Why Siachen must be demilitarised

The February 3 avalanche on the Siachen glacier that buried 10 Indian Army soldiers is a stark reminder to both India and Pakistan about the cost of military deployment in such inhospitable territory. The bodies of most soldiers of the 19 Madras Regiment are yet to be recovered from the post on the northern part of the glacier, at a height of 19,600 feet. This was not an isolated incident but part of a growing trend in that region, as global warming dramatically affects the glacier. Last month, four soldiers of 3 Ladakh Scouts were killed when an avalanche hit a patrol party in the Ladakh region, not very far from the site of the present tragedy. Avalanches are a threat not just to Indian soldiers, but also to the Pakistani troops. In April 2012, in the Gayari sector, 129 soldiers of the 6th Northern Light Infantry of the Pakistani military and 11 civilian contractors were buried by a massive avalanche. It is not just avalanches; the challenging terrain of the glacier and its surroundings as a whole have been regularly claiming lives. According to reliable estimates, over 2,000 soldiers from both sides have died on the Siachen glacier since 1984, when India beat Pakistan by a few days to occupy many of the strategic locations on the glacier.

Ever since the two militaries began a costly engagement on the glacier, there have been numerous efforts by both countries to find a way to demilitarise the glacier. In June 1989, they came very close to clinching a final deal. The two sides had agreed to “work towards a comprehensive settlement, based on redeployment of forces to reduce the chance of conflict, avoidance of the use of force and the determination of future positions on the ground so as to conform with the Shimla Agreement and to ensure durable peace in the Siachen area”. Ever since then, India and Pakistan have tried diplomatically to find away to demilitarise the region. However, a lack of political will on both sides has meant that the status quo holds, and soldiers continue to pay a very high price in that remote snowy outpost. India has in the past suggested delineation of the Line of Control north of NJ 9842, redeployment of troops on both sides to agreed positions after demarcating their existing positions, a zone of disengagement, and a monitoring mechanism to maintain the peace. Given Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s personal initiative to visit Lahore on Christmas day and to push forward peace with Pakistan, it would only be the next logical step to look at the low-hanging fruits in bilateral issues to build trust. The demilitarisation of Siachen is definitely doable. This is not only because it is diplomatically possible, but also because there is a critical mass of opinion in both India and Pakistan that neither can sacrifice, or put in harm’s way, so many lives on the inhospitable glacier. If the initiative is not seized by both sides now, the vagaries of nature will continue to exact a toll on forces deployed in Siachen, even if peace holds.

China’s grand strategy, India’s great dilemma

China’s ‘One Belt One Road’ strategy holds immense significance for India

The spectacular rise of China has been arguably the most important geopolitical development of the past three-and-a-half decades. The concomitant changes in the strategic behaviour of Beijing have forced major powers around the world to take notice, resist, adapt and adjust. After studying the history of the past 500 years, Prof. Graham Allison of Harvard Kennedy School sets the record straight: of the past 16 instances when a rising power has challenged a ruling power, 12 have ended in war. Avoiding a war between the US and China, therefore, will require—according to Allison—“nothing short of bending the arc of history”. To be sure, the prospects of a US-China face-off seem slightly overhyped despite Allison’s warnings. But the significance of China’s rise and its fallout cannot be overstated.

In recent years, China has grown far more assertive in its maritime boundary claims in the East and South China Seas. Partly owing to the slow pace of reforms in international financial institutions and partly to excess capacity at home, Beijing has taken the lead in creating new financial institutions. The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) has produced fissures between the US and some of its European and Asian allies. China is also leading efforts to form a New Development Bank (NDB) along with India, Brazil, Russia and South Africa and an SCO bank along with members of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. But one of its most important steps to make the “Chinese dream” a reality is its “One Belt One Road” (OBOR) initiative.

First unveiled by President Xi Jinping in a speech delivered at the Nazarbayev University during his visit to Kazakhstan in 2013, OBOR aims to achieve greater economic integration with the countries encompassing the three continents of Asia, Africa and Europe. Paradoxically named, the “road” is actually the maritime route connecting the Indian and Pacific Oceans and the “belt” comprises highways, railways, and telecom, oil and gas pipeline projects from coastal China to Europe via Central and West Asia.

While Beijing denies any geopolitical intent behind the OBOR initiative, many commentators do not buy this theory and compare it to the Marshall Plan announced by the US after the Second World War to help rebuild war-torn European economies and contain the spread of communism. OBOR and its geopolitical aspect will have significant consequences for India. While sharing the same strategic space, India and China are party to Asia’s largest territorial dispute. Far from evolving contingency responses to a potential US-China face-off, New Delhi has yet to figure out a coherent response to OBOR.

While India can participate in the OBOR programme to bridge its own yawning infrastructure deficit and get integrated with other economies in South and South-East Asia, it is nevertheless worried about a Chinese encirclement in its traditional sphere of influence. India’s dilemma is best captured by its different response to the BCIM (Bangladesh-China-India-Myanmar) corridor and the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC)—both of which, for China, fit within its larger OBOR strategy. New Delhi has, of late, shed its hesitation over the former but finds the latter, passing through Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, absolutely “unacceptable.” To complicate matters further, India is the second largest stakeholder in the AIIB and the NDB, both of which are likely to be important lenders for the projects envisaged as a part of the OBOR strategy.

India’s own attempt at providing an alternative to the Chinese maritime Silk Road—Project Mausam/Spice Route/Cotton Route—has proven to be a non-starter. Its older commitments of building a port in Chabahar (in Iran) and a rail line from the port city towards Afghanistan have been moving at a snail’s pace. Without the deep pockets of China, and failed by its own bureaucratic lethargy, New Delhi is expected to be a major collaborator in Japan’s new initiative called “Partnership for Quality Infrastructure” (PQI).

While it will benefit from its privileged position in both AIIB and NDB, New Delhi might now find it too late to extract Chinese concessions on CPEC in return for support on OBOR. India has to decide if it wants to cooperate with China on OBOR regardless, or if it will float a competing vision altogether, possibly in partnership with the Japanese PQI. If it chooses to remain ambivalent, its transition from a balancing power to a leading power—the stated foreign policy aspiration articulated on multiple occasions by foreign secretary S. Jaishankar—will not have begun.

How should India respond to China’s OBOR strategy? 

Genetically modified crops: the way forward

The government must be transparent and address understandable fears

Last October, principal scientific adviser to the government of India R. Chidambaram sent a letter to Prime Minister Narendra Modi about the use of genetically modified (GM) food crops, in which he said: “India... should not hesitate to be the first introducer of new advanced technology, after convincing itself, of course, about its value to the users and the nation, its economic viability, its safety and environment friendliness.” It is an eminently reasonable stance. But more often, it’s a lack of clarity that dogs the debate on GM crops in India—as witnessed last Friday when a committee of government and independent experts met inconclusively for the third time this year to evaluate field trial data on GM mustard.

The Indian GM crops saga is a convoluted one. Currently, it has the world’s fourth largest GM crop acreage on the strength of Bt cotton, the only genetically modified crop allowed in the country. But the introduction of Bt cotton has been both highly successful and controversial. Cotton yield more than doubled in the first decade since its introduction in 2002, according to the Economic Survey 2011-12—by which point it accounted for 90% of cotton acreage. But it was also shadowed by controversy, with a tangle of pricing and intellectual property rights (IPR) issues followed by government price interventions and litigation.

GM food crops have fared worse. An agreement to develop Bt brinjal was signed in 2005 between Mahyco—American agricultural biotech giant Monsanto’s Indian Bt cotton partner—and two Indian agricultural universities. Following the study of biosafety data and field trials by two expert committees, Bt brinjal was cleared for commercialization by India’s top biotech regulator, the Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee, in 2009. But nothing came of it, with moratoriums imposed by then Union environment minister Jairam Ramesh and his successor Jayanthi Natarajan following opposition from civil society groups and brinjal-growing states.

This split within the government—Veerappa Moily subsequently reversed Natarajan’s decision on field trials, and both Manmohan Singh at the time and Modi subsequently have advocated GM crops—shows how fraught the issue is.

Multiple studies have shown no human or ecological ill-effects, as well as increased yields and resistance to pests among other benefits. Perhaps the most wide-ranging of these is a 2014 meta-analysis—by Wilhelm Klumper and Matin Qaim of the University of Gottingen, Germany—of 147 studies on farm surveys and field trials of GM crops carried out across the world. Their results: use of GM technology increased crop yields by 22%, reduced chemical pesticides by 37% and increased farmer profits by 68%, with better results in developing countries than in developed ones.

But the foundation of such studies has been questioned by opponents of GM crops—ranging from civil society groups to a minority within the scientific community—who allege that regulatory bodies and scientific publications are in bed with GM corporates. In India, Bt cotton has been questionably blamed for economic distress and farmer suicides and raised questions of biodiversity and horizontal gene transfer.

Both Singh’s and Modi’s administrations must share the blame. GM crops have never been a purely scientific issue. They are situated at a socioeconomic and political nexus, and involve understandable fears about long-term human and environment safety, market monopolies in seeds and food sovereignty. Politics involves managing perceptions; both governments have failed here.

If the Modi government is to lay the ground for a measured, tested introduction of GM crops, it must clean house. It can start with transparency; keeping biosafety data out of the public domain, as has been done with GM mustard, will not help. Nor will the lacking regulatory regime, rightly pointed out as being inadequate by the Supreme Court. Taking up the proposed Biotechnology Regulatory Authority of India Bill again is a must. So is resolving IPR issues that have again reared up with the Andhra Pradesh government seeking compulsory licensing or revocation of the Bt cotton technology patent in its struggle with Monsanto. Such interventions create regulatory uncertainty and deter the entry of competitors that could check monopolistic conditions.

Given agricultural distress and the need for broad reforms in the sector—and the potential of GM crops to supplement those reforms with increased drought resistance and reduced pesticide dependence, among other benefits—opposition must be managed, not allowed to hold sway.

Should the government allow more GM crops in India?

NASA’s most powerful rocket to send 13 tiny satellites into space

These satellite secondary payloads or ‘CubeSats’ will carry sci-tech investigations to help pave the way for future human exploration in deep space.

The Space Launch System (SLS) — NASA’s most powerful rocket ever that will launch an uncrewed Orion spacecraft to a stable orbit beyond the Moon in 2018 — will also carry 13 tiny satellites to test innovative ideas.

These small satellite secondary payloads or ‘CubeSats’ will carry science and technology investigations to help pave the way for future human exploration in deep space, including the journey to Mars.

SLS’ first flight, referred to as Exploration Mission-1 (EM-1), provides the rare opportunity for these small experiments to reach deep space destinations, as most launch opportunities for CubeSats are limited to low-Earth orbit.

“The 13 CubeSats that will fly to deep space as secondary payloads aboard SLS on EM-1 showcase the intersection of science and technology, and advance our journey to Mars,” said NASA deputy administrator Dava Newman in a statement.

While Near-Earth Asteroid Scout or NEA Scout will perform reconnaissance of an asteroid, take pictures and observe its position in space, ‘BioSentinel’ CubeSat will use yeast to detect, measure and compare the impact of deep space radiation on living organisms over long durations in deep space.

‘Lunar Flashlight’ will look for ice deposits and identify locations where resources may be extracted from the lunar surface while ‘LunaH-Map’ will map hydrogen within craters and other permanently shadowed regions throughout the moon’s south pole.

“The SLS is providing an incredible opportunity to conduct science missions and test key technologies beyond low-Earth orbit,” added Bill Hill, deputy associate administrator for Exploration Systems Development at NASA.

This rocket has the unprecedented power to send Orion to deep space plus room to carry 13 small satellites — payloads that will advance our knowledge about deep space with minimal cost,” he informed.

NASA has also reserved three slots for payloads from international partners. Discussions to fly those three payloads are ongoing, and they will be announced at a later time.

On this first flight, SLS will launch the Orion spacecraft to a stable orbit beyond the moon to demonstrate the integrated system performance of Orion and the SLS rocket prior to the first crewed flight.

The CubeSats will be deployed following Orion separation from the upper stage and once Orion is a safe distance away.

‘I think WHO should declare an emergency

The World Health Organization faced flak for its delay by two months in 2014 in declaring the Ebola epidemic as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC). This might not happen in the case of Zika virus when the WHO will convene an emergency committee on February 1 (Monday) to help determine the level of the international response to the outbreak.

It is alleged that WHO declared Ebola as a PHEIC only after a U.S. health care person was infected with the virus. Likewise, is it because the risk to the U.S. is very high in the case of Zika virus that WHO has convened the Committee meeting on Monday? “I think it is safe to assume two things. First, we do know that political considerations factored strongly into the delay in calling a PHEIC for Ebola, due to pressure from West African countries. Second, when a disease has potentially strong impacts on North America and Europe the political calculations change very quickly. That drives the media and pushes WHO to act”, Lawrence O. Gostin from O'Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law, Georgetown University Law Center, Washington DC and Director, World Health Organization Collaborating Center on Public Health Law & Human Rights said in an email to this Correspondent.

But in the first place why should the Zika virus outbreaks be declared a Public Health Emergency of International Concern? The term PHEIC is defined as an “extraordinary event” which is determined if both these conditions are met — constitute a public health risk to other States through the international spread of disease, and potentially requires a coordinated international response.

According to the 2005 International Health Regulations (IHR) agreement, this definition “implies a situation that is: serious, unusual or unexpected, carries implications for public health beyond the affected State’s national border, and may require immediate international action”.

The Zika outbreak in 23 countries meets these conditions. “Given the rapidly spreading Zika epidemic, I think WHO should declare an emergency and use all their powers under the International Health Regulations,” Prof. Gostin said. “Actually there is a detailed algorithm [based on which WHO declares PHEIC], but essentially if the disease has cross border spread, if it is novel, and if it poses an international risk, it qualifies. All that applies to Zika in my view”.

Since its outbreak in Brazil in May 2015, there have been nearly 4,000 suspected cases of microcephaly — a foetal deformation where infants are born with abnormally small heads. Officials are still investigating whether Zika causes microcephaly in newborns, but the link is “strongly suspected,” according to the WHO.

Evidence of virus

“Evidence of the virus has been found in the placenta and amniotic fluid of mothers and in the brains of foetusesor newborns. Yet causation between Zika virus and microcephaly is not yet established”, Prof. Gostin, Corresponding author writes in a paper published recently in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA).

The WHO estimates that 1.5 million people might have been infected in Brazil. “We can expect 3 to 4 million cases of Zika virus disease”, Marcos Espinal, an infectious disease expert at the WHO’s Americas regional office, told Reuters. And Dr. Margaret Chan, Director-General of WHO had said that the virus is “spreading explosively” through the Americas.

Since the first outbreak was reported in May 2015 in Brazil, the virus has already spread to 23 countries and territories in the Americas. It has spread even to Australia by travelers, and is anticipated to spread to rest of theAmericas, Europe and Asia.

Even now under the IHR, the WHO communicates with member countries about public health risks. But things may change or work differently if PHEIC were to be declared. “If a PHEIC were declared, WHO would provide detailed guidance for States, mobilize resources, and provide technical assistance. It would place the epidemic within the framework of binding international law. It will inject major urgency into R&D [to develop therapies and/or vaccines]”, Prof. Gostin explained.

Prof. Gostin says convening an emergency committee does not mean that WHO will declare a PHEIC. For instance, in the case of the Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS), the emergency committee was convened 10 times to take stock of the situation but WHO did not declare a PHEIC; it offered “detailed recommendations to guide member States.”

But the very process of convening the committee would “catalyze international attention, funding and research”. For instance, Anthony S. Fauci, Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease, has already announced that Phase I clinical trials of a possible vaccine against Zika virus may begin before the end of 2016. The National Institutes of Health launched a Zika vaccine initiative late last year. Brazil too has gone on an overdrive to find an effective vaccine. It may take as long as 10 years before a vaccine becomes widely available, Dr. Fauci cautioned.

Little attention was paid as long as the Zika infection remained asymptomatic and self-limiting. But “emerging data on foetal complications altered this equation” and all focus has been directed at finding an efficacious vaccine urgently.

The Zika virus infection usually is asymptomatic in nearly 80 per cent of the cases. As a result, many cases of Zika go undetected, making it difficult to estimate the true scale of the outbreak in the Americas. One in four people infected with Zika develop symptoms — mild illness, such as fever, rash, muscle/joint pain, and conjunctivitis.

Since the infection is spread through Aedes species mosquito (which bites during daytime) which is commonly seen in these countries, and since it causes foetal abnormalities, countries such as Colombia, Ecuador, and Jamaica have recommended that women delay pregnancy. El Salvador has asked women to delay pregnancy until 2018.

On January 15, the Centersfor Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) advised pregnant women “to consider postponing travel to countries with ongoing Zika virus transmission”.

Public Health England (PHE) has said men should wear condoms for 28 days after returning from any of the countries where Zika infection has been reported if their partner was at risk of pregnancy, or already pregnant. It also said that men should use condoms for six months following recovery if a clinical illness “compatible with Zika virus infection or laboratory confirmed Zika virus infection was reported.”

Kudos New Crop Insurance scheme: Building the Future

Kudos New Crop Insurance scheme: Building the Future

Agriculture being the mainstay of Indian people traditionally and culturally, the Narendra Modi government has been focusing on the agriculture front quite seriously. Therefore the announcement of the New Crop Insurance scheme on 13^th January, 2016 by the Government of India has received kudos from all quarters.

The government and the policy makers have always faced a few challenges vis-à-vis the task of ensuring food security, higher agri growth and adequate jobs in agri sector. There has been always a long felt need to bring together at one place all conceptual issues, detailed institutional framework and operational details related to farmers’ welfare, risk management of farming community and the crops during drought and floods and other localized risk factors.

The broad policy on drought and natural disasters management prepared by the government has prescribed multifold actions vis-à-vis the disaster mitigation plans, relief measures required for providing succor to the affected population and the need to integrate these with long term objectives.

In other words, steps were required to be taken on a war footing with a well thought of and far-sighted vision and action plans, both in short term and long terms.

The New Crop Insurance scheme must be understood from that perspective. This is all the more relevant at a time when the country is facing drought for the second straight year due to poor monsoon rains.

Under the new scheme that would cost government Rs 8,000-9,000 crore annually, the farmers' premium has been kept at a maximum of 2 per cent for foodgrains and oilseeds, and up to 5 per cent for horticulture and cotton crops.

To be rolled out from the Kharif season this year, the much awaited scheme - Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana - was cleared at the Cabinet meeting, headed by the Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

The new scheme, to be executed also by private insurance companies, is seen as a significant step by policy makers, farming community and experts. The government’s move will enhance insurance coverage to more crop area to protect farmers from vagaries of monsoon. Hence the scheme is considered very timely and also quite in tune with similar initiatives in some countries.

For Rabi crops, the farmer’s share has been rightly fixed at 1.5 per cent — against actual premiums of 8-10 per cent. For year-long cash crops and horticulture crops, this has been capped at 5 per cent.

The PMFBY will replace the existing two schemes National Agricultural Insurance Scheme as well as the Modified NAIS.

The official sources also clarified that in terms of Service Tax, as the new

PMFBY is a replacement scheme of  NAIS / MNAIS, there will be exemption from Service Tax liability of all the services involved in the implementation of the scheme. It is estimated that the new scheme will ensure about 75-80 per cent of subsidy for the farmers in insurance premium. 

It is worth mentioning that the government is already shelling out around Rs 5000 crore annually average for the last five years for various disaster relief measures even as the government’s new move will now mean a tentative expenditure of about Rs 9000 crore. This will be more helpful especially for farmers as the risk factor would be looked into. According to many, the 'Pradhan Mantri Fasal BimaYojna' will also rid farmers of the web of complex rules of the earlier insurance schemes.

Within hours after official announcement was made, the Prime Minister Modi tweeted expressing confidence that the new Crop Insurance Scheme will bring about a major transformation in the lives of farmers. "This is a historic day. I am confident that this scheme, which is inspired by the consideration of farmers' benefit, will bring about a major transformation to the lives of farmers," the Prime Minister said in a series of tweets.

"Farmer brothers and sisters, at a time when you are celebrating festivals like Lohri, Pongal and Bihu, the government has given you a gift in the form of Prime Minister's Crop Insurance Scheme," he had further tweeted. 

The new scheme includes successful aspects of the existing schemes and "effectively addresses" whatever was lacking in earlier schemes."The scheme has the lowest premium, it entails easy usage of technology like mobile phone, quick assessment of damage and disbursement within a time frame," the PM said.

The government would have to cough out Rs 8,800 crore annually whereas the coverage would be for a crop area of 194.40 million hectare. It is significant to note that after coming to power in May 2014, the Modi government had announced that it would bring a new crop insurance scheme.

Among others, expressing confidence that farmers will adopt this new scheme, the union Home Minister Rajnath Singh said it will help them tide over financial uncertainties.

Experts also say that the mechanism of higher subsidy for crop premiums is not out of line with international standards. The United States, for instance, covers over 120 million hectares and gives subsidy to the tune of around 70 per cent. China insures its farmers for a sown area of around 75 million hectares with a subsidy on premiums of about 80 per cent. In Indian context, during the next five years, the plan would probably cover over 50 per cent of the cropped area.

A Game-changer: There are a few significant features about the new scheme and this will make it both – farmers’ friendly and a game-changer in the long run. The new Crop Insurance Scheme is in line with ‘One Nation – One Scheme’ theme. “It incorporates the best features of all previous schemes and at the same time, all previous shortcomings/weaknesses have been removed,” an official announcement said and thus highlighting the end of the cob of complexities the farmers had to face earlier.

Importantly for the beneficiaries, risks leading to crop loss are to be covered under the scheme include: Yield Losses (standing crops, on notified area basis). Thus a Comprehensive risk insurance is provided to cover yield losses due to non-preventable risks, such as Natural Fire and Lightning, Storm, Hailstorm, Cyclone, Typhoon, Tempest, Hurricane, Tornado. Risks due to Flood, Inundation and Landslide, Drought, Dry spells, Pests/ Diseases also will be covered.

Similarly in cases where majority of the insured farmers of a notified area, having intent to sow/plant and incurred expenditure for the purpose, are prevented from sowing/planting the insured crop due to adverse weather conditions, shall be eligible for indemnity claims upto a maximum of 25 per cent of the sum-insured.

In post-harvest losses, coverage will be available  up to a maximum period of 14 days from harvesting for those crops which are kept in “cut & spread” condition to dry in the field. For certain localized problems, Loss / damage resulting from occurrence of identified localized risks like hailstorm, landslide, and Inundation affecting isolated farms in the notified area would also be covered.

Moreover, it has been made clear that there will be “no upper limit” on the Government subsidy. Even if balance premium is 90 per cent, it will be borne by the Government. Earlier, there was a provision of capping the premium rate which resulted in low claims being paid to farmers. This capping was done to limit Government outgo on the premium subsidy. This ceiling has now been removed and farmers will get claim against full sum insured without any reduction.

The new scheme envisages among other things that there will be use of technology. More technology and science will be encouraged. Smart phones will be used to capture and upload data of crop cutting to reduce the delays in claim payment to farmers. Remote sensing will also be used to reduce the number of crop cutting experiments, sources say.

Making use of technology mandatory will also improve operational efficiency and will be beneficial to both - the farmers and the insurers, experts and insurance players say. Additionally, since farmer's premium will be down, the uptake of policies would be high. Moreover making the new crop insurance scheme mandatory for states will also mean there will be increase in the list of policy takers. Adding catastrophic events also to this cover to protect farmers against crop loss/damage due to incidents like cyclone would be beneficial to all stake holders yet again.

Speech by the President of India, Shri Pranab Mukherjee at the Fifty-Fourth convocation of the Indian Agricultural Research Institute (IARI)

Speech by the President of India, Shri Pranab Mukherjee at the Fifty-Fourth convocation of the Indian Agricultural Research Institute (IARI)

1. I am indeed happy to be here amidst you today for the fifty-fourth convocation of Indian Agricultural Research Institute, a leading institution in our country for agricultural research, education and extension. I congratulate the students who are being awarded degrees today. On this occasion, I also take the opportunity to compliment the members of the faculty for shaping the minds and skills of these students.

2. The IARI, set up in 1905, has played a key role in providing human resource to the national agricultural research system. Over eight thousand students of IARI have been awarded post-graduate or PhD degrees so far. Several alumni of IARI have held key positions driving agricultural research and education in important institutions in India and abroad.

Ladies and Gentlemen:
3. India has only 3 percent of the world’s land resources and 5 percent of water resources. Yet, Indian agriculture system supports 18 percent of the world population. The transformation from a state of "ship-to-mouth" to a leading exporter of food grains has been made possible largely due to the scientific developments in premier institutes like IARI. This Institute has made significant contributions in ushering the green revolution and building a vibrant agriculture sector in our country. I applaud IARI for its dedicated service to the nation.

4. IARI has recently developed several breakthrough technologies bringing prosperity to farmers. India’s basmati rice export has been revolutionized because of IARI’s short-duration high-yielding basmati rice varieties. Pusa basmati varieties accounted for more than 90 percent of the 30,000 crore rupees of export earnings this year. It gave profit in excess of two lakh rupees per hectare to the farmers. Likewise, IARI wheat varieties have resulted in an additional production of 3 million tonnes of wheat in the previous year.

5. Resource management, farm machinery and plant protection technologies of IARI are widely used by farmers. They have resulted in enhanced input use efficiency, farm profit and environmental sustainability. The diagnostic techniques developed by IARI such as "micro-array chip" and "ELISA kits" for plant virus detection, and nanotechnology-based chemical formulations for management of nematodes and insect pests are expected to reduce the input cost of plant protection chemicals. IARI’s climate change and mitigation research on methane emission from rice paddies are significant from the point of view of developing appropriate strategies and protecting India’s interests in climate change negotiations.

Friends:
6. Degrading soil health and dwindling fresh water availability are posing major concerns for agricultural sustainability. Low soil organic matter and imbalanced use of fertilizers are affecting crop productivity. The “Soil Health Card Scheme” aims at providing farm-wise and crop-wise fertilizer recommendations to enhance fertilizer use efficiency. To my mind, IARI technologies like “Pusa Soil Testing and Fertilizer Recommendation meter”, remote sensing-based crop and natural resource monitoring, and decision-support systems can contribute significantly towards this mission. Crops use 23 percent of the applied fertilizer with the balance 77 percent lost to environment. To further increase the efficiency of fertilizer use, easy methods based on plant tissue analysis for sensing nutrient status and making fertilizer recommendations are needed.

7. Enhancing water use efficiency in agriculture can hardly be over-emphasized. In this context, the “per drop, more crop” is a mission statement aimed at improving water productivity. We need technology solutions for smart water usage. It is heartening to note that several water-wise technologies like precision irrigation, Pusa Hydrogel, zero tillage wheat system, direct seeded rice system, and short duration crop varieties have been developed by IARI. Scientists here must continue with their efforts to develop water-efficient and drought-tolerant varieties.

8. Inappropriate treatment and unplanned use of raw sewage water is impacting agricultural sustainability while posing a risk to consumer and environmental health. IARI’s eco-friendly waste-water treatment technology should be able to provide safe irrigation water for peri-urban agriculture and also mitigate the problem of sewage water disposal.

Friends:
9. The production of pulses and edible oil in India has remained insufficient making us dependent on imports. The demand for these food commodities is expected to increase in future substantially. IARI has developed mustard varieties suitable for unconventional areas that can boost oil seed production. The Institute has also initiated the development of synchronous-maturity pigeon-pea hybrids and varieties, apart from chickpea. I am confident these technologies will enhance the productivity of pulses and edible oils to meet our domestic requirements fully.

10. Forty-five percent of children below the age of three years are under-nourished in India. A large number also suffer from Vitamin-A deficiency. To address malnutrition in children, food grains must be bio-fortified with quality protein and micronutrients. I am happy that IARI has developed quality protein maize, and iron and zinc rich wheat, pearl millet and lentil varieties through molecular breeding, and genetically modified “Golden rice” enriched with pro-vitamin A. These technologies should reach the farmers immediately for alleviating malnourishment in women and children.

Friends:
11. Despite the advancements made, Indian agriculture is yet to be completely out of the clutches of weather. After a record food grains production of 265 million tonne in 2013-14, a year of normal monsoon, the production level came down to 253 million tonne in 2014-15, when a 12 percent rainfall deficit was registered. Nature has not been kind to us this year as well. A deficient monsoon followed by a further dry spell is likely to affect agricultural production for the second year in a row. This is an area of grave concern.

12. The time is ripe for some serious efforts as eighty percent of the area under cultivation in India is in the grip of severe climatic conditions like drought, floods and cyclones. Global climate change could aggravate these problems. Institutes like IARI must leverage opportunities from frontier sciences such as bio-technology, synthetic biology, nano-technology, computational biology, sensor technology and geo-spatial technology to develop climate-resilient technology solutions. Innovation in agricultural techniques and practices must be supported through infusion of funds, mentoring of ideas, and technical assistance. The risk-taking ability of farmers must be boosted. The newly-launched crop insurance scheme will leverage technology to provide risk cover to the farmers.

Friends:
13. Agriculture is the source of livelihood for more than fifty percent of our population. Mahatma Gandhi had said once and I quote: “To forget how to dig the earth and tend the soil is to forget ourselves” (unquote). Not many youth, however, are coming forward today to take up farming. To attract youth to agriculture, we need technologies that can make the farm sector profitable. Research in agricultural institutes should focus on minimizing production cost, enhancing profitability in the entire “field-to-plate” food chain, and introducing greater automation to reduce drudgery.

14. Globalization of agriculture has increased the prospects for processed food commodities manifold. Our farmers and agri-preneurs must make full use of this opportunity. Increase in investment for agriculture technology development, rural agri-infrastructure, on-farm processing and value addition, and storage facilities are needed. Agriculturists must be trained to transform their farms into production-cum-processing centres. Research in our institutes must address the critical issues that hinder the development of rural agri-businesses. Proliferation of the recently-launched “Start-up India” to the rural sector could provide fillip to the setting up of agro-based enterprises. The “Mera Gaon Mera Gaurav” programme of IARI, under which each scientist will adopt a village, should aim at changing agriculture from subsistence farming to commercial farm industry.

Friends:
15. Agricultural education in our country must conform to global standards. For that, we need to create a large pool of competent faculty empowered with state-of-the-art research infrastructure. A strong network of teachers, learners and practitioners will facilitate lab-to-field dissemination of good agricultural practices. It will also provide feedback about farmers’ problems to trigger research and technology development in our institutions.

16. Agricultural institutes are the foci on which the success of our farm sector and welfare of people depends. The barometer of performance is the quality of their products. Able, committed and industrious professionals from these institutions are required to spearhead the next farm revolution. Students and alumni of this reputed institution must seize the opportunity and contribute to the transformation in agriculture. I wish the graduating students the very best in life and career. I also wish IARI Godspeed for its future endeavours.