Making of a mammoth tragedy - Manmohan Singh

Making of a mammoth tragedy

Manmohan Singh

Manmohan Singh The decision to demonetise will cause grievous injury to the honest Indian who earns wages in cash. The dishonest black money hoarder will get away with a mere rap on the knuckles It is said that“money is an idea that inspires confidence”. At the stroke of the midnight hour, on November 9, 2016, the confidence of more than a billion Indians was destroyed. Prime Minister Narendra Modi had declared that more than 85 per cent of the value of money held in notes of Rs.500 and Rs.1,000 was worthless overnight. In one impetuous decision, the Prime Minister has shattered the faith and confidence that hundreds of millions of Indians had reposed in the Government of India to protect them and their money. The Prime Ministerin his address to the nation said,“there comes a time in the history of a country's development when a need is felt for a strong and decisive step,” and propounded two primary reasons forthis decision. One was to check “enemies from across the border… using fake currency notes”. The other was to “break the grip of corruption and black money”. Both these intentions are honourable and deserve to be supported whole-heartedly. Counterfeit currency and black money are as grave a threat to the idea of India as terrorism and social division. They deserve to be extinguished using all the firepower at our disposal. However, the popular saying “the road to hell is paved with good intentions” serves as a usefulreminder and warning in this context. The underlying premise behind the decision of the Prime Ministerto render Rs.500 and Rs.1,000 currencies as illegal overnight seems to be this false notion that ‘all cash is black money and all black money is in cash’. This is farfrom reality. Let us understand why. Life thrown into disarray More than 90 per cent of India’s workforce still earn their wages in cash. These consist of hundreds of millions of agriculture workers, construction workers and so on. While the number of bank branches in rural areas have nearly doubled since 2001, there are still more than 600 million Indians who live in a town or village with no bank. Cash is the bedrock of the lives of these people. Their daily subsistence depends on their cash being accepted as a medium of valid currency. They save their money in cash which, as it grows, is stored in denominations of Rs.500 and Rs.1,000 notes. To tarnish these as ‘black money’ and throw the lives of these hundreds of millions of poor people in disarray is a mammoth tragedy. The vast majority of Indians earn in cash, transact in cash and save in cash, all legitimately. It is the fundamental duty of a democratically ALSO READ Amartya Sen terms demonetisation a despotic action 12/10/2016 Manmohan Singh on Demonetisation: Making of a mammoth tragedy ­ The Hindu http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/Making­of­a­mammoth­tragedy/article16779252.ece?homepage=true 4/7 elected government in any sovereign nation to protect the rights and livelihood of its citizens. The recent decision by the Prime Ministeris a travesty of this fundamental duty. Black money in India is a genuine concern. This is wealth that has been accumulated over years by those with unaccounted sources of income. Unlike the poor, holders of black money have access to various forms of wealth such as land, gold, foreign exchange, etc. There have been various attempts by many governments in the past decades to recoverthis illicit wealth through actions by the Income Tax department, the Enforcement Directorate and schemes such as Voluntary Disclosure. These measures were targeted strikes at only those suspected to be holders of such unaccounted wealth, not on all citizens. Evidence from these past attempts has shown that a large majority of this unaccounted wealth is not stored in the form of cash. All black money is not in cash, only a tiny fraction is. Against this backdrop, the decision by the Prime Ministeris bound to have obverse implications by causing grievous injury to the honest Indian who earns his/her wages in cash and a mere rap on the knuckles to the dishonest black money hoarder. To make it worse, the government has actually made it easierto generate such unaccounted wealth in the future by the introduction of a Rs.2,000 note. This brazen policy measure has neithertackled the stock of black money holistically nor has it stemmed the flow of it. It is no surprise that the logistical challenge ofreplacing billions of old currency notes with new ones is a monumental one. It is a huge challenge in most nations, and in a country as vast and diverse as India it was bound to be doubly so. This is also one reason why most nations that have undertaken such currency swap operations have done so over a certain time period and not as a sudden overnight operation. It is heartbreaking to see and hear of millions of poorIndians standing in long lines to withdraw some money for basic sustenance. As someone who has experienced long lines forrationed food during wartime, I neverimagined that one day I would find my own countrymen and women waiting endlessly forrationed money. That all of this suffering is due to one hasty decision makes it even more disconcerting. The macroeconomic impact of this decision of the government is likely to be hazardous. At a time when India’s trade numbers are at multi-yearlows, industrial production is shrinking and job creation is anaemic, this policy can act as a negative shock to the economy. It is indeed true that India’s cash to GDP ratio is very high vis-à-vis other nations. But this is also an indicator of the Indian economy’s dependence on cash. Consumer confidence is an important economic variable in a nation’s growth prospects. It is now evident that this sudden overnight ban on currency has dented the confidence of hundreds of millions of Indian consumers, which can have severe economic ramifications. The scars of an overnight depletion of the honest wealth of a vast majority of Indians combined with their ordeal of rationed access to new currency will be too deep to heal quickly. This can have ripple effects on GDP growth and job creation. It is my humble opinion that we as a nation should brace ourselves for a tough period overthe coming months, needlessly so.

Unintended consequences Black money is a menace to our society that we need to eliminate. In doing so, we have to be mindful of the potential impact on hundreds of millions of other honest citizens. It may be tempting and self-fulfilling to believe that one has all the solutions and previous governments were merely lackadaisical in their attempts to curb black money. It is not so. Leaders and governments have to care fortheir weak and at no point can they abdicate this responsibility. Most policy decisions carry risks of unintended consequences. It is important to deftly balance these risks with the potential benefits of such decisions. Waging a war on black money may sound enticing. But it cannot entail even a single loss of life of an honest Indian. 

Dr. Manmohan Singh was Prime Minister of India from 2004 to 2014. 

Courtesy:The Hindu

Going digital - The Hindu Editorial

Going digital

Path to a less-cash economy is riddled with hurdles that have to do with lack of infrastructure and weak governance

Written by Editorial | Published:December 10, 2016 12:02 am

The government’s push towards a digital economy by incentivisation is a move in the right direction. But there are enormous challenges ahead. The electronic infrastructure space is still under-developed in India, technology governance is weak and cash will continue to play a significant role just as it does in developed countries. The decision to give discounts on a variety of transactions, from online purchase of train tickets and use of credit and debit cards in fuel stations to buying of insurance policies from state-owned insurers, has come a month after the demonetisation decision of November 8. It seems aimed at shoring up the government’s changing narrative on demonetisation — from being a measure aimed at eliminating black money and corruption to a move that will propel India towards a less-cash economy.

But the path to a digital economy is also beset with many barriers. For one, the e-infrastructure today is woefully inadequate to serve the people in semi-urban and rural areas. Internet penetration is low at 30 per cent, and smartphone penetration lower at 17 per cent. What complicates the problem is the changing postal address of people given that the India story of recent times is a story of migration, of the young moving from one place to another, in search of jobs, businesses and education. Then, rural India is a world where small establishments do not have Point Of Sale (POS) terminals and even those that have them not only give discounts on cash purchases but also charge extra on a card transaction. The second issue relates to governance. There have been 30 Internet blackouts across a dozen states in the last three years, adding up to 250 days. Clearly, the government itself is a hurdle to its digital push. The blackouts were for a variety of reasons — unrest, communal violence, examinations. Anomalies also exist in the form of gaps in the regulatory mechanism of credit and debit cards, and mobile wallets. For instance, the discount rate, charged to a merchant accepting card payments, and sometimes to consumers, is by the banks themselves, and not by the regulator — the Reserve Bank of India, in this case.

Though the government has not specified an end date for e-discounts, they are expected to continue for a while because the digital economy has become the most significant end objective of the demonetisation drive. This narrative is unlikely to change any time soon because the availability of cash in the bank branches and  ATMs continues to be meagre. It will make immense sense for the government to take a holistic view on what it takes to be a less-cash economy, and not strive to be a cashless economy.

Courtesy: The Hindu

Beware the cultural revolution

Government directive to educational institutions to execute the digital financial 

literacy mission subverts the idea of the university.

Written by Apoorvanand | Published:December 10, 2016 12:02 am

Cultural revolution, feared by this writer and promised by a minister of the Modi government in these pages, has begun in India. As in the Cultural Revolution in China, universities, schools and educational institutions are being harnessed to unleash it on the country.

In an unprecedented and outrageous move, the Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD) has asked institutions of higher education to deploy their students, faculty and other resources to implement this government’s scheme of turning India into a cashless society. A high-sounding name has been found for this drive: The Digital Financial Literacy Mission. All central universities, IITs, AISERs and other institutions have been asked to rope in students and train them to be digital finance educators. They will fan out in the bazaars, like Sadar Bazar and Azadpur Sabzi Mandi in Delhi, to teach street vendors and shopkeepers the technicalities of cashless transactions.

They are expected to train traders in using the machines and apprise them of the benefits of moving towards a cashless society.

The MHRD has issued a four-page circular, where it calls the scheme a transformational mission. The ministry has asked the directors/heads of institutions to ensure that the mission is undertaken earnestly. Not only are organisations like the NCC and the NSS to be used, but to ensure the participation of students, the ministry has asked the institutions to make it an academic programme and award credits. The language of the circular is one of command, not of suggestion.

The merit of the government’s intention to make India a fully digitised or cashless economy apart, we need to ask how the drive against black money morphed into a mission to make a cashless society. That will happen once we regain our senses and have the right information. But we know that not all economists and financial experts are in agreement with the government’s claims. Sociologists and psychologists are supposed to study the impact of the shift on societal behaviour and tell the society about its long-term implication.

In short, students would expect their teachers to lead them to a process of analysing and criticising the government’s move. What is the other way of creating knowledge about this situation and creating an ethos where informed discussion becomes possible, instead of being forced to choose between the competing claims?

If the Centre is right in using the universities to change the financial habits of the people, why should the government of Bihar not ask students and teachers in that state to work as prohibition volunteers? After all both governments seek legitimacy in the language of morality.

Universities are neither cheerleaders nor footsoldiers of the government of the day. Universities are also not the implementation agency of governments. Forget the government, which in a democracy is supposed to be temporary, even the state and society do not bind the universities to them in a utilitarian relationship. Universities, though created and supported by the state and society, are meant to maintain a respectable distance from the two institutions. There are different theories of knowledge creation, but we can be sure about one thing. If the university merges its interests and being with the centre of power, it loses the ability to talk about it in a language of knowledge. The university is not a spokesperson of the government.

We also know that, from time to time, governments feel tempted to make use of the youth in the campuses to implement their policies. The cover of national interest is used for the purpose. Fight against terrorism is a national mission in many countries. But when the UK government sought to turn the faculty and students into informers and informants, it faced strong opposition. The government was forced to retreat.

What is noble and urgent and universal in the eyes of the government need to be questioned if we are to be true inheritors of the shastras, Plato, Socrates, Gandhi and Foucault. The claims of the government need to put to the severest test. Who will do it if not universities, for they alone have the necessary tools.

The government’s order does two things: It discourages, rather disallows, the faculty and student, to study and examine the state’s move, and uses an unpaid youth population to force people to accept its plan. Involvement of the universities will give the scheme a veneer of respectability.

This was coming. In the last two-and-half years, universities have been receiving circulars directly from the Centre. The UGC has been reduced to a post office that routes government orders. Universities have been ordered to observe days like Swachhata Divas, Ekta Divas, Samvidhan Divas, etc. They are asked to submit proof of implementation of the government order. These orders infantilise and trivialise the nature of the university. But unfortunately, heads of our institutions lack the courage to stand up to the government and say the faculty decides the agenda for the campus.

An innocuous sounding word like divyang coined by the prime minister has entered the administrative vocabulary of academic institutions without any debate. When power becomes the source of wisdom, and when knowledge seekers and creaters reduce themselves to the state of followers, we need to worry.

The writer teaches at Delhi University

Courtes, Indian Express

 

And who are we to say the Syrian revolution is dead?

The spirit of the revolution in Syria persists, even as Assad's forces advance.

byMalak Chabkoun

@malaak_c

Malak Chabkoun is an independent Middle East researcher and writer based in the US.

Regardless of what Donald Trump says he is going to do in terms of disarming Syrian rebels and his promises to Vladimir Putin and Bashar al-Assad, the Syrian revolution is not dead.

Regardless of how many armed opposition factions are fighting among themselves at the moment, regardless of what the external opposition does, or who it plans to "work with" now that Trump will be the new United States president, the Syrian revolution is not dead.

Regardless of how many "Friends of Syria" continue to sell out Syrian revolutionaries, the Syrian revolution is not dead.

Regardless of the countless doomsday declarations that there are no options for the US but to submit to Russia in Syria, the Syrian revolution is not dead.

And regardless of whether East Aleppo falls to the regime or not, the Syrian revolution is not dead.

Declaring the Syrian revolution dead reduces it - and all the sacrifices Syrians have made - to a military conflict, and once again plays directly into the narratives of despots and dictators in the Arab world who treated the Arab Spring as their personal invitation to further destroy their own peoples.

Syrians defined their revolution early on

Since the first anti-regime protests in Daraa, Syrians have defined revolution on their own terms. In those early days of revolution, weapons and military factions - save for the Assad-controlled army - had nothing to do with the peaceful demands of the protesters.

Back then, the "thawra", translated literally as "revolution", represented a changed state of mind, one that defied the decades-long brutal security state built by Hafez al-Assad and willfully extended by Bashar al-Assad.

Syrians have not only demanded that they wanted isqat al-nidham (fall of the regime), but also that they preferred death to humiliation. When the revolution began, activists across the nation used social media platforms to choose the weekly themes of their protests every Friday.

It is very clear from the themes chosen in early 2011 that Syrians were using them to define exactly what their revolution demanded, aspired to and represented: March 18, dignity; March 25, dignity; April 15, persistence; April 29, rage; May 13, free women.

Unfortunately, these demands have not been a focal point for most researchers and journalists covering Syria, particularly as the military map in Syria increasingly became crowded and complex. However, while analysts have chosen to ignore that these demands have translated to civil society initiatives across Syria under far less than ideal conditions, Syrians have not forgotten this.

Earlier this year, Daraya, a city in the suburbs of Damascus, also known as Reef Damascus province, was forcibly evacuated of its revolutionaries by the regime.

Before the evacuation, Daraya gained notoriety in revolutionary circles not only for its staunch resistance against Hezbollah and the regime, but also for its massive library built underground by the very people painted mainly as "Islamist fighters".

As the city was being evacuated, an image of a green evacuation bus circulated with a line of poetry written on the side in Arabic, "Your attempts are in vain. A revolutionary never dies".

For many observers, both inside and outside Syria, it was a reminder from Daraya's people that even on one of the worst days of the revolution, its spirit persists within those loyal to it.

It is worth noting that Syria's history contributes to the current revolutionaries' definition of freedom. An attempted uprising in 1982, for which Hafez Assad punished residents of Hama by killing tens of thousands of civilians, and rebellion against French colonisation of the country starting in 1919, are both cited as inspiration for the revolutionaries.

The revolution's enemies grow in number, yet it persists

The Friday themes mentioned earlier have reflected an expansion of the Syrian revolution as time has gone on - Syrians have had to defend their revolution not only against Assad's assaults, but also the full force of the Lebanese Hezbollah, the militias of the Iranian al-Quds Force, Russian troops and air power, the Democratic Union Party (PYD), and groups such as the so-called Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) and Jabhat Fath al-Sham (formerly Jabhat al-Nusra or al-Nusra Front Front).

On Friday, November 8, 2013, the revolutionaries called out Iran, with the theme, "No to the Iranian Occupation of Syria". On February 28, 2014, and again on August 8 of the same year, Hezbollah's attacks on the Syrian revolution were called out by the revolutionaries.

On November 21, 2014, "ISIS Seeks to Distort Islam". On June 5, 2015, "ISIL Betrays Aleppo". On October 9, 2015, "Russian Intervention Will Not Stop the People's Revolution".

The very fact that peaceful protests persist against these various actors that have attacked the revolution indicates a social change within Syria.

As recently as November 29, as shelling on Aleppo intensified, Syrian activists gathered in Idlib city, both in solidarity and to remind the world, yet again, that their narrative has not changed, and that their demands for freedom and peace have not yet expired.

Who gets to call the end of the revolution?

Can anyone say that the revolution has been free of flaws? No, of course not. Its flaws were expected and human, and have often been a natural reaction to conditions far beyond the revolutionaries' control. But these flaws are not an excuse for random analysts to declare the revolution dead.

Even if, as many are predicting, the battle for Aleppo segues into the eventual fall of Idlib province back into regime and Russian hands, the revolution will not have died. One cannot expect that the freedom and independence displayed by Syrians in these areas will simply disappear: social change in the form of local councils and civil society organisation and mobilisation will not be erased by military conquests.

The bottom line is that the Syrian revolution changed something within Syrians, something that they have paid dearly for and that only they can give life to or declare it dead.

For nearly six years, their narrative has been trampled, twisted and abused, and this would be a fine moment for analysts to finally respect Syrians enough to return the narrative of this revolution back to its rightful owners. 

Malak Chabkoun is an independent Middle East researcher and writer based in the US. 

The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial policy.

Source: Al Jazeera

Report: Majority of Arab youth rejects radicalism

The new Arab Human Development report seeks to dispel misconceptions about young Arabs in the region.

Beirut -  Arab youths are suffering from pervasive social exclusion, the highest unemployment levels in the world, and low female labour force participation, the Arab Human Development Report for 2016 has found. The annual report, entitled Youth and the Prospects of Human Development in a Changing Reality, was launched at the American University of Beirut in late November by the United Nations Development Programme.

The report brings to light a number of matters worth considering.

On one hand, the Arab region as a whole has achieved remarkable progress in educational enrolment and the fight against illiteracy, especially among women. Overall extreme poverty and hunger have declined, and there has been an increase in life expectancy.

Yet on the other hand, the region has witnessed a dramatic increase in armed conflict, militarisation and violence. Fifteen years ago, when the first  Arab Human Development Report, or AHDR, was published, five out of 22 Arab states were witnessing conflict or political violence. Today, this number has gone up to 11.

Half of the Arab region is living in conflict, and the situation does not seem to be improving.

In the past couple of decades, the region has seen low economic growth with very little job creation, which has translated into a general decline in the standards of living for the majority of Arab citizens.

Low oil prices have put government budgets, cross-border investments and workers' remittances under stress, and Arab societies have witnessed a degradation of their social, physical and environmental capital.

With more than 75 percent of the Arab population living in major cities in the region, one just needs to visit these urban areas to witness the extent of air pollution, degraded living conditions, shrinking public spaces and the general malaise of a majority of the population.

Young people in the region are the main victims of this grim situation. They constitute the largest segment in society - 105 million are aged 15-29, 30 percent of the Arab region's population - and suffer from pervasive social exclusion.

Unemployment among youths is the highest in the world at more than 30 percent; young women's labour force participation is at an all-time low; and with an increasing education most university graduates migrate when they can to find better opportunities abroad.

READ MORE: The terrible illusions of the Arab Spring

The less fortunate ones live idle lives, waiting for things to change. This "waithood" has caused a delay in family formation and autonomy, a higher exposure to health risk factors, such as smoking and drug use, and ultimately pushed some youths to engage in extremist activities and armed conflict.

Yet the AHDR 2016 seeks to dispel several misconceptions about young Arabs that have been prevalent in previous analysis and reporting on the region.The first misconception is that the vast majority of young Arabs are prone to radicalisation and extremism.

A massive amount of recent opinion polling data analysed for the Report revealed that an overwhelming majority of youths rejects terrorism and radicalisation, albeit remaining largely conservative in their social and religious attitudes.

The second misconception is that young migrants originating from Arab countries constitute a major threat to developed economies. The AHDR 2016 found that most Arab countries are marked by outward migration; yet, the vast stock of immigrants in Gulf Cooperation Council countries means that Arab countries as a whole receive more migrants - Arab and non-Arab - than they send out.

An estimated 27 million immigrants live within the borders of the Gulf countries of the region; these countries took in about 80 percent of all immigrants - Arab and non-Arab - in the region in 2010–2014.

With the rise in conflicts in the region, forced migration has pushed many Arabs to migrate mostly to other neighbouring Arab countries, with a much smaller share going to countries outside the region such as Europe.

The third misconception is that following the failure of the 2011 uprisings many young Arabs have become apathetic and less interested in civic engagement and political change.

While it is true that the data reveals life dissatisfaction among youth in the region is the highest in the world, they are more civically engaged and socially mobilised, especially young women, than similar youth in other countries around the world.

With an extremely high electronic connectivity - more than 70 percent of young people in the region have access to social media - Arab youths are more exposed to globalisation and connected than any other previous generation. This raises their expectations and aspirations, yet at the same time increases their frustration when nothing is improving in their daily life. 

The AHDR 2016 is a wake-up call for policymakers and citizens in the region to address the systemic issues that are plaguing their societies. Achieving peace and security is a core priority, with the necessity of increasing youth involvement in peace building and conflict resolution.

Tackling rising economic inequality and inequality of opportunity, especially in access to good education and healthcare, is another crucial cross-regional priority. Arab countries are witnessing a widening divide between the "haves" and the "have-nots", and young Arabs living in slums and peripheral areas have less chances of obtaining quality education and access to affordable health services.

The Report calls for increased government investments in the expansion of public education and providing free universal health coverage.

It also calls for opening up the political space for Arab youth, and treating them as real partners in planning the future of the Arab countries, not just as a burden or a threat.

*The writer is  a Lebanese Economist and Social Activist. He is an Associate Professor of Economics at the American University of Beirut. He recently served as the Lead Author of UNDP's Arab Human Development Report 2016. 

Source: Al Jazeera

Muslim-Owned Restaurant Offers Free Christmas Dinners To The Elderly And Homeless

"No one eats alone on Christmas Day."

Ed Mazza Overnight Editor, The Huffington Post

If you’re looking for the true meaning of Christmas, you’ll find it at a Muslim-owned restaurant in London.

Shish, a restaurant that specializes in Turkish food, is offering free meals to the homeless and elderly on Christmas.

“No one eats alone on Christmas Day,” a sign on the restaurant reads. “We are here to sit with you.” 

The sign promising a free three-course dinner to the elderly and homeless was initially handwritten:

“We’re just helping people,” restaurant worker Hasan Masud told BuzzFeed News. “[L]ots of people stay home alone for Christmas… They don’t need to. They can come here and have some fun.”

The meal includes soup and cacik (a yogurt-based dish), an entree of chicken, vegetarian casserole or chicken shish, and rice pudding for dessert. 

Courtesy: Huffington Post India

Will Appeal Against Allahabad HC's Decision On Triple Talaq, Says Muslim Cleric

"We respect High Court's verdict, but we have a constitutional right to appeal against it."

LUCKNOW -- A Muslim cleric, Khalid Rashid Firangi Mahali, on Thursday said they will appeal against the Allahabad High Court's decision on triple talaq.

"We respect High Court's verdict, but we have a constitutional right to appeal against it if not satisfied," he said.

Mahali's statement came hours after Allahabad High Court termed the Islamic practice of divorcing a woman by uttering the word "talaq" thrice as unconstitutional.

He further said that the legal committee of All India Muslim People Law Board will study the verdict and observations, and then it will file its appeal against it.

Expressing disagreement over the High Court's decision on triple talaq being unconstitutional, he said, "I don't think it is unconstitutional, if few people misuse the law then we can take action against them, but cannot remove the law."

"As far as the law of triple talaq, being said to be unconstitutional, is concerned, I think the Constitution of our country has given us the right to profess and practice our religion," the cleric said, adding that Muslim Personal Law and law of triple talaq are integral parts of our religion.

The High Court observed that the triple talaq practice sanctioned under Muslim Personal Law that governs marriage, property and divorce violates the rights of Muslim women. The court further said that no personal law board is above the Constitution.

Speaking over violating the rights, the cleric said, "we are working and exercising rights within the parameters of constitution."

Several women have filed a petition before the Supreme Court seeking the quashing of the triple talaq practice. The Central Government has also told the top court that it is against gender injustice and for equality between men and women under the Constitution.

However, the All India Muslim Personal Law Board has defended the practice, saying it is better to divorce a woman than kill her. The rights bestowed by religion can't be questioned in a court of law, it said.

Courtesy: Huffingtonpost.in