India, Israel to set up $40 mn research fund
Form strategic partnership, call for strong measures against terrorists, terror organisations, their networks and financiers
•India and Israel announced a strategic partnership between the two countries after a meeting between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his Israeli counterpart Benjamin Netanyahu, and signed seven agreements in the fields of water, agriculture, space, including a $40 million joint fund for research and development in innovation.
•“India and Israel live in complex geographies. We are aware of the strategic threats to regional peace and stability,” said Mr. Modi, briefing the media on the outcome of the talks. “PM Netanyahu and I agreed to do much more together to protect our strategic interests and also cooperate to combat the growing radicalisation and terrorism, including in cyberspace.”
•While none of the agreements signed on Wednesday were on security issues, officials said they had been prominent in the talks, and officials had discussed the possibility of “joint development of defence products, including the transfer of technology from Israel.”
•“The historic first-ever visit by an Indian Prime Minister to Israel solidified the enduring friendship between their peoples and raised the bilateral relationship to that of a strategic partnership,” the joint statement issued by the Ministry of External Affairs said.
•An earlier version of the joint statement distributed by the Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs didn’t include the wording on an overall “strategic partnership”, indicating that it had been added in the final round of the talks. Without mentioning specifics of the counter-terrorism cooperation envisaged, they agreed that “strong measures should be taken against terrorists, terror organisations, their networks and all those who encourage, support and finance terrorism, or provide sanctuary to terrorists and terror groups.” They also underscored the need to “ensure that terrorist organisations do not get access to any WMD [weapon of mass destruction] or technologies.”
•The veiled references to Pakistan and Iran, both of which are nuclear-capable powers, reflected the concerns India and Israel have on the issue of terror.
•In view of Israel’s position on not welcoming “third party” interventions on the Israel-Palestine peace process, the joint statement only recorded “their support for an early negotiated solution between the sides based on mutual recognition and security arrangements,” without any reference to a “two-state solution” that India supports.
India for Israel, says Modi; force against bad: Netanyahu
Israeli PM says Modi’s visit has solidified the enduring friendship; calls for merger of talent and technology for taking forward the bilateral relationship
•Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who called the India-Israel partnership a force for “good against bad”, after talks with his Indian counterpart Narendra Modi on Wednesday, said they had tasked special committees to implement the seven agreements between them by January 1 next year, and accepted Mr. Modi’s invitation to visit India.
•The agreements cover the fields of water, agriculture, space, including a $40-million joint fund for research and development in innovation.
•The “historic first-ever visit by an Indian Prime Minister” has solidified the enduring friendship, the joint statement issued by the Ministry of External Affairs later said.
•“We discussed so many fields where we think we can make a big difference, in water and agriculture, fields that affect the lives of our people,” Mr. Netanyahu added.
Water conservation
•The two agreements in the field of water deal with the “increasing awareness” of the need for water conservation, as well as an MoU between the Israeli Water Ministry and the Uttar Pradesh Jal Nigam Board. Three MoUs on space cooperation included one for Electric Propulsion for Small Satellites, and for the development of an optical link as well as cooperation on atomic clocks. The fund for research and development, called the “I4F” or India Israel Industrial Innovation Fund, will see both governments contribute $20 million to help research scholars manufacture their inventions easily.
•At a meeting earlier with Israeli President Reuven Rivlin, Mr. Modi also coined the term “I4I” or “India for Israel”, as a response to Mr. Netanyahu’s formula of “Indian talent and Israeli technology equals India-Israel ties for tomorrow.”
•“From ‘Start-up India’ to ‘Make in India’, Israeli technology fits into all of India’s processes for growth,” said Foreign Secretary S. Jaishankar speaking about the significance of the statements. The two sides also agreed to increase air linkages between the two countries, with Air India expected to commence flights to Tel Aviv.
Selection of ECs must be transparent, SC tells Centre
Advocates enactment of legislation to fill gap in statute
•Though so far the election commissioners (ECs) appointed have been “outstanding people, very fair and politically neutral,” there is still a legitimate expectation that they should be selected through the “most transparent and just process” formalised in a law enacted by Parliament, the Supreme Court advised the Centre on Wednesday.
•The Bench of Chief Justice of India J.S. Khehar and D.Y. Chandrachud pointed out that there is a “gap” caused by the lack of a parliamentary law which transparently spells out the process of appointment of an election commissioner. “Who should be shortlisted? Who shortlists these names? What is the eligibility? There is nothing to show the procedure followed in selecting them,” Chief Justice Khehar observed. He said that even the selection procedure of the CBI Director is formalised by a written law, but not that of Election Commissioners.
•The court was hearing a PIL petition filed by Anoop Baranwal, represented by advocate Prashant Bhushan, contending that successive governments failed in the constitutional obligation to set up a “fair, just and transparent process” for selection of ECs.
•“Though it is very complimentary that outstanding people have been appointed so far, there is still a legitimate expectation in the Constitution that a law should be made on the selection process,” the Chief Justice observed.
Transparent manner
•“The Election Commissioners supervise and hold elections in our democracy...such is the significance of their office. Their selection has to be made in the most transparent manner,” he said.
•The court asked the government whether it should intervene in the issue to achieve the constitutional objective under Article 324 (2).
•Solicitor General Ranjit Kumar submitted that the filtering of names of suitable persons for appointment as Election Commissioners is done under the aegis of the Prime Minister and his Cabinet, who in turn advise the President.
•“None other than the Prime Minister is involved in the selection of the election commissioners. Besides it is for Parliament to decide whether there should be a law or not,” Mr. Kumar said.
Parliamentary secretaries’ appointment set aside
‘No provision for the post under law’
•The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Wednesday set aside the appointment of four MLAs as chief parliamentary secretaries in the Manohar Lal Khattar government.
•However, the court, on the request of the Haryana government, put a stay on the implementation of the decision for three weeks.
•Four MLAs -- Shyam Singh Rana, Kamal Gupta, Bakshish Singh Virk and Seema Trikha -- were appointed as chief parliamentary secretaries in the Haryana government in July 2015.
•The court’s verdict came on a petition filed in public interest by lawyer Jagmohan Singh Bhatti, challenging the appointments.
Burden on exchequer
•In the petition, Mr Bhatti contended that under the constitution there was no provision for the post of chief parliamentary secretaries and their appointment. Besides being unconstitutional, it was a burden on the State exchequer and the taxpayer, he said.
•The State government contested the plea saying that chief parliamentary secretaries were appointed to assist Ministers in public interest in view of their varied duties.
Of plant species few and far between
Team from Botanical Survey of India gathers research evidence on rare, threatened plants in the Southern Western Ghats
•Scientists have recorded a major section of Rare Endemic and Threatened plants and trees in the Western Ghats, some of which have not been assessed by international conservation bodies for nearly two decades.
•The Botanical Survey of India (BSI) project on endemic tree resources in the southern Western Ghats, including Kerala and Tamil Nadu, has now documented about 250 ‘RET’ species.
•The assessment of some of these conducted by the International Union for Conservation of Nature for the IUCN Red List puts them under vulnerable, endangered or critically endangered categories based on literature from 1998.
•The three-member team led by K. A. Sujana, Scientist, BSI , told The Hindu on Tuesday that flowers and fruits of more than 250 RET plants were collected, and many of them were flowering or setting fruit only in the rainy season.
•Nearly 177 species were recorded in Kerala’s Wayanad district, especially from biodiversity hotspots like Kurichyarmala, Ranimala, Aranamala, Chembra peak, Periya and Kuruva island, Dr. Sujana said. The BSI is undertaking a three-year programme to document economically important endemic trees nationally.
•The 22-day expedition set off on June 17 from Kurichyarmala in Wayanad and the team spent nearly one week in Wayanad and Tamil Nadu’s Nilgiri district. Four RET species were found in Masinagudi, Kallatti and Pandallur in the Nilgiris.
•The Malabar coast, Periyar National Park, Sholayar-Valparai region and Anamalai were part of the project.
Heavily exploited
•Poorly documented, heavily exploited or habitat-deprived species such as Kingiodendron pinnatum, known in Malayalam as Chukannapayini, Cynometra travancorica, Vateria indica and Hopea parviflora now have better records.
•Evidence on medicinally important plants including Aglaia malabarica (critically endangered in the Red List), Myristica malabarica (vulnerable), Syzigium stocksii and Syzigium dhaneshiana as well as economically important ones like Humboldtia vahliana (unsustainably collection) and Hopea ponga has been gathered.
•With the availability of samples, the chemical constitution, pharmacological values and economic importance of these plants will be studied, Dr. Sujana said.
•A lot of the existing knowledge on these plants comes from tribal communities. By contrast, the common man is unaware or has not even heard of many RET plants. The exploration concludes on Sunday with a visit to the Travancore region.
•Dr. ABD Selvam, scientist and A. Saravanan, botanist, BSI are the other team members.
•The team visited the Andaman and Nicobar Islands and many regions of the Eastern Ghats too, as a part of the project. In the Andamans, the researchers documented 127 endemic trees.
NGT questions pollution control board appointments
•The National Green Tribunal has directed all States and Union Territories (UTs) to explain within a week whether appointments of chairmen and member secretaries in State pollution control boards have been made as per the guidelines stipulated by it.
•A bench headed by NGT chairperson Justice Swatanter Kumar warned that if the reply is not filed by them within the requisite time, it would impose a cost of Rs. 25,000 on each defaulting State or UT.
Specific reply
•“All the State governments and the UTs shall file a specific reply within one week on whether they have complied with the directions contained in the judgment of the tribunal of August 24, 2016.”
•The matter was listed for next hearing on July 12.
FinMin clarifies definition of ‘branded’ items for GST
Product name should be registered under Trade Marks Act
•The Ministry of Finance on Wednesday clarified that for the purposes of Goods and Services Tax (GST) applicability, an item will be deemed to be ‘branded’ if it carries a brand name or trade name that is registered under the Trade Marks Act, 1999.
•The Ministry was trying to allay the confusion around the definition of a branded product, since several unbranded food items are exempt from GST while their branded variants fall in the 5% tax bracket.
•“Doubts are being raised as to the meaning of registered brand name,” an official statement said. “In this context, the notification… clearly defines ‘registered brand name’ as brand name or trade name, which is registered under the Trade Marks Act, 1999. In this regard, Section 2 (w) read with section 2 (t) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 provide that a registered trade mark means a trade mark which is actually on the Register of Trade Marks and remaining in force.”
•“Thus, unless the brand name or trade name is actually on the Register of Trade Marks and is in force under the Trade Marks Act, 1999, CGST rate of 5% will not be applicable on the supply of such goods,” the statement added.
•The GST rate on the supply of food items, such as channa or paneer , natural honey, wheat, rice and other cereals, pulses, and the flour of cereals and pulses, is nil. The rate on these items, when placed in a unit container and bearing a registered brand name, though, is 5%.
Protecting prisoners
Prison reforms must be directedat securing the rights of inmates
•The focus of public and judicial concern over the situation prevailing in India’s prisons has in recent times been related to overcrowding and long spells of incarceration faced by indigent inmates too poor to obtain bail. On some occasions, such as when the horrific blinding of prisoners in Bhagalpur took place over three decades ago, the stark human rights situation also attracted attention. The brutal murder of a woman life convict in the Byculla women’s prison in Mumbai on June 23 has brought the focus back on custodial violence, especially the vulnerability of inmates to authoritarian behaviour. The allegation that prison guards targeted Manjula Shette, a lifer brought to the jail a couple of months ago from the Yerwada Central Prison in Pune as a warder, over some missing rations is indeed startling. It is said she incurred the wrath of the guards because of her rising popularity among the women prisoners. This suggests that until her arrival the inmates may not have been accustomed to even rudimentary care from the jail authorities. Eyewitnesses say that when the warder was severely assaulted by the guards, it led to a riot-like situation among the prisoners. It is not difficult to surmise that simmering discontent over the prevailing conditions, and an intense animus between the guards and the inmates, were behind the events. It is some consolation that the police have arrested six prison officials for the custodial murder.
•It is disconcerting that the untoward incident took place at a time when the Maharashtra government had been directed by the Bombay High Court to undertake a comprehensive review of the conditions in three major prisons in the State. As per the March 2017 court order, an empowered committee was to be constituted to look into all aspects of the jails in the light of Supreme Court decisions, the Model Prison Manual of 2016 and relevant UN resolutions. In particular, the panel was to suggest measures to create modern jails and modernise amenities. In the last half century, the superior courts have passed a series of orders to reform jails. The issues range from prisoners’ rights, health, hygiene and access to legal aid, to the condition of women inmates and their children. The judiciary’s approach has been anchored in the belief that fundamental rights “do not part company with the prisoner at the gates”. The Union Home Minister released a model jail manual last year. It makes clear that the state is under an obligation to protect the residuary rights of prisoners after they surrender their liberty to a legal process. One can only reiterate a principle already enshrined in it: the management of prisons must be marked by firm discipline, but also due regard to the human rights of prisoners. Prison reforms are not only about amenities and conditions; they must also address the prisoner’s right to life.
Realise the de facto realities on J&K
We need to comprehend that there are vast areas in the State not in the control of India
•The row over the U.S. terming a part of Jammu and Kashmir as being “India-administered” is a bit overdone, if not hypocritical. Especially Ghulam Nabi Azad, a Kashmiri, and a Leader of the Opposition in the Rajya Sabha, attacking the government for not contesting the American characterisation. Mr. Azad called it a ‘compromise’ as regards national security.
•The Americans were being merely factual, consistent with the reality on the ground when they said that “Under (Syed) Salahuddin’s tenure as senior (Hizbul Mujahiddeen) HM leader, HM has claimed responsibility for several attacks, including the April 2014 explosives attack in Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir, which injured 17 people.” We may have our cartographic interpretations on the State’s boundary but they have to be considerably hemmed in by the larger political and military realities.
•Consider the map of Jammu and Kashmir. Not the one that we have been used to seeing in school geography books, the one in which we are shown sharing a border with Afghanistan, because that is totally off the mark. The reality is quite different, not at all consistent with notions of ‘Akhand Bharat’ that seemed fashionable some time ago. It sometimes result in bizarre situations like when a Kashmiri politician like Mr. Azad may get inadvertently caught in a controversy for releasing a booklet showing Kashmir as ‘Indian-occupied Kashmir’, as happened in Lucknow in June.
•Or, a situation like Prime Minister Narendra Modi telling an appreciative American desi audience in Virginia that no country uttered a word in reproach against the ‘surgical strikes’ conducted to defend Indian territory. Consider that territory: It lies along the Line of Control (LoC), in the areas which Pakistan controls.
•No amount of hair-splitting can take away the fact that there are areas in Jammu and Kashmir which are in the control of Pakistan. In fact, Pakistan controls a significant portion of its western and northern parts. Some 78,000 sq. km of it, to cite a statement made in Lok Sabha. Any Indian, including Mr. Azad, needs special travel documents to get to the other side of the LoC. Similarly, it is absurd to think that we should attack our own territory to defend ourselves so that Pakistan can be taught a lesson in deterrence.
Cartographic ‘Lakshman rekha’
•Even at the height of the Kargil conflict, we did not cross the LoC. Was it strategic restraint? Common sense? Or acknowledgement of a reality that stares us in the face? It is certainly not cartographic aggression on the part of Pakistan or China. It is instead a cartographic Lakshman rekha that our politicians hold in utmost respect, even though there are resolutions in Parliament which exhort us to do the opposite and do everything within our means to recover all the territory we have ceded to Pakistan and China. This was formalised in April 2005 when we began permitting Pakistanis to come into Jammu and Kashmir in batches of 30 via Muzaffarabad on the Srinagar-Muzaffarabad highway, not with a passport but with special travel documents. In other words, if someone staying on our side of the LoC wants to go to, let’s say, Gilgit or Neelam Valley, his/her travel has to be sanctioned by Pakistani authorities.
•In the area our maps refer to as Jammu and Kashmir, about 37,500 sq. km, comprising the Aksai Chin, is controlled by China. In addition, some 5,180 sq. km was gifted to China by Pakistan. How much does that leave with us?
•The important thing is that our own politicians have in the past declared that the era of map-making has ended. Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s Foreign Minister Jaswant Singh once said that map-making in the subcontinent has to end. He might as well have been echoing then-U.S. President Bill Clinton’s injunction, after General Pervez Musharraf’s Kargil misadventure, of ‘four Rs’: restraint, renunciation of violence, resumption of dialogue and, most importantly, respect for the LoC. That was the first time that the status quo was elevated to such a level as to provide the basis, a glimmer of hope, for a possible eventual outcome of one of the biggest outstanding differences between India and Pakistan. A question arises: If Kashmir is a formal outstanding bilateral issue between India and Pakistan, what will be China’s role in an eventual outcome?
•It is therefore logical that there exist vast areas of Jammu and Kashmir we have no control over whatsoever, administrative or otherwise. It is equally logical that the areas under our control, we administer. After a fashion, of course, but that is another debate.
Missile diplomacy
The U.S. needs to be inventive in responding to the North Korean provocation
•In early January, Donald Trump, then the U.S. President-elect, tweeted that North Korea would never develop a “nuclear weapon capable of reaching parts of the U.S.”. But Pyongyang appears to have done exactly that, defying warnings issued by Washington. Tuesday’s test of an intercontinental ballistic missile, that appears to be capable of striking Alaska, poses perhaps the greatest foreign policy challenge so far before Mr. Trump. And he appears to be lost for an effective response. While senior officials of the Trump administration have consistently talked tough, they have banked heavily on China, North Korea’s most crucial political and economic ally, to rein in its missile programme. Mr. Trump had even offered China a better trade deal for its help in addressing the crisis and appreciated President Xi Jinping’s efforts. But neither the tough posturing nor banking on China’s help seems to have worked, and Kim Jong-un, North Korea’s Supreme Leader, remains as defiant as ever. Washington’s response to the missile test was typical. The U.S. and South Korea immediately conducted missile exercises to counter “North Korea’s destabilising and unlawful actions”, and the State Department asked for more UN sanctions on the North.
•But had sanctions and threats been effective as a strategy, Mr. Kim would not have carried out the ICBM test in the first place. Ever since he took power in 2012 he has steadily expanded North Korea’s missile programme; challenging the U.S. is central to his foreign policy doctrine. All these years the U.S. has stepped up sanctions and taken an incrementally harsher line towards the Kim regime. Mr. Trump has simply followed the Obama administration’s stick-and-sanctions policy towards the North, but with a China emphasis. But he is now back to square one, with very few options. Though the administration has said all options are on the table, even a limited military strike would be dangerously risky. Given the unpredictability of the Kim regime, any attack could be tantamount to a declaration of war on the Korean peninsula. Another option is to continue the tested-and-failed policy of sanctions and international isolation, which would mean more trouble for the North Korean people with an uncertain effect on the roguish regime. It is also unclear whether China will back such isolation. A third option, something that both the Obama and Trump administrations have seemingly overlooked so far, is to hold direct negotiations with Pyongyang. It may appear strange given the current hostility, but that remains the only realistic option before Washington. Mr. Trump has a counterpart in Seoul, Moon Jae-in, who is more inclined to addressing the issue through diplomacy. Besides, there is the history of the North freezing its nuclear programme for nearly a decade in 1994 after a deal with world powers. Mr. Trump should take a realistic view of the crisis rather than immediately opt for retaliatory and punitive measures.
