Budget -21, Reform push and Time to Market!

There have been budgets in the past which have sort of quickly moved away from the headlines. And there have been budgets which remained in the headlines but for all wrong reasons. This year’s budget, incidentally the 8th one from the Modi Sarkar presented by Nirmala Sitharaman has managed to hog the limelight for all the “right” reasons. The pun here is well intended.

Talking of the reaction to this government’s previous budgets, it’s always been muted and for obvious reasons. Ever since Narendra Modi became the Prime Minister way back in 2014 that too with a clear majority, the expectation has been that he will bite the bullet on many of the much needed, long pending reforms. Honestly, the previous budgets of the Modi Sarkar were mostly incremental budgets with some increased allocations here, some improved programs there and so on. “What’s the Big Idea”? ‘Where are the Big bang reforms?” were some questions hurled by the commentariat post every budget. It has been my observation that under Modi, the budgets have just become an annual statement of allocations and outlays while Big Ideas whether it was the Swachh Bharat Abhiyan or the Ujjwala Yojana et al were launched outside of the budget. But in this year’s budget, there has been a welcome change to announcing some “Big Ideas”.

The positive vibes around this year’s budget can be attributed to the announcement of few big ideas which have been reformist in nature, while keeping the budget free of any “bad news”. One is the announcement of the setting up of an Asset Reconstruction Company (ARC) which is a euphemism for a “Bad Bank”. Second, is the statement of intent on “privatisation” of two Public Sector Undertaking Banks and one General Insurance company. So far, governments have been taking umbrage under the term – Disinvestment without putting out the word “Privatisation” so openly.

Not just the budget, but the announcement has been followed up by speeches in the parliament and other forums by those who matter in the government, on the seriousness of the intent. In fact, as per news reports, Niti Aayog has recommended to cut the number of state owned Public Sector Undertakings (PSUs) to just 24 from over 300 that exist today. If this programme takes off, it will make Modi a reformist of “Thatcherian” proportions. If you recall, Margaret Thatcher way back in 1979, on assuming power systematically embarked on a reform program to revive the British economy. She deregulated markets, cut tax rates, removed exchange controls and consigned militant trade unions to oblivion. But, it is the privatisation of State owned corporations like British Steel, British Petroleum, British Telecom and British Airways that stays as her enduring legacy till today. So, what Thatcher achieved in the early 80’s in the United Kingdom is what Modi is embarking to do in India after forty years. That brings to the next point of this post which is the important piece of “Time to Market”.

In business, Time to Market is nothing but the time taken by a company to launch a product or a service from the date of firming up on an idea.  For companies, this is an important issue in new product introductions.  In businesses that are highly competitive or for that matter any business, you cannot afford to have a long Time to Market.  That would run the risk of your competitor getting ahead or consumer preferences changing that makes the idea less relevant or even redundant.  I believe that even in the matter of reforms for a government, a short Time to Market is critical. And as a country, our track record on that front is unenviable so far.

In the context of reform push, I believe there are three stages namely – Idea, Intent and Implementation. First, the idea is just floated in a budget speech or on important occasion/forum. Then the Intent is demonstrated when the idea is given a proper shape, laws are formulated if there is a need and resources are allocated.  Implementation is when finally the reform becomes a reality and is rolled out. So, in India if you see the history of Time to Market on important reforms, it doesn’t pose a pretty picture.

For example, take the case of a reform like Aadhaar. The idea and need for a unique citizens identity card was floated way back in 2001 by an Empanelled Group Of Ministers (EGOM) chaired by the then Home Minister L.K. Advani during the Vajpayee led NDA regime. It was only in 2009, when the intent was demonstrated by the UPA government led by Manmohan Singh with the announcement in the budget and then following it up with the set up if UIDAI (Unique Identification Authority of India) under the leadership of Nandan Nilekani. And finally, the first Aadhaar card was issued to a citizen in September 2010. So, from the idea to the launch it took a good 9 years. In the case of GST, from the time of the floating of the idea way back in 2000 to showing the intent in the budget in year 2005 to finally launching GST in India in 2017, it took seventeen years.

In the case of the policy of allowing 100% Foreign Direct Investment in retail however, from the stage of the Idea to Intent to Implementation, the landscape of retail has changed. India doesn’t still allow 100% FDI in multi brand retail. This was seen as an important reform in attracting FDI and employment generation a decade ago. But now with the advent of E-Commerce where 100% FDI is allowed in the marketplace model, 100% FDI in Multi-brand retail is no longer seen as a constraint. In other developing countries like Thailand foreign direct investment in retail gave a huge boost to the economy. But India missed that boom because of the dogma around FDI in multi brand retail which stretched the Time to Market on that reform.

Ergo my point is, if the reforms which have been announced in this budget have to make an impact, short Time to Market is critical. Having floated the Idea of a Bad Bank, it is important to follow up quickly with the formation of the ARC and eventually roll it out within this year itself so that the PSU banks can be freed of the stressed loans and they can get back to lending with more ease. Similarly, in the case of privatisation of PSU Banks, the idea has been floating for a while now. But this is the first time, the government has expressed its formal intent via the budget speech. The road to privatisation is not going to be easy at all with trade unions already gearing to pick up the gauntlet with the government. I though believe just as the mass VRS issue in PSUs like MTNL and BSNL etc. went through in spite of stiff resistance from trade unions, this time, the government may be able to pull it off with a few hiccups. Or so I hope.  Also, while the stock markets are on a high this year, the government can manage to get better valuations.

In the run up to the 2014 Lok Sabha elections, Modi repeatedly talked of “Less Government, More Governance” and “Government has no business to be in business” – thoughts which signalled a clear Rightward tilt on the economic philosophy front. However, till this budget speech, we didn’t see much of action towards withdrawing the government from running many businesses. This budget from that sense is critical in signalling the government’s intent towards moving away from running inconsequential businesses, which is a good sign. And, if the intent is translated into action in a reasonably short Time to Market, then it will be Narendra Modi’s lasting legacy in changing the economic course of this country.

Post Script: If Aandolanjivis are those who make a living out of protests, what about taxing them? And what would be the Time to Market for this idea? 😁

Thank God It’s a New Year!

In all these years so far in my life, never have I seen such wholesome relief in people on the passing by of a year. Year 2020 has been one of a kind. Not that there have been bad years before. But in the past, a year would have been labelled annus horribilis probably due to a natural calamity, a sad event/s, an economic bad spell and so on. Also, it so happens that a year turns out to be worse for some regions/countries in the world and better for others. But 2020 turned out to be a disaster for almost most part of the year due to the Corona Virus which did not spare any part of the world. The same time last year, as people ushered in another New Year with the usual sense of happiness and glee, none saw it coming. By April, the world was scrambling to lock itself down to save itself from the raging pandemic. Even as I write this, the pandemic is not behind us fully.

Any New Year usually brings in a ray of hope. A hope for better things to come.  2021 I guess, has been mankind’s most anticipated milestone. And people have not just been looking forward to a ray of hope but a landscape of hope. One just wanted to leave behind the horrors of living through a pandemic year and lead a normal life.  By the end of 2020 if you had asked me to name the phrase I hated the most, it was ‘New Normal’.  It still is.

Coming to India specifically, the year 2020 indeed turned out to be bad. Yet, I would reckon that we as a country came out of it relatively unscathed.  Of course the economy took a humungous hit. Of course lives were lost. Of course the common man had to go through hardships. Of course senior citizens had a tough time coping up. Of course people lost jobs. Of course migrant labour had to migrate without a hope. Of course earnings of people took a beating. Yet, if one looks at the situation now, we should consider ourselves fortunate to have bent the curve decisively, got away with fewer deaths per million compared to many other countries and be in a position where life seems to be getting back to the “Old Normal”!

Leaving aside data and statistics, there are other reasons that made me say that as a country we came out relatively unscathed.  First our size. We are a population of 1.3 billion. Second, most of the cities and towns in our country have a very high population density. Also, much of the population does not have the luxury of space. Third, our general civic standards though improving by the day, still has a long way to go.  Fourth, our propensity to not follow rules and not be disciplined overpowers our propensity to follow rules and be disciplined. Fifth, our overarching credo of ‘Chalta hai’ has ingrained in us an attitude to take things lightly without getting overly concerned. And finally, the lack of adequate medical infrastructure in the country. All this doesn’t at all augur well for a country like ours to handle a pandemic like Covid. Add to this, the complexities of being a democracy and a federal democracy in that where, a central writ cannot run across the country! Throw in the fact that this is the first time that a Covid like pandemic of this scale has stuck India because of which we don’t have established SOPs or tribal knowledge to handle the situation. All these are recipes for nothing else but social tension and unmitigated economic disaster.

The reality as it panned out has not been so bad.  There has been no visible social tension in the country. The only tension we see these days is “Social media tension” between those who support Prime Minister Narendra Modi and those who oppose him. In fact, the not so privileged have shown tremendous resilience in dealing with the crisis. During the last few months, I have been in constant touch with a cross section of common people who touch our lives and who would have been the most affected due to the extended lockdowns. They have all taken the unfortunate fallout of the pandemic in their stride and have got back to their normal lives now. None of them blamed the government for what it did or what it didn’t do. They all politely refused any offer of support and claimed that they were managing fine. This picture is totally opposite to what one gets to read in columns of the commentariat where the Modi Government’s lock down is being pilloried for what it would have inflicted on the poor.

Further, as an economy we seem to be bouncing back quicker and better than expected. To quote economist and famed columnist Swaminathan Anklesaria Aiyar from one of his recent columns, he says, “First, India has proved far more resilient than expected after the terrible first quarter of Covid. Second, India has been resilient despite having among the smallest fiscal stimuli among major nations.” Again, we have managed without actually doling out cash support which was what was touted as the silver bullet for stimulating the economy by almost all the top economists except those who were advising the Government.  Looking back, unlike a country like US where people like to spend, Indians are conservative in nature and would like to save for the rainy day. So, in a pandemic situation, I feel that people would not have spent even if money was transferred to their accounts. Instead, it would have only been kept aside for savings, which in the final run would have been detrimental to the cause of stimulating the economy. In that sense, the approach of the Government in providing free food grains to the needy or loan support for small businesses etc. seems wiser steps for a country like India.

The New Year has been rung in India with the best possible news of the approval of the vaccine for Covid.  Based on the last few months trend, it is clear that the manufacturing and allied industries are on a re-bound. With the dip in numbers and the availability of vaccine, hopefully, the services sector like Travel, Hospitality, Tourism, Food & Dining and related verticals will also see a quick recovery after which, we can say that we are reaching a “Normal” state.

As we segue into a New Year, my wish has become more grounded and guarded. As one exults “Thank God It’s a New Year”, here’s wishing one and all a New Year 2021 which will be just Normal and that will turn out to be an Annus Mirabilis!

The Mandi Vs Modi battle!

As a country, I believe that we are cursed to contend with one distraction after another, which keep our governments busy. If it was the Anti-CAA protests which were grabbing the headlines during winter last year, it is the farmers’ protests against the Modi Sarkar’s farm bills this winter. And in between, we have the Covid and its numbers to be pre-occupied with, still.

In the last few weeks, ever since the farmer’s agitation picked up steam, there have been many op-ed pieces from erudite authors which have by and large spoken in favour of the farm bills. And they have said that this is the 1991 moment for Indian agriculture. And yet, the farmers associations have stood their ground against these reforms. Irony dies when we see articles with pictures now of farmer protests in the past demanding the same reforms!

The opposition has joined ranks with the protestors in trying to push back the Modi government on the farm bills. And it has been pointed to us that many of the opposition parties including the Congress, which is now siding with the farmers in opposing the farm bills, have been votaries of the same proposals in the past. It is clear now that since the opposition cannot take on the government on the floor of the house, its strategy is to take on the government on the streets.

While there have been many pieces exposing the double speak of the parties, I would recommend all to read just this one authored by Gautam Chikermane for the ORF – “An intellectual biography of India’s new farm laws”. Read here:

This piece chronicles the various studies and reports tabled by expert committees under different governments’ right from the year 2000 and invariably the recommendations are similar to the very reforms the present farm bills have brought in. It thereby exposes the intellectual hypocrisy of not just the politicians, which to a large extent we have learnt to live with, but of the commentariat which is not coming out and expressing its views in favour of the farm bills strongly, though it was in favour of the same before.

As you can see in the said article, there has been a rare consensus among economists and domain experts on the issue of reforming the APMC Act and Essential Commodities Act. Therefore, it is a pity that we are seeing such virulent, stubborn opposition to the reforms from one section of the farmers’ universe.

In the past five years, I have consistently observed that the commentariat in India keeps shifting goal posts as per its whims and fancies.  In the beginning of the 1st term of Modi, the narrative was “Where are the big bang reforms?” When the Modi government started bringing in reforms it became, “Where is the consensus in bringing these reforms? Where is the consultation?” When reforms are brought in after consultation and building a consensus as in the case of GST, the narrative is, “Where is the execution?” So, clearly we are seeing a pattern of opposition for the heck of it irrespective of the merits of the case.

In the case of farm bills too, there are those who have been saying that there has been no consultation. It is clear as broad day light in the article that, there have been consultations with stake holders for 20 years now! I believe that the government must reach out to many of these experts who were in favour of these bills during UPA regime and enlist them to express their support for the reforms they were batting for in the past. This could include people like Montek Singh Ahluwalia, M.S. Swaminathan and the likes. Here, it could take a leaf out of UPA-1 rule when Sanjaya Baru, the then Press advisor to Manmohan Singh, reached out to Brijesh Mishra enlisting his support for the nuclear deal when BJP was opposing it tooth and nail. The Civil Nuclear deal discussions with the US started when Atal Bihari Vajpayee was the Prime Minister during the NDA rule. So, having an Ex-National Security Advisor to talk in favour of the nuclear deal when BJP was opposing the same, sort of punctured the opposition narrative.

Again coming back to the point of introducing the reforms after extensive consultations across the board, our experience has not been very good. During UPA, the land acquisition bill was brought in after extensive consultations and after building a broad consensus. The result is there for all to see. The bill never took off. It is a classic case of the operation being called successful while the patient was dead. The Modi government in the very 1st year wanted to fix this and brought in amendments which never went through. Finally, in the absence of a consensus, the amendments were not made and the bill continues to languish without serving the purpose of its existence.

Much of the infrastructure projects announced by the Modi Government are behind schedule or languishing in spite of having a very enterprising and well-meaning Nitin Gadkari as the minister at the helm. The main reason has been the delay in land acquisition essentially because of the rigorous clauses built in the bill that was brought in with a broad consensus.  So, any bill just because it is brought in with a lot of consultations and a broad consensus need not be the ideal bill.

In the parliament, the idea of consultations and building consensus effectively means putting the draft of the bills or amendments through select committees or standing committees. To borrow the words of HDFC Chairman, Deepak Parekh, “In India, when the government cannot commit, it committees!” Which effectively means extended discussions and delays. At the peak of UPA rule, when most of India wanted a decisive government with a majority on its own, it was precisely for these reasons. So, when Modi Sarkar which has now won a decisive mandate on its own twice over, takes the route of avoiding these long winded committees and brings in changes in laws on issues like the farm bills where discussions have been going on for 20 years now, we shouldn’t complain.

Building a consensus is often overrated and I concur with the latest statement by Niti Aayog Chairman Amitabh Kant that in India, we suffer from “too much” democracy. I sincerely hope that the government sticks to the main proposals and not roll back on the essence of the farm bills. In the meantime, it should use its communication firepower led by more amenable ministers like Gadkari to get the message across to the farmers’ associations and get them to pull back.  The Mandi Vs Modi battle is clearly a distraction for us at this time when the government must be focussed on handling the economic mandi (slump) on a war footing to bring the growth back on track.

Post script: The title for this post is courtesy my good friend Gopal Kutty Sasthri who popped this up during one of our chats on the topic and so due thanks to him.

End of a Nightmare!

The last few days, almost whole of the world was consumed by what was happening in America with respect to the presidential elections. In my memory, no other US presidential election was followed so much with anticipation and anxiety. Partly it could be due to the proliferation of the media and of course the monster called Social media. Also it could be due to the long drawn electoral process this time around which meant that people had to remain connected with this topic for a longer time than usual. All these notwithstanding, I doubt if a character called Donald Trump was not in the frame, the US elections would be followed with so much interest.

In 2016, when Trump won the elections and became the President, there was a sense of shock outside of America. May be even within the US. During conversations following that election, I remember many of my American friends being embarrassed about the fact a person like Trump has been elected by their country. These could all be liberals who couldn’t fathom how Trump with his idiosyncrasies could pull off a win. Though there were many reasons attributed to his win that time, it was important to respect the democratic will of the voters which elected a person like Trump.  It was believed that once in power, Trump will behave more responsibly and be an inclusive President. That was not to be.

In the recent past, world over we have seen many disruptions. But, I would say that the mother of disruptions has been the Trump Presidency. Trump put foreign relations completely on transactional mode with no considerations of the past. He displayed a fair amount of disdain and contempt for multi-lateral International bodies like the UN, WHO, WTO etc. He pulled out of agreements which America had committed to in the past. And much more all in the name of protecting America’s national interests. But to be fair to Trump, we can say that he was only following his agenda basis which he secured the mandate. And he was ticking off his poll promises one by one.

It is widely believed that Trump’s track record on the economy front has not been too bad till Covid struck. I am in no position to comment on this. But data on the GDP, unemployment, jobs etc. show that till the pandemic hit US, Trump era has been good for the United States from an economic perspective.

The real issue though, was his own personal conduct as the President of United States of America. One lost count of the inner presidential staff he fired during his term, at times through social media. Most of the days, the world woke up to his tweets that were disruptive in nature. He would in a seemingly innocuous style blurt out comments that are not expected out of any Head of a State. Trump would callously speak about personal conversations he had with other leaders taking everyone by surprise. For example, one day he will be in full praise of “his dear friend Modi” and the next day in a presser he would decry the high custom duties India levies on Harley Davidson motor bikes. Similarly, he will volunteer to mediate between India and Pakistan when the established position has been not to intervene. Trump became notoriously famous for this kind of “hit and run” diplomacy that would create chaos only for his team to clean up the mess through clarifications later on.

Trump’s unpredictability, his disdain for established conventions and a total lack of grace has been in full exhibition even in the last few days after the polling has been over. To the rest of the world, it comes as a complete shocker when a Head of a State calls his own country’s electoral process a fraud. Even after the election has been called in favour of his opponent, Trump continues to claim that he has won.

There are many in India particularly those belonging to the liberal intelligentsia clan who claim that the Indian Prime Minster Narendra Modi is similar to Trump in terms of personality. This comparison is nothing but prejudiced and completely preposterous. Apart from their contempt for liberals, I don’t think there is anything in common between Trump and Modi in terms of their personalities. As a Prime Minister, Modi’s social media communication has been extremely measured and calibrated. He seldom interacts with the press and even then, there has been no instances of embarrassing comments about leaders of other countries. Even on the diplomatic front, though Modi has challenged the status quo in many fronts, he has never tried to show disgrace in his conduct.

Even as the results of Trump’s imminent defeat was trickling in, there has been few articles by opinion leaders which said that Trump may be out but Trump’ism will continue to stay. In the sense, though Trump has been unseated, in terms of popular vote there is only a thin wedge that separates Trump and Biden. So, there is a large American population which believed in the way Trump ruled the country in the last four years. And that it would be difficult for any new incumbent to ignore the sentiments of this large base and completely move away from Trump’ism. Well, if this means being sensitive to the voice of even those who voted for Trump and taking steps accordingly it is fine.

I have no great insights into Joe Biden’s calibre or his past track record in governance. However, I am sure that whatever we have seen of Biden so far, he can never be an embarrassment to even those who did not vote for him, unlike Trump.  It was important that a sense of grace and order be brought back to the seat of the President of the United States and I am glad that it happened with the defeat of Trump. I am not sure if Biden’s term is a beginning of a dream for the world but the nightmare is over.

Post script: If Covid had not struck, they say that Trump’s re-election would have been near certain. So, there you are. If there was a silver lining to Covid, this is it.

Image courtesy: nytimes.com

The “Singhamisation” of police!

If the alleged gang rape and subsequent murder of a young girl in Hathras, UP was not terrible enough, the post death handling of the situation by the UP Police was even more horrendous. It is still bewildering, that someone suggested or ordered a midnight funeral for a murdered victim by the police instead of handing over the body to the parents! 

If that was in Hathras, UP, can anyone forget what happened in Sathankulam in Tamil Nadu, few months ago? In a bizarre case, a father and son duo were beaten to death under custody in Sathankulam police station. For what? For apparently violating lockdown rules!

Last year, in Hyderabad, the police killed the suspects involved in rape and killing of a vet in an early morning encounter which seemed like a scene lifted straight out of a Rohit Shetty (Hindi) or a Hari (Tamil/Telugu) film!

Add to this, the Sushant Singh Rajput case which was hogging media headlines till recently where the police of one state has been in logger heads with another.

Welcome to Singhamisation of Indian police. What is common in all these and more is the crying need for police reforms in India, a long neglected issue by any government of the day.

In our country, the commentariat often talks of the demand for reforms of all types – Economic reforms, labour reforms, judicial reforms, education reforms and so on. But seldom do we get to see the demand of police reforms in the same intensity. And I have always wondered why. As per a data point, roughly 9% of GDP is lost every year on account of poor law and order!  And if you remember, GST as a tax reform was introduced because it was believed that it will improve the GDP by up to 3%! And here we are talking about three times that!

In India, maintenance of law and order hangs in between the clichés of “Law and Order is a State subject” and “Law will take its own course”!  Law and Order which is one of the deliverables of the police is a state subject. States are run not just by ruling party at the centre. Few states are under the main opposition party, few by smaller opposition parties and many are ruled by regional parties. This situation exists at any given point in time. So, every party worth its salt has a stake in maintaining law and order and therefore interest in keeping the police under its thumbs.

I really don’t know when the last time a government seriously intended to initiate police reforms in the country. Even the Supreme Court directive of implementing the Prakash Singh recommendations in Prakash Singh Vs Union of India case in 2006 I believe has not been heeded to. The fact is no Indian state has fully complied with the recommendations. In irony we can say that police reforms is one subject in which all political parties are on the same page!

I believe that the cornerstone of any police reform needs to be “Independence” and “no Interference”. Unfortunately, the institution of police has been used by the ruling class as an instrument of exercising power and control. So much so that in any government the Home Minister, under whom law and order and therefore the police comes, becomes the De facto No. 2. Not the finance minister or the minister holding any other economic portfolio.  The big question is, will any party coming to power would ever give up on keeping the police under their thumb? If our armed forces can be reasonably independent though reporting to a civilian government, why not the police?

The next key focus in police reforms I believe, must be around recruitment, training and compensation. We must not forget that people in the police force have not been dropped from heaven. They are all from the same society as we are. And they read the same WhatsApp forwards as we do. So their world view is shaped and influenced in the same manner as ordinary people. And hence they have their own biases. We saw how this kind of biases come in the way of effective policing even in a developed and mature society like America.  I am talking about the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis when a police man was kneeling on Floyd’s neck for nine minutes even when Floyd was pleading for his life. The key is proper recruitment and training where one’s personal biases do not come in the way while discharging public duty.

Though policing is a highly stressful and high pressure job in India, the police are inadequately compensated. And that’s a major reason for not being able to attract bright people to join the force.  Adequate and attractive compensation will also reduce the menace of corruption that exists even at low levels. So, the combination of reformed recruitment, proper training and attractive remuneration will go a long way in the police discharging their duties in a more professional way.

Coming back to Singhamisation of police, whether films depict life or life follows films is an unending debate. The reality could be a mix of both. If you see Indian films, there was a time long ago, when they usually featured bumbling cops who will reach the scene at the end when everything was over. Then there was a phase where cops were usually of the corrupt variety who will be siding the villains.  Presently it is the Singham era, where cops are this macho super heroes and “Naan Police illa, porukki” types. They deliver justice in their own way and if that means taking law in their own hands, so be it.

And this is what we see in real life as well which is what I call the Singhamisation of the police. Incidentally, the common man in the street who is just interested in timely delivery of justice and not necessarily in the method, loves this. But the point is, if we have to prevent another Hathras or a Sathankulam, police reforms is the need of the hour and not Singhamisation.

Incidentally, Prime Minister Narendra Modi while addressing a bunch of IPS probationers recently, told them not to be influenced by films like Singham. After having initiated bold reforms in agriculture and labour, the time has come for Modi to take up police reforms as well. Then he doesn’t have to worry about Singhamisation of police!

“JUST” learning to live during the pandemic!

Vijay Yadav* is a small time vegetable and fruit vendor who has been carrying out his business in Mumbai since 2 decades now.  Ever since the lock down, in our apartment complex, he is one of the suppliers of fresh vegetables and fruits. Twice a week, we place order over WhatsApp to him and he delivers the same at the parking lot of our building. He informs us the due amount on WhatsApp and we pay the amount due to him through Google Pay.

22nd Aug, 2020 was Ganesh Chaturthi. Due to the current pandemic situation, we couldn’t go to the local market for Pooja related shopping (different types of Flowers, Garland…) on the eve of the festival. When we were wondering what to do, Meena*, our regular flower seller informed us to our pleasant surprise that she will home deliver whatever flowers and items we need and asked my wife to send the list over WhatsApp. On the 21st evening, the list was delivered at our ground floor. She informed us the amount and we made the payment to her through PayTM.

On 22nd Aug was also our Avani Avittam (Janeu changing ceremony) for which our regular Cheenu vaadhyar (bhatji) sent us the YouTube link to join him. From home, we completed the rituals and promptly sent the Acharya sambavana thro Google Pay.

In between we had to consult for a routine ailment with our Homeopath doctor.  We did the same over phone. He said he will send the medicines to our house within 1 hour. He has a tie up with Swiggy and the medicines were delivered at our doorstep. The doctor gave his UPI id for transferring his fees, which we did.

What is common in all these? It is that we and the other parties involved were able to carry on with life even during the lock down period without stepping out of our place, fairly smoothly. And if you look at it closely, this was made possible through a combination of Smart phones, Bank accounts (to which we could transfer the money) and more importantly the UPI platform through which we could transfer money real time into bank accounts of beneficiaries.

It was Dr. Arvind Subramanian, Ex-Chief Economic Advisor to the Government of India who in his 1st Economic Survey document coined the term – “The JAM Trinity” and said that the potential of Jan Dhan Yojana, Aadhaar and Mobile phone could be harnessed to plug subsidy leaks and ensure a more targeted delivery to those needy.  This was the beginning of Modi’s 1st term during which, the government gave a huge push to opening Bank accounts for the poor through the Jan Dhan Yojana and also advocated the use of Aadhaar for identifying the needy.  However, in the aftermath of Covid-19, I would tweak the JAM Trinity and say that it is the “Quad of JUST” which is helping to keep the bottom of the pyramid afloat during the pandemic.

If you look at the examples I have provided at the beginning, you would realise that even with the unexpected strike of the pandemic, what has been sustaining at least some fraction of the economic activity is a combination of

J (Jan Dhan Accounts) – through which we could transfer money to beneficiaries who are not so privileged like Domestic helps, small time vendors and so on.

U (UPI Platform) – without which money transfer to bank accounts through mobile wallets like Google Pay or PayTM for example, couldn’t be so easy and swift.

S (Spectrum) – as in the advent of 4G which has made data usage cheap and ubiquitous in India

T (Technology) – Without which all these would not have been possible at all.

In this four, I would like to focus on the UPI bit. United Payment Interface (UPI) developed by National Payments Corporation of India was launched in India in April 2016. But it was post the Demonetisation that UPI as a tool got its fillip in terms of adoption and usage. Just look at the numbers. From just 21 banks who were part of UPI in 2016 when it was launched, today it is more than 140. The transaction volumes have grown exponentially from 2.06 mn. in Dec 2016 to 1.49 bn. in July 2020. And in terms of revenue, it has gone up from Rs. 13.17 crore to Rs. 29.05 Lac crore in the same period!!

It’s been so much of a runaway success that Google (which is part of the UPI through its GPay product) has written to US Federal Reserve Board urging it to build a similar faster payment service platform in the US citing the case study of UPI.

As documented very well by Shankkar Aiyar in his book, The Accidental India, in post Independent India, almost all of the successful economic transformations happened as an answer to a crisis. Similarly, the success of UPI in India also, could be pointed towards the cash payment crisis situation that resulted due to Demonetisation in November 2016. While Demonetisation might not have yielded the originally intended objective of the government namely to suck out the black money from the system, I feel that it has delivered or still delivering other positive outcomes.

Among the top is the formalisation of the economy which is a Work in Progress. The huge success of UPI has made conducting business smoother and easier even during lock down times even for the micro business community. At the same time, the added benefit is the expansion of the formal economy where less and less transactions happen through cash.

The last few months ever since the pandemic struck, have been testing times for any country and its economy.  It’s my feeling that after the initial complete lock down phase of two months, Indians have accepted the reality and have started looking at ways and means of getting on with their lives even without any dole from the government in the form of cash support. Purely from the stand point of micro businesses, they have all tried to adapt their business models to at least survive and stay afloat. Accepting orders through WhatsApp, doing home delivery and equipping themselves with online payment options are some of these adaptations. And these may very well stay even after the pandemic is over. In that sense, while the media commentary (when not busy with Sushant Singh’s death that is) could be around doom and gloom due to Covid in India, the common man has learnt to live during the pandemic with the “Quad of JUST” and will to survive.

Postscript: Way back in November 2016, in the aftermath of Demonetisation I had written a post titled Cash Mukt Bharat (Read here) where I had fantasised of an India where cash transactions have reduced completely by 2025. We are in 2020. Looks like many things mentioned in that post have already become a reality.  Amen.

*All names changed.

Pic courtesy: Yourstory.com

Ram Mandir and the Positioning battles!

“Positioning” in my book is one of the most important and enduring concepts of marketing. How you position your brand in the minds of the consumer, leads you to all the other elements of the marketing strategy. Any lack of clarity or misstep mid-way on how your product is positioned in the minds of the consumer, is usually reflected on the poor or waning market share of the product. Why am I referring to the concept of positioning which is already well known, in the context of the Ram mandir?

In the run up to the Bhumi Pujan for the Ram mandir at Ayodhya which took place this week on the 5th of August, it is interesting to see how most of the mainstream political parties fared in the positioning battle. I would group them as winners, losers and neutral based on how the parties reacted to the event.

In the positioning battle, the foremost winner is of course the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). The party had made the Ram mandir its existential issue in the 80’s with which it could rally the Hindu vote.  Now in power for the second consecutive term in government, the party got a golden opportunity to make good the promise to build the mandir by way of a favourable Supreme Court verdict.  It must be noted that though the temple construction was made possible due to the Supreme Court verdict, in the minds of the party’s voter base, it is the Narendra Modi led government which has made it possible after such a long wait.

Therefore, it was expected that the Prime Minister Narendra Modi would lead from the front in being a part of the historical Bhumi Pujan. For those who scorned at the leader of a secular country being present at a Hindu religious event, the answer lies at the core of BJP’s positioning strategy. That is of the only party in India to represent and protect the “Hindu Hith” (Hindu interests).  So, why would Narendra Modi let go of an opportunity like this being a ardent Hindu to be out there to leverage on the positive public sentiment emerging out of the Mandir construction?

There were also those who felt that a spectacle like this could have been avoided when the country is fighting a huge pandemic. I feel that from the party’s point of view, re-scheduling the event or making the event low key due to the pandemic would have dented its Nationalistic positioning. “When the time is considered to be the most auspicious for starting the work of the Ram temple, why should we dilute the importance of it due to a virus? That too a virus of Chinese origin?” would have been the thinking among the stake holders.  And not to forget the urgency to complete the temple construction and throw it open before the end of the term in 2024.

In my opinion, it would not have done any damage if the party had somehow got its Ram mandir mascot Lal Krishna Advani to attend the function at Ayodhya. In fact, the presence of Advani alongside Modi on the stage would have added  heft  to the event.

If BJP was the foremost winner, the foremost loser in this battle is obviously the Congress. After having positioned itself as the bulwark of secularism in the country, what did it do now? One by one, its party leaders on cue talked about Bhagwan Ram, Ram Rajya and so on. Starting from Priyanka Gandhi to Rahul Gandhi to other leaders like Kamal Nath, Manish Tiwari, Digvijay Singh, there was a virtual stampede to appropriate Lord Ram and even take credit for the temple construction. In the voter’s mind, the “Hindu” space is clearly occupied by the BJP. By trying to be a political “Me Too” (borrowing the phrase from Barka Dutt) in that space, can Congress ever be able to woo the Hindu voter base? On the contrary, it might have ended up alienating its Non Hindu voter base. How will that section of the voters trust Congress now to be their saviour? In fact, this re-positioning could lead to Congress being neither here nor there. In my opinion, Congress should have just said that it respects the SC verdict and happy that it is being implemented.

The other prime loser is the Shiv Sena. Shiv Sena has been in the forefront of the Ram mandir movement from time immemorial.  Its leader, the late Bal Thackeray was positioned as the “Hindu Hriday Samrat” for the longest time. So, here was the chance to cement its positioning as a party that stands for Marathi interests locally and Hindu interests nationally. And accordingly, its leader Uddhav Thackeray should have pulled all strings to be there on the stage at Ayodhya on the 5th August.  Even if that was not possible, the party should have at least been generous in supporting the event. Instead, it chose to make a “sour grapes” statement denouncing the conducting of the event in the midst of Covid!

Apart from the BJP, the other winner in my eyes is Asaduddin Owaisi and in turn his party, the AIMIM. And here’s why. His is a party with a core Muslim voter base back in Hyderabad. So, in line with this positioning he stuck to his guns of strongly condemning the Prime Minister for being a part of such a Hindu religious event in a secular country. This would keep his positioning among his voter base intact and in the absence of alternatives, can help his base expand outside of Hyderabad.

Apart from these winners and losers in the positioning battle in the aftermath of the Bhumi pujan at Ayodhya, I would say there were parties who didn’t gain or lose. These are parties like the AIADMK in Tamil Nadu (just issued a statement congratulating the PM for the foundation stone laying ceremony), Mamata’s TMC (Issuing a plain “Unity in Diversity” message), Janata Dal (United) in Bihar (keeping silent), Mayawati’s BSP (crediting Supreme Court for paving the way for the temple construction) and DMK in Tamil Nadu (remaining silent). In doing what they did, they chose to remain consistent with their respective party’s positioning in the minds of their voters.

Like for brands, being consistent with its positioning is crucial for political parties as well. A mid-course correction in positioning can be undertaken as a strategy but, the new positioning cannot be a poor “Me too” of the market leader. This is what Congress is attempting and in doing so, is walking straight into to the trap “positioned” by the BJP!

Cartoon credit: Satish Acharya

NEP 2020 – Not a T20 in the making!

Two weeks ago, when I wrote a post that “Marks do matter”, I didn’t realise that a New Educational Policy (NEP) was soon going to be unveiled. The post was purely for the season.  If you haven’t read it, please read here. There was an overwhelming response to the blog with many readers agreeing to my proposition that, in the present scheme of things in India at least, marks do matter. I also understood that it is rather a grudging acknowledgement under the circumstances and not a wholehearted endorsement with glee. Most of us, having been on the rough end of the mark stick some time or the other in our lives, have been yearning for a different system of evaluation for the longest time.

Ergo, when the NEP was announced by the government last week, my primary interest was to see how it handles the “marks” conundrum. NEP has been in the works for a long while. I am aware that even among the sympathisers of BJP and Narendra Modi, there was a tinge of regret and disappointment about the government not making any progress on the education front during its first term. Frankly, I haven’t read the full policy document and have just read the highlights few times over. It is quite technical and without the domain knowledge, I haven’t managed to fully comprehend the implications of some of the proposals in the long term. But from what I read, see and hear, seems it is a well-intentioned policy framework and if followed through with meticulous execution, our country may be a different place in the next two to three decades.

Having said that, I would like to focus on few issues which bother me as far as education system in India is concerned and how this NEP tackles them. First, the issue of many education boards.

“Your daughter is in which class?

6th Std.

Which board?

CBSE. What about your son?”

This conversation must be very familiar to many. The latest class divide in urban/semi urban middle class society these days is manifested in the board of the schools in which children study. In the 70’s and 80’s, when I was growing up, this was not a talking point at all. Most of us were going to schools affiliated to State board with some going to CBSE board schools. However, post liberalisation and rise of aspirations and income levels in general, there is a clamour to put children in schools which are not State board schools. So, while CBSE and ICSE board schools are the ones which are sought after, the newest craze in town are the IB (International Board) schools. I am aware of the scorn State board students are subjected to, when they go for higher studies. The question is “Do we need different boards” that sow the seeds of a divide and discrimination in the society. Is there a case for a country wide uniform system of education whereby all students go through the same system without differentiation?

This is a tricky question to answer. At the outset, it may seem that the answer is obvious i.e. to have a uniform system that doesn’t differentiate and doesn’t end up discriminating students. In Japan, the Japanese rue the very standardised and uniform education system they have in their country. One of my Japanese friends use to say that their schools and colleges were like assembly lines. The output in terms of specifications are exactly similar because of which there is no diversity of thinking or ideas in Japan. So, the answer I believe is not in just one common board which has a standardised syllabus across the country. But continuing the existing system of different boards with a wide gap in standards and levels may not be the answer as well.

I looked at the NEP for its take on the boards. Education being in the concurrent list, first of all there cannot be a single National umbrella structure that can be implemented across the country. So, the NEP talks about the need for each board to ensure equivalence of academic standards and text books with a common core material and supplementing with local flavour and context and so on. I believe it is a via media solution to retain diversity with some commonality. In addition to this, one key point according to me, is the compensation of teachers and staff in State board schools. In order to ensure there is no discrimination in output (quality of students), there should not be discrimination in input (salary levels of staff).

The second issue is regarding the medium of instruction in schools. The NEP proposes that the medium of instruction until 5th standard and preferably till 8th standard and beyond will be preferably home language/Mother tongue/local language. It was later clarified that it is not a mandate but is left to the states to imbibe this guideline. English medium Vs regional language in today’s aspirational India is again a symbol of class divide in the society. In one of my earlier posts (Read here) I had argued that it is time to make English the common medium of language across the country. English may be a foreign language but it is the unifying language in India today. Like it or not, English has become the door opener for opportunities. While I agree that it is good to ensure a child’s proficiency with her mother tongue, making it the medium of instruction may be counterproductive.

And lastly, coming back to the “Marks system”, the NEP doesn’t seem to provide any alternatives but for changing the grading system so that the final board exam is not a make or break effort for the student. It says, “Board exams will be made easier, as they will test primarily core capacities, competencies rather than months of coaching or memorization.” It also talks about a more comprehensive and multi-dimensional approach to student assessments.  This is very good in intent and I think all parents and children would be keen to see how this works in real life.

Based on what I have comprehended so far, the New Education Policy signals a clear intent to bring in a paradigm shift in education in India.  It aims for a long term directional shift and so is a test match and not a T20 in the making!  Now, the devil is in the execution.

Pic credits: The Hindu

Taming the Dragon!

This is intended to be a sequel to my last week’s blog– Return of the Dragon. If you haven’t read it, please read here.

The military standoff between India and China at the border is slowly turning into a diplomatic one with both sides waiting for other side to blink first. Marathon disengagement talks are going in parallel with coercive military build-up on both sides. And in India, we have set in motion a slew of things in an effort to “tame the Dragon”.  But what real options do we have to tame the Dragon?

I remember vividly that whenever we used to have these military tensions with Pakistan triggered by some terrorist attack, though we are a militarily and economically stronger nation, experts would say that a full blown war with Pakistan is not an option between two nuclear powered countries. At the same time, we were told that we must raise the cost for Pakistan to carry out terrorist activities, whatever that means. Since there is little economic activity going on between India and Pakistan, it doesn’t really make any difference to Pakistan even if we sever all economic ties.

Between India and China too, a full blown war is out of question considering the fact that we are both nuclear powers. The issue of longstanding boundary dispute can be resolved through talks and diplomatic efforts. But, since both countries cannot give up even a square inch of land, a solution to the boundary dispute is not coming any soon. Under these circumstances, the best option which is face saving for both is achieving Status Quo Ante!

At the same time, while pursuing diplomatic engagement to get the troops back to where we were before this round of escalation, it is necessary for India to raise the costs for China to deter it from indulging in border escalations.  This, I believe can happen only on the trade front.  On the trade front, I believe that China has more to lose than India if relations are spoilt.  And this is opposite to what the commentariat in the India media feel. That being the case, what are some of the options?

  • China is an exporting economy. For the past few years (coincidentally since Xi took over in 2012), the Chinese economy has been floundering, after years of high growth. Under the circumstances, it cannot shut business with a country like India which is poised to be the most populous country in the world soon. In 2019, we imported US$75 billion worth of goods from China. Those who say that this is miniscule compared to the total exports of US$2.5 Trillion China does, are missing the larger point. As globalisation weakens and Nationalism grows and in particular when large economies like the US, Japan and Germany are talking of de-risking from China in the wake of Covid-19, spoiling trade relations with India and denting the prospects for trade growth is the last thing China can afford. So, leverage on this aspect.
  • A quick look at the last quarter’s import data shows that Electronic Components, Telecom Instruments, Industrial Machinery, Computer Hardware and Peripherals are the top 5 categories of imports from China and take up almost 33% of total imports. As a country, we must roll out a solid, strategic plan for developing the domestic Electronic Hardware manufacturing industry. This cannot happen overnight. But can happen with a vision and a roll out plan in the next ten years. Considering the fact that the role of electronics, is on the continuous rise in every aspect of our life and every aspect of engineering, the scope for just catering to the domestic market and then emerge as a competitive, key part of global supply chains is huge. There has been talks in the past to build a globally competitive electronic manufacturing industry in India but this is the right time to translate those talks into actions on the ground.
  • Ever since, we lost lives of our soldiers in the border standoff, the cries of “Boycott China goods” have become louder and more visible. A total and real boycott of these is not neither feasible nor advisable under the current circumstances. Chinese components are a key cog in the Indian manufacturing wheel today.  Instead, whatever government does needs to be only “covert” and not overt. In short, kick off “Salaami slicing” in aspects of trade and commerce.
    • For example, for all government purchases, government cannot openly declare that it will not buy “Made in China” products. However, it can signal a preference to “Made in India” products.
    • Just last week, government made it mandatory for sellers to indicate the “Country of Origin” for their products offered on the GEM (Government E Marketplace) portal. While this was touted as a move to promote the Prime Minister’s Atma Nirbhar Bharat vision, that it was a move to identify products coming from China was not lost on trade observers. Government can do more covert actions like this.
    • For big infrastructure projects, go slow on Chinese companies. (There are many ways of doing this)

  • In the private consumption space, there is a groundswell of opinion among the common public against Chinese products. Usually this sentiment is very temporary. But now, as the government cannot take part directly in festering any Anti-China emotion, it can use the party, its loyal trade bodies and Non-profit bodies to do the job in keeping the sentiment alive for a long time. Though in terms of dollar terms, the reduction in imports in the consumer goods space may not be significant for China as a country, any reduction in demand and orders particularly with the weakening demand due to Covid-19, will affect the Chinese sellers. For example, for the upcoming festival season in India, even if the orders are reduced by half than usual for the many consumer items including domestic appliances, garments, plastics, gift items, decorative items etc. it will be significant blow.  And if that demand turns into orders for Indian manufacturers, it will also aid the economy here.
  • Creating stumbling blocks for Chinese origin businesses like more scrutiny of compliance matters is another way of covert signalling. For example, just last week, without citing any reason, India customs officials said that there could be delays in clearance of goods imported from China. Moves like these will raise the costs for those importing Chinese goods in India and indirectly act as a deterrent for promoting those products in India in the long run. Here, I would like to add that these moves cannot be sustainable in the long run. But, in the short term helps in messaging. And the Indian government doing this now is a smart thing to do. Manufacturing activity and demand in India is any way weak and tepid at this point in time. So, any delay of a few days here and there is not going the move the dial significantly. I am sure that this will be a short term prick rather than a long term change in process.

Now, there is a distinct possibility that China does retaliatory moves (we hear, it is already acting on delaying customs clearance of goods from India). But as I mentioned, today, India imports 5 times more than it exports. So, as of today, it hurts China more than it hurts India. Of course the imported goods are a part of the Indian economic activity and hence any delay or disruption affects those who are in that sector. It is a small cost to pay compared to the cost our defence forces pay with their lives at the border securing our sovereignty.

In conclusion, to tame the Dragon, we must first believe we can, punch above our weight and play to our strengths as a large consuming and growing economy. “Challenge is a dragon with a gift in its mouth. Tame the dragon and the gift is yours” goes a saying. Time to replace the word Challenge with China?

Return of the Dragon!

For few months now, China has been in the news mostly for all wrong reasons. First, due to the way it handled the initial outbreak of the Corona Virus and now for the LAC row.  Ever since the Corona virus became a pandemic bringing the entire world to its knees, there has been a perceptible anti-China sentiment in most parts of the world. In the midst of fighting this perception battle, China also has been engaging in turf wars.  The obvious question is, why would an embattled China engage itself in these activities at a time like this? I am no foreign affairs/Geo political/Defence/Strategic affairs expert. But as an avid follower of current affairs, it is not too difficult to understand the predicament of China, at least towards India.

Consider the following chronology of events (Aap Chronology samaj lijiye):

  • In 2013, China announces its One Belt One Road project (OBOR), now known as the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). This was aimed at connecting China with important cities and ports in Asia and Europe through maritime corridors and shipping routes. All of the neighbours of India like Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Pakistan with the exception of Bhutan have joined this initiative.
  • In 2017, India announced its decision not to join this China’s ambitious programme on account of strategic reasons – read as “National Interest”. Not just that, India did not send even a representative to attend the launch summit which was attended by many countries which were not part of BRI. (The project is in tatters with some participants expressing concern over the large debt trap they were walking into)
  • In June 2017, India and China got into a border standoff at Doklam when India objected to the alteration of status quo by China, in constructing a road in Doklam at the trijunction border area. “Operation Juniper” was launched by India whereby, several companies of Indian soldiers crossed over to the Doklam area of Bhutan to prevent the construction. The standoff continued for two months and after hectic diplomatic parleys between India and China, the standoff ended with the halting of the road construction.
  • September 2017: India relaxes its rules relating to obtaining forests clearance for infrastructure and army projects along the LAC in a bid to speed up construction.
  • August 2019: Fresh from the re-election, Modi government changes the status quo of Jammu and Kashmir. As part of that, Ladakh region becomes a Union territory directly under the Central government. Though this is an internal re-organisation, the impact of this move on China was not lost on anyone. During the parliament speech, Home Minister Amit Shah thunders that whenever he refers to Jammu and Kashmir, it includes POK and Aksai Chin.
  • In November 2019, India opts out of the negotiating table of RCEP (Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership) ostensibly due to the China factor. One of the main reasons from the Indian side is to protect Indian industry and farmers from a surge in Chinese imports, if a free trade pact is signed.
  • February 2020: In the Union Budget, Customs duty on Toys was hiked from 20 percent to 60% to curb Chinese imports. Similarly 10 to 20 percent hike in few other product categories where China was the chief exporter.
  • Mar 2020: In the wake of Covid-19, QUAD (Quadrilateral Security Dialogue) originally intended to be among United States, Japan, Australia and India) got upgraded to Quad Plus to include New Zealand, South Korea and Vietnam. The conference calls, aside from discussing the fall out of the pandemic has also been seen as an opportunity for India to enhance its strategic weight in the Indian Ocean region.
  • April 2020: India revised its Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) rules to prevent “Opportunistic take overs” of firms who have become vulnerable due to Covid-19 triggered business slowdown. This was few days after People’s Bank of China increased its shareholding in HDFC. The move for obvious reasons irked China.

In between all this we also had informal summits between Modi and Xi in Ahmedabad, Wuhan and last year in Chennai, multi-fold increase in FDI from China into manufacturing and construction projects and start-ups and so on.

In Marketing and Public Relations, there is a strategy which is adopted by large corporations. Which is to “Say one thing in public and do exactly the opposite” in a bid to catch the competition on the wrong foot. I forget the exact name for this strategy but let me call it “Marketing by Deceit” TM for want of a better term. This strategy cannot be used by the same company repeatedly but to be used like a onetime Brahmastra!

If you see India’s strategy, it has been something like this. While, we have tried to engage with China to improve trade and diplomatic relations overtly, we have also tried to secure our National interests in matters of strategic concern. I am surprised that this point is lost even on expert commentators who keep referring to Modi’s photo-ops with Xi.

If I were an official in the Ministry of Foreign affairs in China in charge of India, I obviously would be concerned by the above timeline events. Combined with the pressures around the spread of Corona Virus, it is not an enviable situation to be in. As a wannabe dominant power, China wouldn’t like to show that it is embattled or weakened at this point in time. So, the approach of “Offence is the best form of defence” not just in the Indian borders but in Senkaku Islands, in Taiwan and South China seas etc.

Ergo, our attempts at the LAC to up our infrastructure has been faced with a belligerent China. For both the countries, this development comes at a wrong time. Not just India, but China also is facing the ills of a plummeting economy now for few years. Both the countries are also in the midst of fighting the world’s worst pandemic. Hence better sense has to prevail at both sides to avoid a full blown war.

For India and the government, it is paramount to protect the sovereignty of the nation without getting engaged in a bloody battle. In Arthasasthra, Kautilya aka Chanakya says, “Do not reveal what you have thought upon doing. But by wise counsel, keep it secret being determined to carry it into execution!” In line with this, I believe the government will do what it should in India’s National interest without being overt about it in an All-party meeting or in a media conference.  It is laughable that the opposition and the commentariat being hell bent to know what the government is intending to do to resolve the standoff.

In India, Bruce Lee’s film was released as ‘Return of the Dragon’ as a sequel to his earlier hit ‘Enter the Dragon’! But in Chinese and in the original version released in the United States, it was ‘Way of the Dragon’!  Even in real life, between 1962 and now, let there be no doubt that it is the “Way” and not the “Return”. So, our Statecraft must be prepared to deal with this.

Pic Courtesy: India Today