Unity in unity
Christophe Jaffrelot | Senior research fellow at CERI-Sciences Po/CNRS, Paris, professor of Indian politics and sociology at King’s India Institute, London,
The Indian Express
Jaffrelot writes that the paradigm shift seen in the case of Jammu and Kashmir reveals Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s political style, one which does not favour consensus but acts unilaterally and favours centralisation of the state. Demonstrated at the time of demonetisation as well, this move to an “illiberal democracy” can have wider consequences.
Earlier, the BJP’s majoritarian ideology manifested only in non-official moves — cow slaughter campaigns, love jihad, etc. But, the party is now actively trying to make a “majoritarian nation”.
The Hindu nationalist ideology and the RSS have never favoured diversity, illustrated by BJP ideologue S.P. Mookherjee’s famous slogan on Kashmir: “One country, one emblem and one Constitution”. The sangh parivar is not interested in the constitutional value of federalism, preferring a unitary state, argues Jaffrelot.
Since 2014, the Centre has been asserting its agenda at the expense of state governments. GST, for instance, is monitored by a council where states have two-third of voting rights, effectively giving the Centre veto power if decisions don’t get enough support. The two trends of “obliteration of cultural differences and state centralisation” have appeared in the handling of the J&K issue.
But their efficacy remains to be proven. Uniformity may work in the long run, but presently “tensions will probably increase because of identity clashes”, concludes Jaffrelot.
Un-belonging
Ritu Menon | The writer is with Women Unlimited, Delhi.
The Indian Express
Menon writes that the country today is unrecognisable from the one she was born in. In 1948, when she was born, the country was torn, but was still unique as an experiment in democracy. The country’s nation-building principles included non-violence, co-existence, non-alignment, being non-sectarian, non-communal, egalitarian and plural. Her grandmother had left her house in Lahore with only a few belongings, saying she’d be back soon. She never returned. “And never felt the country she was living in now, was home”, Menon writes.
The country is unrecognisable to Menon because of its “diminished sense of itself”, the limits it has set to decide who belongs and who doesn’t, the hard lines it has set for defining the self and other.
She understands why her grandmother felt that she didn’t belong, as all her constants, and the sense of who and where she was had been disrupted. “What a tragedy it would be if the country I will die in, were to become the kind of country I may not want to be born in”, she concludes.
India has succeeded in outflanking Pakistan
Kanwal Sibal | Former foreign secretary
Hindustan Times
Sibal writes that after the “bold and historic” decision of the Modi government regarding Kashmir and reorganisation of its territory, there ceases to exist any scope to discuss Kashmir with Pakistan.
Pakistan will try to promote clashes between protesters and security forces in order to highlight human rights violations in J&K. Pakistan might also approach the UN Secretary General and Security Council, citing that India’s move is in violation of UN Resolutions and has illegally integrated Kashmir into the Indian union. But India has maintained that J&K is a part of India and third parties such as the UN have no role in this matter.
As per the Shimla agreement, Jammu and Kashmir has to be discussed bilaterally between India and Pakistan, and hence, it is out of UN’s jurisdiction.
The US officially also recognises it as a bilateral issue, but Pakistan will seek Trump’s intervention on the grounds that “the Indian move will interfere with its efforts to midwife the peace process in Afghanistan”.
Pakistan might also approach the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) on the issue, but it is unlikely to receive much support given India’s improved ties with Gulf countries. Moreover, this move has squashed any remaining scope for having any “comprehensive” dialogue with Kashmir. “Pakistan has been outflanked by India”, concludes Sibal.
Kashmir has been cut to the quick
Wajahat Habibullah | Retired civil servant who has served as chief information commissioner and chairperson of the National Commission for Minorities
Hindu
Habibullah writes that there was a lot of speculation within the media when the huge security build-up in Kashmir began, trying to understand the “extraordinary lockdown” that included banks, petrol pumps and stores across the Valley.
One journalist even said, “This is just the right time when militants and their masters in Rawalpindi could do with a terror attack in Kashmir.” Then Home Minister Amit Shah announced his move to nullify Article 370. These might be seen as bold constitutional measures.
But if the government intended to just rectify a constitutional error or “remedy an anachronism”, it should have followed the democratic procedures and not introduced the measures in Parliament in complete secrecy. What the government has achieved is creating a “feeling of betrayal among a section of our people and foreboding among well-wishers of Kashmir”.
Risky moves in Jammu and Kashmir
Shyam Saran | Foreign secretary and is currently senior fellow, CPR
Business Standard
Saran looks at the possible implications of the government’s move to abrogate Article 370. He writes that the step to downgrade J&K’s status from that of a state to a union territory, albeit temporary, will be seen as “demeaning and humiliating” by the Valley’s population. In most of north India though, the step will further increase the popularity of PM Modi.
He writes that contrary to those who are arguing that removal of Article 370 will lead to Kashmir’s better integration, the step is actually likely to “trigger increased militancy and violence”.
Pakistan is likely to exploit the situation, he says. He writes that the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation may soon issue a resolution but India is likely to “weather the storm” given its international clout.
However, he warns that this clout is due to India’s growing economy, and if it continues to slow down, then the fall out may be difficult to handle.
Lessons for Kashmir’s economic integration with the rest of India
Niranjan Rajadhyaksha | Member of the academic board of the Meghnad Desai Academy of Economics
Mint
Rajadhyaksha writes that Kashmir’s political integration now needs to be followed by economic integration. He writes that while India had been a common civilizational entity for a long time, its economic integration started during British rule with the creation of railways.
After Independence, he writes, this process was continued by the public sector under state planning as efforts were made to account for the developmental needs of all regions. This created a national middle-class of “managers, scientists, technicians, administrators and bankers”. Now, the process has been undertaken by the private sector as these big companies are “today not rooted in any one part of the country”.
He writes that economic integration in Kashmir is likely to be a very slow process and the state will have to take the lead. However, this time the state can’t rely on creating public sector industrial units because of the poor financial health of such companies. He recommends that “infrastructure spending is a more realistic option, especially if it pulls in more tourism”.
Is IBC unfair to operational creditors?
Anthony Casey | Bankruptcy professor at University of Chicago School of Law
Bhargavi Zaveri | Researcher at the Finance Research Group, IGIDR
Business Standard
Casey and Zaveri write that a lot of concerns have been raised about the exclusion of operational creditors from the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016. They, however, argue against those concerns.
First, they write, that the exclusion of operational creditors helps in minimising the costs associated with including them. This is because such creditors are dispersed, and “admitting their claims can be expensive and time-consuming”. Also, such creditors have a bias against any liquidation process as they look for probable future payouts in continuing their relationship with the debtors.
Also, they cite data to suggest that IBC hasn’t actually adversely impacted operational creditors.
For instance, “out of the roughly 1,800 resolution processes that we have seen so far [under IBC], a little more than half has been initiated at the behest of operational creditors”.
They add that the recoveries of operational creditors have also been marginally more than financial ones.
Time to Re-Form to Reform
Arvind Panagariya | The writer is professor of economics, Columbia University, US
Economic Times
Panagariya argues that the most important reason behind India’s economic slowdown is the weakness of its financial sector. He writes that the decline in growth rate began with the “decline in the growth of credit by public sector banks due to large and rising level of non-performing assets”. Even though NBFCs initially filled this gap, they couldn’t sustain it.
He writes that measures like income tax surcharge on the rich, protective custom duties, stricter CSR rules coupled with a reluctance to reform labour laws have hurt market sentiment.
He says that growth is unlikely to recover in the current fiscal since if one accounts for off-budget borrowings, then fiscal deficit financing is taking up most of the household savings.
He recommends that the RBI should take two corrective actions — cut the interest rate and allow the rupee to depreciate. And for the longer term, the focus should be on enhancing productivity and investment.