New Delhi: At two recent international showcases, India presented two very contrasting performaces. While the Indian pavilion at the Osaka World Expo last year was “chaotic”, the country’s exhibition at the ongoing Venice Biennale has been described as “dazzling”.
How does the same ministry, working under the same political masters, produce such divergent results just one year apart, asks The Economist in an editorial titled “Why India triumphed at Venice and flopped in Osaka”.
“The easy answer is that the official in charge changed in the interim. The Indian state produces lumpy outcomes because so much of it depends on individual capabilities rather than institutional processes. But a more substantive answer lies in what Vivek Aggarwal, the newish secretary of culture, actually did. Namely, less,” the publication says in its editorial.
The Indian state too often tries to do too much with too little, it says. “On the rare occasion that it trusts Indians to deploy their ample talents, the results are dazzling.”
The article says that in Osaka, the pavilion was “chaotic” and it “opened more than two weeks late”. But by contrast, this year the Pavillion which was held at Venice Biennale is seen as “a triumph”.
This year’s pavilion in Venice is a result of multiple institutions and people, who have different strengths, coming together. The Nita Mukesh Ambani Cultural Centre brought its “influence and expertise”, while Serendipity Arts “handled programming”. The government meanwhile focused on “paperwork, logistics and the inevitable extra costs” meanwhile, Amin Jaffer, the curator was given “complete artistic freedom”.
The article adds that Culture Secretary Vivek Aggarwal’s background in finance and infrastructure “may have helped” as the article writes “He knew what he did not know.”
Also Read: How India’s tapping its diaspora to boost ‘sagging rupee’ & IT sector is ‘surviving AI’—global media
Maharashtra drops millions from Ladki Bahin scheme
Meanwhile, the BBC tracks the latest pruning of the beneficiary list under Maharashtra’s Ladki Bahin scheme, and wonders how thousands of men and government employees were getting cash support from a programme meant for poor women.
“An Indian cash scheme for women drops nine million – 29,000 were men,” it says.
Maharashtra’s Ladki Bahin scheme was brought in to “boost women’s financial independence” by giving eligible women Rs 1,500 every month.
“Though it is a small amount, it really helped us, especially with medical expenses,” the report quotes Nirmala Bawaskar, a beneficiary. For her, this monthly payment became a source of independence. She told the BBC how she got motivated by this and “even learned how to write”.
The report notes that the national auditor said that the state had “overspent its authorised budget by 35.41bn rupees, spending a total of 332.37bn rupees on Ladki Bahin in its first financial year.”
Nevertheless, this scheme has brought in a change in the ground level as the article quotes Welfare economist Neeraj Hatekar who says that Rs 1,500 is “a big amount” for women with low and irregular incomes.
But economist Ajit Ranade warns, “You might divert funds to these schemes and win an election… But what about the long-term damage (to the state’s finances)? That is never audited.”
Recognition, finally, for Punjabi soldiers who died in WWI
Nearly 10,000 Punjabi soldiers who died fighting for Britain during World War I have finally been added to the country’s official casualty records.
In an article—titled “They Died, Unrecognized, for Britain. A Century Later, They’re Being Honored,”—The New York Times reports that while the records have been carefully maintained for the “casualty lists of British troops who were killed in the two world wars” the same was not done for soldiers who had died “for the crown but hailed from colonies, primarily in Asia and Africa.”
One of the reasons why the name of the deceased punjabi soldiers were not added in the official records was because of “discriminatory attitudes” as well as “inconsistent rules for which deaths counted as war casualties”.
Indian servicemen who died outside of the conflict zone, even if they had died from injuries or disease sustained in combat, were not considered “worthy of commemoration”, according to George Hay of the Commonwealth War Graves Commission, says the report.
The commission eventually added 9,909 soldiers to its register in the “largest single update to its casualty record in 80 years”.
For many, this revelation of what happened to their ancestors brings in some peace.
Dr. Inder Singh’s great grandfather was one such person whose name is now being honored. He told The New York Times he now feels “a bit more complete” as he had spent many years researching what had happened to his great grandfather but without any luck.
India’s green growth gamble
In an editorial titled, The Guardian takes a look at NITI Aayog’s roadmap to achieve the country’s ‘net zero’ emission goal by 2070.
“India is attempting to do something the world has never seen before. So claimed Niti Aayog, the government of India’s policy thinktank, earlier this year. It said that no major economy has tried to expand GDP nearly eightfold within a generation while simultaneously redirecting its energy and industrial systems to reach net zero within two generations,” notes The Guardian view on India’s green growth gamble: it will need more than private finance.
China industrialised at a vast scale, but not on a sustainable net-zero path, the report says. “Korea, Japan and Europe became wealthy by industrialising before decarbonising. Today, rich nations have already satisfied the basic demands of their people and created the infrastructure and high per-capita energy use that India is still trying to build. The world’s most populous country has to do this while also reducing emissions.”
“India is industrialising in a world of fragile supply chains, climate trade barriers and Chinese export overcapacity,” it says.
(Edited by Ajeet Tiwari)