A Dark Year for Kashmir
Plus, what are the major features of India's first National Education Policy in 34 years
Hi there, I’m Aman Thakker. Welcome to Indialogue, a newsletter analyzing the biggest policy developments in India. The aim of this newsletter is to provide you with quality analysis every week on what’s going on in India.
Thank you very much for subscribing. My writing, and this newsletter, benefits from your feedback, so please do not hesitate to send any suggestions, critiques, or ideas to aman@amanthakker.com.
Kashmir One Year After the Abrogation of Articles 370 and 35A
This coming Wednesday, August 5, will mark one year since the BJP-led government under Prime Minister Modi revoked the special autonomous status, as guaranteed under Articles 370 and 35A of the Constitution of India, of the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir. The government also bifurcated the state into two union territories - Jammu and Kashmir in the West, and Ladakh in the East.
But beyond the legal changes, August 5 marked the day that the government locked up a whole people. The entire state was put in a lockdown - one that is even a few steps beyond the COVID lockdowns that are all too familiar to us now. State political leaders were arrested for months on end, and some still remain under arrest. Access to phone calls and internet access were taken away entirely.
In defending this move, the BJP largely made a series of claims. The first was that the article was always meant to be temporary. The second that Articles 370 and 35A had “created a wall” with the rest of India. The third was that “denied economic opportunities and social gains for the masses” In making these claims, the government also promised that it would usher in a new era of prosperity and economic development. They also defended the draconian measures by saying they were necessary for security.
On the history of Article 370, and whether it was always meant to be “temporary,” I’d highly recommend you watch this lecture by Dr. Srinath Raghavan, Professor at Ashoka University. It’s a long watch, but worth your time:
Moreover, rather than Articles 370 and 35A creating “a wall” or a division between Kashmir and the rest of India, the reality is that the revocation of these articles has created a deep sense of distrust, anger, and alienation with the people within Kashmir. To understand just how much the government’s decisions have alienated people in the state, I would recommend this short interview (in a mix of Hindi and English) with Waheed-ur-Rehman Para, the youth president and spokesperson of the Jammu and Kashmir Peoples Democratic Party. Full disclosure: Waheed is a friend. We met in Washington D.C. when he came to the U.S. on a delegation for emerging political leaders under the aegis of the U.S. State Department’s International Visiting Leaders’ Program, and have stayed in touch since.
Listen to how he describes how Kashmiris felt “defeated,” “humiliated,” “helpless,” and “insulted”:
Moreover, it is a bit rich to lock up an entire state, leave them without phone or internet connections, and stifle their rights to speech, protest, and political assembly, and then claim that it was all being done in an effort to build a deeper bridge with Kashmir.
Finally, on the notion that Kashmir fell behind on economic or social levels as compared to the rest of India, the record is against the BJP yet again. Data actually shows that the former state of Jammu and Kashmir ranked 3rd in life expectancy, 10th in infant mortality, 7th best in doctors per capita, and ranked ahead of Gujarat and Andhra Pradesh in its Human Development Index Score. Moreover, Shahid Iqbal Choudhary, the District Magistrate and Development Commissioner of Srinagar, wrote in an op-ed that:
It is utterly wrong and unjust to blame Article 370 for every minor or major shortfall faced by Jammu and Kashmir state in the path of development… prominent names of industry have their presence in Jammu which include Chenab textiles, Dabur India, Godrej, Coca-Cola, Berger Paints, Euro Bond, UK Paints”
Investments from these companies have totaled nearly $700 million (Rs 5000 crore) in the erstwhile state.
Rather than building upon this investment to bring more jobs and development to the region, what the revocation of Kashmir’s special autonomous status seems to have done is make it harder for the state to develop. The center, through its stringent lockdown on communications and internet access - a ban of 4G mobile internet remains in place - has created a sense of fear and uncertainty, a far cry from a “desirable” business climate. Tourism, a source of major revenue for the erstwhile state, has collapsed since the decision was announced a year ago.
Looking at the region a year later, it seems clear by all metrics that not only was the decision to revoke Kashmir’s autonomous status under Articles 370 and 35A based on faulty premises, and that it has failed to bring in any development or progress for the region.
I’d like to conclude by saying one final thing. Here in the United States where I live, we have been celebrating the life of civil rights hero, Congressman John Lewis, whose funeral was held last week. In an op-ed published posthumously, he reminded everyone that we have a “moral obligation to stand up, speak up and speak out.” He challenged us to recognize that “When you see something that is not right, you must say something. You must do something.”
The decision to revoke the special autonomous status of Kashmir under the cover of a security threat, through misdirection and confusion, was wrong. Revoking the autonomous status without democratic debate and input from the very people the decision affected was wrong. The restrictions on speech and dissent, and the infringement on rights guaranteed under the Constitution - many of which remain in force to this day - remain wrong. The arrest of political leaders - whether under the public safety act or unofficial house arrest - is wrong.
And if saying that these decisions were wrong gets me in trouble, then, in the words of Congressman John Lewis, it was “good trouble, necessary trouble.”
If you would like to support Indialogue, please consider sharing the newsletter with others who might enjoy it using the button below!
Cabinet Approves a New National Education Policy
Last Thursday, the Cabinet approved the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020. The approval of the NEP marked the first time since 1986 that India had a new national education policy. The goal undergirding this new policy is a desire to modernize India’s education system and move it away from rote-learning to applied and skills-based knowledge. You can read the full draft of the NEP 2020 here, but I have summarized the key features of the policy below:
Replacing India’s current 10+2 schooling system (where Years 1-10 are focused on general education, followed by two additional years of higher secondary school) with a 5 (ages 3-8) + 3 (ages 8-11) + 3 (ages 11-14) + 4 (ages 14-18) structure;
Instruction in the “mother tongue/local language/regional language” until Grade 5, but preferably until Grade 8 and beyond;
The inclusion of vocational education beginning with Grade 6;
A reduction of curriculum to “core concepts;”
A redesign of board exams in Grades 10 and 12 with the aim to test holistic development, as well as additional examinations in Grades 3, 5, and 8;
A common entrance exam for admission to universities and higher education institutions, which will be administered by the National Testing Agency;
The establishment of common regulations for public and private higher education institutions;
The discontinuation of MPhil courses at the university level;
The creation of multiple entry and exit points from undergraduate education, such as
A “Certificate: after 1 year,
An “Advanced Diploma” after 2 years,
A “Bachelor’s Degree” after 3 years, and
A “Bachelor’s with Research Degree” after 4 years;
The creation of a single regulator - the Higher Education Commission of India - for all higher education institutions except for legal and medical colleges; and
The creation of a National Research Foundation (along the lines of the National Science Foundation in the United States).
Beyond these specific goals, the policy also outlines some broad goals it would like to reach, such universalizing school education in the country, nearly doubling higher education enrollment from the current 26.3% to 50% by 2035, and increase spending on education to 6% of GDP as soon as possible.
However, some questions remain about the implementation of the policy. As Priscilla Jebaraj of The Hindu explains:
Some of the proposals require legal changes. The draft Higher Education Commission of India Bill has been languishing in the Ministry for over a year, but is likely to be published for feedback by September. The proposal for a Board of Governors for universities may also require amendments of the Central and State Universities Acts. A Cabinet note has already been moved to set up the National Research Foundation as a trust under the government, but in order to make it a fully autonomous body, an Act may be required.
Others require funding. Free breakfasts can only be considered in the next academic year if a budget allocation is made to cover it. The process of converting affiliated colleges into degree granting autonomous institutions and then further into fully fledged universities is estimated to take at least 15 years, as the Centre will have to provide financial assistance for this purpose.
The Ministry feels that an increase in government funding of education to 6% of GDP will be sufficient to cover the financial implications of the NEP. However, such an increase in funding has been proposed but not achieved for the last half-century, point out experts.
The proposal to make the mother tongue the medium of instruction till Class 5, which has stirred up the fiercest debates, is dependent on State governments, according to the Education Minister, who would not even confirm that the policy will be implemented by centrally-run schools.
The devil will, therefore, be in the implementation, and how this government and successive ones can turn this vision into a document. As Pratap Bhanu Mehta writes:
The New Education Policy, for the most part, provides a forward-looking framework for transforming Indian education. If the government does little else but implement most of the recommendations on school education and empower India’s school children, the future will belong to India. But we should also be under no illusion that the accumulated weight of betrayals in education also threaten to make this promising document just that: Another document.
India-China Tensions Cross 90-Day Mark as Complete Disengagement Remains Elusive
We’re reaching 90 days since the reported start (roughly around May 5) of stand-offs between Indian and Chinese troops in Eastern Ladakh.
The disengagement process, negotiated by India’s National Security Adviser Ajit Doval and Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi on July 5, continues to proceed at an incremental pace. To recap, here’s where things stand based on what is being reported:
At Galwan Valley (Patrol Point (PP)-14), a complete disengagement seems to have taken place.
At PP-15 in Gogra-Hot Springs, Chinese troops have “indicated they will move back without conditions”
At PP-17A in the Gogra-Hot Springs area as well, troops have not yet disengaged.
At Pangong Tso, Despite a partial pullback from Finger 4 to Finger 5, China continues to occupy territory between Fingers 5 and 8, which India considers its own territory. It also continues to occupy positions at the ridge lines above Finger 4.
At Depsang Plains (PPs 10, 11, 11A, 12, 13), very little is known other than reporting from unnamed sources that China has denied Indian troops access to five patrol points, and that there is no disengagement.
However, a spokesperson for the Chinese Foreign Ministry, Wang Wenbin, said in a media briefing that “border troops have disengaged in most localities, the situation on the ground is deescalating and the temperature is coming down.”
India’s Ministry of External Affairs pushed back against such an assessment, saying in a release two days later (on Thursday, June 30) that “There has been some progress made towards this objective but the disengagement process has as yet not been completed,” and that “Senior Commanders of the two sides will be meeting in the near future to work out steps in this regard.”
That meeting of Corps Commanders - the fifth such meeting since the tension began - took place on Sunday, August 2nd, and reportedly lasted for 10 hours.
However, there was little progress to report following after the Corps Commanders meeting (at least as of writing).
News Roundup
Home Minister Amit Shah has tested positive for COVID-19 after experiencing symptoms of the virus last week. He has been admitted to the hospital on advice of his doctors. The Minister attended a Cabinet meeting last week on Thursday. However, government sources have emphasized that social distancing was strictly followed, and the participants were wearing masks.
The Government of India has banned an additional 47 Chinese apps, described as copycats or clones of the 59 Chinese apps the government banned on June 29. The banned apps include Tiktok Lite, Helo Lite, SHAREit Lite, BIGO LIVE Lite, and VFY Lite.
The Ministry of Defense has released a second draft of the India’s new “Defence Procurement Procedure” - renamed in this draft as “Defence Acquisition Procedure (DAP) 2020” - for public comment. A new feature of the new draft includes a provision states that, “With a view to promoting the domestic and indigenous industry as also align the DAP with the reforms enunciated in the Atmanirbhar Abhiyan, the MoD will notify a list of weapons/platforms banned for import, updated from time to time.” The full draft of the DAP 2020 is available here, and is open for public comment until August 10, 2020.
The Ministry of Power has issued finalized guidelines for the bidding process for both Renewable Energy Power Projects and Coal Based Thermal Power Projects.
A study conducted jointly by the Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, the University of Chicago, Duke University, the IDFC Institute, and others under the aegis of NITI Aayog found that 57% of the people tested in slums had been exposed to the COVID-19, while 16% of people tested in non-slum areas had been exposed to COVID-19. The results are drawn from random testing of 6,936 people in three areas (Matunga, Chembur, and Dahisar) of Mumbai. The full study is available here.
Three to Read
From cogent analysis to potentially big news that you should keep an eye on, here are a few commentaries and other pieces of writing that I found particularly enlightening:
Dr. C Raja Mohan, director of the Institute of South Asian Studies at the National University of Singapore, argues: “The idea of democracies working together has an enduring appeal for the US. That India figures in this American vision is relatively new. So is Delhi’s readiness to reciprocate. Constructing a global coalition of democracies will take much work and quite some time. But engaging with that initiative, amidst the rise and assertion of China, should open a whole range of new possibilities for Indian foreign and security policies.”
Dr. Aparna Pande, Research Fellow and Director, India Initiative at the Washington-DC based Hudson Institute, publishes an excerpt of her new book Making India Great: The Promise of a Reluctant Global Power for ThePrint: “Like Americans in the nineteenth century who believed in ‘manifest destiny’, many Indians believe that their country has a right to historical greatness. The world may look at India through the lens of its struggles with modernity, its economic obstacles and its demographic challenges. For most Indians, however, India’s centuries-old civilization, its geographic location, its population comprising one-fifth of humanity, its growing economic power and military strength, and its history make it inevitable that it will be a great power not only in Asia but the world. This faith in ‘Indian exceptionalism’ pervades and defines India’s external relations.”
Roshan Kishore, Data & Political Economy Editor at Hindustan Times, writes: “Even though it contributes less than 15% of the GDP, agriculture continues to provide livelihood to more than 40% of the country’s workers. This makes it critical for economic growth. However, to really shift the fortunes in favour of agriculture will require a demand driven sustainable policy trajectory.”
Thanks for reading this latest edition of Indialogue. Please let me know if you have any thoughts or feedback by emailing me at aman@amanthakker.com.