November 1, 2016 Reign ('kklu) in Spain TOPICS - World, Spain, politics. “Rajoy is the only creature that advances (vkxs c<+uk) without moving,” noted a former socialist (lektoknh) premier (iz/ku) caustically (rh[ksiu ls), just ahead of (ls igys) the return on Saturday of the conservative (:f<+oknh) leader as Prime Minister after an unprecedented (bfrgkl esa igyh ckj) 10-month’ political impasse (xfrjks/) in Spain. Mariano Rajoy not only endured (cnkZLr djuk) the uncertainties (vfuf'prrk) and frustrations (fujk'kk) of his inability (v;ksX;rk) to put together (,d lkFk) a coalition (xBca/u) after his conservative People’s Party polled (ernku gksuk) the largest number of seats in the two inconclusive (vfu.kkZ;d) elections (pquko) since December 2015, but patiently (/S;Z iwoZd) watched his opponents’ prospects (laHkkouk) fade away (detksj gksuk). But despite his instinct (LoHkko) for political survival (cpuk), he heads (ekxZn'kZu djuk) a government that nobody really (okLrfod :i ls) wants. As Prime Minister, Mr. Rajoy enjoyed (vkuan ysuk) an absolute (iw.kZ) majority (cgqer) during his first term (2011-15). The clear mandate (tukns'k) enabled (;ksX; gksuk) him to push through a round of painful economic reforms (lq/kj) after the country’s housing and credit bubble (vklkj) went bust (fnokfy;k gksuk) by the end of the last decade. He now leads (usr`Ro djuk) a minority (vYila[;d) government in alliance (xBca/u) with the centrist (dsUnzoknh) Ciudadanos, facing (Lkkeuk djuk) a difficult but definite prospect of continued (yxkrkj) gridlock (xfrjks/) over every legislative (dkuwuh) initiative ('kq:vkr). His biggest test will be to win (thruk) parliamentary (lalnh;) backing (leFkZu) to meet the fiscal (foÙkh;) deficit (?kkVk) targets (y{; lk/uk) that Madrid has agreed with (lger gksuk) Brussels. A threat ([krjk) to call fresh elections is the only real trump card (,slh pky tks iQk;nk nsa) in his pocket. Mr. Rajoy’s rivals (izfr;ksxh) are too weak to be able to fully capitalise (iwath cukuk) on his woes (ladV). Recently (lEesyu) the principal opposition party, the Socialist Workers’ Party (PSOE), was forced (ckè; djuk) to eat humble pie (ukd jxM+uk) when it decided, not without internal (vkarfjd) differences (Hksn), to abstain (NqVdkjk izkIr djuk) in a parliamentary vote on Mr. Rajoy’s candidacy (mEehnokjh), only to breathe (thfor jguk) life into the minority government of its ideological (oSpkfjd) opponent (fojks/h).
Had the PSOE adopted (viukuk) such a course (jkLrk) after the elections in June, it might have salvaged (cpkuk) its image somewhat (dqN) by being seen as acting in the national (ns'k) interest (fgr). The option (fodYi) the party pursued (vuqdj.k djuk) instead, that of a coalition (xBca/u) with the extreme left Podemos party, only prolonged (yack) the gridlock (xfrjks/). Podemos once rode (lokj gksuk) the wave (ygj) of popular anger (Øks/) against (ds f[kykiQ) economic (vkfFkZd) austerity (l[rrk). For now, it must rest (fojks/h) content with the accomplishment (laiknu) of breaking Spain’s two-party dominance (izHkqRo) . The party’s hopes (vk'kk) lie (jguk) in a consolidation (etcqrhdj.k) of its base (vk/kj) as the platform of the genuine left, as distinct (fHkUu) from the centrist (dsUnzoknh) PSOE. The scenario (n`';) is reminiscent (;kn djkus okyk) of another imbroglio (vO;oLFkk), that of Belgium going without a government for more than 18 months a few years ago on the question of regional (izknsf'kd) autonomy (Lok;Ùkrk) between Flanders and Wallonia. Political fragmentation (fo[kaMu) is an inescapable (ftlls cpk ugha tk lds) fact (RkF;) in the evolution (fodk'k) of democratic (iztkrkaf+=kd) governance. Peaceful reconciliation (le>kSrk) of competing (izfr;ksxh) interests (:fp) is the art (dyk) and imperative (vfrvko';d) of political practice (vH;kl), as Mr. Rajoy is now finding out (rkyk'k djuk). November 2, 2016 School’s out in Kashmir TOPICS - India, Jammu and Kashmir, education, school It is almost four months since the unrest in Kashmir began following the killing of Hizbul Mujahideen ‘commander’ Burhan Wani. Protests, intermittent violence and long stretches of curfew have continued to put normal life on hold. Delegations of civil society representatives as well as politicians have’ attempted to reach out to separatists and find a way to bring calm to the streets, but to little avail. In fact, the opposite is happening with increasing mindless arson attacks on schools over the past two months. By one count, 27 schools, most of them government-run, have been set afire so far in the Valley over this period. No one has yet claimed responsibility for these attacks. The government has blamed the separatists for encouraging the arson. In turn, the separatists charge the administration of failing to protect the schools. Amidst all this blame-shifting, it is disturbing that separatist leaders such as Syed Ali Shah Geelani have not condemned the acts of violence outright. Their equivocation must be called out, even as the Jammu and Kashmir High Court has directed the government to reopen all the schools despite the separatists’ shutdown call.
It is against this backdrop, of life thrown out of gear and specific targeting of school buildings, that students have been rattled by the government’s plan to conduct State Board examinations in the second half of November. The government needs to assure them of adequate security to address their anxieties. The situation is reminiscent of the early 1990s. Hundreds of schools had been targeted then. Disrupting the school calendar is one of the oldest tricks in the insurgents’ playbook. It sends out the signal that the administration is not in full control. And it heightens anxiety among the local population that their children’s life chances are doubtful, thereby reinforcing popular disaffection and alienation. However, the occasional occupation of school buildings by the security forces also makes them a symbol of the state, and a soft target for militants. The government must abandon the practice of using schools to solve logistical problems. Moreover, while the State government focusses on getting students back to school, to be successful this effort must be embedded in a purposeful, urgent plan to return normalcy to the State, especially south Kashmir that has been the epicentre of the protests and violence. The disruption in the academic calendar in the Valley is an outcome of the prevailing unrest. Resumption of the rhythms of normal life is essential to end this disruption. Something has to give. The people of Kashmir need a break from this long and tragic season of protests, shutdowns and curfew. November 2, 2016 School’s out in Kashmir (dk'ehj es Ldwy can) TOPICS - India, Jammu and Kashmir, education, school. It is almost (yxHkx) four months since (tcls) the unrest (v'kkafr) in Kashmir began ('kq: gksuk) following (ds ckn) the killing of Hizbul Mujahideen ‘commander’ Burhan Wani. Protests (fojks/) , intermittent (va/k/qa/) violence (fgalk) and long (yack) stretches (vof/) of curfew (fu"ks/kKk) have continued (yxkrkj’ gksuk) to put normal life on hold (vxys le; rd ds fy, fcyac djuk). Delegations (izfrfuf/ eaMy) of civil society representatives (izfrfuf/) as well as politicians (jktuhfrK) have attempted (iz;kl djuk) to reach out (igq¡p cukuk) to separatists (vyxkooknh) and find a way to bring (ykuk) calm ('kkfr) to the streets (xfy;ksa ;k jkLrksa esa) , but to little avail (izkfIr) . In fact (okLRo esa), the opposite (fojks/h yksx) is happening with increasing (c<+rs gq,) mindless (csdkj dk) arson (vkxtuh) attacks (geyk) on schools over the past two months. By one count (,d fxurh ls) , 27 schools, most of them government-run (ljdkj ds }kjk), have been set afire (vkx yxkuk) so far (vcrd) in the Valley (?kkVh) over this period. No one has yet (vcrd) claimed (nkok djuk) responsibility (ftEesokjh) for these attacks. The government has blamed (nks"k yxkuk) the separatists (vyxkooknh) for encouraging (mdlkuk) the arson. In turn (ikjh esa) , the separatists charge the administration (iz'kklu) of failing (vliQy gksuk) to protect (lqj{kk djuk) the schools. Amidst (ds chp esa) all this blame-shifting (,d nwljs ij nks"k yxkuk) , it is disturbing (v'kkafr) that separatist leaders such as Syed Ali Shah Geelani have not condemned (fuank djuk) the acts (dk;Z) of violence(fgalk) outright (rRdky). Their equivocation (nksgjk vFkZ) must be called out (dke can djus cksyuk), even as the Jammu and Kashmir High Court has directed (fn'kk funsZ'k nsuk) the government to reopen ([kksyuk) all the schools despite (ds ckotwn) the separatists’ shutdown call (vyxkooknh ds can ds vkg~oku ).
It is against this backdrop (fiNyh ?kVuk), of life thrown out of gear (fu;a=k.k ls ckgj) and specific (fo'ks"k) targeting (y{;) of school buildings, that students have been rattled (mÙksftr) by the government’s plan to conduct (laiknu djuk) State Board examinations in the second half of November. The government needs (vko';drk gksuk) to assure (vk'oklu nsuk) them of adequate (i;kZIr) security (lqj{kk) to address (leL;k dk lek/ku djuk) their anxieties (fpark) . The situation (ifjfLFkfr) is reminiscent (;kn djkus okyk) of the early 1990s. Hundreds of schools had been targeted (fu'kku lk/k tkuk) then. Disrupting (ijs'kku djuk) the school calendar is one of the oldest tricks (pky) in the insurgents’ playbook (dke djus dh lwph) . It sends out (iznku djuk) the signal that the administration (iz'kklu) is not in full control (fu;a=k.k) . And it heightens (c<+kuk) anxiety (fpark) among (ds chp esa) the local population (tula[;k) that their children’s life chances (volj) are doubtful ('kadk;qDr) , thereby (iQyLo:i) reinforcing (leFkZu djuk) popular (yksdfiz;) disaffection (vlarks"k) and alienation (vyxkookn). However (fiQj Hkh), the occasional (vkdfLed) occupation (dk;Z] /a/k) of school buildings by the security forces also makes them a symbol of the state, and a soft target for militants (vkradokn). The government must abandon (NksM+ nsuk) the practice (vH;kl) of using schools to solve logistical (rkfdZd) problems (leL;k) . Moreover, while the State government focusses on (è;ku dsafnzr djuk) getting students back to school, to be successful (liQy) this effort (iz;kl) must be embedded (cSB tkuk) in a purposeful (m¼s'; ls Hkjk) , urgent plan to return normalcy (lk/kj.k fLFkfr) to the State, especially south Kashmir that has been the epicentre (dsanz) of the protests (fojks/) and violence (fgalk) . The disruption (cckZnh) in the academic calendar in the Valley is an outcome (ifj.kke) of the prevailing (iQSyuk) unrest (v'kkafr) . Resumption (iqujkjaHk) of the rhythms (y;) of normal life is essential (vfrvko';d) to end this disruption. Something has to give. The people of Kashmir need a break ('kkafr) from this long and tragic (nq[kkar) season of protests, shutdowns (can) and curfew. November 3, 2016 Tight race in a divided country TOPICS - World, USA A few weeks ago, many Americans would have guffawed at any suggestion that there could be a nail- biting finish to the November 8 presidential election. Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton had a comfortable lead in the polls, around 12 percentage points in some surveys. The campaign’ of Republican nominee Donald Trump had been dealt multiple blows stemming from the “Access Hollywood” tapes, where he was caught boasting about groping women without their consent. His popularity plummeted further after at least nine women alleged he had sexually assaulted them years ago. However, with less than a week to voting day, the race has tightened. For the first time since May, Mr. Trump is leading in one major poll. The game changer is FBI Director James Comey’s announcement that his agency was reopening inquiries into Ms. Clinton’s email record after discovering correspondence relating to her in the computer of Anthony Weiner, estranged husband of her aide Huma Abedin. There are multiple undercurrents to this vicious election battle that need to be parsed.
In the blue corner, Ms. Clinton still enjoys an overwhelming statistical probability of winning the 270 electoral college votes required to secure the presidency. She maintained a statesmanlike poise throughout the presidential debates, and in Email-gate the FBI has failed to unearth any evidence of criminality against her so far. Yet her problem lies in the perception of untrustworthiness created by her use of a private server while she was Secretary of State, her proximity to deep-pocketed donors on Wall Street and her hard line on a fiscally expansive welfare agenda for the middle class. In the red corner, Mr. Trump has refused to tone down his abrasive rhetoric against women, Latinos, Muslims, African- Americans and the differently abled despite the expected backlash from these demographics and growing alienation from mainstream Republican Party leaders. He has similarly hurled defiance in the teeth of those demanding that he release his tax returns. His brazen invitation to Russian hackers to go hunting for Ms. Clinton’s emails, and allegations about his shadowy financial connections to associates of Vladimir Putin raise troubling questions. That 21 months of feverish campaigning have ended not with a bang but a collective groan of disappointment in two such untrusted and uninspiring candidates says a lot about how bitterly polarised the electorate is. No matter who wins this ugly election, America’s leaders will have to initiate an honest national conversation about reconciling its social mores. Else, the world’s only superpower will find itself diminished November 3, 2016 Tight race in a divided country (c¡Vs ns'k esa etcqr nkSM+) TOPICS - World, USA(lEesyu) A few weeks ago, many Americans would have guffawed (Bgkdk yxkuk) at any suggestion that there could be a nail-biting (rukoiw.kZ) finish to the November 8 presidential (jk"Vªifr) election (pquko). Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton had a comfortable (vkjkenk;d) lead (c<+r) in the polls, around’ 12 percentage points in some surveys. The campaign of Republican nominee Donald Trump had been dealt multiple blows (dbZ vkoktsa) stemming from (fudy dj vkuk) the “Access Hollywood” tapes, where he was caught boasting (naHk Hkjrsa gq,) about groping (tcjnLrh Nwuk) women without their consent (lgefr). His popularity (yksdfiz;rk) plummeted (vkpkud fxj tkuk) further (vkxs) after at least (de ls de) nine women alleged (nks"k yxkuk) he had sexually assaulted (rax djuk) them years ago. However, with less than a week to voting day, the race has tightened (l[r gksuk) . For the first time since May, Mr. Trump is leading (c<+r) in one major poll. The game changer (ifjorZu djus okyk) is FBI Director James Comey’s announcement (?kks"k.kk) that his agency was reopening (nwckjk [kksyuk) inquiries (tk¡p) into Ms. Clinton’s email record after discovering ([kkstuk) correspondence (i=kkpkj) relating (lacf/r) to her in the computer of Anthony Weiner, estranged (vyx jg jgs) husband of her aide (lgk;d) Huma Abedin. There are multiple (db xq.kk) undercurrents (xqIr izHkko) to this vicious (d"Vnk;d) election (pquko) battle (yM+kbZ)that need to be parsed (in O;k[;k djuk).
In the blue (v'yhy) corner (ifjfLFkfr), Ms. Clinton still enjoys (vkuan eukuk) an overwhelming (vR;kf/d) statistical (vkadM+k) probability (laHkkouk) of winning the 270 electoral (fuokZpd) college votes required (vko';drk) to secure (lqjf{kr djuk) the presidency. She maintained (O;ofLFkr djuk) a statesmanlike (jktusrk) poise (rS;kj djuk) throughout ('kq: ls var rd) the presidential debates (okn fookn), and in Email- gate the FBI has failed (vliQy gksuk) to unearth (mtkxj djuk) any evidence (izek.k) of criminality (vijk/hdj.k) against (ds f[kykiQ) her so far (vc rd) . Yet (vc rd) her problem lies (jguk) in the perception (le>) of untrustworthiness (vfo'koluh;rk) created (fuekZ.k djuk) by her use of a private (futh) server (loZj) while she was Secretary (lpho) of State, her proximity (fudVrk) to deep-pocketed donors on Wall Street and her hard line (n`<+) on a fiscally (jktLoh) expansive (foLrkj) welfare (dY;k.k) agenda (dk;ZØe) for the middle class. In the red (fdlh ds Lokxr ds fy, fcNkbZ x;h njh) corner, Mr. Trump has refused (badkj djuk) to tone down (ean gksuk) his abrasive (l[r) rhetoric (okDiVqrk) against women, Latinos, Muslims, African-Americans and the differently (fHkUu fHkUUk izdkj dk) abled (;ksX; gksuk) despite the expected (vk'kk fd,)backlash (izfr?kkr) from these demographics (tula[;k laca/h) and growing (c<+rk gqvk) alienation (vyxko) from mainstream (eq[; izokg) Republican Party leaders (usrk). He has similarly hurled (tksj ls fpYykuk) defiance (vD[kM+iu) in the teeth of those demanding (ekax) that he release his tax returns. His brazen ([kqYye[kqYyk) invitation (vkea=k.k) to Russian hackers (dai;qVj dk iz;ksx euksjatu ds fy, djus okyk vkneh) to go hunting for Ms. Clinton’s emails, and allegations (nks"k) about his shadowy (vLi"V) financial connections to associates (lg;ksxh) of Vladimir Putin raise (mBkuk) troubling (leL;k ls Hkjh) questions. That 21 months of feverish (mÙksftr) campaigning (vfHk;ku) have ended (lekIr gksuk) not with a bang (/ekdk) but a collective (lkewfgd) groan (djkg) of disappointment (fujk'kk) in two such untrusted and uninspiring candidates says a lot about how bitterly (rh[ks :i ls) polarised (/zqohdj.k) the electorate is. No matter who wins this ugly election, America’s leaders will have to initiate ('kq:vkr djuk) an honest national conversation (laokn) about reconciling (lqyg djuk) its social mores (jhfr fjokt). Else (vFkok) , the world’s only superpower will find itself diminished(izek.k) . November 4, 2016 How to balance our gigs TOPICS - economy, business and finance, company information An employment tribunal ruling in London last week that Uber drivers are “workers” and not “self- employed”, and therefore entitled to a minimum wage and paid leave, could have implications not only for Britain’s 40,000 Uber drivers but for others associated with the ‘gig economy’ in Britain ’and beyond. Uber’s business model is predicated on calling itself a platform that connects those who want transportation services to those who provide them. The ruling held that Uber sells rides, not software, despite its legal and corporate structure and licensing agreements attempting to suggest otherwise. The gig economy is driven by algorithms and technology. It extends beyond ride-sharing applications to food delivery, car rental and hosting services. Earning money as an independent contractor — that is, through a gig — is not new. But the changing nature and growth of such business models and their inextricable linkages to technology, often via a smartphone app, is making it hard for regulators to keep up. From the consumer’s perspective, app-based transportation services have been beneficial: increased clarity on pricing, speedy redress of complaints, decreased waiting times via efficient driver- passenger match algorithms, and so on. The business model has brought more drivers into the workforce by offering flexible hours and gigs to anyone who meets certain criteria. From the service provider’s perspective, the ability to work flexible hours can be a way to earn supplementary income. The British ruling, where the complainants were Uber drivers, focusses on the producer. It has ruled that clever use of legal and technological instruments cannot circumvent basic work-related rights. Thus it has begun the overdue process of determining the producer’s obligations.
In India, with its vast unorganised labour force and patchy social protection, piecemeal work, such as that offered through apps in the for-hire transport market, holds the possibility of earning a livelihood that is above the minimum wage. The issues in India, for now, are likely to be different from those in the U.K., such as ensuring that algorithms do not incentivise drivers to work beyond the permitted maximum number of hours. There are, however, broader themes shared across borders and the range of offerings in the gig economy — including the need for companies to be transparent about their policies and practices so that regulation can be crafted in the first place. Such regulation should be streamlined, responsive to changing ground realities, and easily understandable by users. Any successful way forward will nurture innovation while protecting the rights of all stakeholders. November 4, 2016 How to balance our gigs TOPICS - economy, business and finance, company information. An employment (jkstxkj) tribunal (vf/dj.k) ruling (vkns'k) in London last week that Uber drivers are “workers” and not “self-employed”, and therefore entitled (;ksX;) to a minimum (de ls de) wage (etnqjh) and paid leave (vodk'k), could have implications (my>u) not only for Britain’s 40,000 Uber’ drivers but for others associated with (tqM+s gq,) the ‘gig economy’ (cM+h vFkZO;oLFkk) in Britain and beyond (ds ckgj) . Uber’s business model (uewuk) is predicated (crk;k tkuk) on calling itself (Lo;a) a platform that connects (tqM+k gksuk) those who want transportation (;krk;kr) services (lsok) to those who provide (nsuk) them. The ruling (vkns'k) held (fu;a=k.k j[kuk) that Uber sells rides (p<+uk) , not software, despite (blds ckotwn) its legal (dkuwuh) and corporate (lkewfgd) structure (cukoV) and licensing agreements (le>kSrk) attempting (iz;kl djuk) to suggest (lykg nsuk) otherwise (vU;Fkk). The gig economy is driven by algorithms (dyu fof/) and technology (rduhd). It extends (c<+kuk) beyond ride- sharing applications to food delivery (forj.k), car rental (fdjk;k) and hosting (estcku) services. Earning money as an independent (Lora=k) contractor (Bhdsnkj) — that is, through a gig — is not new. But the changing (cnyrk) nature and growth of such business models and their inextricable (fodV) linkages (laca/) to technology, often via a smartphone app, is making it hard for regulators (izca/d) to keep up (laidZ j[kuk). From the consumer’s perspective (n`f"Vdks.k) , app-based transportation (;krk;kr) services have been beneficial (ykHknk;d): increased (c<+k gqvk) clarity (Li"Vrk) on pricing (fder), speedy (rsth) redress (lek/ku djuk) of complaints (f'kdk;r) , decreased (?kVk gqvk) waiting times via efficient (n{k) driver-passenger match algorithms, and so on. The business model has brought (ykuk) more drivers into the workforce (etnwj leqnk;) by offering (volj nsuk) flexible (yphys) hours and gigs to anyone who meets certain (fuf'pr) criteria (ekinaM). From the service provider’s perspective, the ability to work flexible hours can be a way (rjhdk) to earn (dekuk) supplementary (lgk;d) income. The British ruling, where the complainants (f'kdk;rdrkZ) were Uber drivers, focusses on (dsUnz esa gksuk) the producer (mRiknd) . It has ruled (fu;e nsuk) that clever use of legal and technological instruments (;a=k) cannot circumvent (xfrjks/ iSnk djuk) basic work-related rights (vf/dkj). Thus (bl izdkj) it has begun ('kq: gksuk) the overdue (fcyafcr) process (izfØ;k) of determining (fu/kZfjr djuk) the producer’s obligations (vkHkkj).
In India, with its vast unorganised (vO;ofLFkr) labour (Je) force and patchy (viw.kZ) social protection (lqj{kk) , piecemeal (FkksM+k FkksM+k djds) work, such as that offered (nsuk) through apps in the for-hire (fdjk, ds fy,) transport market, holds the possibility (laHkkouk) of earning a livelihood (thfodk) that is above the minimum (de lss de) wage. The issues (eqn~nk) in India, for now, are likely (LkaHkkfor gksuk) to be different (fHkUUk) from those in the U.K., such as ensuring (lqfuf'p djuk) that algorithms do not incentivise (izksRlkgu nsuk) drivers to work beyond (ds ijs) the permitted (vuqefr) maximum number of hours. There are, however (fiQj Hkh) , broader (foLr`r) themes (fo"k; oLrq) shared (fgLlsnkjh djuk) across (ds ikj) borders (lhek) and the range of offerings (izLrkfor) in the gig economy — including ('kkfey gksuk) the need for companies to be transparent (ikjn'khZ) about their policies (fufr;k¡) and practices (vH;kl) so that regulation can be crafted (cuk;k tkuk) in the first place. Such regulation (fu;ked) should be streamlined (ljy ,oa dkjxj cukuk), responsive (tokc)to changing ground realities (okLrfodrk), and easily (vklkuh ls) understandable (le>us ;ksX;) by users (mi;ksx djus okys). Any successful (lIkQy) way (rjhdk) forward (vkxs) will nurture(c<+kok nsuk) innovation (uofuekZ.k) while (ds nkSjku) protecting (lqj{kk djuk) the rights (vf/dkj) of all stakeholders (fgLlsnkj). November 5, 2016 Still unwieldy but just in time TOPICS - macro economics, taxes and duties Finance Minister Arun Jaitley has managed to break the stalemate with States at the Goods and Services Tax Council’s fourth round of deliberations over the contentious issue of tax rates for the new tax regime. He did this by retaining the standard rates of 12 per cent and 18 per cent proposed at’ the Council’s last meeting, but tweaking the highest and lowest tax slabs from 26 per cent to 28 per cent and 6 per cent to 5 per cent, respectively. Concerns of States that levy Value Added Tax at 5 per cent on items of mass consumption were met by lowering the threshold GST rate. Foodgrains and other items considered essential, that together constitute roughly half the consumer price inflation index, have been exempted from GST. Since inflation is a tax on the poor and indirect taxes are regressive, this would help check worries about inflationary repercussions. But raising the highest tax slab to 28 per cent to balance the fiscal books is a surprise, especially since it would be levied on items such as consumer durables and cars that are now taxed at 30-31 per cent. Even if producers do pass on this rate differential to customers, this is hardly likely to spur the kind of consumption that could drive more manufacturing investment, create jobs and bolster economic growth.
The cess on top of GST to be levied on luxury and sin goods is neither desirable nor efficient. Unless its levy is restricted to end-use products at the point of sale, it would further distort the efficiency gains from GST as input credit for cess paid on intermediary goods is unlikely. The government has argued that the cess will help compensate States for five years and that the Council can take a call on doing away with it thereafter. Similar visibility should be provided on dovetailing the multiple tax rates into two or three in the coming years, if not the international norm of a single GST rate. Multiple rates will not just pose an administrative challenge but also spur ugly corporate lobbying of the kind that the Finance Minister wanted to nix by phasing out exemptions in direct taxes. Days before he became Niti Aayog Vice-Chairman, Arvind Panagariya had flagged the cost of focussing too much on one reform, which spills over into other reforms being delayed. That the recently constituted GST Council has covered much ground with unanimous consensus augurs well for the GST deadline, including refining the model GST law and ensuring industry and the tax department are ready to make the GST switch by April 1, 2017. But the proposed rate structure is still too complicated to meet the objective of radically simplifying tax compliance. November 5, 2016 Still unwieldy but just in time (vcrd cs
The cess (midj) on top of GST to be levied (dj yxk;k tkuk) on luxury (vkjkenk;d) and sin (vijk/) goods is neither desirable (bPNk djus ;ksX;) nor efficient (fuiq.k). Unless its levy is restricted (izfrcaf/r) to end-use products (mRIkknu) at the point of sale (fcØh) , it would further (vkxs) distort (fcxkMuk++++) the efficiency (dk;Z{kerk) gains (izkIr djuk) from GST as input (lg;ksx) credit (Js;) for cess (midj) paid on (pqdk;k tkuk) intermediary (v/huLFk) goods (oLrq,) is unlikely (vlaHkkfor) . The government has argued (cgl djuk) that the cess (midj) will help compensate ({kfriwfrZ djuk) States for five years and that the Council (ifj"kn) can take a call on doing away with (lekIr dj nsuk) it thereafter (rc ls) . Similar visibility (n`f"Bxkspjrk) should be provided (nsuk) on dovetailing (varxZzFku) the multiple tax rates into two or three in the coming years, if not the international (varjkZ"Vªh;) norm (fu;e) of a single GST rate. Multiple rates will not just pose (j[kuk) an administrative (iz'klkukRed) challenge (pqukSrh) but also spur ugly (dq:i) corporate (fuxe) lobbying (vius i{k es tuer RksS;kj djuk) of the kind that the Finance Minister wanted to nix (dqN ugha) by phasing out (gVkuk) exemptions (NwV) in direct taxes. Days before he became Niti Aayog Vice-Chairman, Arvind Panagariya had flagged the cost of focussing (dsUnzhr djuk) too much (cgqr T;knk) on one reform (lq/kj) , which spills (IkQSyuk) over into other reforms being delayed (foyac gksuk) . That the recently constituted (cuk;k x;k) GST Council has covered ( Sri Lankan Tamil fishermen are firm on an immediate end to all incursions and are against seized Indian boats being released without legal process, even though they agree that the arrested fishermen should be released. In talks between representatives of fishermen held a few days earlier, Tamil Nadu fishermen had asked for a three-year phase-out period for their trawlers, and a deal under which they would fish for 85 days a year until then. This was rejected outright by the Sri Lankan side, which holds that the Indian vessels cause serious economic and ecological damage. One way of preventing boundary transgression is to find a livelihood alternative for Tamil Nadu fishermen. Equipping them for deep sea fishing is an option. For now, Tamil Nadu should show greater understanding of the plight of the Sri Lankan Tamil fishermen, who are economically weaker and yet to fully recover from a devastating war, and agree to a more reasonable phase-out period. Sri Lanka, then, can look at a licensing system under which fishermen from both sides can fish on specified days using sustainable methods and permissible equipment. It is important that all sides recognise that there is a humanitarian dimension to the issue. November 7, 2016 Looking for a humane solution(,d ekuorkoknh gy dk rkyk'k) The agreement between India and Sri Lanka on establishing (LFkkfir djuk) a Joint Working Group (la;qDr dk;Z lewg) on fisheries (erL; {ks=k) is a small step (dne) forward (vkxs c<+uk) in resolving (lek/ku djuk) the dispute (fookn) between (ds chp) fishermen (eNqvkjk) of both countries. In fact (okLro esa) , such a mechanism (;qfDr) had been in place until a few years ago (dqN o"kZ igys) to address (leL;k dk lek/ku’ djuk) problems (leL;k) that arose (mRiUu gksuk) whenever (tc dHkh) fishermen from Tamil Nadu were arrested (fXkjÝrkjh) by Sri Lanka. The points agreed (eNqvkjk) on are important: a hotline (nks ns'kksa ds chp ckr djus dh fo'ks"k O;oLFkk) between the Coast Guards of both countries, a meeting of the JWG once (,d ckj) in three months, and a meeting of the fisheries ministers every six months. Welcome too is the commitment (djus dk oknk) that there would be no violence (fgalk) or loss of life of fishermen. These measures (mik;) are useful (ykHknk;d) in getting Indian fishermen or their boats (ukosa) released from custody (fgjklr), but they are unlikely (vlaHkkfor) to have any immediate (rkRdkfyd) impact (izHkko) on the livelihood (thfodk) crisis (ladV) facing (lkeuk djuk) the fishermen (eNqvkjk) of northern Sri Lanka. Such a crisis may grip (idM+) Tamil Nadu fishermen too one day, after the fishery resources (lalk/u) in the Palk Bay are exhausted (fjDr). The real issue is how long trawlers (tkyukSdk) from Tamil Nadu will continue to fish in Sri Lankan territorial ({ks=kh;) waters (tyk'k;) , and how soon bottom (isanh) trawling (Nkuchu djuk) is ended. The official statement (oDRkO;) after the talks (okRkkZ) between the foreign ministers refers (ladsr djuk) to “expediting (rsth djuk) the transition (ifjoRkZu) towards ending (lekiu) the practice (vH;kl) of bottom trawling at the earliest (lcls igys)”. An agreement (le>kSrk) on this is crucial (fu.kkZ;d) , but in the absence (vuqifLFkfr) of a time frame ( Sri Lankan Tamil fishermen are firm (n`<+) on an immediate (RkRdky) end to all incursions (?kqliSB) and are against seized (tCr djuk) Indian boats (ukosa) being released (tkjh fd;k tkuk) without legal (dkuwuh) process (izfØ;k) , even though (;|fi) they agree that the arrested fishermen should be released (NksM+k tkuk) . In talks between representatives (izfrfuf/) of fishermen held (j[kk tkuk) a few days earlier, Tamil Nadu fishermen had asked for a three-year phase-out period (vof/) for their trawlers, and a deal under which they would fish for 85 days a year until then. This was rejected (vLohdkj fd;k tkuk) outright (rRdky) by the Sri Lankan side, which holds that the Indian vessels (cklu) cause serious economic and ecological (ifjfLFkfr foKku laca/h) damage ({kfriqfrZ). One way of preventing (jksduk) boundary (lhek) transgression (my?kau) is to find a livelihood (thfodk) alternative (fodYi) for Tamil Nadu fishermen (eNqvkjk). Equipping (ySl gksuk) them for deep sea fishing is an option (fodYi) . For now (vc ds fy,) , Tamil Nadu should show greater understanding (le>) of the plight (nqnZ'kk) of the Sri Lankan Tamil fishermen, who are economically (vkfFkZd :i ls) weaker (detksj) and yet (vcrd) to fully (iw.kZ :is.k) recover from a devastating (cckZn djus okykl) war (;q¼) , and agree (lger gksuk) to a more reasonable (T;knk rkfdZd) phase-out period. Sri Lanka, then, can look at a licensing system under which (ftlds vanj) fishermen from both sides can fish (eNyh idM+uk) on specified days using sustainable (dk;e jgus okyk) methods and permissible (vuqefr nsus ;ksX;) equipment (lk/u). It is important (egRoiw.kZ) that all sides recognise (igpkuuk) that there is a humanitarian (ekuorkoknh) dimension (igyw) to the issue (eqn~nk). November 8, 2016 Chasing a grand alliance TOPICS - India, Uttar Pradesh Ever since the Mahagathbandhan, or grand alliance, successfully stared down a resurgent Bharatiya Janata Party in the Bihar elections last November, speculation about a possible replication in Uttar Pradesh has been rife. The buzz has grown over the past week, after Congress election strategist’ Prashant Kishor’s meeting with Samajwadi Party chief Mulayam Singh Yadav. Even more recently, at the SP’s silver jubilee festivities in Lucknow, the air rang with calls for “unity of socialist parties” from assembled fellow-travellers from the Janata Dal days — including Rashtriya Janata Dal chief Lalu Prasad; former Prime Minister H.D. Deve Gowda, now of the Janata Dal (Secular); Sharad Yadav of the Janata Dal (United); and Ajit Singh of the Rashtriya Lok Dal, which has a significant support base in western U.P. Through all this, Mr. Mulayam Yadav has been enigmatically tight-lipped, as have been Congress leaders. The other two big forces in the State, the BJP and the Bahujan Samaj Party, have been uninhibited in talking down the threat such a Congress-SP-Lohiaite alliance would pose. This is not surprising as there are big challenges such a grand alliance would face in U.P. as compared to Bihar. A pattern had taken shape in U.P. over the past many Assembly elections, that of the four main parties in the fray fighting from their corners, with smaller, more fungible parties including the RLD going with the best pre-poll deal they could get. In the four-cornered contest, each political party essentially aimed to maximise its outreach to its traditional vote base, and hoped to strike the best deal in government- formation in the event of a hung Assembly. The previous two elections, in 2007 and 2012, broke this pattern with voters giving one party a clear majority, first the BSP and then the SP. In fact, the Congress and the BJP remained hopeless also-rans in this scenario — in 2012 they won just 28 and 47 seats respectively in the 403-member legislature. In the 2014 general election, the BJP did better than even its most optimistic projections by getting over 42 per cent of the vote compared to 15 per cent in 2012. In Bihar, after the BJP effected a similar sweep in 2014, its two main opponents, the RJD and the JD(U), buried their differences and put up a united secular front, pulling the Congress too in their embrace. In U.P., the BSP and the SP show no signs of striking any working understanding — and in its absence it is unclear how formidable an SP-led alliance can be, especially while the Yadav family feud keeps up the surround sound. November 8, 2016 Chasing a grand alliance (,d cM+s xBca/u dks cukuk) TOPICS - India, Uttar Pradesh Ever since (tcls) the Mahagathbandhan, or grand alliance (cM+h xBca/u), successfully (liQyrkiwoZd )stared down (?kwjdj ?kcjk nsuk) a resurgent (fiQj ls c<+us okyk)Bharatiya Janata Party in the Bihar elections last November, speculation (vankt yxkuk) about a possible replication (izR;qÙkj) in Uttar Pradesh has been’ rife (Hkjk gqvk). The buzz has grown (c<+uk) over the past week (ihNys lIrkg ds nkSjku), after Congress election (pquko) strategist (j.kuhfrdkj) Prashant Kishor’s meeting with Samajwadi Party chief Mulayam Singh Yadav. Even (;gk¡ rd) more recently (gky gh esa) , at the SP’s silver jubilee festivities (lEesyu) in Lucknow, the air rang with calls for (vkg~oku djuk) “unity of socialist parties” from assembled (,df=kr fd;k gqvk) fellow-travellers from the Janata Dal days — including ('kkfey gq,) Rashtriya Janata Dal chief Lalu Prasad; former Prime Minister H.D. Deve Gowda, now of the Janata Dal (Secular); Sharad Yadav of the Janata Dal (United); and Ajit Singh of the Rashtriya Lok Dal, which has a significant (egRpiw.kZ) support (lgk;rk) base (vk/kj) in western U.P. Through all this, Mr. Mulayam Yadav has been enigmatically (jgL; ls Hkjk gqvk) tight-lipped (vfuPNqd) , as have been Congress leaders. The other two big forces (rkdr) in the State, the BJP and the Bahujan Samaj Party, have been uninhibited (csfgpd) in talking down (de egRo dk crkuk) the threat ([krjk) such a Congress-SP-Lohiaite alliance (xBca/u) would pose (nkok djuk). This is not surprising (vk'p;Ztud) as there are big challenges (pqukSrh) such a grand alliance would face (lkeuk djuk) in U.P. as compared (rqyukRed) to Bihar. A pattern (cukoV) had taken shape (vkdkj) in U.P. over (ds nkSjku) the past many Assembly elections, that of the four main parties (ny) in the fray (izfrLi/kZ) fighting (yM+kbZ) from their corners, with smaller, more fungible parties including the RLD going with the best pre-poll deal (le>kSrk) they could get. In the four- cornered contest (izfr;ksfxrk) , each political party essentially (vfrvko';d :i ls) aimed (fu'kkuk lk/uk) to maximise (cM+k djuk) its outreach (igw¡p) to its traditional (ijaijkxr) vote (pquko) base (vk/kj) , and hoped (vk'kk djuk) to strike ([kkst djuk) the best deal in government-formation (ljdkj cukus esa) in the event of a hung (f=k'kadq) Assembly (fo/ku lHkk) . The previous (igys dk) two elections, in 2007 and 2012, broke (rksM+ nsuk) this pattern with voters giving one party a clear (Li"B) majority (cgqer) , first the BSP and then the SP. In fact, the Congress and the BJP remained (jguk) hopeless (fujk'k) also-rans in this scenario (?kVuk n`';) — in 2012 they won just 28 and 47 seats respectively (Øe'k%) in the 403-member legislature (fo/ku lHkk) . In the 2014 general election (vke pquko), the BJP did better than even its most optimistic (vk'kkoknh) projections by getting over 42 per cent of the vote compared (rqyukRed :i ls) to 15 per cent in 2012. In Bihar, after the BJP effected (izHkkfor gksuk) a similar sweep (iQSyko) in 2014, its two main opponents (fojks/h) , the RJD and the JD(U), buried (lekIr djuk) their differences and put up (fuekZ.k djuk) a united secular front, pulling the Congress too in their embrace (xys yxkuk) . In U.P., the BSP and the SP show no signs of striking (izgkj) any working understanding — and in its absence (vuqifLFkfr) it is unclear (vLi"V) how formidable (Hk;adj) an SP-led alliance (xBca/u) can be, especially (fo'ks"k rkSj ij) while (tcfd) the Yadav family feud (dyg) keeps up (tkjh j[kuk) the surround sound (dbZ yksxksa dh ckr tkjh j[kuk) .while the Yadav family feud keeps up the surround sound. November 9, 2016 The long battle for Raqqa TOPICS - unrest, conflicts and war, armed conflict The operation to recapture Raqqa in Syria launched by a U.S.-backed coalition of Kurdish and Arab fighters is bound to increase the military pressure on the Islamic State, which is already under attack in Mosul, its power centre in Iraq. The Raqqa offensive has long been on the cards. The Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) finally moved their troops to the city’s defence lines after getting weapons and the clearance from the U.S. As in the case of the battle for Mosul where the U.S. provides air cover to the Iraqi forces and Shia militias, in Raqqa it will provide assistance to the SDF. The U.S. strategy is to choke the IS from both sides, and its partners on the ground seem ready to take the high risk of attacking the group’s strongest bases. Over the past year the Kurdish fighters have been consistently effective in ground battles against the IS. Most of the major territorial losses of the IS in Syria — be it Kobane, Tal Abyad or Manbij — were at the hands of the Kurds. The jihadist group, which once had direct access to the Turkish border, has now retreated to its core in Syria, stretching from Raqqa to Deir Ezzour. Against this background, the SDF clearly has an upper hand. The IS will also find it challenging to defend two of its most important cities at the same time. But that doesn’t mean that the SDF will have an easy walk into Raqqa. The SDF is certain to face strong resistance. Raqqa is one of the first cities the IS captured; it has in place a ferocious, ideologically charged and battle-ready team to build a strong defence. As the ongoing Mosul battle shows, breaching the IS defence lines will take time and also lives. Raqqa has a population of about 2.2 lakh. Major air-borne campaigns to help the SDF advance on the ground will be risky and could result in large civilian casualties. The IS also uses human shields to stop ground advances of enemies. But the most pressing challenge the SDF faces is the response from Turkey. Raqqa is a Sunni- populated town. Turkey is opposed to the SDF taking over Raqqa as a major constituent of the coalition is the Kurdish militia, the People’s Protection Units (YPG). Turkey sees the YPG as the Syrian unit of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, which it calls a terrorist force. The dilemma that the U.S. faces is one of bringing both the YPG and Turkey on the same side of the battle for Raqqa. Turkey had in the past played dubious games with the IS. If it decides to do that again now, the war on the IS could be derailed. November 9, 2016 The long battle for Raqqa (jDdk ds fy, yach yM+kbZ) TOPICS - unrest, conflicts and war, armed conflict. The operation (vfHk;ku) to recapture (idM+uk) Raqqa in Syria launched ('kq:vkr djuk) by a U.S.-backed (leFkZu okyk) coalition (xBca/u) of Kurdish and Arab fighters (yM+kdw) is bound (ckè;) to increase (c The SDF is certain to face (lkeuk djuk) strong (etcwr) resistance (izfrjks/). Raqqa is one of the first cities the IS captured; it has in place a ferocious (mxz), ideologically (oSpkfjd :i ls) charged and battle-ready team to build a strong defence. As the ongoing (yxkrkj pyus okyk) Mosul battle shows, breaching (fu;e mya?ku) the IS defence lines will take time and also lives. Raqqa has a population (tula[;k) of about 2.2 lakh. Major air-borne campaigns (vfHk;ku) to help the SDF advance (vkxs) on the ground will be risky and could result in large civilian casualties (?kk;y). The IS also uses human shields (dop) to stop ground advances of enemies. But the most pressing (c<+rk gqvk) challenge (pqukSrh) the SDF faces (lkeuk djuk) is the response (tokc) from Turkey. Raqqa is a Sunni-populated (tula[;k ls Hkjk) town. Turkey is opposed (fojks/ djuk) to the SDF taking over Raqqa as a major constituent (Hkkx) of the coalition (XkBca/u) is the Kurdish militia, the People’s Protection (lqj{kk) Units (YPG). Turkey sees the YPG as the Syrian unit of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, which it calls a terrorist (vkradoknh) force. The dilemma that the U.S. faces is one of bringing both the YPG and Turkey on the same side of the battle for Raqqa. Turkey had in the past played (Hkwfedk fuHkkuk) dubious (lansgkLin) games with the IS. If it decides (fu.kZ; ysuk) to do that again now, the war on the IS could be derailed (iVjh ij ls mrj tkuk). November 10, 2016 Understanding Trumpocalypse TOPICS - World, USA Donald Trump will be the 45th President of the United States. These words will echo in the hearts of 324 million Americans today, some shell-shocked and downcast, others delirious with joy. The sheer divergence of emotions over the surprise result is a poignant signal of how deeply divided the nation is, after a polarising two-year election campaign. Bigotry, patriarchy and racist rancour, which reared their ugly heads throughout this season of incivility, may find no welcome catharsis with the apotheosis of Mr. Trump. According to the exit polls, 58 per cent of whites and 21 per cent of non-whites voted for Mr. Trump, whereas 37 per cent of whites and 74 per cent of non-whites voted for his Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton. He also scored higher with men than women, and with those voters who did not have a college degree. In other words, blue-collared white men and women thronged to Mr. Trump in droves, angry about their perceived impoverishment and disenfranchisement inflicted by the country’s political and financial elites. It had left them with only one option: to throw a metaphorical grenade at these power centres. At the heart of the shock result is the shock itself, which stemmed from what most analysts have been calling the vote of the “silent majority”. Why did the U.S. media and pollsters fail to see which way the wind was blowing? They apparently did not suspect, when poll results suggested that Ms. Clinton was the more acceptable candidate, that some of the respondents to these polls may have been unwilling to admit to being supporters of Mr. Trump. It is likely for instance that women, 42 per cent of whom voted for Mr. Trump, were reluctant to reveal their preference after Mr. Trump was exposed for boasting about sexual assault and faced allegations of the same. What was not taken proper note of was that in almost every swing State, there were between 11 and 18 per cent “undecided” voters in late October — a significant number of people that tilted the election in favour of Mr. Trump. Insofar as this election reflected expressions of frustration that went against the grain of political correctness, the Trump victory resembles Brexit. However, in his victory speech Mr. Trump has appeared to quickly move past campaign recrimination, the conciliatory tone of which may go a little way in calming nerves at home as well as of anxious world leaders watching the election from afar. If indeed he presents a softer, more collaborative face at home and abroad, the Divided States of America may yet hold firm and lend strength to the global order, as it has done in the past. November 10, 2016 Understanding Trumpocalypse (MksukYM Vªai dh thr tks lcds vk'kk ds foijhr) TOPICS - World, USA Donald Trump will be (gksuk) the 45th President of the United States. These words ('kCnksa) will echo (xqatuk) in the hearts of 324 million Americans today, some shell-shocked (lnfer rFkk fpafrr) and downcast (mnkl) , others delirious (vR;kf/d mRlkfgr) with joy. The sheer (fo'kky) divergence (fHkUurk) of emotions (Hkkouk) over the surprise (vk'p;Ztud) result (ifj.kke) is a poignant (eeZLi'khZ) signal (ladsr) of how deeply (xgjk) divided (foHkktu) the nation is, after a polarising (/zqohdj.k) two-year election campaign (vfHk;ku) . Bigotry (dV~VjiaFkh) , patriarchy (iq:"kiz/ku) and racist (tkfroknh) rancour (fo}s"kh), which reared their ugly (dq:i) heads throughout this season (le;) of incivility (vlH;rk) , may find no welcome catharsis (Hkko fojspu) with the apotheosis (xq.kxku) of Mr. Trump. According to the exit polls, 58 per cent of whites and 21 per cent of non-whites voted (oksV nsuk) for Mr. Trump, whereas (tcfd) 37 per cent of whites and 74 per cent of non-whites voted for his Democratic opponent (fojks/h) Hillary Clinton. He also scored (vad izkIr djuk) higher with men than women, and with those voters who did not have a college degree. In other words, blue-collared white men and women thronged (BlkBl Hkjk gksuk)to Mr. Trump in droves (>qaM) , angry about their perceived (iQSyk gqvk) impoverishment (nfjnzrk) and disenfranchisement (erkf/dkjghu) inflicted (rax djuk) by the country’s political and financial elites (fof'k"V oxZ) . It had left them with only one option (fodYi) : to throw (iQsaduk) a metaphorical (yk{kf.kd) grenade (gBxksyk) at these power centres. At the heart of the shock result is the shock itself (Lo;a) , which stemmed (fudyuk) from what most analysts (fo'ys"k.k) have been calling the vote of the “silent majority”. Why did the U.S. media and pollsters fail (vliQy gksuk) to see which way the wind was blowing(:[k fd/j gS) ? They apparently (Li"V rkSj ij) did not suspect, when poll results suggested (lykg nsuk) that Ms. Clinton was the more acceptable (Lohdkj djus ;ksX;) candidate, that some of the respondents (tokc nsus okys) to these polls may have been unwilling (vfuPNqd) to admit to being supporters (leFkZd) of Mr. Trump. It is likely (laHkkfor gksuk) for instance that women, 42 per cent of whom voted for Mr. Trump, were reluctant (vfuPNqd) to reveal (izdV djuk) their preference (ojh;rk) after Mr. Trump was exposed (iznf'kZr djuk) for boasting (naHk Hkjuk) about sexual assault (/kok) and faced allegations (nks"k) of the same. What was not taken proper (mfpr) note of was that in almost (izk;%) every swing State, there were between 11 and 18 per cent “undecided” (vfu.kZfur) voters in late October — a significant (egRoiw.kZ) number of people that tilted (>qdko) the election in favour of Mr. Trump. Insofar as (tgk¡ rd) this election reflected (n'kkZuk) expressions (vfHkO;fDRk) of frustration (fujk'kk) that went against the grain of political correctness (lq/kj) , the Trump victory resembles (,d tSlk fn[kuk) Brexit. However, in his victory speech Mr. Trump has appeared (izfrr gksuk) to quickly move past campaign (vfHk;ku) recrimination (nks"kkjksi.k), the conciliatory (vuqdwy) tone of which may go a little way in calming nerves at home as well as of anxious (fpfrar) world leaders watching the election from afar. If indeed (okLro esa) he presents a softer, more collaborative (lkewfgd) face at home and abroad (fons'k), the Divided States of America may yet hold firm (l[rrk) and lend (m/kj nsuk) strength (rkdr) to the global order, as it has done in the past. November 11, 2016 Making climate rules at Marrakech TOPICS - World, USA The United Nations conference on climate change now under way in Marrakech, Morocco, has the ambitious task of drawing up the first steps on enhanced finance and technology transfer, which is vital to advance the Paris Agreement that entered into force on November 4. India’s negotiating positions at the ongoing Conference of the Parties 22 (CoP 22) must ensure that on both these aspects, the basic principle of equity and common but differentiated responsibilities laid down by the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change are upheld. Mitigating greenhouse gas emissions is central to the effort to contain the rise of the global average temperature in the current century to well below 2° Celsius since pre-industrial levels. But that goal is considered impossible even if sincere action is taken on all pledges made so far, necessitating a higher ambition. Moreover, the Paris Agreement does not have a carbon budget system that gives weightage to the emerging economies taking their historical handicap into account. The imperative therefore is to demand suitably high financial flows to both mitigate emissions and prepare communities to adapt to climate change. Such a mandate should be seen as an opportunity, since CoP 22 will discuss ways and means for countries to integrate their national commitments submitted for the Paris deal into actual policies and investment plans. In India’s case, new developments in sectors such as construction, transport, energy production, waste and water management, as well as agriculture, can benefit from fresh funding and technology. Adopting green technologies in power generation, which has a lock-in effect lasting decades, and other areas like transport with immediate impacts such as reduced air pollution has a twin advantage. The local environment is cleaned up, improving the quality of life, and carbon emissions are cut. It is imperative therefore that the national position raises pressure on rich countries for technological and funding assistance under the Paris Agreement. In parallel, India would have to update its preparedness to meet the new regime of transparency that is to be launched under the climate pact. The preparatory decisions to write the rules and modalities for such a framework, and assist developing countries with capability building will be taken at Marrakech. There is some apprehension that the U.S. could exit the climate consensus since the President-elect, Donald Trump, has vowed to cancel the Paris Agreement. Yet, business and industry today see a strong case to take a new path, as energy costs favour renewable sources over fossil fuels. States and cities are also charting their own course to curb emissions. These are encouraging trends. November 11, 2016 Making climate rules at Marrakech (ekjds'k esa tyok;q fu;e) TOPICS - environmental issues, conservation, environmental politics. The United Nations conference (lEesyu) on climate change (tyok;q ifjorZu) now under way in Marrakech, Morocco, has the ambitious (egRodka{kk ls Hkjk gqvk) task of drawing up ([khapuk) the first steps on enhanced finance (foÙkh;) and technology (rduhd) transfer (LFkkukarj), which is vital (thoumi;ksxh) to advance (vkxs c Adopting (viukuk) green technologies (rduhd) in power generation, which has a lock-in (vanj can dj nsuk) effect (izHkko) lasting decades (n'kd), and other areas like transport with immediate (rRdky ) impacts (izHkko) such as reduced (de djuk) air pollution (iznq"k.k) has a twin (nqgjk) advantage (ykHk) . The local (LFkkuh;) environment (okrkoj.k) is cleaned up, improving (rjDdh djuk) the quality (xq.k) of life, and carbon emissions (mRltZu) are cut. It is imperative (vfrvko';d) therefore that the national position (LFkku) raises (mBkuk) pressure (nokc) on rich countries for technological and funding assistance (lgk;rk) under the Paris Agreement. In parallel, India would have to update (u;k djuk) its preparedness (rS;kjh) to meet the new regime ({ks=k) of transparency (ikjnf'kZrk) that is to be launched ('kq:vkr djuk) under the climate pact (laf/). The preparatory (izkjafHkd) decisions (fu.kZ;) to write the rules (fu;e) and modalities (uewuk) for such a framework (izk:i) , and assist (lgk;rk djuk) developing countries with capability ({kerk) building will be taken at Marrakech. There is some apprehension (le>nkjh) that the U.S. could exit (fudkl) the climate consensus (vkelgefr) since the President-elect, Donald Trump, has vowed (oknk djuk) to cancel (jn~n djuk) the Paris Agreement. Yet (vcrd) , business and industry today see a strong (etcwr) case to take a new path (jkLrk) , as energy costs (fder gksuk) favour renewable (u;h) sources over fossil (ftok'e) fuels. States and cities are also charting their own course to curb (jksduk) emissions. These are encouraging (mRlkgc/Zu) trends (>qdko). November 12, 2016 Punjab’s legislative adventurism TOPICS - water, water rights There was never any doubt that Punjab’s legislative adventurism in enacting a law in 2004 to terminate all previous agreements on sharing the waters of the Ravi and the Beas with its neighbours would not survive judicial scrutiny. Answering a Presidential reference on the validity of Punjab’s action, the Supreme Court has declared the State’s law illegal. It has ruled that Punjab reneged on its solemn promises by terminating its 1981 agreement with Haryana and Rajasthan to discharge itself of the obligation to construct the Sutlej- Yamuna Link (SYL) Canal. Its objective was to overcome the 2004 decree passed by the Supreme Court directing it to complete the canal work expeditiously. The court’s reasoning draws from previous verdicts relating to the Cauvery and Mullaperiyar disputes, reiterating the principle that “a State cannot, through legislation, do an act in conflict with the judgment of the highest court which has attained finality.” It is another matter if legislation takes the form of a validating Act to cure specific illegalities or one that removes the basis for a particular verdict. The verdict by a five-member Bench is a timely reminder that it would be destructive of the rule of law and federalism if a State were to be allowed to usurp judicial powers by nullifying a verdict that has rendered findings on both fact and law. As Punjab heads for the Assembly election, this issue has already led to posturing by all major parties on which among them is the best protector of the State’s interests. This attitude leads to a disturbing tendency among States to be judges in their own cause, especially when it comes to water disputes. Political parties in power increasingly resort to legislation or Assembly resolutions rather than negotiation. The Opposition parties collaborate in this with equal zeal, lest they be seen to be wanting in passion for the cause. Punjab may well have had legitimate grievances, historically, in the sharing of waters. This was, in fact, the reason the Rajiv-Longowal accord of 1985 contained clauses relating to river-water sharing too. Earlier, differences were first settled by a notification by the Centre in 1976. When the matter led to litigation, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi brokered an agreement in 1981. In effect, the present arrangements, which Punjab seeks to wriggle out of, are backed by three agreements. The Supreme Court ruled against Punjab in 2002 as well as in 2004. The State’s obligation to allow the completion of the SYL Link Canal, so that Haryana can utilise the share of water allocated to it, cannot be frustrated any more. If Punjab feels aggrieved, there may be scope for negotiation and conciliation even now, but it cannot take action unilaterally. November 12, 2016 Punjab’s legislative adventurism (iatkc dh dkuwu laca/h tksf[ke) TOPICS - water, water rights('kCnksa) There was never any doubt ('kadk) that Punjab’s legislative (fof/ laca/h) adventurism (tksf[ke okn) in enacting (ykxw djuk) a law in 2004 to terminate (lekIr djuk) all previous (igys dk) agreements (le>kSrk) on sharing (fgLlsnkjh) the waters (tyk'k;) of the Ravi and the Beas with its neighbours (iM+kslh) would not survive (vfLrRo esa gksuk) judicial (U;k;kf;d) scrutiny (Nkuchu) . Answering a Presidential reference (ladsr) on the validity (OkS/rk) of Punjab’s action, the Supreme Court has declared (?kks"k.kk djuk) the State’s law illegal (xSj dkuwuh) . It has ruled (vkns'k) that Punjab reneged on (eqdj tkuk) its solemn (ifo=k) promises (oknk) by terminating (lekIr djuk) its 1981 agreement (le>kSrk) with Haryana and Rajasthan to discharge (drZO; fuHkkuk) itself (Lo;a) of the obligation (vkHkkj) to construct (cukuk) the Sutlej-Yamuna Link (SYL) Canal (ugj) . Its objective was to overcome (dke;kc gksuk) the 2004 decree (ljdkjh vkns'k) passed by the Supreme Court directing (fn'kk funsZ'k nsuk) it to complete (iwjk djuk) the canal work expeditiously (rsth ls) . The court’s reasoning (rdZ) draws (fudkyuk) from previous (igys dk) verdicts (IkQSlyk) relating to (lacaf/r gksuk) the Cauvery and Mullaperiyar disputes (fookn) , reiterating (nksgjkuk) the principle that “a State cannot, through legislation (dkuwu ds tfj,) , do an act in conflict (fookn esa) with the judgment (U;k;) of the highest court which has attained (izkIr djuk) finality (var esa).” It is another matter if legislation (dkuwu) takes the form of a validating (oS/ Bgjkuk) Act to cure specific (fof'k"V) illegalities (xSj dkuwuhiu) or one that removes (gVkuk) the basis (vk/kj) for a particular ([kkl) verdict (iQSlyk). The verdict by a five-member (ikap lnL;) Bench ([kaMihB) is a timely (le; ij) reminder (;kn fnykus okyk) that it would be destructive (fouk'kdkjh) of the rule of law (dkuwu) and federalism (la?kokn) if a State were to be allowed (vuqefr fn;k tkuk) to usurp (voS/ vf/dkj djuk) judicial powers by nullifying (izHkkoghu djuk) a verdict (iQSlyk) that has rendered (lkSaiuk) findings (izkfIr) on both fact (rF;) and law (dkuwu) . As Punjab heads (izeq[k) for the Assembly (fo/ku lHkk) election (pquko) , this issue (eqn~nk) has already (vkxs c<+uk) led (usr`Ro djuk) to posturing (fn[kkok) by all major (izeq[k) parties (ny) on which (ftl ij) among them is the best protector (laj{kd) of the State’s interests (jkT; ds fgr esa) . This attitude (izo`fr) leads to a disturbing (ijs'kku djus okyk) tendency (LoHkko) among (ds chp esa ) States to be judges (U;k; djuk) in their own cause (dkj.k) , especially ([kkl rkSj ij) when it comes to water disputes (fookn) . Political parties in power increasingly resort (lgkjk ysuk) to legislation (dkuwu) or Assembly resolutions (lek/ku) rather than negotiation (le>kSrk) . The Opposition parties (nyksa) collaborate (feydj dk;Z djuk) in this with equal zeal (mRlkg) , lest they be seen to be wanting (deh) in passion (twuwu) for the cause (dk;Z) . Punjab may well have had legitimate (mfpr) grievances (f'kdk;r) , historically (,frgkfld :i ls) , in the sharing (fgLlsnkjh) of waters. This was, in fact, the reason the Rajiv-Longowal accord (le>kSrk) of 1985 contained (j[kuk) clauses (rdZ) relating to river-water sharing too. Earlier, differences (varj) were first settled (O;ofLFkr fd;k tkuk) by a notification (vf/lwpuk) by the Centre in 1976. When the matter (fo"k;) led to (vkxs c<+uk) litigation (eqdnes ckth) , Prime Minister Indira Gandhi brokered (ckr phr djuk) an agreement (le>kSrk) in 1981. In effect (izHkko esa) , the present arrangements (O;oLFkk) , which Punjab seeks (ekax djuk) to wriggle (NViVkgV) out of, are backed (leFkZu djuk) by three agreements (le>kSRkk) . The Supreme Court ruled (vkns'k nsuk) against Punjab in 2002 as well as in 2004. The State’s obligation (vkHkkj) to allow the completion (iw.kZ) of the SYL Link Canal (ugj) , so that Haryana can utilise (mi;ksx djuk) the share (fgLlsnkjh djuk) of water allocated (ckaVuk) to it, cannot be frustrated (dqafBr gksuk) any more. If Punjab feels aggrieved (oafpr gksuk) , there may be scope (foLrkj) for negotiation (le>kSrk) and conciliation (vuqdqyu) even now (vc Hkh) , but it cannot take action unilaterally (,d i{k ls) . November 14, 2016 The big deal with Japan When India conducted its nuclear tests in 1998, Japan was the country that took it the hardest: it put all political exchanges with India on hold, froze aid and announced economic sanctions within hours. A thaw in ties didn’t come until 2001, when sanctions were lifted. And then, in 2009, the two countries began an annual strategic dialogue. This has now come to fruition with the signing of the nuclear cooperation agreement in Tokyo during Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit. The deal is critical to India’s renewable energy plans. Japanese companies that produce cutting-edge reactor technology were previously not allowed to supply parts to India. In addition, Japanese companies have significant holdings in their U.S. and French partners negotiating for nuclear reactors now, and that would have held up the deals. This is Japan’s first nuclear deal with a non-signatory to the Non Proliferation Treaty, and it recognises India’s exemplary record in nuclear prudence. It is indeed a much-needed moral boost as New Delhi strives for membership in the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG). The move will boost the meagre, and dipping, bilateral trade of $15 billion, and lift the strategic military and defence relationship. There are several riders to this rosy prognosis, however. First, the nuclear deal has to be approved by Japan’s Parliament. This will not be aided by unhelpful references such as those made recently by Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar, about revisiting India’s no-first-use nuclear weapons policy. In Japan, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe may face criticism that he extracted too few assurances from India on a nuclear test ban. In India, Mr. Modi may be criticised for giving in too much, as a note slipped into the agreement now accepts an emergency suspension of the deal if India tests a weapon. The clock is ticking, and Mr. Abe must bring the deal to Parliament in early 2017 to ensure that the commercial agreement for Westinghouse’s six reactors in Andhra Pradesh that is due in June 2017 comes through. This will also coincide with the next plenary of the NSG. Both New Delhi and Tokyo must also be wary of the impact on Beijing of this new stage in their ties. China has been hedging against deeper Japan- India ties in Asia by investing in its relationship with Russia and Pakistan. As the two Asian rivals to China, India and Japan might need the partnership even more in the days to come, as the U.S. President- elect has indicated a lower level of interest in “playing policeman” in the region. November 14, 2016 The big deal with Japan (tkiku ds lkFk CkM+k C;kikj le>kSrk) When India conducted (laiknu djuk) its nuclear (ukHkdh; ) tests (ijh{k.k) in 1998, Japan was the country that took it the hardest (l[rh ls): it put all political (jktuSfrd) exchanges (ysu nsu) with India on hold (jksd yxk nsuk), froze (bLrseky can djuk) aid and announced (?kks"k.kk djuk) economic sanctions (ikcanh yxk nsuk) within hours. A thaw (xjekgV) in ties (le>kSrk) didn’t come until 2001, when sanctions (ikcanh) were lifted (gVk;k tkuk) . And then, in 2009, the two countries (nksuksa ns'k) began ('kq: djuk) an annual (okf"kZd) strategic (dwVuhfrd) dialogue (okRkkZ). This has now come to fruition (vfHk"V iQy dh izkfIr) with the signing (gLrk{kj) of the nuclear cooperation (lg;ksx) agreement (le>kSrk) in Tokyo during (ds nkSjku) Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit (;k=kk). The deal (le>kSrk) is critical (egRoiw.kZ) to India’s renewable energy (uohuhdj.k mtkZ) plans (;kstuk). Japanese companies that produce (mRiknu djuk) cutting-edge (vk/qfudre rduhd) reactor (ijek.kq Hkêðh) technology (rduhd) were previously (igys ls) not allowed (vuqefr gksuk) to supply (vkiqfrZ djuk) parts to India. In addition (vykok) , Japanese companies have significant (egRoiw.kZ) holdings (laifÙk) in their U.S. and French partners (fgLlsnkj) negotiating (le>kSrk djuk) for nuclear reactors now, and that would have held up the deals. This is Japan’s first nuclear deal with a non-signatory (tks gLrk{kj ugha fd;k gSa A) to the Non Proliferation Treaty (vizlkj laf/), and it recognises (igpkuuk ;k tkuuk) India’s exemplary (dBksj) record (ys[k izek.k) in nuclear prudence (le>nkjh). It is indeed (okLro esa) a much-needed moral (uSfrd) boost (c<+kok) as New Delhi strives (iz;kl djuk) for membership (lnL;) in the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG). The move will boost the meagre (vYi) , and dipping (fxjkoV) , bilateral trade of $15 billion, and lift (c<+kuk) the strategic military and defence relationship. There are several (dbZ) riders (lalks/u) to this rosy (mTtoy) prognosis (iqokZuqeku) , however. First, the nuclear deal has to be approved (Lohd`r gksuk) by Japan’s Parliament. This will not be aided (enn djuk) by unhelpful (vlgk;d) references (ladsr) such as those made recently (gky gh esa) by Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar, about revisiting (nqckjk ppkZ djuk) India’s no-first-use nuclear weapons (gfFk;kj) policy (uhfr) . In Japan, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe may face (lkeuk djuk) criticism (vkykspukokn) that he extracted (fudkyuk) too few assurances (vk'oklu) from India on a nuclear test ban (jksd). In India, Mr. Modi may be criticised (vkykspuk djuk) for giving in too much (vR;kf/d) , as a note slipped into the agreement (le>kSrk) now accepts (Lohdkj djuk) an emergency (ladVdkyhu) suspension (fuyacu) of the deal if India tests (ijh{k.k) a weapon. The clock is ticking, and Mr. Abe must bring (ykuk) the deal to Parliament in early 2017 to ensure (lqfuf'pr djuk) that the commercial (O;olkf;d) agreement (le>kSrk) for Westinghouse’s six reactors in Andhra Pradesh that is due in June 2017 comes through (liQyrk ls fudy tkuk). This will also coincide (nks ?kVuk dk ,d lkFk gksuk) with the next plenary (ifjiw.kZ) of the NSG. Both New Delhi and Tokyo must also be wary (lrdZ) of the impact (izHkko) on Beijing of this new stage in their ties (xBca/u) . China has been hedging (ckM+ yxkuk) against deeper Japan-India ties in Asia by investing (fuos'k djuk) in its relationship (laca/) with Russia and Pakistan. As the two Asian rivals (izfr;ksxh) to China, India and Japan might need (vko';drk) the partnership (lk>snkjh) even more in the days to come, as the U.S. President-elect has indicated (ladsr nsuk) a lower level of interest (:fp) in “playing policeman” in the region ({ks=k). November 15, 2016 Hope floats in Colombia The fresh peace deal announced by Bogota and the rebels of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) may look no less fragile than the previous accord that Colombians rejected in a referendum in October. But signs that the gathering economic momentum depends on lasting reconciliation could trump other outstanding concerns. The current endeavour to secure peace has been four years and more in the making. It involved political heavyweights in Latin America and beyond, whose influence should make a reversal of recent gains especially difficult. The Nobel Peace Prize, awarded days after the referendum reversal, has enhanced the stature of President Juan Manuel Santos as a relentless crusader for peace in the midst of formidable if not insurmountable hurdles. But it is not inconceivable that having had the earlier accord rejected in a vote, the risks of a repeat referendum, or alternatively the moral and political deficit likely to arise from dispensing with one in this instance, will cast a shadow over the current effort. Foremost is the question whether the leaders of the FARC should be allowed to participate in the political process. President Santos has defended the retention of the provision in the revised deal, arguing that the promise of a legitimate route to politics for rebel groups has been the hallmark of any peace process the world over. Those opposed to the deal contend that according political eligibility to criminals who have not been brought to justice amounts to a violation of the rule of law. November 15, 2016 Hope floats in Colombia The fresh peace ('kkafr) deal (le>kSrk) announced (?kks"k.kk djuk) by Bogota and the rebels (jkt fojks/h) of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) may look (ns[kuk) no less fragile (Hkaxqj] detksj) than the previous (igys) accord (le>kSrk) that Colombians rejected (vLohdkj djuk) in a referendum (tuer laxzg) in October. But signs (gLrk{kj) that the gathering economic momentum (tks vkfFkZd xfr nsrk gS) depends on (fuHkZj jguk) lasting reconciliation (le>kSrk) could trump (iNkM+ nsuk) other outstanding(mRd`"V) concerns (fpark). The current endeavour (iz;kl) to secure (lqjf{kr djuk) peace ('kkafr) has been four years and more (T;knk) in the making. It involved ('kkfey djuk) political (jktuhfrd) heavyweights (izHkkoh O;fDr) in Latin America and beyond (ds ijs), whose influence (izHkko) should make a reversal (mYVk) of recent (gky gh dk) gains (ykHk) especially ([kkl rkSj ij) difficult (dfBu). The Nobel Peace Prize, awarded (iq:Ldkj nsuk) days after the referendum (tuerlaxzg) reversal, has enhanced (c<+kuk) the stature (egÙkk) of President Juan Manuel Santos as a relentless (dBksj) crusader (/eZ;ks¼k) for peace ('kkafr) in the midst of (ds eè; esa) formidable (Hk;adj) if not insurmountable (thrus ;ksX;) hurdles (ck/k). But it is not inconceivable (vfpUR;) that having had the earlier (igys dk) accord (le>kSrk) rejected (vLohdkj djuk) in a vote, the risks (tksf[ke) of a repeat (nqgjko) referendum (tuer laxzg) , or alternatively (oSdfYid :i ls) the moral (uSfrd) and political (jktuSfrd) deficit (?kkVk) likely (laHkkfor) to arise (mBuk) from dispensing (NksM+ nsuk) with one in this instance (mnkgj.k esa) , will cast a shadow (u"V djuk) over the current effort (iz;kl). Foremost (lcls egRoiw.kZ :i ls) is the question whether (fd) the leaders (usrk) of the FARC should be allowed (vuqefr nsuk) to participate ('kkfey gksuk) in the political (jktuSfrd) process (izfØ;k). President Santos has defended (j{kk djuk) the retention (jksd) of the provision ('krZ) in the revised (nqgjko) deal (le>kSrk), arguing (cgl djuk) that the promise (oknk) of a legitimate (oS/) route (ekxZ) to politics (jktuhfr) for rebel (jkt fojks/h) groups (lewg) has been the hallmark (fo'ks"krk) of any peace ('kkafr) process (izfØ;k) the world over. Those opposed (fojks/ djuk) to the deal (le>kSrk) contend (bjknk j[kuk) that according (ds vuqlkj) political (jktuSfrd) eligibility (;ksX;rk) to criminals (vijk/h) who have not been brought (ykuk) to justice (U;k;) amounts (c<+kuk) to a violation (my?kau) of the rule of law (dkuwu ds fu;eksa dk).