15 June 2016

What is the real problem in Punjab?

What is the real problem in Punjab?

The issue is not the extent of drug problem in Punjab but why the youth there are increasingly being drawn to drugs
Punjab has been in the news for all the wrong reasons. The state, once known as the pioneer of the green revolution, has been under the spotlight because of its drug problem. There may be differences in the estimates of the youth population addicted to drugs, but most agree that it is very high and the situation has reached a crisis point. The issue is, therefore, not the extent of drug addiction; it is why the youth in Punjab are increasingly being drawn to drugs.
While there have been cultural and social explanations for this tendency, the fact remains that successive governments have not only ignored the issue, but may have actively or passively contributed to this menace. This issue is not just an issue of governance failure; it is a symptom of a larger problem in rural areas. The real problem is unemployment or lack of alternative jobs for the majority of youth in Punjab.
The state, once known for its industrious and entrepreneurial farmers, was among the first success stories of the green revolution in the late 1960s and early ’70s. Since the 1980s, the state has consistently been among states with the highest per capita incomes. But the last two decades have also seen Punjab lag behind most states in agricultural growth rates. Not only have the yield and productivity of major crops stagnated, declining incomes in agriculture due to falling land holdings and a deteriorating natural resource situation have meant that few among the youth seem interested in pursuing agriculture. The deterioration of soil quality and declining water tables due to unhindered ground water extraction have led to a rise in the cost of cultivation. With mechanization almost reaching a saturation point, labour use in agriculture has declined to the detriment of workers hitherto employed in agriculture. The worsening of the agrarian situation in Punjab has also been evident from farmer suicides, still a small number but a phenomenon unheard of prior to the 1990s.
Punjab is a classic case of a state failing to diversify into the non-farm sector despite high agricultural productivity. This was partly a result of the failure of local industries in Ludhiana and elsewhere to cope with an open and liberalized Indian economy, but was aided and abetted by the failure of state governments to create and support such industries. The excessive focus on agriculture has also been evident in the state government spending more on subsidizing farming through free electricity and other incentives rather than encouraging employment diversification.
With migration abroad slowing in recent years and lack of alternative employment opportunities within the state, the problem of employment has only gone from bad to worse. There are now enough anecdotal as well as field studies documenting the crisis in Punjab’s agriculture and the associated employment problem among the youth. The process of ‘depeasantization’ has led to a situation where the farming community is increasingly moving out of agriculture and yet, only a few among agricultural labourers have managed to find some manual work. A majority of the cultivating castes and groups are still averse to manual labour and have not been able to find work in the non-farm sector.
But this problem is not unique to Punjab. While it has led to a perverse outcome in Punjab, the fact remains that a majority of the cultivating caste groups are now finding it difficult to retain the young in agriculture. The changing economic situation and the lack of employment opportunities have led to situations of unrest, for instance, in the form of campaigns for reservation in government jobs. The recent agitations demanding government job quotas by Jats in Haryana, Patels in Gujarat and Marathas in Maharashtra are a manifestation of the worsening employment and income opportunities in agriculture. Unfortunately, this has taken place in states that are among those with the highest per capita incomes, but also those that experienced a rapid transformation of their agriculture. Most of these states have failed to create enough employment opportunities in the non-farm sector despite acceleration of their economic growth rates.
This is a larger problem that the economy has been facing for the last two decades. The fact that the economy created only 2 million jobs per year between 2004-05 and 2011-12, a phase of high growth, has already been noted. This was clearly insufficient to take care of the new entrants to the labour market, combined with a 35 million strong labour force moving out of agriculture. Employment creation will remain the single biggest challenge for the economy. Even by a conservative estimate, the National Skill Development Corporation expects at least 25 million workers to move away from agriculture in the next seven years. Along with new entrants to the labour force to the tune of 85 million workers, the minimum that the government needs to do is create 20 million jobs per year. As against this, in the last two years, the economy has created only 700,000 jobs, almost 50% of which were in textiles alone.
The problem of drug addiction in Punjab is not an issue of law and order. While it certainly has been aided and abetted by the governments of the day, the issue is an economic one. This issue needs a wider debate on a strategy to gainfully employ both the youth who are moving out of agriculture and the new entrants to the labour force.
The menace of drug addiction is only a symptom of the larger malaise afflicting our economic policy which has failed to create adequate employment opportunities. Such incidents of unrest are now finding an echo in other states as well and it is high time the central government came out with a strategy to tackle the unemployment problem. Unfortunately, there is hardly a recognition of the problem, leave alone a strategy to deal with it.

Katchatheevu: The big issue over a small island

Katchatheevu: The big issue over a small island

Katchatheevu, an uninhabited islet in the Palk Strait, is the centre of a long-standing dispute between the fishermen of Tamil Nadu and Sri Lanka
During her meeting with Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Tuesday, Tamil Nadu chief minister J. Jayalalithaa pushed for the retrieval of Katchatheevu, the centre of a long-standing dispute between the fishermen of Tamil Nadu and Sri Lanka.
On 26 August 2014, Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi, representing the Centre, told a Supreme Court bench led by Chief Justice of India R.M. Lodha: “If you want Katchatheevu back, you will have to go to war to get it back.”
What is Katchatheevu?
According to Sri Lanka’s ministry of external affairs website, Katchatheevu is an uninhabited islet in the Palk Strait that was formed due to volcanic eruption in the 14th century. The 285-acre land, strategically important for fishing activities, was owned by the Raja of Ramnad (Ramanathapuram) and later became part of the Madras Presidency after the delimitation of Gulf of Mannar and Palk Strait during British rule between the then governments of Madras and Ceylon. In 1921, both Sri Lanka and India claimed this piece of land for fishing and the dispute remained unsettled.
Indira Gandhi’s Emergency
In 1974, Katchatheevu was ceded to Sri Lanka by then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi through the Indo-Sri Lankan Maritime agreement to settle the maritime boundary in the Palk Strait with her counterpart Srimavo Bandaranaike. This forced M. Karunanidhi, then chief minister of Tamil Nadu, to write to Indira Gandhi on how the land was historically a part of Ramnad’s zamindari.
Though ceded to Sri Lanka, the agreement, which did not specify fishing rights, allowed Indian fishermen to fish around Katchatheevu and to dry their nets on the island.
During Emergency, with the Tamil Nadu government dismissed in 1976, without the consultation of the state assembly and Parliament, another agreement was finalized to determine the boundary in the Gulf of Mannar and Bay of Bengal and restricted both the countries’ fishermen from fishing in the other’s waters.
“With the establishment of the Exclusive Economic Zones by the two countries, India and Sri Lanka will exercise sovereign rights over the living and non-living resources of their respective zones. The fishing vessels and fishermen of India shall not engage in fishing in the historic waters, the territorial sea and the Exclusive Economic Zone of Sri Lanka, nor shall the fishing vessels and fishermen of Sri Lanka engage in fishing in the historic waters, the territorial sea and the Exclusive Economic Zone of India, without the express permission of Sri Lanka or India, as the case may be,” said the agreement.
Sri Lanka Civil War
In 1991, the Tamil Nadu Assembly adopted a resolution demanding the retrieval of Katchatheevu. During the civil war and with northern borders under the control of the LTTE (expand), the fishermen had easy access into the fishing grounds. Later in 2008, Jayalalithaa moved the Supreme Court to nullify the Katchatheevu agreements of 1974 and 1976.
As the war between Sri Lankan government and LTTE reached an end by 2009, the Sri Lankan government strengthened its security at maritime boundaries. When Indian fishermen crossed boundaries, arrests followed and talks for retrieval of Katchatheevu followed suit in Tamil Nadu. The Sri Lankan government claims that depletion of marine resources on its waters has affected the livelihood of fishermen.
Recent moves
2014: The Centre informed the Madras high court responding to a PIL that Sri Lanka’s sovereignty over Katchatheevu is a settled matter and fishermen from India do not enjoy any right to engage in fishing activities in the region.
2015: Sri Lanka’s prime minister Ranil Wickramasinghe stoked a controversy in an interview for Chennai-based Tamil Channel (Thanthi TV), suggesting that Indian fishermen may be shot if they intrude into Sri Lankan waters.
“Why are you coming into our waters? Why are you fishing in our waters...? Stay on the Indian side... There will be no issue... No one will shoot anyone else... You stay on the Indian side, let our fishermen stay on the Sri Lankan side... Otherwise don’t make accusations of Human rights violation by the Navy. You came in there.”
The Church
Every February, thousands of devotees from Rameshwaram visit the 110-year-old St Anthony’s Church on Katchatheevu island built by a Tamil Catholic from Tamil Nadu, Srinivasa Padaiyachi.
Last month, reports claimed that the church was going to be demolished by the Sri Lankan government, but it was clarified later by the external affairs ministry spokesperson, Vikas Swarup, that nothing of the sort would happen.
“It has been reported that the existing church will be retained unchanged and the second shrine is proposed to be constructed approximately 100 metres away from the present shrine,” he said, adding that the Sri Lankan navy has also dismissed media reports that it was planning a naval facility at Katchatheevu.

What is a vaccine-derived polio virus and why is it a threat

What is a vaccine-derived polio virus and why is it a threat?

In a vaccine-derived polio virus (VDPV), the source of the virus is the vaccine itself. Here are five things to know about VDPV and the concerns around it
The Telangana government on Tuesday called for a special polio immunisation drive in Hyderabad, as part of preventive action after a surveillance study conducted by the World Health Organisation (WHO) found traces of vaccine-derived polio virus in the city’s Amberpet nala, a major sewage canal in the city.
Here are five things to know about vaccine-derived polio virus (VDPV) and the concerns around it.
What is polio?
Poliomyelitis or polio is a highly infectious disease caused by a virus. It invades the nervous system, and causes paralysis, medically known as an acute flaccid paralysis (AFP), which is characterised by sudden muscle weakness and pain in the limbs. The disease is transmitted from person to person, mainly through the faecal-oral route, affecting children under five years of age. In the absence of wild polio virus (WPV) transmission, India was declared a polio-free country in March 2014, after years of relentless vaccination.
What does the Hyderabad study reveal?
For maintenance of polio eradication in polio-free countries, WHO conducts surveillance for cases of AFP and collects samples of sewage water to find any traces of polio viruses. In one such study in Hyderabad in April, out of 30 samples collected, one sample from Amberpet nala contained traces of type-2 VDPV. Lab tests have revealed that the virus has passed through human body and has undergone mutation or nucleotide change. Similar virus strains were detected in Delhi, Bihar and Gujarat. The Telangana government asked people not to panic, and called for a one-week special polio immunisation drive in Hyderabad, starting from 20 June, to vaccinate around 300,000 children.
What is a vaccine-derived polio virus?
In VDPV, the source of the virus is the vaccine itself. The oral polio vaccine called polio drops, which India deployed extensively to fight against polio, contain a live, attenuated or weakened polio virus. When a child is vaccinated, the weakened vaccine-virus replicates in the intestine and enters into the bloodstream, triggering a protective immune response in the child. Like wild poliovirus, the child excretes the vaccine-virus for a period of six to eight weeks. Importantly, as it is excreted, some of the vaccine-virus may no longer be the same as the original vaccine-virus as it gets genetically altered during replication. In areas of inadequate sanitation, this excreted vaccine-virus can quickly spread in the community and infect children with low immunity.
Why is VDPV a matter of concern?
The cases of paralysis due to VDPV are rare as the virus has to circulate for a long time in the community of under-immunised population before it can infect and cause paralysis in someone. Vaccine-associated paralytic poliomyelitis (VAPP) occurs in an estimated 1 in 2.7 million children receiving their first dose of oral polio vaccine, according to the Global Polio Eradication Initiative, a public-private partnership of national governments and WHO.
The aspect that is a matter of concern is that India reports high number of non-polio—AFP or paralytic—cases in children who are less than 15 years of age, which the study links to the VDPV. According to WHO, more than 50,000 AFP cases are investigated in India every year as a part of its surveillance system.
OPV vs IPV
The detection of VDPV in Hyderabad and other places has intensified the discussion on replacing oral polio vaccine (OPV) with inactivated polio vaccine (IPV). IPV given through an injection contains inactivated virus, considered to be safer than OPV that contains live virus. WHO has been advocating IPV over OPV as part of its global endgame strategy on polio eradication. India introduced IPV in the mandatory immunization programme on 1 December in six states. For the time being, IPV will be given in addition to the existing OPV. OPV has its strong advocates who believe that the vaccine is best suited for countries such as India due to its low cost, high efficacy and ease of administering, and argue that the safety concerns are overstated compared to the benefits of the vaccine.

India’s strategic gambit in Vietnam New Delhi’s abiding interest in Vietnam is focused on defence and is meant as a pressure point against China

India’s strategic gambit in Vietnam

New Delhi’s abiding interest in Vietnam is focused on defence and is meant as a pressure point against China
India under the Narendra Modi government has made no secret of its desire to play a more assertive role in the larger Indo-Pacific. As Modi himself underlined in his address to the joint session of the US Congress last week: “A strong India-US partnership can anchor peace, prosperity and stability from Asia to Africa and from Indian Ocean to the Pacific. It can also help ensure security of the sea lanes of commerce and freedom of navigation on seas.” Therefore, it should not be surprising that India seems now ready to sell the supersonic BrahMos missile, made by an India-Russian joint venture, to Vietnam after dilly-dallying on Hanoi’s request for this sale since 2011. Though India’s ties with Vietnam have been growing in the past few years, this sale was seen as a step too far that would antagonize China.
But now, the Modi government has directed BrahMos Aerospace, which produces the missiles, to expedite this sale to Vietnam along with four other countries—Indonesia, South Africa, Chile and Brazil. India is already providing a concessional line of credit of $100 million for the procurement of defence equipment and in a first of its kind has sold four offshore patrol vessels to Vietnam, which are likely to be used to strengthen the nation’s defences in the energy-rich South China Sea. India’s latest move comes at a time when the US has also lifted its longstanding ban on sales of lethal military equipment to Vietnam. New Delhi’s abiding interest in Vietnam too remains in the defence realm. It wants to build relations with states like Vietnam that can act as pressure points against China. With this in mind, it has been helping Hanoi beef up its naval and air capabilities.
The two nations also have stakes in ensuring sea-lane security, as well as shared concerns about Chinese access to the Indian Ocean and the South China Sea. Hence, India is helping Vietnam build capacity for repair and maintenance of its defence platforms. At the same time, the armed forces of the two states have started cooperation in areas like IT and English-language training of Vietnamese army personnel. The two countries potentially share a common friend—the US. New Delhi has steadily built relations with Washington in the past decade, while Vietnam has been courting America as the South China Sea becomes a flashpoint. As these three countries ponder how to manage China’s rise, they have been drawn closer together.
It is instructive that India entered the fraught region of the South China Sea via Vietnam. India signed an agreement with Vietnam in October 2011 to expand and promote oil exploration in the South China Sea and then reconfirmed its decision to carry on despite the Chinese challenge to the legality of the Indian presence. Beijing told New Delhi that its permission was needed for India’s state-owned oil and gas firm to explore for energy in the two Vietnamese blocks in those waters. But Vietnam quickly cited the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea to claim its sovereign rights over the two blocks in question. Hanoi has been publicly sparring with Beijing over the South China Sea for the past few years, so such a response was expected.
What was new, however, was New Delhi’s new-found aggression in taking on China. It immediately decided to support Hanoi’s claims. By accepting the Vietnamese invitation to explore oil and gas in blocks 127 and 128, India’s state-owned oil company ONGC Videsh Ltd not only expressed New Delhi’s desire to deepen its friendship with Vietnam, but ignored China’s warning to stay away. This display of backbone helped India strengthen its relationship with Vietnam. If China wants to expand its presence in South Asia and the Indian Ocean region, New Delhi’s thinking goes, India can do the same thing in East Asia. And if China can have a strategic partnership with Pakistan ignoring Indian concerns, India can develop robust ties with states like Vietnam on China’s periphery without giving China a veto on such relationships.
Hanoi is gradually becoming the linchpin of this eastward move by New Delhi. Hanoi fought a brief war with Beijing in 1979 and has grown wary of the Middle Kingdom’s increasing economic and military weight. That’s why in some quarters of New Delhi, Vietnam is already seen as a counterweight in the same way Pakistan has been for China.
The Modi government’s decision to sell BrahMos missiles to Vietnam underscores the evolution in India’s policy towards the Indo-Pacific. New Delhi seems to be ready to challenge Beijing on its own turf. And for the moment at least, this stance is being welcomed by states like Vietnam, which fear the growing aggression of China. A more engaged India will also lead to a more stable balance of power in the region.

New elements on the periodic table are named

New elements on the periodic table are named
Names for four new elements, formerly known by their respective atomic numbers 113, 115, 117 and 118, have been proposed by the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC).
The proposed names are- nihonium (Nh), moscovium (Mc), tennessine (Ts) and oganesson (Og).
The names are on a five-month probation before things are made official.
Background:
The elements were recognized by IUPAC on December 30, 2015. Their addition completed the seventh row of the periodic table.
All four elements are not found in nature, and were synthetically created in laboratories. They are super-heavy elements.
Tennessee is the second US state to be recognized with an element; California was the first.
oganesson, symbol Og, for element 118. The name honors Russian physicist Yuri Oganessian.
nihonium, symbol Nh, for element 113. The element was discovered in Japan, and Nihon is one way to say the country’s name in Japanese. It’s the first element to be discovered in an Asian country.
Moscovium has been named after Russia’s capital Mosow.

Cabinet clears civil aviation policy allowing new airlines to fly overseas

Cabinet clears civil aviation policy allowing new airlines to fly overseas

The new civil aviation policy will allow airlines to fly on foreign routes without completing 5 years of domestic operations, and boost regional flying, among other things
The Union cabinet on Wednesday cleared the civil aviation policy that aims to propel growth and allow new airlines like Vistara and AirAsia to fly abroad.
“The policy has been cleared with small changes,” an aviation ministry official said.
The policy will allow airlines to fly on foreign routes without completing 5 years of domestic operations, and boost regional flying, among other things.
Details of the policy are expected to be announced later in the day.
The policy was first presented in November 2014 and revised in October 2015 before being put up for public comments. Its introduction was delayed because of disagreements in several key areas.
With 80 million passengers already and growing at 20% annually, India is expected to become the third largest aviation market by 2020.
The aviation ministry has seen strong reactions and lobbying from older airlines such as IndiGo (InterGlobe Aviation Ltd), Jet Airways (India) Ltd, SpiceJet Ltd and GoAir and new entrants such as Vistara and AirAsia. The latter wanted the 5/20 rule scrapped, while older airlines wanted it to stay.
Under the 5/20 rule, airlines in India are permitted to fly abroad only if they have 5 years of domestic flying experience and at least 20 aircraft in their fleet.
The established airlines have threatened to move court if the government relaxes this provision. They want new airlines to also complete their term of five years of domestic flying before being allowed to fly abroad.

10 June 2016

India ‘clears final hurdle to join Missile Technology Control Regime’

India ‘clears final hurdle to join Missile Technology Control Regime’

The members of the Missile Technology Control Regime, a key anti-proliferation grouping, have agreed to admit India.
  • This breakthrough comes days after India announced that it is subscribing to ‘The Hague Code of Conduct’ against ballistic missile proliferation, which is considered to be complementary to the missile technology control regime (MTCR).
Background:
India, had applied for its membership last year. A deadline for the members of the group to object to India’s admission had expired recently. Under this so-called ‘silent procedure’, India’s admission follows automatically.
Benefits for India:
  • India’s entry into the MTCR is a step closer to its Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) membership.
  • The entry into this group will shape the future of India’s engagement with not just the MTCR but also the broader global non-proliferation community.
  • Admission to the MTCR would open the way for India to buy high-end missile technology.
About MTCR:
Established in April 1987, the voluntary MTCR aims to limit the spread of ballistic missiles and other unmanned delivery systems that could be used for chemical, biological, and nuclear attacks.
  • The MTCR regime urges its 34 members, which include most of the world’s key missile manufacturers, to restrict their exports of missiles and related technologies capable of carrying a 500-kilogram payload at least 300 kilometers or delivering any type of weapon of mass destruction.
  • Since 2008 India has been one of the five countries that are unilateral adherents to the MTCR.

Featured post

UKPCS2012 FINAL RESULT SAMVEG IAS DEHRADUN

    Heartfelt congratulations to all my dear student .this was outstanding performance .this was possible due to ...