#everydayquiz #ReadDaily #TheHindu #BusinessStandard #IndianExpress #TheDawn #TheNewyorkTimes #The Guardian #TheFinancialExpress
Financial Express: Economic reforms: Stop complaining
and start working
A common statement made by analysts, rating agencies, multilateral
institutions and corporates is that we need to have more structural reforms.
There is nothing wrong in asking for more reforms, because striving for the
ideal is always good as it brings us somewhere closer if pursued. But, do all
these reforms matter in the short and medium run, or is it just a case of
asking for more when all that is involved is good housekeeping?
If one goes back to FY14 and FY15, it was often
argued that the economy slowed down due to policy paralysis which was the
result of several irregularities in administration, and which ultimately
affected growth. The decline to 4.5% GDP growth, going by the earlier base
year, was largely due to the government. However, when most of these points
were addressed adequately by the new government in a transparent manner, the
growth rates have changed by not more than 1% (by the new methodology). And yet
we are still unhappy with reforms. Is there something amiss in our expectations
and interpretation?
The argument here is that the government, through
policies or reforms, is an enabler of growth, and the basic growth impulses
cannot be changed unless there is money put on the table. We have an acute
demand problem which has to be addressed for any turnaround. Hence, even if we
make it very easy to do business, investment will not come in if there is
insufficient demand. The Fiscal Responsibility and Budget Management (FRBM)
puts constraints on the amount that can be spent by the government and probably
has militated against growth.
The NDA government has unleashed a series of
measures through reforms to drive the economy, which have all been hailed by
industry with the bromide called ‘game-changers’. Yet variables like
investment, corporate profits, growth, inflation, etc, have not really been up
to our expectations. So, what have been the leading reform measures taken by
the government.
First, the Make-in-India campaign covered 25
sectors and the focus is on investment, both domestic and foreign. We have seen
our rank improve on the list of ease of doing business by the World Bank.
Second, the Ujwal Discom Assurance Yojana (UDAY) is
a remarkable scheme that will transform the power distribution sector and has
been progressively accepted by many states. When implemented by states with
corresponding reforms in transmission and distribution (of electricity) and
pricing, the health of distribution companies will improve substantially.
Third is Indradhanush, which is a plan to rework
the way PSBs function, both in terms of business and governance. This is
probably one of the most important banking reforms since the Narasimham
Committee.
Fourth, Pradhan Mantri Jan-Dhan Yojana, payments
banks, small banks are major reforms in financial inclusion which will reach
out to the poor and also help in payment of subsidies.
Fifth, the various insurance programmes for the
poor complement the banking inclusion programmes on the security front.
Sixth is the Start-up India initiative, which
addresses employment as well as funding, and encourages the spirit of
entrepreneurship. Combine this with the Micro Units Development and Refinance
Agency Bank (Mudra Bank), and we can see that a distinct thrust on the SME
segment has been on the forefront of the policy lens.
Seventh is Skill India, which addresses lacunae for
generating such skill-sets that are currently missing and provides an
opportunity for the demographic dividend of the country.
Eighth, the new crop insurance scheme of the
government. It is a progressive reform which makes it easier for farmers to get
cover in case of adverse monsoon rains, and also spares the banks of NPAs and
the government of loan-waiver payments.
Ninth, FDI has opened up to defence and railway
equipment, and limits for insurance have been enhanced.
Therefore, opening these sectors to foreign
investors is a major positive step taken by the government.
Ten, labour issues have been addressed for smaller
units to eschew harassment and provide better facilities for labour, especially
women.
Last, the National Investment and Infrastructure
Fund (NIIF) will provide the springboard for further creation of infrastructure
in the country.
The list is fairly long, at almost one major reform
a month. Other initiatives have been launching Digital India as well as Swachh
Bharat Abhiyan, which are again progressive ones. Coal and telecom auctions
were carried out quite smoothly, which takes care of the issue of allocation of
natural resources. All this has been done by sticking to the fiscal targets as
well as having monetary policy targeting an inflation objective, thus making it
more predictable. In addition, there has been rationalisation of subsidies
which helps in adhering to FRBM norms.
After all this, what are we complaining of in terms
of reforms?
This is important because, ostensibly, there are
three issues that are now being citied as action points. These are goods and
services tax (GST), land reforms and environment.
* GST is in the final stages of being passed and,
given the complexity of the structure of the country and the federal nature,
getting all states to agree is a legislative and logistical challenge. We seem
to be closer to the end now.
However, practically speaking, GST will ease business
and not really add to fresh investment or production. Counter-intuitively
speaking, if it would, then this should be the reason for producers holding
back their output, which is not the case.
* Resolving land sale through a formula is one thing, but be sure that even if it is passed, it will not open the floodgates of investment, as enterprise will complain of the high land cost. One can’t have it both ways.
* Environment is a very circular factor which all countries are aware of, so having prudential guidelines is a must or else we could also go the China way. There can be no compromise on this one.
* Resolving land sale through a formula is one thing, but be sure that even if it is passed, it will not open the floodgates of investment, as enterprise will complain of the high land cost. One can’t have it both ways.
* Environment is a very circular factor which all countries are aware of, so having prudential guidelines is a must or else we could also go the China way. There can be no compromise on this one.
The time has come for investors and entrepreneurs
to stop complaining and take advantage of all the good work that has been done
by the government. We need to show that we react to positive impulses from the
government before asking for more. It would also be interesting in case foreign
agencies list out what they expect in terms of reforms, with some anecdotal
proof of such reforms bringing about big changes in their investment, or
opinion of countries which have gone for the same. Otherwise, it appears that
analysts are just complaining for the sake of it. There is evidently need for
introspection whenever anyone asks for more.
strive
Make great efforts to achieve or obtain
something.
pur·sue
Follow (someone or something) in order to catch
or attack them.
a·miss
Not quite right; inappropriate or out of place.
im·pulse
A sudden strong and unreflective urge or desire
to act.
a·cute
(of a bad, difficult, or unwelcome situation or
phenomenon) present or experienced to a severe or intense degree.
turn·a·round
An abrupt or unexpected change, especially one
that results in a more favorable situation.
hail
Call out to (someone) to attract attention.
com·ple·ment
A thing that completes or brings to perfection.
la·cu·na
An unfilled space or interval; a gap.
es·chew
Deliberately avoid using; abstain from.
spring·board
A strong, flexible board from which someone can
jump in order to gain added impetus when performing a dive or a gymnastic
movement.
os·ten·si·bly
Apparently or purportedly, but perhaps not
actually.
intuitively
In an intuitive manner; "inventors seem to
have chosen intuitively a combination of explosive and aggressive sounds as
warning signals to be used on automobiles"
im·pulse
A sudden strong and unreflective urge or desire
to act.
THE HINDU: Restoring
goodwill with Kathmandu
Nepal Prime Minister K.P. Oli’s
just-concluded six-day visit
to India has come at an
important juncture. The visit came after months of turmoil in the Madhes, or
plains, region of Nepal following protests demanding a more federal framework
in the new Constitution. India had tacitly backed the agitations, which
resulted in a virtual blockade and a shortage of
essential supplies in Nepal. After a prolonged period of vacillation, Mr.
Oli committed to amendments in the Constitution that would satisfy some of the
demands made by the Madhesis.
This yielded an easing of the blockade after the protestors called off their
stir. The net result of the Indian hand in the unrest, and of New Delhi’s
perceived partisanship, had been a resurgence of jingoism in Kathmandu. It was
also damaging for India, as the stand-off drained the goodwill gained from its
commitment to supporting Nepal’s reconstruction after the devastating earthquake in 2015. The two
countries clearly needed to recalibrate their positions, and this is a good
start. Nepal has to maintain cordial relations with India; its economic
dependence, especially as a landlocked state, is well understood and was, in
fact, reinforced during the economic blockade. India too needs a friendly
Nepal, whose geopolitical importance due to the open border between the two
countries cannot be overstated. It is also in India’s interest that there be
political stability in Nepal, to prevent the spillover effect any turmoil can
have for the bordering States of Bihar and Uttar Pradesh and to secure the
republican consensus needed to pull millions of Nepalis out of poverty.
'To that extent, Prime Minister Oli’s
visit has helped reset some priorities. The emphasis by both sides was on
taking forward the reconstruction assistance that India has promised. A
memorandum of understanding in this regard was signed. Other MoUs covered
economic aid for road projects, enhancing power transmission, and easing travel
and transit of goods. As regards the question of the Constitution, the Indian
government had not budged much from its earlier position on the need for a
consensus through dialogue with the dissenting Madhesis to take their concerns
on federalism on board. But Prime Minister Narendra Modi did acknowledge that
the conclusion of the Constitution-writing process is an “important
achievement”. The onus is now on Mr. Oli, his Cabinet and his party, the
Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist-Leninist). They could still project
the halt in the economic embargo and return to normalcy in the Madhes as a sign
of victory and resist any further concessions towards a truly federal Nepal.
But that would only amount to further brinkmanship, which could prove
detrimental again in the longer run. New Delhi too should dwell on the lessons
from the recent deterioration in ties and on the need for a calibrated position
that supports inclusive democracy in Nepal yet does not amount to interference.
Mr. Oli’s visit has demonstrated the importance of high-level ownership of
bilateral engagement to return relations to a mutually beneficial equilibrium.
junc·ture
A particular point in events or time.
tur·moil
A state of great disturbance, confusion, or
uncertainty.
tac·it
Understood or implied without being stated.
vacillation
Hesitation: indecision in speech or action
called
off
to decide that a planned event, especially a sports event, will
not happen, or to
end an activity because it is no longeruseful or possible
re·sur·gence
An increase or revival after a period of little
activity, popularity, or occurrence.
jin·go·ism
Extreme patriotism, especially in the form of
aggressive or warlike foreign policy.
stand-off
a situation in which agreement in an argument does not seem possible
drain
Cause the water or other liquid in (something)
to run out, leaving it empty, dry, or drier.
spillover effect
the effects of an activity that have spread further than was originally intended
tur·moil
A state of great disturbance, confusion, or
uncertainty.
con·sen·sus
General agreemen
budge
Make or cause to make the slightest movement.
dis·sent
Hold or express opinions that are at variance
with those previously, commonly, or officially expressed.
o·nus
Used to refer to something that is one's duty
or responsibility.
halt
Bring or come to an abrupt stop.
em·bar·go
An official ban on trade or other commercial
activity with a particular country.
brink·man·ship
The art or practice of pursuing a dangerous
policy to the limits of safety before stopping, typically in politics.
det·ri·men·tal
Tending to cause harm.
dwell
Live in or at a specified place.
cal·i·brate
Mark (a gauge or instrument) with a standard
scale of readings.
THE HINDU: A sordid record in
Chhattisgarh
Adivasi rights activist and Aam Aadmi Party leader Soni Sori
was attacked by
motorcycle-borne assailants in Chhattisgarh on February 20. They threw an
acid-like substance on her, which left her in deep pain, and her face swollen
with chemical burns. This was not the first physical attack on Ms. Sori. As
international human rights watchdogs have reported, Ms. Sori was also allegedly
tortured and sexually assaulted by the Chhattisgarh police while in their
custody in October 2011. The latest attack on her comes in the wake of a series
of developments that suggests a government-endorsed clampdown on free speech
and dissent in the State. Earlier this month, Malini Subramaniam, a journalist
associated with the news portal Scroll, and Jagdalpur Legal Aid, a group of
human rights lawyers working with Adivasis, were allegedly forced out of the
State for highlighting police atrocities against the tribal population. Both
the journalist and the lawyers have claimed that their landlords were
intimidated by the police into issuing eviction notices on them. It is worth
noting that Ms. Sori had been trying to lodge an First Information Report against
the Inspector General of Police, Bastar Range. She has been leading a powerful
Adivasi movement that has sought to hold the State administration accountable
for the killing of Adivasis in fake encounters, arbitrary arrests, and alleged
sexual assault and torture of Adivasi women by the police and security forces.
She had planned to highlight these issues through a 200-km march from Bijapur,
set to end in Jagdalpur on International Women’s Day, March 8, before she
became a target of the latest attack.
For some time now, free speech and
dissent have been on the retreat in Chhattisgarh. The official excuse for this
has been the ongoing civil
conflict between the state and Maoist insurgents. But the fact that
individuals who have no connection with the conflict are being forced out,
suggests a larger anti-democratic agenda at work. And this is in keeping with
the pattern across the world where so-called underdeveloped but mineral-rich
regions have fallen prey to fierce corporate plunder of natural resources at
the expense of the local population. The Bastar
region is rich in minerals as
also Adivasi settlements, and the people are loathe to giving up their land for
resource-extraction. It is their resistance to being forcibly evicted from
their land — best exemplified in the figure of Ms. Sori — that is the trigger
for the crackdown on democratic rights in Chhattisgarh. Given the current
political scene where a perverse form of nationalism is threatening to shut
down free speech, the attack on Ms. Sori represents another front in the battle
against the criminalisation of dissent. The kind of spotlight that has been
illuminating the absurd charges of sedition against the JNU students needs to
also be focussed on the likes of Ms. Sori who have been waging such battles for
a long time.
sor·did
Involving ignoble actions and motives; arousing
moral distaste and contempt.
Sordid
morally wrong and shocking
as·sail·ant
A person who physically attacks another.
watch·dog
A dog kept to guard private property.
al·leg·ed·ly
Used to convey that something is claimed to be
the case or have taken place, although there is no proof.
tor·ture
Inflict severe pain on.
clamp·down
A severe or concerted attempt to suppress
something.
dis·sent
Hold or express opinions that are at variance
with those previously, commonly, or officially expressed.
a·troc·i·ty
An extremely wicked or cruel act, typically one
involving physical violence or injury.
land·lord
A person, especially a man, who rents land, a
building, or an apartment to a tenant.
in·tim·i·date
Frighten or overawe (someone), especially in
order to make them do what one wants.
e·vic·tion
The action of expelling someone, especially a
tenant, from a property; expulsion.
lodge
A small house at the gates of a park or in the
grounds of a large house, typically occupied by a gatekeeper, gardener, or
other employee.
dis·sent
Hold or express opinions that are at variance
with those previously, commonly, or officially expressed.
re·treat
(of an army) withdraw from enemy forces as a
result of their superior power or after a defeat.
be/fall
prey to sth
to be hurt or deceived by someone or something bad:
plun·der
Steal goods from (a place or person), typically
using force and in a time of war or civil disorder.
loathe
Feel intense dislike or disgust for.
crack·down
Severe measures to restrict or discourage
undesirable or illegal people or behavior.
per·verse
(of a person or their actions) showing a
deliberate and obstinate desire to behave in a way that is unreasonable or
unacceptable, often in spite of the consequences.
BUSINESS STANDARD: Lower
the temperature
On Tuesday,
the Rajya Sabha was adjourned as debate on the suicide of Hyderabad Central
University research scholar Rohith Vemula led to disruption of the House. The
suicide of Vemula, along with the arrests of several students of Jawaharlal
Nehru University for sedition, cast a shadow over the success of the Budget
session and over political discourse in India more broadly. It is incumbent on
the government and the ruling party at the Centre, the Bharatiya Janata Party
(BJP), to lower the temperature of the discussion sharply. This is necessary
not just in order to increase the likelihood that urgent legislative business
is carried out, but also to ensure that division and rancour do not spill over
further into the streets across India. Hopefully, Opposition political parties
would also take the cue and help facilitate responsible debate over policies
and issues in Parliament and outside.
It is unfortunate that many irresponsible statements have been allowed to take over the airwaves, while the person most able to quell the problem, Prime Minister Narendra Modi, has once again refrained from calming passions. Several BJP leaders and legislators have behaved in deeply problematic ways - one was caught on camera beating up a left-wing activist on the road outside the Patiala House district courts in Delhi, another called JNU a den of sex and drugs and meat-eating, and yet others have called for Congress Vice-President Rahul Gandhi to be killed for "supporting treason". One BJP national secretary even reportedly said that Communist legislator D Raja should have his comrades shoot his own daughter, a JNU student, for participating in protests on campus. Nor have the senior-most leaders of the government avoided making such statements. Home Minister Rajnath Singh himself, on the basis of apparently faulty information, said that the JNU protestors were being supported by Pakistan-based terrorist Hafiz Saeed.
While it may be tempting for the BJP to use hyper-nationalism to fire up its base, the dangers of this strategy must surely be apparent. Not only are free-speech principles at risk - an issue the BJP made a great deal of when it was in the Opposition - but as the prime minister himself has repeatedly stated, the success of the development agenda depends on peace and harmony within the country. It is therefore incumbent on all political parties to ensure that they refrain from statements which act against the promotion of peace and law-abiding behaviour. Sadly, Mr Modi's only apparent reaction has not been heartening. In a speech in Odisha on Monday, the prime minister said that "conspiracies" were being "hatched everyday" to "finish and defame" him. He blamed his government's crackdown on foreign funding of non-governmental organisations as a major reason for these conspiracies. This is not a heartening statement. Instead of speculating on conspiracies, the prime minister should prod his party into taking the lead in reducing the temperature of the national debate.
It is unfortunate that many irresponsible statements have been allowed to take over the airwaves, while the person most able to quell the problem, Prime Minister Narendra Modi, has once again refrained from calming passions. Several BJP leaders and legislators have behaved in deeply problematic ways - one was caught on camera beating up a left-wing activist on the road outside the Patiala House district courts in Delhi, another called JNU a den of sex and drugs and meat-eating, and yet others have called for Congress Vice-President Rahul Gandhi to be killed for "supporting treason". One BJP national secretary even reportedly said that Communist legislator D Raja should have his comrades shoot his own daughter, a JNU student, for participating in protests on campus. Nor have the senior-most leaders of the government avoided making such statements. Home Minister Rajnath Singh himself, on the basis of apparently faulty information, said that the JNU protestors were being supported by Pakistan-based terrorist Hafiz Saeed.
While it may be tempting for the BJP to use hyper-nationalism to fire up its base, the dangers of this strategy must surely be apparent. Not only are free-speech principles at risk - an issue the BJP made a great deal of when it was in the Opposition - but as the prime minister himself has repeatedly stated, the success of the development agenda depends on peace and harmony within the country. It is therefore incumbent on all political parties to ensure that they refrain from statements which act against the promotion of peace and law-abiding behaviour. Sadly, Mr Modi's only apparent reaction has not been heartening. In a speech in Odisha on Monday, the prime minister said that "conspiracies" were being "hatched everyday" to "finish and defame" him. He blamed his government's crackdown on foreign funding of non-governmental organisations as a major reason for these conspiracies. This is not a heartening statement. Instead of speculating on conspiracies, the prime minister should prod his party into taking the lead in reducing the temperature of the national debate.
ad·journ
Break off (a meeting, legal case, or game) with
the intention of resuming it later.
dis·rup·tion
Disturbance or problems that interrupt an
event, activity, or process.
se·di·tion
Conduct or speech inciting people to rebel
against the authority of a state or monarch.
cast a shadow over
to spoil a good situation with something unpleasant
dis·course
Written or spoken communication or debate.
in·cum·bent
Necessary for (someone) as a duty or
responsibility.
ran·cor
Bitterness or resentfulness, especially when
long-standing.
take your cue from sb›
to take notice of someone's words or behaviour so that you know what you should do
fa·cil·i·tate
Make (an action or process) easy or easier.
quell
Put an end to (a rebellion or other disorder),
typically by the use of force.
re·frain
Stop oneself from doing something.
trea·son
The crime of betraying one's country,
especially by attempting to kill the sovereign or overthrow the government.
hatch
(of a young bird, fish, or reptile) emerge from
its egg.
crack·down
Severe measures to restrict or discourage
undesirable or illegal people or behavior.
heartening
making you feel happier and more positive
prod
Poke (someone) with a finger, foot, or pointed
object.
INDIAN EXPRESS: Failed state
The collapse of the administrative and law and
order machinery in Haryana, even as the state burnt for five days, has few
parallels in recent times. It has not only led to 19 official casualties, but
also largescale damage to public property — highways, railway tracks and the
vital Munak canal link that supplies water to Delhi — and private
establishments from shops, malls and restaurants to homes, as Jat protesters
and other caste groups went on a rampage against one another and the
government. The state has begun to assess the losses that would certainly be in
the region of thousands of crores. There was, shockingly, no attempt by the Haryana
government to use instruments available to it to bring the arson and violence
to a swift end. The police were simply missing in action; the fact of Haryana’s
constabulary being drawn mainly from the Jat community could have played some
role there. But more than that, senior police officials themselves were
directionless, as they had no orders from the government to act against
law-breakers, and allowed the violence to spread. Within 24 hours, the state
government had called in the army, though this should have been the last
resort. Some of the failure can be attributed to the inexperience of CM
Manohar Lal Khattar and others in his government. But Haryana is no ordinary
state, bordering, after all, the national capital. Some of the worst violence was
actually witnessed in the NCR districts of Rohtak, Sonepat, Jhajjar, Panipat
and Jind. Irrespective of the political skulduggery that fanned the flames, the
Union home ministry and BJP seniors should
have guided the rookies running Haryana on initiating talks with the Jat
leaders much before the agitation blew up into anarchy. But clearly, the Centre
had other urgent priorities at hand, such as dealing with the sloganeering at
JNU and hunting down “anti-national” students, to bother about the violence
that has laid an entire state to waste in its backyard.
Some of the failure can be attributed to the
inexperience of CM Manohar Lal Khattar and others in his government. But
Haryana is no ordinary state, bordering, after all, the national capital. Some
of the worst violence was actually witnessed in the NCR districts of Rohtak,
Sonepat, Jhajjar, Panipat and Jind. Irrespective of the political skulduggery
that fanned the flames, the Union home ministry and BJP seniors should have
guided the rookies running Haryana on initiating talks with the Jat leaders
much before the agitation blew up into anarchy. But clearly, the Centre had
other urgent priorities at hand, such as dealing with the sloganeering at JNU
and hunting down “anti-national” students, to bother about the violence that
has laid an entire state to waste in its backyard.Had all this happened in a
Had all this happened in a non-BJP-ruled state, the
Centre’s reaction would have clearly been different. It will be months, if not
years, before business-as-usual can be resorted to what has been seen as one of
India’s most pro-industry states and its showpiece districts. In the last few
months, Khattar has toured several countries, inviting investment into Haryana.
The government says it will go ahead with a global investor summit on March 7.
But the damage to investor sentiment, on account of a government seen as unable
to provide even a modicum of security to property from rampaging mobs, is
something not to be underestimated. It remains to be seen if heads will roll,
but accountability has to be fixed for the worst statewide law and order
failure India has seen in recent years
col·lapse
(of a structure) fall down or in; give way.
ram·page
(especially of a large group of people) rush
around in a violent and uncontrollable manner.
con·stab·u·lar·y
The constables of a district, collectively.
skul·dug·ger·y
Underhanded or unscrupulous behavior; trickery.
un·scru·pu·lous
Having or showing no moral principles; not honest
or fair.
fanned the flames
to make a dangerous or unpleasant mood or situation worse
mod·i·cum
A small quantity of a particular thing,
especially something considered desirable or valuable.
heads will roll
something that is said to mean that people will be punishedfor
something bad that has happened
The Guardian view on the South China Sea: high
time for compromise
he islands and rocks that dot the South China Sea have historically been of very little
use to anyone, except a few fishermen and guano collectors. Some are completely
barren, some barely protrude above the waves. The few that are just about
habitable are still pretty inhospitable, and global warming may well submerge
many in the not too distant future. Hopes that possession of them would bring
riches in the shape of oil or control of fisheries have so far been unrealised.
Yet these remote scraps of not so terra firma have become the scene of a
contest between China, its neighbours, and the United States that would be
laughable if it were not potentially so dangerous.
The fundamental reason for this is that China, with scant regard for the
complicated and ambiguous historical record, regards most of these specks as
indisputably parts of its territory. Forceful exertion of its claims goes back
at least to 1947, when the Chinese Nationalists landed marines on Woody Island
in the Paracels, forestalling a squadron that arrived too late to assert French
claims, claims that today’s Vietnam has inherited.
It is on this same Woody Island that, nearly
70 years later, China has just deployed surface-to-air missiles, prompting
American charges that it is militarising the entire ocean region. A few days
later China sent fightersto Woody,
and reports are also coming in that it may be building radar facilities on
artificial islands further south. Beijing took these decisions, whether by
accident or design, as President Barack Obama was hosting a summit meeting of
south-east Asian countries, most of whom contest China’s claims, and while the
US secretary of state, John Kerry, was receiving Mr Wang Yi, the Chinese
foreign minister, at the State Department in Washington. This may not have
been calculated rudeness, but it certainly shows a lack of concern for American
sensitivities.
It must be said that none of the claims on
these islands by any country is that well founded, and that others beside China
have in the past fortified islands they believe are theirs. But there is a huge
difference in scale and in projection of power. China says it has sovereignty
over 90% of the South China Sea and in recent years has moved from reacting to
other claims by such relatively low key moves as intercepting and warning ships
to unilateral actions, such as moving an oil rig into areas claimed by Vietnam
and building artificial extensions to islands to make them large enough for
military installations. Such “facts on the ground”, or, in this case,
facts in the sea, may also allow Beijing to claim control of the waters around
them.
China is undoubtedly interested in the marine
resources to which the islands may be the key. The pickings have so far been
meagre, though obviously that may change. But the real motivation seems to be
to establish itself once and for all asthe dominant player among the other states of the region
and in future as a formidable naval rival to America, one that may in time
be able to deny US warships access to what China regards as its waters.
The military installations on the islands
would not be useful if there were ever a real clash with the US. Indeed, they
would be wiped out in half an hour or less, since the US is likely to keep its
military and naval edge over China for many years, and since weapons systems on
tiny islands are inherently vulnerable. But this is clearly not what the
Chinese envisage. Instead they may wish to make naval access gradually more
problematic for America. Mr Wang’s riposte in Washington to Mr Kerry’s call to
“halt the expansion and militarisation of occupied features” was to say that
China didn’t want “any more close-up military reconnaissance or the dispatch of
missile destroyers or strategic bombers to the South China Sea”. Here you have
the makings of a long-term quarrel that could end up in a very bad place.
It is true that the US navy has inherited
from the British Royal Navy the cavalier view that its ships should be able to
go virtually anywhere at any time without asking anybody’s permission. But it
is also true that the Chinese navy is reading from the same texts about
maritime supremacy that inspire the Americans. It would be in the long-term
interests of both powers to reconcile their naval ambitions. It would equally
be in China’s interest to show its neighbours that it is ready to admit that
its interpretation of sovereignty disputes might not always prevail and that
it is open to arbitration, something that it has until nowsteadfastly refused to do. China’s rise, we must remember,
was supposed to be peaceful.
pro·trude
Extend beyond or above a surface.
pret·ty
Attractive in a delicate way without being
truly beautiful or handsome.
in·hos·pi·ta·ble
(of an environment) harsh and difficult to live
in.
sub·merge
Cause to be under water.
terra firma
dry land, when compared with the sea or air
scant
Barely sufficient or adequate.
ex·er·tion
Physical or mental effort.
fore·stall
Prevent or obstruct (an anticipated event or action)
by taking action ahead of time.
squad·ron
An operational unit in an air force consisting
of two or more flights of aircraft and the personnel required to fly them.
be·side
At the side of; next to.
for·ti·fy
Strengthen (a place) with defensive works so as
to protect it against attack.
un·doubt·ed·ly
Without doubt; certainly.
mea·ger
(of something provided or available) lacking in
quantity or quality.
en·vis·age
Contemplate or conceive of as a possibility or
a desirable future event.
ri·poste
A quick clever reply to an insult or criticism.
THE NEWYORK TIMES: What
Today’s Republicans Don’t Get About Reagan
HE supported the biggest amnesty bill in history for
illegal immigrants, advocated gun control, used Keynesian stimulus to
jump-start the economy, favored personal diplomacy even with the country’s
sworn enemies and instituted tax increases in six of the eight years of his
presidency.
He was Ronald Reagan.
The core beliefs that got Reagan elected and re-elected
were conservative: lower taxes, smaller government and a stronger, more
assertive military. But Reagan was also a pragmatist, willing to compromise,
able to improvise in pursuit of his goals and, most of all, eager to expand his
party’s appeal.
The current field of Republican presidential candidates
invokes Reagan as a patron saint, but the characteristics that made him a
successful politician seem lost on them. Instead, they’ve turned his party into
a swamp of nativism, ideological extremism and pessimism about the country’s
future, in direct opposition to Reagan’s example. And they’ve transformed
primary season into a reality show of insults, betrayals and open feuds,
defying the so-called 11th Commandment that Reagan espoused: Thou shall not speak
ill of any fellow Republican.
Once in office, Reagan said that anytime he could get 70
percent of what he wanted from a legislature, he’d take it. Today’s
congressional Republicans won’t settle even for 99 percent: Their mentality has
shifted away from having policies and governing and toward a kind of bitter-end
obstructionism.
In the early days of the presidency of Bill Clinton,
congressional Republicans essentially went on strike, treating any legislative
accomplishment as a Republican defeat, but they came to the table for a budget
deal in 1997. With President Obama, they have largely refused to accept the
basic legitimacy of a Democratic president. The tactical obstinacy of the 1990s
has curdled into the belief that any compromise constitutes betrayal, a dynamic
now playing out in the primaries.
The issue that shows the divide most sharply between
Reagan and the current crop of presidential hopefuls is immigration. In the
past, Republican candidates have been justly criticized for deploying racially coded
messages around crime and welfare. But in the main, the party has for decades
embraced Reagan’s notion of American identity based on immigration,
assimilation and economic opportunity. Every Republican presidential nominee
since Reagan has been a moderate on immigration, and has wanted to bring
Latinos into the Republican fold.
How did the inclusive, forward-looking Republican Party
of Reagan become the crass, xenophobic party of Donald J. Trump and Ted Cruz?
The rise of super PACs and the right-wing media has
disempowered the party’s gatekeepers, while wage stagnation has widened the
opening for populist demagogy. This year’s primary candidates have learned the
lesson not only that exploiting prejudice around immigration and terrorism
works politically, but so, too, does defying the party’s elders and its
official apparatus. Thus Mr. Trump thrives and the establishment favorite, Jeb
Bush, is already out.
A more surprising reason for the shift? Money. In
economic terms, Republican politicians see increasing returns to extremism. The
Citizens United decision has raised the potential financial stakes of
presidential elections for media companies, political professionals and
candidates alike. The presidential campaign of 2016 will most likely cost
upward of $5 billion, more than 10 times the one that elected Reagan in 1980.
A lot of people get rich in a $5 billion industry, and
some are politicians. Mr. Trump is not the only contender to make the
calculation that running for president is win-win, burnishing “brand” value
even for the losers. Ben Carson — yes, still in the race — seems more
interested in selling books than in attaining higher office. Marco Rubio has
already enjoyed years of patronage from a billionaire auto dealer in Florida.
The examples of Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, Sarah Palin
and Mike Huckabee underscore the point that a no-hope presidential run has more
upside than downside. A career as a right-wing celebrity — a stint on Fox News,
speaking fees, book advances — is more profitable than one in the Senate. These
incentives have helped to shift the Republican Party from a party of
opportunity to a party of opportunists.
The loser could be the party itself. Unless it repudiates
the inflammatory rhetoric of the primary, it will lose Reagan’s claim to the
center and become more like one of Europe’s chauvinistic right-wing parties. In
the 1980s, it was said that the Democrats looked for heretics while the
Republicans looked for converts. To watch the spectacle in the 2016 primaries
is to see those tendencies reversed.
am·nes·ty
An official pardon for people who have been
convicted of political offenses.
prag·mat·ic
Dealing with things sensibly and realistically
in a way that is based on practical rather than theoretical considerations
in·voke
Cite or appeal to (someone or something) as an
authority for an action or in support of an argument.
swamp
An area of low-lying, uncultivated ground where
water collects; a bog or marsh.
na·tiv·ism
The policy of protecting the interests of
native-born or established inhabitants against those of immigrants.
bitter-end
until something is finished
cur·dle
Separate or cause to separate into curds or
lumps.
em·brace
Hold (someone) closely in one's arms,
especially as a sign of affection.
assimilation
The state of being assimilated; people of
different backgrounds come to see themselves as part of a larger national
family
crass
Lacking sensitivity, refinement, or
intelligence.
xen·o·pho·bic
Having or showing a dislike of or prejudice
against people from other countries.
demagogy
Demagoguery: impassioned appeals to the
prejudices and emotions of the populace
her·e·tic
A person believing in or practicing religious
heresy.
con·vert
Cause to change in form, character, or
function.
THE DAWN: Syria
ceasefire
THERE is a
concerted international push for a ceasefire in Syria, though strong scepticism
is also being voiced about the latest proposal. The US and Russia — powers that
have been supporting opposing sides in this brutal conflict — are the principal
international backers of the latest peace plan.
Significantly, both the Assad regime and the
‘moderate’ opposition have also indicated support for the initiative, which is
scheduled to go into effect this weekend.
Of course, what fuels scepticism about the
accord is the fact that numerous attempts to bring the Syrian conflict to a
negotiated settlement have failed up until now. If the ceasefire succeeds, it
can lead to much-needed humanitarian assistance reaching civilians trapped in
war zones.
It may also act as a confidence-building
measure between Bashar al-Assad’s government and his opponents — till now both
sides have shown little faith in each other.
But if the ceasefire falls through, we may
well see the Syrian civil war expand into a wider regional conflict, especially
if Turkish and Saudi plans for a ground invasion materialise. That is why it is
incumbent upon all internal and external players to support the peace deal.
It goes without saying that the major
spoilers in this deal will be the militant Islamic State group, Al Nusra and
other extremist concerns which, for obvious reasons, have not been included in
the peace deal.
It is a fact that some of these militant
groups have had alliances with Mr Assad’s ‘secular’ opponents, and will not be
very pleased at attempts to negotiate a settlement.
Along with the Syrian regime and the
country’s non-militant opposition, the US, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and
Iran will have to play major roles in making the ceasefire work and convincing
their allies inside the country to avoid violations of the truce.
This may well be the last chance to resolve
the Syrian imbroglio before it transforms into something unmanageable involving
powers in the region and beyond, while giving IS and other militant groups even
more room to operate.
con·cert·ed
Jointly arranged, planned, or carried out;
coordinated.
cease·fire
A temporary suspension of fighting, typically
one during which peace talks take place; a truce.
skep·ti·cism
A skeptical attitude; doubt as to the truth of
something.
bru·tal
Savagely violent.
spoil·er
A person or thing that spoils something.
im·bro·glio
An extremely confused, complicated, or
embarrassing situation.
No comments:
Post a Comment