Public Policy, Organising for Change, The Young Man, and the Sea
In 1969, anthropologist, poet, and science writer Loren Eiseley compiled some of his best works into a book titled ‘The Star Thrower’, in which he recounted a story that has been retold millions of times since.
Let’s quote Eiseley, rather than paraphrase it:
“Once, on ancient Earth, there was a human boy walking along a beach. There had just been a storm, and starfish had been scattered along the sands. The boy knew the fish would die, so he began to fling the fish to the sea. But every time he threw a starfish, another would wash ashore. An old Earth man happened along and saw what the child was doing. He called out, 'Boy, what are you doing?' 'Saving the starfish!' replied the boy. 'But your attempts are useless, child! Every time you save one, another one returns, often the same one! You can't save them all, so why bother trying? Why does it matter, anyway?' called the old man. The boy thought about this for a while, a starfish in his hand; he answered, "Well, it matters to this one." And then he flung the starfish into the welcoming sea.”
This is the story that came to our mind when we heard Rajya Sabha Member of Parliament and outspoken crusader for the rightful place of women in society Priyanka Chaturvedi at Takshashila’s first Organising For Change (OFC) session this past Friday.
Chaturvedi, whose reasoned and spirited voice — as a spokesperson first for the Congress and currently the Shiv Sena (Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray faction) — has lifted the level of discourse on Indian television news channels and newspapers as much as it has in the hallowed halls of Parliament, was more than candid in her 90-minute talk with Takshashila’s Manoj Kewalramani. She spoke about her entry into active politics after a successful career in the private sector, her challenges as a mother of two, her and her family’s apprehensions of becoming a politician, well, just about everything that an Indian politician has to go through to make it big at the national stage.
OFC is an attempt by Takshashila to bring policymakers and decision-makers closer to our extended network of students, alumni, faculty, and contributors. How are policy decisions made, how do politicians interact with think tanks, and how do active members of Parliament do their research before engaging with each other in a debate, Chaturvedi spoke unequivocally on each of these issues, and every participant logged out richer in terms of both information and insight.
The next OFC session will be held soon. Watch out for the announcement via our alumni communication and OpenTakshashila.
It All Began In 1949
The post-World War II era was a time of great tumult. In the middle of India earning its independence in 1947, the formation of Israel in 1948, and the evolution of the post-nuclear bomb world saw the geopolitics of China determine a course of history that is as consequential as any other.
In October 1949, Chinese Communist Party leader Mao Zedong established what came to be known as the People’s Republic of China. He led a revolution backed by China’s millions of farmers and defeated the nationalist government led by Chiang Kai-shek, who was backed by the United States. Chiang and thousands of his troops fled to Taiwan, and the Americans continued to back him, leading Mao and his acolytes to forever harbour more than a distrust of Washington.
While 2022 cannot be compared with the upheaval of 1949, it was certainly a watershed year. Because this is the year that will go down in history as the one when the US placed a diplomatic boycott on the Beijing Winter Olympics in February. A month later, US President Joe Biden spoke to Chinese President Xi Jinping and threatened to impose sanctions on Beijing for providing material support to Russia in its war on Ukraine.
In May, Biden announced a series of measures to make the American high-tech industry competitive against China. In August, US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi visited Taiwan, a trip that led Beijing to suspend its climate talks with the US and cut off high-level military communication channels. For good measure, the Chinese military conducted drills by encircling Taiwan, and launched ballistic missiles over the island, some of which landed in Japan’s exclusive economic zone.
In short, things came to such a head that analysts were worried about a catastrophic confrontation between the two largest militaries in the world.
In this context, Takshashila’s Satya Sahu and Amit Kumar posit that this geopolitical moment provides India with an opportunity to become a critical contender for businesses looking to relocate or diversify their operations.
They wrote in their remarkably detailed op-ed for Moneycontrol:
India should not penalise incoming businesses with a mandatory minimum requirement for locally sourced components. The rationale behind local sourcing requirements is to promote domestic value-addition, create employment opportunities, support MSMEs, and reduce import dependence. However, this policy can impose excessive costs and constraints on foreign investors and domestic producers.
India is a new entrant in this segment. It does not have deep backward linkages that cater to potential chip assembly units' quality and quantity needs. Forcing businesses to source components from underdeveloped domestic channels may deter them from setting up shop, eventually derailing the long-term strategic objective of GVC integration.
Without worrying about value addition, policymakers must focus on attracting and retaining businesses in the ATMP segment. Backward supply linkages will, in due course, organically develop as intense participation in the GVC leads to the transfer of knowledge and technology from global players to local suppliers.
You can read their piece here.
If It’s Diwali, It Must Be A Battle Over Firecrackers
There has not been a time in the recent past when the debate over pollution and firecrackers during Diwali has not polarised Indian society. The Supreme Court recently reminded states of their duty to ban pollution-contributing firecrackers, especially ones that contain Barium.
In his op-ed for The Times of India, Takshashila co-founder and director Nitin Pai writes how the “goal of policy ought to be to allow people to enjoy Diwali with firecrackers if they so wish while reducing the damage to the environment.”
He elaborates:
First, leave firecracker regulation to state governments, municipalities and gram panchayats. Air quality, firecracker use, weather conditions, human geography, social norms and biosphere contexts vary vastly across the country. Firecrackers in polluted Delhi have a very different impact from say one in a seaside village in South Goa. It makes little sense to prohibit South Goans from enjoying themselves by setting off a few firecrackers because Delhiites tend to go overboard in an already over-polluted city. While the Delhi government is justified in taking drastic action, the Goan village panchayat has different considerations — fire safety, street dogs and noise, for instance — and a lot more leeway in terms of air pollution.
Which side of the debate are you on? Regardless of one’s cultural heritage, does an Indian citizen need to think of the environment first? Nitin thinks that “instead of seeking a magic bullet, a number of policy levers should be used to change how Indians produce, sell and use firecrackers. These include public education, taxation, restrictions and licensing. Unlike bans, these levers are flexible and can be ratcheted up and down in response to the situation. We often underestimate the power of public education, awareness and cultural norms.”
Perhaps, we can take baby steps toward an important transition rather than imposing one sweeping rule?
You can read Nitin’s column on firecrackers here.
There’s A War On In Gaza. So What?
In his latest fortnightly column for Mint, Nitin Pai wrote on the Israel-Hamas war that threatens to haunt the world for at least another generation.
He writes:
The conflict is still in progress but its course over the past month has already given us three terrible assessments. First, Hamas demonstrated that terrorism can succeed in advancing political objectives. In this it has reversed the post-9/11 strategic consensus that terrorism is not only ineffective as a political strategy but can delegitimise the political cause it seeks to advance. The world had forgotten the Palestinian cause. A month ago, Israel was close to a rapprochement with the Arab powers, Western powers were focused Russia, China and Iran, and Palestine was off the global agenda. Yet even before the Hamas invaders were beaten back, the ‘two-stage solution’ — meaning the creation of viable Palestinian state — was back in circulation. A month later, there is global acknowledgement that ensuring that genuine Palestinian grievances must be addressed and that the two-state solution must be considered with greater urgency.
Did Israel miscalculate? Did Hamas provoke Israel to its own peril? Nitin explains the negative externalities in this era-defining conflict.
He writes:
“When we analysed this conflict using a complexity lens at Takshashila we found that its outcome will hinge on the suffering of civilians, both Israeli and Palestinian. It is the extent of their suffering and the reaction it elicits from their leaders, regional powers and the international community that will determine the future. Watching a humanitarian tragedy unfold before our eyes can create popular pressure for de-escalation and diplomacy.”
Read his column here.
You can also listen to a fascinating episode of All Things Policy on this very topic here.
Two Must-Read Pieces Of The Week
Lt Gen Prakash Menon comes down heavily on the apparent politicisation of the Indian military with a scathing column for ThePrint.
“Two of the Ministry of Defence’s (MoD) recent initiatives are particularly obnoxious and antithetical to the apolitical character of the armed forces. The first asks Service personnel to undertake social work while on leave and the second, which takes the cake, is the creation of ‘selfie points’. They will be established to ‘showcase the good work done in Defence’ and all of them will have the picture of Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Both initiatives prompted Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge to write a letter to Modi, stating that it is of the ‘utmost importance that the armed forces were kept out of politics’.
You can read the column here.
In his fortnightly column for The Free Press Journal, Takshashila’s Sachin Kalbag writes on how the pressures of American domestic politics will always trump its foreign policy. President Joe Biden, 81, and already under attack over his decision to run for re-election in 2024 is, according to Sachin, hedging his bets over possible peace in the West Asia, especially at a time when he is trailing former President Donal Trump in opinion polls conducted in six battleground states.
Sachin writes:
“The lack of support for Biden’s actions in the Israel-Hamas war and the drop in ratings could be the perfect opportunity for Biden to withdraw. But Biden is hedging his bets. If he does manage to bring peace to the region — even if temporary — he could swing right back into the game. Domestic politics, after all, trumps foreign policy.”
You can read his piece here.
Wait, there’s more
In their latest China-focused episode of All Things Policy, Anushka Saxena, Manoj Kewalramani, and Amit Kumar discuss tensions in US-China relations, and whether the upcoming Xi-Biden meeting at the APEC Summit signals a thaw in relations. Manoj and Amit also highlight the significance of the high-level diplomatic dialogue that has taken place between the two sides in the past few months, and its role in creating stability and guardrails in a largely tenuous relationship.
Listen to the podcast episode here.
Applications for the Graduate Certificate in Public Policy (Jan '24 Cohort) are Now Open
That’s all from us this week. Wish you a happy Diwali and take care.