Author: Sanjoy Narayan

Can Military Drafting Solve India’s Job Crisis

Can Compulsory Military Service Solve India’s Job Crisis?

By Sanjoy Narayan

Last weekend in a video story on deKoder, veteran journalist and India’s best-known psephologist Prannoy Roy’s new website, a cross-section of young voters that he interviewed in Bihar nearly unanimously listed jobs and employment as being their topmost concerns in the ongoing mammoth Indian parliamentary elections, two phases of which have been completed and five more are to be held. 

Nearly 200 million of the 969 million registered voters who are eligible to vote in the elections are between 20 and 29 years old and, not only in Bihar but everywhere in India, the biggest focus of this demographic slice of the population is on jobs and employment.

That is no surprise. Out of India’s working population of a billion people, only 100 million or just 10% have formal jobs. The rest, an estimated 900 million (twice the population of the European Union and three times the population of the US) are engaged in casual work or are unemployed. A large proportion of them are in rural areas where 833 million Indians live.

India, with more than 1.4 billion people, has more than 50% of its population below the age of 25 and more than 65% below the age of 35. These are huge numbers but, if seen in the context of employment and jobs, theý are scary numbers. According to some estimates, even if the government’s state-run incentive schemes to spur manufacturing in India succeed, they will create barely seven million jobs, a tiny drop of what is really required.

Maths and Stats of Jobs in India

Breaking down the aggregate numbers of jobs in India reveals eye-opening facts. Agriculture accounts for the largest share of the workforce in India, mainly in the rural areas, but it contributes the least to the country’s GDP. Agriculture and allied sectors employ 44.9% of the male workforce and 62.7% of the female workforce but those sectors contribute less than 17% of GDP.

Industry, which includes manufacturing, construction and other related activities employs less than 17% of the male workforce and 16% of females. The sector contributes around 26% of GDP. The biggest share of the workforce is employed in the services sector–more than 27% of the male workforce and around 22% of females. Services, which includes education, health, trade, transport, IT/BPOs, and financial services, contribute more than 48% of GDP. 

Although the majority of Indians are employed in agriculture, in fact, those statistics could be misleading. Many Indians in rural areas have no alternatives than to choose underpaid or often unpaid occupations related to agriculture. This is a phenomenon known as “disguised unemployment” where the productivity of a worker is very low or even zero. In other words, if some of them were to leave the farms where they ostensibly work, the productivity on the farms could actually increase.

A Military Solution?

The sheer size of India’s working age population makes the problem of unemployment huge and daunting. It is not just the fact that jobs are not there in the numbers that are required. Despite the huge numbers of Indians joining the workforce each year and looking for employment, there is also a serious supply side problem. This is a problem of mismatch. Employers in India say that it is difficult to hire workers who have the required skills. Education at primary and secondary levels is nearly universal in India but the systems for vocational training and higher education are still inadequate. 

For example, there are 23 Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs), which offer around 17,000 seats every year, but the competition to get into them can be fierce. This year more than a million students took the entrance exam. The situation is no better in lower-tier institutes and vocational schools, many of which also offer courses that are less than adequate for employers looking for skilled workers.

In such a situation, could there be an unconventional solution to India’s youth unemployment problem like, say, compulsory conscription into the defence services? It’s a controversial idea, fraught with several risks, but could it be worth it?

Unlike many countries, including Israel, South Korea, Finland, Switzerland, Greece, Brazil, and Norway, India does not have a system of conscription where it is compulsory for young men (and in some cases, women too) to do military service for varying periods of time. In recent years, some countries that had done away with the system have been renewing conscription programmes – notably in the Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania, which won independence from the erstwhile Soviet Union. In those states, the renewal of conscription reflects the threat of aggression by Russia. 

In countries that have had a policy of conscription, it has promoted national unity by bringing citizens together and fostered an appreciation for the sacrifices made by military personnel. It has also created an active reserve of trained personnel who can quickly be deployed in response to national security threats. Besides, military service also imparts various skills in individuals. 

A Controversial Case for Conscription

All of those could be advantageous for India. A spirit of national unity in a country as diverse as India would be welcome, and in a world where national security risks are increasing, there is no harm in having a dynamic reserve of trained military personnel. Also, the benefits of the military’s training and discipline for India’s huge population of youth are obvious.

It will not be easy to implement conscription, though. Two years ago when the Indian government introduced the Agnipath scheme, it faced huge opposition. 

The Agnipath program is a recruitment initiative for the Indian Army, Air Force, and Navy, and it is designed as a “tour of duty” style scheme for recruiting soldiers below the rank of commissioned officers into the three services. The recruits, known as Agniveers, serve for a four-year period and form a new military rank. It is, however, voluntary and not compulsory.

The government’s rationale for the programme was that it would provide a younger and more tech-savvy military force; and it would provide India’s youth with the opportunities to gain military training and experience. At the end of their service period, they would also get a severance package, known as Seva Nidhi, to help them get alternative employment and careers. 

The main opposition to Agnipath was from defence aspirants, military veterans, opposition leaders, and certain states. They argued that the scheme could potentially affect the future of serving personnel, impact the professionalism, ethos, and fighting spirit of the forces, and possibly lead to the militarisation of civil society. There’s also concern about the lack of job security after the four-year term ends, as only 25% of Agniveers would be selected for regular military service for a full term of another 15 years, while the rest would be demobilised.

Yet, Agnipath Has Been a Hit

By all accounts the programme has found takers from the target group it addresses–youth aged between 17.5 and 21. In 2024, the Indian Army received a significant increase in applications for the Agniveer program compared to the previous year. A total of 12.8 lakh youth, including both men and women applicants, have applied to become Agniveers. This is 10% higher than the 11.3 lakh applicants in 2023. The planned recruitment of Agniveers for the armed forces annually is roughly 46,000, with 40,000 for the Army and the remaining 6,000 for the Navy and the Air Force combined.

If the Agniveer programme has worked, would a compulsory conscription scheme also work? India has always had a voluntary armed force without any conscription laws. However, the Indian constitution has a provision in Article 23 that allows the government to mandate conscription in the interest of national security and public welfare. Yet, India has never applied this provision. 

Conscription has gained attention in recent years due to reports of recruitment shortfalls, particularly for officer positions, since 2008. This shortfall in recruitment can be  a threat to national security. Since India’s Independence, there have been several systems of compulsory military training for students in public schools and universities, although conscription was not mandatory. 

The National Cadet Corps (NCC), formed in 1948, aimed to generate youth interest in defending the country. In 1962, China invaded Indian territory, leading to the implementation of specific emergency recruitment regulations and, through the 1970s, NCC cadets were trained in handling weapons and basic techniques of warfare such as tank and artillery training.

Backlash Versus Benefit

Many argue that conscription is a violation of personal freedom and choice. Some are opposed to it because of moral, ethical and religious reasons. There is also the question of whether military training can impart skills that are relevant for civilian life. 

The most serious issue that India faces is that of tackling unemployment. Only 100 million Indians have formal jobs.According to the Centre for Monitoring the Indian Economy, in the October-December 2023 quarter, joblessness among those in the age group of 20 to 24 grew to 44.49% from 43.65% in the previous quarter of July to September 2023. On the other hand, it stood at 14.33% for the age group of 25-29 compared to 13.35% in the July-September quarter.

These are sobering numbers and they are a wake-up call for policy makers. No matter who nearly a million Indians will vote into power in the next few weeks, dealing with youth unemployment and the job crisis will have to be the most important task, and the way forward could be by thinking out of the box. Could conscription be a non-conventional solution?

For more details visit us: https://lokmarg.com/

Modi’s Millennial Plan And Social Media

Modi’s Millennial Plan, Social Media, And the Scorching Heat of Electioneering

By Sanjoy Narayan

“I can clearly see that the coming five years will be about our collective resolve of establishing the roadmap that will guide our trajectory as a nation for the next thousand years and make India the embodiment of prosperity, all-round growth and global leadership.”

Yes, 1000 years. You read right. The next five years will be about putting together a roadmap for, not 10, 25, 50 or 100 years, but for the next millennium. In case you are still wondering who that quote is attributed to, it is Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

Modi has always said that he is in for the long run and that he wants to make India a developed country by 2047, which will be the 100th anniversary of its Independence. Now, over the next five years, he wants to lay the foundations for the next 1000 years.

On 16 March, after the Election Commission announced the dates for India’s gargantuan seven-phase, 44-day Lok Sabha elections, Modi took to WhatsApp where he has 14 million people following his channel updates to post a long message. The quote above is from that post. With hashtags such as #PhirEkBaarModiSarkar and slogans such as “Ab Ki Baar, 400 Paar!” Modi’s WhatsApp updates are frequent, upbeat, and supremely confident.

In his 16 March WhatsApp update, he called the elections the “biggest festival of democracy” and outlined how in the past ten years, since his government has come to power, new records of development have been created. And of how, “in our third term, there’s much work to be done”. Oozing sanguinity and supreme confidence, he concluded his post with: “I derive great strength from people’s blessings, especially the poor, our farmers, Yuva and Nari Shakti. When they say ‘मैं हूँ मोदी का परिवार’, it fills me with joy and makes me work harder to build a Viksit Bharat. This is THE era to make it happen and together we will! यही समय है सही समय है!”

On X, where Modi has 97.4 million followers, higher than any other serving head of state in the world, he has been more prolific during his campaigning, posting often multiple times daily, quotes and video clips from the ubiquitous rallies he addresses across the country, sometimes several in a single day. 

Not surprisingly, electioneering’s uglier side surfaced soon after the first phase of polls concluded on 19 April. The media, particularly international publications, pounced on a new controversy that seemed to emerge after Modi was accused by the opposition parties in India of, to quote CNN, “delivering Islamophobic remarks” at a rally in Rajasthan. Video clips of the rally show Modi saying if the main opposition party, Congress, was voted into power, it would distribute the country’s wealth among “infiltrators” and “those who have more children”, apparently referring to the minority Muslim community, estimated to be a population of more than 200 million in India.

Opposition leaders accused him of making a “hate speech” and urged action by the Election Commission, which has asked Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) to respond to the complaints. Opposition parties fear that such remarks by Modi could encourage vigilantism against Indian Muslims but Tom Vadakkan, a BJP spokesperson, told New York Times that Modi’s speech was being misinterpreted. “This is not about our compatriots, the Muslims,” he said. Modi was talking only about “infiltrators,” according to Mr. Vadakkan.

Yet as temperatures run high in electioneering, both literally (much of India is reeling from a heat wave with temperatures of 40 deg. C and more) and otherwise, the degree of divisiveness in Indian society cannot be wished away. Feelings of insecurity and discrimination among Muslims and other minority communities appear to have grown, and because politics is intertwined with religion in India, these are heightened during the so-called festival of democracy, or the election. 

To blame right-wing politics or the rise of Hindu nationalist parties such as the BJP for the frisson between India’s majority Hindus and minorities such as the Muslims is simplistic to the point of being naive, as the Western media often is. Communal divide has existed for centuries in India. After Independence and the partitioning of the Indian sub-continent, which was marked by violence, tragedy and injustice, the divisions became sharper. The very fact that the BJP has won the national elections twice, each time with a huge mandate, demonstrates what the majority of Indian voters want.

Yet, as the third phase of elections begin on 7 May (with four more scheduled after that), the polarisation on communal lines seems sharper. Part of that is because of the proliferation of social media. India is estimated to have 585 million WhatsApp users; 314 million Facebook users; and 27 million X users. Millions of Indians are able to express their views, often anonymously, on social media platforms. They can also spew hatred, abuse, threats, and discrimination more freely than ever before. Could it be that India’s majority community of Hindus (who make up 80% of the population) seem more vocal because of social media’s ubiquity?

The flipside of social media platforms and their massive reach in India is about how political parties can use them. Modi and his party have been far more adept at that than the opposition parties. His well-attended rallies, where thousands turn up to listen to him, in effect, also reach via social media millions of people who don’t. The clips of his rally where he made the remarks about Congress and its ostensible plans of wealth redistribution caused consternation among minority communities and the opposition parties but they also reached, probably in greater numbers, the majority community, many among whom could be regarding them with approval.

For more details visit us: https://lokmarg.com/

Rahul bjp

Rahul Gandhi Is At The Last Chance Saloon And It’s Not Looking Good

By Sanjoy Narayan

The Economist, the British publication that is often described as a weekly newspaper published in a printed magazine format, appears to have a soft spot for Rahul Gandhi, the leader of the Indian National Congress and the scion of the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty that runs that political party. A few days before the first phase of India’s gargantuan parliamentary elections was held, the publication joined Gandhi on his campaign trail and ran a piece that tacitly implied that Gandhi, 53, who holds no official position in his party, had got his mojo back.

The piece did list the main challenges that the Congress faces: the lack of an ideological alternative to Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s dominant and seemingly unstoppable Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) whose amalgam of Hindutva and economic development has proved to be a successful electoral recipe; the lack of organisational discipline in the Congress; and Gandhi’s own lack of experience–he has never run a state nor a central ministry.

Yet the Economist’s piece on Gandhi was hopeful–a contrarian view from what many others think of him–and concluded that if the Congress had to reverse its decline, Gandhi would have to step up or step aside. 

Gandhi actually has had more chances than any political leader is usually lucky to get. He has led the party’s defeat in two parliamentary elections, in 2014 and 2019; he has seen the number of seats that his party along with its allies have won plummet to just 52 out of 543; and has seen it lose several state elections–the Congress now rules in just three out of India’s 28 states. 

Yet, it is a silly season that is underway in Indian politics–six more phases of elections will be held and no exit polls will be allowed till the last vote is cast on June 1–and all manner of speculation, some of it nonsensical, abounds. A few days before the first phase of elections was held, the prominent Congress leader, Jairam Ramesh, 70, commenting on a quote of Prime Minister Modi, posted on X: “A pathological liar who plumbs new depths of lies every day. Just two more months, though, of this man as PM.” 

The Congress and its supporters have been circulating various prophecies, including a now-deleted opinion poll that suggests the Congress-led big-tent alliance of 41 opposition pirates would get more seats than the BJP-led National Democratic Alliance. On their part, Modi and the NDA have made no bones of their expectation that they would win 400 seats or more in the ongoing elections, which, if it happens, would mean a massive 74% majority.

The BJP’s confidence shows. When the first phase of elections ended last Friday evening, Modi, who with 97.3 million followers is the 7th most popular on X (former US President Barack Obama is the only politician who has more, while another ex-Prez Donald Trump has less), posted: “Getting EXCELLENT feedback from today’s voting. It’s clear that people across India are voting for NDA in record numbers.”

Everyone, including the media in India, political commentators, and international media publications (who are more critical of Modi and his regime than their Indian counterparts), has by and large concluded  that a third term for Modi as Prime Minister and a huge mandate for his party and its allies is all but assured and that the only matter of interest is how many seats they get when the results are declared on June 4–more than the 346 that they now have or less. 

Gandhi And His Team’s Third Test

Let us assume that the prevalent view that Modi will be reelected as Prime Minister for the third time comes true. What about the Congress? After his party’s dismal showing in 2014 and 2019, this year’s election is a crucial test for Gandhi. The Congress could end up with either more seats than the paltry 52 that it currently has in Parliament, or less. What would those scenarios mean for the scion of a party that was once the dominant political organisation in India and one that has its roots in the first nationalist movement to emerge in the British Empire. The Congress was formed in 1885, which makes it 139 years old. For 48 years, or nearly half a century after Independence in 1947, the party has helmed India’s government and for many years it also ruled in most of India’s states.

But its decline has been swift and shocking. In 2014, the Modi-led NDA first dealt it a blow (the Congress that year won just 44 seats); in 2019, it was a repeat. If 2014 was a wake-up call, 2019, was a plaintive cry for survival. 

Yet, on the face of it, the party’s leadership did little. Yes, Gandhi himself sort of took the blame for the electoral debacle, resigning as party president in 2019,  and refusing to remain in any official position in the party. His mother, Sonia Gandhi, widow of former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi, continued as interim president of the party before a veteran leader, Mallikarjun Kharge, who is 81, was appointed as president in 2022. 

Publicly Congress leaders would like to describe Kharge’s appointment as a demonstration of non-dynastic meritocracy in the Congress but, in private, they scoff as loudly as Congress’s rivals. For everyone knows that it is still one family, the Nehru-Gandhis, which continues to call the shots in the party. In other words, it is Gandhi, his mother who is 77 and in indifferent health, and his sister, Priyanka, 52, who is a general secretary of the party, who control everything in the party. Every other leader in the party has to be subservient to the family. Or else they have to leave.

Many have. In significant droves. Since 2014, several promising Congress leaders, some of them young, enthusiastic and credited with the potential to turnaround the fortunes of the party have ditched it. Their reasons for leaving are simple: the way the party is controlled by the family. Many of them have joined the BJP, which has become a kind of equal-opportunity recruiter of political talent from across the spectrum of opposition parties. If an opposition politician has the heft to get votes, the BJP’s doors are open for him or her.

The situation is so grave for Congress that besides some old-timers, many of whom are at the terminal stages of their political careers, there are few who remain that can revive the party. When the results of the ongoing elections come out in June, for Gandhi and his family it could be the last chance to do something about an organisation that is sliding in a spectacular political avalanche. Or, would it be too late?

Stepping Aside Could Be the Only Option

A third electoral debacle would be severely humiliating for Gandhi but catastrophic for his party. He is the main challenger to Modi and seen as the real leader of his party–whether or not he has an official post in Congress is irrelevant. 

If, in the first scenario, the Congress ends up with, say, 50-100 seats this time, what should Gandhi do? A charitable suggestion is that he should step aside from all party work and, although it depends on his personal choice, probably from politics altogether. Indians looking at Gandhi’s track record would have had enough of him and even those who support his party would probably not want him around anymore. If he or his party would like him to continue even after another electoral drubbing, he would be a parodistic personality inviting rebuke rather than respect. Not an image that anyone would cherish for himself.

There is, of course, a second scenario. Let’s assume hypothetically that the opposition’s Indian National Developmental Inclusive Alliance (INDIA) flies in the face of prevailing public perception and wins the elections (caveat: I said “hypothetically”!). 

INDIA is made up of 41 parties but is chaired by the Congress president Kharge. Besides the Congress, the constituent parties in the alliance include smaller national parties, communist parties, and several regional parties from different states, including those representing minorities such as Muslims, discriminated castes, and tribals. 

It is a sort of hodge-podge of parties from across the ideological spectrum that lies outside the bounds of the BJP’s Hindutva plus development plank. Formed less than a year before the ongoing elections began, already some of the original member parties have left, notably Bihar’s Janata Dal (United) led by the original convenor of the alliance, Nitish Kumar, who left to ally with the BJP. 

Nevertheless, let’s assume the INDIA gets to form a government on the strength of a hypothetically higher number of seats than the NDA that it wins. Each of its constituents will wield varying degrees of power on account of the number of seats it wins and brings to the kitty. Some of them are strong in their home states and regions and can dictate terms in the formation of the government. How many of them are likely to agree to a Prime Minister from the Congress party? And even if they do, how many would vote in favour of Gandhi? 

As I said, it is the silly season now, a time when speculation abounds. So let me leave you with those two questions to speculate about, purely hypothetically.

For more details visit us: https://lokmarg.com/

Guide to Modi’s Win-Win Foreign Policy

A Jargon-Free Guide to Narendra Modi’s (Mostly) Win-Win Foreign Policy

By Sanjoy Narayan

Just two things from last weekend can give you a huge insight into the manner in which India’s foreign policy has undergone a significant transformation under the leadership of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who completes 10 years at the helm of India’s government and is poised to win another five-year term. But first the two things (spoiler: both have to do with S. Jaishankar, Modi’s foreign minister and close confidant when it comes to anything to do with India’s international policy).

One. Last Friday, at an event to launch the Marathi version of his book, Jaishankar said: “Whosoever will be the President of America will have good relations with India, because America will always want to have a partnership with Prime Minister Modi.”

Two. At the same event, in an obvious reference to cross-border terrorism from Pakistan, he also said: “They (terrorists) should not think; we are this side of the line, so no one could attack us. Terrorists do not play by any rules. The answer to terrorists cannot have any rules.”

Both those statements by India’s foreign minister are accurate. I would amend the first a bit by substituting “partnership with Prime Minister Modi” with “partnership with India” but then we should not mind Jaishankar’s preference for mentioning the name of his boss. 

Indo-US relations and the China factor

Let’s start with the first statement. India’s relationship with the US has pivoted in the past couple of decades and has been warming for several reasons but for the US, the most important of them is the dynamics of China’s rise and its implications for regional stability. US-China relations have been deteriorating ever since the US started worrying about China’s military buildup and its assertiveness in the South China Sea. Then, in 2018, a trade war began under the Trump administration with both countries imposing tariffs on each other’s goods. In 2020, the tension escalated over the handling and origins of the COVID-19 pandemic and issues such as the handling of Hong Kong and the treatment of Uighurs in Xinjiang. 

Strategically, the US supports India’s emergence as a leading global power in the region and sees it as a counterbalance to China’s rise. This strategic interest, coupled with economic interests and shared democratic values, has contributed to the strengthening of the US-India relations. 

The two countries now cooperate in areas such as defence, trade, technology, and climate change. So, to paraphrase Jaishankar, no matter who becomes the next occupant of the White House, the US will always want to have India as a partner, no matter what. When Canada accused India of being involved in the murder of a Sikh separatist on Canadian soil, the US was remarkably guarded in its response, simply because it needs India strategically. 

For India, it is a win-win. It follows a policy of strategic autonomy and has avoided becoming a formal ally of the US, which allows it to follow an independent foreign policy that can also sometimes diverge from what the US would ideally expect. Case in point: India’s relations with Russia.

Indo-Russian relations and the economic factor

While the US-led West has imposed heavy sanctions on trade with Russia following its invasion of Ukraine, India has maintained its historical bond with Russia. India buys Russian oil, weapons and trade between the two continues to be robust. In the financial year 2024, India bought 35% of its oil imports from Russia. India and China together buy an estimated 80% of Russia’s oil. In 2023, India spent $15.2 billion on Russian oil. For Russia, embroiled as it is in a war in Ukraine since February 2022, such revenue is of critical importance. 

Arguably, those earnings could be financing Russian President Vladimir Putin’s onslaught against Ukraine but for India, it is a win-win. Because India has been buying Russian oil at discounted rates. Following the sanctions imposed on Russia, Russian Urals crude has been selling at a discount. For instance, at one point, it was more than $30 a barrel cheaper than Brent crude, the global benchmark.

Indo-Chinese relations and the tension factor

If India’s relations with the US and with Russia can be said to be determined by strategy and economics, respectively, its relations with China are much more complex. It is marked by both cooperation and contention. Continuing border disputes with China have strained ties between the two countries. 

The border disputes over areas in the north-eastern part of India are long-standing. Recently, Prime Minister Modi highlighted the “urgent need to address” the prolonged situation on the borders to resolve the “abnormality in bilateral interactions”. There have been ongoing diplomatic efforts to ease the tensions, but there has been no breakthroughs.

A new controversy has been over China renaming territories by issuing standardised names in Mandarin for places within India’s Arunachal Pradesh, which China refers to as Zangnan. India has strongly condemned this move, with the Indian defence minister questioning the logic behind the renaming and asserting that such actions cannot change the fact that Arunachal Pradesh is an integral part of India. The U.S. has also reacted to this development.

These actions by China are seen as attempts to assert its territorial claims over the region, which India rejects. The renaming of territories is part of a broader pattern of assertiveness by China in its border disputes, but India maintains its stance that Arunachal Pradesh is, and will always be, an integral part of its territory. The situation remains sensitive.

India also fears security threats from China. In 2020, it banned 59 Chinese-made apps, including popular ones like TikTok and WeChat, citing them as a danger to the country’s sovereignty, integrity, and national security.

Yet, Indo-Chinese relations aren’t that simple. Despite the border tensions, trade between India and China has not only continued but has reached new heights. In 2022, the trade volume between the two countries was at an all-time high of  $135.98 billion, with India’s trade deficit with China crossing the $100 billion mark for the first time. This was despite India’s efforts to become more self-reliant and reduce its dependence on Chinese imports. However, imports from China have remained strong mainly because they are cheap.

Indo-Pak relations and the big daddy factor

I began this piece by listing two recent statements by India’s foreign minister but tackled only the first. The second too is of significance. When Jaishankar said the “answer to terrorism cannot have rules”, he could have likely been referring to a report in The Guardian, which alleged that India’s external intelligence agency, Research and Analysis Wing (R&AW), conducted operations deep inside Pakistan to neutralise wanted terrorists. That statement reflects the tough stance that India now adopts when it comes to cross-border terrorism from Pakistan, particularly in Kashmir. 

Elsewhere, in its South Asian neighborhood, India under Modi has tried to reassert its leadership role. Its ‘Neighbourhood First’ policy aims to foster better relations, but challenges persist. India’s influence faces competition from China’s economic clout, as Beijing invests heavily in regional infrastructure projects.

Modi’s global ambitions are also reflected in India’s outreach to Africa and the Middle East. In Africa, India has focused on development partnerships and trade, positioning itself as an alternative to China’s resource-driven approach. In the Middle East, energy security and the welfare of the Indian diaspora (66% of non-resident Indians live in the Middle East) have guided its policies, leading to stronger ties with nations like Saudi Arabia and the UAE.

As Modi likely heads into a third term, what kind of foreign policy should we expect? For sure, the policy of “strategic autonomy” that has now become familiar will continue with India navigating the complex geopolitical web of the world by blending pragmatism with national interest. That strategy will also gain heft from  India’s economic might–it could soon become the third largest economy in the world. To sum up, it would be: Modi’s win-win foreign policy.

For more details visit us: https://lokmarg.com/

Modi Should Make Equality & Not Growth His Main Target

By Sanjoy Narayan

A crucial and key aspect of the Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP) election campaign is the rallies that Prime Minister Narendra Modi addresses across India. Modi, 73, is a powerful orator and he has a hectic itinerary, criss-crossing the country to address public rallies, sometimes as many as three or even four in a single day. The rallies are usually huge, with hundreds of thousands of people turning up to hear him deliver his speeches, which resonate regardless of one’s political views. In India’s current political scenario there isn’t anybody else whose public speeches can match up to Modi’s.

Last week, in Cooch Behar a northern district of West Bengal, which will go to the polls on April 19 in the first phase of India’s 44-day parliamentary elections, Modi, in his customary style of exhorting public responses (and sometimes referring to himself in the third person), asked the crowd four rhetorical questions: Should we or should we not make India the world’s third largest economic power? For that do we need a strong government or not? Does Modi provide a strong government or not? Will Modi provide a strong government in future or not? 

The target of making India the world’s third largest economy (measured by GDP) is not only attainable but it may even be low-hanging fruit–not very difficult to pick. Economists and organisations like the World Economic Forum (WEF) believe India’s economy is on track to become the world’s third largest, possibly by the end of this decade. 

India is currently the world’s fifth largest economy with a GDP of around $3.7 trillion. The US and China hold the top two spots, followed by Japan and Germany. 

India’s economic growth rate is expected to be around 6.7% on average over the next seven years, which is higher than most other major economies. This growth is fueled by factors like a large young population, increasing digital adoption, government reforms, growth in domestic consumption, and investment in infrastructure.

Several financial institutions believe India can achieve its target of becoming the third biggest economy within the next 3-7 years by maintaining a growth rate of around 7-8% This would require surpassing the growth rates of Germany and Japan, and staying competitive with China’s projected growth.

According to S&P, the American credit rating agency, India could achieve this goal by 2030, or, just after the end of term of the next Parliament. Others, including Modi, believe it could happen even earlier. 

Shocking Inequality is Widening

Becoming the third-largest economic power would undoubtedly be a moment of pride for all Indians. Yet, the more important challenge–and one that no one, including Modi, likes talking about–is the deplorable level of economic inequality in India. While India’s policymakers and politicians have professed to make growth inclusive and ensure that the benefits of economic progress reach all segments of society, it has not happened. 

In his speech at Cooch Behar last week, Modi claimed that in the past 10 years, his government had pulled 250 million Indians out of poverty. It is true that during his regime, which began in 2014, India has witnessed a significant decline in multidimensional poverty from 29.17% in 2013-14 to 11.28% in 2022-23. This represents a reduction of 17.89 percentage points. Multidimensional poverty indices break down poverty levels in different areas of a country and among various sub-groups of people, and consider factors besides only income–like education, health, living standards, and other essential aspects of well-being.

Yet, as poverty declines, income inequality in India has widened. According to Oxfam India’s “Survival of the Richest: The India Supplement”, the top 1% in India owned more than 40.5% of total wealth in 2021, while the bottom 50% of the population (700 million people) has around 3% of total wealth. From the beginning of the Covid pandemic till November 2022,  billionaires in India have seen their wealth surge by 121%. That means by a staggering Rs 3608 crore per day in real terms (or Rs 2.5 crore a minute!). 

Take a few moments to digest those numbers and then consider this: The country still has the world’s highest number of poor at 228.9 million. On the flipside of that is the fact that, according to Forbes, the number of billionaires in India rose from 169 last year to 200 this year, making it the world’s third largest concentration of the ultra-rich. 

Additionally, the richest 10% in India collectively own 72.5% of the country’s wealth, further emphasising how acute inequality is in India and the fact that although India’s policymakers can feel proud about making it the world’s fastest growing economy, that pride is superficial. Modi’s avowed target of making India the third largest global economy means little really to the masses of people who gather to hear him speak at his election rallies.

Huge Challenge of Joblessness

According to Oxfam’s index, India ranks 147th out of 157 countries in terms of commitment to reducing inequality. India’s Gini index, which measures income distribution inequality, in 2021 was 35.7. The Gini index measures the extent to which the distribution of income or consumption among individuals or households within an economy deviates from a perfectly equal distribution. A Gini index of 0 represents perfect equality, while an index of 100 implies perfect inequality. 

In a way, India is trapped in the cycle of inequality. Economic disparities hinder India’s poorest from being socially mobile and to move up the ladder. Economic inequality intersects with caste, gender, and background disparities, thus making it even more difficult to break out of that cycle.

Concentration of wealth in the hands of a few can undermine social justice and cohesion and further perpetuate inequality. 

A classic textbook method of redistributing wealth is to tax incomes progressively. Yet, in India despite the concentration of wealth among a few, the number of people who pay taxes is abysmally low. Only 20.9 million people paid income tax in 2021-22. In the same year, there were 943.5 million adults among the population. Unless the income tax net is widened, meaningful redistribution of wealth will be impossible to achieve.

The biggest challenge that policymakers face is youth unemployment. According to data from the Centre for Monitoring Indian Economy (CMIE) released this year, youth unemployment (20-34 age group) has been on the rise. In the October-December 2023 quarter, 44.49% of those in the age group of 20-24 were unemployed, while for the 25-29 age-group it was 14.33%, and for  the 30-34 age group it was 2.49%. Breakups of that data show that the problem is particularly acute in rural India where youth unemployment is at record levels. Remember too that the number of Indians that are 15-24 is estimated at 250 million, more than half the population of the European Union.

So when Prime Minister Modi exhorts crowds at his election rallies with slogans about making India one of the world’s most powerful economies, we might need to stop and wonder what power he is talking about.

For more details visit us: https://lokmarg.com/

Will Kejriwal’s Arrest Make AAP More Powerful

Will Kejriwal’s Arrest Make AAP More Powerful?

By Sanjoy Narayan

Approximately one year from now, when the state of Delhi holds its next assembly elections, how many of the 70 seats do you think the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) will get? Here are some facts to help you with your estimate: Last time the Delhi elections took place, in 2020, AAP won 62 of them, while the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) won 8; and in the previous elections, in 2015, AAP won 67, while the BJP won 3. So how many seats do you think AAP will win in 2025?

It might seem a bit silly that I’m talking about an election that will probably not happen till February 2025, at a time when everything should really be focused on the big fat Indian elections that begin next month when nearly a billion of us will vote to elect 543 Members of Parliament. Then again, there will likely be few surprises when that long 44-day polling is over and the votes are counted. Unless something totally unforeseen happens, Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) are expected to sweep those elections and the only question is about whether they can get more than the 353 seats they won in 2019 and, if so, how many more.

Delhi’s next assembly election, though, is a more interesting subject to speculate about. As I write this, AAP’s national convenor and Delhi’s chief minister, Arvind Kejriwal, is in a Delhi prison after he was arrested on 21 March by the government’s Enforcement Department, which investigates economic crimes such as money laundering offences. The charges against Kejriwal, 55, and some of his senior party colleagues who are also incarcerated pending trial, involve alleged aberrations in the granting of liquor licences to private vendors in the state of Delhi. Even as AAP refutes those allegations and the ED continues its investigations, his arrest coming just before the parliamentary elections start has raised many questions.

Kejriwal’s AAP, a young party formed in 2012 out of a larger mass civil movement against corruption, has already blazed a remarkable political path. In Delhi, it has decisively won elections to the state assembly and Kejriwal has been chief minister since 2015 (also earlier for a year in 2013-14). In Punjab, in 2022, as a newcomer, the party won the state election with 92 of the 117 seats and has been running the state’s government there. It has just one seat in Lok Sabha and has not really fared too well in other states where it has contested elections but Kejriwal’s popularity as a politician and leader has been on the rise and AAP does have ambitions of emerging as a national party.

In recent months, arrests and investigations against opposition leaders by agencies of the government of India have caught the attention of those who follow Indian politics because of their timing and also because of the people that have been targeted. In an interview to Al-Jazeera news channel, the opposition leader and Trinamool Congress MP from West Bengal, Derek O’Brien alleged that 96% of the anti-corruption cases against politicians are against those from non-BJP opposition parties. He also alleged that most of these are “trumped-up charges” that miraculously go away when some of those charged defect to the BJP.

It is for the investigators and the judiciary to decide whether the charges against various politicians stick or not but the timing of some arrests may be more than mere coincidence. Kejriwal’s rise and the growing prominence of his party has clearly been a challenge for the BJP as well as the Congress. A first-generation politician from a middle-class family, Kejriwal, who has an engineering degree from one of India’s top technology institutes, quit a government job to join politics. Like Modi he doesn’t come from a political dynasty as many Indian political leaders, notably Rahul Gandhi of the Congress party, do.

His Aam Aadmi Party has the avowed mission of being dedicated to the cause of the common man and despite several constraints that his government faces because of Delhi’s special status as a state, its achievements are notable. Here are some of them: In education, the AAP government has focused on improving the quality of education in Delhi. Initiatives like mohalla schools and happiness classes have been implemented to enhance learning outcomes. In healthcare, the Delhi Arogya Kosh scheme provides free treatment to over five lakh citizens. In public transport, the addition of 1,650 electric buses to the public transport fleet aims to reduce pollution and improve mobility.

It’s not easy for the Delhi government to operate within constraints imposed by the special status of the National Capital Territory (NCT), where certain subjects such as policing, law and order, and land matters, fall under the jurisdiction of the central government. In addition, the NCT’s 33.8 million population (with a staggering 22,800 people per sq km) poses challenges related to infrastructure, traffic, and pollution management that are not easy to tackle.

Although AAP is part of an alliance of around 26 opposition parties, the badly-named Indian National Developmental Inclusive Alliance (I.N.D.I.A.), it is one of the few parties within that fold that can be expected to challenge the BJP’s formidable force in coming years. AAP may still be a small and young party but its leader, Kejriwal, has the charisma and voter-pulling power that few others among India’s opposition parties do. Many such as Mamata Banerjee of the Trinamool Congress in West Bengal have a sway over their own states but have been able to make no headway outside their fiefdoms. Kejriwal, who has led AAP to victory in Punjab, stands out among the others.

In Delhi, because of the state’s special status, Kejriwal and his AAP government have constantly sparred with the Lieutenant Governor of the state, who is, in effect, appointed by the Centre, and has discretionary powers over the subjects outside the state government’s jurisdiction. As a consequence, AAP and Kejriwal have become, from the point of view of the BJP, a thorn in its side.

One of the professed objectives of the Modi regime since it came to power in 2014 was to create an India or Bharat that is “free of the Congress party”. It is an objective that electorally it has achieved. In Parliament, the once powerful Congress party has just 50 of the 543 seats; and of the 28 Indian states, it is in power in only three.

With the Congress out of the way, could the BJP now be training its sights on other rising opposition parties such as AAP? Or could its recent crackdown on Kejriwal and other AAP leaders actually backfire and boost support for them? That brings us back to my earlier question: How many seats in the next Delhi elections do you think AAP will win? Any guesses?

For more details visit us: https://lokmarg.com/

Expect in Five More Years of Modi

What You Could Expect in Five More Years of Modi

By Sanjoy Narayan

What You Could Expect in Five More Years of Modi

In mid-March, at this year’s annual conclave organised by the India Today group, in his introductory speech before inviting Prime Minister Narendra Modi to speak, the group’s chairman Aroon Purie remarked that Modi was not just campaigning for the soon to begin 2024 parliamentary elections but he also seemed to have his sights on the next one to be held in 2029. When Modi rose to speak, he was quick to grab that as a cue. Playfully rebuking Purie, he said, “You stopped with 2029? I am aiming for 2047!”

That repartee may have been in jest. In 2047, Modi, if he is still around, will be 97–an age at which it is not usual to still be active in politics. Yet, 2047, in Modi’s scheme of things, is a significant year. It will be the 100th anniversary of India’s Independence. It is also 

the year for which Modi has envisioned Viksit Bharat @2047, a plan that is all about making India an advanced and developed country by that year. 

Most observers, political analysts, and journalists, including the dwindling few among that third group in India who could still be considered detractors, are quite clear that it is almost a certainty that Modi will get a third term as Prime Minister, and that his Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and its allies will again win an overwhelming majority of the 543 seats for which the elections will be held in seven phases, beginning April 19. Modi himself is confident that his alliance, the National Democratic Alliance, will get more than 400 seats, beating its 2019 tally of 353. 

The support and popularity that Modi enjoys is quite unprecedented in Indian politics and, as a consequence, his party and its allies are tipped as the clear winners in this year’s elections. Yet when it comes to the number of seats, the math may not be simple. Modi and his party are not very popular in the southern Indian states, which have largely been a bastion of regional parties and the opposition Congress Party. The south (four states and one union territory) has 130 of the 543 parliamentary seats, and in the 2019 elections, while it swept the northern states, the NDA won only 30 of them. How Modi and his alliance fares in the south this time would determine whether their final tally touches or crosses 400.

The Impact of Modi 3.0

That is a minor math conundrum. The larger issue is what a third term for Modi would mean for India and its people. At the India Today Conclave mentioned earlier, Modi ended his speech with his own predictions. In the next five years, he said, India’s infrastructure would reach new heights with significant advancements. For example, he said, Indian Railways would bring transformative changes to transportation. India, which is now the world’s biggest importer of defence equipment, would emerge as an exporter with a much stronger presence in the global defence market. And, in the space sector, after already having launched a successful moon mission, India would set new records in space endeavours.

Economic Growth. On the economic front, Modi has already set some tangible targets to achieve in his third term. Such as becoming the third largest economy in the world after the US and China. India with a GDP estimated at $3.7 trillion is growing the fastest among the world’s big economies and in size it is now the fifth largest economy in the world. To become the third, it would have to overtake Germany (at number 4) and Japan (number 3). With its fast-paced growth that would not seem difficult to achieve.

Reducing Poverty. According to the National Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI), India has  already made big strides. The MPI captures overlapping deprivations in health, education, and living standards by complementing income-based poverty measurements by directly measuring and comparing deprivations. In the period, 2019-21, 14.96% of India’s population was multi-dimensionally poor, compared to 24.85% in 2015-16. This means that 135 million individuals have escaped multidimensional poverty during the 5-year period. The several schemes implemented by the Modi regime (such as direct transfers of welfare and subsidies; credit assurance to vendors; and support for tribal groups and artisans) will likely lead to further reduction in poverty during a third Modi term.

Other areas where progress could continue includes women’s empowerment. Although violence against women, closing gender gaps, and promoting economic opportunities are ongoing priorities, women have benefited from schemes to increase financial inclusion, subsidies on items such as cooking gas, emphasis on girl child education, and women’s involvement in local government. Gender equality can be expected to be an important objective in Modi’s third term.

An increased emphasis on national security and strengthening India’s security infrastructure, both internal as well as external, will also be a top priority area for the government. ‘

The Worrisome Issues

A third term would also pose other challenges for the Modi regime. One topic of discussion has been the potential downgrading of democracy ratings in India and the independence and autonomy of its institutions such as the judiciary. In 2021, international indices such as the US-based non-profit, Freedom House, downgraded India’s status from a free democracy to a “partially free democracy”. Sweden’s V-Dem Institute, which publishes datasets that describe qualities of different governments, classified India as an “electoral autocracy”. The Economist Intelligence Unit described India as a “flawed democracy” pointing to enacted laws such as the Citizenship Amendment Act, the National Registration of Citizens, and the revocation of Kashmir’s special status.

The past 10 years has seen a rise in majoritarianism in Indian society and increased communal tension, particularly between Muslims who account for 14.2% of the population and Hindus who make up 80%. How minorities will be treated in a third term of the BJP-led government could be an area of concern.

Also, despite the optimism about the Indian economy and its high growth rate, issues like inflation, unemployment, and rural inequality remain pressing challenges that need to be addressed. Youth unemployment because of mismatch of education with employment opportunities are areas that the new government or a Modi 3.0 regime will have to focus on in the next five years. India is still a young country–more than 50% of its population is below the age of 25 and more than 65% below the age of 35. While this is often referred to as a demographic dividend, in the absence of opportunities for India’s young, it could backfire horribly.

For more details visit us: https://lokmarg.com/

Why Is America Scared of TikTok

Why Is America Scared of TikTok, Which Is Owned By US Investors?

By Sanjoy Narayan

In regions where the app, TikTok, is allowed to be used, it has been a runaway success. The social media app dedicated to short-form videos that are user-generated has more than a billion active monthly users and TikTok’s format lends itself to entertainment and comedy. Of late, however, it is increasingly being used for other purposes – news, infotainment, and marketing promotions.

The largest number of TikTok users is in the US where it is estimated to have 170 million users (a sizeable proportion of the country’s population of 332 million). Other countries with significant user bases include Indonesia (110 million), Brazil (82 million), and Mexico (58 million). Last week, however, the US House of Representatives approved and passed a bill that could potentially force TikTok’s parent, the Chinese company, ByteDance, to either sell the app or face a partial ban within the US.

In fact, TikTok is already banned in many countries, including in India where, in 2020, the Indian government banned it along with dozens of other Chinese-made apps. The reasons cited for the ban were concerns related to sovereignty, integrity, defence, security, and public order. At the time of the ban, India had an estimated 200 million active users and was the largest market for the app.

Tik Tok is also banned in Afghanistan where the ruling Islamist regime felt the platform’s content was not in line with Islamic laws. In countries such as Australia, Canada, Belgium, and Denmark, the app is banned on all government-owned or government-issued devices. In the European Union, its three main institutions—the European Parliament, European Commission, and EU Council—have imposed bans on TikTok for staff devices, and the EU remains cautious about the platform’s ties to China.

In the US, legislators’ worries about TikTok have intensified after the tensions between the US and China have escalated. Many legislators believe that TikTok’s addictive algorithm could allow the Chinese government to access user data and potentially influence Americans. The bill aims to cut off Chinese influence by selling TikTok to a “qualified buyer,” likely a Western company. Legislators fear that ByteDance might be secretly controlled by the Chinese Communist Party.

Who Really Owns TikTok?

While ByteDance denies sharing sensitive user data with the Chinese government, concerns persist. China’s history of cracking down on domestic tech firms and its censorship practices raise suspicions. TikTok is popularly described as a Chinese app. And, indeed, it is owned by ByteDance, an internet technology company headquartered in Beijing, China. It was founded by two Chinese entrepreneurs, Zhang Yiming and Liang Rubo in 2012. But who really owns ByteDance?

ByteDance is called a Chinese company but 60% of it is beneficially owned by global investors such as the Carlyle Group, General Atlantic, and Susquehanna International Group–all US companies. The Carlyle Group is a global investment firm, founded in the US; General Atlantic is an American growth equity firm providing capital and strategic support for global growth companies; and Susquehanna International Group is a privately held global trading and technology firm, headquartered in the US. So, more than half of ByteDance’s equity is owned by American investment firms.

What about the rest? Roughly 20% is owned by ByteDance employees worldwide; and the remaining 20% is owned by ByteDance’s founders. TikTok’s CEO is Shou Zi Chew, also known as Chew Shou Zi, a Singaporean businessman and entrepreneur, based in the US.

Does China Influence TikTok?

As can be seen from the details of who owns TikTok’s parent company, ByteDance, the Chinese government or state agencies do not have control over the company in the traditional sense, that is, through shareholding. However, the rest of the world outside China believes that there is a nuance regarding the Chinese government’s influence over social media and online platforms. While not a direct owner, a small stake (1%) in one of ByteDance’s Chinese subsidiaries is held by entities with ties to the Chinese government. This gives them some influence, but the extent is unclear. 

Then there is the geographic factor. Owing to ByteDance’s Chinese origins, many countries worry the Chinese government could pressure the company to hand over user data. TikTok maintains its US user data is stored outside of China and that its CEO who is based in the US makes key decisions. So, while the Chinese government doesn’t directly own TikTok, the ownership structure and Chinese origins raise concerns about potential government influence over user data.

Interestingly, TikTok has never been available in China, as the country has its own version of the app called Douyin, incidentally, also owned by ByteDance. While TikTok is available internationally, in China, you would find Douyin, which has been described as the country’s domestic alternative to TikTok. It is held on a different server than TikTok, which researchers have attributed to ByteDance complying with internet regulations set by the Chinese government. Douyin is available via the web, and it operates within China, subject to monitoring and censorship by the government.

It is believed that China has strict control over its media environment, both traditional and digital. China’s central government employs a combination of legal regulations, technical control, and proactive manipulation to restrict online freedom of expression.

China’s Great Firewall (officially known as the Golden Shield Project) monitors and filters internet traffic, blocking access to foreign websites and services. Authorities use libel lawsuits, arrests, and other means to force journalists, bloggers, and media organisations to self-censor.

Moreover, China emphasises the concept of “internet sovereignty”, requiring all internet users (including foreigners) to abide by Chinese laws and regulations. Chinese internet companies have to sign a pledge on self-regulation and professional ethics, imposing even stricter rules.

The heat around TikTok is, therefore, generated by concerns that its parent, ByteDance, 60% of which is controlled by investment firms that are really American, will have to comply with Chinese regulations on internet and social media platforms and that TikTok’s parent company ByteDance, could access user data for surveillance or influence campaigns. 

Doesn’t Every App Collect User Data? 

Yes, they do. Pretty much all popular apps collect user data. This can include browsing habits, location, purchase history, and even how you interact with the app itself. 

Data collection by apps is becoming more regulated, but it’s a complex issue. Laws like GDPR in Europe and CCPA in California give users more control over their data, but enforcement varies. In India, for instance, the government has been actively addressing data privacy and collection through various measures but it is still evolving. When apps collect your data, there are potential risks such as privacy intrusion but also security breaches where data can be stolen and used for malicious purposes. 

Apps and platforms such as Facebook (with a monthly user base of more than 3 billion); X (350 million); and Instagram (1.2 billion) all collect personal data that, potentially, can be used for malicious intent that TikTok is potentially suspected of. The fact is there is no evidence that any of these apps and platforms misuse the data that they collect. Then again, there is neither any evidence that TikTok does that. Ultimately, all major platforms collect a substantial amount of user data. For users, therefore, it is wise to be cautious and review the privacy settings on any app that they may be using. 

For more details visit us: https://lokmarg.com/

Why India’s Richest Don't Want to Give their Wealth Away

Why India’s Richest Don’t Want to Give their Wealth Away

By Sanjoy Narayan

Michael Bloomberg, the former mayor of New York City and the founder of the financial, software, and data company, Bloomberg L.P., could well be the world’s most exceptional living philanthropist. Over his lifetime, Bloomberg, who is 82, has given away a staggering $17.4 billion to various charitable causes. That sum, in Indian rupees, is 1.44 lakh crore. Bloomberg’s dedication to improving education, public health, and social equality has left an indelible mark, making him one of the most influential philanthropists of our time.

In 2023 alone, Bloomberg contributed $3 billion to support the arts, education, environment, public health, and programs aimed at improving city governments around the world. In the same year, according to a ranking by Hurun, a research, media and investments group, the top 10 Indian philanthropists together donated ₹5,800 crore or $700 million. In Indian media, it was widely described as an impressive contribution that made a significant impact. To put it in perspective, however, the sum that the top 10 Indian philanthropists donated together is a little less than 25% of what Bloomberg donated in the same year.

Bloomberg is not richer than the richest Indian, by the way. He is actually poorer. Bloomberg’s net worth, according to the Forbes real-time ranking of billionaires, is $106.2 billion. The richest Indian, according to the same Forbes list, is Mukesh Ambani, with a net worth assessed at $117.5 billion. Ambani ranked as the ninth richest person in the world. And, in 2023, he and his family, according to the Hurun Philanthropy list (which happens to be the only credible and authentic estimation of Indian philanthropy), made a donation of ₹376 crore or, if you are into comparisons, $45 million. As stated before, in the same year, Bloomberg, who is the 12th richest person in the world, contributed $3 billion.

The number of Indian billionaires has been growing apace every year. According to Forbes, a record number of Indians, 186 in total, have made it to Forbes’ 2024 World’s Billionaires list, an increase from 169 last year. The total number of billionaires in the world is estimated by Forbes to be 2,555, a staggering 19-fold increase since 1987. American billionaires, unsurprisingly, account for the highest number–735 on the Forbes list but for a country that accounts for one of the world’s largest population of poor people (according to the Multidimensional Poverty Index, which considers factors like health and education, 14.96% of Indians are in multidimensional poverty), 186 billionaires is a massive number. 

Yet, the number of Indians among the world’s biggest philanthropists is appallingly small. In fact, the biggest philanthropists in India aren’t the richest, and even as the number of Indian billionaires burgeons, the amount that they give away remains paltry. Interestingly, one of the greatest philanthropists of all time was an Indian pioneer industrialist and founder of the Tata group, Sir Jamsetji Tata who passed away more than a century ago. Tata began his endowments in 1892 and his lifetime donations are estimated to be worth $102.4 billion, which is many times what today’s India’s richest businessmen together donate.

The Indians that do lead in philanthropy are ones that keep a far lower profile than their headline-grabbing richer peers. The two biggest philanthropists in India today are Shiv Nadar, 78, and Azim Premji, also 78. Both built their fortunes primarily in technology. Premji started with his father’s cooking oil and soap making business and founded Wipro, a multinational corporation that provides information technology, consultant and business process services. Nadar is a first-generation entrepreneur who started HCL, a technology multinational similar to Wipro.

Last year, Nadar and his family donated ₹2,042 crore mainly to arts, culture, and heritage; and Premji donated ₹1,774 crore primarily to education. In dollar terms, their contributions, $214 million and $246 million, respectively, hardly match what the world’s billionaire philanthropists donate but in India, they are far bigger philanthropists than their richer peers who control bigger Indian business conglomerates.

Why don’t India’s Rich Give Away their Money?

One easy answer is that they probably fear the taxman. Many Indian businessmen own their businesses (and, ergo, their wealth) through intricate webs of holding companies that help them minimise the taxes they have to pay on their incomes and wealth. To be seen to be forking out large sums to good causes could attract unwanted attention. Indeed, many rich Indians do like to donate and when they do, they prefer to be anonymous.

Some of the available figures of corporate or individual donations may also not be accurate. The relationship between wealth and philanthropy in India is complex. While some wealthy individuals actively engage in charitable giving, others may not contribute as significantly. Then there are traditional and historical factors. India has a strong tradition of religious giving. Many affluent individuals donate to temples, religious institutions, and festivals. This form of charity is deeply ingrained in Indian culture and may not show up on philanthropy lists and rankings.

The emergence of wealthy and super-rich Indians is also a new phenomenon. Many among India’s growing breed of new rich have built first- or second-generation wealth and are not yet secure enough to donate part of that. It could take a couple more generations before philanthropy becomes a more widespread practice. Thus, wealthy Indians often prioritise supporting their extended families, including education, healthcare, and other needs. This familial responsibility can sometimes take precedence over broader philanthropic efforts.

India wants to be a global economic superpower. Many believe it is on its way to becoming one. In the last quarter, the Indian economy, according to official figures, grew at 8.4%, which is far higher than most of the world’s big economies, and last week Prime Minister Narendra Modi said “with this speed, India will become the world’s third-largest economy.” At the same time, India grapples with extreme income inequality. The gap between the rich and the poor is stark, and the country’s developmental needs are huge. That is why India’s rich ought to take philanthropy more seriously, and that is why individuals such as Premji and Nadar are exceptions who should become examples to follow.

For more details visit us: https://lokmarg.com/

Narendra Modi’s Southern Discomfort

Narendra Modi’s Southern Discomfort 

By Sanjoy Narayan

If you go by the media, both Indian and international, the Narendra Modi led Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP) victory in the yet to happen parliamentary elections in India is already baked in, which is to say that it is a conclusion that has preceded the actual event. With a degree of certainty that view does not vary much, as most political sages, whether in the media or in the wise environment of every Indian living room, are sanguine that Modi and his party will win a third term in government when the elections are held and the results come out in mid-May this year.

They are probably right. Modi himself has been quoted as saying that he could “gauge the mood of the nation”, and that voters “will definitely give the NDA (the BJP-led National Democratic Alliance) more than 400 seats and the BJP at least 370 seats.” In 2019, the NDA won 353 seats, 303 of them won by the BJP on its own. That is an impressive tally but still not as massive as the 404 seats that the Congress party, led by Rajiv Gandhi, won back in 1984, after the assassination of his mother, former Prime Minister Indira Gandhi.

Can the BJP and its allies match that feat in this year’s elections? Modi’s regime enjoys very high approval ratings. He himself is among the most popular leaders that post-Independent India has had. In fact, according to one global survey, he continues to hold the title of the world’s most popular leader, with an impressive approval rating of 76%. His regime will obviously benefit from a number of factors at this year’s polls, which are expected to begin in April.

For one, the Indian economy’s performance has been outstanding, at least in terms of macroeconomic numbers. Not only has India been the fastest growing among the world’s largest economies (its GDP of $3.2 trillion makes it the world’s fifth-largest economy), according to official figures released last week, its GDP surged 8.4% in the last three months of 2023 compared with the previous year, up from a growth of 7.6% in the June-to-September period. India has overtaken countries such as the UK, France, Italy, Canada, and Brazil, and despite challenges like demonetisation, GST reforms, and the COVID pandemic, the economy has shown remarkable resilience. Inequality and job creation remain problematic but overall the Indian economy has fared well.

Besides, the Modi government has accelerated infrastructure projects, such as impressive new highways. On average, 36 km of highways are built daily, more than triple the earlier pace. It has also doubled the capacity of solar and wind-powered energy in the past five years. The average Indian citizen has also benefited from initiatives such as Swachh Bharat (a cleanliness drive), digitisation of subsidy and social welfare benefits, as also housing for the poor, and piped water supply. The Modi regime’s foreign policy stance has improved India’s global standing and its rising stature has rubbed off on people’s national pride. 

BJP also finds support among large proportions of India’s majority community of Hindus, and actions such as the recent lavish inauguration of a temple in Ayodhya on a site where a mosque was demolished three decades ago have only strengthened that support. 

Discordant notes from the South

Still, such positive factors for the Modi government could be dampened by some disharmony. In southern India, the BJP has not fared well. Continued efforts by the BJP and its allies to increase their influence in the south have not been successful. In southern states, the BJP faces strong opposition from regional parties and the opposition’s Congress party.

In Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Andhra Pradesh, and Telangana, the BJP’s attempts to make political inroads have not worked out. In Tamil Nadu, the ruling party is the regional All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK); in Kerala, it is the Left Democratic Front (LDF); in Andhra Pradesh, the government is led by the regional Yuvajana Sramika Rythu Congress Party (YSRCP); and in Telangana, it is a Congress-led government that is in power since December 2023. In Karnataka, the only southern state where the BJP made significant inroads and ruled during 2018-2023 (save a short interruption by the Janata Party), it was dislodged last year by the Congress. 

Let’s do a bit of math. The BJP’s tally from the south in national elections has not been heartening for it either. Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, Kerala, Karnataka, and Puducherry together have 130 of the 543 seats in the Lok Sabha. In the 2019 elections, while BJP and its allies swept the northern states, in the southern states, they managed to win only 30 seats, 25 of them from Karnataka. In contrast, of the 91 seats that the Congress-led UPA won in 2019 Lok Sabha, 58 were from the southern states. The BJP’s foothold in the south is clearly weak.

There are non-political disparities between India’s northern and southern states as well. Data shows that southern Indian states consistently outperform the rest of the country in health, education, and economic opportunities. There is enough evidence to suggest that a child born in southern India is more likely to live a healthier, wealthier, and more socially impactful life compared to a child born in the north. 

Interestingly, at India’s independence in 1947, southern states (Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Kerala, and Andhra Pradesh) were mostly in the middle or bottom in terms of development. However, since the 1980s, southern states have diverged positively compared to the rest of India, with accelerated progress.

The combined population of Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Kerala, and Puducherry is estimated at 250 million, representing approximately 18% of India’s population, but Uttar Pradesh, India’s most populous state, alone has an estimated population of more than 240 million. A lower population has its advantages.

The progressiveness of the southern states and their economic performance is demonstrated by their per capita GDPs and how those stack up with the rest of India’s states and Union Territories. While, small states such as Goa, Sikkim and Delhi understandably top the list of per capita GDP rankings in India, it is significant that some of the southern states such as Telangana (at the fifth spot), Karnataka (at the sixth), Tamil Nadu (at the ninth), and Kerala (at the 11th) are way higher than, say, northern states such as Uttar Pradesh (at 32), Bihar at (33), and Madhya Pradesh (at 25).

India is likely one of the most complex countries in the world with a degree of heterogeneity across regions that is unparalleled elsewhere. The differences are sharpest between the north and the south. Besides linguistic, cultural, and traditional differences with the north, the southern states have never really accepted some aspects of the BJP’s nationalistic stance. The party is still viewed as a northern party from the Hindi belt and Hindi has never really become a part of linguistic array in the south. Not surprisingly, the BJP’s efforts to spread its influence in the southern states have largely failed.

So if we come back to the math and consider the BJP’s aim of getting 400 plus seats in the elections this year, the numbers, as the idiom says, might just not add up.

For more details visit us: https://lokmarg.com/