📰 India, Thailand, Singapore naval exercise concludes in Andaman Sea
It highlights growing synergy between the three friendly navies, says India
•The second edition of the India, Thailand and Singapore trilateral Naval exercise SITMEX-20 concluded in the Andaman Sea on Sunday and the 27th edition of India-Singapore Bilateral Maritime Exercise SIMBEX-20 is scheduled to be held in the same area from November 23 to 25.
•“The exercise, being conducted as a ‘non-contact, at sea only’ exercise in view of COVID-19 pandemic, highlights growing synergy, coordination and cooperation in the maritime domain between the three friendly navies and maritime neighbours,” the Navy said in a statement.
•The Indian Navy deployed indigenous Anti-Submarine Warfare corvette INS Kamorta and missile corvette INS Karmuk for the exercise held on November 21 and 22 and hosted by the Singapore Navy. Singapore deployed a ‘Formidable’ Class frigate ‘Intrepid’ and ‘Endurance’ Class Landing Ship Tank ‘Endeavour’ and the Royal Thai Navy deployed a ‘Chao Phraya’ Class frigate ‘Kraburi’ for the exercise.
•The first edition was hosted by the Indian Navy and was held off Port Blair in September last year. Besides improving inter-operability between the friendly navies, SITMEX series of exercise also aim to strengthen mutual confidence and develop common understanding and procedures towards enhancing the overall maritime security in the region, the statement added.
•For SIMBEX, the Indian Navy is deploying destroyer INS Rana with its integral Chetak helicopter in addition to INS Kamorta and INS Karmuk which are already in the area. In addition, submarine INS Sindhuraj and P8I maritime reconnaissance aircraft will also participate in the exercise, the Navy stated.
The mission, which is expected to cost over ₹4,000 crore, will give a boost to efforts to explore India’s vast Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf, he said.
•India will soon launch an ambitious ‘Deep Ocean Mission’ that envisages exploration of minerals, energy and marine diversity of the underwater world, a vast part of which still remains unexplored, a top official of the Ministry of Earth Sciences said.
•The ministry’s secretary, M Rajeevan, said required approvals are being obtained for the “futuristic and game-changing” mission, and it is likely to be launched in the next 3-4 months.
•The mission, which is expected to cost over ₹4,000 crore, will give a boost to efforts to explore India’s vast Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf, another senior official of the MoES said.
•Mr. Rajeevan said the mission will also involve developing technologies for different deep ocean initiatives.
•The multi-disciplinary work will be piloted by the MoES and other government departments like the Defence Research and Development Organisation, Department of Biotechnology, Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO), Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) will be stakeholders in this mission, Mr. Rajeevan added.
•Some of the technologies involved will be developed by organisations such as the ISRO and DRDO.
•One of the main aspects of the mission will be design, development and demonstration of human submersibles, the MoES official said.
•Another aspect is exploring the possibility of deep sea mining and developing necessary technologies, the official added.
•The official said the move strategically significant as it will enhance India’s presence in the Indian Ocean where other players like China, Korea and Germany are active.
•Last week, China live-streamed footage of its new manned submersible parked at the bottom of the Mariana Trench. This was part of its mission into the deepest underwater valley on the planet.
•India has been ear-marked nearly 1.5 lakh square kilometres of area in the central Indian Ocean for exploration.
•In September 2016, India signed a 15-year contract with the International Seabed Authority (ISA) for exploration of Poly-Metallic Sulphides (PMS) in the Indian Ocean.
•The ISA is an institution set up under the Convention on Law of the Sea to which India is a Party.
•The 15-year contract formalised India’s exclusive rights for exploration of PMS in the allotted area in the Indian Ocean.
•The ISA earlier approved 10,000 sq. km for India with a 15-year PMS exploration plan along the Central Indian Ridge (CIR) and Southwest Indian Ridge (SWIR) region of the Indian Ocean.
•Poly-Metallic Sulphides (PMS), which contain iron, copper, zinc, silver, gold, platinum in variable constitutions, are precipitates of hot fluids from upwelling hot magma from deep interior of the oceanic crust, discharged through mineralized chimneys.
•PMS in the Ocean Ridges have attracted worldwide attention for their long term commercial as well as strategic values.
•The aim is to be prepared when rules are formalised in this area. The deep oceans frontier is yet to be explored. We have been working on it on a piecemeal basis but the thrust is to carry out work on mission mode, the official added. The mission will also involve procurement of more advanced deep sea vessels for explorations. The existing vessel Sagar Kanya is nearly three-and-half decades old.
📰 Uproar over Kerala law to curb abusive content
The amendment had resurrected the “same legal vices” the Supreme Court had “trashed” by scrapping Section 66 A of the IT Act.
•A drastic amendment to the Kerala Police Act, 2011, to give the local law enforcement more teeth to curb defamation has led to an uproar with opposition parties, journalist bodies and civil rights activists seeing a threat to the freedom of the press and free speech in Kerala.
•Kerala Governor Arif Muhammad Khan recently signed an ordinance amending the law to give the police more power to prosecute persons who exploit various communication platforms to slander fellow citizens.
•The ordinance has introduced a new provision, Section 118-A, to the Act. The amendment proposes three years of imprisonment and a fine of upto ₹10,000 for those convicted of producing, publishing or disseminating derogatory content through any means of communication to intimidate, insult or defame any person.
•The Congress has reacted sharply to the move. Leader of the Opposition Ramesh Chennithala said the amendment would reverse the course on media freedom, muzzle free speech and jeopardise civil liberties.
•Former Union Finance Minister P Chidambaram tweeted: “Shocked by the law made by the Left Democratic Front (LDF) government of Kerala making a so-called 'offensive' post on social media punishable by [three] years in prison”.
•KPCC president Mullapally Ramachandran said the new law granted wide latitude to law enforcers to clamp down on free speech and browbeat critics, journalists and commentators into submission.
•B.G. Harindranath, former Law Secretary, Kerala, said the amendment granted the police untrammelled authority to examine published and broadcast content and register cases even in the absence of a specific complaint. The new law has rendered defamation a cognisable offence.
•The amendment had resurrected the “same legal vices” the Supreme Court had “trashed” by scrapping Section 66 A of the IT Act.
•“Conferring power on the police to gauge mental injury, loss of reputation and such matters due to dissemination of information would result in widespread abuse. The amendment could curtail the freedom of speech and expression guaranteed under Article 19 (1) of the Constitution”, he said.
•IUML state general secretary K.P.A. Majeed has criticised the move as an attempt to muzzle the press. Various journalist unions have echoed a similar sentiment.
•Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan said the amendment targeted defamatory social media posts and online content. It did not seek to curb reportage, political satire, opinion, free speech, impartial journalism or commentary.
•The State Government had repeatedly received complaints against the rampant misuse of social media, especially by specific online channels, to launch "inhuman and vile cyber attacks" against individuals and their families under the guise of journalism. However, the ordinance did not specifically mention social media posts.
•The Chief Minister said such attacks smacked of personal vendetta and have resulted in tragic consequences for victims, including suicide. The government has the responsibility to uphold the freedom and dignity of citizens.
•Mr. Vijayan said the “traditional media” functioned mostly within the bounds of the law. However, "certain" online channels had scant regard for law and violated the rights of others with impunity.
•Such outlets have “created an atmosphere of anarchy that could alter the social order, which cannot be allowed”, the Chief Minister said. The government was open to “creative opinions and suggestions” regarding the amendment, he said.
📰 132 countries attend 4th Global meet on criminal finances
Representatives discuss cross-sector solutions against the criminal use of cryptocurrencies
•Over 2,000 representatives from 132 countries attended the virtual 4th Global Conference on Criminal Finances and Cryptocurrencies organised by the Interpol, Europol and the Basel Institute on Governance from November 18 to 19.
•“Representatives from law enforcement and the judiciary, Financial Intelligence Units (FIUs), international organisations and the private sector have met virtually to shape international cross-sector solutions against the criminal use of cryptocurrencies,” said the Interpol.
•The conference is an initiative of the Working Group on Cryptocurrencies and Money Laundering established in 2016 by the three organisations, launched with an objective of strengthening knowledge, expertise and best practices for investigations into financial crimes and intelligence on virtual assets and cryptocurrencies.
•“Recent increases in the number and quality of investigations in the field of cryptocurrency-facilitated crime and subsequent money laundering means that law enforcement and other public entities are continuing to enhance their level of knowledge and expertise in this crime area. In this regard, the conference served as an opportunity to underline the need for countries and jurisdictions to increase the exchange of tactical information and best practices, so that lessons learnt by one entity can be useful to others,” it said.
•The conference underlined the need to expand capabilities on ways to probe virtual assets and regulate virtual asset service providers to prevent money laundering.
•“A multi-agency and multi-disciplinary approach involving both the private and public sectors is key to tackling criminal finances and the misuse of cryptocurrencies. By combining the expertise and data on financial crime held by the private sector with the investigative capabilities of law enforcement, we can enhance our collective capabilities and scale up efforts against criminal finances,” said Ilana de Wild, Interpol’s director of organised and emerging crime.
•The conference’s agenda included trends and investigations on cryptocurrency related offences, exploring criminal flows and operations in the dark markets, ransomware and sextortion case studies, money laundering involving virtual assets, and the transfer of drug proceeds using cryptocurrencies.
•The participants endorsed the recommendations on capacity building measures on ways to probe virtual assets, establishing clear regulatory framework to prevent money laundering, adopting ‘follow the money’ strategies against criminal proceeds, strengthening information exchange to dismantle criminal networks, and exploiting new technologies in criminal finances investigations, said the Interpol.
📰 Peaceful possibilities: On J&K local body polls
Elections in J&K can lead to participatory politics and meaningful dialogue
•The coming local body elections in Jammu and Kashmir could be an opportunity to open a new political dialogue in the Union Territory, particularly on the question of restoring its statehood. In the first democratic exercise since the Centre revoked J&K’s special status and reorganised it into two UTs in August 2019, Panchayati Raj elections are scheduled over eight phases beginning November 28. For the first time, this part of India will have the entire 73rd Constitutional Amendment coming into operation. In October, the UT administration amended the Panchayati Raj Act, providing for District Development Councils (DDC) in each district, and establishing the three-tier PR structure. Alongside the election of 280 DDC members, by-elections for around 12,000 panchayat seats and over 230 urban body seats will also take place. Peaceful, participatory election in a troubled region can be the most forceful demonstration of the resilience of Indian democracy. It is for this reason that elections are a target for those who believe that only violence can achieve popular aspirations in Kashmir. Four JeM militants who were planning a terror attack in the Valley to disrupt the elections and sow chaos were neutralised last week.
•A violence-free election is necessary, but not sufficient for a vibrant democracy. The BJP’s strident political posturing, portraying all its political opponents as anti-national and separatist might be electorally useful for it in the Jammu region but is harmful for the national integration that it professes. When such statements come from the Home Minister of India, it is even more counterproductive. Choices before the people of J&K must not be framed as a binary of macabre violence of Islamist separatism and dehumanising submission of their cultural identity to authoritarian ultranationalism. There are other viable possibilities for J&K’s progressive, respectful and accommodative association with the rest of India, which preserve national integrity and honour the region’s identity. A coalition of regional parties including the PDP and the National Conference, once the BJP’s allies, and the CPI(M), under the banner of People’s Alliance for Gupkar Declaration, has made the restoration of J&K’s special status and its statehood central to its politics. The alliance leaders have complained about restrictions on their campaigning. The Congress, which was in touch with the alliance earlier, has now snapped its ties with it. The government must encourage the widest voter participation, the clearest route to this being through an unrestrained and freewheeling campaign that mobilises and expresses the whole range of public opinion. All that might be said would not be acceptable or desirable. But meaningful dialogue is essential, and elections are the best way to open up peaceful possibilities.
📰 In vaccine race last lap, the key steps for India
Linked to the government plan of supply from multiple sources is the need for a concise recipient prioritisation policy
•Evaluation of candidate vaccines for COVID-19 should be done on technical parameters and programmatic suitability. An ideal vaccine would provide all of these — immunity that is of a high degree (90% + protective especially against severe illness), broad scale (against different variants) and durable (at least five years if not lifelong); a vaccine that is safe (little or no side-effects and definitely no serious adverse effects); a vaccine that is cheap (similar to current childhood vaccines); a vaccine that is programmatically suitable (single dose, can be kept at room temperature or at worst needs simple refrigeration between 2°C and 4°C, needle-free delivery, and a vaccine that is available in multidose vials, has long shelf life and is amenable to rapid production.
•Obviously, a vaccine having all these desirable characteristics is a pipe dream and most vaccines would fare well in some and not so well in other parameters, making it difficult to choose between them. Also, at this stage, we are only looking at a one-time use of this vaccine to stop the novel coronavirus pandemic as the requirement for a regular vaccination (as for influenza) would be somewhat different.
A difficult vaccine to develop
•Historically, we have faced difficulties in the development of coronavirus vaccines. Although there were some attempts at development of vaccines against Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) and the Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS), there are no licensed vaccines for any coronavirus yet. Previous coronavirus vaccines were found to be immunogenic (generate antibodies as in phase II) but did not effectively prevent acquisition of disease (phase III) fuelling a concern that vaccination may not induce long-lived immunity, and re-infection may be possible. There are also safety concerns due to immunological consequences of the vaccine as these vaccines use newer techniques with which we do not have long term or large population experience.
•At this stage, it is not possible to comment much on the duration and breadth of protection of COVID-19 vaccine candidates. About the safety of vaccines, there are always possibilities of rare (one in million) or delayed (by months or years) serious adverse events which will come to light only after mass vaccination has started; this requires a good post-licensure surveillance system to be in place. We should be prepared for such eventualities, and a clear policy on their compensation should be framed.
Most could be in two doses
•The COVID-19 vaccine candidates by Moderna and Pfizer have already released early information of high effectiveness (90%+). Pfizer’s two-dose shots need to be stored at minus 70°C) something which is beyond India’s current vaccine storage infrastructure. Moderna’s vaccine is more thermostable and has a requirement similar to what we used for oral polio vaccines. AstraZeneca, also a frontrunner, makes use of simplified storage settings as do many other candidates. As results of phase 3 trials of other vaccines are out, we will be faced with a dilemma of choice (referred to earlier). Almost all of them seem to require two doses.
•Given this complicated scenario, what should the government strategy be while choosing a vaccine and for vaccination?
Ranking by risk category
•The first rule would be to not to put all your eggs in one basket. We already know that government has planned for vaccine supply from different sources. The second rule would be to prioritise. The World Health Organization has issued guidelines for prioritisation for vaccine recipients. For this, we need to rank population sub-groups by risk category (risk of infection or adverse outcome or economic impact), and by programmatic ease of vaccination — based on their captivity (health-care workers, organised sector, workplace, schools), and access to existing channels of vaccination (pregnant women and children). Start with where these two criteria intersect — health-care workers followed by policemen. The third rule is use multiple channels to immunise the population. Other important considerations would be of equity and cost. Obviously, military and paramilitary staff will be dealt with as a special case due to their high captivity and national security considerations.
•The first product off the block may not be suitable in terms of cost and cold storage, but if the priority is health-care workers, then we could go ahead and buy some (how much is a trade- off) vaccines for this group if it is above 75% effective, as it is possible to immunise health-care workers keeping cold storage requirements at their own facility, including in private sector or district hospitals. The same infrastructure can also be used to vaccinate the police force. This will buy us some time to evaluate other vaccines and delivery options. The workplace and school-based vaccination roll-out could be the second phase of vaccination.
Models of social mobilisation
•Problems will arise as we move towards vaccinating the general population, even high-risk groups (the elderly and those with co-morbidity) in the general population. It might be easier to vaccinate the institutionalised elderly as compared to community-dwelling ones. The only orderly option is to create some sort of a technological solution of a queuing system based on an earlier registration process for age and presence of co-morbidity and allotment of appointment in a nearest booth. It is essential that we avoid overcrowding during vaccination.
•However, the greatest challenge would be to immunise the poorest and the most vulnerable (slums/migrants/refugees/people with disabilities). Because of access issues, this must be by an outreach or camp approach (booths along with web-enabled appointments facilitated by civil society); a programmatically suitable vaccine will have to be prioritised for them. We have learnt major lessons through social mobilisation efforts during the Pulse Polio campaigns, Aadhaar card enrolment and elections, which will serve as good models. We have the wherewithal to do it. However, our Aadhaar experience shows that this will take time. Fortunately, for the pandemic to end, we need not have to immunise everybody. It is expected that the pandemic would start receding once we protect about 60% of the population (in terms of coverage x effectiveness). However, we should ensure that this coverage is well-spread out, else focal outbreaks will keep occurring in areas with poor vaccine coverage. This also raises the possibility of using a ring immunisation strategy (immunising the population around reported cases), even earlier.
Dealing with ‘pay and get’
•One major challenge would be that many people would be willing to pay for the vaccine and ask for expedited access. So, should we allow this? Obviously, till we cover a bulk of phase 1 beneficiaries, the government should not concern itself with other groups. However, it can and should allow the vaccine to be available in the private sector at a market-driven price for such people. It will be ethical as well as cost-saving for the government, if it does not divert vaccines from the government-driven programme. Let the decision to wait for a government-delivered vaccine or one from the private sector be made by individuals, and not the government. It will also free the government to focus more on “needy” people.
•Many countries have already published their prioritisation policy whereas in India, it is only based on what we hear from the media — that health-care workers have been prioritised and details are not available in the public domain. It is critical that the government has a fair, transparent and published policy in this regard even if it results in heartburn in some quarters. Choosing, paying for vaccines and their administration by governments are going to be most challenging with no easy answers. And I expect some missteps early in the game. I would not like to be in those shoes, as public criticism is inevitable.
📰 No Minister, the trade agreement pitch is flawed
Citing trade agreements for India’s below-potential growth appears to be a way to deflect blame for policy errors
•India’s External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar has presented an ill-considered take on India’s trade record in a ‘keynote’ speech delivered at a “dialogue” on November 16.
•The Minister believes that the economic growth that has accrued from globalisation is not a good enough outcome for India. An “honest” self-assessment of this trade and economic performance is necessary to show what costs India has paid for its economic success: That if globalisation, especially trade, is assessed in the broader context of its overall impact on society, the costs could be shown to have set off the gains considerably. That one such cost is “de-industrialisation”. That “employment challenge” was created by trade. That trade agreements have made India “over-dependent on imports”.
•Let us fact check the Minister. A new paper by Shoumitro Chatterjee and Arvind Subramanian, ‘India’s Inward (Re)Turn: Is it Warranted? Will it Work?’ is instructive.
Export-led growth
•The Minister gets it right when he says that trade has delivered high economic growth for the country. India’s record of export-led growth cannot be dismissed. Between 1995 and 2018, India’s overall export growth averaged 13.4% (in dollars) annually. This is the third best performance in the world among the top 50 exporters. It is nearly twice the world average growth and not far behind China’s growth of just over 15%. The Chatterjee-Subramanian paper also shows how much exports contributed to GDP growth in each of the three decades since the 1990s.
•The Minister has a point when he says this performance represents only limited progress relative to India’s potential, and that this gap with the potential presents the real challenges. It is true that despite the evident success, India is not a big exporter on the global scale; its share of global manufacturing exports is only 1.7%, marginally less than Vietnam’s, at 1.75%.
‘Strong rupee’ approach
•But how much of the blame for India’s below-potential growth can be ascribed to trade agreements? This causation Mr. Jaishankar suggests is problematic. India’s exports growth has lost momentum in recent years. The Narendra Modi government’s “strong rupee” approach is among the chief causes that have been shown to have slowed down exports. The real effective exchange rate has appreciated by about 20% since 2014. This is not a subsidy given by other countries to their exporters. It is in fact a subsidy given by Mr. Modi’s government to the exporters of other countries. If imports — such as of holidays and higher education overseas — have leapt, it is because the exchange rate has made them more affordable.
•Studies of trade agreements by NITI Aayog show that Indian exporters suffer logistics, compliance and transaction costs twice as high in other countries. This low ease of doing business relative to other exporting countries has further eroded the competitiveness of Indian exports. In sectoral causes, the damage to the reputational advantage of India’s pharmaceutical exports after malfeasance fraud was exposed at some manufacturers, has hurt exports. Those can also not be blamed on trade agreements.
On manufacturing
•The Minister does not get it quite as right on manufacturing. Between 1995 and 2018, India’s manufacturing exports (in dollars) grew on average by 12.1%, nearly twice the world average. This was the third-best performance in the world, surpassed only by China and Vietnam. Even during the years of slowing global trade post-2012, when world exports were virtually flat, India continued to gain global market share, its exports growing by about 3%. During this period, India’s manufacturing export growth ranked within the top 10 among the 50 major exporters. Can this be characterised as “de-industrialisation” caused by trade? If India’s manufacturing sector finds itself in crisis since 2012, it is in large part because of policy errors inflicted first by the Manmohan Singh-led government and then the one headed by Mr. Modi.
•Between fiscal years 2006 to 2012, manufacturing-sector GDP grew by an average of 9.5% per year. India’s trade openness was at its peak during these years of high growth that also overlaps with the period when the highest number of Indians in recorded history exited poverty. Then, over the next six years, manufacturing-sector GDP growth declined to 7.4%, coinciding with the phase of corruption scandals, a severe banking crisis, demonetisation and a badly designed Goods and Services Tax(GST) — none of which were consequences of trade agreements.
MEA in lead role
•The paper by Chatterjee-Subramanian shows how openness to trade is in fact one of the few channels available to India for generating employment in the post-COVID-19 world, given that the financial positions of households, government and banks are too weak to support the economy. They calculate that after the 2008 global financial crisis, China vacated about $140 billion in exports in unskilled-labour intensive sectors, including apparel, clothing, leather and footwear. But India did not take advantage of the opportunity. India is exporting about $60 billion of low-skill exports annually less than it can if the underlying problems are addressed.
•The weakest case the Minister makes is on the employment challenge. Probably because economic arguments are playing an ever-shrinking role in formulation of trade negotiating positions and growth strategies, with curtailed roles for the Departments of Economic Affairs and Commerce, and the Ministry of External Affairs taking over much of the economic diplomacy.
•Trade openness versus import substitution is the one policy debate where policymakers need to look no further than India’s own pre-1991 experience of inferior, low-quality products on the one hand and low growth rates on the other. Great examples of how responsible globalisation can solve problems are the multiple COVID-19 vaccines being readied across the world. They are in fact India’s only hope of safeguarding the population. To denounce trade openness and globalisation at this point is also poor timing.
•Mr. Jaishankar’s speech is a great candidate for a fact check of the sort done on U.S. President Donald Trump’s unfounded statements by the U.S. media. But to explain it away as a poorly-researched and badly argued talk would be to miss the point of it completely. It serves to lend credibility to the anti-trade narrative invented by certain political outfits — on the Left and the Right — that have come to represent India’s worst economic insecurities. This is no ordinary member of Mr. Modi’s Cabinet speaking. By blaming trade agreements for “de-industrialisation”, Mr. Jaishankar seeks to deflect blame for the Modi government’s policy errors.
•India’s switch to a “strong rupee” policy, in line with the Prime Minister’s pre-2014 election campaign, led to the surge in imports of goods and services preferred by non-rich Indians, and a measurable loss of competitiveness in labour-intensive exports. At the same time, the disadvantages Indian exporters have long struggled against — the substantially higher logistics and other costs — remain as burdensome. The speech is a purely political one.
