognise friends. The Foreign Minister had
said, India needs partners, not preachers. The same can be said about India.
Many countries want India as a partner, not a moral preacher.
Another point that is
heavily debated is who won the limited battle that lasted some 3 days unlike
those in Ukraine and Gaza which have been in since 3 years. Again, the
comparison may not be as authentic as India and Pakistan are both nuclear
powers.At any rate, both countries know deep inside the extent of their loss
and vulnerability.
A word about the role of the
media, especially the electronic media, the TV. Less said the better about the
media. They have shamed themselves by spreading lies and damn lies to
sensationalise India' reaction and Pakistan's counter action etc. The
action-reaction continuum was lost on the media. In future, none expects the
media to report with responsibility and accountability.
Can Pakistan take advantage
the ceasefire and regroup to attack again. But New Delhi should remain ever
vigilant and willing to retaliate. Eternal vigilance against Pakistan is the
price of the security of Indian citizens.---INFA
(Copyright, India News & Feature Alliance)
|
|
| | << Start < Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next > End >>
| Results 64 - 72 of 6263 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|