Myanmar by Rajiv Bhatia

New Delhi should capitalise on the momentum from recent state visits by Myanmar’s top leadership to forge a strategic partnership with the country

Two state visits from Myanmar in less than two months — by President Htin Kyaw in August and State Counsellor and Foreign Minister Aung San Suu Kyi in October — have strengthened India-Myanmar relations. Ms. Suu Kyi’s participation in the BRICS-BIMSTEC outreach summit in Goa highlighted Myanmar’s pivotal importance as the land where South Asia, Southeast Asia and China intersect. These developments necessitate a holistic look at Myanmar.

Invitation to participate in a conference in Yangon last week on “India-Myanmar Relations: Federalism at Work” provided a valuable opportunity to this writer to interact with a cross-section of the Burmese elite. Our conversations covered the larger issue: what drives Myanmar today and where it is heading.

Long road to reconciliation

The decisive victory of the National League for Democracy (NLD) in November 2015 and Ms. Suu Kyi’s emergence as the de facto leader of the government in April 2016 represent a historic transformation. After five decades, the generals have taken a back seat — but without loosening their grip on core elements of power, i.e. defence, home affairs and border security. The civilian government works with the military, without controlling it. The people’s voice, Ms. Suu Kyi, has become the government’s public face and top representative at major international meetings.

The NLD-Army relationship has become stable. The shared understanding is that the party would operate within the 2008 Constitution and, in return, the military would allow it to govern. If “redlines” of each side are respected, no serious difficulty is anticipated. However, neither full democracy nor shift to federalism can be introduced without constitutional reform. The NLD has elected to postpone that battle to another day. Happily, political liberties, including “freedom from fear”, are a reality now.

Criticism of the government and Ms. Suu Kyi’s leadership has begun to surface. Myanmar watchers maintain that decision-making is getting concentrated in one pair of hands. New ministers have not impressed people. The second rung of leadership in the party or Cabinet is yet to be created. Parliament is dominated by NLD MPs, but they are under tight control of the party leadership. Consequently, the parliament is not as effective in supervising the executive as it was during President Thein Sein’s era.

The initial hope of the people that a shift to democracy would quickly enhance the quality of their lives is now blended with hard reality: political change does not accelerate economic progress automatically. Nevertheless, the Myanmarese people, patient by nature, are willing to give sufficient time to “Ma Suu” to produce results.

Securing national peace and reconciliation is the government’s top priority. It is a laudable but challenging goal, given the tragic history. Trust between the majority Myanmarese community and ethnic minorities as well as between the military and ethnic armed groups remains low. Buddhist-Muslim equations, notably in the Rakhine State, have become more complex following recent armed attacks on border posts in Maungdaw. The 21st Century Panglong Conference, held in early September, was a good first step, but a long and difficult road lies ahead. Reconciling conflicting positions will test Ms. Suu Kyi’s political and diplomatic skills to the limits, especially as internal problems are linked with China’s motivations and actions.

The Chinese embrace

Ms. Suu Kyi quickly discovered that high-profile foreign policy engagements yield rich political dividends. She readily chose the role to be Myanmar’s chief diplomat. Given her credentials and position in Myanmar, foreign powers — China, the U.S. and India — have had little difficulty in treating her as the real head of the government. India scored a notable gain by having the honour of hosting both the President and the State Counsellor, a privilege not yet extended to others.

However, Myanmar’s most-talked-about foreign relationship is with China. This is not surprising, given the solid political, economic and defence cooperation China has built up over the years. But the China connection is stamped with growing unpopularity. Many Myanmarese recognise that a substantial relationship with China, moulded by potent factors, is inevitable, but also believe democratic Myanmar has “other options” that it must leverage fully. This explains why the Suu Kyi government has adopted the Thein Sein line of a balanced and “non-aligned” foreign policy. A notable difference between the present and previous government is that the former is more anxious to pursue a friendly approach towards Beijing.

In this context, the time for a crucial decision is approaching fast. The government-appointed commission on the Myitsone Dam project will submit its report in November. The Cabinet will then decide whether to revive or “kill” the controversial project for good. While in Yangon, I heard about a possible deal under which the project would be “buried”, but Chinese companies may win new projects of strategic value in south-western Myanmar. It is an alarming prospect that should cause considerable worry in Delhi.

After a slow start, bilateral interaction with democratic Myanmar gathered momentum from June onwards, culminating in two state visits. They now need to be backed by tough decisions by both sides. “Close coordination” in countering anti-India insurgent activity from Myanmarese soil would need more proactive cooperation of the Myanmar Army. Prime Minister Narendra Modi aptly urged Myanmar to show “sensitivity” to India’s strategic interests on a reciprocal basis. The next logical step should be for the two governments to establish a “strategic partnership.” Apparently President Sein was interested in forging it. The new government should go for it, considering its commitment to a balanced policy. (Myanmar already enjoys a comprehensive strategic partnership with China.) India and Myanmar should hold an annual summit. South Block will do well to plan a visit by the Indian Prime Minister in early 2017.

Two other points are noteworthy here. First, I was sad to observe that India is losing friends because of widespread discontent over continuing delay in completion of our flagship projects — Kaladan (that will connect Kolkata with Sittwe port in Myanmar) and the India-Myanmar-Thailand trilateral highway. Conceived over a decade back, they are scheduled to be completed by 2019. Nor is there adequate public awareness about the recent projects on IT and agriculture that our government completed on time. Officials need to develop an effective communication strategy, and a new management mechanism that fast-tracks the flagship projects.

Second, despite mutual consensus on the value of people-to-people exchanges, actual progress is negligible due to the absence of an enabling instrument. The setting up of an “India-Myanmar Foundation” merits consideration. Let the two governments and apex business chambers set aside adequate funds and encourage the two ambassadors (in Yangon and Delhi) to co-chair a board of experts. The proposed foundation, working in conjunction with interested institutions in India’s Northeast/western Myanmar, can easily organise extensive exchanges among media, students and civil society groups.

Until people’s limitless energy is unleashed, India-Myanmar relations may not scale new heights. As Ms. Suu Kyi once stated: “… Governments come and governments go. But the peoples of the countries, they remain.”

Rajiv Bhatia is Distinguished Fellow, Gateway House, former Ambassador to Myanmar, and author of ‘India-Myanmar Relations: Changing contours’ (Routledge, 2016)

-by the hindu

A short note on the development of the tribal people

INTRODUCTION

The tribal population is identified as the aboriginal inhabitants of our country. They are seen in almost every State of India. For centuries, they have been living a simple life based on the natural environment and have developed cultural patterns congenial to their physical and social environment. References of such tribal groups are found even in the literature on the ancient period, right from the Ramayana and the Mahabharatha periods.

The tribes can be distinguished into five broad regional groupings based on

ecological, social, economic, administrative, and ethnic factors (although there are

many overlaps):

1. Himalayan Region: It has three sub-regions: (a) Northeastern Himalayan region,

(b) Central Himalayan region, and (c) North-Western Himalayan region.

2. Middle Region: It is constituted by the States of Bihar, Jharkhand, West Bengal,

Odisha and Madhya Pradesh (including Chhattisgarh), where more than 55 per cent

tribal people of India live.

3. Western Region: It includes the States of Rajasthan, Gujarat, Maharashtra, Goa,

Dadra and Nagar Haveli.

4. Southern region: It is comprised of the states of Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu,

Karnataka and Kerala.

5. Island Region: The Islands of Andaman and Nicobar in the Bay of Bengal and

Lakshadweep in the Arabian Sea.

Meaning of ‘Tribe’:-

As the name implies, tribals are 'Adivasi' or original dwellers, living in the subcontinent from unrecorded time and possibly driven into the forests by more aggressive settlers-Aryans being the earliest one to socially subjugate them. In order to resist complete domination, tribals evolved their distinct identity through endogamy, their cropping pattern, hunting and food gathering. Above all, in their intensely personal relationship with the forest around them, they formed perfectly balanced rhythms which can best be described as symbiotic.’

According to L.P. Vidyarthi; the tribe is a social group with definite temtory, common name, common district, common culture, behaviour of an endogamous group, common taboos, existence of distinctive social and political system, full faith in leaders and self-sufficiency in their distinct economy

P.G. Krishnan defines "tribe is a social group of simple and kind, the members of which speak a common dialect, have a single government act together for common purposes and have a common name, a contiguous territory, a relatively uniform culture or way of life and a traditions of common descent.”

A.B. Bardhan defines the tribe as "course of socio-cultural entity at a definite historical stage of development. It is a single, endogamous community with a cultural and psychological make up.’*

According to D.N. Majumdar the tribe is "a collection of families or common group bearing a common name, the members of which occupy the same territory, speak the same language and observe certain taboos, regarding marriage, professions and have developed a well assured system of reciprocity and mutuality of obligations”

Kamala Devi Chatopathayaya defines "a tribe ordinarily has an ancestor or a patron deity. The families or groups composing the larger units are linked through religions and socio-economic function.”

In Irish history, however, the term meant families or communities of persons having the same sur name. In certain other areas of Western countries and certain period of history, it stood for a division of territory allotted to a family or community.’

Similarly various authors have described the tribes by different nomenclature. Dr. Ghurya named them 'backward Hindhus', Dr. Das and Das rename them as 'submerged humanity'. The other names are Aboriginals, Primitive tribe, Adivasi, Vanyajati, Vanavasi, Adimjati etc.

 In the ancient literature of India such as the Vedas, thePuranas, theRamayana, theMahabharata, the tribals appeared as Nishad, Sabarars, Kiratas, and Dasyas. They are believed to be the earlier among the present inhabitants of thecountry.

The term 'tribe' have not been defined clearly anywhere in the Indian constitution . Only the tern 'Scheduled Tribe' explained as "the tribe or the tribal communities or parts of or group within tribes or tribal communities". 

These groups are persumed to form the oldest ethnological sector of the people."

The term 'Adivasi' (Adi = original and Vasi = inhabitant) has become current among certain people. The International Labour Organization has classified such people as 'indigenous'. According to ILO conventions the aboriginals or tribals have been defined as the "tribals or semi tribal groups of the independent countries deprived socially or economically and having their own customs, traditions and traits or they have their own special customary

laws/ convention.”

A Note on Constitutional Safeguards for Tribals:-

Pre-independence tribals living in forests, hills and even on the plain were isolated from the mainstream. The status of the tribals were unsatisfactory during princely and colonial region. It was a policy of neglect and saga of exploitation. Due to this, their land and forest were slowly and gradually grabbed by the rich people like landlords and money lenders. They were turned into bonded labourers, leading a life of extreme poverty and misery. The excessive encroachment on their rights in forest land led to an expression of anger in the form of riots. Thus independent India inherited a complex tribal problem' from the British colonial system. The major thrust is to solve the tribal problem in view of our commitment to the objectives of social justice, social, economic and political equality of status and opportunity as enshrined in the preamble to the  constitution. The makers of the constitution paid special attention towards the tribal problems and tried to eradicate it for ever.

The concern of the constituent members of the constitution for protection and promotion of the interests of the deprived sections is amply reflected in the preamble of the constitution which was amended in 1976.It succinctly proclaims the aims and objects of the constitution, i.e., to constitute into a Sovereign, Socialist, Secular, Democratic Republic.

The Scheduled Areas and Scheduled Tribes Commission for the Tribal Welfare and Development, 1961 headed by Sri U.N Dhebar observed that the constitution arranged for the provision of resources and provided the required institutional apparatus. Some of the safeguards for the tribals in the constitution were initially in co-operated for ten years. In fixing this period, the constitution had envisaged an effective follow -up programmes which would have obviated the need for their continuance. This hope has not materialised and the period has been extended. But it is observed that this has not been due to any deficiency in the constitution itself. It is the result of deficiency in performance.’

The constitution deliberately laid emphases on both aspects - protective as well as developmental. The members of the constitution were keen that the tribals join the main streams of the national life, in order to retain their traits and cultural heritage. Keeping this  in view, the tribal status in constitution, therefore, made special provision for their social and economic development.

The provisions are contained in Articles 46,244,330, 332, 334, 335,338, 339, 342 and schedules V,VI to the constitution of India. The constitution also permits for change in laws, according to the tribal situation in concerned area.

Concept of Development:-

The term development has been used in a wider sense. The purpose of development is to provide increasing opportunities to all people for a better life. It is essential to bring about more equitable distribution of income and wealth for promoting social justice and efficiency of production, to provide a greater variety of facilities like education, health services ,nutrition, housing etc.

According to ILO, Development involves 'humans' as distinct from material product. It is defined as a process which involves improvement in the quality of life of weaker sections and a greater participation and involvement of the masses in the process of decision making in the economic, social, political and cultural life of a society. To Denis Gonlet "development is not a cluster of benefits given to the people in need, rather a process by which a populace acquires a greater mastery over its own destiny."" Schumpeter defines development as only such changes in economic life that are not forced upon it from without, but arise by its own initiative from within.

 According to Dedley Seers, "Development means creating condition for the realisation of human potential.” Development is an elusive concept and evolves mobilisation of natural resources, augmentation of trained manpower, capital and technical know how and their utilisation for attainment of constantly multiplying national goals, higher living standards and the change over from a traditional to a modern society. The essence of development is generally perceived as industrialisation and modernisation. Development is a multi-dimensional and multi - linear process.

Development is usually conceived as an aspect of change that is desirable, broadly planned and administered or at least influenced by governmental action.

 Thus the concept of development consists of (a) an aspect of change (b) a plan or prediction and (c) involvement of the government for the achievement of that planned or predicted goal.

 The term development is also used for the process of allowing and encouraging people to meet their own aspiration.

The main aim of development is to increase national as well as per capita income and to raise the standard of living of the people and secure justice, freedom, equality and security for them in society. The focus of development is now increasingly on 

1. equitable distribution of wealth and income 
2. full utilisations of manpower. 
3. better utilisation of natural resources, and 
4. protection of human environment, etc.
   
    Hence, Development means change plus growth i.e., it includes growth, modernisation, increase in social facilities, etc.

Tribal Development : Meaning and Scope

The goal of tribal development in India were best summarised in Nehru’s forward to Verrier Elwin's Book on NEFA . It is otherwise known as "Tribal Panchsheel."" The Nehru's Panchsheel (five point) are:

1. People should develop along lines of their own genius and we should avoid imposing anything on them. We should try to encourage in every way their own traditional art and culture.
2. Tribal right in land and forests should be respected.
3. We should try to train and build up a team of their own people to do the work of administration and development. Some technical people from outside will no doubt be needed, especially in the beginning. But we should avoid introducing too many outsiders into tribal territory. 
4. We should not over administer these areas or overwhelm them with multiplicity of schemes. We should rather work through and not in rivalry to their own social and cultural instructions, and
5. We should guide results not by statistics or the amount of money spend but by the quality of human character that is involved.

This five point formula enunciated by Nehru stand as the comer stone of the India's government policy. This was further elaborated by Elwin, who emphasised the need for the tribal people to come to terms with their own past avoiding danger of pauperism and without creating a sense of inferiority. Elwin stressed on recognising the contribution of the tribal people in helping the Indian Society as a whole, so that they may feel as they are the part and parcel of India as any other citizen.

Dr. B.S. Guha explained the tribal welfare goals in such a manner that "schemes for tribal welfare must fulfill two essential conditions namely, conformity to the social values and patterns of the people for whom they are intended and the psychological receptivity and ability of the tribal population to absorb them. Theoretical perfection of a scheme or its suitability to people in general must not be regarded as the criterion for tribal people. Ignorance of these basic facts and inability to appreciate them are responsible for the failure of many developmental programmes which by themselves are unexceptionable.”

Dr.Guha further commended about tribal development that, isolation and absence of interaction with other communities are injurious to the people. The views put forward here are motivated by these consideration only and not framed with the purpose, conscious or unconscious of attempting to keep the tribal people as "museum specimens" as is so often wrongly attributed to the

anthropologists. To allow a tribe to retain its traditional value and the mode of life in its natural setting and give it the chance to develop along its own genius is the very reverse of the 'museum specimens' idea!

Tribal development aims at increasing the incomes and strengthening the material aspects of tribal culture through better utilisation of the environmental resources, i.e, forests, minerals, flora and fauna, agriculture, animal husbandry, industrial potential as wells as skill of the tribal people.

The goals of tribal development can be summarised into

 1). Long term objectives and

2 Short term objectives.

The long term objectives are

 (a) to narrow the gap of development between non- tribals and tribals.

 (b) to improve the quality of life without disturbing their ethnicity

The short term objectives are-

1. elimination of exploitation by all means, by rapid socio-economic development ,
2. improving organisational capabilities and
3. building up inner strength of the tribal people.

Tribal development is often taken as synonymous with rural development. The tribal situation in the country presents a varied picture. Some areas have high tribal concentration, while some have no tribals. The developmental parameters of each tribe is different and it depend on the inhabitants and their settling conditions. The tribal development scene was critically reviewed on the eve of Fifth Plan. The review of the first Tribal Plan 1974-79was also discussed in the report of the working group on tribal development, during the Sixth Plan (1980 -85) under the chairmanship of B.G. Deshmukh. In respect of "tribal concentrated areas", it was decided to accept an area development approach with focus on a family oriented programme for tribals and for dispersed tribals.

Approaches for Tribal Development

There are mainly five approaches which have been employed so far in the welfare of tribals in India. 

The approaches are :

1. Political approach.
2. Administrative approach. 
3. Religious approach with special reference to missionary approach.
4. Voluntary agencies approach.
5. Anthropological approach.

Political approach:-

The political approach for the tribal welfare may be understood in the context of the pre and post-independence period. The colonial rule created "excluded" and "partly excluded" areas and gave separate political representation to the tribes. Nationalists opposed these measures as part of a diabolic conspiracy to a new separatism.

After independence, the constitution has given the tribals a number of safeguards by considering them to be the weaker section of the population. In the first instance a period of 10 years was given to achieve the goal, but as the problem was too complicated to be solved through a single decade, it has persisted through decades.

Through affirmative action, Tribals get 7% of seats in Parliament, Vidhan sabhas and Local governments.

Administrative Approach:-

The administrative approach is closely followed by the political approach. The government of India has constituted a vast administrative machinery for tribal welfare.

At the State level, the governor has been made responsible and on his behalf the chief minister and welfare minister are in charge of the special schemes to be implemented in the tribal areas. In some major concentrated tribal areas, the State has an independent tribal welfare ministry. The welfare ministry is advised by two bodies. The Tribes Advisory Council and the Tribal Research institute are framing the political programmes for tribal welfare.

ReligiousApproach:-

The religious approach has been attempted by different religious agencies like Christian missionaries, the Ramkrishna mission, the Arya samaj and other local religious institutions which are engaged in the welfare works for the tribals.

The Christian missionaries have been active in tribal India. For both types of work, spiritual and material, the missionaries did realize the importance of understanding the tribal culture and language. Missionary welfare activities have been viewed by different persons in different ways.

VoluntaryAgenciesApproach:-

Under the voluntary agencies approach social workers, social welfare agencies, social movement agencies, social reformers, etc., are working to uplift the weaker section of our society in their own ways. Voluntary social services organizations have done considerable humanitarian work in the tribal areas but their idealism and spirit of service have not been matched by their understanding of tribal organisation, values and problems.

Anthropological Approach:-

Anthropologists believe in the ultimate integration of tribes into the mainstream of national life. After independence, some anthropologists came out with several papers and addresses, dealing with the importance of applied anthropology in tribal welfare programmes. The various tribal research institutes are engaged in conducting researches on Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. Besides, many University Departments in the country undertake research on them.

Whatever the approaches are being taken, it is important to integrate the tribal people in the national mainstream. But the problem is that national mainstream is very wide. Unfortunately the main propose to integrate these tribals with the mainstream is left aside since there are innumerable problems that have emerged on account of their so called integration in the national mainstream: The important problems identified as the "Chaos of Values" and "Counter Values" and the consequent break up of the social The contacts of the tribals with the urban people have also created problems of adjustment. The tribals suffer also due to inferiority complex. There are problems of alienation of land in their native  places. The fertility of land also get reduced due to carelessness. There is heavy economic loss due to indiscriminate deforestation. Owing to the impact of governmental programmes and modernisation, tremendous changes took place in the living conditions of the tribal community. The tribals in India are passing through a phase of economic change along with the rest of the society. Modem technology and concepts are penetrating their culture. The factors that are shaping the future of the tribal welfare are

 (a) education,

 (b) exposure to urban market forces

 (c) the co- operative movement and 

(d)banking.

Research Problem

The tribal development measures adopted during the second half of this century are found to be insufficient in improving the economic conditions of the tribals. Even after the introduction of several welfare measures, the tribals are still facing several economic and social constraints. 

Therefore, it is necessary to evaluate the various developmental programmes undertaken during the last five decades. Moreover, an analysis of the socio-economic development of tribals in Kerala and the extent of the human development they achieved are also imperative.

Indicator Species,Smooth Coated Otter

During the Course of the Mangrove destruction(both natural and man-made), It is welcoming step in finding the Smooth Coated Otter on the banks of mangrove forest in Wild life sanctuary of Krishna District,Andhra Pradesh.

Scientific Name of the smooth-coated otter is Lutrogale perspicillata. 

Smooth-Coated Otter is one of the Ecological Indicator Species. Otter,Which are found playing and preying in the brackish water of the Eelachetladibba and Lankevennedibba krishna district, indicates the Rise of the Mangrove Cover. The otter lives in rivers, lakes, peat swamp forests, mangroves and estuaries. It uses swamps as natal den sites and nursery during early winter, the breeding season.

Polygamous behaviour

Males are polygamous mating with up to the four females, according to the IUCN. The Smooth-coated otter predominantly preys on the fish but often eats shrimp and crab.

Changing the course of the planet by Arunabha Ghosh and Vaibhav Chaturvedi

At Kigali, India has once again demonstrated willingness to be part of a multilateral climate deal while being able to secure a differentiated outcome for itself

After seven years of negotiations, on October 15, 197 countries reached a historic agreement in Kigali, Rwanda, to amend the Montreal Protocol and phase down hydrofluorocarbons. HFCs are refrigerant gases used for commercial, residential and automotive purposes (and in other applications) but are hundreds to thousands of times more potent that carbon dioxide. They were meant to replace HCFCs in order to protect the ozone layer but their global warming potential (GWP) has increasingly become a matter of concern in climate negotiations. The Kigali Amendment is one that could avoid global warming by up to 0.5° C. What did India gain? What should India do?

The Kigali Amendment is not as ambitious or as flexible as desired. Earlier proposals from North America, Europe and Small Island States had demanded a 2021 freeze date for HFCs for all countries. India wanted a 2031 freeze date. Eventually, developed countries agreed to an earlier baseline (2011-13) and freeze year (2019). For most developing countries (including China), the baseline was set at 2020-22 with 2024 as the year to cap HFC use. But India and a few other developing countries got a later baseline (2024-26) with HFCs freezing only in 2028. By not satisfying all the demands of all the countries, the Kigali Amendment signals a good compromise. But before any blame is attributed (or credit claimed), it is important to understand why India demanded differentiated treatment.

Why latitude for India

India and China are the only developing countries that manufacture HFCs. But China’s output is much bigger given its significantly larger share of the global air conditioner market. Even in 2050, India’s HFC emissions under business as usual would have been 7 per cent of the world total against China’s 31 per cent. Moreover, according to analysis by the Council on Energy, Environment and Water (CEEW), India’s A/C market and HFC consumption picks up only after 2025. So, differentiation with China, which will witness rapid emissions during 2015-2030 (and has to act sooner), was warranted. The deal accounts for differences in current consumption, future growth and overall income levels.

Action prior to 2028 would have imposed additional costs of currently much more expensive alternative refrigerants. In the residential sector, the only viable alternative is propane (R290). The other alternative is R32, although it too has a relatively high GWP of 675. Hydrofluoroolefin (HFO) blends remain expensive. HFO1234yf (an alternative for mobile air conditioning) is anywhere between four and 10 times more expensive than the current gas in use. HFO1234ze, which can be used in some commercial applications, is cheaper but for other types of commercial A/Cs there are no viable alternatives.    —>Alternatives.

The cost burden is not merely of alternative refrigerants but includes the one-time cost of product redesign, servicing equipment, training of servicing personnel, and per unit equipment costs. In the lead-up to the Kigali meeting, a $53-million philanthropic initiative was launched for energy efficiency measures in developing countries as a complement to shifting to HFC alternatives. While welcome, the actual costs of transition would be much higher. A CEEW-International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis study found that for India, economy-wide costs of an HFC phase-down could be €12 billion (sum of undiscounted costs, 2015 prices) under the original Indian proposal and €34 billion under the North American proposal between 2015 and 2050. 

India wanted extra time until more information became available.

The agreed decision requires the Montreal Protocol’s Multilateral Fund to cover incremental costs related to production, consumption, servicing and patents. But it is unclear how much of the total costs will get covered until the guidance document on calculating costs is prepared.

Another concern for India was access to technology. Many alternative gases are not manufactured in India currently, although firms are moving in that direction. Ideally, if more (patent-free) alternatives emerged, and their prices fell rapidly, India should be prepared to voluntarily begin a phase-down even earlier, despite the later date it has secured in the negotiations.

The other aspect of technology is the need to test alternatives under India’s high ambient temperature conditions. Testing for some chemicals has already begun but further verification was necessary before India could firmly commit. This is one reason why, in September, India announced a domestic, collaborative R&D programme to develop next-generation, sustainable refrigerants.

Gains from Kigali

Overall, India’s primary gain is that it has once again demonstrated willingness to be part of a multilateral climate deal while being able to secure a differentiated outcome for itself. The deal allows India’s heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) sector to grow while giving time to refrigerant manufacturers to shift to alternatives. Second, a review of technological options is also envisaged so that India is not left stranded in 2028. Third, despite the three baselines, the bulk of global HFC emissions starts getting phased down earlier, delivering a massive gain for the fight against climate change. Fourth, the deal is legally binding, and failure to act could invite non-compliance proceedings, making it a more effective deal than the Paris Agreement on Climate Change.

It is important to recognise how research, analytics and consultations can help to move the needle and change the course of the planet. Until two years ago, India was unwilling to even negotiate HFC phase-down under the Montreal Protocol. Extensive research within India combined with several rounds of consultations between government, industry and civil society helped to prepare the ground for a more informed and proactive approach to the negotiations. The narrative of the global HFC negotiations also shifted, from merely ambition to include economy-wide costs, differentiation, and high growth rates. Rather than rest on negotiated laurels, Indian industry now has to recognise the shifts in global markets, invest in technology and nudge consumer behaviour towards more efficient and less damaging refrigerants. The international result is welcome; attention now shifts to domestic action.

Arunabha Ghosh is CEO and Vaibhav Chaturvedi is Research Fellow at the Council on Energy, Environment and Water

(Inputs from the hindu)

Indo-Russian Relations by P.S.Raghavan

Bilateral agreements and the informality of the one-to-one conversation between PM Modi and President Putin in Goa have showcased the strength of India-Russia ties

The India-Russia summit in Goa on October 15 was high on both symbolism and substance. The joint dedication by Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Russian President Vladimir Putin of Unit 2 of the Kudankulam power plant and the “pouring of concrete” for Units 3 and 4 projected a unique partnership in nuclear energy: eight years after India’s foreign collaborations in civil nuclear energy were legitimised, Russia remains the only foreign country involved in nuclear power production in India. Mr. Modi invoked a Russian proverb to reaffirm India-Russia friendship in a changing world: “An old friend is better than two new ones.” The informality of a one-to-one conversation of the leaders over lunch also showcased the intimacy of relations.

Pillars of the partnership

The bilateral agreements and the joint statement contained significant substance. The three defence cooperation projects are notable, not only for their functional importance, but also for the speed of their progress from announcement to agreement. The decision to jointly manufacture Kamov Ka226T helicopters in India was announced in 2014, an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) was concluded in 2015, and a shareholders’ agreement was signed in Goa. The S-400 air defence system and building of naval frigates have taken an even shorter time from conception to IGA. This is a refreshing departure from the glacial progress of most defence projects. Two other decisions could have a far-reaching impact on India-Russia defence cooperation: the establishment of a ministerial-level Military Industrial Conference to identify new projects and resolve pending issues, and a Science and Technology Commission to facilitate development and sharing of cutting-edge technologies.

These agreements consolidate Russia’s position as India’s principal defence partner. Over the past 10 years, Russia provided 70 per cent of India’s defence imports; the U.S. was next with 14 per cent. About 70 per cent of our weapons and equipment are of Russian or Soviet origin. Diversification of defence acquisitions will necessarily be an extended process. The Russian partnership has a role even in this process: it can be leveraged to increase benefit from other partnerships. Whether it is technology or other support, the Russian benchmark is what other partnerships will be pressed to match. The more we raise this benchmark, the more we benefit.

The effort to strengthen non-defence pillars of the India-Russia partnership shows progress. Agreements for Units 5 and 6 in Kudankulam are under finalisation and six more units are in the pipeline. There are major developments in hydrocarbons: in the last four months alone, Indian companies have invested about $5.5 billion in the Russian oil and gas industry. Equally significant is the acquisition, by a consortium led by Russian oil major Rosneft, of about 98 per cent of Essar Oil and its Vadinar port in a cash deal worth $13 billion. A joint fund of $1 billion, equally shared by Russian sovereign fund RDIF and our National Investment and Infrastructure Fund (NIIF), is to promote investment in infrastructure and technology projects. The agreement for information security cooperation should enable India to benefit from Russia’s globally acknowledged expertise in cyber technologies. There has been a significant increase in university exchanges and joint science and technology research projects funded by the two governments.

Areas that need improvement

As yet, however, the effort to broad-base the India-Russia economic partnership has not percolated fully to our private sector industry, whose attitudes are shaped by some experiences of the past and unflattering images of Russia in the international media. The popular narrative of a floundering Russian economy distorts reality. International Monetary Fund (IMF) statistics highlight some strong fundamentals of the Russian economy: a healthy current account surplus, low unemployment (under 6 per cent), undervalued corporate stocks and external sovereign debt of only 13 per cent of GDP. The IMF has progressively upgraded its outlook on the Russian economy, now predicting growth of over 1 per cent in 2017.

There is also misinformation about sanctions. The sanctions against Russia bind only a few countries — G7 and the European Union — and are specific in their application. European businesses have found channels to circumvent them. Recent investments in Russia by our hydrocarbons companies have also shown the way. The RDIF-NIIF fund provides an opportunity to cast off misconceptions about the Russian economy and sanctions.

The joint statement declares “zero tolerance for direct or indirect support of terrorism”, stressing the need “to deny safe havens to terrorists”. In Afghanistan too, it calls for eliminating “terror sanctuaries, safe havens and other forms of support to terrorists”. The target of these references is clear.

Russia reaffirmed support for India’s permanent membership of the UN Security Council. India “recognised” Russia’s efforts for a political settlement in Syria. The call for full implementation of the Minsk Agreements of February 2015 echoes Russia’s position on Ukraine.

Diplomatic norms preclude public airing of areas of “concern” in the relationship that were discussed in the closed-door meetings. On the Indian side, these relate to aspects of Russia-China relations and Russia-Pakistan defence links — dramatically highlighted by joint military drills barely a week after the Uri attack. India’s Foreign Secretary confirmed in his press briefing that India received satisfactory assurance that Russia will not take any step detrimental to India’s security interests. The joint military drills have been privately explained by Russians as inspired by elements inimical to India in the Russian establishment. India cannot accept this explanation, even if it is true. As a former Indian Foreign Secretary wrote recently, this action is as provocative as a joint India-Ukraine military exercise near Crimea would be to Russia. Ways have to be found to prevent such crossed wires. On Russia’s arms supplies to Pakistan, the CEO of Rostec, the apex holding company of the Russian defence industry, confirmed publicly that besides four Mi-35 helicopters, no other military equipment supply to Pakistan is in the pipeline. While welcome, this assurance needs a continued reality check.

The pursuit of strategic interests in the global geopolitical environment dictates alignments along multiple axes. Russia pursues a “multi-vector” foreign policy, dealing with countries of widely divergent perspectives. Contacts with Japan, Turkey and Saudi Arabia are examples. The partnership with China and dalliance with Pakistan are part of this mix. Equally, India is broad-basing its international engagement to maximise its room for manoeuvre.

This new dynamic has not diminished the political and strategic relevance of India-Russia relations. India-Russia, India-U.S.-Japan and India-West Asia alignments are not mutually exclusive. Some strands of cooperation from these alignments could intertwine, since there are common interests across them.

A frank and continuous high-level dialogue, reinforced by regular backchannel communications, should ensure that each partner remains sensitive to the core concerns of the other and discordant public messaging is avoided.

P.S. Raghavan is a former diplomat, and was Ambassador of India to Russia (2014-16). The views expressed are personal.

(Inputs from the hindu)