Prime Minister to Inaugurate Exhibitiion ‘Swachhagraha “Bapu Ko Karyanjali”-a Mission, an Exhibition’ Tomorrow

Prime Minister to Inaugurate Exhibitiion ‘Swachhagraha “Bapu Ko Karyanjali”-a Mission, an Exhibition’ Tomorrow

The Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi will inaugurate the exhibition entitled ‘‘Swachhagraha “Bapu Ko Karyanjali”-A Mission, An Exhibition’ on the occasion of 100th Anniversary of Champaran Satyagrah tomorrow in National Archives of India (NAI) Janpath, New Delhi. Briefing media persons here today, Shri Raghvendra Singh, Director General, NAI said that this exhibition is a humble tribute to Gandhi Ji on hundred years of his first experiment of Satyagraha in India, in Champaran and is an attempt to sensitize future generations to fulfill Gandhi’s dream of ‘Swachh Bharat’, where society’s reflection would be as clean as the thoughts within, of every citizen of India. This digital and experiential exhibition strives to connect the essential principles of Satyagrah ‘Jeevan-Chakra’ evolved by Gandhi Ji, with the elements of Swachhagraha, the movement. The exhibition will be open for public in NAI campus for one month and later on, it will be taken to other cities of the country as Mobile exhibition. He informed the media persons that the Prime Minister will launch an “Online Interactive Quiz” on the occasion which will continue for 30 months till October, 2019. 

Gandhi Ji was initially reluctant to visit Champaran. Rather, he had hardly knew where Champaran was and was unaware of the conditions of the farmers who cultivated Indigo. Upon his arrival in Patna on 10th April 1917 and thence to in Motihari on 15th April, he immediately realized that his stay there would be a long haul. The drama of Champaran has been succinctly depicted in this exhibition. During his stay, Gandhi Ji delved in detail with the problems of people. Social practices of scavenging, illiteracy, issues covering women and health were found to be the main impediments. These obstacles were common to the political issues that Gandhi Ji confronted. Satyagraha was the weapon he employed to overcome hurdles on both these fronts. 

The Champaran Satyagraha changed the dynamics of Indian politics, catapulting Gandhi Ji to the forefront of India’s freedom struggle. For the first time, people of India realized the power of non-violence and passive resistance, based on action. 

Gandhi Ji’s freedom struggle culminated in India’s independence on 15th August 1947. Though politically independent, India has long since grappled with the same vital issues that Gandhi Ji came face to face with in Champaran, that of health, sanitation, clean water, cleanliness, lack of awareness and education etc. This exhibition is an attempt to link Gandhi Ji’s core principles of Satyagraha with contemporary issues, a movement to improve conditions through Swachhagraha. The younger generation of India needs to understand its importance. In fact we all need to. 

The chemical attack in Syria must compel the global community to bring the war to an end

The chemical attack in Syria must compel the global community to bring the war to an end

The barbarism of Syria’s civil war was on display once again when at least 72 people were killed in a chemical attack in Idlib province. The heartbreaking images of dead and injured children and desperate parents from Idlib’s Khan Sheikhoun have understandably triggered global outrage and calls for international action. Syrians have suffered a lot over the past six years. There have been multiple chemical attacks for which both the regime of Bashar al-Assad and the jihadists were held to blame. More than 400,000 people are believed to have been killed and millions displaced since the crisis broke out. With violence continuing unabated and the Assad regime not showing any real interest in settling the crisis, even hopes for peace and normal life look surreal. The needle of suspicion for the Idlib attack points towards the regime whose murderous nature has been exposed several times in the past six years. Idlib is a rebel-held province where the regime is currently carrying out air strikes. Activists in the province and Western governments have claimed the regime used chemical agents in Khan Sheikhoun.

If they are right, Damascus has not only committed a war crime but also violated a major international agreement. After the 2013 sarin attack in Ghouta in a Damascus suburb that killed hundreds — which was also blamed on the regime — the U.S. and Russia had agreed to remove Syria’s chemical weapons stockpiles. As part of the deal, 1,300 tonnes of chemical agents were shipped out of Syria and destroyed. The question is, where did the latest chemical weapons come from? Syria had either hidden some of the stockpiles or clandestinely developed such weapons after the deal was reached — both serious violations. This is a regime that neither respects the fundamental human rights of its people nor cares about the international agreements it has entered into. Irrespective of its role in Tuesday’s attack, the Syrian regime is primarily responsible for the country’s humanitarian catastrophe. For years, it justified whatever it did in the war saying it was fighting terrorism. But how long can Mr. Assad sustain this argument, leaving millions of people vulnerable to bombers, snipers, chemical agents and tanks? The real crisis of Syria is that its regime is acting with a sense of impunity, thanks to the blank security cheque the Russians have issued to Mr. Assad. The international community could not hold Mr. Assad to account for his actions at any point of the Syrian war, which worsened with the involvement of other regional powers. The latest attack should be a wake-up call for all these countries. Syria has to be treated as an immediate priority, and in a way that transcends the narrow geopolitical interests of regional and global powers. There must be a coordinated effort to bring the war to an end, and to hold the perpetrators of war crimes accountable for their barbarism. Only then can Syria be rebuilt.

ANS OF ALL QUESTIONS REGARDING TEMPERING OF EVM MACHINE

ANS OF ALL QUESTIONS REGARDING TEMPERING OF EVM MACHINE

FAQs on Security Features of The ECI-EVMs

In the recent past, there have been some queries in the minds of common people about the security features of Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) of Election Commission of India (ECI). The Election Commission has, time and again, stated that ECI-EVMs and its systems are robust, secure and tamper-proof.

The following FAQs give a detailed view of security features including latest technological features of EVMs and stringent administrative measures taken at every step of its usage from manufacturing to storage.

1. What is meant by Tampering of EVM?

Tampering means alteration in the software program written either on existing microchips of Control Unit (CU) or introducing malicious software program by inserting new microchips in CU and also making keys - pressed in Ballot Unit (BU) not record faithfully in the Control Unit.

2.  Are the ECI- EVMs hackable?

NO.

M1 (model one) of EVM machines were manufactured till 2006 and had all necessary technical features making M1 non-hackable contrary to claims made by some activists.

On the recommendations of the Technical Evaluation Committee in 2006, M2 model of EVMs produced after 2006 and upto 2012 incorporated dynamic coding of key codes thereby enabling transfer of the key – press message from  Ballot Unit (BUs) to  Control Unit (CUs), in an encrypted form as an additional security feature. It also contains Real time setting of each key press so that sequencing of key presses including so called malicious sequenced key presses can be detected and wrapped.

Further, the ECI- EVMs are not computer controlled, are stand alone machines and not connected to the internet and /or any other network at any point of time. Hence, there is no chance of hacking by remote devices.

The ECI-EVMs do not have any frequency receiver or decoder for data for wireless or any external hardware port for connection to any other non-EVM accessory or device. Hence no tampering is possible either through hardware port or through Wireless, Wi-Fi or Bluetooth device because CU accepts only encrypted and dynamically coded data from BU. No other kind of data can be accepted by CU.

3. Can ECI-EVMs be manipulated by Manufacturers?

Not Possible.

There is very stringent security protocol at manufacturer level regarding security of software. The Machines have been manufactured in different years starting from 2006. After manufacturing, EVMs are sent to State and district to district within a State. The manufacturers are in no position to know several years ahead which candidate will be contesting from a particular constituency and what will be the sequence of the candidates on the BU. Also, each ECI-EVM has a serial number and the Election Commission by use of EVM – tracking software can find out from its database which machine is located where. So, any manipulation at manufacturing stage is ruled out.

4. Can Trojan Horse be incorporated into the chip in CU?

Sequence of voting in EVM eliminates the possibility of injection of Trojan Horse as mentioned below. The stringent security measures by ECI make it impossible to introduce Trojan Horse in the field.

Once a ballot key is pressed in CU, the CU enables BU for registering the vote and waits for the key pressing in the BU.  During this period, all keys in the CU become Inactive till the entire sequence of casting of that vote is complete.  Once any of the keys (candidates vote button) is pressed by a voter in BU, the BU transmits the key information to CU.  The CU gets the data and acknowledges it by glowing the corresponding LED lamps in BU.  After the enabling of ballot in CU, only the ‘first key press’ is sensed and accepted by CU.  After this, even if a voter keeps on pressing the other buttons that is of no use as there will not be any communication between CU and BU as the result of those subsequent key presses, nor will BU register any key press.  To put it in other words, there can be only one valid key press (the first key press) for every ballot enabled using CU.  Once a valid key press (voting process) is complete, until another ballot enabling key press is made there will not be any activity between the CU and the BU.  Hence, sending of any malicious signal, by way of so called ‘sequenced key presses’, is impossible in the Electronic Voting Machines being used in the country.

5. Are Old model ECI- EVMs still in use?

M1 model of EVM machines were produced up to 2006  and were last used in 2014 General Elections. In 2014, EVM machines which completed 15 years of economic life and also because M1 were not compatible with VVPAT (voter-verified paper audit trail) , ECI decided to discontinue use of all M1 EVMs manufactured upto 2006. There is a Standard Operating Procedure laid down by ECI to discard EVMs. The process of destruction of EVM & its chip is carried out in the presence of Chief Electoral Officer of the state or his representatives inside the factory of manufacturers.

6. Can ECI-EVMs be Physically Tampered with/ their components be changed without anyone noticing?

In addition to the existing security features in earlier models M1 & M2 of ECI-EVMs, the new M3 EVM produced after 2013 have additional features like Tamper Detection and Self Diagnostics. The tamper detection feature makes an EVM inoperative the moment anyone tries to open the machine. The Self diagnostic feature checks the EVM fully every time it is switched on. Any change in its hardware or software will be detected.  

A prototype of a new model M3 with above features is going to be ready shortly. A Technical Experts Committee will examine it and then production will commence. About Rs. 2,000 crores have been released by the Government to procure M3 EVMs with above additional features and new technological advancements.

7. What are the latest technological features to make ECI-EVMs tamper proof?

The ECI-EVMs use some of the most sophisticated technological features like one time programmable (OTP) microcontrollers, dynamic coding of key codes, date and time stamping of each and every key press, advanced encryption technology and EVM-tracking software to handle EVM logistics, among others to make the machine 100% tamper proof. In addition to these, new model M3 EVMs also have tamper detection and self-diagnostics as added features. Since, software is based on OTP the program cannot be altered, re-written or Re-read. Thus, making EVM tamper proof. If anyone make, attempt, the machine will become in operative.

8. Do the ECI-EVMs use foreign technology?

Contrary to misinformation and as alleged by some, India do not use any EVMs produced abroad.  EVMs are produced indigenously by 2 PSUs viz. Bharat Electronics Ltd., Bengaluru and Electronics Corporation of India Ltd., Hyderabad. The Software Programme Code is written in-house, by these two companies, not outsourced, and subjected to security procedures at factory level to maintain the highest levels of integrity. The programme is converted into machine code and only then given to the chip manufacturer abroad because we don’t have the capability of producing semi-conductor microchips within the country.

Every microchip has an identification number embedded into memory and the producers have their digital signatures on them. So, the question of their replacement does not arise at all because microchips are subjected to functional tests with regard to the software. Any attempt to replace microchip is detectable and can make EVM in-operative. Thus, both changing existing programme or introducing new one are detectable making EVM in-operative.

9. What are the possibilities of manipulation at the place of storage?

At the district headquarters, EVMs are kept in a double-lock system under appropriate security. Their safety is periodically checked. The officers do not open the strong room, but they check whether it’s fully protected and whether the lock is in proper condition or not. No Unauthorized person can get access to the EVMs at any point of time. During non election period, Annual Physical Verification of all EVMs is done by DEOs and report sent to ECI. Inspection & checking have recently been completed.

10.       To what extent are allegations of EVM tampering in local body polls true?

There is a misunderstanding in this regard due to lack of knowledge about jurisdiction. In case of elections to Municipal bodies or Rural bodies like Panchayat Elections, the EVMs used do not belong to the Election Commission of India. Above local bodies elections come under the jurisdiction of State Election Commission/s (SECs), which procure their own machines and have their own handling system. ECI is not responsible for functioning of EVMs used by SECs in above elections.

11.       What are the different levels of checks and balances ensuring tamper proofing of ECI-EVMs?

•      First Level Checking: BEL/ECIL engineers certify originality of components after technical and physical examination of each EVM, undertaken in front of representatives of political parties. Defective EVMs are sent back to factory. The FLC Hall is sanitized, entry is restricted and no camera, mobile phone or spy pen is allowed inside. Mock poll of at least 1000 votes is conducted on 5% EVMs selected randomly by reps of political parties and the result shown to them. The entire process is video graphed.

•      Randomization: EVMs are randomized twice while being allocated to an Assembly and then to a polling booth ruling out any fixed allocation. Mock Poll at polling station is conducted in front of polling agents of candidates on the poll day, before polls begin.

After Poll, EVMs are sealed and polling agents put their signature on the seal. Polling agents can travel upto strong room during transportations.

•      Strong Rooms: Candidates or their representatives can put their own seals on the strong rooms where polled EVMs are stored after the poll and also camp in front of strong room.  These strong rooms are guarded 24x7 in multilayers.

•      Counting Centres: The polled EVMs are brought to the Counting Centres and Unique IDs of the seals and CU are shown to reps of candidates before start of counting.

12.       Can a manipulated ECI- EVM be re-inducted in the polling process without anyone coming to know?

Question does not arise.

Looking at the above series of fool-proof checks and balances that are undertaken by the ECI to make EVMs tamper proof, it is evident that neither the machines can be tampered-with nor defective machines can get re-inducted into the polling process at any point of time because Non ECI -EVMs will get detected by the above process and mismatch of BU & CU. Due to different level of stringent checks and balances neither ECI-EVMs can leave the ECI system nor any outside machine (Non-ECI –EVM) can be inducted into the system.

13.       Why have Developed Nations like the US and European Union not adopted EVMs and some have discontinued?

Some countries have experimented with electronic voting in the past. The problem faced with the machines in these countries was that they were computer controlled and connected to the network, which in turn, made them prone to hacking and hence totally defeating the purpose.  Moreover, there were not adequate security measures and safeguards in their corresponding laws regulations for security, safety and protection. In some countries, Courts struck down the use of EVMs on these legal grounds only.

Indian EVM is stand-alone whereas, USA, The Netherlands, Ireland & Germany had direct recording machines.  India has introduced paper audit trail, though partly.  Others did not have audit trail. Source code is closed during polling in all of the above countries. India also has closed source burnt into memory and is OTP.

ECI-EVMs, on the other hand, are stand-alone devices not connected to any network, thus making it impossible for anyone to tamper with over 1.4 million machines in India individually. EVMs are most suited for India, looking at the country’s past poll violence and other electoral malpractices like rigging, booth capturing etc. during the polls.

It is worth mentioning that in contrast with countries like Germany, Ireland and the Netherlands. Indian Laws & ECI regulations have in-built adequate safeguards for security & safety of EVMs  Besides, Indian EVMs are far superior on account of secured technological features. Indian EVMs also stand apart because VVPATs going to be used with EVMs in phases to make entire process transparent for voters.

In case of The Netherlands, rules regarding storage, transport and security of machine were lacking. Machines produced in The Netherlands were also used in Ireland & Germany. In a judgment in 2005, German Court found voting device ordnance unconstitutional on the ground of violation of the privilege of the public nature of election& the basic law. So, these countries discontinued the use of machines produced in The Netherlands.  Even, today many countries including USA are using machines for voting

ECI – EVMs are fundamentally different from the voting machines and processes adopted in foreign countries. Any comparison based on computer controlled, operating system based machines elsewhere will be erroneous and ECI – EVM cannot be compared with. 

14.       What is the status of VVPAT enabled machines?

The ECI has conducted elections in 255 assembly constituencies and nine Lok Sabha constituencies using Voters Verified Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT). The use of M2 and new-generation M3 EVMs along with VVPAT is the way forward for further confidence and transparency of the voters. 

Beyond governance by intentions

Narendra Modi may claim that the intent behind his policies is good, but he must go beyond this to good implementation

Perhaps one of the most intriguing statements by Narendra Modi in his victory speech after the historic wins in the Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand elections was, “We can make mistakes, but our intentions are never wrong.” In effect, he was urging the public to judge him on his intent rather than actions. Given the election results, there is little doubt that he has largely been able to convince the electorate. The challenge now is to see how good intentions can be operationalized.

Traditionally, government actions (or lack thereof) have mostly been extensively researched, debated and judged by outcomes. Is the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) a failure or success? Was bank nationalization necessary? Have our education and health policies achieved the desired outcomes? Did the Agriculture Produce and Marketing Committees meet their objectives? No doubt, all these policies were well-intentioned, but intention alone never mattered as much as this government wants it to. In fact, it would be foolish for any government to act without the best interests of the public in mind, and this government is no exception.

The Modi government has adopted several well-intentioned moves during its tenure. The most recent of these include surgical strikes across the Line of Control, demonetization, and pushing digitization, among others. Armed with unparalleled communication skills, and with little time or data to enable independent impact evaluation of government policies, not to mention a listless opposition, Modi has been successful in getting votes based on intent. The strategy has been simple yet effective: Take an economically risky decision; build a narrative of it being well-intentioned, necessary, in the national interest and reflective of a strong and decisive authority; exhort the people to contribute to such a nation-building exercise; strike an emotional chord in the process and get votes.

It has been suggested that emboldened by election wins, Modi will aggressively push his reforms agenda. Difficult decisions could be taken on important issues like benami property, land acquisition, labour reforms, stressed assets, job creation, farmer incomes, subsidy rationalization, expanding use of Aadhaar, digital payments and ease of doing business, among others. Fortunately, the goods and services tax is on course for implementation from July 2017. This narrative suits Modi as he is not afraid to take difficult decisions. He may once again get the intent absolutely perfect, yet the delivery may not be as good.

This seems to be a high possibility given Modi’s panache for intent and political message. Already, his critics are denouncing the way the demonetization, digitization, Jan Dhan Yojana and Aadhaar linkages have been pushed in the country. This is something that Modi would want to avoid at all costs in light of his national status. The question then is: Does Modi have the courage to go beyond headlines to address implementation and sustainability-related concerns? Is he ready to walk an extra mile to address the concerns of those oft neglected? Will he hear his critics and be open to course-correction, if need be?

Decision making on each of the issues mentioned above, and several others, would require dealing with a complex set of often conflicting interests. These include environmental and sustainability concerns, rehabilitation and resettlement issues, welfare of labour, rural inhabitants, and taking into account the interests of small and medium enterprises. Many of the existing problems have arisen owing to archaic and complex policies, an ill-equipped bureaucracy, lack of a coherent strategy, and process flaws in policy-making. Dealing with these issues will require structural changes in governance and administration, an area which might not make headlines like other popular reforms initiated by Modi. To truly make progress, the government will need to encourage impartial impact assessment of initiatives like mandating Aadhaar for social security schemes, Digital India, Make in India and Startup India. It will also need to take a long-term approach and introspect over its stand on issues like citizen surveillance, privacy, data protection, and consumer choice and protection.

Efficient decision making and effective implementation will require Modi to go beyond governing by intent. A comprehensive plan of action, outlining the objective of government policy, stakeholders involved, estimated impact, defining implementation, monitoring, compliance responsibilities and fixing accountability of actors, will need to be adopted. Such plans must be formulated after efficient public consultation and taking into account the concerns of diverse groups.

Process reforms like regulatory impact assessment, which require estimating and comparison of costs and benefits of policy and regulatory alternatives, will need to be integrated into the policymaking process. Data and its sources must be available for scrutiny in the public domain and be open to independent review.

Most experts argue that Modi has already won the 2019 general election as he is set to be in government for a decade, perhaps more. He has the opportunity to set the direction for India for the next 50 years, and truly become one of the country’s greats. He must not waste this opportunity. While good intentions will be important, they are not sufficient. It is time Modi realizes this and gets his act together in implementation.

Can unarmed states prohibit nuclear weapons?

While a hypothetical nuclear exchange between India and Pakistan is a favourite of experts to prove the humanitarian consequences of even limited use will be global, this scenario is far more alarming when considering nuclear use by the US, Russia and China.

120-odd nations—nearly two-thirds of UN members—that do not possess nuclear weapons participated in a UN conference seeking a ban on nuclear weapons

Guess what terrifies nations armed with the most powerful weapons ever invented? Believe it or not—a mere UN conference to ban them, which began on 27 March in New York. This gathering of nations without nuclear weapons to negotiate a “legally binding instrument to prohibit nuclear weapons, leading towards their total elimination”, has caused greater consternation among the nine nuclear-armed states and their shielded allies than the spectre of Armageddon through deliberate, inadvertent or accidental nuclear use.

This was amply demonstrated when the US, UK and France, along with several other countries which live under nuclear umbrellas, publicly protested against the conference and sought to justify why they were boycotting it. In doing so, they not only exposed their uber anxiety over the conference but also, inadvertently, focused a spotlight on the proceedings, which might otherwise not have garnered as much attention.

The supreme irony is that despite the fear of the nuclear-armed states, neither the conference nor the subsequent treaty, which is likely to be concluded later this year, will disarm a single nuclear weapon. Yet the trepidation of the nuclear weapon states is not entirely irrational.

First, the 120-odd nations that participated in the negotiations highlight that nearly two-thirds of UN members have been able to ensure their security without the possession or protection of nuclear weapons. In contrast, the 40 nations staying away—less than one-fourth of all UN members—perceive that nuclear weapons are essential to ensure their security. This is also the rationale provided by the US and its allies to justify their nuclear weapons and their boycott of the conference. However, as Alexander Marschik, the Austrian delegate to the conference, retorted: “If nuclear weapons are truly indispensable in providing security, then why should not all states benefit from this advantage?” This argument also lays bare the fallacy that deterrence based on nuclear weapons is more stable than deterrence without nuclear weapons, given that relations among nuclear weapon states are crises-ridden.

Second, the conference participants and deliberations have also underlined the dangers of nuclear weapons use to non-nuclear weapon states. While a hypothetical nuclear exchange between India and Pakistan is a convenient favourite of experts to prove that the humanitarian consequences of even limited use will be global, this scenario is far more alarming and existential when considering nuclear use by the US, Russia and China.

Unsurprisingly then, some of the countries spearheading the negotiation process—Austria, Cuba, Ireland, Mexico, Mongolia and Sweden—are likely to face the brunt of nuclear fallout if weapons are used in their region by the heavily-armed nuclear nations. To put this in context, the fallout from the single biggest nuclear test conducted by the US on Bikini Atoll in the Pacific on 1 March 1954 with a yield of 15 megatons—five times more than all the firepower used in World War II—spread over 18,000 sq. km and showered radioactive material as far as Australia, India, Japan and the US. It was this one test that prompted Jawaharlal Nehru to propose a nuclear test ban treaty.

Third, the conference and treaty will plug a serious legal gap in that nuclear weapons (unlike chemical and biological weapons) are the only weapons of mass destruction that are not prohibited by international law. This is an unfathomable lapse given the potential of nuclear weapons use to lead to global extinction.

If nuclear-armed states are unhappy with the momentum picked up by the negotiations, then they have only themselves to blame. This conference is a direct result of the diminishing faith in the nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT) process, the conference on disarmament, and the nuclear-centred world order even after the end of the Cold War. Ever since the indefinite extension of the NPT in 1995, the nuclear-armed states failed on two counts. First, they failed to keep their commitments made in NPT review conferences, primarily on disarmament, thus alienating even the most loyal non-nuclear adherent. Second, despite the growing disconnect between the emerging nuclear disorder and the evolving world order, the nuclear weapon states (also permanent UN security council members) failed to accommodate aspirant powers and establish a new world order that was not based on nuclear weapons.

Against this backdrop, the proposed treaty offers a significant opportunity, at the very least, to diminish the role of nuclear weapons in deterrence and subsequently to move towards a nuclear-free world order. To be clear, the treaty will not eliminate existing nuclear weapons in the first instance; it is more likely to establish an international norm that prohibits the development, acquisition, manufacture, possession, transportation, transfer or use of nuclear weapons. As envisaged in these negotiations, the treaty is likely to allow for the future membership of nuclear armed states with the objective of eliminating their nuclear arsenals, but only in cooperation with them. Thus, by participating in the negotiations, nuclear-armed states could underscore their commitment to a nuclear-weapon free world and also contribute to the contours of the treaty. By staying out, they gain nothing and lose goodwill.

Whether the nuclear-armed states come in or stay out, one thing is clear: The pen that writes the treaty might still turn out to be mightier than the mightiest sword built by mankind.

The politics and economics of farm loan waiversThe politics and economics of farm loan waivers

Several parts of India are in the grip of an agrarian crisis.

In part, this is because of the cumulative effect of bad monsoons. Farmers in many parts of India are still dependent on the annual rains which were deficient (by double digit rates) in both 2014 and 2015; 2016 was a good year, though.

Commodity cycles that cause global food prices to go up and down cyclically are also responsible for this. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), at the end of 2016, food prices were roughly at the same level they were in 2006 (they witnessed a huge spike in the intervening decade).

In India, agriculture remains highly regulated, with inadequate linkages to markets, and opaque and unscientific pricing. And farmers lack access to and expertise in risk management tools and techniques that can help them deal with the vagaries of nature and market shocks. Mint’s columnist Himanshu (he uses only one name), one of the country’s leading agricultural economists, has previously written on how the long decay of Indian agriculture has forced once dominant and prosperous agricultural communities such as the Jats and the Patels to launch agitations seeking reservations in government jobs.

Unhappy farmers worry politicians. 

The National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government that ran India between 1999 and 2004 suffered a shock defeat in the 2004 parliamentary elections because of the lingering effects of the 2002 drought (India received only 80% of the rainfall it usually does during the south-west monsoon that year).

And populist moves directed at farmers usually result in substantial political dividends. The United Progressive Alliance (UPA) surprised itself and everyone else by returning to power in the 2009 parliamentary elections, largely on the back of a Rs70,000 crore farm-loan waiver it announced in 2008. That waiver, and the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme—a job guarantee programme that promised 100 days of employment a year to at least one adult from every poor rural household—helped India through the 2008 financial crisis. The rural economy continued to shine in that period, and a broader fiscal stimulus (including lower indirect taxes on some products) meant that the Indian economy saw a sharp V-shaped recovery.

The growing chorus for a waiver of agricultural loans in Maharashtra—another once-prosperous agricultural community, the Marathas, has also been agitating for subsidies for students and job quotas—and the recent waivers of such loans announced in Tamil Nadu (around Rs8,000 crore) and Uttar Pradesh (around Rs37,000 crore) need to be seen in this context.

Apart from being an effective political weapon, waivers promise instant relief to farmers. But they punish farmers who have been diligent with repayments and encourage all sorts of wrong behaviour—lax credit discipline and the use of borrowed funds for non-agricultural purposes.

Mint’s house view is that loan waivers are a bad idea. They were a bad idea in 2008. And they are a bad idea in 2017.

The current NDA government is, like almost all ruling dispensations that preceded it, centrist (and leans towards the left). Before it came to power in 2014, there were some who believed that it would be more rightist (in economic policies). This belief wasn’t entirely out of place. The third edition of the NDA that ran India between 1999 and 2004 (before it, the first had run the country for 13 days and the second for 13 months) was a progressive, right-leaning government. Since 2014 though, there has been enough evidence to suggest that in terms of broader economic agenda, the current government is no different from the one that came before it, albeit minus the corruption and the ad-hocism. 

Politically, it makes eminent sense to announce a farm loan waiver now, in 2017. The next parliamentary elections are in 2019, not too far away. From a humanitarian perspective too, it is difficult to ignore the suffering of farmers. 

Economically, though, it is difficult to make a case for loan waivers—simply because there is no case to be made. Some pundits have equated these with some corporate debt restructuring exercises, but the solution to sweetheart debt restructuring deals that banks get into with companies—the country’s largest bank, State Bank of India, entered into one with Kingfisher Airlines in 2012—lies in prevention, not in compensating by offering similar sweetheart deals to farmers.

At another level, the solution to the agrarian crisis is better risk management and more efficient agricultural markets.

Sure, the current government has the right ideas; it has launched a new crop insurance scheme and also sought to create a National Agricultural Market, but as Mint has previously reported, the first is still skewed towards protecting banks that provide agricultural loans than farmers, and the second is still in its infancy. Just around one in four farmers has protection, and the various national agricultural markets are yet to be linked (which means all trading happens within each, and not across), and powerful trader lobbies have ensured that important commodities (so-called bulk ones) do not get traded on them. Still, with some tweaking, both could provide at least a partial answer to the ongoing agrarian crisis.

That must be done. Loan waivers are great palliatives, but can’t tackle the underlying problems. 

india and bangladesh

If our commitments are honest, India and Bangladesh can achieve many things that are beneficial to our people
Maintenance of good relations with the neighbours, friendship to all, malice to none — is the policy I pursue throughout my life. My only desire in my political thought is to build a society for common people where none will suffer from the curse of poverty while their basic needs will be met. In other words, they will get the opportunity to have the right to food, clothing, shelter, medicare, education, improved livelihood and a decent life.
I received the teaching of such sacrifice from my father. My father, Father of the Nation, Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, did his politics with a motto to change the lot of the people. Wherever there was an injustice, he would protest it. This was the policy of Bangabandhu and he was always vocal for establishing the rights of the people. And, for that reason, he had to embrace imprisonment time and again and endure persecution. But he remained firm on the question of principle. Bangladesh earned its independence under his leadership.
ALSO READ
A new Delhi chapter for Sheikh Hasina
The support and cooperation of neighbouring and friendly countries had accelerated our goal to earn the independence of Bangladesh. Among those, India played the leading role.
India’s helping hand
The Pakistani military junta started a genocide launching armed attacks on the innocent Bangalees on March 25, 1971.
In the 1970 general elections, people of Bangladesh voted for Bangladesh Awami League and made it the majority party. This is for the first time that Bangalees had got the mandate to rule Pakistan. Although the population of East Bengal constituted the majority in Pakistan, the Bangalee nation was subjected to oppression and subjugation all the time, and deprived of its rights. The nation was about to lose its right to speak in the mother tongue. It was unthinkable to the military rulers that the Bangalee nation would ascend to state power and that was why they imposed the uneven war on Bangalees.
With the people’s mandate, the Father of the Nation declared the independence of Bangladesh and directed the people to carry on the war of liberation. Responding to his call, the people of Bangladesh took arms and the liberation war began. The Pakistani rulers and their local collaborators engaged in committing genocide, rape, looting, arson and attacked the innocent people of Bangladesh. The world woke up. People and the Government of India stood beside the oppressed humanity. They gave food and shelter to nearly 10 million refugees of Bangladesh. They extended all-out cooperation in our great liberation war and played an important role in creating global opinion in favour of Bangladesh. This helped us to earn victory and the country was freed from enemy occupation.
We are grateful to the friendly people of India. The Indian government had played an important role even in getting Bangabandhu released from the Pakistani prison. Shrimati Indira Gandhi had played the leading role in earning our independence, freedom of Bangabandhu and bringing him back to his beloved people. We got her government, political parties and above all the people of India beside us during our hard times.
ALSO READ
Prime Minister Narendra Modi with Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina
Teesta hangs fire as Sheikh Hasina arrives
The killers brutally assassinated the Father of the Nation on August 15, 1975. I lost 18 of my family members, including my mother, three brothers and sister-in-laws. I, along with my younger sister Rehana, survived as we were abroad. In our bad days, India again stood beside us. I could not come back home for six long years. The Bangladesh Awami League elected me its president in my absence. I returned home with the support of the people.
In Bangabandhu’s foosteps
On my return, I started a movement for the restoration of people’s basic rights and democracy. We formed the government in 1996 after 21 years. I got the opportunity to work for the people. I devoted myself to the task of welfare of my countrymen not as a ruler but as a servant. My father got the opportunity to build the war-ravaged country for only three and a half years. And I got the chance to serve the people after 21 years.
During that time, the people of Bangladesh realised that the objective of a government is to accomplish the task of people’s welfare. We signed the Chittagong Hill Tracts Peace Treaty ending the two-decade-long conflict. We brought back 62,000 refugees from India and rehabilitated them in the country. We signed the Ganges Water Sharing Treaty with India. The country’s image brightened in the outside world.
Two steps back
A five-year period is too short for the development of any country. We couldn’t win the election of 2001. The Bangladesh Nationalist Party-Jamaat-e-Islami assumed state power and destroyed all our achievements. Again, the country’s progress suffered a setback. Militancy, terrorism, corruption and misrule made people’s life miserable. The country became champions in the corruption index five times. The minority community became victims of torture. The country’s socio-economic development had been stalled. The Awami League leaders and workers became targets of persecution. Bangladesh once again fell under emergency rule. We demanded restoration of democracy. We faced jail, torture and false cases. But finally, people triumphed.
The national election was held after seven years in 2008. Winning the election, we formed the government. We started implementation of a Five Year Plan and 10-year-long Poverty Reduction Strategy Plan. We have been working to turn Bangladesh into a middle-income country by 2021 and a developed one by 2041. The people of Bangladesh started getting the benefit of it.
Bangladesh is marching ahead. We earned over 7.1% GDP growth. Inflation is contained within 5.28% and the poverty rate has been reduced to 22%. At this moment, on many socio-economic indicators, Bangladesh’s standing is better than many other South Asian nations whereas a few years ago our position was at the bottom. But we still have a long way to go to ensure prosperity of the people. And we are working towards that end.
My objective is to fulfil the dream of Bangabandhu through building a hunger- and poverty-free Golden Bangladesh being imbued with the spirit of the War of Liberation.
Regional cooperation the key
I always refer to poverty as the main enemy of this region. A large number of people of Bangladesh and India suffer from malnutrition. They are deprived of their basic needs. Lack of nutrition is impeding the growth of a huge number of children. They don’t have proper medicare and schooling. We have to change this scenario. We have the ability. The only thing we need is to change our mentality. I think eradication of poverty should be the first and foremost priority of our political leaders. And, in today’s globalised world, it is difficult to do something in isolation. Rather, collaboration and cooperation can make many things easier. That is why I always put emphasis on regional cooperation and improved connectivity.
I believe in peace. Only peaceful co-existence can ensure peace. There are some issues between us. But I believe that any problem can be resolved in a peaceful manner. We have demonstrated our willpower through the implementation of the Land Boundary Agreement. There are some more issues like sharing of waters of the common rivers (the Teesta issue is currently under discussion) that need to be resolved. I’m an optimistic person. I would like to rest my trust on the goodwill of the great people and the leaders of our neighbour. I know resources are scarce, but we can share those for the benefit of the people of both countries. We share the same culture and heritage. There are a lot of commonalities (at least with West Bengal). We share our Lalon, Rabindranath, Kazi Nazrul, Jibanananda; there is similarity in our language, we are nourished by the waters of the Padma, Brahmaputra, Teesta; and so on. The Sundarbans is our common pride. We don’t have any strife over it. Then, why should there be any contention over the waters of common rivers?
Our foreign policy’s core dictum is: ‘Friendship to all, malice to none.’ The Father of the Nation, Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, defined the policy. We are also inspired from his words: “The very struggle of Bangladesh symbolised the universal struggle for peace and justice. It was, therefore, only natural that Bangladesh, from its very inception, should stand firmly by the side of the oppressed people of the world.” At international forums, we support all international efforts towards building a just and peaceful world.
In recent years, especially after 2009, when my party assumed office, cooperation between Bangladesh and India has been bolstered manifold. Rail, road, and waterway connectivity boosted. Trade, commerce and investment maximised. People-to-people contact also got momentum. Such mutual cooperation is definitely benefitting our people. Relations, at a personal or national level, largely depend on give-and-take measures. Mexican Nobel Laureate Octavio said ‘Friendship is a river’. I think that the friendship between Bangladesh and India is like a flowing river and full with generosity. This is the spirit of the people of the two neighbours. I think if our commitments are honest, we would be able to achieve many things that are beneficial to our people. On the eve of my four-day visit to India, I myself, and on behalf of my countrymen, would like to convey the heartiest greetings to the people of India. I hope that the cooperative relations between Bangladesh and India would reach a new height through my visit.
Sheikh Hasina is the Prime Minister of Bangladesh