THE HINDU EDITORIAL-MARCH 10, 2022

 THE HINDU EDITORIAL- MARCH 10, 2022

 

 

Tradition and formality Leaders’ wrangling should not lead to politicizing of constitutional norms   Two contrasting issue concerning the legislature in two States appear to sum up the potential for political controversy when elected governments and Governors do not see eye to eye. In the West Bengal Assembly, Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee and legislators of her party had to virtually plead with Governor Jagdeep Dhankhar to start reading his customary address amidst a prolonged uproar by the Opposition BJP MLAs. Mr. Dhankhar appeared ready to give in to the protesters, but was ultimately persuaded into reading the first and last lines. In Telangana, on the other hand, the K. Chandrasekhar Rao government seems to have decided not to have Governor Tamilisai Soundararajan address the legislature before it presented this year’s Budget. Instead, it is treating the current meeting of the legislature as a continuation of the last session. That the session, which last met some months ago, was not prorogues, has given scope for the government to contend that it is just a further meeting, and it is not necessary for the Governor to open it with an address. The ceremonial address is usually delivered in the first session of every year. Dr. Soundararajan has issued a rare statement to argue that the government’s position was technical, and it would not be proper to commence the Budget session without her address. The episode appears to arise from points of conflict between the government secretariat and Raj Bhavan, as the ruling TRS seems aggrieved that the Governor deviate from the text of her address last year and on some other issues too. The Governor’s address is a constitutional formality, albeit a significant one, as it is essentially a statement of policy of the regime of the day. That the formal occasion is mired in political wrangling is a sign of institutional decay and unwarranted politicization of constitutional decay and unwarranted politicization of constitutional norms. That Mr. Banerjee saw the incidents in the Assemble, which almost resulted in the abandonment of the Governor’s address, as “an attempt to create a constitutional crisis” shows that leaders still attach constitutional significance to the tradition. It will be desirable if the same recognition is seen in Telangana too. After all, if not now, the next session will have to open with the Governor’s address. It is true that there are sound arguments that question the need and the relevance of the office of Governor, or support the view that some incumbents are politically partisan. There may even be a case for doing away with the formality, or even arguing that the policy statement is better read out by the elected Chief Minister. However, as long as the current system is in vogue, there is a case for abiding by the norms. Politics notwithstanding, it is only in such formality that civility in public discourse is expressed.   A chance for peace Putin should pause the war and start talks on Zelensky’s compromise proposals   Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky delivered a Churchill-like speech at the British Parliament on Tuesday, vowing to fight to the end “in forests, fields and streets”. But hours before his speech, through video-conferencing, he sent the clearest signal to Russian President Vladimir Putin – in an insensitive issue such as Ukraine’s bid to join NATO, and the status of Russian-controlled Crimea and the breakaway Donetsk and Luhansk republics. He also called for “a collective security agreement” that would include Russia, the U.S. and Western European countries as part of a lasting solution. What makes his apparent concessions important is that he announced them a day after the Kremlin laid out three conditions to stop what it calls its “special military operation” in Ukraine: It wants Kyiv to accept Crimea as a Russia territory, recognize Donetsk and Luhansk as independent republics and amend the country’s Constitution to drop attempts to join any bloc (NATO) and reinstate its neutrality. While Mr. Zelensky stopped short of offering recognition to the breakaway regions, his offer for compromise and dialogue opened a path towards a political settlement. The Russian Foreign Ministry’s statement on Wednesday that its goals would be better achieved through talks also signals hop for a de-escalation. In the last two weeks, Mr. Zelensky has emerged as the face of the Ukrainian resistance. But he is also in a difficult situation. The Russian advances are slow given Russia’s relative power, but in the last 13 days, Ukraine has lost sizeable territories, from its northern border with Belarus to its southwestern Black Sea coast. Russia has not taken any major Ukrainian city except Kherson in the south, but most cities, including Kharkiv in the north and Mariupol in the southeast, are being encircled. Kyiv, the capital city, is being enveloped from the east and west. Mr. Zelensky has repeatedly asked for military help from NATO. But his request for a no-fly zone was shot down. Even the Polish offer to send its fleet of MIG-29 fighters was dismissed by the U.S., which does not want any kind of military involvement in the conflict. So, the practical solution before Mr. Zelensky is to take advantage of Ukraine’s initial resistance and seek a solution through talks. Against this backdrop, his comment about Ukraine dropping its NATO bid is a welcome step. But the question is whether Mr. Putin would take this and be ready for de-escalation. If Russia had expected a quick collapse of the Ukrainian government, it has been proved wrong. Nearly a fortnight of conflict has taken a huge toll on Russia’s economy. Its ties with Europe have been set back by decades. Continuing this war endlessly does not serve anybody’s interest. If Mr. Putin’s primary concern is Russia’s security interests, he should pause the operation and start serious dialogue with the Ukrainians on Mr. Zelensky’s proposals.

An unnecessary war and its grave portents Kyiv is paying a heavy price and a change of tack is needed, where the cardinal objective is to save lives and Ukraine M.K. NARAYANAN Russia’s attack on Ukraine, which began from the third week of February, shows no sign of ending. It has, in the meantime, led to a humanitarian crisis of gigantic proportions. The number of refugees streaming into countries adjoining Ukraine has revived memories and images of the vast numbers who sought refuge in Europe following the wars in Syria, Iraq and North Africa at the turn of the century. No one would have anticipated that a similar situation would arise just a few years later in Europe. The number of refugees has already approached, and possibly even crossed, the two million mark; and this is apart from the several thousands who have been killed inside Ukraine. It is a vivid demonstration of the callousness of human nature, more so considering the underlying cause of the conflict. It is most surprising that nothing concrete is being done by powerful nations in Europe and across the world to try and end the conflict through a process of reconciliation and negotiation. What the conflict, though, has exposed is the irrelevance of the United Nations in dealing with situations of this kind – becoming in many ways a modern day variant of the ill-fated League of Nations created at the end of the First World War. More an economic concern The primary concern of European nations and the United States appears to be the economic impact of the conflict – rather than the human costs involved – consequent on the ongoing war in Ukraine. The International Monetary Fund has already issued a warning of the serious global impact of the war, which includes a surge in energy and commodity prices, and being taken seriously by the U.S., almost all European nations and many countries across the globe. Leading western economists have been pontificating on the economic consequences of the war, and the ways and the means to reduce its impact. Similar concerns about the human costs of this unnecessary war are nowhere to be found. Least of all to be found are suggestions on how best to end the conflict, or at least bring about a truce to reduce the human toll that keeps steadily rising. Debating the sanctions route It may appear tendentious to think that there are leading elements in the West who believe that by waging a prolonged ‘sanctions war’ against Russia of the kind currently being pursued – rather than seeking a compromise by which to end the genocide in Ukraine – an option had become available to checkmate Russia, which under Russian President Vladimir Putin was posing a threat to the West. Russia deserves to be rightfully condemned for being in violation of the United Nations Charter and invading Ukraine. There are, however, far more efficacious means to checkmate Russian moves than persisting with a prolonged period of ever widening economic sanctions aimed at crippling Russia’s economy. This may be an ideal way to achieve a ‘regime change’ in Moscow, getting citizens to rise against the regime due to the shortages and other restrictions imposed by a ‘sanctions’ regimen. It is, however, not the best way to end a conflict in the shortest possible time, and avert a greater human tragedy that a prolonged conflict entails. Sanctions, no doubt, do and will affect Russia and its economy, but it has had little impact on Russia’s war effort. Meanwhile, Ukraine, or more particularly the citizens and the residents of Ukraine, are innocent victims of the tussle between the West and Russia. For the present, each new sanction only strengthens Russia’s determination to compel Ukraine to cut its links with the West. No country within the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). Or even those outside it, is at present willing to send forces in support of Ukraine. Waiting for the eventual collapse of the Russian state while leaving Ukraine and its citizens to the not-so-tender mercies of the Russian juggernaut is tantamount to becoming an accessory to genocide. While concerns that the conflict in Ukraine may lead to a nuclear conflict do appear exaggerated, what is taking place is a tragedy of a kind that should not befall any nation. Deconstructing Ukraine The need to break the cycle of conflict and end the death of innocent civilians – as also the destruction of property – is the most vital issue at this juncture. There are, no doubt, certain special circumstances that make the problem inherently difficult and complicated. Ukraine, for instance, is not just another country as far as Russia is concerned. It was part of the erstwhile Soviet Union till 1991, and even at the time there were inherent tensions in the relationship. Ukraine in turn has long struggled with ethno-linguistic tensions encompassing western and central Ukraine and the Russian-speaking Eastern Ukraine. Western Ukraine is also largely Catholic while the east is largely Russian Orthodox. Even after its split from Russia in 1991, Ukraine has had problems in maintaining a semblance of neutrality between Russia and the West. Aggravating the situation is the fact that Ukraine was, in a sense, a child of a series of ‘Colour Revolutions’ that shook parts of the Russian Empire in 1991 – when Russian influence was at its lowest ebb after the Second World War. Matters god further aggravated when a pro-Russian President of Ukraine – who was elected in a relatively fair election – was ousted and had to flee the country. Following this, Russia intervened and annexed Crimea and took aggressive measures to reinforce Russian influence in Donetsk and Luhansk, regions of eastern Ukraine which have large Russian populations. The ties between Russia and Ukraine are thus in a sense both historical and political. The declared ambition of NATO is to deter Soviet expansionism and, hence, any nation becoming a part of NATO is deemed by Russia to be anti-Russia. Russia has, from time to time, made it apparent that under no circumstances would it countenance NATO membership for Ukraine, and that this would be perceived as a hostile act towards Russia. The politics of the war As of now, Ukraine has become a pawn between Russia and the West. The war over Ukraine is, furthermore, a reflection of the prevailing myopia of current leaders who seem doomed to repeat past follies. An extension of NATO by the inclusion of Ukraine at this time – a country with a complex history and polyglot composition – was hardly a compelling necessity at this juncture, but badly misreading the situation (for even as far back as 2007 at the Munich Security Conference where I was the Indian delegate, Mr. Putin had made it amply clear that ‘NATO extension…. Represents a serious provocation that reduces the level of mutual trust’). Since then, Mr. Putin has given no indication whatsoever of any change in his attitude on this issue. This misreading of Mr. Putin’s personality has been a cardinal error, and Ukraine is paying a very heavy price. Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky, who openly flaunts his pro-West inclination, is hardly a match for President Putin in terms of strategy and tactics. While Mr. Zelensky employs grandstanding as a strategy, Mr. Putin is a born fighter. Anyone who has had an opportunity to interact closely with Mr. Putin would never have attempted to challenge him in the manner that Mr. Zelensky has been doing these past few weeks. Currently, an unlikely hero to his fellow countrymen, he could well go down in history as someone who has caused the ruin of Ukraine. Had he had played his cards properly; he could have prevented the situation from reaching the present impasse and still maintained Ukraine’s independence. To say the least, this is extremely unfortunate for Ukraine and much of the world as well. Press the pause button A change of tack is clearly called for. At this time, the cardinal objective should be to save human lives and the existence of Ukraine. Ukraine’s ambitions to join NATO, which are in any case a distant dream, need to be put on the back burner. For the present, any extension of NATO further to the east should be given up, and, instead, an effort made to rebuild some of the bridges that existed between Russia and the rest of Europe at the beginning of this century. Alongside this, the West should hit the ‘pause button’ on initiating ‘Colour Revolutions’ which have led to more conflicts than peace in Europe or elsewhere. More than anything else, leaders of nations and countries need to understand and assimilate the lessons of history, to avoid the kind of critical mistakes that have been evident during the current Russia-Ukraine crisis and war.   Water management needs a hydro-social approach Freshwater resources are under stress, the principal driver being human activities in their various forms SRIKUMAR CHATTOPADHYAY   The Global Water System Project, which was launched in 2003 as a joint initiative of the Earth System Science Partnership (ESSP) and Global Environmental Change (GEC) programme, epitomizes global concern about the human-induced transformation of fresh water and its impact on the earth system and society. The fact is that freshwater resources are under stress, the principal driver being human activities in their various forms. Fresh water, water valuation In its fourth assessment report in 2007, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) highlighted the link between societal vulnerability and modifications of water systems. It is globally estimated that the gap between demand for and supply of fresh water may reach up to 40% by 2030 if present practices continue. The formation of the 2030 Water Resource Group in 2008, at the instance of the World Economic Forum, and the World Bank’s promotion of the group’s activity since 2018, is in recognition of this problem and to help achieve the sustainable Development Goal (SDG) on water availability and sanitation for all by 2030 (SDG 6). Formally, it is: “to ensure safe drinking water and sanitation for all, focusing on the sustainable management of water resources, wastewater and ecosystems….” The latest UN World Water Development Report, 2021, titled ‘Valuing Water’, has laid stress on the proper valuation of water by considering five interrelated perspectives: water sources; water infrastructure; water services; water as an input to production and social-economic development, and socio-cultural values of water. Designing a comprehensive mix of divergent views about water (along with ecological and environmental issues) held by stakeholder groups is necessary. In this context a hydro-social cycle approach provides an appropriate framework. It repositions the natural hydrological cycle in a human-nature interactive structure and considers water and society as part of a historical and relational-dialectical process. Inter-basin transfer projects The anthropogenic factors directly influencing a freshwater system are the engineering of river channels, irrigation and other consumptive use of water, widespread land use/land cover change, change in an aquatic habitat, and point and non-point source pollution affecting water quality. The intra- and inter-basin transfer (IBT) of water is a major hydrological intervention to rectify the imbalance in water availability due to naturally prevailing unequal distribution of water resources within a given territory. There are several IBT initiatives across the world. One recent document indicates that there are 110 water transfer mega projects that have either been executed (34 projects) or being planned/under construction (76projects) across the world. The National River Linking Project of India is one of those under construction. These projects, if executed, will create artificial water courses that are more than twice the length of the earth’s equator and will transfer 1,910 km3 of water annually. They will reengineer the hydrological system with considerable local, regional and global ramifications. Based on a multi-country case study analysis, the World Wildlife Fund/World Wide Fund for Nature (2009) has suggested a cautious approach and the necessity to adhere to sustainability principles set out by the World Commission on Dams while taking up IBT projects. Some of the key assumptions Recently, inter-basin transfer of water drew attention in India due to a provision made in Budget 2022 for the Ken Betwa river link project which is a part of the National River Linking project (mooted in 1970 and revived in 1999). This decision raises larger questions about hydrological assumptions and the use and the management of freshwater resources in the country. We shall ponder over some of them. First, the basic premise of IBT is to export water from the surplus basin to a deficit basin. However, there is contestation on the concept of the surplus and deficit basin itself as the exercise is substantially hydrological. Water demand within the donor basin by factoring present and future land use, especially cropping patterns, population growth, urbanization, industrialization, social-economic development and environmental flow are hardly worked out. Besides this, rainfall in many surplus basins has been reported as declining. The status of the surplus basin may alter if these issues are considered. Second, there is concern about the present capacity utilization of water resources created in the country. By 2016, India created an irrigation potential for 112 million hectares, but the gross irrigated area was 93 million hectares. There is a 19% gap, which is more in the case of canal irrigation. In 1950-51, canal irrigation used to contribute 40% of net irrigated area, but by 2014-15, the net irrigated area under canal irrigation Ground water irrigation now covers 62.8% of net irrigated area. The average water use efficiency of irrigation projects in India is only 38% against 50%-60% in the case of developed countries. Agriculture, grey water use Even at the crop level we consume more water than the global average. Rice and wheat, the two principal crops accounting for more than 75% of agricultural production use 2,850 m3/tonnes and 1,654 m3/tonnes of water, respectively, against the global average of 2,291 m3/tonnes and 1334 m3/tonnes in the same order. The agriculture sector uses a little over 90% of total water use in India. And in industrial plants, consumption is 2times to 3.5 times higher per unit of production of similar plants in other countries. Similarly, the domestic sector experiences a 30% to 40% loss of water due to leakage. Third, grey water is hardly used in our country. It is estimated that 55% to 75% of domestic water use turns into grey water depending on its nature of use, people’s habits, climatic conditions, etc. At present, average water consumption in the domestic sector in urban areas is 135 liters to 196 liters a head a day. Given the size of India’s urban population (469 million estimated for 2021), the amount of grey water production can be well imagined. If grey water production in the rural areas is considered it will be a huge amount. The discharge of untreated grey water and industrial effluents into freshwater bodies is cause for concern. The situation will be further complicated if groundwater is affected. Apart from the inefficient use of water in all sectors, there is also a reduction in natural storage capacity and deterioration in catchment efficiency. The issues are source sustainability, renovation and maintenance of traditional water harvesting structures, grey water use efficiency, and reuse of water. Planning ahead Looking into these issues may not be adequate to address all the problems. Nevertheless, these measures will help to reduce demand supply gap in many places, and the remaining areas of scarcity can be catered to using small-scale projects. The axiom that today’s water system is co-evolving and the challenges are mainly management and governance has been globally well accepted. Water projects are politically charged and manifest an interplay of social relations, social power, and technology. It is important to include less predictable variables, revise binary ways of thinking of ‘either or’, and involve non-state actors in decision-making processes. A hybrid water management system is necessary, where (along with professionals and policy markers) the individual, a community and society have definite roles in the value chain. The challenge is not to be techno-centric but anthropogenic.