Of losses and quick wins

The Bihar assembly results are out and open to interpretation. There will be dissection, postmortem and blame fixing in the coming days. On the face of it, the resounding victory of the Grand Alliance, brings out some very interesting facts. First, the clean image of Nitish Kumar was a factor that helped, but his image was not clean enough and the Janata Dal (United) could only win 71 of the 101 seats it contested. Second, though the clean image of Nitish Kumar made him a popular Chief Minister, a corrupt and convicted Lalu Prasad’s Rashtriya Janata Dal bagged 80 of the 101 seats it contested. Third, Indian National Congress, which was reduced to a humiliating four seats in the outgoing assembly managed to win 27 seats this time. Fourth, the huge crowds that the Prime Minister pulled during his 30 rallies in the state, did not like his message and hence voted someone else.

There are many reasons, which worked in favour of the Grand Alliance and pushed it to a two-thirds majority in the assembly. Similarly there are reasons, which lead to the crushing defeat of National Democratic Alliance. Some of the reasons that immediately come to mind are similar to the ones that failed corporations face during their turnaround. At the end of the last parliament, India was similar to a failing organisation. Big ticket scams, slowing economy, non-existent foreign policy, cash guzzling and zero value social programmes (MNREGA) and fuel subsidies were pulling the country down. India was not allowed to live up to its potential.

Failing corporations employ experienced consultants to turnaround the company. The consultants in turn use tried and tested (sometimes radical) measures to re-engineer the processes and bring in efficiencies. The Modi government promised a similar re-engineering for India. But the similarities end there. A good consultant knows that challenging the status-quo will inevitably bring resistance. Change is the only constant, yet it is the most difficult thing to accept. Try bringing in a radical change in an organisation and it is doomed to fail. The consultants know this and they have found a way around. For the entire organisation to see the benefit of the turnaround exercise, they use quick wins. Quick wins are tasks that are easy to do, take little time to implement but show results that are visible and tangible.

Once the quick win succeeds the rest of the organisation can be easily taken on board and they will act as partners in the turnaround. The Modi government failed in identifying quick wins. Let alone implementing them. The government embarked upon dream projects like Make in India and Swachh Bharat. Both very well meaning projects and will yield results, but in the long run. The mammoth task of bringing millions in the banking network was achieved rather swiftly but again it falls short on expectations. Having a bank account is good but there has to be enough money in it for the account holder to benefit.

The PM is repeating the mistakes the Vajpayee government made. Stressing on big ticket reforms at the cost of quick wins cost them the 2004 elections and the UPA I reaped the benefits five years later.

One of the easiest quick wins for the government is job creation. Job creation in semi-skilled sector. That is where the rural population hunts for employment. The government should emphasis on sectors like highway and manufacturing. These are labour intensive sectors and have a high multiplier effect. Red tape and archaic concession agreements make it difficult for the private sector to bid aggressively and for the government to close the transaction efficiently.

A construction site or a factory not only provides employment to the actual workers, it also generates business opportunities for transport companies, taxi services, restaurants, hospitals, housing companies, and so on, creating further employment opportunities. It helps create an ecosystem, which brings in prosperity and jobs to a region.

So far the government has done things for India, it is now time to do things for Bharat. Gold monetisation might attract India but a country where two thirds of the population is poor, Bharat might find it elitist. The government has lost a year and a half, if it does not wake up to quick wins, it might see a repeat of 2004 and the next government will reap the benefits of the long term reforms that the Modi government is carrying out today. Bihar is a warning bell and we know for whom it tolls.

The deal – what it means to India and South Asia

At last

Twenty months of negotiations, threats and diplomacy has led to a deal, which will stop Iran from acquiring weapon grade Uranium. The details of the deal are still trickling in. According to this CNN report, “The deal reduces the number of Iranian centrifuges by two-thirds. It places bans on enrichment at key facilities, and limits uranium research and development to the Natanz facility. The deal caps uranium enrichment at 3.67 percent and limits the stockpile to 300 kg, all for 15 years. Iran will be required to ship spent fuel out of the country forever, as well as allow inspectors from the IAEA inspectors certain access in perpetuity. Heightened inspections, including tracking uranium mining and monitoring the production and storage of centrifuges, will last for up to 20 years. The U.S. estimates that the new measures take Iran from being able to assemble its first bomb within 2-3 months, to at least one year from now”.

 

Three decades of animosity between Iran and the US, due to political intervention of the latter and an unprecedented hostage crisis during the revolution, seems to be thawing. The deal of course means a lot to Iranian economy (the full impact of the deal will only be felt once the sanctions are lifted next year), it also has the potential to influence much of South Asian geo-politics and economy. Iran has the fourth largest proven oil reserves in the world but exported only 2.3 million barrels a day, against 6.2 million barrels a day (2014 data; US EIA) by Saudi Arabia. The sanctions significantly reduced the exports and forced Iran to store millions of barrels of crude in floating tankers in the Persian Gulf.

 

The future – India

Once the sanctions are lifted, Iran will increase production and export. The oil prices already under pressure from a weak demand and oversupply might see a further decrease in prices. Assuming the diplomatic relations between US and Iran will improve progressively and the deal will hold, it is possible that Iran will provide US access to its ports in the Persian Gulf. It may also offer surface connectivity, enabling the NATO to supply its forces in Afghanistan. These two possibilities have the potential to change things for better, for India.

 

With over 80% of its energy needs being imported, India will stand to benefit immensely by cheaper crude prices. India ran a bill of USD 112.7 billion on oil imports in 2014-15 A price drop of even a single dollar per barrel translates into a billion dollars saved. A substantial drop will provide India with a windfall gain, making precious financial resources available for development work.

 

Indian business also stands to benefit from a sanctions free Iran. ONGC Videsh Ltd. discovered a gas filed in the Persian Gulf (Farzad-B) with an estimated reserves of 21.7 trillion cubic feet. The operating contract (with ONGC Videsh owning 60% stake) was never signed due to international sanctions. The situation will change once the sanctions are gradually lifted next year.

 

The future – Pakistan

On the other hand a friendlier Iran may also mean access to US and NATO supplies to Afghanistan. In the past a hostile Iran made Pakistan the sole point of transit for almost all NATO supplies. The heavy dependence on Pakistan lead to billions of dollars being paid to the army and civil administration by America. The money thus paid found its way to funding various terror groups. The fact that Pakistani establishment sponsored terrorism has long been established by both international governments and strategic research scholars. Professor Christine Fair of Georgetown University in her book, fighting to the end gives a well-researched account of Pakistani army, the ISI and past dictators who indulged in funding Jihad.

 

The dependence on Pakistan to serve its goals in Afghanistan, remains a major reason why the US funds Pakistan. Possibility of an alternate route from Iran puts Pakistan in a situation where the American aid dollars might dry up sooner than expected. While cheaper crude will help India fund its poverty elevation programme, a fund crunch in Pakistan might force it to scale down its terror funding.

 

The hope

What really happens is a question that will get answered only in the future, as and when sanctions are removed and how US engages Iran. But there is a clear opportunity for India to scale up its civilizational ties with Iran and turn them into mutually beneficial business relations. A rejuvenated foreign policy and a business friendly government have the potential to make the transition. Hassan Rouhani as a chief guest at Rajpath, for next Republic Day might do India a lot of favour.

Scroll it

On May 17^th the Home Minister, Rajnath Singh, created sort of a mini hysteria among the established historians. In three tweets he forced many journalists and publications to come up with counter arguments. What the Home Ministers had said in his three tweets was –

 

“Maharana Pratap became an icon for freedom fighters because his name evoked a strong feeling of love and sacrifice for motherland”.

“Our text books have not been able to fully recognise Maharana Pratap's contribution and significance in India's history”.

“If Akbar can be called 'Akbar the Great' for his contribution then why can't Maharana Pratap be recognised as 'Maharana Pratap the Great”.

He tweeted after he inaugurated a statue of Maharana Pratap in Pratapgarh Rajasthan.

What happened in the days following the tweets can be read here, here and here   

Yes, it was here, there and everywhere. Most articles suggested that the tweets were an attempted “saffronization/communalization of history”. Lot of ink was poured to justify why Akbar was indeed great and why Maharana Pratap was just heroic at best. But the funniest pieces were written by Scroll (a left leaning online publisher). They can be read here and here and here

The first piece tells us that the textbooks we read are withholding information, which can technically mean they are lying. The article informs us that all the stories we hear or read about the Rajput valour and might is a lie. On the contrary the Rajputs failed miserably in battles for centuries. The Rajputs were in fact inept at discipline, technical & technological prowess and tactical acumen.

This reasoning is stupid at best. The rules of war in India were different from that of the nomads who had none. In India wars were fought in open spaces and civilian causalities were rare. The only large scale loss of life documented is that during the war of Kalinga. The impact of the widespread destruction was so profound on Ashok that he devoted rest of his life spreading Buddhism and drafting laws to protect environment and people.

The logic given by Girish shahane would in fact justify the swift advance of the Islamic State (IS) in Syria and Iraq and blame the loss of territory, life and history on the missing skills of Iraqi and Syrian forces. The tactical acumen Girish talks about was horrendous and in today’s time and age would qualify the Ghaznis, Ghouris, Khiljis and Baburs to be tried at the international Court of Justice for crimes against humanity. The acts that followed the wars, by the “eminent” personalities mentioned by Girish, were mass killings of civilians, destruction of places of worship, rape of women, taking slaves and sending tribute to the Ottoman Caliph. These are exactly the acts that followed the fall of Mosul, Palmyra, Anbar, etc. at the hands of the IS.

What the Home Minister said and what the likes of Scroll made it into is bizarre. The three tweets had nothing, which in any way would qualify as an attack on Akbar or the larger set of Muslim rulers. But the Left leaning and some self-proclaimed centrist journalists concocted stories. Played it out to imply the statement was an attack on “secularism” and an attempt to “rewrite history”.

But interesting thing is that publications like Scroll often carry biased and under researched articles that can be termed misleading. Take this for example Shoaib Daniyal concocts another conspiracy on how the Bengali calendar is a fusion of Hijri and Hindu calendar. Only he forgets that there is no such thing as a Hindu calendar. The Bengali calendar or Bangabda as it is called is a solar calendar unlike Hijri, which is lunar. The Hijri has no mechanism to adjust for the loss of eleven days every year or to ensure the link between months and seasons, making it useless for a community dependent on agriculture. The article ends with a note relishing how the calendar has become an integral part of agriculture and Hindu religion.  Another lie. None of the Bengali festivals are celebrated (apart from the New Year) according to Bangabda. They are all celebrated according to Vikram era.

The likes of Scroll who often blame the others for rewriting history are in fact experts in the trade. Be it the half-truths of the “eminent” rulers or outright lies like the story of Bangabda, Scroll has perfected the art of misleading.

The Silk Road and the slow moving elephant

During his visit to Pakistan, Chinese President, Xi Jinping agreed to invest USD 46 billion in the China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), part of an ambitious surface connectivity project named Silk Road. Named after the ancient caravan route, the larger project envisages connecting Beijing with Rotterdam in the Netherlands. China also aims to complement the land route with a maritime route connecting Venice to Quanzhou, in Fujian province of China, on the shores of South China Sea. The link extending into Pakistan seems to be an afterthought and an interesting one at that.

 

China has a vision of its “peaceful rise” while laying its hands on resources and markets around the world. This is nothing surprising, it is the second largest economy and the most populous country in the world. It needs resources and market access to sustain the pace of development it has pulled off in the last couple of decades. With the economy showing signs of cooling down, China has to spur consumption and shift its focus from being an export driven economy. Moreover it has to find a useful way to deal with the pile of foreign exchange it is sitting on (USD 4 trillion at the end of 2014). Investing in infrastructure projects abroad is one such use. Japan has done it the past and in the process helped Japanese companies to enter new markets.

The proposed investment in Pakistan should be seen in light of diminishing American presence in Asia, warming of India – America relations and an ambitious China eager to make its mark in international arena. The CPEC is a mix of transport and energy projects stretching from Kashgar in Xingjian, China to Gwadar in Baluchistan, Pakistan. The projects will help energy starved Pakistan and create jobs over the period of implementation. More importantly the CPEC will provide China the access to Straits of Hormuz, mitigating its dependence on the Straits of Malacca. Any blockade in an event of war will have serious impact on its trade.

Meanwhile the Indian High Commissioner to Pakistan, T.C.A. Raghavan has said, India is not worried by the Chinese investment in CPEC. It would be interesting to know what the inner circle at Ministry of External Affairs has to say. But the question one should ask India is, “will the elephant move faster”? It moves but at a woefully slow pace. While China has been extending its foot print in Africa, Europe and ASEAN, India has done precious little to enhance its own presence.

Progress and prosperity. May be, may be not.

Indian Affair has written on theIndia-ASEAN relationship and need to improve surface connectivity, in 2012, while the commemorative India-ASEAN Summit was underway. The post from December 2012 can be re-read to the policy makers today without having change much. Prime Minister Modi attended the 12^th India-ASEAN Summit in Nay Pyi Taw last November. He stressed a lot on the shared culture and heritage and the urgency to implement the Free Trade Agreement (FTA) in services and a relook at the FTA for goods. Same things that were discussed in 2012. He hardly had anything to say on surface connectivity.

The India – Myanmar – Thailand trilateral highway still exists only in files and the proposed rail link connecting India’s north eastern states to Myanmar and Thailand have been almost forgotten (despite many of the rail projects being termed “national projects”).

The 2010-11 annual report of Indian Railways lists a total of twelve projects (seven of them “national projects”) being undertaken to enhance connectivity in the region. The aim is then to connect the Indian Railways network to that of Myanmar, Thailand and eventually to Vietnam. Sadly the recent report for the year 2014-15 lists all but one (Harmuti – Naharlagun, a 20 km section in Arunachal Pradesh) project as incomplete. What is worse is that the 2010-11 report anticipated all twelve projects to be completed by the year 2015-16, the latest report has not given any fixed date for most of the projects. The total cost estimate for the twelve projects is INR 33,016 crore (USD 5.1 billion). The amount spent so far is a meagre INR 7,308 crore (USD 1.1 billion) or 22% of the total budget. So much for the status of “national project”.

The newly inaugurated Integrated Check Posts in Manipur, Meghalaya, Tripura and Mizoram, will not be of much use as long as the surface connectivity remains poor. The road connectivity in the region is poor and takes a long time to undulate around the Chicken’s Neck. The time for India to act on its ASEAN trade and foreign relations policy is now. China is already connecting its cities to ASEAN and is building artificial islands to expand its territory. The choice with India is simple, let the elephant move at its own pace or outpace the dragon.

When stunts go wrong

It is common in the film industry to have a body double to perform stunts, which are too dangerous to be performed by the protagonist. Stunts are important because the audience loves thrill, action and edge of the seat adrenalin rush. That’s when they come out saying, “paisa wasool ho gaya” (I got value for my money).  Stunts is a risky job despite all the precautions that are taken. The harness, the cushions and now the computer, which can turn a stuffed toy into a tiger, make the act more of an art than a dare. The job is still not risk free and that’s probably the reason the demand for stunt actors still exists. The stuntman or stuntwoman is someone who risks his or her life to earn a living and earns applause for the protagonist in the process.

 

The real life

Now, human mind is very creative. It has the power to read patterns and adapt itself to the events around them. Here is where the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) enters the scene. It started off as a people’s movement that captured the imagination of youth. Its evolution from a street movement to a political force and eventually power holder in Delhi was carefully carried out with a charm offensive targeted at the youth. But the recent events of a major split in the party ranks, ouster of the ideologues Prashant Bhushan and Yogendra Yadav and a series of stings involving top leadership has left the party clutching at straws to save its image. The youth needed another event to charm it, to restore the credibility of the movement.

 

The reel life

Veeru climbed the water tank and threatened suicide. The villagers left what they were doing and gathered at the foot of the tank. They pleaded him to climb down and made all attempts to convince Mausi to promise Basanti’s hand in marriage to Veeru. Once promised, the suicide is called off and the scene ends. While Veeru was threatening suicide, Jai was calm as a cucumber and made no attempt to stop his friend from jumping to his death. He obviously has called his bluff. He said, “jab daaru utregi to yeh bhi utar jayega”. But that was cinema, takes, retakes and more retakes.

 

The real life

The Aam Aadmi Party chose this classic scene from Sholay to charm its audience. After all who does not love some drama? So Gajendra, a politician in making, who was in touch with Manish Sisodia might have been chosen to play Veeru. Kejriwal will play Jai the indifferent friend who knows what is happening. Thus started the drama. Gajendra perched himself up on a tree with a broom, which also happens to be the party emblem of AAP. He started sloganeering, tied a towel around his neck and threatened suicide. He said his crop was damaged and the wanted to kill himself. The speeches by AAP continued below and the police stood by. People watched Gajendra do his sloganeering, some might have urged him to climb down but that did not seem to have any effect.

While all this was going on, Jai the indifferent friend, Arvind Kejriwal, kept silent. It appears he knew Gajendra was playing Veeru. He also knew that unlike the screen Veeru Gajendra was not allowed any retakes nor were there any safety harness to save him should he slip. Real life stunts cannot be the same as reel life stunts. He did slip and hung himself. A tragic loss of life. A woman lost her husband, three children lost their father and the AAP grabbed a lot of headline.

The director and the stunt man

A man who claimed to be a devastated farmer was a professional safa expert and owned a fairly large plot of family land. News reports suggest that there was no apparent reason for him to commit suicide, other than a domestic row he had a few day ago.

 

Reports also suggest that he was a party hopper who switched his allegiance from the BJP to SP to Congress and recently to the AAP. His alleged meeting with Manish Sisodia at 11 AM on the day of his suicide raises some important questions. He might have met him to further his political ambitions or to discuss the stunt, we may never know. But what we know is that his death was probably a political stunt that went horribly wrong. The usual blame game has begun and will probably continue for a few days before the public memory fades and something new catches its fancy.

The one thing that has emerged from the fiasco of a rally that AAP organised is that Kejriwal and his AAP will go to any extent to further their political ambitions. Gajendra is a small sacrifice on the long road Kejriwal has chosen for himself. This is dangerous. Bollywood should be restricted to cinemas, the day it enters our streets we will be left at the mercy of directors like AAP. They will not flinch at coaxing another Veeru to climb a tree.

Inside the USCIRF - The people, the commission and their selective list

We have an agenda, do you know what it is?

Later this month the US Commission on International Religious Freedom will come up with its 2015 report. The media will offer it extensive coverage to the findings of the report, like it did in the past. Last year the commission placed India in its tier II list, along with Afghanistan, Russia, Indonesia, Turkey and five other countries. The Tier II is a category where there is some degree of concern on religious freedom. The other categories being, Tier I with “particular concerns” and the milder, “other countries and regions" mostly in Western Europe. The list of countries exclude the entire Americas, except for Venezuela, Cuba and French Guiana. It also excludes all countries in North Africa, except for Egypt and Sudan.

 

It’s interesting why some countries are excluded from the list while some like French Guiana (with a population of 250,000) are included in the list. But before giving that a thought, let us see who the people behind the commission are. The commission is a bipartisan organization, enacted by law, with members appointed by both the Republicans and Democrats. It essentially means that both parties get to drive their agenda. Here is a short introduction of the Chair, Vice Chair and the Commissioners.

Name and Designation	Best known for	Appointed by
Dr. Katrina Lantos Swett, Chair	President of Lantos Foundation, daughter of the only Holocaust survivor elected to the US House of Representative	Democrat, Harry Reid, Senate Majority Leader
Dr. Robert P. George, Vice Chair	Most influential conservative Christian, opposition to same sex marriage, embryonic stem cell research, anti-abortion	Republican, Speaker of the House John Boehner
Dr. James J. Zogby, Vice Chair	Founder of Arab American Institute, subtly justified Muslim outrage against the Danish cartoons	Barack Obama, president of US
Dr. M. Zuhid Jasser, Commissioner	President of American Islamic Forum, served as medical officer in US Navy	Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell
Professor Mary Ann Glendon, Commissioner	Former US ambassador to Vatican, consultant to the US council of Catholic Bishops, refused to share stage with Obama for his alleged anti-Catholic views	Republican, Mitch McConnell Senate Minority Leader
Dean. Eric P. Schwartz, Commissioner	Former assistant secretary of state for population, refugees and migration, dean of Hubert Humphrey School of public affairs	Barack Obama, President of US
Dr. Daniel I Mark, Commissioner	Professor at Vilanova University, works with Tikvah Fund, formerly taught at Yeshiva University	Republican, John Boehner, Speaker of the House
Rev. Thomas J. Reese, Commissioner	Catholic Jesuit priest, believes in missionary activities, member of the Society of Jesus	Barack Obama, President of US
Hannah Rosenthal, Commissioner	Head of Jewish Council for Public Affairs, combats anti-Semitism, works for other Jewish matters	Democrat, Minority leader US house of representatives, Nancy Pelosi.

 

An institution claiming to look at the religious freedom of other countries, which are more diverse and multicultural than the country it is based in, has virtually no religious diversity in its own management. The people representing the commission are either conservative Christians or Jews who work for Jewish cause. Of course there is a token Muslim face.

It will be unfair to assume that Christians or Jews are not capable of judging the religious freedoms of countries with Muslim, Buddhist, Sikh, Atheist or Hindu populations. But one should be concerned when the people on the board have clear conflict of interest. How is an ultra-orthodox Dr. George or Professor Glendon supposed to view religious freedoms in other countries when they themselves espouse opinions which are contrary to other people’s freedom (anti-abortion or dislike for a President’s views on Church)? How is a Dr. Swett or Ms. Rosenthal or Dr. Mark supposed to judge other countries when all that they do is to further only the Jewish cause (Dr. Swett however does some work on human rights by awarding meagre grants of USD 500 – USD 2,500)?

The exclusions & inclusions

The list includes most of the Middle Eastern countries in its tier I list, which is hardly surprising given their harsh rules to suppress other religions. But surprisingly it excludes the rich kingdoms of United Arab Emirates and Qatar, which offer next to nothing when it comes to freedom of speech or basic human rights let alone freedom of religion. Both monarchies happen to be flush with oil, gas and cash, a key American requirement. It also excludes the war torn Yemen where sectarian violence between Shia and Sunni Muslims has claimed thousands of lives in the past years. Apparently religious freedoms of failed countries is not important. Israel, a country that blatantly discriminates against its Muslim Arabs is not on any of the three categories. No surprises here.

The commission has put most west European countries on its list. This is primarily because the European secular and human rights laws are apparently at odds with view of American religious freedoms. Banning of religious symbols in public by France, or protests by activists against male genital mutilation, also known as circumcision, in other European countries is a terrible cause of concern for America. A country, which has passed a law on religious freedom at federal and state level, with potential to be abused against other religions and communities.

Strangely enough Cuba and Venezuela (both with majority Christian population and hardly any religious diversity) feature in the list. The only reason for their inclusion is their communist government, which is not friends with Uncle Sam. Poor French Guiana is there just because France is on the list. What is also interesting is to see why Morocco (with its national motto, “Allah, Homeland, King”) is not on the list but Egypt is, or why the Philippines with its Christian-Muslim conflict is not on the list but Vietnam is? It will not be unfair to say that most of the times the concern boils down to the presence of Christians in the countries. So while Morocco with hardly any Christian population is off the list, Egypt with Coptic Christians is in the list. A Catholic majority Philippines is out but Vietnam (a communist country) with a Christian population is in. Another reason why countries make it to the list is to further the agenda of the missionaries working in those countries. The evangelical and proselytization activities by the missionaries, like the Joshua Project in India, will find special attention from the ultra-orthodox members of the commission.

One of the main objectives of the commission is to use the information and rankings as a tool of America’s foreign policy. It is no surprise that countries, which the American government wants to deal with but finds it difficult are on the list.  The commission serves the two pronged strategy of furthering the religious agenda of the ultra-orthodox Christians in America and the department of state of the US government.

So the next time you read the report released by the commission (most likely on 30^th April) or its coverage by the print and electronic media make sure you know what the commission really is. It is a tool like many other to further vested interest of individuals, organisations and the US government.

The fringe is now mainstream

The fringe has gone mainstream, claims Rana Ayyub in her latest post on DailyO (a site run by India Today). In another article on Firstpost, G Pramod Kumar warns that the attacks on Christians are merely a warning shot for Muslims. Meanwhile former officer of the Indian Police Service, Julio Ribeiro wrote a letter to the Indian Express saying, “As a Christian, suddenly I am a stranger in my own country”. Ribeiro later told a TV channel that he exaggerated some of the claims to attract attention.

In the past few months, there have been thefts in Churches in some parts of Delhi, one church was gutted. These incidents were painted as an attack on Christians by some Hindu groups. The commissioner of Delhi Police later issued a statement giving information on cases of theft in places of worship. It turned out that more temples were burgled than any other place of worship. The highest number of temple theft being reported in 2014, the year Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) lead National Democratic Alliance came to power.

The spate of concerned opinions like the claims of Rana Ayyub, the warning from G Pramod Kumar and the emotional outburst of Ribeiro came just after the brutal sexual assault on a nun in Ranaghat, West Bengal.  Are these concerns justified? Is there evidence suggesting Christians are being targeted? Your guess is as good as mine. The one thing that is common in all such concerned opinions is that the blame squarely lies at the Prime Minister’s door step. Almost the entire Indian media is blaming the Prime Minister for the law and order situation that is essentially the responsibility of the state governments according to the constitution.

There are two important things to be taken note of. One, an atmosphere of panic is being created by the media, where minorities, especially Christians are shown under siege. The three articles sighted above are full of text sans any statistics to back the opinion up with. Such writings would classify as provocative, if someone were to carefully scrutinize them, at best and hatemongering at worst. A law and order problem is being given a communal colour, deliberately. Second, the blame is selectively put on the union government, where it actually lies with the state government (surprisingly no one has questioned the respective state governments, unless it happens to be a BJP government).

So should one trash the concerns raised by the press and a decorated IPS officer? The answer in a word is, no. But having said that the cases should be examined on what they really are. A law and order problem. Safety is not just a concern of the Christians, but of every citizen of India. The individual state governments should ensure that the rule of law is imposed without any discrimination or favour. Mamata Banerjee’s West Bengal has become one of the most dangerous places for women. She in the past has dismissed the rape and assault of Suzette Jordon as a “sajano Ghatana” (concocted incident) to malign her government. After the rape of the nun, when she went to show her sympathy, she was welcomed with a blockade of her convoy, rightly reflecting the anger of people against the miserable failure of her government to maintain law and order. Her colleague, Firhad Hakim shifted the blame from his government to Gharwapsi. Surprisingly there is no hue and cry on such indifference  and apathy by an elected chief minister.

What the press should be concerned about is the absence of strict implementation of laws to ensure safety of everyone, not just the Christians or women or minorities. We all deserve a safe environment to live in. 

Whose land is it anyway?

One more revolution, please.

The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), humbled by a humiliating defeat in the recently concluded Delhi assembly elections, will open the budget session of the parliament today. The party with its allies will present the first full budget. Expectations are high. Among other developments Deepak Parekh, chairman of HDFC, said, “nothing has changed on ground” since the NDA came to power. A long brewing political drama finally climaxed in Bihar. Anna Hazare, the anti-corruption hero of 2013 has threatened to start fresh protests over an amendment to the land acquisition act (2013). The budget session looks set for a high decibel show.

The government, especially the finance minister, has a lot riding on it this time. The industry would expect major reforms and policy changes to make doing business easier (currently India ranks 142, one point above the West Bank and one point below Uzbekistan, in the ease of doing business ranking). The average citizen would expect respite from a high food inflation (currently at around 6%) and the middle class would expect tax rebates. The highly ambitious “make in India” programme of the Prime Minister will see some success if it is backed up by policy reforms and a push in infrastructure development (trucks carrying manufactured goods travel less than 300 km a day, compared to an average of around 600 km in Europe). To come up with a game changing policy to boost manufacturing and reducing food wastage the government has to offer major breakthroughs in building new infrastructure.

To do so the government has to offer land. To build roads, lay electricity transmission lines, widen highways, etc. land will be required. Unlike in China, where land is owned by the government, India cannot simply ask the land owners to move somewhere else. To this effect, the last UPA government brought the land acquisition act (2013) in its final days. The act made provisions for compensating the land owners the tune of four times the value of land. One can debate on “how fair is fair compensation”, given the discrepancy in registered value of land against market value. The act however made it sort of mandatory to have a consensus to acquire land from multiple landowners.

The new government came up with an amendment to the act by means of an ordinance. The highlight of the amendment was to exempt projects related to national security or defence of India, rural infrastructure, affordable housing for the poor, industrial corridors and infrastructure & social infrastructure projects (including PPP) where the land is owned by the government. This essentially means that a consent from the buyers will not be essential for such projects to go ahead. This exemption is not automatic, however and would require a notification from the government. The government has not made any changes to the provisions of compensation to land owners.

Land acquisition has always been a difficult task in India and many projects have suffered due to this. The new airport for Mumbai, POSCO project in Orissa, Nano manufacturing plant in Singur and a twenty years long battle for the Narmada multipurpose project are some such projects. Delays are not just costly for the promoters but to the people too. Loss of potential jobs, economic benefits and general slowdown in poverty eradication, exponential cost overruns are all result of such delays.

In the last few weeks Anna Hazare has warned of a mass protest against the land acquisition bill, which he calls anti-farmer. He however does not sight any specific clause(s) that he thinks is anti-farmer. He has also invited all and sundry to his show of strength, starting today. Other social activists like Medha Patkar of the Narmada Bachao Andolan and Aruna Roy have also jumped in to lend a helping hand. In a recent interview to Firstpost Medha Patkar said she is not anti-development but the ordinance is anti-people, again without sighting specifics in the ordinance, which she thinks are anti-people. The Indian press, which is ever ready to ask “tough questions”, has so far failed to ask even the basic question of “what is anti-farmer in the ordinance?” it seems to rub its hands in glee at the prospect of another “revolution”.

The government should prepare itself to handle the drama waiting to unfold on the streets of Delhi. If one considers the last agitation call given by Anna Hazare, which was an absolute disaster, this movement too might find few takers on the streets. The scene inside the parliament might be different though. The government should come up with some innovative idea to compensate the landowners. The idea behind compensation is not only that of loss of an asset but also that of loss of livelihood. A farmer for example will lose his or her source of livelihood if the land is taken away by the government and hence would need something on top of the compensation. Most projects promise jobs for the landowners, but these may come to naught for various reasons, desired skills being one.

A better idea would be to divide the compensation into two sections. One a lump sum amount and another an annuity against the remaining sum. The lump sum amount can help the farmer in buying land elsewhere or finding alternate means of sustenance and the remaining can provide a fixed, predictable income. Both the chunks of money can be deposited in the bank accounts opened under the Jan Dhan Yojana or in an existing bank account. Landowners who want the entire compensation at once should also be free to have it their way. Such an arrangement will take care of both the immediate needs of the farmer and the question of sustenance at once.

The Patkars and Hazares will always come up to oppose change. The best way to handle them is to defeat them at their own game.

The AAP landslide

Yes, you will all get the freebies

The results for Delhi elections are trickling in for the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and pouring in for the Aam Admi Party (AAP). The early trends suggest a land slide for AAP. Prima facie, it looks like a case of socialist promises of freebies and a negative campaign run by the BJP, winning over everything else. The imminent defeat of the BJP is strikingly similar to the rout faced by the Indian National Congress (INC) in recent Lok Sabha elections. The INC for long thought handouts will win them votes and allies. It miserably failed to gauge the change in public opinion and demography. An aspirational middle class with a demographic bulge was in no mood to fall for utopia. The BJP campaign was carefully planned around the aspirations of an emerging India and the voters rewarded it (though the cart load of scams perpetrated by the INC and its allies contributed to its loss). Just nine months down the line, the BJP seems to have misjudged the voters. It has done an INC.

The huge vote share (more than 50% according to early counting trends), will obviously make the AAP supporters euphoric. They ran a relentless campaign and ensured a massive shift in traditional vote banks. The expectations form the new government are hazy at best. The previous stint of 49 days was a disaster and left Delhi without a government for almost a year. One can only hope that this time around with a decisive mandate, the AAP will deliver some of its promises. Unlike last elections they have refrained from giving deadlines for their promises. This is sensible, especially when realpolitik is a different animal than street politics. The only fear Indian Affairs has is, Arvind Kejriwal turning into a Mamata Banerjee, who still has to come to terms of being a Chief Minister and not a street protestor anymore. Hopefully Kejriwal has learnt his lesson from the 49 days in power.

What was touted as a close contest by the BJP is turning out to be the most disastrous result for them. Kiran bedi, the Chief Ministerial candidate trailing (and probably losing to AAP) talks volumes about the way the party carried out its campaign. Hubris is all one can blame it on. There would be many rounds of postmortem in the BJP war room, blames would be assigned and scapegoats sacrificed. What the party really needs is realigning.  For a start it should avoid doing an “India shining” all over again. The first National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government carried out large scale reforms, fruits of which were reaped by the succeeding United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government.

If the NDA wants to keep its voters in good humour, it should have a two prong strategy. Carry on with the reforms, which will bear fruit in the long run and identify quick-wins at the same time. A nuclear deal or make in India will take their own time, meandering through bureaucracy and the federal structure. The results may not be visible in the next two or three years. The benefits of which, might take even longer to reach the bottom of the pyramid (the most critical section of voters). On the other hand schemes like Jan-Dhan Yojna can be leveraged relatively quickly to show impact on the masses. Though the reform agenda and the social media blitz the government has embarked upon bodes well with the middle class, it has little or no relevance to the masses.

To capture the imagination of the masses, NDA should not get into a populist binge mode. The right approach will be to balance the big ticket reforms with quick-wins. Access to quality education, formal banking, utilities (Water, energy, sanitation) and infrastructure will immediately benefit people even in the remotest of corners. Ensuring teacher attendance, direct cash transfers, holding utility operators accountable and fast tracking infrastructure projects can show results in a short period of time.

The roumours have it that the BJP is struggling with internal dissent. The Modi, Amit shah combine has sure rattled a lot of feathers in the party. Containing the dissent from the sundry sadhus and sadhvis to veterans in the party will not be easy. The rules of the game cannot be changed overnight. Will the NDA learn its lesson from the humiliation in Delhi is yet to be seen. More interesting will be to see how the AAP keeps its socialist promises and how it finds the money despite lowering tax rates.

Falling energy prices the ITER and global terrorism

Energy prices are at their historic low. The benchmark Brent crude took a plunge and stood at USD 49.55 per barrel, lowest since the financial crisis of 2008. Natural gas saw a similar downward trend with its prices. Natural gas prices dropped from a high of USD 6/mmBTU in early 2014 to around USD 3.01/mmBTU today.  Coal prices showed resilience in 2014, but fell down from a high of USD 63/st in early 2014 to USD 46.8/st today. For the past six months the global energy prices have been in secular decline. Sanctions on Iran, conflict in Iraq, civil war in Libya and political instability in South Sudan have all reduced the global oil output. Asian economies, which also happens to be large oil importers (India and China), have slowed but not drastically. The cars on streets of Delhi and Shanghai are still increasing and factories of China and India are demanding more power for their production lines. Yet the energy prices are ebbing.

Energy experts believe that one reason the oil prices are in free fall is the decision of Saudi Arabia (the most powerful member of the oil cartel, OPEC) to not cut oil production. The logic behind this decision is to throttle the energy boom in the US and Canada. Both countries perfected technologies to extract oil from shale and tar sands. Saudi Arabia has taken a similar step in the past to put pressure on Iran. If this is indeed the logic behind low oil prices, the trend is likely to stay for a while. It will take some time for the Americans and Canadians to give up their quest for extracting oil from its sands in response to weakening oil prices.

In south of France scientists are busy shaping up a nuclear fusion reactor. The project called ITER or International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor is an international venture funded and run by seven entities including China, European Union, India, Japan, Russia, South Korea and the US. Aim of the project is to design a reactor capable of generating energy at a commercial scale. Though nuclear energy is common today, it has its negative environmental impact. The Fukushima disaster of 2011 is reminder of the dangers nuclear power poses. The ITER once ready will generate power using Hydrogen isotopes, which are abundant. Another advantage of fusion reaction is its safety. The fusion process leaves behind harmless residual elements, which can be disposed of easily. If successful, the process can make every country in the world self-reliant and can possibly lead to elimination of energy import costs.

Falling energy prices, promising non-conventional sources of energy, increasing fuel efficiency and efficient energy storage (batteries in an electric car) indicate towards a future where oil and gas will play a less important role in shaping a country’s economy. What will such a future mean for us? Cost of living will go down for one. We can push global warming back by a few centuries, perhaps. But the most important change we will see will happen in how people live in oil rich countries today. Though some of the countries like Brazil, Nigeria, the US have democratic setup and power keeps changing hands, most of the oil producing countries are either dictatorships (Venezuela) or medieval kingdoms (Saudi Arabia, UAE).

While countries like Venezuela are in sever financial trouble despite their huge oil reserves, the likes of Saudi Arabia are splurging to buy legitimacy. Other than keeping their subjects happy by providing subsidized fuel, housing, education, overseas education, cheap loans, cheap foreign labour, and so on, the kingdom also runs one of the largest terror financing networks. It is no secret that the Middle East in general and Saudi Arabia in particular have funded the growth of radical Islam by means of funding mosques and training clergy. A recent report in The Tribune talks about Pakistan waking up to Saudi terror funding using its mosques. The Saudis and other Middle Eastern countries have been funding terror and extremist ideologies in the past. Flush with oil money the Kingdoms of the Middle East poured money in the Iran-Iraq war and to fight the Russians in Afghanistan. Books written on the politics of Saudi Arabia note that various charities in the Kingdom funded the “mujahideens” who wanted to fight in Afghanistan. Flight tickets were provided, arms and fleets of pickup trucks were financed and local media was turned into a propaganda machine highlighting the glories of “Jihad” in Afghanistan. The activities continued in the twenty first century. Saudi and Emirati men planned and carried out the 9/11 attacks with people from other countries. Much of this is still going on, despite an attempt to curb down terror funding by countries like Pakistan (itself a terror sponsor).

As long as the oil lasts

All this has happened with the backing of petro dollars. So what will happen when the oil becomes irrelevant? When the cars will get fully charged while you finish your coffee. Or when homes will be lit with cheap and clean energy from wind or nuclear fusion. Or when factories will produce goods using a mix of energy options with oil not being one of them. An oil free world is still a speculation, but a realistic one. In the next decade or so we will see a change in the energy mix, away from coal and oil. If that happens, countries like Russia, Venezuela and the Kingdoms of the Middle East will have nothing to turn to. They will have to feed the population, which has grown up on handouts. The change will be slow but sure. How these countries will tackle that is yet to be seen.

Will plunging oil prices stop the Kingdoms from financing terror activities and use the money to feed their subjects? We do not know yet. The fund crunch might stop terror financing but on the other hand an economy solely dependent on oil money will surely fail. Even the apparently diverse economy of the UAE relies heavily on oil money. How will the subjects react to a changing economic situation? Will they mend their ways and start working as street cleaners and truck drivers? Or will they take to violence? How will the over pampered clergy of the Kingdoms react once the money stops flowing in? Will they go back to living in their Bedouin tents? Or will they resort to propagation of extremist Islam to wrest legitimacy from the rulers? These are some questions for, which we have no answers yet.