REWIND

New Delhi, 19 February 2026

TOWARDS INDO-U.S. FRIENDSHIP

By Inder Jit

(Released on 5 November 1976) 

Both New Delhi and Washington will need to keep their fingers crossed.  By all accounts, Dr Kissinger's visit was truly a success. Years of nagging distrust and misunderstanding has been removed in a big way. Important first moves have been made to establish a basis for what the Secretary of State so aptly described as “a new and mature relationship” between the two countries. A promising rapport has been struck between Dr Kissinger and Mrs Gandhi and other top Government leaders: Mr Chavan, Mr Jagjivan Ram and Mr. C. Subramaniam; a rapport had already been established with Mr Swaran Singh who prepared the ground for the Secretary’s visit. Early follow-up steps are already on the cards. The U.S. Agriculture Secretary Mr Butz, may visit New Delhi soon after the World Food Conference in Rome and the U.S. Secretary of Treasury, Mr. Simon in December.

Indo-US understanding is expected to be strengthened further by these two visits, which will be followed by a renewed exchange when Mr. Subramaniam, who had a useful talk with Dr. Kissinger, visits Washington for an IMF meeting in January and Mr. Chavan some weeks later for the second session of the Indo-US Joint Commission. In keeping with national dignity and self-respect, Mrs. Gandhi and her colleagues avoided broaching the specific question of U.S. aid to India and relating it to Dr. Kissinger’s visit. The emphasis all along was to seek an understanding on various aspects of bilateral relations, the situation in the subcontinent and in South Asia and a review of the global scene with particular reference to the crisis facing the world community. However, Washington has now greater (and more sympathetic) awareness of India’s economic difficulties and problems and may well initiate some measures as proof of its new outlook and approach.

Washington now appears inclined somehow to find a million tonnes of foodgrains for India, despite heavy demands on its limited stocks and in contrast to its earlier willingness to try and spare about half a million tonnes. This is likely to be made available on a 40-year credit carrying an interest rate of about two per cent. At the same time, Washington is expected to take a more helpful attitude in regard to debt rescheduling in view of the colossal problem created by the import bill for food, oil and fertilizers which is expected to go up to Rs.1500 crores --- or even Rs. 1,800 crores during the year. The World Bank has been pressing the U.S. and other aid-India Consortium countries to reschedule 40 per cent of the debt repayment. West Germany, Britain and Japan have been generally inclined to accept the recommendation. But the U.S. so far been opposing the proposal and, in the process, has provided an excuse to the other Consortium countries to drag their feet.

Mrs Gandhi and her colleagues appear determined to tackle the economic crisis on their own and with help from wherever it is available so long as this is consistent with national honour. They are not going to be influenced by the hostile stance adopted against the Kissinger visit by the CPI which alas continues to think in out-dated cold-war terms and is being a lot less practical than its Soviet friends. Barely a few months ago, a senior leftist Congress leader, who visited Moscow and met top Soviet leaders, was candidly told: "India's main problem today is production, not distribution. We are doing our best for you friends. But you need much more help and credit. Get it from the U.S. or wherever else you can." That is not all. When the D.P. Dhar delegation later visited the Soviet Union and sought, among other things, help for Bhilais expansion, it was politely told: "You know what we believe should be your priorities in production. Priority one: food. Priority two: food. Priority three: food!"

New Delhi is more than conscious of the need to give top priority to agriculture and is looking forward to studying with interest the comprehensive programme which the U.S. proposes to present to the World Food Conference “as its contribution to freeing mankind from the eternal struggle for sustenance”. In fact, Dr. Kissinger was glad to get from the President, Mr. Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed, some food for though during their half-hour meeting. The President stressed the importance of long-term measures to grow food for the world community with the help of fertilizers (wherever these could be produced) and shared technology in irrigation and power. India will be happy to get such fertilizer as the U.S. can spare immediately and in the future. Incidentally, as interesting study shows that the US uses some three million tonne of fertilizer annually for its lawns and flower beds.

The economic side is, however, the least part of the mutual Indo-US gain flowing from Dr. Kissinger’s visit. The most important aspect lay in establishing a new basis for peace and friendship. Both sides will hereafter act maturely and not be quick to air differences stridently in public and even to exaggerate them. They will air them privately as in the case of the Soviet Union. Actually, both New Delhi and Washington have already been practising this for some time, thanks to the quiet initiative taken earlier by Mr. Swaran Singh and the efforts of the Ambassadors of the two countries, Mr. Kaul and Mr. Moynihan. Significantly, the US did not hit the roof following India’s peaceful nuclear explosion at Pokhran as in the case of Canada and Australia and, to an extent, the U.K. Washington also avoided any public stance on the recent developments in Sikkim. On India’s part, Mr. Swaran Singh’s speech at the UN was noted for its restrained references to the U.S.

India is pleased to see the U.S. face reality in the subcontinent and recognise that India’s size and position give it a special role of leadership in South Asian and world affairs. It is happy to have the Indo-US Joint Communique welcome India’s affirmation to develop nuclear technology for peaceful purposes only. It is also glad to get from Dr. Kissinger the assurance that the U.S. will not seek to promote a balance of power in the subcontinent or encourage an arms race. But it is not fully satisfied with the latter formulation and would, therefore, like to be assured that Dr. Kissinger will not yield to Mr. Bhutto’s pressure and resume supply of military hardware merely because Mr. Bhutto once acted as “a bridge” between the U.S and China. It hopes Washington will accept India’s basic stake in Pakistan stability and progress and that, contrary to Islamabad’s simulated stance, New Delhi has no interest in the dismemberment of Pakistan.

Dr. Kissinger impressed one and all by his brilliance, sophistication and statesmanship --- and was equally impressed by the warmth and hospitality extended to him. He spoke the right words and was remarkably categorical in assuming both Government leaders and the Press that there would be no U.S. interference in India’s internal affairs. He answered questions candidly at his Press Conference and left no one in doubt that he was not willing to allow American newsmen to foul up his efforts. When an American correspondent asked if India had “asked for food and, if so, how much” he firmly replied: “I do not like to have the question put in terms of: has India asked…” he listened patiently to the FICCI leaders at a brief get-together and offered to put in a word for expeditious passage of trade liberalization laws. In the final analysis, however, New Delhi will judge Dr. Kissinger not by what he said but by what he does.---INFA

(Copyright, India News and Feature Alliance)

Open Forum

New Delhi, 18 February 2026

Creating Employment

BUDGET, FTAs & AFTER

By Dhurjati Mukherjee 

The hype around the budget will be over within a few days but the recent trade deals need analysis, keeping in view the total potential in creating jobs. The scenario does not look quite encouraging though there are some positive points that cannot be denied. Questions have been raised about efforts made with regard to job creation in the budget? Is it not another attempt to woo the upper echelons of society? Another distressing aspect is the low female labour force participation in India, which is low compared to even Bangladesh and Pakistan. Women professionals have been wondering why a woman finance minister has not taken any initiatives in this regard. These questions remain unanswered in the budget.    

However, the most important thing that needs to be highlighted at the very outset is the fact that around 45 percent of the population is still engaged in agriculture, obviously, the reason being lack of better and dependable employment in the country. Agriculture as a sector is growing far slower than the Indian economy – 4.4 percent vs 7.4 percent. Thus, India’s protectionist stand in trade deals is undoubtedly justified. However, economists ponder over the question of how many decades will it take to reduce agricultural population, say, to around 20 percent. 

The first thing that strikes us is that the government slashed the allocation for the Pradhan Mantri Viksit Rozgar Yojana (PMVBY), an ELI scheme by over 90 percent in the RE over the budgetary estimate. Moreover, the government allocated just Rs 95,692 crore for VB-GRAM G, that is set to replace MGNREGA, is believed to be much less than the required funds as the scheme seeks a guaranteed increase of employment per year to 126 days.  It is quite obvious that the new scheme might see a decline in performance as the fund sharing formula has changed with the states having to bear 40 percent of the expenditure, up from 10 percent under the MGNREGA. It would thus be easy for the Centre to blame the states if the new scheme delivers less than that of the MGNREGA as is bound to happen. 

The unequal income distribution skewed to urban centres results in severe lack of employment opportunities in rural as well as semi-urban areas. While the government refers to World Bank data to show the decline in poverty levels, nobody questions what is the income improvement of the segment that has crossed the line and whether they can afford the basic necessities. Something favourable would have worked if the government would have allocated more money for the job scheme and now, depending on the states for 40 percent contribution may lead to a fiasco. The promise of 125 days of work per household will obviously not be met though the Centre can’t be blamed.  

Though there has been a lot of talk on skilling programmes, it is amply clear that employment opportunities are shrinking and both the Centre and the states are oblivious to the fact. However, the emphasis on electronics and IT has been quite positive with iPhones being manufactured in the country, creating around 2 lakh direct jobs. But the lack of adequate resources for the health sector may stand in the way of creating employment for para-medical staff, lab technicians, caregivers and the like. Though the emphasis on manufacturing has rightly been given the necessary thrust over the years and specially in the recent budget, a lot depends on the private sector which is yet to come forward in a big way to invest in this sector. 

As regards innovation is concerned again the private sector does not spend adequately on R&D while most universities are starved of funds. Added to this research fellowships have not seen any increase in recent years while some have been reduced. In a situation where technology upgradation is vital for new avenues and jobs, this obviously is not the right strategy. It is necessary that both the public and private sectors allocate adequate funds for R&D in tune with other emerging nations such as Brazil, South Africa, Indonesia etc. 

The emphasis on the MSME sector in the budget definitely needs to be applauded as it represents the most significant opportunity for achieving inclusive growth in this decade. To put this in perspective, with 63.4 million enterprises contributing 30 per cent to GDP and employing over 100 million people, the MSME sector’s economic footprint is much larger than the entire economy of countries like Thailand or Sweden. MSMEs have a Rs 20-25 lakh crore credit gap. Access to credit for this sector has to be ensured, specially by the nationalized banks as it has immense employment generation potential. 

While the emphasis on infrastructure is well taken, more financial allocation for social infrastructure, that is, education and health sectors could have opened job opportunities. This is something that needs to be adhered to by both the Central and state governments as these are vital areas and needs special focus. Moreover, it is indeed tragic that India attracts just 1.3 percent of the world’s tourists and this sector, which is a huge job creator, needs to be given a thrust as many smaller countries like Thailand have been centres of attraction. The regulations in starting hotels needs to be simplified while the cost structure must be brought down to withstand competition.   

Coming to the trade deals, the most important one with the US revives hopes of generating jobs in labour-intensive areas like textiles, footwear and gems and jewellery. Here it needs to be mentioned that the emphasis in the budget on apparel, particularly textile modernisation and footwear, needs to be applauded as this area has high potential in view of the trade deals with the US and the European Union. These have rightly been applauded by the prime minister at the recent ET NOW summit. But India should not just depend on them but to create enhanced employment, it should go in for aggressive marketing not just in the above markets but also in the new and unexplored ones. 

The point that needs to be made here is that exports may be boosted up and may benefit the economy of the country and create employment of skilled and highly skilled personnel cannot be doubted. Though skilling has rightly been taken up on a big scale, the hype over AI needs to be seriously considered in view of its potential to further reduce jobs. 

However, the larger question remains of what would happen to say semi-skilled, Class XII pass-outs etc. who do not even have the money to set up a micro level unit. There is a need to think of some plan to boost the rural economy so that adequate employment opportunities are created – whether through self-employment or very small manufacturing units of various types of goods. It is in this realm that an area-specific survey should be conducted, and technical training imparted to those who could benefit. An overall strategy is critical.---INFA 

(Copyright, India News & Feature Alliance)

Political Diary

New Delhi, 17 February 2026

Anhoni Jab Honi Ho Jai

TALE OF PM, SPEAKER & RAHUL

By Poonam I Kaushish 

Fatigued and bored of first phase of Parliament’s tumultuous Budget session. Wake up. Three,   unthinkable things happened resulting in a first rate emotion-filled politico-drama.  Questionably, anhoni jab honi ho jai, tab kya hua…

One, Prime Minister Modi did not reply to President Murmu’s Motion of Thanks in Lok Sabha on Speaker’s directions that he had “credible information that several Congress women MPs would create an unprecedented incident after reaching Prime Minister’s seat.” Even as Congress denied there was any plan to carry out an “unpleasant act” or physical threat,Birla ignored it.

Raising a moot point: Is the Prime Minister unsafe in India’s temple of democracy Parliament?  How and why? Given he enjoys the highest security in the country. Besides, Parliament complex is secured by hi-tech gadgets and installations alongside its security is handled by the Central Industrial Security Force directly overseen by the Home Ministry. 

This in an extremely serious matter which should be thoroughly investigated and all loopholes, if any, should be plugged immediately.  Clearly, even by standards of current political distrust this stretches credulity. Whereby, the Speaker’s conduct invites criticism which he urgently needs to answer.

Two, 118 Opposition MPs submit a no-confidence notice seeking Lok Sabha Speaker Birla’s removal. Accusing him of favouring BJP-led NDA and not letting Opposition members speak during the Session. Opposition’s anger centres on Birla not allowing Rahul Gandhi to speak in the House about ex-Army Chief Naravane unpublished memoirs accusing him of openly espousing the ruling Party’s version on all controversial matters.

In a climate of polarisation there has been long-simmering friction between the Speaker and Opposition reaching a flashpoint during the Winter Session when eight MPs were suspended even as he let BJP MPs get away with similar conduct. Birla stands accused of his “aggressive” posture during Opposition protests and his partiality to BJP.

Although Government has the numbers and the motion against Speaker will be defeated when the House reconvenes 9 March, Birla, has taken a moral high ground and decided he would not attend House proceedings until a decision is taken on the no-confidence motion.

Who is to blame? BJP which has hailed Parliamentary disruptions as a form of democratic protest and indulged in them extensively in the past? Or Speaker who allegedly seems to appear keen to protect the interests of the ruling dispensation? Or is it the gradual erosion of democracy where, on one side, decorous debate has become impossible, and on the other, even the prestige of a hoary position cannot make office-bearers cast aside their private political leanings.

Till date, no Speaker has been removed from Office though attempts have been made. In 1954 MPs moved a motion against Speaker Mavalankar which was defeated, in 1966 against Hukam Singh was not admitted as it lacked requisite number backers and in 1987 against Balram Jakhar again defeated with them continuing to hold office. 

Forgotten in the quintessential position, is the Speaker who is essentially servant of the House has fast become its master, thanks to rules of procedure. Highlighting, falling standards in conducting legislative business in Parliament and the need to clearly define these.

Undoubtedly, the Speaker’s position is paradoxical. He contests election for Parliament or State Assembly and then for the post on a Party ticket, and yet is expected to conduct himself in a non-partisan manner, all the while being beholden to the Party for a ticket for the next election. Confided a former Lok Sabha Speaker: “We are elected on Party tickets with Party funds. How can we claim independence? Moreover, even if we resign on becoming Speaker, we would still have to go back to the Party for sponsorship for next election.”

Three, a BJP MP initiates a substantive motion against Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi for termination of his Lok Sabha membership and a lifetime ban on contesting elections for being “an urban Naxal, hand in glove” with “anti-national” forces. Adding, he has engaged with Soros Foundation, Ford Foundation, USAID, travelled to US, Thailand, Cambodia and Vietnam to engage in “anti-India” activities.

Besides, “he is very cleverly fomenting public sentiments, levelling unsubstantiated allegations against Election Commission, Supreme Court, lowering Government’s dignity without any evidence.” It’s another matter the motion comes a day after Gandhi tore into the India-U.S. trade deal, accusing Government of compromising national interests.

Countered Congress, “We are not bothered about any motions and if you want to hang us, we are ready for that also. Which privilege has Gandhi broken? They removed him last time. What happened afterwards people ensured his victory with more votes compared to that of Modi...” 

The key question is whether Government will allow the matter to proceed to a vote. There have been past instances where matters did not reach voting stage. Political analysts assert many such motions are political statements rather than steps to remove someone.   

What’s the likely outcome? If the motion is discussed, it will become a political debate in Parliament. The Speaker decides if any further action is warranted whereby the motion could remain symbolic rather than resulting in disqualification. Succinctly, the motion is serious politically and symbolically, showing a strong BJP pushback. First, it must navigate Parliamentary processes. But as of now it is not an immediate legal removal or ban on Gandhi.

In this milieu is deflection the new accountability?  Is comparison the new conscience? And is attacking an opponent answer to a moral question?

Where does one go from here? Time to look afresh at the Speaker’s powers, depoliticize his office and promote neutrality. Under Westminster model, Speaker resigns from his Party on his election and is re-elected unopposed in subsequent elections in the House of Commons. Lok Sabha and Assembly Speaker’s impartiality is more important as he has more absolute powers than his House of Commons’s counterpart.

Succinctly, the Speaker is of the House, by the House and for the House. He has to place himself in a judge’s position, not become partisan so as to avoid unconscious bias for or against a particular view thus inspiring confidence in all sections of the House about his integrity and impartiality.

The three anhonis signal a breakdown of trust and harmony between Treasury and Opposition benches leaving no room for manoeuvres for both sides. Having ratcheted up the pitch both sides need to ask where they can go from here: Bury the hatchet and restore Parliamentary ethos and honour through negotiation, not removal.

As for Speaker the onus is on him and his Office to earn the confidence of the Opposition, motion or no motion. Parliament functions best when procedure is respected and political battles stay within democratic norms. The moment of decision has arrived. There is no middle ground left. What gives? ---- INFA

(Copyright, India News & Feature Alliance)

Round The States

New Delhi, 14 February 2026

VandeMataram Directive

STIRRING UP HORNET’S NEST?

By Insaf 

The Union Home Ministry’s revised directive to all States that all six stanzas of the National Song VandeMataram,be sung before the national anthem Jana Gana Manaat government events and schools has sparked significant political and religious debate across various states. So far, some opposition parties and Muslim bodies are opposing it as an “attack on religious freedom”. In West Bengal, TMC leaders accuse the Centre of “rewriting history” for electoral gains, while the state BJP welcomes it as a long-overdue honour for the state’s literary icon, Bankim Chandra Chattopadhyay. In UP, the opposition SP called the order as an attempt to impose a specific cultural narrative and distracting from issues like employment and economy.Recall, in Rajasthan tensions had escalated with BJP government mandating it be sung in madrasas, with protests from Muslim organisations. On Thursday, JamiatUlama-i-Hind described the directive as ‘unilateral’ and ‘arbitrary’ and alleged it’s a ‘blatant attack’ on the freedom of religion guaranteed by the Constitution.The All-India Muslim Personal Law Board said that following Tagore’s advice and deliberations in the Constituent Assembly, it had been agreed that only the first two stanzas of VandeMataram would be used. A secular government can’t impose the beliefs of one religion on followers of others, it added, saying the songwas written in the context of Bengal and includes references to worship of Durga and other deities. The CPM noted that the non-inclusion of the four stanzas by the Constituent Assembly was because it felt ‘it did not resonate with the secular character of the Indian Republic. The BJP-led Union government is attempting to create an unnecessary controversy with ulterior motives.’ One perhaps could be the impending Bengal elections. Or should one say the only motive?

*                                                           *                                                

TN Poll Preparations

The poll bugle being sounded in Tamil Nadu, ruling DMK-ledSecular Progressive Alliance (SPA) and Chief Minister Stalin has got into top gear. On Friday, the government announced depositing Rs 5,000 each to 1.31 crore women beneficiaries as part of its women entitlement scheme. The amount includes financial aid for three months and extra funds for summer expenses.Perhaps there will be more sops as women votershave changed victory dynamics. Additionally, Stalin seeks to placate allies. On Wednesday, he asserted the alliance with Congress was ‘intact,’ in the backdrop of press reports claiming strained ties. However, he firmly ruled out ‘power-sharing’, a demand voiced by Congress MPsaying it was up to people to decide whether it was single party or coalition government.Actor Vijay and his TVK, which is going solo so far, promptly takes a swipe: allies being denied cabinet representation was against ‘social justice’ as they play a key role in victory.The Assembly has 234 seats and any alliance, or party would need at least 118 seats to form a government. Permutations, combinations and freebies will play a key role. Keep watching as drama unfolds.

*                                                           *                                              Maharashtra Mayors

The mayors’ post in Maharashtra has caused jubilation is one camp and dismay and bickeringin another. The BJP and Shiv Sena alliance secured the Mumbai Mayor’s post after a gap of 44 years. With a majority in the BMC, Ritu Tawde became its 78th Mayor, the second BJP corporator to occupy the prestigious post,ending the Thackeray family’s dominance in Mumbai’s politics and Shiv Sena’s Sanjay Ghadiwas elected deputy mayor. Both were elected unopposed as Shiv Sena (UBT) and other opposition parties didn’t field any candidate. Unlike this smooth sailing, the Chandrapur mayoral elections have raised a stink. The BJP won the seat surprisingly by a single vote defeating the Congress candidate, despite the grand old party having the most seats and Sena-UBT won deputy mayor post.It turns out SS-UBT supported BJP, prompting a livid Congress to question their allies’ betrayal. The SS-UBT in turn blames internal divisions within Congress for the loss and mess.The bitter war of words has put a big question mark about the stability and viability of the MVA. Tempers need to calm down before more damage is done.

*                                                           *                                               

Trade Unions’ Strike

The nationwide strike called by 10 central trade unions on Thursday against the four new labour codes and VB-G RAM G Act saw limited participation overall. Notably, normal life was hit in Kerala (government declared a dies-non--a day i.e. when no legal business is carried on) and Odisha, as public transport was disrupted and public facilities like markets closed; Jharkhand’s banking, insurance, and coal sectors were hit; some banks closed in Chhattisgarh; Tamil Nadu port operations slowed; Punjab’s ruling party AAP supported farmers and workers; and Madhya Pradesh saw delayed attendance in defence establishments. Surprisingly, in West Bengal, normal operations continuedas vehicles plied and state government and private offices recorded usual turnout. At its end, the Centre sent a terse message to the protestors– it tabled and got passed the Industrial Relations Code (Amendment) Bill in both Houses of Parliament! While Labour Minister MansukhMandaviya said the four codes would protect workers’ interests, the Opposition MPs opposed his claim asserting the bill is ‘anti-worker as it snatched basic rights, won after several decades of struggle’. Time will tell who is right.

*                                                           *                                                

Two Villages’ Tale

It’s a tale of two villages in the 21^st Century. One, which should make our heads hang in shame. The leader of Opposition in Rajya Sabha and Congress President Mallikarjun Kharge on Thursday raised during Zero Hour ‘boycott’ of an anganwadi centre in Ghadiamal village, Odisha’s Kendrapara district, after a Dalit woman was appointed cook-cum-helper.District officials were forced to visitthe village forprobe and asked residents to stop the boycott. The incident puts sharp focus on ‘caste-based prejudices’ among majority community against SCs, said Kharge and added ‘this would not have happened if government had taken timely actions in such incidents in the past.’ These include: ‘a man urinating on a tribal in Madhya Pradesh, a Dalit employee in Gujarat committing suicide because of caste-based exploitation at workplace and linking of an IPS officer’s suicide in Chandigarh to caste bias.’ Such behaviour, he asserted is a clear violation of Articles 14, 15 and 17. 

On the other hand, in Saundala, Maharashtra’s Ahilyanagar district,the gramsabhaon Thursday passed a resolution declaring the village as ‘caste-free’to eliminate discrimination, untouchability and social injustice. On February 5, the gram panchayat discussed creating ‘a humanitarian social system based on principles of equality, brotherhood and social justice as enshrined in Constitution’.Its resolution read: there’ll be ‘no discrimination on basis of caste, religion, creed or lineage and all residents will be treated as equal. All public places and facilities, including government services, water sources, temples, cremation grounds, schools and social functions, will remain open to all residents without discrimination.’Plus, no villager would post or promote any content leading to untouchability, social boycott or social injustice, else action would be taken. As per National Crime Records Bureaurecords stated in parliament, 50,900, 57,582 and 57,789cases during 2021, 2022 and 2023 respectively were filed under crimes/atrocities against SCs. Not enough. Need a national campaign: ‘My caste – Human’.---INFA 

(Copyright, India News & Feature Alliance)