The right to return
Suvir Kaul | A.M. Rosenthal Professor, Department of English, University of Pennsylvania
The Indian Express
Kaul recounts that twice during violence in Kashmir, his mother was asked to leave but he notes, “Her answer was simple: We aren’t planning to leave; this is home, and the weather is lovely.” The lesson his mother taught him was, “If you are Kashmiri, and a Pandit, you need to go home and to make it yours, regardless of the privations you suffer. And Kashmiris have suffered, and continue to suffer, all manner of deprivation. But if Kashmir is home, you need to be there, to insist, even in your declining years, that you will suffer the inconveniences and the fears that are a staple of life, because it is home.”
He notes that many Pandits were forced to flee their homes and also highlights the various theories behind that. Now that the #HumWapasAayenge has emerged after the change in Kashmir’s status, he hopes many Pandits return to the Valley. However, he warns that they should not expect the government to provide more than token financial help. “If Pandits return to Kashmir, they will realise just how life has been disrupted and violent for years now, and they will live as their Muslim and Sikh brethren have lived, in fear of the soldiers who control civilian lives”, concludes Kaul.
How Ambedkar, Constituent Assembly dealt with the caste conundrum
Madhav Khosla | Author of India’s Founding Moment – The Constitution of a Most Surprising Democracy and teaches at Columbia and Ashoka University
Hindustan Times
When the Constitution of India came into existence one of its most striking features was the emphasis on individual freedom, writes Khosla. He recounts what Ambedkar said, “Democracy in India is only a top-dressing on an Indian soil which is essentially undemocratic.” Khosla notes that for Ambedkar, the institution of caste was central to that undemocratic character. It was fundamentally undemocratic because it was impossible to see everyone as an equal participant in a common subject.
Khosla notes, “The Constitution did not aim to protect any particular group. It tried to liberate individuals who were under conditions of domination, and the special treatment toward caste was a consequence of applying this general principle.” He concludes that the Constitution has moved away from its original vision due to the path reservations have taken as well as “the clubbing together of groups that have very different histories and experiences of discrimination, the inattention to the distinct rationales for special treatment in different sectors.”
The continuing theme of uncertainty, volatility
M.K. Narayanan | Former National Security Adviser and a former Governor of West Bengal
The Hindu
Narayan writes, “Democracy and democratic freedoms are coming under increasing attack accompanied by a retreat from liberalism and globalisation.” He speaks of global ruptures — the uncertain future of Great Britain under the shadow of Brexit, the US-China trade war, protests in Hong Kong and instability in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Egypt. On domestic tensions, Narayanan recounts the events of 2019 from the Pulwama terror attacks last February, to the abrogation of Article 370 and finally protests against the newly passed Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA). He notes, “Perceived insensitivity by those in authority to such protests, and misguided attempts to polarise opinion in these circumstances can prove to be short sighted.”
Narayanan also talks about managing the economy and notes, “Given the current economic malaise facing the country, which can hardly be treated as a cyclical phenomenon, the economic portents for 2020 also do not look too good.”
How to protect trade in a tug of war between nations
Raghuram Rajan | Former RBI governor and Professor of finance at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business
Mint
Rajan finds that there are “no easy trade deals anymore” given increased “uneasiness over international trade and investment arrangements”. Two factors have led to this.
First, competition from emerging markets have created “left-behind communities in developed countries” who desire the “old status quo—where developed-country elites turned a blind eye to the off-shoring of manufacturing so long as markets for their services expanded”, explains Rajan. Communities in the American Midwest and northern England for example helped fuel “political movements” responsible for Brexit and making Donald Trump the US president, adds Rajan. Second, “emerging-economy elites want a share of the global market for services, and are no longer willing to cede ground there”.
Though Rajan is sympathetic to the concerns of developed countries, he notes that imposing “one’s preferences on unions, regulation of online platforms, and duration of patents on other countries—will further undermine the consensus for trade”. He therefore calls for “less intrusive trade agreements”.
Has inequality come down?
Madan Sabnavis | chief economist, CARE Ratings
Financial Express
Based on a sample of income tax returns, Sabnavis concludes that “there is no evidence of income equality increasing”. The average of tax assesses has risen from “Rs 4.2 lakh to Rs 6.2 lakh, which is a CAGR of 6.6% as against growth of per capita GDP of 10%”, which means they had “a lower growth in average income compared with the national average”, observes Sabnavis.
Sabnavis’ analysis juxtaposes the share of taxpayers in various income brackets with the share in total income as per the returns that were filed (though the analysis is not indicative of wealth).
He finds significant upward mobility in the income brackets of Rs 5 lakh, 5-10 lakh, 10-20 lakh and 20-50 lakh. However, the “next three categories, which are actually very high income groups with over Rs 50 lakh income, show a contrasting picture”. Sabnavis notes that this is because the economic slowdown has made the “salary component of senior executives… sluggish in the upward direction while there could be compensation in the form of stock options” and this has remarkably narrowed the inequality index.
Potentially disruptive north-south divide
Jaimini Bhagwati | former Indian Ambassador and World Bank Treasury professional
Business Standard
Bhagwati warns of “disaffection among southern states” due to recommendations by the 15th Finance Commission.
He explains that since the 1990s “per capita incomes in south Indian states have risen substantially faster than in the larger north Indian states” and yet allocation of tax revenues by various Finance Commissions has been correlated to state populations.
Not only has the 15th Finance Commission run into trouble for carving out a section for defence and internal security expenditure, but also for basing its recommendations on the 2011 census, he explains. This may result in higher proportions of revenues allocated to northern states, he observes. “States need to be treated fairly but poor past economic performance should not be the basis for preferential treatment,” writes Bhagwati.
Bhagwati suggests the 15th Finance Commission take a leaf out of the 14th Finance Commission’s report that states the “weight assigned to the population should be decided (as per the 1971 census) and an indicator for demographic changes (since then) be introduced separately”.