Hafiz Muhammad Saeeds detention may only be a strategic

signal by Pakistan army. Or it could be more than that?

Sceptics are likely to dismiss Lashkar-e-Taiba chief Hafiz Muhammad Saeeds
detention this week as one more iteration of the Pakistani intelligence
services well-worn smoke-and-mirrors show on terrorism. Little of actual
consequence has happened other than the placement of new signage on
some Lashkar premises; no criminal charges have been pressed, and none
are expected. It is, however, of significance that Islamabad has felt compelled
to put on an act at all. Though there has been speculation that the action may
have been intended to avert United States sanctions, the evidence is less
than compelling. None of the elements of the process the United States
follows before imposing sanctions had been initiated. Though Pakistan was
indeed not in compliance with commitments it had made to the multinational
Financial Action Task Force against terrorism, that body has no punitive
powers. Thus, Pakistan had no immediate pressing reason to act and
thereby hangs a story.
Ten years ago, as the central government of President Asif Ali Zardari
struggled to keep Saeed in prison after 26/11, now-Prime Minister Mian
Nawaz Sharifs provincial government in Punjab sabotaged his incarceration.
Shahbaz Sharif, the prime ministers brother and Punjab chief minister,
correctly assessed that jihadists would rally support around the party. Now,
though, the scenario has changed. The Sharifs are grievously weakened by
revelations, from the Panama Papers, of their overseas property holdings.
Punjabs jihadists have turned on their rule. In large swathes of the country,
state authority has long disappeared; now the anchor of the political system
itself seems set to be uprooted. For a Pakistan seeking to revive its fragile
economic fortunes, this is bad even catastrophic news.
It is of no small significance that the sole press conference on Saeeds
incarceration was held by the Inter-Services Public Relations, the Pakistan
Armys public-relations wing, not the government. It is clear that the army is
not seeking a confrontation with the Lashkar-e-Taiba; Saeed could have
mobilised large-scale protests but did not do so, a clear sign that a deal has
been struck. The most plausible explanation is that the army seeks to signal,
both to the West and to worried allies like China, that it is in charge of its
proxies; that the tail does not, as many fear, wag the dog. The red line
Pakistan is seeking to draw is for its own survival, but New Delhi has equities
in watching just where the pen meanders.

Universal Basic Income

Economic Survey makes it a desirable goal

Of late the concept of Universal Basic Income (UBI) has attracted attention of
analysts and the Economic Survey too talks of this alternative to welfare
schemes meant to help the poor. Two prerequisites for this idea to be
successful are: a Jan Dhan account and an Aadhaar number for direct cash
transfers and a Centre-state understanding on cost-sharing. Few dispute the
need for economic security for the vulnerable sections but differences arise
over making it universal. Ensuring a basic income for every citizen involves a
huge cost even if the existing Central and state subsidies are scrapped. The
survey expects the Universal Basic Income to cost between 4 and 5 per cent
of GDP and hence agrees that this powerful idea is not yet ready for
implementation.
Another outstanding feature of the survey is the official assessment of the
impact of demonetisation on the economy. The survey claims the adverse
effects of demonetisation will be transitional and the economy will grow
between 6.75 and 7.50 per cent in the next fiscal. Not many may buy this
optimism. Even though the RBI has been careful not to hazard a guess, the
survey claims the pain of demonetisation will end by April. One hopes this
does not meet the fate of Modis December 30deadline. Experts expect the
cash squeeze and its consequences for economic pick-up to last at least six
months, if not more. Even though the Finance Minister has been liberally
advised to stick to the fiscal deficit target of 3 per cent of GDP, the survey
points to two factors that can unsettle Jaitley's fiscal calculations:
implementation of the wage hike and muted tax receipts.
Also, there are quite a few reforms that the Chief Economic Adviser, who
prepared the survey, has listed. While the push for digitisation is already a
priority with the government, there are suggestions of bringing land and real
estate under the GST, reduction in taxes and stamp duty and improving the
tax administration for greater economic benefits in the long run. These are
contentious issues and will require a political consensus.

A fine balance
Coming within three months of the Central governments purge of
high-value currency notes that has dampened economic activity,
particularly in the informal sector, it was imperative that Union Finance
Minister Arun Jaitley soothed frayed nerves with Budget 2017-18. It
was equally critical that he provided a glimpse of a larger plan to
prevent regeneration of black money, the original intent behind the
demonetisation of 500 and 1,000 notes. He has managed to do
both to a fair degree, without resorting to the easy options of blatant
populism or spending his way out of trouble in a slowing economy.
Apart from funding the sops announced a month ago by Prime
Minister Narendra Modi for vulnerable sections of society, the Finance
Minister has done his best to further ease the pain of people most
impacted by the adverse effects of demonetisation. The tax rate for
small and medium enterprises with an annual turnover of up to 50
crore, which are the bulwark of job-creation but end up paying higher
taxes than large companies, has been slashed to 25%. For
corporates, though, there is no road map on lower tax rates. In
addition, halving the personal income tax rate from 10% to 5% for
those in the lowest tax slab of 2.5 lakh to 5 lakh not only puts more
money in the hands of this segment, but is also an effective nudge to
bring more people into the formal tax net. All other taxpayers have
been given a benefit of 12,500 each.

There is a redistributive element to such sops, with part of the revenue

loss from these income tax giveaways being funded by a 10%
surcharge on the income tax of those in the 50 lakh to 1 crore
bracket. Mr. Jaitley hinted as much, saying the demonetisation has
helped transfer resources from tax-evaders to the government. He
disclosed that there has been a remarkable 34% rise in advance
personal income tax collections in the first three quarters of 2016-17,
after recording single-digit growth in the previous two years. Perhaps
the note ban has put the fear of the law into many tax- dodgers. Some
logical next steps have been taken, including a bar on cash
transactions of more than 3 lakh, a nudge to businesses to make all
payments over 10,000 digitally, and rationalising the costs of non-
cash payments. Granting infrastructure status to affordable housing,
together with a few changes in the tax treatment to incentivise
builders, and the interest subventions already announced for low-ticket
home loans, could spur construction activity, and thus job-creation.
There is higher allocation for MGNREGA, irrigation and infrastructure
projects.

With the Goods and Services Tax on the horizon, Mr. Jaitley has
refrained from tinkering too much with indirect taxes. Although a high-
level panel that reviewed the Fiscal Responsibility and Budget
Management Act has recommended deviations from fiscal deficit
targets after far-reaching structural reforms such as the
demonetisation, he has done well to refuse to deviate from the fiscal
consolidation road map and alter Indias strong macroeconomic
fundamentals. There may be no big new schemes or dramatic reforms;
the big bang in this Budget is the shift from unfettered populism. On
the flip side, the promise to confiscate assets of defaulters such as
Vijay Mallya who flee the country and, separately, clean up electoral
funding the most potent root of corruption appear to be red
herrings at best. Provisions already exist to attach assets of defaulters
to recover dues. And reducing the cash donation limit from any one
source to political parties from 20,000 to 2,000 is meaningless as
long as there is no cap on the number of such people who can make
donations anonymously. More clarity is also needed on the electoral
 bonds proposed to be issued to protect donors from any adverse
effects of baring their political leanings.

With the railway budget subsumed by the overall exercise for the first
time, and against the backdrop of a series of train accidents, there was
expectation that a strong programme on rail safety would be outlined.
The 1 lakh crore to be devoted over five years for a safety fund, the
Rashtriya Rail Sanraksha Kosh, will have to address the many
imperatives identified by expert panels such as the Kakodkar
Committee. The Railways have a long list of tasks, starting with
acquisition of advanced signalling for train control and, as the Budget
notes, elimination of level crossings for smooth operations.
Replacement of carriages of old design with the better-engineered
Linke-Hofmann Busch coaches would cost at least 10,000 crore. On
the commercial side, passenger tariffs are to be calculated taking into
account costs, social obligations and competition from other modes of
transport. The objective of the countrys biggest organisation, however,
should be to use the higher capacities on identified travel corridors to
provide safe, comfortable and affordable travel for all. This can be
done relying on a rise in revenues from integrated freight solutions that
the Budget has spoken of. Apart from the dovetailing of the railway
budget, the abolition of the distinction between Plan and Non-Plan
expenditure and its early presentation, Union Budget 2017-18 marks
another break from tradition. It is the first time Mr. Jaitley extensively
turned to poetry as he began his deftly crafted, workmanlike Budget by
referring to a season of optimism. With just one more full-year Budget
likely before the 2019 Lok Sabha elections, the Modi government must
now put all its energy behind implementing the legislative and
administrative reforms it has promised, to translate that optimism into
visible change on the ground.

The chosen four

Supreme Courts move to appoint a new panel to oversee cricket
reform is steeped in questions.

The best argument about the need for the Supreme Court to involve itself as
heavily as it has done in matters of cricket by not only dismantling the
existing structure of the board but also appointing a panel to run it was that
the board wouldnt have reformed on its own. Indian cricket would have
suffered if board officials werent pushed out. Those who have followed the
goings-on in the IPL, teeming with conflict of interest issues and crony
capitalism, probably agree with the court. However, its an argument that
doesnt sit well with critics who see in the apex courts moves elements of
judicial overreach.
Couldnt the court have appointed a panel to amend the constitution of the
BCCI to lay down rules for its elections and laws on how to function, instead of
entering the business of running it? Thats the question, especially after the
recent decision to appoint a four-member panel to oversee the administration
of cricket in the near future. The composition of the panel seems
unexceptionable: A former CAG, an eminent historian with affection for and
erudition about cricket, a businessman who quit Wall Street to involve himself
in public policy in India, and a cricketer with experience in administration.
Vinod Rai, Ramachandra Guha, Vikram Limaye, and Diana Edulji cover all the
bases. Yet the question is, still: How did the apex court arrive at these names?
The selection procedure of a committee that aims to bring in transparency,
professionalism, and structural reform in a sports organisation shouldnt have
been so opaque.
More importantly, how long does the Supreme Court intend to intervene in the
running of cricket in the country? The courts last few moves have only
deepened the confusion. It appeared initially that the Lodha committee, which
spent a year researching, interviewing and brainstorming to come up with
solutions, would be the one to oversee the implementation of the order. After
all, they had invested so much time and energy in it. Now that the decision
has been taken to appoint people who are seen to be independent, they
would need to start again from the beginning. A CEO, too, was appointed but
that hasnt quite solved the issue of how the game would be run as he doesnt
have the authority to force the state associations to do the bidding of the
court. Hopefully, the new panel can do that. But already, it has invited
questions for instance, two of its members belong to the same
organisation, with Rai and Limaye both on the board of IDFC. Marking out the
way ahead for Indias cricket demands greater judgement and a longer term
vision than has been evident so far.

Hafiz Saeeds detention

A holding job or turn for the good?
Is it a coincidence that Jamat-ud-Dawa chief Hafiz Saeed was detained at his
palatial headquarters in Lahore soon after US President Donald Trump
warned three countries, including Pakistan, that their citizens were at the risk
of extreme visa vetting? Pakistan is well aware that Saeed is a UN-
designated international terrorist and with a $10 million bounty on his head
under the US Justice for Rewards programme. It has been treading on thin
ice by allowing him to roam free. It even gave Saeed the space to buy
insurance against any precipitate action against him by cobbling together a
grouping of 40 extremist groups opposed to the US.
Saudi Arabia, another country warned by Trump of extreme vetting, caved in
spectacularly. King Salman agreed to set up a safe zone in Syria for civilians
escaping the murderous civil war. This is a sharp about turn for it had nurtured
the very terrorists who have brought about this situation in Syria. It was
inevitable that Pakistan would have to resort to symbolism to remain out of
Trumps zeal to make good on his election promises against radical Islam.
Pakistan has frequently and openly shielded Saeed by arguing that there is no
universally agreed definition of terrorism and he was merely providing moral
backing to the resistance in Jammu & Kashmir. But the signatures left
behind by Saeeds men in Mumbai and Kashmir have proven their
involvement in indiscriminate violence and killings.
It has suited Islamabad-Rawalpindi to keep up the tempo of violence
perpetrated by militants in Kashmir in an attempt to internationalise the
dispute. India is not unhappy with the development but past experience would
make it wary. Saeed has been detained in the past and let off each time. His
domestic constituency is already protesting against even this soft detention.
Pakistan may opt for a temporary detention unless India signals a willingness
to mend ties. An opportunity may come at the proposed SAARC summit in
Nepal, provided it is held. It will be in Indias interest to avail of that opportunity
even if Pakistan detained Saeed to appease the new US Administration.

Demonetisations long shadow

The Economic Survey presented on the eve of the Union Budget has
been dominated by a singular action of the government. As Chief
Economic Adviser Arvind Subramanian stated, To deify or demonise
demonetisation that is the difficult question the world is asking, to
which the survey tries to respond. Describing the November
8 decision to withdraw high-value currency notes as a radical
governance-cum-social engineering measure aimed at punitively
raising the cost of illicit activities, Mr. Subramanian and his team
acknowledge the complexities in assessing its potential impact as well
as the lack of historical precedent to make reliable predictions. The
Survey, however, emphatically asserts that while there have been
short-term costs to the economy, which would need to be expeditiously
addressed, there will be long-term benefits. Real GDP growth in the
current fiscal, the Survey projects, will see a likely reduction by one
quarter to half a percentage point relative to the baseline of about 7%
as a result of the demand shock triggered by demonetisation. The
Survey argues that any comparison with last fiscals 7.6% pace would
be inappropriate as among the other factors that influenced growth
this year was that global oil prices stopped declining, lessening the
updraught that soft energy prices lend to the economy. It contends that
the latest growth estimates of the World Bank and the International
Monetary Fund the bank trimmed its forecast to 7% from 7.6% and
the IMF by 1 percentage point to 6.6%, both citing demonetisation as
 reason reflect a higher baseline assumption and ought to be
compared only on the extent of change in estimate.

Devoting a whole chapter to demonetisation, the Survey recommends

fast, demand-driven remonetisation, further tax reforms, including
bringing land and real estate under the ambit of the Goods and
Services Tax, and reducing tax rates and stamp duties. It cautions
against tax authorities turning overzealous. It flags the risks that Brexit
and the U.S. election result pose to the world economic order, and to
Indias economy. The prospect of shifts in the direction of isolationism
and nativism could threaten the global market for goods, services and
labour. The Survey conservatively projects growth for the coming fiscal
at 6.75%-7.5%, with a caveat that lingering effects from
demonetisation, oil prices and the possible rise of trade protectionism
could jeopardise the forecast.

Ageless Federer
Lets savour every frame of his magnificent victory. It is a rare
moment.
Maybe, if Roger Federer wasnt 35, and his game hadnt perceptibly waned,
or had he annexed Grand Slam No. 18 when he was still the undisputed
monarch of the tennis universe, the joy that accompanied his Australian
Open triumph might not have been quite so unbridled. What once might
have been de rigueur, has now morphed into a magical thing. For as much
as the tennis world would have loved to see Federer clasping the 18th, even
the fiercest of Federer diehards would have sensed it was a dream too far.
At 35, Federers rankings had plunged to 17. His body was creaking. He was
injury-ridden and six months out of the circuit. The bookmakers had placed
odds of 20/1 on him winning the title, the same number they had given to
Canadian youngster Milos Raonic, and significantly lesser than Novak
Djokovic, Andy Murray, Stan Wawrinka and Rafael Nadal. Not even Federer
himself had nursed real hopes of winning the title. A quarterfinal I thought will
be a great tournament, he later said. Here, he was a pure outsider, though
the adulation and roar were still there. And here he was, a champion, at the
end of the fortnight.
Maybe, it was destinys way of making a victory feel sweeter. To take
everything away from a champion, as if to assert the transience of human
glory, and then at the unlikeliest moment, bestow it again. Or maybe, it was
the way the tennis gods reciprocated the services of a man who has
enriched the game in its broadest sense. Now that he is nearer to the finishing
line than the starting blocks, we are reminded that we need to savour every
single frame of the Federer experience.

Executive chaos
President Trumps xenophobic order
What is worse than a bad decision? A really bad one. US President Donald
Trumps January 27 executive order banning the entry of refugees into the US
from all over the world for at least 120 days for protecting the nation from
foreign terrorists entry into the United States was bad. The 90-day bar on
people from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen is worse,
compounded by the clause that preference will be given to Christian refugees
from Muslim-majority countries who seek refuge in the US. No matter which
way it is sliced, the order is xenophobic, in general, and Islamophobic, in
particular. It is at the opposite end of the values espoused by the US and its
Founding Fathers.
Chaos is just the only word to describe what followed as the ill-thought-out
order was executed by people who did not have the required clarity about its
implications. Among the immediate detainees at the US airports were people
who held valid visas, and even the green-card holders permanent
residents. Some federal judges gave partial relief, but the move has been
enormously disruptive. While President Trump adamantly maintained that its
working out very nicely, there appeared to be some pullback from the White
House on green-card holders.
This far-right administration does have support from a section of the
Americans who set its agenda. Spontaneous protests at various airports,
however, were a visible and welcome expression of inclusiveness by
Americans who chose not to be affected by the new climate of hate and fear-
mongering. Various business and political players too have condemned the
order, but voices from the Republican Party have been scant. World leaders,
too, have taken positions, but none so unequivocally as the Canadian Prime
Minister who said, To those fleeing persecution, terror and war, Canadians
will welcome you, regardless of your faith. Diversity is our strength. Now, that
is one positive message to emerge from the chaos that President Trump's
order has caused.

As bigotry becomes policy

American President Donald Trump implemented his campaign promise
of extreme vetting on Friday when he announced that his
administration had banned, for 90 days via executive order, travellers
from seven Muslim-majority nations: Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan,
Syria and Yemen. Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Pakistan were not on the
list, perhaps owing to the close economic and strategic ties that
Washington, and indeed the Trump Organization, have with some of
these nations although White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus
indicated that Pakistan may be put on the list, going forward. Mr.
Trump has placed on hold indefinitely the U.S.s asylum programme
for refugees from Syria, and suspended entry of all refugees to the
U.S. for 120 days. While he may have enthused his core constituency
of predominantly white, blue-collar workers, beset with economic and
racial insecurities, his order sent shock waves at home and abroad,
and sparked fears that it could create a recruitment bonanza for
terrorists. Leading the liberal counterattack, the American Civil
Liberties Union argued that Mr. Trumps order represented
constitutional and legal overreach. In response, a federal judge in New
York ruled that sending back the travellers detained in airports may
cause them irreparable harm, and that the government was enjoined
and restrained from, in any manner and by any means, removing
individuals with valid papers. Similar rulings came in Virginia,
Massachusetts and Washington State.
 Mr. Trumps shock therapy for controlling immigration begs the
question whether the order is constitutional. In 1965, Congress
had deliberately circumscribed presidential power in this regard by
stating that no one could be discriminated against in the issuance of
an immigrant visa because of the persons race, sex, nationality, place
of birth... The order will probably have a wider fallout in the economic
sphere already Silicon Valley firms have scrambled tobring back
their staff deployed in affected countries, and CEOs including Googles
Sundar Pichai, Facebooks Mark Zuckerberg and Microsofts Satya
Nadella, have expressed concern that the ban will affect their talent
pools. More broadly, Mr. Trumps order has done irreparable damage
to Americas reputation as a melting pot of immigrants, a beacon for
bright minds and a humane force against authoritarian excess abroad.
No major attack has taken place on U.S. soil in the past eight years.
Ultimately, Mr. Trumps insistence on preferential treatment for
Christian refugees makes a bogeyman of Muslims, a retrograde action
that will exacerbate anti-Americanism worldwide.

Sena in disarray
Its break-up with BJP ahead of local body polls is the latest sign
of its flailing for relevance in a changing polity

The Shiv Senas decision to call off its ties with the BJP ahead of elections to
urban civic bodies in Maharashtra is a reflection of the partys endeavour to
regain its primacy in state politics. While being a part of the BJP-led
government at the Centre and in Maharashtra, the Sena has been sharp in its
criticism of its ally recently. The alliance had survived only because the Sena
needed the support of the BJP to run the Brihanmumbai Municipal
Corporation (BMC) and the BJP needed Sena legislators to prop up
the Devendra Fadnavis government. Ahead of the BMC elections in February,
the Sena evidently feels that contesting the local body polls with the BJP
would force the party to part with seats which could severely limit its chances
to protect, if not expand, its political base in Mumbai.
The Sena claims to be a pan-Maharashtrian outfit, but the party could not
expand its base outside urban pockets in the state even half a century after its
inception. The alliance with the BJP lasted a quarter century and helped the
two parties to emerge as the pole of anti-Congress politics in Maharashtra:
The Senas nativist agenda complemented the BJPs Hindutva politics.
However, when the BJP started to expand its political reach by wedding a
development agenda with Hindutva, the Sena started losing voters to its ally.
The Senas nativist, anti-migrant politics too began to lose currency amid
quickened change in the social composition of cities, especially Mumbai. The
Sena is now forced to fall back on Mumbai, because it is losing ground
elsewhere the BJPs emergence as the single largest party in the last
assembly election was a clear sign of the Senas decline.
The party recognises that it needs to reinvent itself as a regional outfit with a
distinctive agenda to protect itself from being subsumed by the BJPs
Hindutva narrative.
The dilemma of the Sena is how to shore up its nativist core while also
courting the broad non-Marathi vote. The party has projected its
distinctiveness as a regional outfit by targeting the BJP on both ideological
and governance fronts from Ram temple to demonetisation, the Sena has
accused the BJP of failing its supporters. In Mumbai, the Sena has sought to
highlight its administrative achievements, and development works, like coastal
roads, wharf ferry services, drinking water projects, etc. In a bid to reach out
to the youth, the party has taken up the revival of the citys night lifeas a
campaign issue. All this while, it has muted its shrill rhetoric on migrants and
non-Marathis. With Marathis constituting just about 26 per cent of the votes in
Mumbai, the Sena knows that it needs to extend its appeal beyond the sons
of the soil. It is a transformation the Sena is forced to undergo to remain
relevant in Maharashtra politics.
The farm debt issue
Courts nudge should prompt action, not litigation
Although the Centre makes budgetary allocations for agriculture, fixes
minimum support prices (MSPs) for select farm products and has even
introduced crop insurance, there is no national policy to compensate farmers
for crop failure or indebtedness, the two chief causes that drive farmers to
suicide, as the Supreme Court has discovered to its surprise. It is heartening
to note that a Bench of Chief Justice JS Khehar and Justice NV Ramana has
come to the rescue of farmers and taken up a petition earlier turned down by
the Gujarat High Court. An NGO sought relief for some 600 farmers who had
committed suicide between 2004 and 2012. A previous apex court Bench had
refused to entertain a PIL petition seeking MSP for left-out farm products,
saying we are not supposed to go into policy matters.
Some well-meaning steps have been taken at the Central and state levels but
the root causes of agrarian distress have not been touched. There is lack of
political will to act. Agriculture is largely a state subject and states, barring a
few, are perpetually short of funds. Agriculture that supports 60 per cent of the
population has ceased to be remunerative. It cannot survive without
government support but subsidies offered are usually grabbed by those well-
connected. The system of loss assessment and compensation disbursal is
leaky. Solutions to agriculture-related problems usually boil down to loan
waivers close to elections. A loan waiver for farmers may be electorally
attractive but it does not offer a permanent cure. After the Rs 52,000-crore
loan waiver announced by the UPA ahead of the 2009 elections, the problem
of debt and farmer suicides is back.
What ails agriculture has been studied in detail by the MS Swaminathan
commission. It has recommended a 50 per cent profit over input costs. The
BJP promised to do so in the 2014 elections but backed out of it on gaining
power. Instead of writing off loans or giving subsidies which do not reach the
needy, the Swaminathan formula can be tried. An easy access to institutional
lending and a clampdown on farmer exploitation by private lenders can help.
These are governance issues; courts have only a limited role to play.

Simply the best

 In times to come, 2017 will be remembered by tennis fans as the year
the Australian Open went retro. For, it featured the big-stage revival of
two of the sports most storied rivalries. Roger Federer was pushed to
the limit by Rafael Nadals relentless, shape-shifting style before the
Swiss maestros sublime artistry prevailed in a classic his third win
in nine Major finals over the Spaniard, his 18th Grand Slam crown and
his first since Wimbledon in 2012. And Serena Williams, playing sister
Venus in a Major final after nearly eight years, continued her
dominance, capturing a professional-era record 23rd title. The warm
nostalgia these great champions evoked was accompanied by the thrill
of the unexpected. Of the four, only Serenas presence in the final was
unsurprising. The resurgence of the old guard the first time in the
Open Era that all four finalists were over the age of 30 might have
had something to do with the faster courts in Melbourne this year.
Federer, among others, certainly thought so. He said it kept points
shorter than normal and made fewer demands of the body. He also felt
that those who had started out before 2005 had an edge they were
more instinctively attuned to the quicker movement of the ball.

It takes singular skill and a certain ruthlessness, however, to make

capital of the smallest advantages, and Federer and Serena, and to a
marginally lesser extent Nadal and Venus, did precisely that. Federer,
who missed six months last year with an injury, knew he could not
allow Nadal time and space. With his opponent looking in excellent
physical condition, Federer could not afford to be drawn into long,
bruising rallies; he had to dictate the tempo of play. This meant taking
the ball uncomfortably early, with a narrow margin for error, and it
required all of Federers genius to pull it off. He also had to overcome
the psychological scars of past defeats to Nadal. Federers nerve in
big matches against his greatest rival has been questioned before,
but on Sunday he displayed a calm resolve. Serena, too, had to
master her emotions against Venus, who is both beloved sister and
formidable threat. While her explosive athleticism is the most apparent
 facet of her game, Serenas underrated tennis intelligence has
contributed significantly to her capturing a record 10 Grand Slam titles
after turning 30. With their triumphs in Melbourne, Federer and
Serena, both 35, managed what only a few of the greats have. They
quietened the voice of doubt that speaks in every athletes ear a
voice that grows more persistent with age and raged against the
dying of the light.

The wrong buttons

Choice of gifts for Goas new voters reinforces stereotypes, a
culture of sexism

Assembly elections were held in Goa with all the vibrant fanfare, cheery songs
and cheeky bunting that accompanies polls across India. But apart from the
usual carnival, Goas polls saw an unusual first move too. Trying to encourage
new voters, the Election Commission (EC) decided to hand out gifts at
polling booths. How nice, you might think. But the gifts came wrapped in
meaning, for women first-time voters were given pink teddy bears while men
received pens.

The EC, laudably, is known for seeking ways to popularise voting and make
younger citizens in particular enthusiastic about joining Indias biggest and
most democratic party. But this choice of return gifts is a telling misstep.
Giving women a teddy bear, while gifting men pens, carries a strongly sexist
note. Why should gifts for women be a little bit of antacid-shaded fluff, while
men get a serious pen?

Gender equality is a troubling paradox in Goa. Compared to the rest of India,

women in Goa have a much higher rate of literacy, many more women head
households and access better healthcare. However, there is also a sharp
gender downside. Women in Goa find much less employment compared to
men than in other states; Goan womens labour force participation is
abysmally low, 2011-12s NSS data and other statistical studies finding about
28 per cent women in Goa employed for reportedly over 70 per cent men;
women employed in other states number over 31 per cent. This means lower
incomes for Goan women, who also suffer a cultural acceptance of denial of
property rights while facing domestic violence, bigamy and the refusal of men,
accustomed to traditional, male-run bodies like the communidade and
gaunkars, to share panchayat power with women. Given the struggle women
in Goa face for democratic empowerment, equating their gift of citizenship
to a coy plaything, is only pressing the wrong buttons.

Disruptions again
Much noise over a non-issue
The Left and Congress parties have needlessly made E Ahameds death an
issue. The former Union minister collapsed on the floor of the House,
apparently due to cardiac arrest. That was unfortunate but the way Opposition
MPs have politicised it is uncalled for. It seems the Opposition has run out of
ideas and any reason is good enough for it to disrupt Parliament and stage
walkouts. There are two sides to the issue. One is a sort of demand for an
investigation into reasons why and not whether the announcement of
the death of the IUML leader was delayed. Relatives and supporters of
Ahamed insinuate the death was kept a secret deliberately so that it did not
interfere with the presentation of the budget.
Ahameds son has alleged that he was not allowed to visit his father in
hospital. There is much that is wrong with government hospitals but that
becomes news only when a VIP family goes through some ordeal. Ordinary
people routinely suffer much worse situations and rarely do legislatures take
note of their sufferings. Unsubstantiated allegations are being made and
motives are seen. The suspected delay in making the death public is
attributed to an intervention by a high office.
The second issue is whether Parliament should have adjourned after the
obituary references, that on a day when the budget was to be presented. The
Speaker, Sumitra Mahajan, dug up records to find a precedent and gave a go-
ahead to the budget. The Opposition had demanded budget postponement in
view of the assembly elections but both the Supreme Court and the Election
Commission did not find weight in its argument. The Opposition needs to
ponder whether the convention of adjourning both Houses after a members
death is worth keeping, particularly when Parliament works only intermittently.
The Modi dispensation is questioning and at times breaking time-honoured
parliamentary practices. The Prime Minister now makes only a guest
appearance in Parliament. Why this fuss over the discarding of one more
convention? There used to be a convention of Parliament conducting its
business smoothly. Why has disruption become a new normal?

Perilous U-turn on Iran

A set of new sanctions imposed on Iran by the United States over a

missile test has taken ties between the two countries, which saw
incremental improvement over a couple of years, back to the pre-
Obama era. Bilateral relations were particularly hostile during the
presidency of George W. Bush, who had threatened military action
over Irans nuclear programme. Barack Obama took a different line,
moored in political realism. He reached out to the Iranians and finally
clinched the nuclear deal last year, a far-sighted diplomatic solution to
a complex international crisis. The U.S. and other world powers took
years to find a common ground with Iran, which prevented the country
from acquiring nuclear weapons in return for removal of international
sanctions. The deal, viscerally opposed by Israel, allowed Iran to mend
ties with European countries, boost its oil production and trade with
other countries, thereby minimising the pain its people had suffered
due to economic sanctions. The U.S. and Iran cooperated on the
battleground in Iraq against the Islamic State. And domestically, it
 strengthened the hands of Iranian moderates. This progress stands
threatened by President Donald Trumps hostility towards Iran.

Mr. Trump may not repeal the nuclear deal as it is a multilateral

agreement. But by putting immigration curbs on Iranian citizens,
imposing new sanctions on Iran and branding the country the greatest
state sponsor of terrorism, the Trump administration has clearly
announced that dtente is dead and the policy of containment back. If
Mr. Obamas Iran policy was defined by pragmatism, Mr. Trump
appears determined to pursue the agenda of restoring the bipolar
balance between Saudi Arabia and Israel, the U.S.s strongest allies in
West Asia. This could prove dangerous. Iran, unlike the Iraq of 2003, is
a strong regional power whose influence runs from Iraq and Syria to
Lebanon and Yemen. Any meaningful effort to stabilise West Asia calls
for Irans cooperation, not hostility. Second, the primary reason for
destabilisation in West Asia is the ongoing cold war between Saudi
Arabia and Iran. Targeting Iran by siding with the Saudis would only
prompt Tehran to step up its activities in other countries through the
Shia corridor. Finally, the world, including the U.S., needs Irans
cooperation to fight the Islamic State, particularly in Iraq, where
Iranian-controlled Shia militias played a key role in liberating cities. If
Mr. Trump ignores these realities, he runs the risk of making West Asia
even more chaotic than it is.

An opportunity lost
In face-off between tribal custom and gender justice, Nagaland
government abdicates its responsibility
The Nagaland governments decision to defer elections to urban local bodies
shows that it remains in thrall to the states powerful tribal bodies. These
influential male-dominated groups fomented unrest over the state
governments decision to reserve 33 per cent of seats for women in civic
bodies, slated to go to the polls in the first week of February. The Naga Hoho,
the body that represents the states 16 tribal groups, contends that the
reservation violates the safeguards to the tribal customary laws provided by
the Constitutions Article 371A. But womens rights groups in the state argue
that since municipalities and town councils are not customary institutions,
women should be entitled to the reservations in these urban local bodies
mandated by the 74th amendment to the Constitution. In the run-up to the
elections, the state government had affirmed its commitment to this
constitutional provision. But by backing off in the face of violence incited by
tribal groups, the Nagaland government has shown its lack of resolve to fulfill
its constitutional obligation to gender justice.

This volte-face could have been foretold. Nagaland delayed the adoption of
the 74th amendment by 13 years because the state government did not want
to upset the tribal groups. In 2011, womens groups challenged the state
governments refusal to hold elections to urban local bodies in the Gauhati
High Court. In its response, the Nagaland government said it had received
representations that opposed the reservation of seats for women on grounds
that it was against Naga customs. The court found the state governments
arguments flimsy and directed it to hold elections. The Nagaland
government, however, managed a stay against the order in the Supreme
Court. In April 2016, however, the apex court vacated the stay order.

That the state government has unresistingly pandered to the anxieties of the
tribal groups says something about its inability to stand above the
contradictions of Nagalands society. At 76.69 per cent, womens literacy in
Nagaland is far above the national average. Naga women work in fields, excel
in business, and as academics and professionals. But customary laws prevent
them from claiming rights to land or inheriting ancestral property. Since Rano
Mese Shaiza was elected to the Lok Sabha in 1977, no Naga woman has
made it to Parliament. The Nagaland state assembly has never had a woman
member. It is unfortunate that another chance to resolve these contradictions
has been lost.

Politicians spared
Violations of law common, only small fries caught
Drugs, cash and gold worth Rs 116 crore have been seized during elections in
Punjab but no candidate or politician has been linked with the seizures even
after 2,142 FIRs and an equal number of arrests. The official explanation is
political links will be known after investigations. That seldom happens. In 2014
similar seizures were made but nothing concrete emerged thereafter. No big
gun was caught. The latest cash seizures show the Election Commission
needlessly worried about the elections getting hampered by the RBI curbs on
withdrawals. The EC claims of candidates facing a cash crunch were a little
exaggerated and that should have been the last of its worries. Candidates
know how to manage things.
What needs to be probed is how they could splurge on electioneering in
times of notebandi. The possibility of drug money funding elections has
seldom been seriously explored. In 2014 the Ministry of Home Affairs did
conduct an internal investigation but its findings have not been disclosed. The
legal protection available to political parties in accepting cash up to Rs 20,000
without disclosing the donors identity has been misused to peddle black
money. Reducing the limit to Rs 2,000 from the next fiscal will not help. The
loophole needs to be plugged if elections are to be clean and transparent.
This time the Income Tax Department has shown urgency in issuing
summons to some 300 candidates to verify their asset claims made in
affidavits filed at the time of nomination. But again nothing much would come
out unless the penalty for giving wrong information on affidavit is made more
stringent and enforced. The legal limit on poll expenses too is violated openly
without any one ever getting hauled up. Politicians break the law with impunity
as the Election Commission has limited powers to discipline them. The
existing laws are not enforced once the code of conduct goes and things wont
change as MPs and MLAs forget their differences and speak in one voice
when it comes to protecting their own interests.

Testing times on NEET

It is a measured gambit by Tamil Nadu. The State has taken the
legislative route to grant itself exemption from the National Eligibility-
cum-Entrance Test (NEET), a uniform examination that will decide
admission to medical courses all over the country. The two Bills
passed by the State Assembly seek to retain its present admission
system for under-graduate and post-graduate medical courses based
on marks obtained by students in their higher secondary school
examination. The Bills are likely to displease the Supreme Court,
which insists that NEET marks be the sole basis for admission. The
Bills will also require the Presidents assent; else they would be
repugnant to the provisions of the Indian Medical Council Act and the
Dentists Act that prescribe the entrance test. Tamil Nadu, which
abolished entrance examinations to professional courses in 2006,
argues that NEET would be traumatic for both parents and children, as
it would be based on a syllabus different from the one taught in
schools under the board for higher secondary education. The fear is
that NEET would be insurmountable for students from rural areas
and under-privileged backgrounds and those who cannot afford
coaching centres. Its concern that urban students, especially those
from streams such as the CBSE, would dominate admissions under
NEET cannot be dismissed easily.

Regulations introducing NEET were struck down by a three-judge

Bench of the Supreme Court in 2013 by a two-one majority. Last year,
a five-judge Bench recalled the verdict and NEET was back in place.
Students all over the country were gripped by anxiety and tension
 following the sudden change in the admission method. The Centre
promulgated an ordinance to grant relief for under-graduate medical
admissions in 2016, but no such protection is available this year. There
is now an inevitable conflict between the need for a fair and
transparent admission system to curb rampant commercialisation of
medical education and the socio-economic goals of the State, which is
worried about producing enough committed doctors ready to serve in
rural areas. Both objectives are indeed laudable. However, a moot
question is whether uniformity should be thrust on a country that has
wide regional, economic and linguistic disparities. Normally it is the
political leadership, and not the courts, that should harmonise such
differences and evolve a viable admission policy. At the same time,
States cannot remain forever insulated from the need to upgrade
educational standards. It may be easy to advise the courts to keep out
of the policy domain, but a more difficult task is for institutions in the
government and the private sector to maintain standards and pass the
courts triple test of fairness, transparency and freedom from
exploitation.

A dead end
Pointing at China and complaining loudly on Masood Azhar isnt
working. India needs to rethink strategy.

Chinas technical hold on the UN designation of Jaish-e-Mohammeds

Masood Azhar was foretold. Nothing has changed between India and China,
or China and Pakistan, for Beijing to have had a change of mind at the UN
1267 Sanctions Committee that designates terrorist entities, individuals and
groups. This is the third time since the January 2016 Pathankot attack that
China has used this route to block Azhars designation. Each time, India
pointed at Beijing and complained loudly. But the government must know by
now that China is not easily embarrassed. Like every country, China is guided
by self-interest. Clearly, it does not consider the JeM a threat to its own
interests yet. On the other hand, each such episode is an exposition of the
limitations of Indian diplomacy with China even a personal word from Prime
Minister Narendra Modi to Chinese President Xi Jinping, and an appeal from
External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj, have not done the trick. It is time
India stopped investing so much diplomatic energy in the 1267 Committee.

Existing designations also seem to have done nothing to dismantle the

infrastructure of terrorism; the JeM and the Lashkar-e-Toiba were designated
in 2001. Five years later, the LeT struck with the Mumbai train blasts in July
2006, and two years later, with the 2008 attack on Mumbai. Shortly after this,
Hafiz Saeed, head of the LeT proxy Jamaat-ud-Dawa, and the group, were
both designated. Barring some discomfiture for Pakistan, and a few months
under house arrest for Saeed, the designation has done nothing to
disadvantage him or the JuD.
The JeM, which unlike the JuD, is banned in Pakistan under its own Anti-
Terrorism Act, has likewise continued to grow since its designation. After the
Pathankot attack, Pakistan chose to take Azhar into protective custody.

Indian interests may be better served by working to improve ties with China in
a new, unpredictable world, and to convey to Beijing that India-aimed
terrorism emanating from Pakistan threatens the stability of the region, and
thus hurts Chinas ambitious economic interests in Pakistan.

This thought appears to be dawning in the Chinese establishment too. There

has been some chatter that the recent house arrest of Hafiz Saeed may have
come after a nudge from China, not the US. While there is no evidence to
back either possibility, it would also be unwise to put too much store by
Pakistans move, which may have been aimed at showing anti-terror
credentials to the immigration-obsessed Trump administration. Saeed has
easily shaken off previous house arrests under the Maintenance of Public
Order Act through appeals in the courts, which, while setting him free, have
reprimanded the government for bending to pressure from India or the US. It
would be no surprise if this happens again.

H1B visa curbs

Sleepless nights for Indian techies

US President Donald Trump is yet to unroll the America First doctrine. But
worryingly for India, Democrats are competing with him in imposing
restrictions on low-cost foreign IT workers. The US House of Representatives
has taken up a Bill for reforming H1B visas. Indians account for one lakh such
visas every year, besides another 1.25 lakh that are renewed. The sponsor of
the Bill is a veteran Democrat representing the Silicon Valley, indicating that
the notion of Indian cyber-coolies is widespread. Officially, the Indian
Government has withheld comment because similar Bills in the past have
sunk into oblivion. But deep inside there must be considerable concern. The
failure to create jobs inside India is being compounded by the inability to
defend jobs for Indians abroad.
Currently, the US President is beyond the call of reason. In due course, he will
appreciate that trade in services with India is not a one-way street. If India
raked in $19 billion from the US last year, the corresponding figure was $12
billion. This is set to increase because of $28 billion US investment in this
sector. Trump will also not be unaware that Indias $25 billion annual trade
surplus in goods with the US may shrink. His predecessor has set the stage
for increased US involvement in Indias infrastructure sector and energy
supplies, both fossil and solar based.
If those are not enough reasons to go slow on clamping down on H1B visas,
three of Trumps Cabinet picks were CEOs of Fortune 500 companies, the
very section that has benefited the most from low-cost IT labour from India.
Would they not be counselling their President against such a move? On the
world stage, the US needs India because of its tensions with Pakistan and
China and close ties with Japan, Singapore, Vietnam, Indonesia and Australia.
The Obama days will not return anytime soon when Indias trade surplus and
work visas had doubled. While fighting to retain the quota of H1B visas, India
will also have to take a call on how long its corporates will make money on the
back of modestly paid techies?

Prudence amid uncertainty

For the first time in six meetings this fiscal, the Reserve Bank of India
has shifted its policy poise, moving to neutral from an
accommodative stance. The central banks Monetary Policy
Committee has opted to sit pat on rates and choose to give itself time
to assess how the transitory effects of demonetisation on inflation and
the output gap play out. The decision came just a day after Prime
Minister Narendra Modi told Parliament that the governments move to
withdraw high-value currency notes had been undergirded by the
premise that the economy was doing well and thus our decision was
taken at the right time. The RBIs emphasis on caution suggests that
not only has the economy suffered short-run disruptions as the
central bank said in December but that the long-term impact may
be far more enduring and hard to predict than anticipated. The policy
statement issued by the six-member MPC also projected the second
successive downward revision in economic growth as measured by
the Gross Value Added for the current year ending in March, with the
pace of increase in GVA now forecast at 6.9%, from 7.1% in December
and 7.6% prior to the November demonetisation.

Separately, both the outlook for inflation and international uncertainty

are also causes for concern, according to the RBI. Viral Acharya, the
recently inducted Deputy Governor overseeing monetary policy,
 flagged the risks that global inflation and a strengthening U.S. dollar
pose to domestic price gains. Specifically, the central bank is worried
about the unyielding nature of core retail inflation, which strips out
food and fuel costs, and has been stuck around 4.9% since
September, mainly due to stickiness in price gains for housing, health,
education, personal care and household services. The MPC reckons
that the persistence of inflation excluding food and fuel could set a
floor on further downward movements in headline inflation and trigger
second-order effects that, when combined with hardening
international crude oil and base metal prices and exchange rate
volatility. It could have the potential to threaten the RBIs baseline
inflation path of 4.5% to 5% in the second half of 2017-18. And
ironically, were the effects of demonetisation to wear off quickly,
vegetable prices, that had softened on the back of distress sales of
perishables, could potentially rebound, posing another risk to the
central banks inflation outlook. As Mr. Acharya summed it up at the
post-policy briefing, the RBI has plumped for prudence and flexibility.

Infosys board should open a

conversation with its founders,
who must take a step back
Infosys: Today, Sikka has an enormous task at hand, that of
steering a $6-billion company, and he has just had three years at
the helm.

The dust had barely settled over the Tata-Mistry feud after Cyrus Mistry
whose family holds 18.4 per cent stake in Tata Sons Ltd was ousted by the
Tata Trusts last October, when corporate India woke up to another conflict,
another unsavoury episode. The well-regarded founders of Infosys have
alleged serious corporate governance lapses by the companys present
board.

In an interview to The Economic Times, N.R. Narayana Murthy lashed out at

the board led by industry veteran R. Seshasayee over the 2000-times salary
difference between Infosys CEO Vishal Sikka and the entry-level software
engineer. He also wondered if the high severance package paid to the
companys erstwhile CFO Rajiv Bansal in October 2015 constituted hush
money to hide something. The Infosys board stood by its CEO and also its
chairman, but appointed law firm Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas to formalise a
process to receive inputs from the promoters and other key stakeholders.

Murthy, Nandan Nilekani, Kris Gopalakrishnan and other founders deserve all
the accolades and more for turning Indias first start-up into a multi-billion
dollar software company. It is a story that Indian leaders talk up at every global
forum. Murthy has chaired committees on corporate governance and Nilekani
has been a cabinet rank minister, having conceived and implemented the
Aadhaar unique identity project. But after handing over the baton to a
professional in Sikka, it is incumbent upon and expected of the founders to
give him a free hand, in order to give wing to the growth ambitions he sets for
the company. Times have changed since the founders were active managers.
Having said that, however, the board also needs to open the doors for a
conversation with the founders. For the sake of transparency and the benefit
of all shareholders, the company should disclose any new material information
that emerges following the queries and doubts raised by the promoters.

Today, Sikka has an enormous task at hand, that of steering a $6-billion

company, and he has just had three years at the helm. The promoters hold
about 12 per cent stake, and commensurate to their holding have different
avenues under company laws like the annual general meeting to
express their views and opinions on decisions taken by the Infosys board. The
mounting of an attack on the companys existing board by the promoters
demoralises employees, raises red flags for clients and does no good to future
growth prospects.

Punjab poll rallies

Exploiting the RTI loophole
Once upon a time political rallies were spartan affairs consisting of a makeshift
stage and a mike and, sometimes a shamiana if a high constitutional authority
was on the dais. Indira Gandhi broke that mould with her so-called kisan rally
in 1980 to celebrate her unexpected return to power. No expenses were
spared for the event supervised by the controversial Sanjay Gandhi. Trains
were commandeered and pliant district administrations requisitioned
thousands of buses and trucks to ferry bemused villagers to Delhi to listen to
the born-again great leader. Even the Left got into the act. Wherever and
whenever it holds power, its events are high voltage that reek of money
power.
Little was known earlier about the expenses incurred because the Right to
Information bug was introduced into the system barely a decade back.
Punjab, gripped by the poll fever till February 4, staged two different kinds of
rallies. And the ludicrousness was exposed in both of them. In the first
category was the Indira Gandhi-type rally where no expenses were spared.
The official machinery in Punjab must have lent its shoulder with even more
fervor, after all December 8 was the long-running Chief Minister Parkash
Singh Badal's birthday. What better occasion to dress up the event as Save
Punjab Day and whip up sentiment over water at the state expense? It now
transpires, thanks to the RTI that also exposed the Badal family's free
helicopter rides, that government departments have been asked to foot the bill
two months after Badal was serenaded at Moga.
The other type of rallies was staged after the elections to the Punjab
assembly were announced. Information is still coming in but on available
evidence, the expenses submitted by the Congress and the Shiromani Akali
Dal to the Election Commission strain credulity. Congress candidate Navjot
Sidhu reported total expenses of just over Rs. 4,000 for a rally in the Amritsar
(East) constituency. The veteran CM also turned in an expense sheet of a
mere Rs 2,768. But the template has been set by Prime Minister Narendra
Modi who has adroitly exploited the dark hole in the RTI that bars political
parties from being questioned.

Solar power breaks a price barrier

In another barrier-breaking development, the auctioned price of solar

photovoltaic (SPV) power per kilowatt hour has dropped below 3 to
2.97 in Madhya Pradesh, providing a clear pointer to the future
course of renewable energy. The levellised tariff factoring in a small
annual increase for a given period of time for the 750 MW Rewa
project over a 25-year period is 3.29, which is less than half the rate
at which some State governments signed contracts in recent years.
The progress of this clean source of energy must be deepened with
policy incentives, for several reasons. Arguably, the most important is
the need to connect millions of people without access to electricity. A
rapid scaling-up of solar capacity is vital also to meet the national goal
of installing 100 gigawatts by 2022, a target that is being
internationally monitored as part of the countrys pledges under the
Paris Agreement on climate change. It will also be transformational for
the environment, since pollution from large new coal-based power
plants can be avoided. There is everything to gain by accelerating the
pace of growth that essentially began in 2010, with the Jawaharlal
Nehru National Solar Mission. Yet, performance has not matched
intent and the target of installing 12 GW solar capacity in 2016-17 is
far from attainable, since it fell short by almost 10 GW as of December.

A glaring lacuna in the national policy on renewables is the failure to

tap the investment potential of the middle class. While grid-connected
large-scale installations have received maximum attention, there is
slow progress on rooftop solar. Clearly, adding capacity of the order of
more than 10 GW annually over the next six years towards the 100
GW target will require active participation and investment by the
buildings sector, both residential and commercial. This process can be
kick-started using mass participation by citizens, with State electricity
utilities being given mandatory time frames to introduce net-metering
systems with a feed-in tariff that is designed to encourage the average
consumer to invest in PV modules, taking grid electricity prices into
account. The experience of Germany, where robust solar expansion
has been taking place over the years, illustrates the benefits of policy
guarantees for rooftop installations and feed-in tariffs lasting 20 years.
SPV costs are expected to continue to fall, and tariffs paid both for
large plants and smaller installations require periodic review. At some
point, significant subsidies may no longer be necessary. That scenario,
however, is for the future. Currently, India needs a lot more good
quality power, which renewables provide. Solar power is an emissions-
free driver of the economy, generating growth in both direct and
indirect employment. A lot of sunlight remains to be tapped.