The Hindu Editorial Analysis | 25th Sep’19 | PDF Download

Climate for action

• India’s call for solid steps on climate change must be matched by domestic measures
• Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s assertive stance on the need for all countries to walk the talk on climate change action is to be welcomed as a signal of India’s own determination to align domestic policy with its international commitments. Mr. Modi’s comments at the UN Climate Action Summit in New York have turned the spotlight on not just the national contributions pledged under the Paris Agreement of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), but also the possibility of India declaring enhanced ambition on cutting greenhouse gas emissions under the pact next year. Several aspects place the country in the unenviable position of having to reconcile conflicting imperatives: along with a declared programme of scaling up electricity from renewable sources to 175 GW by 2022 and even to 450 GW later, there is a parallel emphasis on expanding coal-based generation to meet peaks of demand that cannot be met by solar and wind power.
• The irony of the Prime Minister telling the international community in Houston that his government had opened up coal mining to 100% foreign direct investment was not lost on climate activists campaigning for a ban on new coal plants and divesting of shares in coal companies. No less challenging is a substantial transition to electric mobility, beginning with commercial and public transport, although it would have multiple benefits, not the least of which is cleaner air and reduced expenditure on oil imports.
• Advancing the national climate agenda in the spirit of Mr. Modi’s action-over-words idiom requires the Central government to come up with a strong domestic action plan. The existing internal framework, the National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC) is more than a decade old. It lacks the legal foundation to incorporate the key national commitment under the Paris Agreement: to reduce the emissions intensity of economic growth by a third, by 2030. Without an update to the NAPCC and its mission-mode programmes, and legislation approved by States for new green norms governing buildings, transport, agriculture, water use and so on, it will be impossible to make a case for major climate finance under the UNFCCC. It is equally urgent to arrive at a funding plan for all States to help communities adapt to more frequent climate-linked disasters such as cyclones, floods and droughts. There is, no doubt, wide support for India’s position that it cannot be held responsible for the stock of atmospheric carbon dioxide influencing the climate; even today, per capita emissions remain below the global average. Paradoxically, the country is a victim of climate events on the one hand and a major emitter of GHGs in absolute terms on the other. In New York, Mr. Modi chose to rely on the country’s culture of environmentalism to reassure the international community on its ability to act. In coming years, national actions will have to be demonstrably effective in curbing carbon emissions.

Balakot Redux

• Evidently, the strike on terrorists in Pakistan did not have a lasting impact
• Army chief Bipin Rawat’s revelation at the Officers Training Academy in Chennai that the terrorist camp in Balakot has begun functioning again is a deeply worrying development on several counts. It was barely seven months ago, in February, that the Air Force bombed Balakot and claimed to have taken out about 300 terrorists being trained there. That action was sold as being a pre-emptive one, and at the same time as a punitive response for the Pulwama attack which killed 40 CRPF personnel earlier that month. Though the Army Chief paraded this information on resumption of Balakot camp’s activities as yet more conclusive proof that the air force strike had put that terrorist camp out of business for the intervening months, it really comes across as an action that has not had any of the intended effects the planners had hoped for, not one. Indeed, it seems to have had the opposite effect. Evidently, the Jaish-e-Mohammed, though a banned entity, continues to operate with impunity. This underlines the reality that replenishing the numbers of terrorists who are taken out of reckoning is not a challenge for Pakistan’s establishment. That things have been turned around in less than seven months opens the door to more questions about the much touted efficacy of the strike as well. Certainly, the development does not increase the Indian people’s confidence that the Balakot strike has somehow frightened terrorists and their patrons in Pakistan into demoralized disarray.
• Far from it. Gen. Rawat said that there were 500 terrorists ready to infiltrate into Kashmir, and that to counter those attempts the Army had “thickened” its presence along the Line of Control. This is possibly in addition to the troops that were sent into Jammu and Kashmir to strengthen the security grid ahead of the moves on Article 370 and Article 35A, after which the State has been in a lockdown. The longer the clampdown lasts, the longer the soldiers remain deployed on trigger fingers, the more the accretion of belligerence continues on either side of the LoC.
• The Army chief has chosen to provide this information ahead of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s bilateral meeting with American President Donald Trump, ahead of the Prime Minister’s address to the United Nations General Assembly. The hope is once all the grandstanding is done, saner counsel will prevail and steps taken to guide both Kashmir and the bilateral relations with Pakistan to a space where they can be better managed bilaterally. Unfortunately, with about a month to go for elections in Haryana and Maharashtra, this may not turn out to be the case.
• It is perhaps for the best that the U.S.-Taliban talks were called off earlier this month. The Taliban leadership’s proposed visit to Camp David in the United States would have led to a slew of significant geopolitical changes with implications for the region and beyond.
• Perhaps the Taliban became far too greedy and impatient, or the U.S. President has pulled out what he thinks is the Trump card to gain a negotiating advantage especially given that the American establishment is not too happy with the deal. There were misgivings about the deal that the chief U.S. negotiator to Afghanistan, Zalmay Khalilzad, was about to ink with the Taliban.

Back to square one

• The Taliban, having fought against and displaced the powerful coalition forces over the past 18 years, has the luxury of time on its side, even as it is steadily increasing its political legitimacy within Afghanistan. Recall that this is not the first time U.S.-Taliban talks are breaking down, and every time the Americans have had to come around to negotiating again.
• Mr. Donald Trump on the other hand may not have the luxury of time. As for the international community, it has grown tired of the Afghan story.
• In any case, we are back to another season of heavy fighting in Afghanistan with devastating attacks being mounted by the Taliban far more frequently than before.
• What implications does the cancellation of U.S.-Afghan talks have for the volatile South Asian region in general and for India in particular?
• Implications for Afghanistan
• The direct fallout of the American pullout from the negotiations is more bloodshed in the country. The gloves are now off (not that the Taliban was greatly restrained earlier) and the Taliban has already started carrying out major attacks with the American troops fighting back. However, the current dispensation in Afghanistan, led by President Ashraf Ghani, might not be too displeased with the outcome. The September 28 elections are likely to go ahead, and Mr. Ghani has a chance to continue as President without having to share power with the Taliban — a prospect Kabul has been uneasy about for a long time — to the extent that he actively discouraged all talks with the Taliban that did not involve Kabul. The Ghani government will also be pleased with the fact that U.S. troops are likely to continue in the country, for if left alone the government will not survive long.
• The larger question that should concern the Afghan people is whether the Taliban is a changed lot or not.
• The Taliban has been making direct and indirect assertations about how they are a much evolved group on the question of girls’ education, treatment of women and minorities, among others. But these are claims at best and that is precisely why a deal with the Taliban should include commitments on its domestic behaviour.
• What it means for India
• Even with a properly negotiated deal, the ascent of the Taliban in Afghanistan would have meant a certain amount of regional uncertainty and geopolitical recalibration. Pakistan, for instance, has been counting on the return of the Taliban in Afghanistan which it deeply believes gives it strategic depth vis-à-vis India. Pakistani triumphalism in the context of Afghanistan would have meant pinpricks for India. Now that there is no deal between the Taliban and the U.S., there is likely to be more violence internally within Afghanistan while the external implications would be more or less contained. This calculus might change if and when the Taliban returns to power and foreign troops withdraw.
• India’s best bet in Afghanistan would be a negotiated withdrawal of foreign troops from Afghanistan, for this would check the Taliban’s proclivity to engage in troublemaking outside Afghan territory.
• A non-negotiated withdrawal of U.S. forces would be the worst-case scenario for India even though that is unlikely to happen. This will mean little check on the Taliban’s behaviour at home and in the neighbourhood. It will also enhance Pakistan’s ability to control elements of the Taliban for tactical or strategic anti-Indian uses.
• Once the Taliban returns to power in Afghanistan, on its own or as part of a powersharing arrangement, Indian civilian assets and interests in Afghanistan could come under increased pressure. Today, with the Pakistani side up in arms against India, thanks to New Delhi’s Kashmir decision, the possibility of the Taliban going against Indian interests is much higher, if we were to assume Pakistan to be a major influence on the Taliban’s actions.
• The Kashmir question
• Kashmir in many ways will continue to be at the centre of how the emerging geopolitical situation in Afghanistan will impact India. While it is true that a repeat of the late 1980s, when scores of unemployed Afghan fighters turned up in Kashmir at the behest of the Pakistani agencies, is unlikely to happen today for a number of reasons, including due to physical barriers and the amassing of Indian troops on the border, some presence of the Taliban fighters cannot be ruled out.
• More significantly, however, if a non-negotiated withdrawal of the U.S. forces takes place, it could lead to an open season for Taliban’s regional engagement which could potentially be influenced by Pakistan’s strategic calculations. Even if there is a deal between the U.S. and the Taliban, the fact that the Taliban will have “forced” the Americans out of Afghanistan would provide a shot in the arm to Pakistan, and young Kashmiris who are willing to take up arms against the Indian state.
• “If a superpower like the U.S. can be pushed out of Afghanistan by the Taliban with help from Pakistan, would it be too difficult to beat India?” is the argument doing the rounds among sections of aggrieved Kashmiri youth.
• The manner in which talks between the Taliban and the U.S., were being conducted would have led to negative consequences for New Delhi. To that extent, the breakdown of the Trump-Taliban talks is advantage India. The U.S. and the international community, while picking up the threads of negotiations in the days ahead, will need to ensure that there are enough guarantees built into a deal to disincentivize undesirable external behaviour by the Taliban.
• India, on its part, needs to reach out to the Taliban, not to recognize it but to engage with it, in its own national interest. In fact, we are already pretty late in this game, and with the Chinese, Pakistanis and even the Russians converging on the importance of the return of the Taliban to the Afghan scheme of things, one wonders whether India will ever be able to make inroads into the higher echelons of the Taliban. In any case, any outreach from the Indian side would make the government in Kabul led by Mr. Ghani, unhappy. This leaves India in a difficult situation. Hence, such an outreach will also need to be carefully calibrated and discreetly executed.
• Agroecology is recognized worldwide as a system that enhances fertile landscapes, increases yields, restores soil health and biodiversity, promotes climate resilience and improves farmers’ well-being. Its practices are supported by many agricultural scientists, the Food and Agriculture Organization, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, farmers’ groups and several NGOs. It is therefore surprising that the National Academy of Agricultural Sciences, based on a brainstorming session that included industry representatives, sent a letter to Prime Minister Narendra Modi opposing Zero Budget Natural Farming (ZBNF).
• ZBNF, developed and publicized by agro-scientist Subhash Palekar, has been adopted by Andhra Pradesh.

Zero Budget Natural Farming in India

• Zero Budget Natural Farming (ZBNF) is a set of farming methods, and also a grassroots peasant movement, which has spread to various states in India. It has attained wide success in southern India, especially the southern Indian state of Karnataka where it first evolved. The movement in Karnataka state was born out of collaboration between Mr Subhash Palekar, who put together the ZBNF practices, and the state farmers association Karnataka Rajya Raitha Sangha (KRRS), a member of La Via Campesina (LVC).
• The neoliberalization of the Indian economy led to a deep agrarian crisis that is making small scale farming an unviable vocation. Privatized seeds, inputs, and markets are inaccessible and expensive for peasants. Indian farmers increasingly find themselves in a vicious cycle of debt, because of the high production costs, high interest rates for credit, the volatile market prices of crops, the rising costs of fossil fuel based inputs, and private seeds. Debt is a problem for farmers of all sizes in India. Under such conditions, ‘zero budget’ farming promises to end a reliance on loans and drastically cut production costs, ending the debt cycle for desperate farmers. The word ‘budget’ refers to credit and expenses, thus the phrase ‘Zero Budget’ means without using any credit, and without spending any money on purchased inputs. ‘Natural farming’ means farming with Nature and without chemicals.

Threat to powerful elites

• Farming in India, as in most other countries, is largely under the control of powerful lobbies with vested interests and connections to deep pockets. These include fossil fuel, fertilizer and seed companies as well as scientists with funding connections to agribusiness. These lobbies perceive large-scale transitions to agroecology as a substantial threat to their influence on farming systems. If India, a large developing country, shifts to sustainable farming methods, they would all have to look elsewhere for support. The battlelines are drawn and when natural farming, still a small player in the margins, starts to move towards the centre, shrill voices in opposition are likely to get louder.
• In Britain, when public hearings were held in the early 2000s to discuss genetically modified (GM) crops, corporations threatened to pull grants from scientists on the committees if they voted against GM. When individual scientists in Europe and the University of California published articles describing how GM foods and crops affected the health of human beings and insects adversely, they were personally attacked and vilified. When glyphosate trials against Monsanto were recently decided in favour of litigants who accused the company of causing cancer, some voices called to have only scientists on such juries, thus opposing the central tenet of “a jury of one’s peers”.
• What hangs in the balance while these battles are being fought is the threat to food systems and biodiversity.
• As a result of industrial farming, friendly insects are no longer part of the agricultural landscape, water pollution is rampant, depleted soils are commonplace and plunging groundwater tables have become the norm. The opportunity cost incurred from investing only in industrial methods of agriculture is one that has been borne largely by the farming community and the natural systems.

Different paradigms

• That scientific enquiry and scientists are part of a paradigm of belief systems has been established, at least since Thomas Kuhn’s Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Support from corporations for research has become part of “normal” science. The problems with this normalization in medicine, pharmaceuticals and university research have been described in numerous studies. Assessment of an issue by scientists does not by itself guarantee its legitimacy or truth.
• The current battle on ZBNF is between those powerfully entrenched and new voices of state and civil society. Mr. Palekar’s words too have been jarring on some topics. Quarrels among the powerful in one camp or another have become a clash of egos, where substantive matters are lost in semantics and jargon, often taken out of context. There are many successful agroecology-based methods in India, so mudslinging among groups can also be a distraction.
• The most prominent voice for ZBNF is Mr. Palekar’s and the developing experiment is showing success largely because farmers are supporting it. The practice may not be all zero budget, may not be fully successful everywhere and will need to be adapted to India’s various agroecological zones. The funds for the Andhra model (₹16,500 crore) are reportedly going mostly to train farmers. This is small in comparison with huge subsidies for the Green Revolution and the numerous lobbies it has spawned. So, while the enemy is being made out to be Mr. Palekar and his methods, this is a red herring. The real attack is on agroecology, for the threat it poses to entrenched institutions.
• We presently have a subsidy-based agricultural system where farm inputs are firmly in the hands of corporations and their elite networks. Agroecology-based farming is not regressive, but rather a technology of the future with a traditional idiom. Farmers appear to be listening to and following Mr. Palekar. If policymakers ignore the posturing and stay focussed on improving soil health and quality of life for farmers, while observing and supporting successes, farmers may even double their incomes and India’s food security could sow new beginnings.
• The SASTRA Ramanujan prize for 2019 will be awarded to mathematician Adam Harper, Assistant Professor with the University of Warwick, England.
• The prize carries a citation and an award of $10,000 and is conferred annually on mathematicians from across the world who are less than 32 years of age, working in an area influenced by the genius Srinivasa Ramanujan.
• “The SASTRA-Ramanujan Award has gained global repute ever since it was instituted in 2005 and today is easily amongst the top five awards of this type for mathematics. Many previous winners, including Manjul Bhargava and Akshay Venkatesh, went on to win the Fields Medal later,” said Dr. S. Vaidhyasubramaniam, Vice-Chancellor of SASTRA University, in a press release.

Police has no power to seize assets, says SC

• The Supreme Court on Tuesday made clear that a police officer is not empowered to seize immovable property under Section 102 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
• Section 102 deals with the power of an investigating officer to seize any property suspected to be part of a crime.
• The question of law regarded by a three-judge Bench of Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, Justices Deepak Gupta and Sanjeev Khanna was whether landed property comes within the ambit of ‘property’ mentioned in the legal provision.
• “Given the nature of criminal litigation, seizure of an immovable property by the police officer in the form of an attachment and dispossession would not facilitate investigation to collect evidence to be produced during inquiry and trial,” Justice Khanna observed.
• Justice Gupta said seizure of land by a police officer during a probe would lead to an “absolutely chaotic situation”.

Download Free PDF – Daily Hindu Editorial Analysis

Sharing is caring!