Myths of religious solidarity
C Raja Mohan | Director, Institute of South Asian Studies, National University of Singapore
The Indian Express
Mohan writes about Pakistan’s disappointment with the lack of support it has received from Muslim nations in its opposition to India’s action in Kashmir. United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Saudi Arabia (KAS) have been strong supporters of Pakistan but now their economic interests in India have taken precedence over their support for Pakistan, writes the author.
Pakistan’s own experience contradicts the idea that Muslims are a unified political community. Pakistan first lost Bangladesh due to divergent linguistic identities, and now there is conflict with Baloch, Pashtun and the Mohajirs communities that are beyond religious issues. Pakistan neglects Beijing’s “ill-treatment” of Uighur Muslims in China’s far western province of Xinjiang, but Prime Minister Imran Khan continues to cry about Kashmir. “If the appeal to religious solidarity has only limited value, why does Pakistan persist with it?”, asks Mohan.
No ideologies such as “communist internationalism, pan-Asianism, pan-Arabism, pan-Islamism” have survived in the 20th century. National interests are always more important, and nations only “invoke larger identities” when it suits them. Perhaps Pakistan will soon realize that reconciling with India will allow it to “release its energies for a larger role in the Middle East, the Muslim world and beyond”, concludes Mohan.
How US policy in Af-Pak has hurt Indian interests
Brahma Chellaney | Geostrategist
Hindustan Times
Chellaney writes that US President Donald Trump joining Prime Minister Narendra Modi at his rally in Houston next Sunday will be a big show of solidarity with India but in reality, the US has not kept Indian interests in mind in its Afghanistan-Pakistan (Af-Pak) negotiations.
The deal between the US and Afghan Taliban has collapsed but had it gone through, no peace would have been achieved only a new war between Afghan nationalists and Pakistan’s proxies. US’s approach to the Af-Pak region has caused huge “destabilisation” in Afghanistan and enabled Pakistan’s army to exert tremendous influence on the country – this has meant security costs for India. US’s Af-Pak policies, “centred on rewards to Pakistan”, ended up bringing terrorism to India and jihad culture to Jammu & Kashmir.
The US’s potential deal with the Taliban was testament to the fact that it “only negotiates with terrorists”, writes Chellaney. US strikes have strategically assassinated three Taliban chiefs in order to win Pakistani cooperation in Afghanistan. But it won’t kill any “India-wanted Pakistan-based terrorists” who also happen to be on its terrorism lists, like Hafiz Saeed. India has always taken a “cautious” approach to security issues but now it needs to play a bigger role in Afghanistan to outdo Pakistan.
Israel, Pakistan ties a bridge too far?
Sujan R. Chinoy | Director General, Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses and former Indian diplomat
The Hindu
Chinoy writes about speculation that Israel and Pakistan may establish diplomatic ties. Israel has tried to forge diplomatic relations with many countries but most have not recognized it. The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) has strongly condemned it for its “occupation” over Palestine. Yet, it has established relations with most of the 193 UN member states. India’s ties with Israel go as far back as 1992 and both countries have been “been victims of asymmetric warfare such as terrorism”.
Israel-Pakistan ties could be beneficial to Pakistan as Israel has influence in Washington and could mediate on US-Pakistan tensions. But Pakistan sought support from OIC for the Kashmir issue, and its ties with Israel might “dilute its Islamic credentials”.
Iran is a threat to Israel, plus the Shia-divide divide is a point of contention between Pakistan and Iran. But according to Pakistani commentator Ayesha Siddiqa, Israel can’t leverage Pakistan against Iran as more than 20 per cent of Pakistan’s population is Shia. India toed a careful line between Israel and Pakistan, and Israel will have to do the same with Pakistan and India. “It is not in Israel’s interest to seek diplomatic ties with a state that sponsors terrorism”, concludes Chenoy.
A gendered view of India’s nutrition strategy
Phalasha Nagpal | Young Professional, Economic Advisory Council to the Prime Minister
Hindu Business Line
To tackle female malnutrition in India, Nagpal calls for the integration of the ‘Beti Bachao, Beti Padhao’ initiative and the National Nutrition Mission (NNM) that can lay greater focus on the female child.
Unlike the rest of the world, under-five mortality rates in India are higher in females (40.4) than in males (38.4) with malnutrition as the biggest contributor, writes Nagpal. This is caused by skewed socio-cultural mindsets and gender discrimination. The female child, who often experiences mistreatment, neglect or is even breast-fed for a shorter time than her male counterparts, grows into an adult women who continues to have less access to nutrition and economic resources in the household. Therefore, female malnutrition is a cyclical problem, explains Nagpal, that infringes on the right to health.
By focusing on the female child in particular, the NNM can make a “substantial dent in malnutrition”, explains Nagpal. When it comes to reducing gender-bias, however, the Poshan Abhiyaan Jan Andolan should promote maternal education and awareness to overturn such attitudes.
What the government can do to keep bad loans from piling up
V. Anantha Nageswaran | Dean of IFMR Graduate School of Business, Krea University
Mint
In his piece, Nageswaran suggests ways for monetary policy to address the current economic slowdown. India’s industries have always lacked scale, he writes, and were bound to create structural problems in the economy after “rapid bursts” of growth. Low inflation rates this year suggest that the economy was able to operate well below potential, and “this makes a case for an economic stimulus” through monetary policy, writes Nageswaran .
Monetary policy should first solve “bankers’ aversion to lending” but the effectiveness of policy depends on two “mitigating factors”. Nageswaran identifies these as a) linking interest rates charged on long-term housing loans to short-term interbank rates and b) fixing inadequate credit flows to non-financial parts of the economy. The latter he terms as “the single biggest contributor to lifting the economy out of its funk”.
Policies that have backtracked on power purchases have also caused trouble for government-owned banks and produced non-performing assets in the power sector. This can be helped by a greater commitment to making “power generation viable”, writes Nageswaran, which will also attract investment.
Recipe for Recovery
Arvind Panagariya | Professor of Economics, Columbia University
The Times of India
Panagariya argues that the auto industry’s claims that it is facing a crisis are “not entirely credible.” The numbers that the industry is citing “appear to be concocted,” he writes. The auto industry needs to seek relief from “regulatory barriers” that give power to “bureaucrats, serves no public purpose and undermine productivity growth,” to tackle the manufacturing decline it is facing.
Panagariya writes that the government needs to improve its own data gathering and “use effectively the data it may have at its disposal.” A structural economic slump requires a “restructuring of the economy” and government intervention only delays it. Conversely, a temporary economic slump requires macroeconomic countercyclical action, not one that is aimed at a particular section.
According to Panagariya, the measures announced by the Finance Minister are in line with these principles but he suggests that RBI let rupee depreciate further and “cut its policy interest rate by another half percent.” He also suggests that the government drop the interest rates in small savings and revise its chosen inflation target.
Spend to grow
C Rangarajan | Former chairman, Prime Minister’s Economic Advisory Council and former Governor, RBI
D K Srivastava | Chief Policy Advisor, Ernst & Young India
Indian Express
In the present economic context of declining investment rate and demand, Srivastava and Rangarajan argue that “enhancing government expenditure, especially capital expenditure” might be a good solution. The RBI bonanza will only be able to meet the shortfall in revenues and “a larger disinvestment may help.”
Policy changes like the GST have also led to structural changes, affecting the balance between “between goods and services, formal and informal sectors, and central and state tax revenues compared to the pre-GST period.” Further, a change in monetary policy has affected “nominal GDP growth rate and growth rate of tax revenues.” This has augmented the government’s capital expenditure.
Rangarajan and Srivastava suggest three ways in which the Centre could increase capital expenditure – bringing on board state governments, investing in central public sector enterprises through the public-private partnership (PPP) mode. He also recommends higher growth in exports.
Federalism and the Finance Commission
Nirvikar Singh | Professor of Economics, University of California, Santa Cruz
Financial Express
The finance commission has been one of the “success stories of India’s constitutionally created institutions” but the Terms of Reference (ToR) for the 15th Finance Commission may push it into “problematic territory,” writes Singh.
The primary objective of the Finance Commission is to “recommend tax sharing rules between the Centre and the states, and among states” but the ToR tilts the scales in favour of the Centre. It also recommends revisiting a previous FC decision to increase the share of states and “places emphasis on providing performance incentives to states.” Both of these are concerning developments, according to Singh.
Further, the ToR also asked “FC XV to suggest ways of allocating non-lapsable funds for defence and internal security.” This suggests that the Commission is being pushed “into serving as a political tool of a particular national agenda.”
This move towards “greater central control” is a move in the wrong direction, writes Singh. The need of the hour is greater fiscal federalism which would allow states and local governments to “have greater autonomy to decide on their own revenues.”