Himalayan face-off is inevitable

India and China are competing everywhere on earth, from nearby Pakistan to faraway Africa, for natural resources and diplomatic edge. The situation is no different in the rugged terrains of neighbouring Nepal

India and China have a long history of love-hate relations that can be traced to the pre-civilisational era. Colonisation, of course, changed the conventional terms of engagement — especially the Boxer Rebellion in which the Indians fought, along with British forces, against the Chinese revolutionaries. Since then, the Chinese have never really trusted the Indians.

A part of the Henderson-Brooks-Bhagat report on the 1962 India-China War clearly establishes the effects of this old Chinese complex. It also details the blunders done by the Indian Armed Forces and the defence establishment.

Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru’s heightened sentimentalism, rather his show of statesmanship that caused for the war, have also been exposed. The report is only partially in the public domain; nonetheless, it has given much insight into India-China relations.

Tibet and Kashmir and China’s irritating stand on boundary issues are the focus in journalist Shishir Gupta’s book, The Himalayan Face-off: Chinese Assertion and the Indian Riposte, which says, “Even if bilateral trade between India and China goes beyond $100 billion in the coming years, China’s posture towards India is adversarial and will perhaps remain so in the future, with Beijing viewing New Delhi through the prism of the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan Government-in-exile… A rising China, inflexible on boundary dispute resolution and with strong tentacles across South Asia and beyond, could encroach on India’s strategic space and lead to a potential crisis this decade.”

However, the book doesn’t look into the India-China ‘face-off’ in Nepal. China has turned overtly cunning in Nepal, so as to challenge the traditional comfort characteristic of India-Nepal ties.

China is infusing large amounts of money in Nepal to minimise the warmth New Delhi and Kathmandu have enjoyed through economic cooperation. On the ‘softer’ side, China is missing no chance to slap its cultural load on Nepal.

Hence, the number of Nepalis wanting to learn the Chinese language has seen a dramatic rise in recent years. Still, it will be difficult for China to counter India’s traditional position in Nepal.

Politically, the advent of Maoism in the mid-1990s gave China a big foothold in Nepal. But Maoism in this Himalayan Kingdom has been so diluted that it has almost lost its Chinese soul, especially in the face of the complex conditions produced by local competitive politics.

For many years, Maoists were able to hold on to power because they were pragmatic and flexible in their political programming.

The Maoists in Nepal designed their policies in keeping with the changing political situation of the land. They rose to occupy the highest positions in the country, but in recent years they have lost the sheen after the top Maoist leadership’s dubious stands were exposed and the former insurgents frittered away the credentials to stay on the high moral ground.

China is watching the developments in Nepal closely. The 2013 election has given the new regime a mandate to govern, not rule ruthlessly and without a sense of direction. In this new composition, Maoists are a minimal force.

From a larger geo-strategic point of view, China perceives India to be getting close to the world’s only superpower. Therefore, it has been seeking to encircle India through various advances.

Some may argue that this is perhaps partially an existential tussle caused by China’s continuing complex vis-à-vis India. Perhaps China still sees India as a collaborator of the colonial British Army that plundered Chinese cities.

However, this seems like a ridiculous argument when China, today, is one of the biggest offenders of human rights. It makes little sense as to why China would seek to shape its current engagement with India on the basis of an event that happened over a century ago, and that too under the control of colonialists, not Indians per se.

Still, India and Nepal, in all their diplomatic manoeuvrings towards China, must take into account the complexities of the Middle Kingdom.

Time and again, the Chinese leadership has asserted its belief in co-existence — India has been acknowledging this without giving heart to it, as this country has its own share of complexes, born out of Chinese betrayals that began in 1962. Nepal, with its unique historical position, has rarely had to face-off with either Beijing or New Delhi.

India and China appear to be in a tug of war, with their many unresolved issues. It is difficult to be optimistic about the future, given the incorrigible complexes of both Beijing and New Delhi. The Himalayan face-off is a reality, and it is going to be an enduring one.

India and China are competing everywhere on earth — from nearby Pakistan to faraway Africa — for natural resources and diplomatic edge. The situation is no different in the rugged terrains of Nepal.
-Atul K Thakur
Email: summertickets@gmail.com
(Published in The Pioneer on April22,2014)

The 'riot' game!

Those who instigate riots know the rule to be 'fireproofed'—and to thrive on dangerous fundamentals. Beyond such calculated moves, the sufferers and their humane observers live in oblivion.

Quite often, we see the frail silent image of Manto hanging on wall and his literatures meeting disdained responses, likewise as: I'll fly all from here--not to listen, these are at service, always at service!

Akbar Illahabadi wrote: “They hold the throne in their hand. The whole realm is in their hand. The country, the apportioning of men’s livelihood is in their hand. The springs of hope and of fear are in their hand—in their hand is the power to decide who shall be humbled and who exalted.” But who they are? Why they enjoying such sinful authority?

Their authority powered from the effects of fragile public dismay—and by the electoral design, which allows the representative of particular interest group, winning the ground. The riot cannot be secular—however time and again, political parties have tried falsifying this kind of simple argument.

Most recently, the Samajwadi Party government in UP termed their handling of Muzaffarnagar riots as ‘secular response’—though outside the ‘ambit of reasons’ and nailed in no time, its leaders and sycophant bureaucrats have made all efforts to keep the state government away from imminent legal and moral scrutiny.

As a nation, India was born in the atmosphere of fractured communal harmony—by that account, year 1947 was intensely grim coated. That year, the partition theory reached swift action mode and resulted the bloodiest outbreak of riots and exodus across the imagined borders of two nations in making.

The ‘two nation theory’ worked as planned by the ‘White Sahibs for Brown Sahibs’—and British left not one but two ‘free countries’—both scare-faced and terribly handicapped in keeping alive the momentum of great sacrifices, made during the independence movement.

The scores of people butchered, displaced to never return their home—and most shockingly, women raped for being identified with particular religious identity, had not really shook the minds and souls of system.

But the man who spearheaded the non-violent fight against the tyranny of empire, Gandhi, was in deep shock. He avoided the well deserved happiness for independence and tried to control the frenzied communal clashes in Calcutta.

Sadly, the ruling political classes at that time and later in the history of modern India— remained unflinchingly inactive and unimpressed with an option of ‘straight shooting’ against the hooliganism of unparalleled distort.

Why so? Because only being complicit in the communal riots goes against the ‘law of the land’? Then such law must come under the scanner, which spares the state’s role in commanded violence—with a few rounds of hiccups. Beyond the political overplay, ‘riots’ need to be relooked—much more seriously than the other currents of history.

And this must start with India’s partition, which not only bifurcated the nation but left it permanently vulnerable, to be marred by the ‘communal elements’ and opportunist users of secularist ideas.

During the Delhi riots in 1984, Bhagalpur riots in the late 1980s, Gujarat riots in 2002 and most recently at Muzaffarnagar, the superficial political inquisitions surpassed the real grief of human tragedies. Thousands were murdered, most of them without realizing the actual spectre of politics behind the riot—they simply vanished, as easily as they appeared destined for it!

The ‘riots’ in Indian contexts have been driven through certain ‘political intents’—and communal assertion intermingle them at certain stage. In such wild state of affairs, ‘personification’ takes place at high stage. With each incident of riot, our collective memory recalls a face behind it—the real issues get no attention in public memory or by the restless and assumptive media.

Henceforth, the riot victims presented as numbers and court seeks evidences—only evidences, and not anything reasonable.
Those sheltered in riot camps are treated like ‘citizens on margin’—and ‘the rulers’ of state claims such inhuman arrangements, charity.

A young—undeserving—and untimely CM of UP, Akhilesh Yadav will never ever understand what his government has done in follow-up action on the wake of communal outbreak in politically charged Muzaffarnagar.He could have easily done without Saifai extravaganza or Europe trip for his party rank and file, when people were freezing in relief camps, away from their homes.

They are still in camps, winter was harshest for them. Most of them are facing health issues, which arise by the lack of basic nutrition and hygiene. Like normal human being, they too require elementary amenities—circumstance to go back home, which are burnt and need to be repaired. Though they know, the soul of their home has withered away—as only a few good neighbours want to see them back.

Something similar happened in Kashmir in 1990—still we talk about relief camps, and we recall the grim faces of Kashmiri Pandits. Now they are settled everywhere, except at their home in valley—my fear is the same for those uprooted from the villages of Muzaffarnagar.

The victims live in reality—as they have no command on resources. Their ‘dignity’ is compromised—the kids are trying to learn the lessons, through experiences and self efforts. But there is a limitation of self-learning. The young girls are being married, to suppress the extra amount of insecurity and helplessness.

The terror outfits are, reportedly visiting these camps to negotiate with ‘anemic sheltered citizens of India’—and they return without much success, as people have still trust in state, if not in leadership. They collect relief to survive—as survival is not less than a virtue, for both ‘fit& frail’.

This way, the riot works in India. Knowingly or unknowingly, political animals help each other to float in the dirty stream—and they really triumph the alternative wisdom. In the coming general elections, the ‘secularism claim’ must be tested by the electorates in UP, and wherever the land is India!
-Atul K Thakur
Email: summertickets@gmail.com
(Published in Governance Now on March22,2014)

Spoilers of the democratic drive

Maoists in Nepal have in the past, with greater share in power politics, done immeasurable harm to the chances of healthy democratic movements in that country. They have unfailingly and deliberately created problems for the Government

Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal, also known as Prachanda, is a worried man these days, principally coloured in red — not for the lost ideological claim of his party, but because his command and credibility inside the party and in national politics is on the wane.

He has kept mum for months after the humiliating performance of his party in the 2013 parliamentary election. But after the customary soul searching, he is now trying to reunite the different Maoists camps and revive the party’s character in its rank and file.

In this endeavour, Prachanda is looking to the working class and the marginalised sections of society but he has also almost given up on his former colleague and now CPN(Maoist) chairman Mohan Baidya. This is his version of struggle for survival, but while doing this he has displayed his and indeed his party’s deep rooted desperation towards the new developments in Nepali national politics.

Another big factor is Mr Baburam Bhattarai — a powerful Maoist comrade who turned dubious to match Prachanda’s ambitions. There are open theories about their dualism in public life and none are refuted by these two giant leaders of the Himalayan nation. Mao is not alive but it seems like these two leaders believe in the old saying that ‘China’s leader is our leader’.

So much like Mao, they too, time and again, have committed follies, cheated the poor Nepali people of their aspirations, and damaged the delicate democratic fabric of Nepal.

Nevertheless, it will be wrong to say that Nepal doesn’t have place to accommodate radicals. But it is the wrong moves of the radicals, which have falsified the conception of progressive political manoeuvring. This amounts to a big setback for a democracy that is still trying to cross many hurdles.

Since 1996, when Maoism formally haunted the nation, almost two decades in Nepal have been wasted. Governance is broken, infrastructure is decaying, industry is in a mess — and the people are fleeing to Gulf countries where they live perilous lives.

Who are these Maoists representing then? Why they are still sticking with their false ‘ism’s and not focussing on national issues that are getting more serious day by day? In recent years, outbound human trafficking from Nepal has seen unbelievably high. Abroad, Nepalis live in a kind of exile and are routinely exploited.

Barring the elite, it is tough to find a Nepali who lives in dignified state. This was not the case earlier when Nepal was still poor but at least its political leadership had better control. Still, there has hardly been a ‘golden phase’ in Nepal.

Maoism was a stream forced to flow in an authoritarian China, where democratic tributaries were seen as rival counter-currents. It kept revising over the years in the country of its origin and, so cunningly, that it made China not only a closely-guarded, ruthless communist regime but also amusingly a hub of crony capitalism as well.

So, today, many communist leaders from China find themselves on the Forbes billionaire list even if their socialistic convictions stop them from making flashy style statements.

Sadly, this kind of an unhealthy cocktail of social and economic policies is being seen as the cure that can fix the ills of socio-economic disparity in Nepal. However, this will be at the cost of democracy, that will otherwise benefit the masses, unless the leaders turn into looters of resources. Such endemic tussles are, of course, long-standing. And resolving them is perhaps the toughest challenge for democracy.

Writing on Nepal’s last two decades appears tough, given how fast-evolving trends and developments boggle the commentator’s mind. One can see endless political activity and the unstoppable movement towards factionalism as well as the lust to grab the top seat of power, even if for a short while.

The Maoists brought these changes with bigger effect, and in the course of time, their brand of politics was borrowed by the old parties and narrowly-shaped the Madhesi and ethnic groups. And within this flurry of opportunistic moves, Nepali democracy has suffered. It has never recovered enough to support the country’s progress in different areas.

In the past, the Maoists, who then had a greater share in power politics, did immeasurable harm to the chances of healthy democratic movements in the country. Even now, they are creating trouble for the existing Government run by Mr Sushil Koirala.

It will be worthwhile to recall that Prime Minister Koirala is not a conventional representative of the Koirala family, rather he is detached from the aura of power. He has given the mandate to lead; he has not fought for it.

But his success is doubtful. The Constitution-drafting process is threatened by a motley group of Maoist comrades and it is unlikely that they will allow Nepal to stay the democratic course. The Maoists mock Nepali democracy and democracy here betrays masses and their humane expectations. On the other side of the tunnel, there seems to be no light.

Tough times will remain in this country that has no king but is not free from king-size maladies. And for that, the people cannot be blamed for an error of judgement as they were always without better choices.
-Atul K Thakur
Email: summertickets@gmail.com
(Published in The Pioneer on March25,2014)

Under-estimating the potential

Monarchy has given way to democracy in Nepal. But the executive head of the world's largest democracy has chosen not to be an enthusiastic enough part of the great political transition taking place right next door

Last month, at a reception at the Embassy of Nepal in New Delhi, I asked Nepal’s visiting interim Minister of Home Affairs and Foreign Affairs, Mr Madhav P Ghimire, if he, on behalf of Mr Khil Raj Regmi, the Chairman of Nepal’s Council of Ministers, had extended an invitation to the Indian Prime Minister to visit Kathmandu. Mr Ghimire said he did, and that he was also visibly impressed with the warmth he received in New Delhi for his handling of the second Constituent Assembly election in Nepal.

Right after his visit, Press reports suggested that Prime Minister Manmohan Singh was willing to visit Kathmandu after the new Government there had been formed. This would be a path-breaking step. It would certainly do some long-overdue damage control for India-Nepal relations. India has maintained a long-standing apathy towards its northern neighbour, especially in terms of high-level diplomatic and political engagement.

On occasions, the leadership and citizens of Nepal have wondered when the Indian Prime Minister will make an official visit to their country, otherwise considered to be a most strategic neighbour. For decades, Nepal has awaited a visit by an Indian Prime Minister, but India’s Ministry of External Affairs and the Prime Minister’s Office have been slow to respond.

It is also bizarre that ceremonial trips by the Indian President too have been on hold. Yet such visits would have helped give bilateral ties a much-needed level playing field. That Nepal’s own political establishment has been on a roller-coaster ride itself, not to mention is still fragile, has only made the whole scenario more precarious.

In New Delhi, the South Block routes its resources and infrastructure in a manner that overlooks the genuine expectations from its immediate neighbours. This is particularly shocking when one takes into account the fact that Nepal’s front rank leadership has always preferred its southern neighbour as its most trusted destination. It is true that there was an increased favour for China when a radical Government was at the helm in Nepal. This had also evoked some strong reactions in New Delhi. But with the extremist regime now a spent force, the ice has melted in no time.

The visit of Maoist Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal, popularly known as Prachanda, to Beijing before he travelled New Delhi, in 2008, offended India and supposedly resulted in his premature ouster from office. He was replaced by his deputy Baburam Bhattarai. An alumnus of an Indian university, Mr Bhattarai did not repeat the follies of his predecessor and brought back the bonhomie back between the two countries.

Sans that one hiccup with Prachanda, Nepal’s Prime Ministers have always naturally leaned towards India. This should have been acknowledged and reciprocated from the Indian side. Inder Kumar Gujral was the last Indian Prime Minister to make an official visit to Nepal in June 1997. In the 17 years since then, no such gesture has been made by his successors. As Prime Minister, Mr Atal Bihari Vajpayee also came to Kathmandu in January 2002, but that was to attend the 11th summit of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation.

Yet, as far back as February 1991, during then Prime Minister Chandra Shekhar’s visit to Nepal, both sides had agreed to form a high-level task force to preparing a programme of cooperation under the Nepal-India Joint Commission. But on the unofficial side, this long friend of Nepal also faced the wrath of the masses in the Himalayan nation for his anti-monarchy stand. Still, it must be admitted that Chandra Shekhar had shown enthusiasm on issues concerning Nepal, and this had produced some results. In 1990, though, he was an unpopular person for the average Nepali for whom the king was dear.

Things have drastically changed in the last two decades. The monarchy has given way to a democracy. But the executive head of the world’s largest democracy has chosen not be part of a great political transition taking place right next door. On the contrary, in the past 14 years, all Nepali Prime Ministers except Mr Jhalanath Khanal have visited New Delhi. The former Indian Ambassador to Nepal, Mr Jayant Prasad, termed the long gap in visit by an Indian Prime Minister as unnatural. However, he stressed that the delay could be due to the turmoil and political transition in Kathmandu since 1996.

It is equally surprising that like India, China too hasn’t shown interest in a Kathmandu visit by its Premier. The last Chinese Prime Minister to visit Nepal was Zhu Rongji in May 2001. On this count, China has matched India. When Mr Manmohan Singh received an ailing Girija Prasad Koirala at the airport in 2006, he accorded respect to this towering democrat of South Asia. Mr Singh should come to Kathmandu again, as Nepal is unlikely to have a high calibre leader like Koirala for whom the Indian Prime Minister can softly break protocol.
-Atul K Thakur
Email: summertickets@gmail.com
(Published in The Pioneer on February10,2014)

Skill Development in India: Big Promises, Tall Failures

The globalised world demands skilled manpower to convert growth opportunities into jobs and stable incomes. With millions of new job-seekers entering the job market every year, skill development has become one of India’s urgent priorities.

The 12th Five Year Plan (FYP) has highlighted skill-building as an imperative need to reap India’s so-called demographic dividend. Indian universities and professional institutions churn out hordes of degree and diploma holders, most of them are unemployable because they lack the skills manufacturing and services industries look for.

The bulk of employment is still being created through agriculture, which is subject to seasonal fluctuations. Even skill-based manufacturing sector is sensitive to these seasonal changes as the processing of agricultural products majorly determines its overall production cycle.

It’s true that India has comparative advantage in terms of having a younger workforce than China and all OECD countries, but the drive to scale-up high on these is missing. The world will witness unprecedented shortage of skilled workforce in coming years, but it’s unlikely that with the existing policy framework on skill development, India will be able to tap this chance.

The 11th FYP’s recommendations on the matter led to a three-tier structure: the PM’s National Council, National Skill Development Coordination Board (NSDCB) and the National Skill Development Corporation (NSDC).

The NSDCB has spelt out policy advice, and direction in the form of “core principles” and has given a vision to create 500 million skilled people by 2022 through skill systems (which must have high degree of inclusiveness); it has taken upon itself the task of coordinating the skill development efforts of a large number of central ministries/departments and states.

The NSDC has geared itself for preparing comprehensive action plans and activities which would promote public private partnership (PPP) models of financing skill development. In policy outlook, these changes have made the issue of skill development a vital agenda for the governments. The state governments have clearly given more space to channelize the skill development initiatives and reap its benefits as well.

But the challenges on skill development in the 12th FYP are numerous and those are blocking the developmental spirit: the government’s monopoly over the skill training is foremost of them. Therefore, a greater emphasis on PPP model could have best way forward in achieving the real goal of skill development. Through proactive regulation or leverages, individual employers and various industry associations should be given more space for meeting the mammoth challenges of skill creation.

Besides, the need is for better institutional mechanism to carry out impact evaluation and surveys of actual job aspirants. Even today, only about 8 percent of the total workforce in India is employed in the organized sector. The rest are employed in the informal sector, without social safety nets.

Obviously, the quality of employment is better in organized sector but it has limited capacity to absorb a large number of workforces. So the role of services either in organised tertiary sector or through self-employment is important. In given circumstance, it’s essential to promote a balance between labour and capital intensive sectors. Agriculture, tourism and SMEs would be the areas, where suitable action will bring better results.

The amendments to Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970, and workable social security schemes for both organized (like Rajiv Gandhi Shramik Kalyan Yojna-under ESIC, EPFO etc) and unorganized (like Rashtriya Swasthya Bima Yojna etc) could make livelihood attainable for all citizens.

So far, the flagship government programmes for sustainable livelihoods (such as Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme, Swarnajayanti Gram Swarozgar Yojna and Swarna Jayanti Shahri Rozgar Yojna ) have not only failed to alleviate the poverty but these all have made corruption firmly established at the lower tier of bureaucracy and on the panchayat level.

Ministries such as Labour& Employment, Human Resource Development, Rural Development and the Urban Development& Poverty Alleviation have launched their skill upgrading programmes, but they are not producing desired results.

Creation of National Skill Development Mission in PPP mode was a good move, but its performance is far from satisfactory. The chances of the NSDC setting up 1,500 new ITIs and 5,000 skill development centers in targeted time are bleak, too.

The Modular Employable Skills (MES) and Skills Development Initiative Scheme (SDIS) adopted by the Ministry of Labour and Employment provide the framework for skill development for school leavers and workers, especially in the unorganised sectors, but again, the results are sub-optimal.

The reason why well-meaning government plans on skill development come to grief is that the existing strategic and implementation models of skills development don’t correspond well with the competitive global requirements of skilling. Of course, India’s IT sector is a beacon of hope but lack of skill development explains why manufacturing has not taken off as a major growth component of India’s economy.

Today, the slow employment generation and its inflationary impact haunt badly. The Phillips Curve reveals it: “lower the employment, higher the rate of inflation”.

A report of Boston Consulting Group and the Confederation of Indian Industries (CII) tells that India’s workforce in 2006-07 numbered 484 million: out of this, 273 million were working in rural areas, primarily in agriculture, while 61million were working in manufacturing and about 150 million in services.

The study exposes that 40 percent of the current workforce is illiterate and another 40 percent is represented from school dropouts. Those who have completed formal schooling comprise 10 per cent, meaning that only 10 percent of the overall workforce could be counted as trained.

On the technical front, NASSCOM says that of the 400,000-odd engineering graduates who pass out every year, only 20 percent would meet the industry requirements. The rest would have to go through rigorous training before businesses could find them useful.

However Rita Soni, CEO, NASSCOM Foundation, sees the context in diverse shades: "The role that technology has played in empowering the most marginalized sections in India, be it people from remote areas or persons with disabilities, cannot be completely overlooked. While there are no true silver bullets that the industry can list down as it continues to face challenges, it is encouraging to know that it is already treading the path of inclusive development."

According to the Economic Survey 2011-12, 63.5 million new entrants would be added to the working age group during the period 2011–16. Consultancy majors IMaCS and Aeon Hewitt have added a caveat in this respect: “An incremental shortfall of nearly 350 million people will be surfaced by 2022 in 20 high-growth sectors of the Indian economy, including the infrastructure sector and the unorganized segment.”

Lack of universal access to institutional credit and other financial services is a critical factor that hobbles entrepreneurship in India. The suppressed entrepreneurial impulse adversely impacts skill development.

The problem inherently rests with the financing model of Indian banks, which lays unrealistic emphasis on collaterals or guarantees--the victims of such credit policies are mostly belong to the lower strata. The RBI has to act swiftly on this. But the structural and financial initiatives for the skill enhancement and livelihood would not come into effect until the industry will follow a clearer definition on the employability.

The primary concern of the lending should be to target the prepared individual, who is capable to run a business and nurture entrepreneurship. Though SMEs comes under the priority sector lending tag, it has not obviously helped in big deal by formal lending agencies to assist weaker sections pick their way out of poverty and the aspiring entrepreneurs liberate their animal spirits.

Micro Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 became operational with effect from October 2, 2006. The Act replaces the concept of “industry” with “enterprises”. This Act notionally facilitates the promotion, development and enhances the competitiveness of Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.

But the ground reality is stark, as MSMEs have no proper advocacy/industry association (barring few obscure and ineffective organisations, like CIMSME /SME Chamber of India) to look after on their interests. The leading industrial chambers-FICCI, CII or others are mostly run for pursuing the interests of big corporations and their attention on MSMEs comes only for keeping ‘high moral ground’.

National Small Industries Corporation (NSIC) has been working since 1955, and over the decades it has proved itself a big elephant of government. With its over-sized secretarial set-up, but shabbily planned programme structures, NSIC mimics the entrepreneurial aspiration of Indian youths. Its website too appears short on informations and high in offering ‘self help tips’ – it drops the dream liner with no tenability-how to become successful entrepreneur?

FICCI Survey on Labour / Skill Shortage for Industry sings a different escapist tune: “Despite having a favorable demographic profile, labor and skill shortage continues to be one of the key concerns for the Indian industry. This problem has been compounded by the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA). It seems that MGNREGA has made a perceptible difference to the ‘choice of work’ of the casual labor in rural and semi urban areas.”

Though another study done in 2010 by FICCI -IMACS comes with clearer insight: “There is a need for an independent system to assess quality, comprising all elements of the skill development value chain, right from need assessment and student mobilisation up to training and placement. Current systems are primarily oriented towards quality checks (through trade tests) during the phase of assessment and certification.”

CII has launched its own Skills Development Initiative, which shares the goal of the National Skills Development Agenda to skill 500 million people by 2022. In this endeavour, CII, has set up its first skills centre at Chhindwara, MP, to train people in bar bending, grinding, pipe fitting, welding, etc. (although its functional dividends have yet to be visible, which stands opposite of CII’s hyper exuberance).

CII, along with HPCL, have also launched the ‘Swavalamban’ project to train 2,200 youth in multiple trades. The programmes have local concentration, relevance and in-built flexibility. So far, CII has released five sectoral studies on skills requirements in the constructions, auto, retail, healthcare and banking & financial services sectors. CII has also taken skills development initiatives beyond national boundaries (in Afghanistan, South Africa among the others). For the sake of record, these appear impressive, but still they are not changing the course for desirable outcomes.

T N Thakur, ex-CMD, PTC India and former Deputy Secretary, Ministry of Personnel (GOI), looked after training policy, plan and non-plan training programmes-he also spearheaded the major reforms in UPSC in Rajiv Gandhi government, he shares his views:

"India has very large young population, 70 percent of India's 1.2 billion populations is below 30 years of age. Such young population is a great strength if they are gainfully employed, otherwise they will turn to be a great liability. It's, therefore, imperative for India to have massive skill development programme and create employment opportunities through growth oriented schemes. We cannot distribute wealth if we don't have it. Only a balanced growth alone will bring prosperity and equity."

National Skill Development Corporation (NSDC) CEO & MD, Dilip Chenoy, puts his perspectives on this with incorrigible optimism:

“For a country keen to make its way in to the league of advanced nations within the next decade by leveraging its favourable demographic profile, skill development offers the best solution to realize this aspiration. In consonance with this philosophy, the National Skill Development Corporation (NSDC) through its private sector training partners has been steadfastly engaged in empowering Indian youth by equipping them with the skill sets that would allow them to participate in and contribute to the process of inclusive growth and development.”

He adds: “Till March31, 2013, NSDC Partners-which range from marquee names of corporate India such as NIIT, Future Group, IL&FS, TVS, Aptech, Apollo Hospitals etc to NGOs such as Pratham, and from start-ups such as Empower Pragati and Talent Sprint to educational institutions such as the Centurion Group of Institutions in Orissa-had skilled nearly 6lakh people nationwide. By establishing a presence in 333 districts in 25 states and 2 Union Territories through2, 598 physical and mobile facilities, NSDC Partners have been imparting outcome-linked job-oriented training in a wide array of sectors.”

Many of the NSDC’s Partners such as IL&FS Skills Development (a Special Purpose Vehicle formed between NSDC and IL&FS), NIIT Yuva Jyoti (the NSDC Special Purpose Vehicle with NIIT) or Future Sharp Skills (the NSDC Special Purpose Vehicle with Future Group), for example, have embarked on large-scale training projects capable of training over a hundred thousand or more persons in 10 years either on their own or through consortiums. These could not be said practical, as the big corporations involved with NSDC hardly needs any outside support for their skill needs.

In any case, if NSDC will start thinking for the Infosys or other big corporations’ skill requirements--the rational of its existence would be naturally questioned. A specialized body like NSDC is meant to cater the skill requirements of mass people and small enterprises, which simply cannot afford the professional skill feeding from the open source on commercial rate. A big industry entity should neither seek NSDC’s services and nor NSDC should offer them-MSMEs, must be the vantage point for NSDC.

Presently, its initiatives like: Gram Tarang (Special Purpose Vehicle formed by Orissa-based education major Centurion Group of Institutions), operates in the Naxal (ultra-left wing extremist) belt of Orissa and Andhra Pradesh, and Udaan that empowering graduates and postgraduates of Jammu&Kashmir to join the mainstream and find gainful employment opportunities, hold better promises than high shot collaborations with undeserving big companies.

Dr S Ramadorai, Adviser to the Prime Minister in the National Council on Skill Development, Govt. of India in his interview given to The Times of India, on March12, 2013, pressed for a new rational rapproach from industry on skill creation: “the Industry needs to play a major role in the skilling initiative. With a highly demand-driven labour market, apprenticeship with industries is an important way forward. Currently, such ‘earn while you learn' models have been highly under-leveraged. More wages should be paid to highly skilled people, else training is disincentivised.”

To conclude, today the definition of skill development is fast changing. Under the industrial requirements, skills are supposed to be in consistent updation; so, there is a need for re-ordering the priorities and shifting from the one-dimensional model, which has wrongly viewed economic progresses only by statistical growth. Industry and governments must think seriously, why their well carved out plans are not working?

The failures to live on the promises are pathetic and unsustainable; at any cost, the outlays on the skill development initiatives and their outcomes have to be proximate. Unless this is realised, the exuberance on principled structures would not be meaningful. In simpler terms, the poor and the underprivileged have to be protected and involved under the new growth agenda. For that, the livelihood programmes have to be better democratized.
-Atul K Thakur
Email: summertickets@gmail.com
(Published in Governance Now on February17,2014)

Too early to drop one’s guard

India must work closely with the newly-elected Nawaz Sharif Government in Pakistan. But, while it must explore enhancing relations in areas of trade, New Delhi must remain vigilant all the time.

Mr Nawaz Sharif’s return to power and his exuberant shower of constructive announcements offer hope, both to the Pakistani people as well to those in India wanting to improve relations with Pakistan. But India has had a mixed experience dealing with democratic regimes in Islamabad — at the start, things appear to be promising but suddenly the relationship turns sour. This was the case with Mr Sharif’s previous stint as Prime Minister, when friendly summits and goodwill trips to Pakistan by the NDA leadership were reciprocated with heavy infiltration in Kashmir.

Also, Mr Sharif, groomed under the cunning shadow of former President Zia-ul-Haq initially had little problem with limited military-political interface within the Pakistani establishment. His perception changed, however, after his Army chief Pervez Musharraf’s coup d'état in the post-Kargil days. While in exile, Mr Sharif has supposedly become more gentle, practical and reliable. So, he exudes hope to the crowds in Pakistan as well as to the Congress-led UPA regime in New Delhi, which has no strategic foreign policy for the South Asian neighbourhood.

But let us not forget that the root cause of pessimism in Pakistan lies in the fact that this country knows not how to live with rational actions. Today, Pakistan exists somewhere between the grim world of Saadat Hasan Manto and Faiz Ahmad Faiz.

These two literary greats had witnessed the making of Pakistan, and knew the country better than others and much before it was overrun by fundamentalists. A country created on religious lines, and also a product of the tussle between the elitist leaders of the Muslim League and those of the Congress, Pakistan has never been able to outgrow the complexes attached to its birth.

The history of democracy in Pakistan is blurry and replete with instances of continuous military interference, which till date distort political processes. Sixty-three years after its birth, Pakistan is far from how its founder Mohammad Ali Jinnah, an astute politician, had envisioned it. And even though a small segment of progressive Pakistanis may like to hold on to Jinnah’s vision, it is, for all practical purposes, now lost.

Its international borders notwithstanding, Pakistan’s alliances with China and the US have already compromised its sovereignty. Driven by their imperial compulsions, these countries use Pakistan to maintain their grip on the South Asian region. And this is obvious to Pakistani leaders, civil society activists and journalists.

The other factor that defines Pakistan’s geo-strategic policies is Afghanistan. The ground realities from that country plague Pakistan on a real time basis even as one powerful class of Pakistanis reap the benefits of instability. This class knows how important it is to keep stirring the pot — as, in a political order that is driven by force rather than constitutional values, it is troubled times that offer better strategic dividend than peace times.

India has the burden of history to bear when it comes to its foreign policy vis-à-vis Pakistan. However, New Delhi has often failed miserably to carry the load. This maybe in part due to the inadequacies of those who have sought to shape India’s policy towards Pakistan in recent years. Many of these so-called ‘Pakistan experts’ in New Delhi have practically no on-ground exposure to that country and only limited understanding of the historical linkages between India and Pakistan. They look upon Pakistan as a project that they need to handle. This impedes any deep and long-term study of the Pakistani problem in India.

Even New Delhi’s diplomatic corps, from the IIC to the Gymkhana generation, has failed to make its mark when it comes to strategic thinking with respect to Pakistan. Yet, India cannot afford to remain indifferent to this neighbour. As for now, India should keep playing safe with Pakistan. New Delhi may allow for an enhanced trade engagement with Pakistan, for instance. More importantly, it should support Mr Sharif so as to keep hardliners at bay in Islamabad. A fresh round of goodwill summits may also be encouraging for bilateral relations.

But through it all, India must remain vigilant. It must not be caught off-guard like it was in the 1990s when the then Prime Minister was indeed working to make a long-lasting improvement in India’s relations with Pakistan. Of course, both countries are in a different state now — this is especially true in Pakistan where the people have chosen the ballot over the bullet. Hopefully, Mr Sharif too will stay democratic and the Pakistani military will be cut to size by him. At this juncture, New Delhi should work closely with Islamabad for a positive turn in bilateral ties but while keeping its border security mechanism firmly in place.

-Atul K Thakur
Email: summertickets@gmail.com
(Published in The Pioneer on June18,2013)

Give democracy a chance

With Chief Justice Khil Raj Regmi reacting positively to suggestions by Nepal’s political class to head an election Government, Nepal’s transition to democracy has suffered yet another setback.

The shrewd proposal to form a Government headed by the Chief Justice was floated by the ruling Maoist party recently, after political parties failed to reach consensus on who would head the election Government.

Like many recent political events in Nepal, this is also surprising, and it challenges the sincerity of the so-called democratic activism that is being pursued by Nepal's political parties.

The move is worrisome as it will violate the core values of the Constitution. The provision of Article 106(1) of the Interim Constitution allows, at best, the Chief Justice or a Justice to be on deputation for judicial inquiry — it clearly prohibits a former Justice, let alone a sitting Chief Justice, to serve as the topmost executive of the Government.

On a larger scale the principle of ‘separation’ of powers as well as judicial independence would come under heavy strain. Then, what compels Nepali politicians to abandon their avowed role and instead come up with a highly objectionable set of plans?

Understandably, these political shenanigans have not found favour with the people. The ongoing protests in Kathmandu lend credence to the growing disenchantment of the masses with the incumbent regime which is labouring under the delusion that the ordinary Nepali has a dismal sense of political realities in their country.

The obvious lack of political will and consensus to hold elections and install a properly elected Government, has further eroded the credibility of the Nepali political class.

Unfortunately, the United Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) and the Nepali Congress have failed to acknowledge the gravity of the situation. Rather, they are working overtime to block the prospects of a ‘multi-party transitory Government’, which could have addressed the issues related to the fresh election in the country, besides putting in place a new Constitution, which is the dire need of this nation going through a difficult transition.

This is crucial to keep alive the democratic sentiments, although much more than mere tokenism is required today to pull Nepal out from its political chaos.

Ever since monarchy was abolished in this tiny Himalayan kingdom in 2008, the political parties, belying all expectations, have failed to provide a credible leadership to the country. Today, five years on, the situation has gone from bad to worse.

Probably, at this stage Nepal misses its ‘centrist stalwarts’ like its five-time Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala and Ganesh Man Singh, or an idealist of Man Mohan Adhikari’s calibre. They are worth remembering, not with nostalgia but to emphasise the fact that the first generation political leadership could understand and empathise with Nepal’s democratic aspirations in a much better way.

These leaders were not faultless, but their performance was never at variance with the promises made to the nation and its people. They led from the front and did not shy from taking on the role of troubleshooter when issues of crucial national interest cropped up.

In the present scenario, it is impossible to find anyone from Nepal’s political circle who is not championing ‘political overplay’! Most of the current clutches of leaders are more intent on targeting easy goals and short-term interests, blithely unmindful of the disaster that such recklessness entails.

The Maoists have contributed largely to this atmosphere of gloom and despondency that Nepal finds itself in currently. It is evident now that the Maoists have clear plans of running a totalitarian regime while destroying India’s conventional position vis-à-vis Nepal.

So a sort of ‘Maoist monarchy’ is in the offing, and the rest of the contenders like the leaders of the democratic Opposition, the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist-Leninist) and Nepali Congress, have been unable to stand up for the people even as the situation has worsened over the years.

Over the years, the delay in holding elections, and in setting up of the Constituent Assembly and the involvement of non-Nepali elements in governance and federalism-related debates have made a mockery of Nepal’s polity.

It is depressing to see that an aspiring democracy like Nepal, which streamlined the basic tenets of democracy in a short span of time and successfully handled the ‘ultra radical’ political outfits following the abolition of monarchy, is struggling to save those ideals.

The coming days will decide whether Nepal dissolves into anarchy or stands up for its democratic ideals. The people, the civil society must act now to keep the system running by not allowing the Chief Justice to become the Prime Minister and by preventing the incompetent Prime Minister Baburam Bhattarai from brokering power.

Nepal needs a simple democratic political course that can be easily attained without seeking the ‘blood or tears’ of the citizens. The political parties should not worry about China’s reaction; they should just move on.
-Atul K Thakur
(Published in The Pioneer on March05,2013)

The politics of better economics

It seldom happens when economic wisdom wins political argument. This is a reality of our democracy, which has consistently been ignored the basic temptations of its economy for achieving ‘unknown benefits’.

It is surprising to see Bihar chief minister Nitish Kumar pitching for seeking special status for Bihar as his gameplan for upcoming elections and ahead. Undoubtedly this would be epoch-making for Bihar and the nation.

His renewed politics appears fair in crucial dimensions as he is determined to go ahead with ‘development’ and without accepting BJP’s unholy leadership. This move will strengthen the acceptance of his efforts for getting Bihar on the map of investment destinations.

As expected, Bihar’s CM saw huge gathering at his rally in Ramlila Maidan. As Congress is seriously considering on Bihar’s demand for special status, chances are of a smooth coalition in future. Bihar has come long way between 2005-3013.

Although the state can’t claim for ‘satisfactory’ overturn of all odds in its way, perhaps such realisation would do well. At this point, Bihar would be able to materialise its quest for industrialisation and farming sector with improved energy supply and additional developmental funds from center that would come through a special status.

For decades, Congress sailed on Bihar’s inert politics, which was dangerously thrived on the plagued socio-economic scenario. Congress has lost even its footprint in the state. It has lost its credibility long back in Bihar’s politics.
The CPI’s base almost diminished from its traditional basin-North and South Bihar.

It’s not surprising that Nitish Kumar has many takers. The BJP is out of touch and its Bihar unit has suddenly found the coalition with JD (U), nothing beyond the misunderstood Machiavellian notion of auxiliary services for a greater ally.

This is a misnomer, which no one is willing to understand. With many power centres but few recognisable leaders, BJP is trying to forget the good part, where its role was formidable in bringing Bihar back on track. Allured with non-issues and wrong choice of placing the baton of 2014 elections on Gujarat chief minister Narendra Modi will make NDA, a larger platform for chauvinistic politics.

With no appearance of third front, Congress would benefit in the emerging political scenario. However, it will be difficult for UPA-III to maintain the ‘complacency’. I am sanguine with the upcoming elections would make the position of country’s top executive post competitive and in action. For close to a decade, India has missed a leader in the PMO. Things would get uglier if this trend turns into a ‘norm’.

In a situation when Congress and BJP stand on low moral grounds and have no clear macro policies to revive our sinking economy, a leader like Nitish Kumar could bring much needed balance. It’s shocking to see left parties are not making mind for such alternative coalition, this is wrong on their part to believe that such democratic alliance would take place more effectively after the poll.

When the desperation from current regime is on an all-time high and the BJP is chasing its target, the time is conducive for bringing back progressive element to the economic and political governance. India’s corporate structure is bleeding with corruption and inherent incompetency.

The grammar of Indian politics has to be corrected to keep the country as an ‘emerging nation’.
Beyond the poster-hijacking, undeserving PM candidates would prove fatal. India can’t walk the Gujarat way, though Gujarat has to follow India’s footprint.

‘Profit’ can drive trade but not the democratic politics, and this Nitish Kumar knows well. He speaks for pluralism, he also understands the ‘economics’ better than most of the ‘over-rated economists’ ruining the country. Bihar is one example where good politics and economics coexist.

Nitish Kumar’s populism could do well to the masses. As a leader of Bihar, he is doing fairly well and would not fail in Delhi either.
-Atul K Thakur
Email: summertickets@gmail.com
(Published in Governance now on March22,2013)

Frindship is a two-way street

Both India and Nepal have faltered in strengthening their historical ties in recent years. But now, as Kathmandu struggles towards democracy, New Delhi must be a more understanding and supportive neighbour
As the political transition in Nepal progresses, the country’s political institutions have become a hub of sorts for intermingled ideas. These ideas are neither being shaped nor developed constructively to end the political impasse that has plagued Nepal’s journey to democracy. Consequently, key challenges such as drafting the Constitution, delineating the nature of Nepali federalism and more recently, accepting a national unity Government before general election next summer, still remain. It is against this backdrop that President Ram Baran Yadav’s recently concluded trip to India must be viewed. In fact, many were a bit surprised that Mr Yadav made this visit when his country was at such a critical juncture. After all, the President is the sole stable authority in Nepal today.

Mr Yadav’s official visit to India took him to Banaras Hindu University, where he was conferred an honorary DPhil, but his time in New Delhi was also quite hectic as he met with leaders of the ruling and Opposition parties, besides inviting his Indian counterpart to Kathmandu. At a time of receding trust in India’s role in Nepal, President Yadav’s India visit holds strategic value that can lead to greater cooperation between these formidable allies. The beginning of this new dialogue will hopefully infuse dynamism in the India-Nepal diplomatic engagement and economic partnership.

Hailing from the Madhesh region of Janakpur in Nepal, Kolkata-educated President Yadav is well-connected in India. His understanding of India-Nepal relations is better than that of the average Nepali politician. Even though President Yadav doesn’t have the charisma of someone like Girija Prasad Koirala, as a long-practicising doctor, he knows how to treat maladies well. It is an ability that is sadly lacking in many leaders who have been entrusted with handling India-Nepal affairs.

For instance, even Indian representatives and officials who are otherwise sensitive and responsive towards Nepal, try to run down their counterparts in Kathmandu during diplomatic visits. This makes India, a less dear ally. Also, Nepal has never really received the kind of attention it deserves from India’s Tier-I leadership, even though it is one of New Delhi’s important neighbours. This is an unwavering trend that has continued since the period of Jawaharlal Nehru.

It is time that India brings to its relationship with Nepal more in action, rather than friendly mannerisms alone. This is the need of the hour, especially if New Delhi wishes to keep at bay Nepal’s India-baiters. The first generation of Nepali leaders had also fought for India’s independence and they shared with their Indian counterparts a desire for democracy. Leaders like BP Koirala, MP Koirala, Manmohan Adhikari, Ganesh Man Singh and others had also dealt with the politics of two countries, and this was possible only because they had leveraged the power of people-to-people relations between India and Nepal.

In New Delhi, President Yadav’s presence at the Mahendra Malangia Natya Mahotasav (organised by the Maithili Lok Rang), which saw the participation of a number of reputed artists from India and Nepal including leading Maithili thespian Ramesh Ranjan Jha and his Mithila Natyakala Parishad, was a reminder of the golden moments that India and Nepal once shared in the cultural-political field. In fact, it is events such as these that really have the potential to boost bilateral ties.

Listening to the voices of aggrieved Nepali youth (mostly because of their ignorant biases) at a New Delhi conference, organised by the Nepal-Bharat Sahyog Manch a few weeks back, however, offered an altogether different experience. A blunt question put to one of India’s seniormost diplomats at that conference by a young Nepali continues to haunt the mind for it also represents the mindset of a reactionary section in Nepal. The youth had asked why Nepal should give priority to India, and not favour China instead.

Such wild ideas are causing the current mess in Nepal. In this case, for example, it is amply clear that China will not think twice before disrupting Nepal’s close relationship with India, but still there are talks about China taking over India’s place in Nepal.

There is, of course, no doubt that Nepal will overcome its political hurdles in its own time, especially if its leaders and its people were to exude more confidence in democratic values. Since the massacre of 2001, the royal family of Nepal first became a nefarious and later a ghostly object. Now, it is no longer in a position to offer itself as a system of alternative governance. Still, while the physical end of the monarchy was painful, the collapse of the idea of the monarchy is a healthy development for Nepal’s democratic aspiration. Still, unless the duplicity of political leaders is brought under control, change as desired will not happen.

Ideologically, the radical Maoist movement in Nepal is impure and reflects the personal cynicism of its leadership. Next to the ideological line, these leaders have been nurturing their political ambitions by pumping up a ‘sovereignty phobia’ which naturally leads to anti-India sentiment in Nepal. The Maoists are a divided entity now, and those who sit outside the power circle are trying to carve a niche for themselves. They hope that the anti-India demonstration will give them the leverage to do so.

Over the last one and a half decades, China has made various efforts to proliferate a certain version of communism inside Nepal. Sect and sub-sects of Maoist ideology have marred Nepal’s development on all fronts. Nepal has a lot to deliver with its untapped natural and human resources; here, the political leadership of Nepal has a pivotal role to play. It must decide on how it will move collectively on the bigger issues of foreign policy and trade negotiation and how it will rid Nepal of the ‘underdog’ tag that has prevented the country from embarking on a regular course of development. President Yadav too must remind the political elite in Nepal of all its unkept promises to him and the country.
Atul K Thakur
(Published in The Pioneer, 31 December2012)

Land Of(Missed)Opportunity

In spite of being endowed with fertile soil and a favourable agro-climatic condition, Bihar’s agricultural sector has remained short of cutting edge in recent times. Since the benefits of Five Year Plans couldn't reach the state, the total food grain production continues to stand below the minimum requirement. In the recent years, however, Bihar’s economy has shown signs of resilience, visible through the constructive approach towards development. Nevertheless, rural Bihar is not getting its due from the opportunities generated by rapid economic growth. This is because the languishing rate of agricultural growth caused by an inadequate support mechanism, asymmetric new wage rates followed by the rise in public spending and natural imbalances (such as floods and drought).

The general perception about the agricultural scenario in Bihar is that it can be the food bastion for India but the current state of affairs is not very encouraging on that front. The agriculture linked industries are not really working out and conventional farming is not generating profitable returns, which is delinking the productive cycle from traditional set of systems.

In the initial decades after Independence, agricultural productivity in Bihar was better compared to other states, but now it is trailing below the national average. Statistically, some achievements have been established on the scale of production with the state government stepping in but the lurking dangers from 'unnaturally high farming wage rates' and the 'dwindling size of land holding' are being ignored. The most worrying reality is the average size of a farm, which is 0.37 hectare or less; one of the lowest in India (according to The Planning Commission of India’s estimation, 2009). At this rate collective farming would remain the only option if farm land-fragmentation isn’t checked using a more effective, alternate mechanism, soon.

The bifurcation of Bihar in the year 2000 has made the role of the primary sector even more critical, as Jharkhand now houses most of the industries and the mineral resources. So, Bihar’s economic prospects strongly rely on agriculture. It is the most vital component of the state's socio-economic structure, as the sector provides 90 per cent of the rural population their livelihood. It also contributes to about one-third of the gross domestic product of the state, which is a staggering figure.

Over the last few decades, Bihar has witnessed remarkable agricultural development with the adoption of scientific methods, but shockingly such growth has been inequitable and imbalanced. The basic reason is the highly problematic land ownership pattern which, with some geographic variations, still persists in most parts of the Bihar. For example, with radical movements for land reform, north Bihar has a progressive system of land ownership as compared to south and central Bihar, where feudalism has not been uprooted. In other parts of Bihar, land reforms could not take off as the situation on the ground remains at status quo.

According to the National Sample Survey Organisation (NSSO-2003), marginal and small farmers, who constituted 96.5 per cent of the total landowning community, owned 66 per cent of land. The medium and large farmers, who constituted only 3.5 per cent of the landowning community, owned 34 per cent of the land. Of the latter, the large owners (constituting only 0.1 per cent of total) owned 4.63 of total land. In absolute terms, this 0.1 per cent of large owners owned a little over eight lakh hectares or 19.76 lakh acres of land-a big size of land in a land starved state. The wrong landholding pattern hampers the healthy prospects of agricultural progress in the state and creates a skewed picture of economic growth altogether.

With a high density of population, the absolute level of poverty continues to be high in Bihar, making it one of India's poorest states. Both rural poverty at 42.1 per cent and urban poverty at 34.6 per cent were significantly higher than the national average (28.3 per cent for the rural areas and 25.7 per cent for the urban areas) during 2004-05 (Government of Bihar 2008-09). As a result, marginal land holders, individual labourers and casual non-farm labour are poor. The politics of state governance could be attributed as the force behind such pathetic arrangements, where 'non-issues' have been given prominence over basic livelihood issues: the irresponsible phase — from 1990-2004 — was the height of such follies.

Social security systems such as government educational institutions, public healthcare facilities and public distribution system have improved in recent years and when combined with the phenomenon of migration, as powerful means of social mobility, engenders mixed outcomes for rural Bihar. Migration was once a suitable option in Bihar's agrarian society, empowering the poor against exploitation as well as helping them escape the ironies of economic distress and caste exploitation in their home state. Things have changed a little in the last eight years and no longer are the temporary migrants from Bihar — who hitherto worked as farmhands for meagre wages —a cheap source of labour.

This would have counted as constructive change but greater social mobility is not enhancing entrepreneurial zeal in the state. The new agrarian atmosphere is in fact killing the conventional productive mechanism due to the unaffordable cost of services and goods, which has surfaced in recent years. Besides the effects of public spending, the state's rapidly growing housing upsurge poses a severe challenge to farming and related activities. We all know, the days of ‘kachha’ housing are over but the way unplanned construction is being given the name of 'progress' blurs the real state of affairs. The truth of matter is that the growth of other sectors comes at the cost of farming and allied occupations.

Today, the ground realities of rural Bihar are hardly being noticed by institutions or experts working on policy matters: their placid demeanour is largely shaped through the 'bandwagon' of applause for changing Bihar, even where it is changing in an unhealthy manner. It is true that now manual labourers from Bihar can negotiate better for their services but it is disappointing that 'money from outside' at cost of local productive engagements is being preferred. This damages the natural/social fabric, and distances the state from the control of economic policies. It further attracts the wrath of cynical regional biases towards these 'unsolicited migrants' from Assam to Maharashtra.

Worse than the national average, Bihar has received attention from self proclaimed 'policy think tanks' and genuine research organisations, supported by the government. In the absence of proper statistical data and insights, the local government officials have less to say 'on record' in response of any queries made about the pathetic agricultural conditions in state. Bihar government's initiatives look progressive, but there is a huge discrepancy between what was promised and what has been delivered. So far, against the claims of near about 200MOUs related to industrial set-ups in Bihar (including agro-processed industries), few are actually working.

Bihar could have retrieved in well shape, a losing co-operative system through channelizing investments in the cash generating agri-businesses like, fisheries, sugar production, fruits farming, dairy etc, alas, the tall claims were mostly forgotten and north Bihar remained without major industries.. The two prominent and erstwhile industrialised districts, Darbhanga and Madhubani have more than a dozen dysfunctional industrial infrastructures, where once paper, spinning products and sugar were produced on a large scale. These industries were based on local agricultural inputs and hence were supported local farming and enterprise. At that time farmers were not in a wretched condition although their reliance on external money was negligible.

Despite these impediments, rural Bihar is likely to be less gloomy than other distressed terrains of the country, as the people of the state are witnessing change in a positive direction. In absolute terms, Bihar has a long road to walk to generate balanced growth and attain its lost edge in agriculture, besides acquiring a continuing flow of public spending and attracting private investments.

The National Council of Applied Economic Research’s agricultural outlook and analysis report states: "The global scenario for the food commodities has also been affected by the adverse weather conditions. The estimates by FAO, USDA and other international agencies indicate decline in the world production of grains in 2012-13 as compared to the previous year." So, time is ripe now for Nitish Kumar’s government to focus on core areas to save the state’s agriculture from a vicious tailspin.

Atul Kumar Thakur
(The author works on policy issues. He can be reached at atul_mdb@rediffmail.com
The views expressed here are personal)
(Published in Businessworld,19December2012)

Obama’s re-election is blessing for India

The US President’s sharp and well-woven South Asia policy will be crucial for all stakeholders. Both India and the US will benefit from the new arrangement
As per The Wall Street Journal, “Obama's victory in the bruising campaign marks a landmark in modern election history. No sitting president since Franklin D Roosevelt in 1940 has won re-election with a higher unemployment rate, which stands at 7.9 per cent.”

Also, this election will be remembered for the excessive reliance on economic policies as its rallying point. With India-US total merchandise trade touching $57.80billion in 2011, the US is now India's third largest trade partner and hence shares many concerns jointly.

Despite WTO's reservations on such sound bilateral trade relations between these two countries, it's unlikely that any significant change will take place in their cooperation in the days to come. India's current diplomatic engagement with the US is primarily being driven by the hope that Mr Obama's return to the White House will make his economic sense more ‘improved'. But, stepping away from his anti-outsourcing stand would not be easy for the US President, leaving Indian corporates not much to cheer about at this stage.

During the presidential debates, India attracted only fleeting interest of the candidates. Though much like the rest of the world, India too breathed a sigh of relief at Mr Obama's re-election. By choosing to look askance at Mr Obama's first term, where US economic policies were shaped mostly against Indian interests, India has shown a progressive and pragmatic approach towards strengthening ties and dealing with the US Government's ‘new protectionist policies’.

Mr Obama's presidency started off on a less friendly standing with India when he initiated a short-lived, albeit deep, engagement with China. But the past four years have shown that his views have turned significantly in India's favour. His distrust of military-dominated Pakistan in Afghanistan clearly marks India's expanding future role in the South Asian region. So, it's hardly surprising if Mr Obama is now building Bush-era like close ties with New Delhi.

In his new term, an older and wiser Mr Obama is likely to rearrange policy on South Asia and adopt a stricter line on Islamic terrorism emanating out of Afghanistan-Pakistan region. So, in strategic terms too, the US President is looking to India for decisive cooperation in Afghanistan and West Asia.

Washington knows that a decade-old operation in Afghanistan can be ended only through a more proactive role by India. India, on the other hand must not forget that the “Americans are adept at producing or reproducing well packaged formulas”, and should follow the course with proper guard for maintaining its own foreign policy fundamentals.

In the post-Cold War scenario, the US is pre-eminent but nowhere has it held supreme position. The current global strategic scenario is heavily influenced by the US, but it will be too simplified if it is called anything close to ‘unipolar dominance'. USSR's breakup had strengthened the chances of a homogenised world. India must resist such developments as an idealistic leader of global politics. In the last six decades, India has been maintaining its independent stand on foreign policy unmindful of the brickbats and bouquets that came its way. Since 1947, the country has moved up and now it has a legacy to offer.

So, it was not by chance that Mr Obama named Gandhi as his inspiration just after winning the presidential election. With amazing diversity and capacity to act as a bridge between industrialised and developing world, India is now a prominent soft power state. It's a fair development that US now realises India's security concern more responsibly and accepts ‘terrorism' as the immediate target to fight with. The world's two great democracies, India and the US, face many common challenges and also share similar conditions to act on them.

Mr Obama's sharper and well-woven South Asia policy will be crucial for the all stakeholders. India and the US will be benefit in the new arrangements, which might be a conservative estimation though would be closer to the reality. The responses and counter-responses in the main areas of cooperation between the two countries will decide the future course. The present is promising enough with Mr Obama's return.
Atul K Thakur
Email: summertickets@gmail.com
(Published in The Pioneer,dated on November21,2012)

India’s financial regulator at loggerheads!

At the height of the ongoing worldwide recession, the Fed chief, Ben Bernake’s predictably shocked appearances used to discourage we all, who so far didn’t stopped believing in the might of otherwise a foregone power-‘central banks’. The current case of RBI’s Chairman-D.Shubbarao is not much different after escaping his contagious ‘smile’ that essentially translates nothing much than invisible ‘unease’ around him. And here, common men have to pass through a sort of ‘illiteracy syndrome’ every-time while decoding such unbreakable code.

Ironically, unrelenting mysterious smiley’s from the RBI’s head is troubling for this dreaming nation alike, as finance ministry responds every such move with the irritated doses of ‘we will march alone’ and other principles, which are practically unconquerable. A close look on the financial policy making suggests the inherent contradiction within it. The ambiguity on two goals, respectively, lower inflation and high growth is the basic reason behind the unusual mock and verbal tussle between north block and mint street. This unworthy raw is a fruitless exercise without having any clear end in its sight.

The RBI’s stubbornness on keeping interest rates in anti-growth mode has deteriorated the chances of bouncing back for Indian economy, which is grappling with a very odd combination of high inflation and lower growth. In all, the rational part of governance is completely lacking even now, for pushing up the momentum in right course. Earlier, the meltdown sentiment had favoured RBI and its conservative role with ‘no touch and playing safe’ approaches were hailed like ‘concert of chimes’.

Those difficulties have given a new sort of complex time for the Indian financial market, where the issues of working or not on the stated agenda are heavily depends upon the rapport, finance ministry and RBI maintains. It utterly disappoints, the way RBI is losing ‘ease’ with the government and attention from the core issues. Here, it will be also worthwhile to recall that somewhere government too is overstepping in the shoes of central bankers-the abrupt announcement of more private sector banks in the budget speech of Pranab Mukherjee and later lax handling by the RBI on this shows the prevailing s state of affairs.

After twenty-one years of liberalisation programme, Indian economy has grown up in the size and maximization of the wealth is also no longer a ‘non-reality’ for the different income groups. But in these years, the income gap has also spiraled up like never before and the ‘income security’, which both the good socialistic and capitalistic system necessitates, as the programme to execute has been cornered over the years. The system, which walks with the two foremost powers- regulation and capital, is not keeping concern for an equitable system under immense pressure from the cronies and political classes, with large though hidden business interests.

However, not to miss the case of allowing fair and advanced banking in the country, the RBI must ensure the action requires without stopping the strict regulatory watch over the players in the fray of financial sector. As at some point of time, the buzz of innovation too needs careful handling. On this count, the RBI has so far responded well with treating the exotic financial products quite stringently. But its proactive part remained in hibernation, when chances arose to lift the Indian financial market out of working below potential.

Once the RBI was a well shaped moderator but under the changing pattern of financial businesses, it’s falling in the league of its peers, where the desperation is virtue in dealing with the stagnant economies. Much to dismay of the optimists, finance can no longer be handled with the extreme of liberal or stringent set of rules; instead believing in the capacity of spontaneous action by the leadership would make tone much better. In all weather and season, the RBI’s governor should know the pulses of economy down from the rural terrains to the up-market areas of metro cities.

The balancing exercise would be critical here to the further course of action for India’s financial market. The combination of populist politics and over mechanized economic bureaucracy would do no well to the India’s economy, which is in perplexed state on its own future. Knowing where to act effectively in the policy making would solve the petty issues in the high circle that causes endless troubles to the believers of sound financial administration. Access to the institutional finance plays vital role in ensuring the fair chances of employment for the youths.

The entrepreneurial zeal is not weak in India albeit more practical banking approaches are the need of this hour. Still, it would be wrong for the RBI or finance ministry to compare India with the western economies, which have shaped through the different historical developments and ofcourse with the support of colonial projects. India can’t go artificially in the history for overlooking on odd economic issues.

Unlike, India as a new nation and old civilisational land, needs to keep growing and under the aegis of its commendable democratic system. Neither the totalitarian China nor the lightly floating USA would make India, what its majority of people dreams relentlessly. The loggerheads must stop and RBI should think for the common men and business communities too, as nothing would go untoward hereafter!
Atul K Thakur
November2nd, 2012, Friday
Email: summertickets@gmail.com
(Published in Governance now,dated on November10, 2012)

Nepal’s politics at a cross roads

Prithvi Narayan Shah, 18th century king and the father -figure of Nepal, had once termed his country’s position as “a yam between two boulders”. He was, of course, referring to Nepal’s unusual status between the two intimidating giant powers — India and China. Even to this day, his metaphor aptly defines the existing state of affairs in Nepal’s strategic terms with its neighbours. Despite the fact that Nepal as a nation is far older than both of its principal neighbours, it has not been able to come out of the major influence of the two, especially India.
While the India-Nepal relations have historic backing from a series of factors, China’s quest to downplay India’s special friendly status with Nepal is part of Beijing’s narrow imperialistic ploy. Now, both in international relations and domestic politics, Nepal is facing the adverse implications of recently increased political engagement with China.

In broad terms, Nepal has suffered a lot by mismanaging its conventional role of a passive and focussed nation that tempered its special peaceful standing in South Asia. In his later days, King Birendra shared close relations with China, and so the royal massacre of 2001 shocked the Chinese greatly. King Gyanendra, who then occupied the throne in highly suspicious circumstances and without the respect that his predecessors enjoyed from an average Nepali, sought to cement ties with China by offering it space in the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation in 2005. India had been understandably less than amused by Kathmandu’s overture to China.
Since the end of the monarchy, Nepal’s politics has turned more inward looking. The breathless twists and turns hatched by political parties, whose working patterns are radically different from one another. Such is the friction among them that the attainment of any goal collectively or individually has become a lot more challenging. After the bloodless coup in February 2005, Mr Baburam Bhattarai, a thinking leader from the Maoists’ camp, came forward against the obstinate ideological hardline pursued by the likes of Mr Puspa Kamal Dahal, popularly known as ‘Prachanda’, called for the democratic means of struggle — that was a point of highest accomplishment in Nepal’s democratic transition.

Things are not similarly idealistic and flexible now, even with Mr Bhattarai as the elected Prime Minister having greater acceptability inside the party and outside. The conclusion that can be drawn over the failures of Constitution making on another deadline is that Nepal’s polity is undergoing a major change in its fundamentals.
Consequently, the assertiveness could be found at an all-time high among the elite political participants, though this is hardly surprising as every major political change in Nepal (even in the past) has created a new class of elite with shrewd aspirations. That’s why the project of democratic revolution has not met with the success that it deserved in Nepal since 1950.

Chronic political deadlock is denting the credibility of mainstream political forces in Nepal. There is the need for an immediate consensus among the country’s political parties to acknowledge the progress that democratic movements have made since 1990, when the county first tasted democracy, although on restricted scale. Misleading demands of the Rashtriya Prajatantra Party, the Rashtriya Janshakti Party and others for bringing back the Constitution of 1990 or to go for an election only because the term of the CA has ended is condemnable. Such a move will give a fresh lease of life to a defunct monarchy. Despite the failures of the CA, revisiting the last seven years since the abolition of monarchy presents many positive landmarks on which the future base of democracy could thrive.

In this time of uncertainty, the Interim Constitution of 2006, which is still functioning, can offer the new proposed Constitution all the progressive set of rules that is enshrined in it and has a degree of high credibility. The Interim Constitution consists of all the major issues to be followed in the future, such as the abolition of monarchy, provision of federalism, participative representation in state services and others.

The intra-party feuds in the major political parties of Nepal and the failure of these parties to reach a consensus on crucial issues including on the CA, have severely damaged the democratic spirit of the country through decades of struggle. As compared to the Nepali Congress and the CPN (UML), the Maoists are new to power and lack the soundness they should have as representative of a ruling collation.
The issues of federalism based on ethnic identity need a sensitive response on the policy front. Unfortunately, exactly the opposite has been done by the top political leaders. Before the Madhesi parties’ total convergence with the Maoists on this front and their outsmarting acts over NC-CPN(UML), the region of Madhesh had passed through a rather volatile phase in which many lives were lost in the process of peaceful demonstrations in favour of statehood. A major blast in Janakpur (unofficially Nepal’s political laboratory) left four dead, including an emerging Maithil-Nepali leader Ranju Jha.

Kathmandu has to be more accountable in the changing times to the Madhesi-Janjatis who now have a greater say over political matters and can easily make or break the established political discourse for their long-anticipated rights. The concentration of power in Kathmandu has to be reduced. While this will happen with the upcoming execution of the federal model, it may not cure all the maladies of ‘divisive political mania’. Still, its impact at least in selected terms would be long-lasting in favour of a peaceful and stable Nepal.
In the ongoing round of political manoeuvrings, India has played an apparently passive role. Diplomatically though, this cannot be taken as inertia, as silence speaks too. No longer is India ‘Swyambhu’ and no longer is Nepal ruled by the comprador capitalists.
Atul Kumar Thakur
June 24,2012,Sunday, New Delhi
Email: summertickets@gmail.com
(Published in The Pioneer, June 18, 2012/ http://www.dailypioneer.com/columnists/item/51822-nepal%E2%80%99s-politics-at-a-crossroads.html )