Open Letter to Aman Ki Asha Brigade + (Psuedo (Liberals + Intellectuals) x Tukde Gang)

Dear Aman Ki Asha Bridage & Pseudo-Liberals / Intellectuals and others in general,

Thank you for forcing me to wake up from my self-induced writers’ block to respond to the “Aman ki Asha” (AKA henceforth) brigade amongst my friends and acquaintances, who have blamed me for being an arm-chair activist (true) demanding war with Pakistan when it achieves no purpose except loss of lives on both sides. The human cost is too high it seems (which I agree and is true). Their argument can be effectively summed up as below:

The context (we all know):

14^th February 2019 was a red-letter day for the Indian defense forces for all the wrong reasons; a fidayeen attack carried out on the CRPF convoy in Pulwama led to the death of 44 jawans. Instead of red-roses, we had our streets bloodied red with the blood of our soldiers. JeM, head-quartered in the terrorist haven of the world – none other than Pakistan; unabashedly claimed the responsibility for the attack. Whether ISI or Pakistan Army had any direct involvement, it is not yet in public domain; but the irrefutable fact remains that the terror emanated from Pakistan. It is the largest peace time loss of jawans for India in Kashmir since independence.

What many of our anti-Modi Indian citizens claim due to anti-Hindutva rhetoric – it is a tactic by the government to garner votes ahead of the general elections three months from now; also stooped as low as classifying the martyrs according to their castes; all of these intellectuals are alteast college graduates mind you; part of the ‘tukde gang’; ignoring the basic fact that 44 unarmed jawans martyred wasn’t good enough for any Indian to demand for retaliation. In part I do hold Indian media accountable for creating forced hysteria which has given further impetus to the claims of these section of the society.

When surgical strike took place post Uri attacks, it wasn’t a vote garnering tactic then, at a national level; thankfully state elections in 5 states took place before September 2016. The surgical strikes have been vehemently denied till date by Pakistan against all proofs shared. It is a different topic altogether whether the operational details of the strike should have been made public by the Modi government or not for two reasons:

1. Such strikes become difficult to carry out in future.
2. Pseudo-liberals and anti-nationals will always question the motive of the government for making it public in lieu of garnering points by ratcheting up levels of jingoism amongst the general populace.

The knee-jerk reaction (as per pseudo-intellectuals):

Irrespective of the above, it became imperative that Modi government responded by force to the dastardly attack in Pulwama to ensure that Pakistan understands that such attacks will have a consequence and will not go unpunished. My personal assessment amongst these same set of friends and acquaintances was that India will retaliate within 2 weeks; indeed, Indian fighter jets took punitive measures in Balakot and two other locations demolishing Jaish training infrastructure after 12 days; not causing any civilian or military losses on Pakistan’s side (Indian MEA carefully crafted the narrative; kudos to them).

Key Point to note: It was deep inside Pakistan crossing the de-facto LoC in Kashmir; first time since 1971 Indian fighter jets crossed Pakistani airspace.

Pakistan had to respond to save its face. So, it did by intruding inside Indian airspace the next day resulting in the loss of one Pakistani and one Indian aircraft respectively. The fall out of this was the unfortunate capture of the Indian Airforce pilot as paraded by Pakistan in violation of Geneva convention.

For the last 48 hours, there has been constant barrage on social media and news channels, high on adrenalin about how India avenged Pulwama followed by the anguish over capture of the Indian Pilot. Thanks to Pakistani disinformation campaign through social media, it has been able to effectively arm both the arm-chair activists like me as well as the opposing camp of pseudo-liberals calling for opposing set of actions – peace! The pseudo liberal camp wants “Aman, Shanti & dialogue” with Pakistan forgetting the basic facts that:

1. India has been having dialogues with Pakistan for the last 70 years
2. After every major dialogue, Pakistan’s parting gift was Kargil war, Pathankot and Uri attacks.
3. Pakistani Civilian government has no control over India specific policy and hence not the right stakeholder for the Indian government to engage for any dialogues. Still Modi tried to twice.
4. Pakistan Army and ISI doesn’t want Kashmir issue to be resolved as it’s a cash-cow for them. They run the country, manufacturing cereals to cement. Their claim to fame will get demolished if Kashmir issue is resolved.
5. OBL was captured right under the nose of Pakistan Officers’ Training Academy in Abbottabad.
6. Sheltering of JeM chief Masood Azhar and Dawood Ibrahim.
7. Pakistan’s core philosophy is to destroy India through thousand cuts and is ingrained within Pakistani military establishment.
8. Hence, use of Jihadis is Pakistan’s deep state policy; thereby stoking and supporting Khalistani, North-East and Maoist terrorists acting against India’s interests.
9. India did not retaliate after Kandahar hijack or even after death of 166 Indians on 26/11. Did that stop further terrorist attacks in India?

Generic over-arching arguments by AKA Brigade to avoid any conflict with Pakistan:

1. Loss of human life is too high on both sides - TRUE
2. Army is not impersonal; Army families are impacted when they lose someone dear - TRUE
3. Easy to comment on social media being an arm chair activist - TRUE
4. It will lead to Nuclear War - HaHaHa
5. Shanti and peace will suddenly appear out of thin air and resolve everything, once calmer heads prevail it will sort out the issue that couldn’t be sorted out civilly in last 70 years - LOLZ

For point 1 and 2 - In this regard, each defense personnel is very much aware of the risk and pitfalls of the job they voluntarily joined. For them nation comes first. And it is the very same nation that is under attack; for which you maintain a defense force – whose main duty to protect and defend the very nation when called upon to do so. Not sure how many of you know of Field Marshal Cariappa’s son as POW in 1965 war. When General Ayub Khan offered to release him immediately, Cariappa replied, "He is my son no longer. He is the child of this country, a soldier fighting for his motherland like a true patriot. My many thanks for your kind gesture, but I request you to release all or release none. Give him no special treatment." This demonstrates the psyche on which Indian Armed Forces operate.

Let’s not politicize it.

In face of the above facts, let’s be honest and practical; dialogue is a failed process in this situation. If we accept this fact, the logical choice becomes very clear and unidirectional that Modi government has taken – both after Uri and Pulwama. For the first time since Indira Gandhi we have a decisive strong PM who have the guts to take the necessary action, even if its stern.

Can AKA brigade guarantee that, taking no retaliatory measure would have resulted in

1. No further terrorist misadventures in India?
2. Resolving Kashmir issue?
3. Avenging the death of 44 martyred unarmed Jawans?

The answer to each one of the above is NO. If it is indeed no, then according to AKA brigade as last straw is to push for Aman ki Asha because

1. Pakistan may use nuclear weapons
2. We may enter into a long-drawn war like Vietnam and Afghanistan.

Both of the above arguments are naïve and laughable; because:

1. We already had a sub-conventional conflict in 1999 Kargil war without escalating it to a nuclear conflict. As per Musharraf’s latest interview, he acknowledges that Pakistan using nuclear weapon against India isn’t an option as it will destroy entire Pakistan. About time we call it a bluff. Even if tactical nukes are used by Pakistan, it will also lead to Pakistan’s destruction which neither India or Pakistan would want. Pakistan doesn’t have enough range to nuke entire India whereas India does and can nuke whole of Pakistan – that’s the core premise why nuclear war is a bluff; especially because of India’s massive retaliatory policy. Nuclear deterrence has effectively failed – also because of India’s No First Use policy to some extent.
2. Indo-Pak war has been and will always be a short intense war
• Due to international pressure; especially now due to nuclear armed nations rhetoric.
• Pakistan cannot sustain a long-drawn war given just USD 7 billion in reserves against India’s USD 417 billion.

So, what next?

Well, Israel and it’s dealing with such situations is classic case-study for India. When ISIS ran amok in middle-east, they were very careful not to touch Israel – Such was the Khauf! Can India ever reach that stage? That should be the gold standard so that we don’t lose countless lives like Pulwama. Sitting idle and having dialogues is of no use. It’s better to have a decisive war than to lose countless lives under the thousand cuts policy of Pakistan also resulting in the war of attrition that the AKA brigade tends to forget. The decisive victory will result in a longer lasting peace – obviously achieved at a certain cost when everything else fails. It is the last resort for India as all other avenues have been explored. The end outcome of what will happen to Pakistan – there are quite a few narratives, which I leave it to your fertile imagination.

The following tweet sums up my argument; 

So stop with your misplaced notion of war-mongering!

Long Live India. Jai Hind!

Read More »

Theory of Relative Happiness

What constitutes a happy life?

Well, am neither the first to ponder on this thought nor the last. But, this for one, have crossed the mind of many, when posed with a set of challenges to confront.

Few had radical thoughts, that eventually led to establishment of religions. Take for example of Gautam Buddha; sufferings in this world made him renounce the worldly pleasures and seek the path of divinity, founding Buddhism. Not commenting on the other monotheistic ones; founders who found and heard God in the most mysterious of ways. Had they lived in today's world, their views would have had some Freudian interpretation and most probably would have been recommended to undergo some kind of therapies - end of religions - boon or bane - a separate discussion altogether.

But coming to the core premise: All religions to some extent have codified the means to live a happy, healthy life devoid of pleasures. Practically speaking, in today's world, it would rather be an oxymoron.

One unique example comes to my mind in this regard. The recent wedding of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle made memorable by a long sermon on love by Rev. Michael Curry. He had an Apple iPad as his book of sermon that he often referred to; just wondering the possibilities of the discourse without it. Imagine Jesus with an iPad, preaching. Or nearer home, Baba Ramdev and his multi-billion dollar empire of FMCG products that have taken on the heavyweights in the sector and has literally shaken them up to the core. Does he really need that kind of moolah to do good in the society? Or is he just being practical about spreading goodness through his charitable trusts - which by the way am in no way promoting or questioning (*disclaimer in order to avoid being sued of being making a certain section of populace angry).

At the end, happiness is individual centric. While one can radiate and spread happiness, how well it spreads depends centrally on the individual. Be it giving up worldly pleasures or playing PS4 for days at a stretch - happiness is at the core of it. Another example, that of a professional video gamer giving up on relationship with the world's hottest weather girl has raised eyebrows of many - but at the end, being happy is the core motto here.

While many have defined renouncing worldly pleasures as happiness; many have unfortunately found happiness in less desirable means of drugs, alcohol etc, which not only has negative impact on self, but also around others. Albeit, it provides a temporary sense of fragile mistaken happiness, but leads to disastrous consequences in the end. Does the individual in question care? Well, they don’t - most of the time… why? As it provides them happiness…

So what is happiness?

It's relative. Depends on how one defines it in this material world - denounce all or be in love with it as two ends of the spectrum… The Happiness Relativity Spectrum, as I would like to call it...

While founders of the religion fall at one end of the spectrum that gave them happiness, more often we come across people who are in love with money, sex, drugs or alcohol falling at the other end of the spectrum. There cannot be any defined happiness level for every individual as each one is unique. It rather has to be an unique self-discovery that falls somewhere in the middle for most. Be happy and still enjoy the fruits of labour without any overt concerns. If someone is able to guide another in that direction to identify the real happiness, would be doing a better job than all the holy books combined. That would be real happiness at the end. Humans have invented God. Humans have defined happiness. But for sure, neither do we understand God, nor have the patience to find real happiness. That is why, Chris Gardener and the movie, In Pursuit of Happyness remains one of the classics of all time in that regards.

Read More »

SC Ban on Cracker Sale - Is it Judicial Overreach?

Diwali is the festival of lights… not the festival of sound (and pollution).

Keeping this in mind, the Honourable Supreme Court of India has issued an order on the ban on selling of fireworks in the NCR till 1^st November, 2017. This means that there is no ban on bursting of fire crackers.

There are many good reasons that has been cited for this move. First and foremost being the deterioration of the air quality in and around Delhi. Secondly, this almost coincides with the season of crop burning in the neighbouring states of Haryana and Punjab. Lastly, the smog situation in Delhi during winters, despite having the largest fleet of CNG buses and 100% Green Metro (DMRC) and temporary closure of coal based Badarpur Thermal Power Plant. This is not a revelation. This is a constant reminder of the fact of the failure of the central and state governments to tackle this multi-directional cumbersome problem. CPCB (Central Pollution Control Board) and SPCB (State Pollution Control Board) are toothless tigers that have been entrusted to monitor the air-quality. In case of Delhi, CPCB is supposed to send a daily air quality report to EPCA (Environment Pollution Control Authority) that is supposed to implement the “Graded Response Action Plan” formulated by the Union Ministry of Environment and Forest in January, 2017. The State Secretaries have been designated as the Nodal Officers for the implementation.

Courtesy: Hindustan Times

Many believe, it is too little, too late – including me.

We need to have an overarching plan to combat the pollution, not just in Delhi. This is a basic governance problem that has not be effectively alleviated, resulting in the Supreme Court to step in. In this context, much has been highlighted in the media about the petition received on behalf of 3 children last year, that has resulted in passing of this order.

But will this achieve the desired results? Is it not a judicial overreach?

We need to understand that this is a temporary measure, just like the highly debated odd-even scheme. Secondly, why target just Diwali as the festival and why not also include crackers as a whole across all occasions including marriages, Christmas and New year? This shows that the issue is being addressed in a piecemeal approach. Thirdly, why not ban bursting of crackers as well? Fourthly, the livelihood, GST and various other factors have already hit the informal sector hard enough. This will also result in lower income of this population segment engaged in fireworks production. Fifthly, despite 1,200 kg of illegal fireworks seizure since SC ban on the sale, those enthusiastic enough will buy on black market or from places outside of NCR. Lastly, once the fireworks are bought, do the Indian government have actually enough manpower and effort to actually validate whether it was purchased legally?

On the aspect of Judicial overreach, while it is understood that the honourable SC was passing the judgement on the petition submitted by the children last year; should it not be the responsibility of taking the government, the CPCB, SPCB and EPA to task and grill them why the situation remains grim with respect to pollution, especially in NCR that the air is unbreathable and remains at 999 on AQI? The SC may have all the good intentions at the core, but also needs to ensure that the respective agencies entrusted to protect the environment along with the Government are doing their job. Also, just banning the sale and not the bursting of crackers is another example why this order will have limited impact on the pollution.

To conclude, Judicial Activism is good and important in the Indian democratic context. When this turns into Judicial Overreach – primarily due to the failure of Government institutions, this becomes a problem. The current SC order, in this case seems to be a classic catch 22 situation where there is a very fine line drawn between Judicial Activism vis-à-vis Judicial Overreach. As someone said, “Like beauty, Activisim lies in the eyes of beholder!” So, you the reader – be the judge of this situation…

Read More »

Timebomb

A sad sad world… tripping on a landmine

Haze and hail – that won’t let through sunshine…

Was there a loss, when the lost world embraced you?

Did you win when the real world lost you?

Where is the sorrow when you smiled through those glazed eyes & blew yourself up?

Where is the happiness when the mortal fragments are scraped through & stuffed in a cup?

Where is the fulfilment when humanity rejects your ideals?

Why this emptiness when fates are sealed by a name-sake friend that closes a devilish deal?

Deals of sufferings, pain, loss and deaths

The end game is only lying of wreaths

Out of which no one comes out winning

That only inflicts more tears and suffering

A funny world we live in,

Thoughts of which are no longer considered a sin!

Where candle vigil and prayers are held dear,

It’s only a tribute that led to the cause for the depart.

Yet, none is ready to face the real fear,

As the world tears itself apart.

For those who terrorises – they reign through terror,

They are considered by many as martyr

While one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter

Words that you cannot take any longer lighter...

Because, if there is some iota of humanity left,

Then there would be less of lives theft.

Universe goes through ups and down,

Eventually there is zilch value of nickel and crown.

Earlier you understands & gain some moral uplift,

That will be the day, which can be considered a fundamental shift.

A shift so important, which be held dear in glove,

Will be spoken of only love and dove!

But Alas! It’s all a haze and hail,

I can still hear those loud and silent wails…

Read More »

The Curious Case of Kulbhushan Jadhav

India and Pakistan’s diplomatic row has reached to another level. After 46 years, since 1971, India for the first time has approached the International Court of Justice, Hague, in the hope of resolving an issue that could have been possibly solved through bilateral negotiations and backdoor diplomacy. While mentioning this, the author acknowledges the fact that there is every possible chance that backdoor diplomacy might have been tried but failed to yield any results – unfortunately, such actions cannot be brought to public light... just yet.

The issue in question is the Kulbhushan Jadhav’s death sentence row by Pakistan’s military tribunal. While Pakistan claims that he is a RAW agent, sent by India to create unrest in Balochistan; India maintains that he is an ex-Naval officer who owned legitimate business in Iran and was abducted by ISI near Pakistan border. There is contention on both sides – whether he was illegally in Pakistan at the time of his capture or snatch – terminology depending on the intent.

*Courtesy DG ISPR website

The Indian passport in question mentions his name as Hussein Mubarak Patel. This raises more question than it answers. Also, there has been no open decry (that the author is aware of at the time of penning this article) from Indian side against denying the fact that Hussain Mubarak Patel and Kulbhushan Jadhav are two different persons. Here lies a fundamental question on which Pakistani arguments and allegations lie – Why the same person has 2 different names or rather an alias? What was he doing near Pakistani border in Iran? Also his past as an ex-Naval officer doesn’t help much to save him, but raises more suspicion in the mind of the Pakistani establishment.

Even though a lot of reasoning can be provided around his legitimate presence including business that he owns near Indian developed Chabahar Port in Iran (strategically to counter China’s involvement in Pakistan’s Gwadar Port some 50 km away), it still becomes a point of contention – why was the person travelling under the Indian passport that bears his name as Hussain Mubarak Patel instead of Kulbhushan Jadhav? Is it a Pakistani ploy to mislead India? Was there any maleficent intent on the part of the person in question? Did he really pose any legitimate threat to the sovereignty of Pakistan? Well, it will be folly to speculate or answer the question – as whatever possible logical conclusion that might be construed will be without facts to support in the public domain. It will be the only select few at the top echelons at both sides of the government who are fully aware of the truth at this stage.

*Courtesy Asian Age

Now, for the sake of argument – there are four possible theories:

1. Kulbhushan is innocent and no agent of RAW
2. Kulbhushan is innocent at the time of capture but might have different objective
3. Kulbhushan is a legitimate entity, assisting Indian foreign policy, but was in Iranian soil at the time of capture
4. Kulbhushan is guilty as charged by Pakistan

Irrespective of the whether Kulbhushan is guilty or not, he should have been provided Consular Access by Pakistan under Vienna Convention that was denied. It no doubt is a violation of Human Rights. Hence, this calls for review of the legitimacy of the verdict passed by the Pakistani Military Tribunal – which is nothing but a sham (compare this with the open trial of Kasab). This is the cornerstone on which esteemed lawyer Harish Salve has set across his argument that has been hailed as an initial victory for India; which led to the denial of Pakistan playing the supposed confession tape (in all probability obtained under duress) in front of the judges.

But it is not the time to celebrate for India yet, unfortunately. There are dangerous precedents that can be set in motion (you can read it here). There is a pretty good chance that India might lose this case. In all probability, Pakistan might still go ahead and execute Mr. Jadhav disregarding the ICJ ruling even if it’s in India’s favour, or might decide to use him as a bargaining chip in the long run. Kulbhushan Jadhav’s future doesn’t look bright right now, but it is still heartening to see that he is garnering the attention he deserves as an Indian national under foreign imprisonment unlike Sarabjeet Singh or so many umpteen fishermen who are often caught straying into Pakistani waters unknowingly.

Every covert operative is aware of the dangers of operating in the shadowy circumstances and the disavowing protocol of plausible deniability if caught, but that should not lead to any action at all – which has been the Indian stance so far in the last 70 years of independence. There has been the famous case of the American spy Gary Powers who was caught by USSR flying a U2 Recon plane over Russia at the heights of Cold War in 1960-62.  He was eventually swapped with a Russian spy in 1962 after spending almost 1yr 9 months in captivity. Here lies some hope.

If all else fails, there should be an ace up the sleeve that India should be able to utilise effectively and efficiently to ensure that Kulbhushan Jadhav is returned unharmed back to India. Hoping, Lt Col (retd) Mohammed Habib Zahir working for Pakistan’s ISI and supposedly part of the team that captured Kulbhushan Jadhav is possibly that ace – whom Pakistan claims to have been abducted by India from Nepal in a bid to arm-twist Pakistan into submission. Let’s hope it’s true; but hope against all hope – let’s hope it will not come to that. If it does, then let’s be hopeful of an Indian version of Gary Powers. Finally, let’s pray that Kulbhushan, the son of India returns unharmed. All’s well that ends well!

N.B. A detailed transcript of the application submitted by India before the ICJ can be found here.

Additional References:

http://indianexpress.com/article/india/missing-pakistan-operative-was-in-team-that-trapped-kulbhushan-jadhav-death-sentence-india-4609708/

Read More »

Is India's Growth Story that different from China's?

India and China – two largest nations on the Earth in population terms; chose different ways towards their right to self-determination. While India, based on the earlier established limited democratic framework under the British and the GoI Act 1935 decided for a democratically elected bicameral legislature with President as the head of the state; China went for a unicameral legislature with Communism as the core doctrine – what Chinese call as ‘Socialism with Chinese Characteristics’.

Despite China and India moving on different political trajectories post 1940 – both of them have remarkable similarities.  Both the countries gained total control to decide their future roughly around the same time – 1947 for India and 1949 for China. It is notable that both the countries had similar share of world GDP in 1950 [4.2% & 4.5% for India and China respectively] and were agrarian in nature, both had to fight illiteracy, poor health care and corruption; But China today is on much better footing than India, even HDI says so.

The start for either of these countries was marked with challenges – primarily being how to increase the pie to be effectively shared amongst the population?

India followed the Nehru-Mahalonobis model of development favouring heavy industries over agriculture and China followed a similar path – both relying on USSR initially to expand the industrial technology. Both the countries were averse to the idea of ‘West’ helping them, leaning towards self-sufficiency. Then came the famines – Earlier in China as a result of Mao’s ill-conceived Great Leap forward [1958-1961] and in India as a result of poor monsoon [1966-1969]. For India, it was a positive outcome resulting in ‘Green Revolution’. On the other-hand in China, it resulted in heavy censure of Mao. Mao had to launch the ‘Cultural Revolution’ unleashing his ‘Red Guards’ over his perceived enemies consolidating this power from 1966 till 1978. This put Chinese development on a stand-still till Mao’s death in 1978. India faced a similar situation much later in 1975-1977 when Emergency was declared and India witnessed a pseudo-dictatorial regime within a democratic framework. So for both India and China – the periods from 1947-1980 and from 1949-1978 respectively were the age of self-learning through mistakes.

China rebounded harder under the leadership of her visionary leader Deng Xiaoping who is credited with Chinese reform. One of the first things that Deng did was to make China more receptive of growth of its Asian neighbours [Singapore, Taiwan and South Korea] and learn from their experience and implement them under Chinese context. Introduction of Family Responsibility System, allowing foreign capital and opening up SEZs were great steps under communist regime. India partially opened up in 1980’s but the shock of 1991 was the actual turning point when the doors were finally opened to foreign competition ushering in LPG reforms. But, it was easier to introduce reforms in China than in India – due to the political culture in place. Chinese leader had the final say on all major reforms while Indian PM often had to appease a larger audience in the political spectrum to remain in power given the coalition politics.

The key takeaway is Chinese rise as compared to other communist countries seems an anomaly, primarily due to the fact that China has been able to segregate its Political ideology of Leninist State from its economic prerogatives and decisions [allowing limited capitalism within communist ideology]. In India’s case, economic socialism is inbuilt in Indian democracy as enshrined in the Indian Constitution, but still has a long way to go. India’s case seems to be driven primarily by private sector entrepreneurial spirit that is best served by limited government intervention unlike China. License Raj was a glorious failure. In today’s interconnected world, closed economy is a guaranteed failure. A lesson learnt by both the countries.

In conclusion, China will have to eventually address the questions of political ideology when dissent happens – but so long, the economic prosperity ensues, such questions can be kept in check. India on the otherhand may remain a soft-state as compared to China, and little chance that it can ever catch up with China in the next few decades economically, but nevertheless, free speech and actions will ensure that poverty is eventually a bygone word in Indian context.

Read More »

To Be or Not To Be | India's Energy Consumption vs Growth Dilemma

World is witnessing incredible changes in the sphere of environment sustainability in this decade. The steps taken, though tentative, are instrumental in reversing the damages caused due to rapid industrialization over the last 2 centuries.

Kyoto Protocol has been hailed as the most successful initiative so far that had the blessings and willingness of more than 190 countries – an amazing feat. It has been able to heal the ozone layer to an extent in a short span of 2 decades. More recent Paris Agreement on Climate Change was ratified by again a similar number of countries in less than 11 months of its conception – another wonderful feat indeed considering the challenges that are inherently associated with such a large number of countries with their own demands and needs & getting the same accommodated to everyone’s satisfaction as was highlighted by Prof. Ghosh of CEEW at the seminar conducted by Takshashila in Delhi on 5th Nov, 2016.

But few questions remain.

One should ask – Is it enough? There is enough criticism on the content of the Paris Agreement. Firstly, it is largely non-binding on the member countries. Secondly, many estimates suggest that the current commitment of NDCs are too low to restrict temperature rise below 2 degrees, while restricting it below 1.5 degrees by 2100 is more preferable. Thirdly, there are enough caveats for the developed countries to bypass the existing commitments [like purchasing Carbon Credits] – which no doubt is a great instrument in investing in cleaner energy in developing worlds; but essentially provides the right to pollute by more wealthy countries. Fourthly, it has a finance component of USD 100 Billion to be invested by 2025 which seems to be a challenge.

With respect to the last point about climate finance, Green Climate Fund [GCF] was proposed, established and operationalised in COP 15 [Copenhagen Accord], COP 16 [Cancun] and COP 17 [Durban] respectively. The objective was to generate a fund of USD 100 Billion by 2020. But only USD 10.3 Billion could be raised from member countries – with major European Countries facing tough financial situation during the period. It seems the that finance component of the new Paris Agreement is the extension of the same with an extended target. How much of it would be feasible and successful is yet to be seen; given the history of poor generation of finance from the wealthy countries who have a moral obligation to invest in such areas that focus on cleaner technologies.

But still Paris agreement is a positive step in the right direction. It focusses primarily on adaptation of new technologies rather than Mitigation. Thereby, it stresses on use and investment in cleaner and newer technology, rather than implementing safeguard measures and workarounds on the existing polluting means of energy generation. It will be a quantum jump for the developing nations and underdeveloped nations to directly use and utilise these technologies which do not come cheap. It is in the world’s best interests that the developed countries provide these technologies at an effective viable cost and subsidize where necessary along with a liberal IPR policy where required - in order to allow these technologies to be widely adopted; so that the social benefits are not traded off with development goals of these nations.

What should India do?

India has done quite a lot in this regard – slowly gaining traction as a pioneer of thought leadership in this arena. India has in place relevant laws enacted domestically to counter and support the stand it needs to take globally. But more importantly, Mr. Modi has led from the front with the foundation of International Solar Alliance – a grouping of 121 poorer and developing countries, pledging growth with the help of greener energy. Converting this motley alliance of 121 countries into a strong buyers’ club effectively has put the ball in the court of the richer developed countries that has a moral obligation to financially support these countries in the goal of achieving energy independence through cleaner energy without compromising on the developmental aspects.

One aspect that goes in India’s favour is that, there can be proper planning to add new energy sources to the existing power grids – evaluating in advance whether it will be through existing standard power generation techniques primarily thermal and nuclear power plants or through other means like hydel, tidal, wind or solar. GoI has already announced the target of 175,000 MW of renewable energy production to be achieved by 2022 as follows: 100,000 MW from solar power, 60,000 MW from wind energy, 10,000 MW from biomass and 5,000 MW from small hydro power projects. This provides a clear sense of direction.

Subsidies are already in place for both producers and consumers promoting solar energy adoption, especially at individual unit level. But unfortunately, the residential units figure at the bottom of the list of priorities for availing the subsidies [1]. Understandably, schools and government institutions like hospitals are higher on priority, but low income groups need to be kept in mind, specially first time energy consumers who may not have the purchasing potential to avail these schemes. There are few pockets in the country where off-grid subsidised solar energy sets are being provided at a minimal price, but as mentioned, these are happening in pockets.

Second aspect to be looked into is how soon can India reach its peak energy demands? This has various aspects and implications. Firstly, peaking is important to consider if the target of temperature rise has to be contained below 1.5 degrees by 2100. Secondly, later we peak, lesser time we have to cut down on emissions. Thirdly, can India afford to declare the peak emissions like China did [2030] at this stage? This doesn’t augur well for India at the moment, and hence no peak year has been mentioned. It would be more apt to look at the consumption pattern for another decade before a peak year is committed – as we are far behind China as far as development goals are concerned. It is a typical catch-22 situation. So, in short it is in India’s best interests to peak its energy demands as fast as possible – implementing and upgrading its existing energy infrastructure as per the policy defined above.

Last aspect being, can there be some radical means to bypass the entire discussion of energy savings and fight between rich and poorer countries on clean energy adoption and technology transfer?

We need radical technologies to effectively change the current pace of environment degradation – many existing estimates suggest that we might be a little late in containing the damage [2] [3]. There are ground-breaking new technologies like SolarCity and Hyperloop One that are being worked upon which will completely revamp two keys areas where energies are consumed in bulk – Housing and Transportation. Elon Musk’s overall objective is to tie in both of these horizontally with his Tesla project thereby creating an effective loop of energy savings. And the best place on Earth to start with, on a large scale should be China and India – two of the largest and fastest economies where appetite for energy is going to increase in the coming decades. Both India and China has to aggressively support such innovative technologies and embed them as part of national policies on energy – so that the right message is sent out to the world that we are indeed serious about climate change it is not all rhetoric and that we will walk the talk. The current challenges seem to be the investment climate of these countries coupled with complex bureaucracies that has a negative effect on investment from these companies in the energy sector.

In conclusion, there are technologies that are focussing on improving the efficiency of existing energy consumption – vehicles, power generators, etc. A renewed focus is on reduce, reuse and recycle. Actions also underway in creating carbon sinks to suck up atmospheric carbon-di-oxide that acts as a greenhouse gas. But the rhetoric is primarily around containing the temp increase below 2 degrees which may not be enough, especially for island countries. Developing countries and India also need to keep their self-interests intact and there are ways and means that have been highlighted above. It may be about time to take a step back and reassess if the existing solutions should be adequate to address the situation or should we focus more on new radical technologies and investment techniques that has more potential in saving the day and assess their impact – however radical it sounds.

=============================

References:

[1] https://www.bijlibachao.com/solar/procedure-to-get-subsidy-on-solar-pv-systems-through-nabard-in-india.html

[2] https://www.carbonbrief.org/two-degrees-will-we-avoid-dangerous-climate-change

[3] http://www.reuters.com/article/us-climatechange-temperature-idUSKBN0NM40820150501

Read More »