Over 1.3 lakh Tibetans living in exile and settled across India and other parts of the globe shall be electing their next Parliament-in-Exile, called Central Tibetan Administration, and it’s head in May 2021.
Do you think that India’s support for the Tibetan cause is the root cause of all irritants in India-China relations?
Electing the exiled Government
The Tibetan Parliament-in-Exile (TPiE) has its headquarters in Dharamsala, in the Kangra district of Himachal Pradesh.
According to the Green Book of the Tibetan government-in-exile, over 1 lakh Tibetans are settled across India.
The remaining are settled in United States, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Costa Rica, France, Mexico, Mongolia, Germany, United Kingdom, Switzerland and various other countries.
Here is how the Tibetan elections will be held:
Tibetan Parliament-in-Exile (TPiE)
The Speaker and a Deputy Speaker head the Tibetan Parliament-in-exile.
The 16th TPiE had 45 members – 10 representatives from each of the traditional provinces of Tibetan – U-Tsang, Dhotoe and Dhomey.
It includes two members from each of the four schools of Tibetan Buddhism and the pre-Buddhist Bon religion.
Other representatives are from the Tibetan Communities in North America and Europe; and from Australasia and Asia (excluding India, Nepal and Bhutan).
Till 2006, it used to be called as Assembly of Tibetan People’s Deputies (ATPDs) with the chairman as its head and a vice-chairman.
Tibetan Constitution
The Central Tibetan Administration exists and functions on the basis of the Constitution of the Tibetan government called the ‘The Charter of the Tibetans in Exile’.
In 1991, The Constitution Redrafting Committee instituted by the Dalai Lama prepared the Charter for Tibetans in exile. The Dalai Lama approved it on June 28, 1991.
In 2001, fundamental changes happened with the amendment of the Charter that facilitated the direct election of the Kalon Tripa by the Tibetans in exile.
The Kalon Tripa is called Sikyong or president of the Central Tibetan Administration.
The Kashag (Cabinet)
The Kashag (Cabinet) is the Central Tibetan Administration’s highest executive office and comprise seven members.
It is headed by the Sikyong (political leader) who is directly elected by the exiled Tibetan population.
Sikyong subsequently nominates his seven Kalons (ministers) and seeks the parliament’s approval. The Kashag’s term is for five years.
A backgrounder: Democracy for Tibet
The Dalai Lama began democratization soon after he came to India during the 1959 Tibetan National Uprising.
He reportedly asked Tibetans in exile to choose their representatives through universal adult suffrage, following which polls were held for electing Tibetan Parliamentarians in 1960.
Democracy for the Tibetans, thus, began in exile.
The Dalai Lama, however, continued to remain the supreme political leader. On March 14, 2011, he relinquished his political responsibilities, ending a 369-year-old practice.
Is TPiE officially recognised by any country?
Not exactly, it is not recognised officially by any country, including India.
But, a number of countries including the USA and European nations deal directly with the Sikyong and other Tibetan leaders through various forums.
The TPiE claims its democratically-elected character helps it manage Tibetan affairs and raise the Tibetan issue across the world.
The incumbent Sikyong, Lobsang Sangay, was among the guests who attended the oath-taking ceremony of our PM in 2014, probably a first.
The Joint Parliamentary Committee on Office of Profit has deliberated on whether a Parliamentarian can continue to teach at University and if this draws the provisions of “Office of Profit” rules.
Note: The Constitution of India does not define the Office of Profit. It has only mentioned it under Article 102 (1) and Article 191 (1).
The concept of ‘Office of Profit’
MPs and MLAs, as members of the legislature, hold the government accountable for its work.
The essence of disqualification is if legislators hold an ‘office of profit’ under the government, they might be susceptible to government influence, and may not discharge their constitutional mandate fairly.
The intent is that there should be no conflict between the duties and interests of an elected member.
Hence, the office of profit law simply seeks to enforce a basic feature of the Constitution- the principle of separation of power between the legislature and the executive.
What governs the term?
At present, the Parliament (Prevention of Disqualification) Act, 1959, bars an MP, MLA or an MLC from holding any office of profit under the central or state government unless it is exempted.
However, it does not clearly define what constitutes an office of profit.
Legislators can face disqualification for holding such positions, which bring them financial or other benefits.
Under the provisions of Article 102 (1) and Article 191 (1) of the Constitution, an MP or an MLA (or an MLC) is barred from holding any office of profit under the Central or State government.
An Un-defined term
The officials of the law ministry are of the view that defining an office of profit could lead to the filing of a number of cases with the Election Commission and the courts.
Also, once the definition is changed, one will also have to amend various provisions in the Constitution including Article 102 (1) (a) and Article 109 (1) (a) that deal with the office of profit.
It will have an overarching effect on all the other sections of the Constitution.
Factors constituting an ‘office of profit’
The 1959 law does not clearly define what constitutes an office of profit but the definition has evolved over the years with interpretations made in various court judgments.
An office of profit has been interpreted to be a position that brings to the office-holder some financial gain, or advantage, or benefit. The amount of such profit is immaterial.
In 1964, the Supreme Court ruled that the test for determining whether a person holds an office of profit is the test of appointment.
Several factors are considered in this determination including factors such as:
whether the government is the appointing authority,
whether the government has the power to terminate the appointment,
whether the government determines the remuneration,
The Indian Regional Navigation Satellite System (IRNSS) has been accepted as a component of the World Wide Radio Navigation System (WWRNS) for operation in the Indian Ocean Region by the International Maritime Organization (IMO).
Try this PYQ:
With reference to the Indian Regional Navigation Satellite System (IRNSS), consider the following statements:
IRNSS has three Satellites in geostationary and four satellites the geosynchronous orbits.
IRNSS covers entire India and about 5500 sq. km beyond its borders.
India will have its own satellite navigation system with full global coverage by the middle of 2019.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
(a) 1 only
(b) 1 and 2 only
(c) 2 and 3 only
(d) None
What is IRNSS?
The IRNSS, with an operational name of NavIC (acronym for Navigation with Indian Constellation) is an Indian regional satellite navigation system that provides accurate real-time positioning and timing services.
It covers India and a region extending 1,500 km around it, with plans for further extension.
The system currently consists of a constellation of seven satellites, with two additional satellites on ground as stand-by.
The constellation is in orbit as of 2018, and the system was expected to be operational from early 2018 after a system check.
It will provide two levels of service, the “standard positioning service”, which will be open for civilian use, and a “restricted service” (an encrypted one) for authorised users (including the military).
Benefits of the move
This move will enable merchant vessels to use IRNSS for obtaining position information similar to GPS and GLONASS.
This will assist in the navigation of ships in Indian ocean waters within the area covered by 50°N latitude, 55°E longitude, 5°S latitude and 110°E longitude (approximately up to 1500 km from Indian boundary).
Back2Basics: International Maritime Organisation (IMO)
IMO is the UN specialized agency with responsibility for the safety and security of shipping and the prevention of marine pollution by ships.
Its primary purpose is to develop and maintain a comprehensive regulatory framework for shipping and its remit today includes safety, environmental concerns, legal matters, technical co-operation, maritime security and the efficiency of shipping.
IMO is governed by an assembly of members and is financially administered by a council of members elected from the assembly.
The National Digital Health Mission will soon be ready for a nationwide roll-out, confirmed the Chairman of National Health Authority and CEO of Ayushman Bharat.
Our PM has launched the National Digital Health Mission on 15th August 2020.
The mission aims to create an integrated healthcare system linking practitioners with the patients digitally by giving them access to real-time health records.
It is a complete digital health ecosystem. The digital platform will be launched with four key features — health ID, personal health records, Digi Doctor and health facility registry.
At a later stage, it will also include e-pharmacy and telemedicine services, regulatory guidelines for which are being framed.
Its implementation
The NDHM is implemented by the National Health Authority (NHA) under the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare.
The National Health Authority (NHA), is also the implementing agency for Ayushman Bharat.
Early this year, our PM attended the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) virtual summit, after previously skipping two summits.
Not attending that last few summits, had signalled India’s sudden departure away from NAM and having adopted the policy of multi-alignment.
This has raised eyebrows of those who still believe in the true spirit of Non-Alignment of which India has been the champion for a long time.
The question of strategic autonomy is in limelight since the 2+ 2 talks between India and the US.
Exploring India’s role in the launch of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) during the Cold War and its relations with participant countries today is pivotal to understanding ‘ India’s idea of strategic autonomy.
What is NAM?
The Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) is a forum of 120 developing world states that are not formally aligned with or against any major power bloc.
After the United Nations, it is the largest grouping of states worldwide.
Drawing on the principles agreed at the Bandung Conference in 1955, the NAM was established in 1961 in Belgrade, SR Serbia, and Yugoslavia.
It was an initiative of then PM Jawaharlal Nehru, Ghanaian President Kwame Nkrumah, Indonesian President Sukarno, Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser and Yugoslav President Josip Broz Tito.
The countries of the NAM represent nearly two-thirds of the United Nations’ members and contain 55% of the world population.
Membership of NAM
Membership is particularly concentrated in countries considered to be developing or part of the Third World, though the NAM also has a number of developed nations.
At that point in time, reason behind NAM creation
Non-alignment, a policy fashioned for the Cold War, aimed to retain the autonomy of policy (not equidistance) between two politico-military blocs i.e. the US and the Soviet Union.
The NAM provided a platform for newly independent developing nations to join together to protect this autonomy.
NAM was thus similar to neutrality in a sense of not taking sides, but with the difference that if their decisions and actions coincide with one of the fighting blocs, it is their own preference, their own worldview, not supporting the bloc who has similar standings.
Relevance TODAY
Since the end of the Cold War, the NAM has been forced to redefine itself and reinvent its purpose in the current world system.
In the years since the Cold War’s end, it has focused on developing multilateral ties and connections as well as unity among the developing nations of the world, especially those within the Global South.
Fading significance of the NAM
The policy of non-alignment lost its relevance after the disintegration of the Soviet Union and the emergence of unipolar world order under the leadership of the US since 1991.
De-colonization was largely complete by then, the apartheid regime in South Africa was being dismantled and the campaign for universal nuclear disarmament was going nowhere.
Freed from the shackles of the Cold War, the NAM countries were able to diversify their network of relationships across the erstwhile east-west divide.
India and the NAM
India played an important role in the multilateral movements of colonies and newly independent countries that wanted into the NAM.
India’s policy was neither negative nor positive.
Country´s place in national diplomacy, its significant size and its economic miracle turned India into one of the leaders of the NAM and upholder of the Third World solidarity.
The principle of ‘acting and making its own choices’ also reflected India’s goal to remain independent in foreign policy choices, although posing dilemmas and challenges between national interests on international arena and poverty alleviation.
Namely, the economic situation with the aim to raise the population’s living standards challenged the country’s defence capacity and vice versa. Preserving the state’s security thus required alternative measures.
Wars with China and Pakistan had led India to an economically difficult situation and brought along food crisis in the mid-1960s, which made the country dependent on US food.
India’s position was further complicated due to agreements with the Soviet Union about military equipment.
This placed India again in a situation where on one hand the country had to remain consistent on the principles of NAM while on the other hand to act in a context with fewer choices.
The guiding principle of NAM should be repurposed as a balance between ‘Global value consensus’,‘Freedom of Alignment’ and ‘Neutrality’.
What is meant by Strategic Autonomy?
Strategic autonomy for India denotes its’ ability to pursue its national interests and adopt its preferred foreign policy without being constrained in any manner by other states.
In its pure form, strategic autonomy presupposes the state in question possessing overwhelmingly superior power.
This is what would enable that state to resist the pressures that may be exerted by other states to compel it to change its policy or moderate its interests.
Today’s ideation of ‘strategic autonomy’ is much different from the Nehruvian era thinking of ‘non-alignment’.
Strategic autonomy is today a term New Delhi’s power corridors are well-acquainted with. It is an issue & situation-based, and not ideological.
Beyond Power-Politics nexus
Strategic autonomy for India is both about power-politics and responsibilities.
India’s quest for strategic autonomy is more about justice in terms of creating the international system where all states’ voices will be heard and decisions are made on value-based consensus.
Such an idea is often misunderstood and confused with ‘opposing some states and allying the others.’
What dictates India’s alignment now?
India acknowledged the importance of economic growth as a factor in domestic poverty alleviation and for the realization of national interests in the international arena.
(1) National security
China’s rise and assertiveness as a regional and global power and the simultaneous rise of middle powers in the region mean that this balancing act is increasing in both complexity and importance, simultaneously.
China’s growth presents great opportunities for positive engagement, but territorial disputes and a forward policy in the region raise concerns for New Delhi, particularly in the Indian Ocean and with Pakistan.
(2) Global decision-making
Another distinctive feature of India’s foreign policy has been the aim to adjust international institutions consistent with changes in international system.
The support for strengthening and reforming the UN as a multilateral forum, restructuring the international economic system and preserving independence in its decision-making has become an integral part of India’s foreign policy.
(3) Prosperity and influence
India’s 21st century’s strategic partnerships with two of the biggest economies, the USA and EU rely heavily on trade and technology cooperation.
In addition, the partnership with the USA has touched the boundaries of strategic issues like cooperation on counter-terrorism, defence trade, joint military exercises, civil nuclear cooperation and energy dialogue.
(4) Multi-polarism
Another means to execute India’s foreign policy strategy of autonomy has been forming extensive partnerships with other emerging powers.
India has been an active G4 country speaking for the reform of the UN Security Council and having been elected seven times as a non-permanent member.
As a result, there is an overlap of countries in different platforms, as can be seen in cases of India’s partnership with BRICS, SAARC, etc.
The purpose of India is to increase the participation and share of developing countries in global policy-making.
Benefits out of strategic alignment
India needs investments, technology, a manufacturing ecosystem to employ millions of its young population and improve its living standards.
It requires advanced weapons and technologies for its military. India is ambitious and wants to be a great power and the US and the Western world recognise this and are willing to partner India.
US along with France, are India’s principal backers in the UN Security Council and also support its membership in it.
The Quad of India, US, Japan and Australia is also slowly institutionalizing the multilateral partnership that is committed to an open, secure, inclusive and prosperous Indo-Pacific region.
China’s “not-peaceful rise”
India is a long term rival for China, which does not want India’s rise. It wants to keep India boxed into South Asia, and tries to keep it off balance using Pakistan which it arms and supports.
It has made inroads into the region using the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). It continues to block India’s membership in the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) and continues to needle in the UNSC over Kashmir.
We all know the recent heat up after Ladakh standoff. It occupies parts of Indian Territory and also claims the entire state of Arunachal.
Hence, the Non-alignment is difficult because,
We have to safeguard ourselves from a power which has trampled upon all her neighbours most blatantly and the whole world has seen and withstood them with deafening silence.
China has kept our territory since 1962 violating all international norms and we could do nothing with this diplomatic tool called Non- Alignment.
Any policy formulation has to serve the national interest.
The US prefers its partners to pay for and manage their own security, but collaborate in all possible ways — weapons sale, sharing civil and military arsenals, diplomatic support, intelligence sharing etc.
It will be pragmatic to take advantage of the great power rivalry by suitably aligning with a power that India can derive maximum benefit from.
But Wait, NAM stillmatters!
(1) Global perception of India
India’s image abroad has suffered as a result of allegations that creep into our secular polity and a need arises to actively network and break out of isolation.
India’s partnership with America faces an uncertain future in the post-pandemic period ahead of the regime change under Joe Biden.
Indeed, India is overtly keen to upgrade a quadrilateral alliance with the US, Japan and Australia — but there too, we’re all dressed up and nowhere to go. There is no concrete commitment yet.
We can sense the growing proximity between the NAM member countries and China.
As it is, one-half of NAM comprises members of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference, which remains highly critical of the plight of Indian Muslims.
(2) For the Impulsive U.S.
For India complete dependence on the U.S. to counter China would be an error.
As the U.S. confronts the challenge to its dominance from China, the classical balance of power considerations would dictate accommodation with Russia.
A strong stake in India’s relations with the US could reinforce Russia’s affinity for China.
Russia, these days looks less pragmatic to see Indian ties with its rivals as a joint venture, not an alliance in which they could pursue shared objectives to mutual benefit.
Importance of NAM: As power booster for multilateralism
The NAM can never lose its relevance because-
Cold War has revitalized with time: Critics of NAM who term it as an outcome of the Cold War must also acknowledge that a new Cold War is beginning to unfold, this time between the US and China, which if reflected in Trade War, Protectionism, Indo-Pacific narrative, etc.
NAM provides a much bigger platform: NAM becomes relevant to mobilize international public opinion against terrorism, weapons of mass destruction (WMDs), nuclear proliferation, ecological imbalance, safeguarding interests of developing countries in WTO (World Trade Organization) etc.
NAM as a tool for autonomy: NAM’s total strength comprises 120 developing countries and most of them are members of the UN General Assembly. Thus, NAM members act as an important group in support of India’s candidature as a permanent member in UNSC.
A podium for India’s leadership: India is widely perceived as a leader of the developing world. Thus, India’s engagement with NAM will further help in the rise of India’s stature as the voice of the developing world or global south.
NAM for multilateralism: Though globalization is facing an existential crisis, it is not possible to return to isolation. In the world of complex interdependence, countries are linked to each other one way or another. With rising threats such as climate change, terrorism, and receding multilateralism, the global south and NAM countries find themselves in a precarious condition.
NAM as a source for soft power: India can use its historic ties to bring together the NAM countries. India’s strength lies in soft power rather than hard power. Therefore, NAM cannot be based on the current political structure where military and economic power is often used to coerce countries.
NAM as a tool for institutional reforms: Global institutions such as WTO and the UN are facing an existential crisis because only a few nations dictate their functions. India can use the NAM platform to push for reforms in these institutions for a more equal and democratic world order.
Elasticity is the guiding principle of diplomacy.
– Anonymous
Way Forward
In the post-COVID-19 world, India will have to make a disruptive choice — of alignment.
In the threat environment marked by a pushy China, India should aim to have both- American support and stay as an independent power centre by cooperation with middle powers in Asia and around the world.
Complete dependence would be detrimental to India’s national interest such as its ties with Iran and Russia and efforts to speed up indigenous defence modernization.
Rather than proclaiming non-alignment as an end in itself, India needs deeper engagement with its friends and partners if it is to develop leverage in its dealings with its adversaries and competitors.
A wide and diverse range of strategic partners, including the U.S. as a major partner is the only viable diplomatic way forward in the current emerging multipolar world order.
Conclusion
Though sections of the Indian establishment still want to reinvent non-alignment under ever new guises, India is showing signs of pursuing strategic autonomy separately from non-alignment.
India continues to practice a policy of non-alignment in an attempt to maintain sovereignty and oppose imperialism.
Indo-US ties are complementary, and a formal alliance will only help realize the full potential of these relations.
India, thus, emphasizes the relations with the region and emerging powers not only in terms of economic development but also as actors with similar understandings and expectations of the world system.
In some way, the relations can be described as expectations without expectations. States interact with each other in expectations to change the international system, but without expectations to ‘ally or oppose.’
India believes in making value-based decisions and maintains its coherent foreign policy. As it is familiar with the phrase ‘multi-vector’ foreign policy, it is high time to maximise its potential.
The article highlights the importance of MSMEs for the economy and issues faced by the sector.
Context
The economy may have recovered from the trough of April but is yet to show signs of a sustained recovery on an annual basis.
The number of establishments registered with the Employees’ Provident Fund Organisation declined by more than 30,800 in October, compared to September.
Incentives for MSMEs
The above-cited numbers are indicator of the vulnerability of the employment situation, but also as a performance indicator of micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs).
The MSME sector is vital for employment generation, as also for an economic recovery to sustain.
Under Atmanirbhar Rozgar Yojana the government will bear the entire provident fund contributions for two years of all new employees hired.
However, similar announcements earlier failed to enthuse the MSME sector.
Along with the employment incentive, the MSME sector has also been provided collateral free credit.
But the offtake from the scheme has not been impressive, pointing to deeper issues.
Why the incentives failed
Part of the reason these incentives failed lies in the very nature of the MSME sector and its heterogeneity, which is inherent in its definition as a residual sector once large enterprises are excluded.
A 2015-16 survey of the National Statistical Office shows that almost 94% of these enterprises are tiny, with less than four workers.
Only 31% are registered under various acts, but these face regulatory hurdles, some of them related to compliance with the goods and service tax (GST).
Problems faced by MSMEs
In 2015-16 survey of the National Statistical Office two most important problems mentioned were a lack of demand and unpaid dues.
On both, the situation after 2015-16 has worsened, with the economy slowing down and the government responsible for the largest unpaid dues.
With the finances of state governments also strained due to pandemic, the fiscal situation has added to the problem of unpaid dues.
The sector is also affected by the political economy of state intervention, which seems biased in favour of large corporations.
Unlike the ₹1.5 trillion tax bonanza that large companies received as part of a pre-pandemic stimulus, there was no such bounty for the MSME sector.
With most state governments relaxing labour regulations for large companies, even the low-wage advantage that this sector enjoyed has got diminished.
Policy changes have not only reduced the compliance burden of labour laws, but have also helped large enterprises reduce wage costs.
Consequently, the MSME sector has to now compete with a corporate sector that has easy access to capital, cheap and unregulated labour and a lower tax burden than before.
Way forward
Apart from the fiscal stimulus, the sector requires a political-economy approach that prioritizes MSME interests.
India needs to ease the regulatory burden of small units and aid their survival through fiscal support.
Above all, they need a level-playing field vis-à-vis big businesses.
Consider the question “Despite several incentives by the government MSME sector fails to play the role expected of it. What are the issues faced by the sector and suggest the measure to deal with the issues.”
Conclusion
Given the important role played by the sector in the economy, issues faced by it must be addressed on ani urgent basis to revive the economy battered by the pandemic.
Democracies across the world are facing several challenges. The article examines these challenges.
Threats to democracy
Efforts by Donald Trump, to negate the result of the recently held presidential elections, indicates a new set of tactics, previously seen only in dictatorships.
In the case of the U.S., one of the world’s oldest democracies, what we are witnessing is a deep divide.
This division is evident in many other democratic nations today.
This is true of many other democracies as well and must be viewed as a wake-up call.
What is evident is that issues of identity, or threats to identity, are becoming an important issue in elections across democracies.
Democracies already confront such problems, but it will become still more evident as time passes.
Manipulation of grievances by using psychometric techniques (as done by Cambridge Analytica), and the use of ‘deep fakes’ made possible through Artificial Intelligence, further enhances the threat to current notions of democracy.
Troubles to democracy in Europe
Europe will have to deal with the declining importance of America in global politics.
An uncertain Brexit will further damage the prospects of both the United Kingdom and Europe.
Russia, under Vladimir Putin, remains an enigma, for despite its military strength and strategic congruence with China, its future appears increasingly uncertain.
France displays even greater fragility and French values appear to be undergoing major changes.
The recent wave of terrorist attacks has been a major trigger, raising questions about long-held secular beliefs.
Return of terrorism
Terrorism is resurfacing, and with renewed vigour.
The al-Qaeda is again becoming prominent. The IS, which many thought had been vanquished has returned in full force.
Recently IS has carried out spectacular attacks in France and in Austria which is a reminder of the transnational character of the threat it poses to democratic countries.
They combine symbolism with spectacular violence.
The intent is to shock the public at large, and produce a reaction across the entire Muslim world, reigniting the fading embers of a religio-cultural conflict.
Information manipulation
Alongside the above issues, there is a growing concern across the globe about increasing efforts to manipulate information in order to perpetuate power.
Manipulation of information — and also events — to achieve certain desired ends, is becoming the stock-in-trade of many a democratic regime as well.
Many democratic nations today resort to manipulating data to support or prop up the government’s version of events. Informational autocracy is, hence, the latest danger that threatens democracies.
India’s challenges
1) Threat to democracy
In some regions, especially where mid-term elections are scheduled, as in West Bengal, the atmosphere today is highly polarised.
The ghosts of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act and the National Register of Citizens have by no means been laid to rest.
Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) is witnessing a kind of surface calm, but beneath this, there are evident tensions.
Aggravating this situation are Pakistan’s efforts to push in terrorists in ever larger numbers.
Uncertain external environment
The downward spiral in its relations with China has not been arrested.
15 Asia-Pacific nations, including China, have signed on to the world’s biggest trade bloc, the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) — from which India has been excluded.
The RCEP, which covers almost a third of the world’s economy, is perceived as the springboard for future economic recovery across the region.
India’s absence from RCEP represents a cardinal failure of India’s bargaining strategy.
India’s isolation is evident from the fact that even a weak Pakistan is pursuing a policy of provocation— the latest provocation being the holding of Assembly elections in Gilgit-Baltistan.
India is again being steadily marginalised in Afghanistan, where the control of the Taliban is increasing, with all other players accomodating Taliban.
Consider the question “What are the various challenges faced by the democracies across the world and India is no exception to it. In the context of this, examine the issues facing democracy in India.”
Conclusion
Though democracies across the world are facing several issues, resilience inherent in them will help them clear the chaos created by these issues.
The article counters the argument made by External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar about the impact of economic liberalisation on India’s economy.
Impact of liberalism on India
India’s External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar recently disapproved of free trade and globalisation.
About FTA’s he said that “the effect of past trade agreements has been to de-industrialise some sectors.”
These observations were made days after countries of the Asia-Pacific region signed the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) agreement.
He said that , “in the name of openness, we have allowed subsidi[s]ed products and unfair production advantages from abroad to prevail”
Flaws in the argument
There are several flaws in Mr. Jaishankar’s arguments.
1) India cannot be the part of global value chain
India is now truly at the margins of the regional and global economy.
With trade multilateralism at the World Trade Organisation (WTO) remaining sluggish, FTAs are the gateways for international trade.
By not being part of any major FTA, India cannot be part of the global value chains.
India’s competitors such as the East Asian nations, by virtue of they being part of mega-FTAs, are in an advantageous position to be part of global value chains and attract foreign investment.
2) Indian economy has bee relatively closed economy
India is surely a much more open economy than it was three decades ago, globally, India continues to remain relatively closed when compared to other major economies.
According to the WTO, India’s applied most favoured nation import tariffs are 13.8%, which is the highest for any major economy.
Likewise, according to the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, on the import restrictiveness index, India figures in the ‘very restrictive’ category.
From 1995-2019, India has initiated anti-dumping measures 972 times (the highest in the world) trying to protect domestic industry.
3) Economic survey accepts the benefits of FTAs
The External Affairs Minister is contradicting government’s economic survey presented earlier this year.
The survey concluded that India has benefitted overall from FTAs signed so far.
Blaming FTAs for deindustrialisation means ignoring real problem of the Indian industry — which is the lack of competitiveness and absence of structural reforms.
4) India has been a major beneficiary of economic globalisation
It cannot be ignored that India has been one of the major beneficiaries of economic globalisation — a fact attested by the International Monetary Fund (IMF).
Post-1991, the Indian economy grew at a faster pace, ushering in an era of economic prosperity.
According to the economist Arvind Panagariya, poverty in rural and urban India, which stood at close to 40% in 2004-05, almost halved to about 20% by 2011-12.
This was due to India clocking an average economic growth rate of almost 8%.
Conclusion
Desire to make India a global destination for foreign investment is a pipe dream because it is naive to expect foreign investors to be gung-ho about investing in India if trade protectionism is the government’s official policy.
Important Announcement: Topics to be covered on 23rd November
GS-1 History of the world include events from 18th century such as industrial revolution, world wars, redrawal of national boundaries, colonization, decolonization.
GS-4 Dedication to public service, empathy, tolerance and
compassion towards the weaker sections
Reviews will be provided in a week. (In the order of submission- First come first serve basis). In case the answer is submitted late the review period may get extended to two weeks.
*In case your answer is not reviewed in a week, reply to your answer saying *NOT CHECKED*. If Parth Sir’s tag is available then tag him.
For the philosophy of AWE and payment, check here: Click2Join
The office of the Registrar General of India (RGI) has said the schedule or the questionnaire of the National Population Register (NPR) is being finalised.
The National Population Register (NPR)
The NPR is a database containing a list of all usual residents of the country. Its objective is to have a comprehensive identity database of people residing in the country.
It is generated through house-to-house enumeration during the “house-listing” phase of the census, which is held once in 10 years.
The last census was in 2011, and the next will be done in 2021 (and will be conducted through a mobile phone application).
A usual resident for the purposes of NPR is a person who has resided in a place for six months or more and intends to reside there for another six months or more
How it is different from the Census?
The census involves a detailed questionnaire and there were 29 items to be filled up in the 2011 census.
They aimed at eliciting the particulars of every person, including age, sex, marital status, occupation, birthplace, mother tongue, religion, whether they belonged to any SC or ST etc.
On the other hand, NPR collects basic demographic data and biometric particulars.
Once the basic details of the head of the family are taken by the enumerator, an acknowledgement slip will be issued. This slip may be required for enrolment in NPR, whenever that process begins.
The details will be recorded in every local (village or ward), sub-district (tehsil or taluk), district and state level.
Once the details are recorded, there will be a population register at each of these levels. Together, they constitute the National Population Register.
What is the legal basis for the NPR?
While the census is legally backed by the Census Act, 1948, the NPR is a mechanism outlined in a set of rules framed under the Citizenship Act, 1955.
Section 14A was inserted in the Citizenship Act, 1955, in 2004, providing for the compulsory registration of every citizen of India and the issue of a “national identity card” to him or her.
It also said the Central government may maintain a “National Register of Indian Citizens”.
The Registrar General India shall act as the “National Registration Authority” (and will function as the Registrar General of Citizen Registration).
Incidentally, the Registrar General is also the country’s Census Commissioner.
Attempt this question
Q.Enumerate the major points of the ‘Assam accord (1985)’. How is it associated with the present issue of the National Register of Citizens?
