📰 Union Cabinet gives approval for Akash missile export
It also approves a high-level committee to expedite clearance of such exports.
•As part of efforts to boost defence exports,. the Union Cabinet, chaired by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, on Wednesday approved the export of the indigenously developed and manufactured Akash short-range Surface to Air Missile (SAM) system. It also approved the high-level committee formed to expedite clearance of such exports.
•Besides Akash, there was interest coming in for other major platforms such as the Coastal Surveillance System, radars and air platforms, the Defence Ministry said. For faster approval of export of such platforms, a committee comprising the Defence Minister, the External Affairs Minister and the National Security Advisor had been created, it stated.
•“This committee would authorise subsequent exports of major indigenous platforms to various countries. It would also explore various available options, including the government to government route,” it said.
•Defence Minister Rajnath Singh said on Twitter: “The export version of Akash will be different from system currently deployed with Indian armed forces.”
Export of big platforms
•So far, Indian defence exports included parts and components but the export of big platforms was minimal, Mr. Singh noted. “This decision by the Cabinet would help the country to improve its defence products and make them globally competitive.”
•After its induction in the Services, interest was shown in the Akash missile by many friendly countries during international exhibitions/Def Expo/Aero India, the Ministry said, adding that the Cabinet approval would facilitate Indian manufactures to participate in tenders issued by various countries.
•Akash has a range of 25 km and can simultaneously engage multiple targets in all weather conditions. It has a large operational envelope from a low altitude of 30 metres to a maximum of up to 20 km. It was inducted in 2014 in the Air Force and in 2015 in the Indian Army.
•“Akash is the country’s important missile with over 96% indigenisation,” Mr. Singh pointed out.
Vietnam evinces interest
•As reported by The Hindu earlier, under the second Line of Credit (LoC) of $500 mn extended by India to Vietnam in 2016, Hanoi has expressed interest in procuring the Akash system and Dhruv Advanced Light Helicopter.
•To achieve the target of $5 bn defence exports and improve strategic relations with friendly foreign countries, the government intended to focus on exporting high value defence platforms, he stressed.
•In August, the Defence Ministry issued a draft ‘Defence Production & Export Promotion Policy (DPEPP) 2020’ for public feedback with the aim to achieve a manufacturing turnover of $25 bn or ₹1,75,000 crore, including exports of $5 bn in aerospace and defence goods and services by 2025
Greenfield industrial cities will be connected to major transportation corridors
•The Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs (CCEA) on Tuesday approved three infrastructure proposals worth ₹7,725 crore for setting up greenfield industrial cities with connectivity to major transportation corridors such as the eastern and western dedicated freight corridors, expressways and National Highways.
•The three projects, proposed by the Department of Promotion of Industry & Internal Trade, include construction of various trunk infrastructure components for the Krishnapatnam Industrial Area in Andhra Pradesh with an estimated cost of the project of ₹2,139.44 crore; Tumakuru Industrial Area in Karnataka with an estimated cost of ₹1,701.81 crore; and a Multi Modal Logistics Hub (MMLH) and Multi Modal Transport Hub (MMTH) at Greater Noida in Uttar Pradesh with an estimated cost of ₹3,883.8 crore.
•“Envisioned on the backbone of major transportation corridors like Eastern & Western Dedicated Freight Corridors, Expressways and National Highways, proximity to ports, airports, etc., the objective of Industrial Corridor Programme is the creation of greenfield industrial cities with sustainable, ‘plug n play’, ICT enabled utilities to facilitate the manufacturing investments into the country,” an official statement said.
•It added that the developed land parcels in these cities will be ready for immediate allotment to attract investments into manufacturing and position India as a strong player in the global value chain.
•These projects will generate ample employment opportunities through industrialisation. For the Krishnapatnam node, estimated employment projection on the completion of the first phase of development is likely to be around 98,000 persons, of which about 58,000 persons are likely to be employed at the site. For the Tumakuru node, employment of about 88,500 persons is estimated, out of which 17,700 persons will be from service industries such as retail, offices and other commercial opportunities in the initial development phase, the government said.
•It added that the MMLH at Greater Noida will be developed as a world-class facility that will provide efficient storage/transitioning of goods to/from dedicated freight corridors, and offer a one-stop destination to freight companies and customers. The facility will not only provide standard container handling activities but also various value-added services to reduce logistics cost with improved efficiency of operations.
•Likewise, the MMTH located near the already existing Indian Railways station of Boraki will act as a transport hub with provisioning of rail and road. It will have space for an Inter State Bus Terminal, a Local Bus Terminal, a Metro transit system, commercial, retail and hotel space, and green open spaces. “The project will provide world-class passenger movement facilities for the growing population of the catchment zone catering to upcoming developments in the U.P. sub-region of NCR (National Capital Region) and thus, decongest Delhi,” it said, adding that the employment generation is estimated to about 1,00,000 persons by 2040 for both these projects.
📰 Over 66,000 police on VIP duty in 2019: report
The sanctioned strength for the job was 43,566 policemen.
•More than 20,000 additional policemen than the sanctioned strength were deployed in VIP protection duty in the year 2019, according to a report prepared by the Bureau of Police Research and Development (BPR&D), police think tank of the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA)
•As per the report, Data on Police Organisations, as many as 66,043 policemen were deployed to protect 19,467 ministers, members of parliament, judges, bureaucrats and other personalities in 2019 compared to 63,061 policemen for similar duty in 2018. The sanctioned strength for the job was 43,566 policemen.
Highest in Bengal
•The highest number of persons who received police protection in 2019 were in West Bengal — 3,142, followed by Punjab 2,594, Bihar 2,347, Haryana 1,355 and Jharkhand 1,351.
•The total number of Central Armed Police Force (CAPF) personnel engaged for providing personal protection to various individuals was not included in the report.
•At 8,182, the Delhi police deputed the highest number of personnel for personal protection of 501 individuals, the report said. Capital city Delhi is home to several union ministers and other important protected individuals and the sanctioned strength for such duty is 7,294.
•As per the report, the Population Per Police Person is 511.81, that is one policeman for every 511.81 persons and 3.9 policemen for each VIP. Bihar had the worst ratio with one policeman for 867.57 persons. The projected population as in November 2019 provided by the Registrar General of India for tabulating the data was 134.3 crore.
Computers, servers
•The report also showed that at the national level, 1,40,482 computers, 1,681 servers and 13,232 laptops are available with State and Union territory police. Maharashtra police had the highest number of personal computers — 16,014, followed by West Bengal 10,910, Gujarat 10,686, Karnataka 10,374 and Uttar Pradesh 9,709. The Kerala police had the highest number of laptops — 4,019 followed by the Karnataka police 2,000 laptops.
•The report was released on Tuesday. It is being published on an annual basis since 1986.
📰 Facial recognition technology: law yet to catch up
Rapid deployment of facial recognition system by the government without any law in place poses a huge threat to privacy rights and freedom of speech and expression, say experts
•There are currently 16 different facial recognition tracking (FRT) systems in active utilisation by various Central and State governments across India for surveillance, security or authentication of identity. Another 17 are in the process of being installed by different government departments.
•While the FRT system has seen rapid deployment by multiple government departments in recent times, there are no specific laws or guidelines to regulate the use of this potentially invasive technology.
•This, legal experts say, poses a huge threat to the fundamental rights to privacy and freedom of speech and expression because it does not satisfy the threshold the Supreme Court had set in its landmark privacy judgment in the ‘Justice K.S. Puttaswamy Vs Union of India’ case.
•In 2018, the Delhi police became one of the first law enforcement agencies in the country to start using the technology. It, however, declined to answer to a Right to Information (RTI) query on whether it had conducted “privacy impact assessment” prior to deployment of the facial recognition system (FRS).
•Advocate Apar Gupta, co-founder of Internet Freedom Foundation (IFF), in his RTI application had also asked the Delhi police whether there are any guidelines, policies, rules or standard operating procedure governing its use of facial recognition technology.
•The Delhi police vaguely replied, “The FRS technology may be used in investigation in the interest of safety and security of general public”. In the same RTI reply, the Delhi police also stated that the use of facial recognition technology was authorised by the Delhi High Court.
Function creep
•However, advocate Anushka Jain, associate counsel (Transparency & Right to Information), IFF pointed out that the police got permission to use the FRS by an order of the Delhi High Court for tracking missing children.
•“Now they are using it for wider security and surveillance and investigation purpose, which is a function creep,” Ms. Jain said.
•A function creep happens when someone uses information for a purpose that is not the original specified purpose.
•In December last year, The Hindu reported that the Delhi police, with the help of automated facial recognition system (AFRS), was comparing the details of people involved in violence during the anti-Citizenship Act protests in Jamia Millia Islamia with a data bank of more than two lakh ‘anti-social elements’.
•Ms. Jain said: “The function has widened at the back end and we don’t actually know for what purpose they might be using it and how they are being regulated and if there is any regulation at all”.
•“This might lead to an over-policing problem or problems where certain minorities are targeted without any legal backing or any oversight as to what is happening. Another problem that may arise is of mass surveillance, wherein the police are using the FRT system during protest,” Ms. Jain said.
•If someone goes to a protest against the government, and the police are able to identify the person, then there might be repercussions, she argued. “This obviously has a chilling effect on the individual’s freedom of speech and expression and right to protest as well as my right to movement”.
•“This might lead to government tracking us all the time,” she added.
Proportionality test
•Vidushi Marda, a lawyer and researcher at Article 19, a human rights organisation, said the Supreme Court in the Puttaswamy judgment ruled that privacy is a fundamental right even in public spaces.
•“And if these rights needs to be infringed, then the government has to show that such action is sanctioned by law, proportionate to the need for such interference, necessary and in pursuit of a legitimate aim,” Ms. Marda said.
•She flagged various issues with the AFRS, an ambitious pan-India project under the Home Ministry which will be used by the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) and various States’ law enforcement departments.
•“The IFF filed a legal notice to the Home Ministry asking under what legal basis was the AFRS built, since, as per the Puttaswamy judgment, it does not meet the threshold of proportionality and legality,” Ms. Marda said.
•“The basis of the AFRS is a Cabinet note of 2009. But the Cabinet note is not a legal substance, it’s a procedural note at best. So it does not form a valid legal system based on which the AFRS can be built,” she added.
Questionable accuracy
•Ms. Jain, who is currently working on Panoptic, a project to track the deployment and implementation of FRT projects in the country, said that 100% accuracy in finding matches has not been achieved under this technology.
•“In case an inaccurate system is installed, two things can happen. There can be a ‘false positive’ wherein somebody is recognised as somebody they are not or ‘false negative’ wherein the system refuses to recognise the person as themselves.
•In case of a ‘false positive’, she gave example of the police using the FRT system to identify and arrest somebody who is not the suspect. If a ‘false negative’ occurs when the government is using the FRT system to provide its schemes, then this could lead to many people facing exclusion from such government schemes, Ms. Jain added.
•“These FRT systems are being developed and deployed across India without any legal framework in place, which creates a lot of problems. If you are caught hold off by the police through the FRT system, what do you do? What are your remedies? There is no framework in place where you can even question them,” she pointed out.
•Ms. Mishi Choudhary, technology lawyer and digital rights activist, said, “Many cities and states in the U.S. have either completely banned the usage or impose moratorium on the usage of facial recognition tech”.
•“Companies like IBM, Microsoft have decided not to sell these technologies to law enforcement at all. Even Amazon has imposed a moratorium. Facial recognition technology has not only been invasive, inaccurate and unregulated but has also been unapologetically weaponised by law enforcement against people of color,” Ms. Choudhary added.
•“In India, we have no law to protect people, no guardrails about usage of data by private players or government. We hear several news on police abuse even without the aid of technology. Facial recognition is perfect form of surveillance that builds tyrannical societies. It automates discriminatory policing and will exacerbate existing injustices in our criminal justice system,” Ms. Choudhary said.
📰 British lawmakers approve post-Brexit trade deal with EU
The European Parliament also must sign off on the agreement, but is not expected to do so for several weeks.
•Britain’s House of Commons voted resoundingly on Wednesday to approve a trade deal with the European Union, paving the way for an orderly break with the bloc that will finally complete the U.K.’s years-long Brexit journey.
•With just a day to spare, lawmakers voted 521-73 in favor of the agreement sealed between the U.K. government and the EU last week.
•It will become British law once is passes through the unelected House of Lords later in the day and gets formal royal assent from Queen Elizabeth II.
•The U.K. left the EU almost a year ago, but remained within the bloc’s economic embrace during a transition period that ends at midnight Brussels time — 11 p.m. in London — on Thursday.
•European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and European Council President Charles Michel signed the agreement during a brief ceremony in Brussels on Wednesday morning. The documents were then being flown by Royal Air Force plane to London for British Prime Minister Boris Johnson to add his signature.
•“The agreement that we signed today is the result of months of intense negotiations in which the European Union has displayed an unprecedented level of unity,” Mr. Michel said. “It is a fair and balanced agreement that fully protects the fundamental interests of the European Union and creates stability and predictability for citizens and companies.”
•The European Parliament also must sign off on the agreement, but is not expected to do so for several weeks.
•Just after the EU’s top officials formally signed the hard-won agreement in Brussels, Mr. Johnson urged legislators in the House of Commons to back a deal that he said heralded “a new relationship between Britain and the EU as sovereign equals.”
•It has been four and a half years since Britain voted 52% to 48% to leave the bloc it had joined in 1973. Brexit started on Jan. 31 of this year, but the real repercussions of that decision have yet to be felt, since the U.K.’s economic relationship with the EU remained unchanged during the 11-month transition period that ends Dec. 31.
•That will change on New Year’s Day. The agreement, hammered out after more than nine months of tense negotiations and sealed on Christmas Eve, will ensure Britain and the 27-nation EU can continue to trade in goods without tariffs or quotas. That should help protect the 660 billion pounds ($894 billion) in annual trade between the two sides, and the hundreds of thousands of jobs that rely on it.
•But the end to Britain’s membership in the EU’s vast single market and customs union will still bring inconvenience and new expense for both individuals and businesses — from the need for tourists to have travel insurance to the millions of new customs declarations that firms will have to fill out.
•Brexit supporters, including Mr. Johnson, say any short-term pain will be worth it.
•Mr. Johnson said the Brexit deal would turn Britain from “a half-hearted, sometimes obstructive member of the EU” into “a friendly neighbor — the best friend and ally the EU could have.”
•He said Britain would now “trade and cooperate with our European neighbors on the closest terms of friendship and goodwill, whilst retaining sovereign control of our laws and our national destiny.”
•Some lawmakers grumbled about being given only five hours in Parliament to scrutinize a 1,200-page deal that will mean profound changes for Britain’s economy and society. But it is highly likely to get backing from the House of Commons, where Mr. Johnson’s Conservative Party has a large majority.
•The party’s powerful euroskeptic wing, which fought for years for the seemingly longshot goal of taking Britain out of the EU, has backed the deal.
•The strongly pro-EU Scottish National Party and Liberal Democrats voted against the bill. But the main opposition Labour Party, which had sought a closer relationship with the bloc, said it would vote for the agreement because even a thin deal was better than a chaotic no-deal rupture.
•“We have only one day before the end of the transition period, and it’s the only deal that we have," said Labour leader Keir Starmer. "It’s a basis to build on in the years to come.”
•Former Prime Minister Theresa May, who resigned in 2019 after three years of Brexit acrimony in Parliament, said she would vote for Mr. Johnson's agreement. But she said it was worse than the one she had negotiated with the bloc, which lawmakers repeatedly rejected.
•She noted that the deal protected trade in goods but did not cover services, which account for 80% of Britain's economy.
•“We have a deal in trade, which benefits the EU, but not a deal in services, which would have benefitted the U.K.," Ms.May said.
📰 U.K. approves Oxford vaccine
India’s drug regulators, in a meeting convened just hours after the approval, reviewed an application by Serum Institute of India for emergency use of jab.
•AstraZeneca’s COVID-19 vaccine has been approved for emergency supply in the United Kingdom, with the first doses being released on Wednesday, so that vaccinations may begin early in the New Year, the company said in a statement on Wednesday.
•This is significant for India, as the Pune-based Serum Institute of India (SII) has tied up with AstraZeneca to deploy the vaccine in the country. “This is a great and encouraging news. We will wait for the final approval from Indian regulators,” Adar Poonawala, CEO, SII, said.
•India’s drug regulators, in a meeting convened just hours after the approval accorded to AstraZeneca, reviewed an application by the SII for ‘emergency use authorisation’ (EUA).
•However, the Health Ministry, in a statement, said the Subject Expert Committee of the DCGI (Drugs Controller General of India) was still analysing “additional data” and would reconvene on Friday. Applications of Bharat Biotech, which is testing its ‘Covaxin’ vaccine candidate; and Pfizer, with its m-RNA vaccine, were also reviewed.
•The EUA is for active immunisation of individuals of 18 years or older and recommends two doses with an interval of between four and 12 weeks. “This regimen was shown in clinical trials to be safe and effective at preventing symptomatic COVID-19, with no severe cases and no hospitalisations more than 14 days after the second dose,” the statement noted.
•An EUA allows an organisation to launch vaccine without putting it through the full range of tests that a new untested vaccine must usually go through.
•A scientist connected to the approval process of new vaccines told The Hindu that a nod from regulators in the U.K. or the U.S. “works very favourably” for the SII.
•Neither company has announced the results of the ongoing phase-3 trials that test the vaccine candidate in thousands of volunteers in India.
•Both AstraZeneca and Pfizer have been approved in the U.K. and the U.S. respectively after they publicised data from their ongoing phase-3 trials.
•Were Indian regulators to approve, at least 50 million doses of the vaccine would reportedly be available to Indians and would go some way to aid the nearly 300 million priority individuals--healthcare workers, police personnel, those with co-morbid disease conditions--that are expected to be inoculated in the first half of 2021.
•The U.K. government, in a statement, said it had “accepted” the recommendation from the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) to authorise the Oxford University/AstraZeneca vaccine for use.
No sub-zero refrigeration
•Unlike the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, the ‘Oxford vaccine’ doesn’t require sub-zero refrigeration and is reportedly more conducive to be distributed in India.
•AstraZeneca aims to supply millions of doses in the first quarter as part of an agreement with the government to supply up to 100 million doses in total.
•The U.K. health regulator’s decision was based on independent advice from its Commission on Human Medicines following a rolling review of the trial data that included an interim analysis of the Phase III programme led by the University of Oxford. The data were also published in The Lancet on December 8, 2020.
•AstraZeneca said it was working with its global partners to be able to manufacture up to three billion doses of the vaccine globally in 2021 on a rolling basis, pending regulatory approvals.
•AZD1222, as the vaccine candidate is called, was co-invented by the University of Oxford and its spin-out company, Vaccitech. It uses a chimpanzee viral vector based on a weakened version of a common cold virus (adenovirus) that causes infections in chimpanzees and contains the genetic material of the SARS-CoV-2 virus spike protein. After vaccination, the surface spike protein is produced, priming the immune system to attack the SARS-CoV-2 virus if it later infects the body.
📰 Himalayan manoeuvres: On India and the Nepal political crisis
India did well not to meddle in the political crisis unfolding in Nepal
•By sending a senior delegation of the Communist Party of China to Kathmandu within days of Prime Minister K.P. Sharma Oli’s controversial decision to dissolve Parliament and call for elections, Beijing has sent a worrying message that it is prepared to intervene in Nepal’s politics. The team led by the Vice Minister of the CPC’s International Department, Guo Yezhou, met political leaders and called on President Bidya Devi Bhandari and Mr. Oli, with a stated mission to try and reverse the split in the party and convince Mr. Oli and his rivals Pushpa Kamal Dahal ‘Prachanda’ and Madhav Nepal to effect a patch up. But Mr. Oli has shown no signs of budging from his decision to mount what has been described a “constitutional coup”, calling for elections without discussing alternative government formation options, rushing through an endorsement from President Bhandari, and carrying out, as caretaker Prime Minister, a cabinet reshuffle. Mr. Dahal and Mr. Nepal are clear that they will not reconsider their move to split the unified Communist Party of Nepal (CPN) and apply to the Election Commission for control of the whole, unless Mr. Oli backtracks and restores the Pratinidhi Sabha (Lower House). While it is surprising that both factions have been willing to meet with the Chinese delegation at a time like this, it is even more curious that the Chinese leadership would risk losing face and lose popular goodwill with a move that sparked protests in Kathmandu.
•In contrast, India has chosen to be more pragmatic and restrained, possibly due to a historical understanding of the main players in Nepali politics, and their penchant for political brinkmanship. This is not the first time politics has been brought to the precipice since Nepal adopted its new Constitution in 2015; Mr. Dahal walked out of a coalition government with Mr. Oli in 2016. While Mr. Oli’s moves of December 20 seem irreversible, there are still compromises possible. Much will depend on whether the Supreme Court, that has given the Nepali PM until January 3 to explain his actions, will stay the election process, and whether the Parliament Speaker will persuade the President to convene the Lower House despite its dissolution. While it is clear that India is not playing its traditional leading role in Nepal, neither is it facing the odium for playing spoiler. Both Mr. Oli, who has reached out to India after months of the map controversy, and Mr. Dahal, who has been a closer Indian ally during this period, are engaging the government. The positive situation gives New Delhi a little more space in which to consider its moves, and how to avoid instability in its Himalayan neighbour’s polity, something that is crucial to their relations and in the long term, to their closely inter-linked prosperity.
📰 Straws in the wind in South Block
Various developments this year have created a kind of lull on the foreign policy front
•The gravity of the COVID-19 situation, which has not yet abated; impasse on the border with China; severe restrictions on travel; the unsettled situation in the U.S., with three weeks to go for Joe Biden to be sworn in as President; and the game-changing developments in West Asia have created a kind of lull on the foreign policy front. But below the surface, there is feverish activity to figure out future policies. Every straw in the wind in the statements, speeches and seemingly isolated reports emanating from South Block needs to be watched.
The China challenge
•Modiplomacy 2.0 appears to be evolving differently from its first incarnation. The stage, which was set during the first term of the government, has turned out to be inadequate for the new choreography, which is changing minute by minute. China’s intransigence is beyond comprehension. The frustration over the continuing occupation of Indian territory by China is evident in all pronouncements at all levels. The comfort level with the Donald Trump administration over China has disappeared and the focus is on Mr. Biden’s formula in dealing with China. Quad was a tantalising possibility, but avoiding the ‘C’ word in the new vocabulary has become a liability. Determination and resolve are evident in Indian statements, but so is the sense of limited options. All that emerges from South Block is willingness to negotiate and readiness to meet any eventuality.
•India’s pandemic diplomacy figures prominently in the projection of its foreign policy. We take pride in the fact that we went to the rescue of many countries with relief supplies, medicines and equipment. The emphasis that India put on global cooperation to deal with the global challenge seems to have made an impact. A spike in demand from different countries for pharmaceuticals, especially hydroxychloroquine and paracetamol, made India ramp up production. Today, the focus has shifted to vaccine production and rapid testing, both essential for the return to normalcy. India is deeply involved in many international collaborations and initiatives.
•India is proud of its contribution to international mobility and migration. As people sought to return to their homes, cooperation between governments to prepare the necessary logistics and protocol was central to that objective. In India’s case, more than 2.5 million citizens came back. More importantly, we supported the movement of more than 1,10,000 foreigners out of India to 120 countries. India’s stress on multilateralism and international cooperation seems to have been appreciated.
•An increasingly visible integration of foreign and defence policies has added a new dimension to policymaking and execution. The visit of the Chief of the Army Staff and the Foreign Secretary to Myanmar could not go unnoticed. Nepal saw the visits of the Chief of the Research and Analysis Wing, the Chief of the Army Staff, and the Foreign Secretary. “To my mind, adequately securitising foreign policy is for me an absolute imperative. And the primary reason for that is quite obvious: there are really very few major states that still have unsettled borders to the extent that we do,” said External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar. “Of equal relevance is the unique challenge we face of years of intense terrorism inflicted on us by a neighbour. We also cannot disregard any attempts to undermine our national integrity and unity. Over and above these exceptional factors, there are the daily security challenges of long borders and large sea space. The thinking and planning of a polity that operates in such an uncertain environment naturally will give primacy, should give primacy to hard security,” he said.
•There have been hints of India distancing itself from globalisation, following India’s decision to keep out of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership. It has been stated officially that globalisation and trade agreements have resulted in de-industrialisation in certain sectors. The concept of ‘Atmanirbharta’ appears to be a precursor to reducing dependence on countries like China, even though we know that boycotting Chinese goods and investments is impractical at present. India joining the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative has become even more remote now.
Intolerance of criticism
•Another trend that is visible of late is intolerance of international criticism of internal developments. Some of the measures that countries take to express displeasure over statements or actions of other countries that are prejudicial to their own national interests include slapping trade sanctions, refusing to recognise the government in power, and getting the critical country expelled from international organisations. India has resorted to these measures judiciously over the years. These exceptional diplomatic actions are taken rarely and after considerable thought. That is why every such action is judged on merits, taking care that its adversarial impact is minimum even while conveying a strong message. In recent times, two boycotts by Mr. Jaishankar have been seen as increased intolerance of external criticism. The first was his decision not to meet Democratic Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal owing to her unflattering view of the government’s handling of the Kashmir issue. Senator Bernie Sanders and Indian-origin Senator Kamala Harris, now Vice-President-elect, criticised India for ‘silencing’ its critic. Ms. Harris tweeted: “It’s wrong for any foreign government to tell Congress what members are allowed in meetings on Capitol Hill.”
•The second boycott was even more significant as it involved a Ministerial meeting on COVID-19 convened by Canada. The reason for the boycott was Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s statement on the agitation of Indian farmers, consisting largely of Sikhs. The Canadian High Commissioner was summoned by the External Affairs Ministry to be told that the statements made by “the Canadian Prime Minister, some Cabinet Ministers and Members of Parliament on issues relating to Indian farmers constitute an unacceptable interference in our internal affairs.” The Ministry said that such actions, if continued, would have a “seriously damaging impact” on ties between India and Canada, characterising some pronouncements as “legitimising extremist activism”. Mr. Trudeau continued to maintain his criticism as the Sikh community in Canada intensified its criticism of India.
•The British Foreign Secretary was more diplomatic when he explained that Sikh politics had become part of U.K. politics and hence the request from some British MPs to him to intercede with India on behalf of the farmers. At a time when there is some criticism of the invitation extended to the British Prime Minister to be the Chief Guest at the Republic Day parade, neither side wants to rock the boat. India’s policy is to be supportive of our diaspora abroad and we could have been tolerant of such criticism abroad. Every country counts in these days of global rebalancing. Much of the permutations and combinations being worked out in South Block will emerge as the new norm settles down.
📰 Separating the wheat from the agri-policy chaff
In the farm laws debate, the focus should be on the exchequer-farm subsidies issue and the spending on farm subsidies
•In the on-going debates around the three new pieces of agricultural legislation and the farmers’ demand for continuation of minimum support prices (MSP), questions have often been raised whether the government should be using the taxpayers’ money to provide subsidies to the farming community in this country. However, logically, two further questions must be asked, but none of them has been, in any significant manner. First, why have successive governments used the exchequer to provide farm subsidies. And second, how large is India’s spending on farm subsidies as compared to those of other countries having substantial interests in agriculture?
Adverse terms of trade
•It should be obvious to any keen observer of the Indian economy that the country’s agriculture, which also supports the remaining rural workforce, was, forever, living beyond its means. In 1950-51, agriculture’s share in the country’s GDP was 45%, the share of the workforce dependent on the sector was close to 70%. Seven decades later, agriculture’s share in GDP is below 16%, but almost 50% of the country’s workforce depends on this sector. The squeeze on the agricultural sector becomes even more evident from its terms of trade vis-à-vis the non-agricultural sectors. Agriculture has been facing adverse terms of trade over extended periods since the 1980s, and even during the phases when the terms of trade have moved in its favour, for instance in the 1990s and again since 2012-13, there was no distinct upward trend. A more telling commentary in this regard is that since the middle of the 2000s, farming communities have almost consistently faced adverse terms of trade vis-à-vis non-farmers.
•Erosion of farm incomes was triggered by growing inefficiencies, which, in turn, was caused by a lack of meaningful investment in agriculture. The share of this sector in the total investment undertaken in the country consistently fell from about 18% in the 1950s to just above 11% in the 1980s. In the subsequent decades, the situation has got far worse with agriculture’s share not even reaching double digits.
•In the most recent quinquennium for which data are available (2014-15 to 2018-19), the average share of agriculture was 7.6%. However, despite this unacceptable situation, every government in post-independent India systematically ignored the need to step up investment in agriculture, which would not only have ensured more efficient use of farm resources but would have also been a crucial step towards improving farm incomes.
A look at yields
•A quick comparison of the yields of the major crops in India with those of other countries confirms the dismal state of agriculture in this country. If one ranks countries in terms of their yields in wheat and rice — India’s two major crops — the country’s ranks were 45 and 59, respectively, in 2019. It may also be added here that this ranking would go down sharply if the areas recording high yields, such as Punjab and Haryana, are excluded. In other words, for farmers in most regions of the country, it is an uphill battle for survival amid low yields.
•The market has always been the farmers’ biggest adversary, making it impossible for them to realise remunerative prices for their produce. The existing marketing system dominated by the Agricultural Produce Market Committees has long been proved to be against the interests of the small farmers, but the government, in its own wisdom, has now decided to introduce even larger middlemen that would do no more than complete the circle of misery for the farming communities.
Need for a policy
•It is a no-brainer that such complex problems facing Indian agriculture cannot be resolved through ad hoc decision-making, and that this country needs an agricultural policy that addresses the challenges facing this sector in a comprehensive manner. Surprisingly, the demand for such a policy has seldom been made in a forthright manner, even by the country’s farming communities. The lack of a coherent policy for agriculture must surely be regarded among the most remarkable failures of the governments in post-Independence India.
•The magnitude of this failure can be better understood if one considers the fact that the United States, with less than 2% of its workforce engaged in agriculture, has been enacting farm legislations every four years since the Agricultural Adjustment Act was enacted in 1933, the first piece of legislation of U.S. President Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal. In a similar vein, members of the European Common Market adopted their Common Agricultural Policy in 1962, only a few years after establishing the institution. These policies comprehensively address the needs of the farm sector through proactive support from the respective governments.
Issue of farm subsidies
•The above discussion is useful for contextualising India’s farm subsidies. The government dole out is a price that the country pays for the failure of the policy makers to comprehensively address the problems of the farm sector. Thus, instead of engaging with the farming communities for putting in place a comprehensive set of policies (which also provides for the setting up of farmer-friendly institutions in order to improve the economic viability of the sector), successive governments have chosen to dole out subsidies in order to ensure domestic food security and protecting rural livelihoods.
•It must be said that the governments have continued granting subsidies as a failure to realise that either of the two objectives can have catastrophic consequences for the country. At the same time, however, wanton distribution of subsidies without a proper policy framework has distorted the structure of production and, consequently, undesirable outcomes in terms of excessive food stockpiling. And, yet, the fundamental ills of Indian agriculture are not adequately addressed.
•When subsidies have virtually been made the survival kit for Indian farmers, there is possibly a need to understand the magnitude of the government dole out, also by comparing it with those granted by other countries. Members of the World Trade Organization (WTO) are expected to notify their agricultural subsidies as a part of their commitment under the Agreement on Agriculture (AoA); the subsidy notifications provide a good basis to understand where India stands vis-à-vis other countries in this regard.
Economically weak farmers
•India’s latest notification, for 2018-19, shows that the subsidies provided were slightly more than $56 billion. In most of the recent years, the largest component of India’s subsidies ($24.2 billion, or 43% of the total) are provided to “low income or resource poor farmers”, a terminology that the AoA uses. However, designation of this category of farmers is left to individual members. India has notified that 99.43% of its farmers are low income or resource poor. According to the agricultural census conducted in 2015-16, these are the farmers whose holdings are 10 hectares or less. Thus, according to the Government of India, almost the entire farm sector comprises economically weak farmers.
•The two major providers of farm subsidies, namely, the U.S. and the members of the European Union (EU) gave much larger magnitudes of support than India did. America provided $131 billion in 2017 and the EU, nearly €80 billion (or $93 billion) in 2017-18. Absolute numbers do not provide a good yardstick to compare the farm subsidies; the ratios of subsidies to agricultural value addition for the three countries give a much better picture. Thus, for 2017, India’s farm subsidies were 12.4% of agricultural value addition, while for the U.S. and the EU, the figures were 90.8% and 45.3%, respectively. This then is the reality of farm subsidies that India provides.
📰 A virus that changes stripes
The emergence of the new variant shows that more genome sequencing of SARS-CoV-2 is needed
•On December 29, six samples of passengers who had returned from the U.K. to India had been found to contain the new variant of the SARS-CoV-2 virus (VOC 201212/01). About 33,000 passengers from the U.K. had arrived at various airports in India between November 25 and December 23. Of them, 114 tested positive for the virus using RT-PCR. All the 114 positive samples have been sent to 10 INSACOG (Indian SARS-CoV-2 Genomics Consortium) labs for genome sequencing.
•India temporarily suspended flights from the U.K. from December 23 to 31 to prevent the new strain from entering the country. However, it is possible that many people infected with the new variant had already arrived here days or even weeks before the suspension of flights. Only through detailed epidemiological studies combined with genome sequencing data can we confirm the presence and spread of the variant in India. While the new variant, first identified in the U.K. in September, has been spreading “rapidly” there since end-November, preliminary results have shown it does not cause increased reinfection risk or disease severity.
•The genomic analysis undertaken by the COVID-19 Genomics U.K. Consortium (COG-UK Consortium) found that this particular lineage was growing around 70% faster in the U.K. Is that a cause for concern in India? At the moment, the variant does not seem to pose a huge risk to India — given its propensity to spread faster, the variant should have already caused a spike in cases in some cities, which is not the case. Since the preliminary study indicates that the variant is unlikely to cause increased risk of reinfection, the new variant might not spread wildly here due to difficulty in finding dense pockets of susceptible people. This is because 40%-50% of urban India, particularly in Tier-1 and Tier-2 cities, and about 30% of people across India would have already been infected.
More sequencing needed
•The emergence of the new variant brings to the fore the importance of undertaking more genome sequencing of the virus. Though the total number of recorded cases stands at over 10.2 million, India has so far sequenced only around 6,300 genomes of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. In contrast, the U.K. has sequenced nearly 1,57,000 genomes of the virus though the total number of cases is only about one-fourth of India’s.
•A few days ago, the National Task Force on COVID-19 belatedly recommended the setting up of a Genomic Surveillance Consortium (INSACOG) to map the various strains circulating in India. It has also said whole genome sequencing would be done for 5% of the positive cases from all the States and Union Territories. The new variant shows the importance of genome sequencing and the need to link genome data with epidemiological and clinical information in order to make a difference in controlling the disease, says Professor Sharon Peacock, Director of the COG-UK Consortium, in The Guardian.
Independent emergence of variants
•A team of researchers from CSIR-IGIB led by Dr. Vinod Scaria has demonstrated the importance of undertaking more genome sequencing of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. In a study of 120 unique variants reported in literature based on genome sequencing of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, the team found that 86 were genetic variants associated with immune escapes. Of the 86 variants, nine had over 1% frequency in the respective countries.
•One of the variants (N440K) identified has a frequency of 2.1% in India and a high prevalence in Andhra Pradesh (33.8% of 272 genomes). The same variant has been identified in the U.K., Denmark and Australia. Though the epidemiological and clinical significance of the N440K variant is yet to be studied, its emergence in India and three other countries is an example of homoplasy — the ability of a mutation/variant to emerge independently in different genetic lineages. The N440K variant was found in a healthcare worker who was found to have been reinfected. The presence of N440K in the reinfected person is only an observation. More studies are needed to draw a causal relationship or even a correlation between N440K and reinfection.
•The N501Y mutation in the new variant first identified in the U.K. is believed to make the variant more transmissible. The N501Y mutation has independently arisen in South Africa too. Due to homoplasy, the possibility of N501Y arising independently in India cannot be ruled out. So, only through increased genomic sequencing can we stay prepared.
•The possibility of dangerous mutations arising independently in distant locations underscores the need for more genome sequencing of the virus to identify variants on time and for genomic epidemiology to study the spread of the variants. Linking the genome data with clinical and epidemiological information can go a long way in controlling the spread of any variants that cause more infections or severe disease.
