Gupta writes that the Centre’s proposal to reinvent Delhi is reminiscent of colonial thinking. Twenty-first century India will be written about in the future as “The Age of Replacement”, with changed road-names, institutions and actual buildings like Pragati Maidan’s Hall of Nations.
If the plans for Rajpath come to life, ice cream at India Gate will turn into an encounter with security guards and barbed wire. There are claims that trees won’t be cut, but the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change had axed several in Jor Bagh at night. Not only buildings like the secretariat complex but also “people’s space is now under threat”. Destroying the old structures and building new ones will apparently help Delhi reflect the values of “New India” – “governance, efficiency, transparency, accountability and equity”. This includes building massive convention centres and officers, rather than giving ration-cards to the poor, or addressing child deaths due to malnutrition.
The “ghost of Lutyens” must be smiling as it did in 1912 when he was tasked with understanding India’s prevalent architecture styles, writes Gupta. The government today is looking for national or international firms to do the same. An “Indo-Saracenic-Modernist-Brutalist-Burj Dubai concoction” might be the result. This project should be discussed nationally and New Delhi residents need to wake up to see what is happening to their home.
Prakash Singh | Former DGP and police reform campaigner
The Times of India
Singh writes that instead of protecting people, the police today serves the interests of the political class. Even in 1979, the National Police Commission had observed that after Independence the relationship between police and foreign powers had merely evolved into a police-political party tie-up. The Status of Policing in India Report 2019, prepared by the NGO Common Cause and the Centre for Study of Developing Societies, stated that “political pressure continues to remain one of the biggest hurdles in crime investigation for the police”.
A 2006 Supreme Court judgment had directed state governments to set up three new institutions: State Security Commission, Police Establishment Board and Complaints Authorities – all meant to ensure autonomy and accountability for the police. But these directives have still not been implemented. Police reforms are needed to address issues like the lack of manpower in the forces, shoddy infrastructure, inadequate transport, “dismal” housing facilities, meagre forensic support and an insufficient communication network.
Democratic frameworks are redundant if the police cannot take action against criminals even if they have political power. Ensuring governance, sustaining economic progress, and also dealing with internal security challenges like those posed by Maoists are the police’s responsibility. Our leaders need to “transform the police into a professional, people friendly force,” concludes Singh.
Shaking the foundation of fake news
Ruchi Gupta | Joint secretary in-charge of the Congress Party’s student wing
The Hindu
Gupta writes that fake news is believed to be a recent phenomenon linked to the rise of social media, but governments and political stakeholders have always fostered “disinformation campaigns” to build selective narratives. Traditional news media is no longer trusted by many, hence social media has “decentralised the creation and propagation of fake news”.
Current responses to fake news include rebuttal, removal and educating the public. Rebuttal, writes Gupta, is a form of “fact checking” wherein fake news is debunked by revealing various errors. There is immense pressure on companies like Facebook and Youtube to remove fake news content from their platforms and tweak their algorithm to curb them. Here, the accountability to curb fake news rests on the technology platforms. Educating people means teaching them to be “discerning consumers of news” – showing them how to use verification tools to check the accuracy of news items before they share them.
Fake news is disseminated at a rapid rate and attempting to rebut it is like “hitting a moving target”. Produced in a decentralised manner, it is impossible to completely remove all of it. We shouldn’t “disproportionately” focus on fake news, and should instead create alternative narratives that make fake news irrelevant.
Neeraj Kaushal | Professor of Social Policy, Columbia University, US
The Economic Times
In her piece, Kaushal discusses the merging of 10 public sector banks into four with the Government of India remaining as a majority shareholder. “Do not expect a bang from the bank mergers”, she writes, because as long as the government is a majority shareholder, PSBs will continue to be instruments for “carrying out patronage to favoured groups” with no professionalism and efficiency in sight.
The merger has received major pushback from bank trade unions who fear it will jeopordise their job security. Considering the cost of keeping PSBs from “being sunk” by their large non-performing assets (NPAs), Kaushal suggests bank unions, who often “represent some of the most privileged, and highly paid, workers in the Indian economy”, must accept the need for staff adjustments given the circumstances.
She also predicts the merger will lead to a “diminution of public sector banking” and if the trend continues, “private banks will be the ones providing the building blocks for the economy”.
India, too, has an all-weather friend
G Parthasarathy | Former High Commissioner to Pakistan
The Hindu Business Line
Parthasarathy uncovers layers of India-Russia bilateralism and predicts that the future of Indian diplomacy will focus on emerging power dynamics between the US, China and Russia, where US and Russia will be the major players in the global energy sector.
Citing instances from 1955 and 1962, he points out how Russia has consistently supported India on the Kashmir issue and its continued support since the Modi govt’s abrogation of Article 370. Any of Russia’s concerns about the India-US relationship were “assuaged” when India refused to “bow to threats of US sanctions on its acquisitions from Russia” — be it S 400 surface-to-air missiles or the production of AK 203 rifles, explains Parthasarathy. Modi’s plans to invest $1 billion in Russia’s Far East will also “set the stage for expanding cooperation in areas like imports of LNG and coal from Russia”, he writes. Russia’s welcoming of Indian and other foreign investments in its Far East, however, might have something to do with its deep distrust in China, explains Parthasarathy.
India’s FTAs: Threat or opportunity?
Naushad Forbes | Co-chairman Forbes Marshall
Business Standard
Forbes analyses the Free Trade Agreements (FTA) that India had signed with different countries in the 2000s and whether they have enhanced trade. He notes that compared to non-FTA partners such as the US and China, India has “certainly not seen the benefits from the FTAs that we expected”.
He identifies three reasons for this. One, India is not the only country signing FTAs, other countries have signed deeper and more expansive FTAs. Two, “tariffs are not the only barriers for trade,” additional restrictions make it difficult for industries to sell their products in different countries. Three, “trade patterns reflect underlying industrial competitiveness.” Forbes argues that improving our trade competitiveness is the “surest way of improving our trade balance.”
The impending RCEB requires India to learn from its FTA failures and Forbes identifies two ways to do so. He calls for a stronger export-promotion with a competitive exchange rate. There should also be FTAs with India’s strongest trade partners – US, China and the emerging pan-African Free Trade Area.
More importantly, writes Forbes, “Indian industry must see its future in export”. Instead of focusing on protecting Indian markets, industries should work towards accessing Asian markets.
Making farmers and farming smart
PVS Suryakumar | Chief GM, NABARD, Karnataka Regional Office, Bengaluru
The Financial Express
Suryakumar argues that there is a need to relook at agriculture with the “farmer at the centre” and identifies 10 elements of strategy. He calls for policies to develop seed villages and community-managed seed systems into “entrepreneurial activities in villages improving farmers’ incomes”. He suggests a reduction in chemical fertilisers since “‘soil health, crop health and public health’ are inextricably interconnected”.
He also recommends adopting sustainable agriculture, growing crops suitable to geography and also participatory watershed development through rainwater harvesting. Suryakumar then moves onto a set of recommendations concerning the fiscal side of agriculture such as agricultural marketing, agricultural credit – credit for post-harvest to stop distress sale by farmers –and agricultural extension. According to him, “ The capacity of extension experts in terms of knowledge and skills and necessary financial budget needs to improve”.
Suryakumar’s final two strategies are aimed at doubling farmers’ income and the need to remove agriculture as a state subject since it requires the intervention on both the state and the Centre.