Open Forum

New Delhi, 4 May 2011

Rising Unemployment

GOVT INTERVENTION VITAL

By Dhurjati Mukherjee

Prompted by country-wide concerns of growing unemployment and under-employment, the Government set up an expert committee to ascertain the accuracy of the Union Labour Ministry’s annual employment survey and suggest remedial measures.

Shockingly, the survey for April-March 2009-10 released in October last, revealed a much higher unemployment rate of 9.4 per cent spread over a 400 million work-force. This year plans are afoot to widen the survey base and cover all the 629 districts against only 300 last year and interview over one lakh respondents. 

Rising unemployment is all the more alarming against the backdrop that the growth rates are quite high. True, certain categories of employers are optimistic about their hiring plans and the organized sector is set to create around 1.6 million new jobs this year, the figures are far from adequate keeping in view the employment needs of the new entrants into the job market.

The advent of new technology and techniques of increasing productivity (both in the field and factory) have led to increased unemployment. Notwithstanding, that heath care (2.50 lakh jobs), hospitality, real estate, media and entertainment and IT are promising sectors of employment generation.

This has resulted in muted demands being voiced to accord Constitutional guarantee to the Right to Work. Presently, only socialist countries accord the Right of Employment to their citizens but there are no unemployment benefits as an alternative.

A document prepared by the Labour, in the 1980’s pointed out: “The overall approach to the concept of Right to Work has essentially to be that of creating conditions for the people to find productive work in the process of development …. . However, the inclusion of Right to Work as a Fundamental Right in the Constitution would make it incumbent to provide employment to the residuary categories of persons who will still be unemployed during the transition period”.   

Economists and planners feel that the primary reliance must be on the economic system to generate employment. As such, employment generation has to be consciously built into the development strategy of any country. In India, for example, of the over 400 million working force, around 220-230 million continue to depend on agriculture for their living. Thus, the 9 per cent growth of the economy has of no significance to the farm workers.

Leading to surmise that India’s employment strategy needs to be based on revitalizing all segments of the rural sector which have been neglected over many years.  Though, the emphasis on infrastructure development vis-à-vis building roads, bridges etc and extending power and telecom facilities impacted in generating employment, including self-employment, in the last few years but this is inadequate.

Consequently, it is now necessary that the improved infrastructure should be utilized to motivate people to set up tiny and cottage industries along-with agro-based industries which have great potential through skill training and financial assistance.

Besides, the country needs to explore the employment potential in the food processing and horticulture industry which is witnessing a revolution. Undoubtedly, if this development of agro-based industries is given special attention, it could change the face of Indian villages and generate employment opportunities. Towards that end, an integrated food law could be brought to replace the current multiple laws and regulations, which have affected normal growth and standards of the food processing industry.

In addition, horticulture, floriculture and food processing could add value to products and ensure better returns for the farming community. These unexplored areas with active support from research institutes could also help in generating adequate employment opportunities and assist the revival process of the rural economy. Moreover, through a proper plan, the country could also gain valuable foreign exchange through exports.

Apart from these, there needs to be proper development of cottage and village industries. The Government has to come forward and encourage artisans to ensure that they get market value for their products. By identifying around 200 growth centers throughout the country and providing proper infrastructural facilities, roads, power and telecommunication, would ensure accessibility to markets and help sell produce at competitive rates. This could be completed in a time-bound frame of 5 to 10 years, by the Twelfth Plan.

The National Commission for Enterprises in the Unorganized Sector (NCEUS) aptly suggested the need to promote small, micro and tiny enterprises with credit, marketing and technology support. Clusters of tiny industries deserve SEZ treatment more than the rich exporting units. Priorities in credit facilities should go to small farmers and micro enterprises.

Importantly, the entire planning process must now centre on helping the poor and the vulnerable sections. The Government’s decision to provide 100 days guaranteed employment in a year under the NREGS to one member of every poor household at a minimum wage for public works projects should be seriously implemented. As it has helped in serving the dual purpose of generating employment and in building rural infrastructure.

However, the performance review committee of the NREGS found that the national average for April-October 2010 was poor and stood at 34 days. Only Andhra Pradesh had done well by generating 46 days of work per household. It was followed by Tripura (40) and Orissa and Rajasthan (39) each.

Clearly, our leaders need to heed the concerned voices of economists and planners including former President Abdul Kalam who have repeatedly asserted the need to reverse the planning strategy and concentrate on the rural sector. As this would go a long way in tackling the problem of unemployment and under-employment as also boost the living standards of the poor and the economically weaker sections. Thereby, usher in the much-talked about inclusive growth. ----- INFA

(Copyright, India News and Feature Alliance)

Political Diary

New Delhi, 7 May 2011

India: A Soft State

NOTHING BUT CHEAP TALK

By Poonam I Kaushish

“Geronimo EKIA…. We got him.” Thus, ended the life of the world’s most wanted terrorist, Osama bin Laden. Devastatingly and brutally brought home Monday last when after 10 long years of 9/11, the US tasted victory. Not only did Operation Osama, the culmination of the War on Terror showcase to the world what US patriotism and nationalism is all about, earning it the numero uno Super Power tag. More important, it is a country which neither forgives nor forgets. Bluntly, don’t-mess-with-me-I’ll-get-you. Eureka!  

On the flip side, from the Kargil fiasco, Kandhar humiliation and Parliament brazen assault to 26/11 Mumbai blood-bath, India’s security farce continues. While Masood Azhar roams free in Pakistan, ‘death awardee’ Afzal Guru is alive and kicking in jail, Ajmal Kasab is still to be convicted,  Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi  and Hafeez Muhammad Saeed continue to spew venom against India and Pakistan scoffs at New Delhi’s hard rhetoric about crushing terrorism which ends in a whimper.

Regrettably, our leaders continue to wallow in the false belief that wars are born in the minds of men ---- won by waving the white flag! Think, post Washington’s Operation Geronimo, as the clamour for an US-type operation to revenge Pakistan’s diabolic terrorists’ acts grows, led by Army Chief VP Singh (India can stage an Abbottabad-type operation), our leaders refuse to re-draft its Pak policy.

Instead, South Block willy-nilly asserts dialogue with Islamabad is the best option given the volatile situation in the country. Said Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, “The Osama episode will not deter will not change the universe of the discourse between India and Pakistan. Talks with Pakistan will continue...” Sic. Adding lamely, even the US has not broken its ties with Pakistan.

Arguably, is this 'don’t-rock-the-boat-avoid-confrontation' policy responsible for New Delhi’s failure to check terrorism, from across the border, North-East and Naxal country? Do we lack the will for bold, decisive action to defend the country’s security interests?  Is India a soft state? Yes, a big yes.

Undoubtedly, the polity’s powerlessness to deal with hard targets strongly has given us the soft State image whereby everyone takes us for a ride. Worse, the Administration is unable to enforce its writ throughout the country, a natural sine qua non of a State. Remember, it is no use having the instruments to enforce law if one lacks the ability to put them to effective use.

Undoubtedly, New Delhi’s hunger to build bridges with Islamabad appears to have blinded the Government to the web of deceit spun by its duplicitous neighbour. Astonishingly, the Prime Minister turned his cheek to Pakistan's Foreign Secretary Salman Bashir's blasphemous remarks describing as “outdated” India's demand for action against the Mumbai perpetrators and warning of “severe consequences and terrible catastrophe” if it undertook an Abbottabad-type “misadventure.”

Conveniently forgetting the harsh truth. Talks and terror cannot co-exist. Pakistan is a sponsor and user of terror and not its victim. It has not been honest in its commitment that its territory will not be used for terror. Asserted a senior South Block official, “Remember, Islamabad is no pushover, it needs to answer some tough questions. Are they doing enough on LeT, JeM and Hizbul Mujahideen? The Mumbai trials? On Lakhvi, Saeed et al all who remain a serious threat to India”?

In fact, many question the utility of an Indo-Pak dialogue when Islamabad has not delivered on India's demands on 26/11. “Where was the need for India to say that it will continue with the dialogue process irrespective of the fact that Osama bin Laden was protected by Pakistan? India had not called off the dialogue. It reflects poorly on India's foreign policy. It is devoid of any strategy, leave alone objective. All these show that our policy is whimsical and not goal-oriented," said a strategy affairs expert

Indeed, India's approach has been incoherent over the past two years, in fact bankrupt since 26/11. While a section of the Government favoured talks after Sharm-el-Sheikh, the Union Home Ministry talked tough on terror. Finally, the Prime Minister, for reasons best known to him, put the talks back on track by inviting his counter-part Yousaf Raza Gilani to Mohali as part of cricket diplomacy.

But till date all this has yielded zilch results. Clearly, if New Delhi means business it needs to quickly do justice in the 26/11 case by sentencing Ajmal Kasab through a speedy trail. There is no point in asking Pakistan to hand over Hafiz Saeed or Dawood Ibrahim and speculating on the possibility of a special operation to access them when a terrorist caught during a terror  act of terror is being used as a poster boy for Indian democracy and justice system.

The time has come for New Delhi to get its priorities straight and act together. Our leaders need to show some backbone in punishing terrorists before claiming to deal with the phenomenon of terrorism. They need to distinguish between conflict resolution and peace. Make clear that terrorism facing the country is not co-terminus with the Kashmir problem. Kashmir’s resolution and countering Pak-sponsored terrorism are two different issues.  Solution of J&K will not automatically defuse the terrorist threat for India.

Also, work towards evolving a policy that combines open dialogue with diplomatic pressure. Simply inter-acting, is not a solution. Talks to improve trade and cultural ties are not instruments to address terrorism from Pakistan. Plainly, statements like “Pakistan should stop harbouring terrorists” are innocuous demands having only rhetorical value. India should delineate a time frame with specific demands and spell out viable consequences if these are not met. Misadventures like Operation Parakaram (troop mobilization along LoC in 2002) following the attack on Parliament should be avoided.  

Pertinently, perhaps former US President Nixon had India on his mind, in his book "The Real War." Said he: “Nations live or die by the way they respond to the particular challenges they face While might certainly does not make right, neither does right by itself make might. The time when a nation most craves ease may be the moment when it can least afford to let down its guard.

“The moment when it most wishes it could address its domestic needs may be the moment when it most urgently has to confront an external threat. The nation that survives is the one that rises to meet that moment: that has the wisdom to recognize the threat and the will to turn it back, and that does so before it is too late.”

Clearly, La affair Osama should awaken New Delhi India into crafting a long-term Pakistan policy taking national security imperatives into consideration. We need to formulate a clear-cut regional diplomatic thrust. As also get rid of the naïve notion that we can preserve peace by exuding goodwill. This is not only stupid but could be dangerous. It may win New Delhi accolades but it also tempts the aggressor to be more belligerent.

True, one may not be overtly aggressive but we need to think and act smart. Have a clear view of where the dangers lie and the responses necessary to quell the danger. Tough times call for tough action. Above all, our polity needs to hold the mirror and be truthful. That ‘bankrupt’ practitioners of third-rate politics do not have the critical first-rate political will and stomach for making India into an effective hard State. After all, war can only be won by war! ----- INFA

(Copyright, India News and Feature Alliance)

Round The World

New Delhi, 3 May 2011

Osama Bin Laden’s Death

 WAR ON TERROR: WHAT NEXT?

By Monish Tourangbam

Research Scholar, School of International Studies (JNU)

The US has finally hunted down their enemy No.1, Saudi tycoon-cum-dreaded terrorist leader Osama Bin Laden aka the most wanted man in the world responsible for the 9/11 attacks. Probably the longest man-hunt in human history ended with an American operation at the garrison town of Abbottabad, about 50 kms North-East of Pakistan’s Capital Islamabad.

Needless to say, Osama was the primary reason behind the War on Terror in Afghanistan that will now out-live his death. In fact, the War on Terror and the Af-Pak strategy is much more complex at present and it is no longer about one Osama.

 Consequently, despite the debate that certainly arises as to how Osama’s death would affect America’s withdrawal strategy from Af-Pak, US operations in the region at this juncture can hardly be decided on the basis of his death. Indeed, there might be increasing pressure on allied countries to re-assess the war in Afghanistan as all nations involved have experienced war-fatigue and are looking for a safe way out.

But, it is also true that the war in the Af-Pak region has morphed into a bloodier, messy and enduring campaign and the Taliban insurgency and the many splinter groups that Islamic fundamentalism has spawned will hardly be affected with the death of one Osama Bin Laden.

Significantly, the coming days and weeks will be a critical time to see how the Obama Administration, triumphant and energized because of this successful campaign capitalizes on the gains. For one, the Al Qaeda will definitely be in an unsettled mood suffering a leadership void because not many terrorist leaders could be as charismatic as Osama, who had a reputation of unifying ability and carried with him the aura of an iconic leader, a millionaire and a former Mujahedeen who stood with his brethren for the cause of Islam.

Even while he was on the run from the US forces, and maintained an under-ground life, the very knowledge that he was out there somewhere still plotting against the western countries would have been a big morale booster for other like-minded groups and “jihadis”. Indeed, his death will be a big blow to the hearts and minds of Al Qaeda members and their affiliate groups. His second in command, Ayman Zawahiri, for all his capabilities, does not seem to have the same kind of charisma and uniting power.

Thus, definitely some points could be scored at this moment of crisis within the central Al Qaeda. But, again the Al Qaeda itself has become highly de-centralized over the years leading to a lot of splinter groups in different parts of the world, sharing the same kind of ideology and often employing the same kind of terror tactics but without much of a central control.

Moreover, one-man terror plots are equally possible these days, with the kind of reach and connectivity that terrorist operations have shown, using information technology and other inventions of the modern world for their sinister purposes.

As such, the coming days are not going be easy. Hence, the end of Osama is a watershed moment, a tremendous psychological blow to terror organizations, a show of resolve that the effort to catch or kill the mass murderer had not slackened over the years.

But, this is definitely not the end of Al Qaeda, nor any real comfort to the kind of campaign that US forces and other countries would face in their fight against terrorism, especially in the epicenter of international terrorism: the Af-Pak region.

 The Taliban insurgency and the various splinter groups will hardly be affected by Osama’s death. The corruption in the Afghan Government and society, the internal ethnic divisions and the drug money that fuels a large part of the insurgency has hardly anything to do with the end of Osama. Dreaded groups like the Haqqanis or groups in Pakistan like the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan and the Laskar-e-Taiba will hardly tone down their violence because Osama is gone. 

According to Seth Jones of RAND Corporation, a major US think-tank, Bin Laden's death does not resolve the big-ticket issues between Washington and Islamabad, namely Pakistan's support for the Taliban and other insurgent groups battling U.S. forces in Afghanistan, like the Haqqani network.

“As long as many of those issues continue to exist, and they have very different interests, and very different strategic goals in the area, then some level of conflict will likely persist,” Jones added.

In fact, it is being feared that terrorist attacks could actually rise in the coming days and weeks as a sort of reprisal and revenge against Osama Bin Laden’s killing. There could be deliberate effort to show that the Al Qaeda was still very much in action. This could be done through quick-time small-scale terrorist attacks.

The US Department of Homeland Security reportedly said, “The Intelligence Community (IC) assesses the death of Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden could result in retaliatory attacks in the Homeland and against US and Western interests overseas.”

The death of Osama and the circumstances in which he was found has raised a major debate around the role of Pakistan in the War on Terror. The fact that Osama was traced to a mansion at Abbottabad, very close to the Pakistani Capital, and right under the nose of the Pakistani Military Academy has raised a lot of questions on the Pakistani military intelligence and the Government.

Undoubtedly, for quite some time, the top brass of the Pakistani leadership have been denying that Osama was in Pakistan. The present situation puts them in tight rope exposing either the connivance of the Pakistani Establishment or the incompetence of their intelligence.

According to Hasan Askari Rizvi, a military analyst in Lahore, “If Bin Laden’s presence was not known to Pakistan’s security agencies when he was located close to important military installation, it will be viewed as their incompetence or over-confidence. If they knew about his presence but did not take action, this will raise questions about the agenda of Pakistan’s security agencies for fighting terrorism,” he added. 

Importantly, Indian officials also have taken serious note of the scenario, and re-emphasize their long held view that Pakistan continued to provide safe havens to terrorists, thus under-mining the fight against terrorism. “The world must not let down its united effort to overcome terrorism and eliminate the safe havens and sanctuaries that have been provided to terrorists in our own neighbourhood,’’ observed India’s External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna.

Undoubtedly, Pakistan is an important ally in the US War on Terror in the Af-Pak region but it cannot be denied that Islamabad has not been committed to the purpose and has played a double-game. In the process, sincerely acting against only those terror groups that threaten the Pakistani State, and over-looking and even colluding in the case of groups that target India.

Hence, in the coming days, the location of the operation to kill Osama, Abbottabad might assume more importance opening rounds and rounds of debate regarding the nature of Pakistan’s assistance in the War on Terror and testing various nuances of the US-Pakistan alliance against terrorism. ----- INFA

(Copyright, India News and Feature Alliance)

Economic Highlights

New Delhi, 29 April 2011

ADB Warning

REVERSE FARM POLICIES

By Shivaji Sarkar

The Asian Development Bank’s (ADB) assessment on food inflation is a stern warning to India and its neighbouring Asian countries. The Bank has virtually criticised these Governments for their lack of initiative to control inflation.

Importantly, the ADB suggestion calls for stoppage of foreign direct investment in agriculture. The Bank has told these nations that if food prices continue to rise at 10 per cent the GDP growth pattern would be hit. (International rating agency Goldman Sachs too had made similar predictions a few days back for India).

According to ADB it would also push over 6.4 crores more people to extreme poverty --- earning less that $ 1.25 a day, in the region. India would have half of them at 3 crores additional extreme poor over its estimated figure of 45crores. If the food inflation rate is at 20 per cent, as it has been during the last two years, the number of extreme poor would touch 5.9 crore in India alone, says ADB

Rising food prices, the ADB affirms is affecting other sectors as well and the growth story in the region might reverse. As food remains the major expenditure and if that increases, people’s capacity to spend on other necessities diminishes. The Chief ADB economist Changyong Rhee asserts, “Left unchecked, the food crisis will badly undermine recent gains in poverty reduction made in Asia”. Bluntly, the region would not be able to achieve the Millennium Development Goal set by the UN.

The Bank has suggested efforts to stabilise food production with greater investments in agriculture and expand storage facilities. It has called upon India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sir Lanka, Malaysia, China, South Korea and Vietnam – to take steps to check shrinkage of agricultural land. The region is becoming more populous and it needs to retain arable land if not add to it.

The problem is to accentuate as the population is rising fast. Even at slower rates population in India has touched 121 crore. It is estimated to surpass China in two decades. The global population is to increase to 900 crore from today’s 600 crore.

The ADB prescription is not difficult. The experts in this country too have been suggesting it. But it calls for having a relook at 12^th Plan draft. The Planning Commission led by Deputy Chairman Montek Singh Ahluwalia has been repeatedly harping on removing people from agriculture to other areas.

Shockingly, the Plan panel refused to look at the reality that jobs in all other sectors are not growing or they grow for a small period followed by sacking of workers for a longer period. In effect, jobs are not being added in a sustainable manner.

Undoubtedly, agriculture is an eyesore for experts who target double digit growth. They have a reason. The latest Economic Survey says agriculture contributes only 4 per cent to GDP. A good reason! But it also says that this small portion of the GDP sustains 58 per cent of the population, almost 72 crores. Some years back the figure was around 62 crores.

Where would these burgeoning numbers be given jobs? It seems the nation is unwilling to learn from the agitations of Singur, Nandigram in West Bengal; Aligarh-Bulandshahar in western UP or Jaitapur in Maharashtra.

Needless to say, making agriculture less remunerative has cost the nation dearly. Punjab, Haryana and Gujarat have not progressed on the mere strength of their industry. But a pragmatic approach to agriculture has made these States stand apart. Bihar is now turning this as a great opportunity.

But, planners state that agriculture needs higher investment, bring in policies that are detrimental to its growth and deprive those engaged in farming. The indigenous farmers who created the bread basket are derided. They are not extended any official support. Whatever little was being given in the name of subsidy has all been withdrawn leading to shooting prices of fertilisers and other farm inputs.

The panacea suggested is foreign direct investment (FDI). Stealthily many farm areas have been opened to FDI --- warehousing and cold chains terming these as “infrastructure”, production of seeds, horticulture, floriculture, cultivation of vegetables and mushrooms. Besides, animal husbandry, pisiculture, aquaculture have also been thrown open to FDI.

It appears to be a nice way to boost investment. It is not. The Government policy would cause more hardship for those dependent on agriculture. It is allowing back-door entry of multi-nationals like Monsanto and Cargill in this sector. These companies and even large Indian companies wherever they have entered this area even in a limited way have thrown more people out of agriculture.

In many cases these companies promote farming non-food items as they have done in the US and Brazil, where farmers are told to produce crops for bio-fuel. The recent global food grain price rises by 30 per cent is attributed to shifting of cultivable area to bio-fuel in the US and Brazil having the largest arable area leading to food grain shortage.

It is a bit surprising that India is following this failed path. Not only higher food prices, as ADB says, but the new FDI policy would also throw many more engaged in farming to extreme poverty as they would have little to do.

Often it is touted that large companies as they enter would create new jobs and make the GDP look healthier and obese. That does not happen. The companies are more interested in recovering their investments. They reduce cost on manpower and turn entrepreneurs into their slaves. Is that the way to treat the skilled farmers?

Our planners need to remember that the farmers remain the mainstay of rural cottage industries, handicraft and many exotic ways of production and lifestyle. The new corporate-oriented policies would virtually lead to their annihilation.

It is time the nation discusses this and forces the Government to reverse the policy. The Government needs to invest in re-training in new research processes by the farming community. They are the most adaptable but our investment percentage in farm research remains at the level of 1970s with very minor variation.

India needs to increase production, save farm land, strengthen and universalise the public distribution system. Investment is needed but not the way the Government has envisaged through the pernicious process of FDI. It calls for a review and reversal of the farm policy. --- INFA

(Copyright, India News and Feature Alliance)