10 Nov 2020

COVID-19 pandemic creating a social disaster in India

Wasantha Rupasinghe


Despite the attempts by the Indian government of Prime Minister Narendra Modi to paint a rosy picture about the coronavirus crisis, the pandemic is continuing to spread throughout cities and villages, having already created a social catastrophe.

For all Modi’s talk of “decreasing” COVID-19 cases, every day sees 40,000 to 50,000 officially recorded new infections and 500 deaths, even though these figures are currently about half the most recent peaks in September.

Interviewed by the Economic Times on October 29, Modi did not even refer to the more than 127,000 COVID-19 deaths in the country. Instead, he said: “We should assess our coronavirus fight against the metric of how many lives we are able to save.” He claimed: “India followed a preemptive, proactive, graded, whole-of-government and whole-of-society approach to tackle the pandemic.”

Commuters wearing face mask as a precaution against the coronavirus jostle for a ride on a bus in Kolkata, India, Tuesday, July 21, 2020. (AP Photo/Bikas Das)

In reality, as a result of the failure of Modi’s Baratiya Janata Party (BJP)-led government and state governments throughout the country to stop the spread of the virus, India has become the world second-worst impacted country. According to the highly understated official figures, reported COVID-19 cases now exceed 8.5 million. More than half a million cases are still active.

India’s COVID-19 testing rate is among the lowest in the world and falling. Daily tests per thousand people have dropped from 0.86 per thousand on October 26 to 0.75 on November 2. A number of epidemiologists and medical experts have warned of a second surge during the winter and as a result of large social gatherings in the festive season following the easing of government restrictions.

Internal migrant workers

In his Times interview, Modi claimed that his “timely” lockdown “helped” to avoid “the rapid spread of the virus with many more deaths.” The truth is that the two-month lockdown was a failure and a disaster for hundreds of millions of people, mostly migrant workers. It was not accompanied by mass testing, contact tracing, the supply of basic necessities for people forced to remain indoors and, most importantly, the huge allocation of resources needed to upgrade the under-funded public health system.

More than 100 million migrant workers lost their livelihoods overnight when Modi declared a nationwide lockdown on March 24 with just four hours’ notice. Nearly 1,000 migrant workers died from starvation, exhaustion or accidents as they tried to walk home, often hundreds of kilometers from where they worked. Those unable to walk home were detained in hellish “quarantine” centres without enough food, medical care and COVID testing. When they were finally allowed to leave for their villages amid mounting unrest, many carried the virus to remote areas with virtually non-existent public health facilities.

Modi also boasted of providing “free food grain and pulses to 800 million people for eight months.” But according to a NewsClick report, which cited a survey by civil society organisations, “nearly 66 percent of rural households fell short of cash for food, nearly 40 percent of the households had reduced their food intake, 41 percent of the returned migrants were not working and only 7 percent of migrants had found work under the MGMNREGA [Mahatma Gandhi Rural Employment Guarantee Act]”.

The survey noted that “a number of households had pawned assets to buy food items, and three out of every four had experienced fear and anxiety.” It stated that “only half the returned migrants got free rations three times or more as the Modi government had promised.” Quoting a report published by the Stranded Workers Action Network, the article said 84 percent of migrant workers had received no wages from their employers during the lockdown, while 12 percent got partial payment.

Women and children

Millions of children in poor families have been deprived of education as they cannot afford internet facilities to follow online classes during the closure of schools. The Indian Express on October 12 revealed increasing child trafficking and other crimes targeting children. It reported: “As the economic distress began to sink in, a more sinister movement of children gathered pace—of those being taken away from their homes for illegal labour, trafficking and forced marriages.”

Between March and August, Childline, a national hotline established by the Ministry for Women and Child Development, received 2.7 million distress calls. Another Express article said most of the parents of trafficked children are marginal farm labourers and farmers whose income was severely impacted when they could not sell their perishable vegetables during the lockdown.

Rising other deaths

Due to the disruption of already crippled health facilities, millions of patients suffering from serious diseases like cancer, leukemia and chronic diabetes are in immense danger. An article in the Wire on October 20 painted a grim picture of the situation at the Dr Bhubaneswar Borooah Cancer Institute (BBCI) in Guwahati, the sole full-fledged cancer care centre in India’s northeast.

It showed patient visits at the BBCI fell by 50 percent during the lockdown, while the chemotherapies dropped by 42 percent, radiotherapy 56 percent and surgeries 74 percent.

According to a National Cancer Registry Program (NCRP) report, northeast India had the highest national incidence of cancers between 2012 and 2016. Even at normal times, cancer patients in the region had a hard time accessing cancer care and treatment due to the lack of medical care facilities.

It is likewise with patients suffering tuberculosis (TB), the world’s deadliest infectious disease. India accounts for a fourth of global TB cases. Due to the lockdown and reassignment of lab technicians, between January and June, TB notifications in India dipped by 25 percent from the corresponding period in 2019, according to the World Health Organisation’s annual TB report. This will translate into “millions of excess deaths from tuberculosis,” Zarir F. Udwadia, a consultant physician at Mumbai’s Hinduja Hospital, told the Wire Science.

The pandemic has adversely affected the mental health of millions of people suffering from anxiety, fear, isolation, distancing, uncertainty and emotional distress. India accounts for 15 percent of the world’s mental, neurological and substance-use disorders. According to the Wire, the health ministry has “admitted a treatment gap of 50-70 percent, and this gap has only been rising. To cater to the needs of patients, there are only 0.3 psychiatrists, 0.12 psychologists and 0.07 social workers for every 100,000 Indians.”

Another Wire article, based on data from the Indian government’s Health Management Information System, reported “drastic declines in health services during lockdown, ranging from 20 percent or so for ANC (number of pregnant women registered for antenatal care) registration to 60 percent or so for in-patient headcount and major operations.” It added: “Out-patient attendance during the lockdown was just half of normal levels.”

All these figures show that an even bigger health disaster is on the way, behind the COVID-19 pandemic.

Yet, the government and the Indian ruling class have refused to direct much-needed funds into the healthcare system. In his Times interview, Modi insisted that India was becoming a “major producer of PPE and masks” and “we are not only meeting our domestic demand but are also capable of meeting the demand of other countries.” Yet, 87,000 health care workers have been infected and 573 have died due to COVID-19, even according to the government’s own data.

India’s health budget was less than 2 percent of the country’s gross domestic product between 2009 and 2019, one of the lowest levels in the world. India ranks 184 out 191 countries in public spending on health. An estimated 62.4 percent of the current health expenditure is paid by patients themselves. The government contributes only 16.7 percent, putting India among the countries with highest out-of-pocket expenditures on health.

Police crack down on Thai protesters demanding democratic rights

Peter Symonds


The riot police clashed with thousands of protesters in the Thai capital of Bangkok on Sunday as they sought to deliver letters setting out their grievances and demands to the King Maha Vajiralongkorn. The ongoing protests, comprised mainly of students and young people, are demanding the resignation of Prime Minister Prayuth Chan-ocha and his military-backed government, a new constitution and reforms to the monarchy.

The protesters gathered at the city’s Democracy Monument before marching toward the Grand Palace, where they planned to deliver their letters. While the police estimated the number involved at 7,000, Reuters journalists put the figure at more than 10,000. After the protesters broke through police lines and pushed aside one of the buses set up as a barrier, the police used water cannon and riot police to disperse the march.

One demonstrator, Thawatchai Tongsuk, told Associated Press: “If the police gave way, I believe that the leaders would have submitted the letters and then been finished. Everyone would go home… The more violence they use, the more people will join the protest.”

The protests have continued for months despite the arrest of protest leaders and the imposition of a state of emergency. Broad layers of young people have been involved in what has been a politically diffuse movement that has included everything from references to the Hunger Games and Harry Potter to the involvement of activists demanding gay rights. The underlying motivation, however, is hostility to the political domination of the military in concert with the monarchy, the state bureaucracy and key sections of business.

Protesters occupy a main road as they gather at a junction in Bangkok, Thailand, October 15, 2020 [Credit: AP Photo/Sakchai Lalit]

Prime Minister Prayuth, as army commander in chief, led the 2014 military coup that ousted the Pheu Thai government of Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra and was installed as head of the military junta. Yingluck Shinawatra and her billionaire brother Thaksin Shinawatra, who was ousted as prime minister by the 2006 military coup, represent business whose interests have been stymied by the domination of traditional Bangkok elites.

While an election was eventually held last year, it was under an anti-democratic constitution drawn up by the military that stacked the 250-seat upper house with military appointees and allowed for the installation of an “outside prime minister”—that is one that had not stood for election. Prayuth, who did not stand for election, was appointed by a joint sitting of the upper house with the 500-seat lower house. Even then, the military’s Palang Precharath party came second in the election. It had to wheel and deal to obtain enough support to install Prayuth, who has nominally retired from the army, as prime minister.

The protesters have publicly criticised the monarchy, which has been the political linchpin of the Bangkok elites. In doing so, they risk jail terms of up to 15 years under the country’s draconian lese majeste law—the repeal of which is one of their demands. The monarchy has become even more unpopular after King Maha Vajiralongkorn was installed in 2006 following the death of his father. The king, who spends most of his time in Germany, has attempted to consolidate his personal control over the huge crown assets and elements of the military.

The protest on Sunday was designed to expose the empty character of the king’s gesture a week before. At a rally of thousands of royalists outside the Grand Palace, a reporter asked the king what he had to say to the protesters. “We love them all the same,” he declared and said Thailand was a land of compromise, hinting that concessions might be possible.

The government, however, has made no such moves. Amid an expanding protest movement, Prayuth revoked the state of emergency earlier this month and attempted to establish a meaningless “national consultation” aimed at enlisting the assistance of opposition parties. But he has flatly refused to resign. Protest leaders have rejected any participation in such a process.

The New York Times cited a right-wing royalist and publishing tycoon, Sondhi Limthongkul. At the end of last month, he called for the military to directly intervene so as to restore stability and protect the monarchy. “I see a coup as not a bad thing,” he said. Sondhi was central to whipping up yellow shirt, royalist opposition to Thaksin Shinawatra, paving the way for his overthrow in 2006.

Prayuth has refused to rule out a coup, saying in late October that he would not determine whether “there will be a coup or there won’t be a coup.” In reality, a military “coup” would do no more than shuffle the personnel in the regime, which is effectively controlled by the military in any case. However, the military would be brought onto the streets to suppress the protests, including by force. In 2010, the military violently suppressed protracted demonstrations by pro-Shinawatra “red shirts,” killing at last 90 and wounding hundreds.

The lack of a clear political program is the greatest danger confronting the protesters, who continue to have illusions in the opposition parties—including the Pheu Thai party of the Shinawatras and the smaller Move Forward Party (MFP) that, as the Future Forward Party, won a significant vote from younger people at the 2019 election. Like Pheu Thai, however, the MFP represents layers of big business that seek to end the domination of the traditional elites.

The founder of the Future Forward Party, Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit, who was disqualified from parliament earlier this year on trumped-up charges, has personal wealth of $US180 million. He was a top executive of the Thai Summit Group, which was founded by his father and is the largest auto parts manufacturer in the country.

Young people need to turn to a different political perspective. Around the world, the ruling classes, confronted with mounting economic and social crises, are resorting more and more to authoritarian forms of rule to contain and suppress growing opposition in the working class. The fight for democratic rights in Thailand is intimately bound up with an orientation to the working class, not politicians such as Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit and their parties, and the struggle based on a socialist program to abolish capitalism.

Australian Senate passes motion acknowledging “alleged” persecution of Julian Assange

Oscar Grenfell


On Monday, the Australian Senate passed a motion “noting” the plight of WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange, who is imprisoned in Britain and faces extradition to the United States for his exposure of American imperialism’s war crimes, global diplomatic intrigues and human rights violations.

The motion was the first to be passed in either house of the federal parliament that is in any way supportive of Assange, since the British police illegally arrested him in April 2019. It is one of only a handful of times the WikiLeaks founder has been mentioned in parliament following last month’s conclusion of the final British show trial hearings for his extradition on unprecedented US espionage charges, on which he could be jailed for life.

The impetus for the motion was undoubtedly concern over popular hostility toward the complicity of the parliamentary establishment in the railroading of an Australian journalist and publisher.

Over 150 legal experts and lawyers’ associations around the world condemned the British court proceedings as a legal travesty. A group of 161 prominent international political figures, including 13 former national presidents, similarly denounced the hearings as a sham and demanded Assange’s immediate freedom.

Assange with former Ecuadorian Foreign Minister Ricardo Patiño in 2013 [Credit: Xavier Granja Cedeño/Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores]

The Australian government and the Labor Party opposition, aided by the corporate media, however, maintained a stony silence throughout the trial. This was in line with the support given by the entire political establishment for escalating US militarism and its corollary—efforts to quash anti-war opposition, epitomised by the campaign to destroy Assange.

With the verdict over Assange’s extradition due on January 4, the Australian ruling elite is well aware that the widespread latent public support for the WikiLeaks founder, which they have sought to suppress, will again come to the surface.

The motion’s function was to put on record the “concerns” of some parliamentary parties, without committing them to anything. The perfunctory character of such gestures is underscored by the fact that not a single corporate media outlet, including the publicly-funded Australian Broadcasting Corporation, reported the motion. Nor does it appear that any of those who passed it have gone to any great lengths to publicise the motion.

The resolution was moved by Greens Senators Peter Whish-Wilson, Sarah Hanson-Young and Janet Rice. The motion passed with the support of Labor Party senators and some crossbenchers. Those who voted against were members of the Liberal-National Coalition government and the right-wing populist Jacqui Lambie.

The text of the motion can be described only as ambivalent, tepid and mealy-mouthed. Its form is to state a series of incontestable facts, without commenting on their significance or putting forward any clear political position.

The motion begins by “noting” that Assange is an Australian citizen, that he has a family and that he won a 2011 Walkley Award for outstanding contributions to journalism, all of which can be discovered by looking at his Wikipedia entry.

The second section “acknowledges that during the recent extradition trial, the court heard evidence about” WikiLeaks’ exposure of war crimes and human rights abuses, along with

(ii) the alleged spying operation conducted against Julian Assange by UC Global on behalf of United States (US) intelligence agencies, (iii) the alleged seizure of legally privileged material from the Ecuadorian Embassy by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, (iv) alleged plans to poison and kidnap Julian Assange, and (v) the devastating health consequences that Julian Assange is currently facing.

The final section “acknowledges” that there have been demands from local councils for the Australian government to intervene in defence of Assange, that a number of “world leaders” have called for his freedom, and that protests have been held in support of the WikiLeaks founder.

The motion abruptly concludes by noting that a British court will rule on Assange’s extradition next January. Anyone looking for an indication of what the senators themselves are planning to do will be disappointed.

Significantly, the motion was amended between the time that it was put on notice on Sunday night, and passed on Monday. The change was to place the word “alleged” before each of the references to violations of Assange’s rights by the US government and intelligence agencies.

The purpose of these amendments was to prevent any direct condemnation of the crimes of the American state against Assange, or any suggestion that the senators were preempting the decision of the British courts.

Labor, like the Coalition government, has insisted that it has “full confidence” in the British and US legal processes, despite the fact that the attempt to extradite Assange and to prosecute him for publishing activities violates international laws and domestic legislation in both the UK and US.

Labor has held fast to this position, even as it has been shown that the British judge overseeing the case has close ties to the intelligence agencies, and that Assange has been denied the right to prepare a defence, would have no prospect of a fair trial in the US, and has been deliberately imperiled by coronavirus infection by being detained in a maximum-security British prison, despite the fact that he has not been convicted of a crime.

By inserting “alleged” before each substantive statement of fact, the motion leaves Assange’s fate in the hands of the British judiciary and ruling class, which have already demonstrated that they will rubber stamp the demands of the major powers for Assange to be thrown in a US prison for the rest of his life.

Similar calculations underlie the motion’s failure to make any demands for the Australian government to intervene. Labor has echoed the government’s false claims that it can provide only worthless “consular assistance” to Assange. This has been aimed at covering-up the fact that there are substantial legal bases and precedent for a government to fight for the freedom of a citizen who is being persecuted abroad.

Behind Labor’s mask of impartiality and vague concern for Assange’s health, the party, which has the closest ties to the US and Australian intelligence agencies, is intensely hostile to the WikiLeaks founder. It was a Greens-backed Labor government that responded to WikiLeaks’ exposures of US war crimes by denouncing it in 2011 as a criminal organisation, and pledging to assist the American intelligence agencies in their campaign against Assange.

The character of the motion demonstrates again that the fight for Assange’s freedom cannot succeed through parliamentary horse-trading and appeals to the official parties.

The Greens, while claiming to oppose the persecution of Assange, have rejected calls, including from within their own ranks, for a public, party campaign demanding that the government intervene to secure his freedom. Instead, they have sought to divert opposition behind illusions in the very parliamentary set-up that is responsible for Assange’s dire plight.

This is in line with the Greens’ character as a party of the affluent upper middle-class, oriented toward forming coalitions with Labor and the Liberals, and increasingly open in its support for imperialist war.

As the Socialist Equality Party (SEP) explained in a recent congress resolution, “the only way to block Assange’s extradition to the US and secure his freedom is through the development of a mass international movement, centred in the working class. Millions of workers have entered into explosive struggles over the past years, including in Britain, the US, and, increasingly, in Australia. These will intensify over the coming period.

“The task of all those fighting for Assange’s freedom, including the SEP, is to turn to this movement, and to explain that the fight for the WikiLeaks founder’s liberty must be inscribed on the banner of every struggle in defence of democratic rights, for social equality and against war.”

GM Canada contract ratification ends 2020 negotiations at Detroit Three’s Canadian operations

Carl Bronski


Unifor announced Monday that 85 percent of those who voted accepted a new three-year contract with General Motors Canada. The agreement covers about 1,100 workers in St. Catharines, 360 workers in Oshawa (with another 175 on layoff), and 75 at the Woodstock, Ontario parts distribution center.

In a press release announcing ratification of the deal, Unifor President Jerry Dias praised the federal Liberal and Ontario Conservative governments for their “support.” The federal and provincial governments are providing well over a billion dollars in subsidies to the Detroit Three automakers—GM, Ford, and Fiat-Chrysler—as part of a union-supported restructuring of the Canadian auto industry aimed at ensuring its “global competitiveness.” The new deal will ensure that the industry continues to produce bumper profits for investors through intensified production, job-cutting, and a further erosion of workers’ rights and living standards

“I want to thank both levels of government for supporting us,” declared Dias. “We went into bargaining in the middle of a pandemic, facing great uncertainty. Now we can proudly say these three contracts will breathe new life into Canada’s auto sector.”

Jerry Dias, Unifor National President. (Image Credit: UNIFOR Canada/Facebook)

Throughout the 2020 auto negotiations Unifor has functioned as nothing more than a cheap labour contractor, offering up current and future autoworkers to be ruthlessly exploited for the profit interests of the Detroit Three transnational auto giants.

The lavish government handouts and the incentives provided to automakers to retain a significant share of their North American production in the US and Canada under the renegotiated North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) undoubtedly played a significant role in the investment pledges the Detroit Three have made to Unifor as part of the 2020 contract negotiations.

But their most important consideration was Unifor’s readiness to further enshrine and expand their use of two-tier and TPT (Temporary Part Time) workers, otherwise maintain real wages and benefits well below what they were before the 2008-9 auto industry “bailout,” and impose regressive work-rule changes.

The much-ballyhooed reopening of the Oshawa Assembly Plant in 2022, which GM has said will create up to 1,700 jobs, provides an example of this pro-corporate policy in microcosm.

There are only 175 workers from the shuttered Oshawa GM assembly operation who are currently marked as “on layoff” and therefore eligible for the projected new jobs. The rest of the 2,600 former assembly workers have either taken retirement or severance packages or are among the 300 workers who remain employed at the plant producing after-market parts.

Consequently, the vast majority of the expanded Oshawa workforce will be made up of second-tier new hires, who will have vastly inferior rights and face a lengthy eight-year “grow-in” period before they reach full pay.

There will also be a large contingent of TPT workers. They will be full-time in all but name yet have virtually no rights or prospect of obtaining permanent employment. Henceforth at least 15 percent of the Oshawa workforce will be made up of TPT workers, says the bargaining report issued by Unifor Local 222.

Unifor has also agreed to the introduction of an alternative work schedule (AWS) in Oshawa. This grants the plant’s management authority to organize shifts as they see fit, and eliminates overtime pay for most work on weekends or beyond the traditional 8-hour workday. The bargaining report notes, “(T)he company will have the ability to structure the shift’s start and end times to avoid high peak time utility costs.” It continues, “The company will maintain the ability to maximum run-time for optimal operating flexibility, inclusive of unpaid lunches (8.5-hour shifts).” In other words, autoworkers will be forced to endure anti-social shift patterns at considerable cost to their social and family lives, so as to further boost GM’s profits; and they will receive no paid meal breaks.

Buried in the union “highlights package” is an admission from Unifor that the company has in fact made “no future product commitment” to the Oshawa plant beyond 2025. GM, says the Unifor document, has committed to the reopened plant producing its hot-selling Chevy Silverado and GMC Sierra models for a “life-cycle” of at least three years, or what the union terms “well into the new Collective Agreement 2023.”

Even for those three years, GM has given no commitment to retaining a 1,700-strong workforce. The local agreement explicitly notes that new hires will be “laid off” if there is a “permanent reduction in (the work) force.”

Like GM, Ford Canada and FCA are calculating that they will reap major labour cost advantages thanks to their ability to flood their plants with low-paid new hires and TPTs. At Ford, Unifor also agreed to the introduction of the onerous Alternative Work Schedule, a concession it and the company hid from workers until after the contract ratification vote. Overtime payments for 10 hour shifts at Ford have already ended.

All three deals Unifor has brokered with the Detroit Three provide the automakers with the power to renege on their investment promises essentially at will. GM, for example, says its commitments are “conditional on stable demand, business and market conditions; the ability to continue producing profitably; and the full execution of GMS (Global Manufacturing Systems),” i.e., its global production strategy. Similar contract language has enabled GM to close three of its Canadian plants, including the Oshawa Assembly Plant in 2019, over the past decade, despite previous “guarantees” they would remain open.

The Unifor-GM deal explicitly opens the door to further contract concessions. After outlining its investment plans for all three of the facilities covered by the agreement, the GM “investment and product commitment letter” states, “The parties understand that the expected conditions upon which these opportunities are based can change, potentially affecting the product allocation and/or employment levels. If any changes to the above are anticipated, the parties will discuss in advance.”

Unifor’s imposition of savage attacks on workers’ rights is the inevitable product of its nationalist and corporatist program, which insists that workers’ jobs and benefits must be subordinated to the automakers’ profits and investor returns. The union insists that autoworkers protect the competitive position of the transnational corporations operating in Canada and compete against workers in the US, Mexico and around the world for investments and products.

The pitting of autoworkers against each other has facilitated the whipsawing of wages and benefits back and forth across North America’s borders by the globally mobile automakers and contributed to the destruction of tens of thousands of auto jobs in Canada and the United States since the 1980s.

The latest bargaining round has seen both Unifor and the UAW intensify their promotion of Canadian and American nationalism. Unifor pressed for and succeeded in obtaining three-year agreements at all of the Detroit Three’s Canadian operations, instead of the usual four-year deals. This means the new contracts will expire in Sept. 2023, at the same time as those between the UAW and Detroit Three.

This was not done to unify workers across the borders for a common fight. On the contrary, Dias justified Unifor’s push for a common expiry date with the complaint that the UAW scooped up all the new product-placements before Unifor got to the bargaining table a year later. Opposed to a joint struggle of US and Canadian autoworkers, Unifor’s aim is to go head to head with the UAW in a bidding war, to determine which union apparatus can provide the automakers the most lucrative terms, in a race to the bottom at workers’ expense.

The UAW, for its part, has reacted with its own outburst of American nationalism to the news that GM is restarting truck production in Oshawa. “It's a little disappointing they didn’t give us a chance at increasing our line speed vs. retooling another plant,” Eric Welter, the UAW Local 598 chairman at the Flint Truck plant, told the Detroit News. “It's not a concern today or tomorrow,” said Rich LeTourneau, UAW Local 2209 plant chairman in Fort Wayne, Indiana, “but … (when) there has to be a volume reduction somewhere. Where does that hit?”

While Unifor proved able to impose savage attacks on autoworkers across the Detroit Three’s Canadian operations during the 2020 bargaining round, significant signs of opposition did emerge. These included substantial minorities voting ‘no’ in all three ratification votes, and the widespread readership among autoworkers achieved by articles and statements from the WSWS Autoworker Newsletter.

In opposition to the nationalist poison spewed by Unifor, the UAW and other unions, autoworkers are increasingly aware that they have to unite their struggle across borders to fight the transnational corporations. This was demonstrated in the courageous stand taken by the GM workers in Silao, Mexico who defied the corrupt CTM union and refused to accept added work during the 2019 GM strike in the US. Workers in the US and Canada expressed their solidarity with the Silao workers who were victimized for taking a stand.

The task now facing autoworkers is to translate this opposition into a conscious political struggle against the automakers’ insatiable drive for profit and their junior partners in Unifor. As the sweeping union-backed concessions come into force in the plants in the weeks and months ahead, the formation of rank-and-file action committees by autoworkers in every plant to fight for decent working conditions and a safe and healthy workplace will be posed with ever greater urgency. The struggle to establish such committees must decisively reject Unifor’s Canadian nationalism and subordination of workers’ jobs and livelihoods to corporate profits.

Wall Street and global stocks boosted by news of COVID-19 vaccine

Nick Beams


The announcement by Pfizer early on Monday morning that its COVID-19 vaccine had proved 90 percent effective in trials produced a surge on Wall Street when trading began for the day and boosted markets around the world.

The S&P 500 index immediately jumped by around 4 percent to record an intraday record high before finishing the day up by 1.2 percent. The Dow jumped by more than 1000 points at one stage, putting it in sight of breaching the 30,000 mark, before falling back at the close of the day.

There was, however, a significant divergence in the market as the tech-heavy NASDAQ index fell by 2.2 percent This was due to a shift away from stocks that have benefited as a result of the pandemic and working from home. So-called hot “momentum” stocks, such as Zoom, Video Communications, PayPal and Netflix were among the biggest losers.

The divergence continued yesterday as the Dow rose by a further 263 points, or 0.9 percent, the S&P dropped by 0.1 percent and the NASDAQ was down by 1.4 percent. But even after these falls, the NASDAQ remains 28 percent higher than at the start of the year.

Covid-19 vaccine (AP Photo)

The bifurcation in the market reflects a turn by Wall Street investors to so-called value stocks—those companies that have been hammered as a result of the pandemic—and are looking to a return to more normal conditions in the event that a vaccine can be successfully developed and rolled out.

But the change in the market does not indicate any underlying strength in the economy. Rather it is an expression of the highly speculative character of shifts by Wall Street investors based on the assumption that growth will start to return.

As the New York Times commented in an article on Monday’s surge: “With little changed on the ground, the market’s exuberance can be confounding. After all, the United States is still setting records for new coronavirus cases, the economy is still in the grip of a recession, and it could be months before a vaccine is widely available. But investing by its nature looks to the future, and on Monday investors were basing their buying and selling on their expectations of what the world could look like in a few months, rather than what it looks like today.”

In other words, the market surge is a major gamble amid signs that it could rapidly run out of steam. And market turbulence could result from another significant development—the rise in the yield on the US 10-year Treasury bond which has recorded a sharp increase in the last few days after plunging to record lows.

The yield on the bond, which forms a base rate for rates across the economy, has risen to as high as 0.97 percent, a level last reached in March. Bob Michele, the chief investment officer at JP Morgan Asset Management, told the Financial Times that it could go as high as 1.25 percent.

An increase in interest rates would raise borrowing costs for corporations which have raised large amounts of debt to take advantage of ultra-low credit orchestrated by the Fed, which has poured trillions of dollars into financial markets.

Michele argued that the Fed was unlikely to let Treasury yields to spike significantly, given the potential financial damage.

“This can only go as far as the Fed is willing to let it go,” he said. “They are not going to let it go crazy because that could derail the recovery.”

It is a measure of how dependent financial markets have become on the actions of the central bank and how far their operations have moved from the past that the prospect of an economic “recovery” and a return of interest rates on Treasury bonds to something resembling more “normal” conditions could be the source of market turbulence.

The Fed has indicated it intends to keep interest rates at their present ultra-low levels until the end of 2023 and is intervening in bond markets to the tune of $80 billion per month—a rate of almost $1 trillion per year—to hold them down. It may have to increase its level in the coming period because of the increase in government debt.

As the Financial Times noted in an article earlier this month, in order to “insure against a destabilising rise in borrowing costs that could upend the economic recovery, some market participants believe the Fed must soon focus the bulk of its bond-buying on longer term debt, or increase the aggregate size of its purchases.”

The rise on Wall Street has been broadly replicated on global financial markets. Japan’s Nikkei index rose by more than 2 percent on Monday after passing through the 25,000 level on Friday for the first time in more than three decades.

Europe’s Stoxx 600 index was up by 4 percent on Monday, its biggest increase since May, and the MSCI All Country World index of global stocks hit a record after rising by 1.3 percent on the day.

But with the surge in the pandemic in Europe and the prospect of a further contraction likely to shatter earlier forecasts for a revival in the further quarter, jobless levels are set to rise again.

According to research issued by the European Central Bank, one in seven Spanish workers are employed in businesses, excluding financial firms, which are at risk of a collapse. The figures for Germany and France are 8 percent, and 10 percent in Italy. Companies at risk of collapse are defined as those having negative working capital and high debt levels despite receiving subsidies.

Indian Navy: Time to Expand the Geographical Scope of Mission Based Deployments

Vijay Sakhuja


The Indian Navy has added a new acronym—TIDE—to its lexicon, which stands for Trust; Interoperability; Domain Awareness; and Enhanced Engagements. In his online 
address, titled “SAGAR - Charting India’s Maritime Security,” to the National Defence College, India’s Navy Chief, Adm Karambir Singh, emphasised that TIDE is closely linked with Indian Prime Minister Narendera Modi’s vision of Security and Growth for All in the Region (SAGAR), an initiate that was announced five years ago in Mauritius.

Adm Singh also alluded to the Indian Navy’s three ‘Lines of Effort’: (a) collaboration and cooperation; (b) enhancing positive influence in the region; and (c) enhancing reach and sustenance in the farthest corners of India’s areas of interest, which resonate with “like-minded maritime nations, and are focused towards pursuance of our overall national and regional maritime objectives.” However, in the same breath, ostensibly referring to China, he was unequivocal that the ‘global commons’ could emerge as ‘contested seas’ threatening free flow of commerce and trade. Addressing this, he argued, necessitates a “pragmatic and outcome based strategy, rather than a purely conceptual.”

Although it is fashionable for militaries to coin acronyms for long or complex formulations for use in their day-to-day operational and administrative functioning, Adm Singh’s acronym, TIDE, embeds three important security discourses—cooperative, convergent, and competitive. These are also echoed in India’s politico-diplomatic thinking and strategic decision-making.

The ‘cooperative’ discourse is led by SAGAR, which motivates states to “conserve and sustainably use the maritime domain, and to make meaningful efforts to create a safe, secure and stable maritime domain.” Its primary focus is on the Indian Ocean, in which India is an important player and has been labelled as the ‘net security provider’. Its contribution to regional grouping such as the Indian Ocean Rim Association (IORA), the Indian Ocean Commission (IOC), the Djibouti Code of Conduct, the Indian Ocean Naval Symposium (IONS) etc is worth mentioning.

The ‘convergent’ security discourse is the Indo-Pacific Oceans Initiative (IPOI), flagged by Prime Minister Modi at the November 2019 East Asia Summit in Bangkok. It is an ‘open global initiative’ and draws on “existing regional cooperation architecture and mechanisms to focus on seven central pillars conceived around Maritime Security; Maritime Ecology; Maritime Resources; Capacity Building and Resource Sharing; Disaster Risk Reduction and Management; Science, Technology and Academic Cooperation; and Trade Connectivity and Maritime Transport.” These are to be achieved by creating partnerships with interested countries. Significantly, India’s vision of the IPOI resonates with Japan’s Free and Open Indo Pacific, which envisages combining two continents (Asia and Africa) and two oceans (Pacific Ocean and Indian Ocean); and the ASEAN Outlook on Indo-Pacific, which seeks cooperation in a broad range of areas of maritime collaboration, connectivity, UN Sustainable Development Goals 2030, economy etc.

TIDE’s ‘competitive’ discourse is reflected in the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (QSD) that is associated with the Malabar series of naval exercises, involving India, Japan and the US (which now includes Australia). These fit into New Delhi’s broad understanding of the Indo-Pacific that is centered on China albeit with varying interpretations. Undeniably, the Indo-Pacific is an arena of a power shift (relative and real) and has a bearing on the global security order.

There is ample evidence of competitive security at play in the Indo-Pacific. In particular, the western Pacific Ocean has emerged as the centre of gravity of naval presence, aggressive posturing and maritime/naval infrastructure development. The US has announced the Pacific Deterrence Initiative; has conducted unprecedented multi-carrier operations; and has relentlessly undertaken Freedom of Navigation Operations in the South China Sea. China’s navy has responded in equal measure such as by carrier operations; simultaneous naval-air drills in different sea areas; launching DF series ballistic missiles (carrier killers) in the South China Sea; and military intimidation of Taiwan. The Australian and Japanese navies have conducted high end naval exercises. The French navy too is proactively engaged in multilateral naval exercises; the Canadian navy is making its presence in the region; the British Royal Navy has plans for long deployment in the region by its new carrier; and it would not be surprising to see the German navy in the region in the coming future.

Since June 2017, the Indian Navy has engaged in Mission Based Deployments (MBD) for enhanced Maritime Domain Awareness, and its warships, submarines and aircraft have been deployed in the Indian Ocean on near continuous basis for Presence and Surveillance Missions off critical choke points/sea lanes. It is fair to argue that the future of Indo-Pacific security will be determined in the western Pacific. The Indian navy is not new to the western Pacific, given that it has conducted the Malabar naval exercises in the region (off Guam and the Sea of Japan). The MBDs must avoid being labelled as the proverbial ‘frog in the well’ and expand into the western Pacific.

MTN Global Graduate Programme 2021

Application Deadline: Ongoing

To be Taken at (Country): African countries listed below

About the Award: MTN’s Global Graduate Development Programme seeks to source, develop, and accelerate top graduates from across MTN’s footprint in Africa and the Middle East. The programme offers a privileged experience that fast-tracks talented individuals into critical roles at MTN. The MTN Graduate Development Programme combines both formal development in partnership with Duke Corporate Education and the MTN Academy, as well as on-the-job development through full employment and placement into a strategically aligned role.

The formal component includes modules at MTN’s 3 regional learning centres, located in Southern, Northern and Western Africa.

Type: Job

Eligibility: You should be

  • An African in the following countries
  • 27 years

You must have completed or be studying towards a qualification with the following:

  • minimum 65%
  • bachelors degree
  • 14 disciplines

You must have experience with the following

  • Digital Marketing
  • Commerce
  • Economics
  • Marketing
  • Business Administration

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Award:

  • Financial rewards for performance
  • Global induction
  • Free or subsidised mobile phone
  • Medical Aid
  • Laptop/tablet
  • Staff discounts
  • Career development resources
  • Pension scheme
  • Subsidised canteen services
  • Flexible working hours

Duration of Award: Fulltime.

How to Apply: Click your country’s link below:

MTN Global Graduate Programme 2021 – Cameroon

MTN Global Graduate Programme 2021 – eSwatini

MTN Global Graduate Programme 2021 – RSA

MTN Global Graduate Programme 2021 – Uganda

MTN Global Graduate Programme 2021 – Zambia

Visit Award Webpage for Details

African Development Bank Group (AfDB) Call for Papers on the Impact of COVID-19 on African Economies

Application Deadline: 15th November, 2020. 

About the Award: The issue will analyze the impact of COVID-19 on African economies with an emphasis on submissions that address the socio-economic impacts of this pandemic, as well as policy implications. A combination of both theoretical and empirical contributions deriving from forefront of economic models is highly encouraged.

Eligible Field(s): Submitted papers should relate directly to the covid-19 pandemic, including but not limited to the following areas:

  • Accommodative Public Policies and Potential Effects
  • African and Global Supply Chain Disruptions
  • Business Bankruptcies: Winners and Losers
  • COVID-19 and Gender Issues
  • Debt Sustainability Considerations
  • Embedding Behavioral Insights into Policy
  • Emerging Opportunities in the Aftermath of the Crisis
  • Government Capacity Constraints in Fragile Contexts
  • Health Impacts and Opportunities for Strengthening Public Health
  • Human Development Challenges in the Time of Pandemics
  • National Economic Resilience in Response to the Outbreak
  • Socio-economic Impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic

Type: Call for Papers

Eligibility:

  • Submitted papers should not be under consideration elsewhere.
  • Submissions will be screened with respect to their relevance to the theme of the special issue and then will be peer reviewed according to ADRev standards.
  • Manuscripts will be checked for plagiarism before review.
  • To be accepted, submitted papers should be in English or French, not exceed 7,000 words in length and be preceded by a 200-word abstract.
  • Papers submitted after the deadline will be rejected.

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Award: No fee is required to submit for this special issue.

How to Apply: Interested authors should submit their manuscript online via

https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/adrev(link is external). Kindly indicate that the submission is for the special issue.

For more information, please contact Yaya Koloma (y.koloma@afdb.org(link sends e-mail)) and Adeleke Salami (a.salami@afdb.org(link sends e-mail))

PDF iconDownload the call for papers

Visit Award Webpage for Details

Own Nothing and Be Happy: Being Human in 2030

Colin Todhunter


The World Economic Forum’s (WEF) annual meeting at the end of January in Davos, Switzerland, brings together international business and political leaders, economists and other high-profile individuals to discuss global issues. Driven by the vision of its influential CEO Klaus Schwab, the WEF is the main driving force for the dystopian ‘great reset’, a tectonic shift that intends to change how we live, work and interact with each other.

The great reset entails a transformation of society resulting in permanent restrictions on fundamental liberties and mass surveillance as entire sectors are sacrificed to boost the monopoly and hegemony of pharmaceuticals corporations, high-tech/big data giants, Amazon, Google, major global chains, the digital payments sector, biotech concerns, etc.

Using COVID-19 lockdowns and restrictions to push through this transformation, the great reset is being rolled out under the guise of a ‘Fourth Industrial Revolution’ in which older enterprises are to be driven to bankruptcy or absorbed into monopolies, effectively shutting down huge sections of the pre-COVID economy. Economies are being ‘restructured’ and many jobs will be carried out by AI-driven machines.

In a short video showcased on social media, the WEF predicts that by 2030, “You’ll own nothing and you’ll be happy.” A happy smiling face is depicted while a drone delivers a product to a household, no doubt ordered online and packaged by a robot in a giant Amazon warehouse: ‘no humans were involved in manufacturing, packaging or delivering this product’; rest assured, it is virus- and bacteria-free – because even in 2030, they will need to keep the fear narrative alive and well to maintain full-spectrum dominance over the population.

The jobless (and there will be many) could be placed on some kind of universal basic income and have their debts (indebtedness and bankruptcy on a massive scale is the deliberate result of lockdowns and restrictions) written off in return for handing their assets to the state or more precisely the financial institutions helping to drive this great reset. The WEF says the public will ‘rent’ everything they require: stripping the right of ownership under the guise of ‘sustainable consumption’ and ‘saving the planet’. Of course, the tiny elite who rolled out this great reset will own everything.

Hundreds of millions around the world deemed ‘surplus to requirements’ are to be robbed (are currently being robbed) of their livelihoods. Our every movement and purchase are to be monitored and our main dealings will be online.

The plan for individual citizens could reflect the strategy to be applied to nation states. For instance, World Bank Group President David Malpass has stated that poorer countries will be ‘helped’ to get back on their feet after the various lockdowns that have been implemented. This ‘help’ will be on condition that neoliberal reforms and the undermining of public services are implemented and become further embedded.

On 20 April, the Wall Street Journal ran the headline ‘IMF, World Bank Face Deluge of Aid Requests From Developing World. Scores of countries are asking for bailouts and loans from financial institutions with $1.2 trillion to lend. An ideal recipe for fueling dependency.

In return for debt relief or ‘support’, global conglomerates along with the likes of Bill Gates will be able to further dictate national policies and hollow out the remnants of nation state sovereignty.

Identity and meaning

What will happen to our social and personal identity? Is that to be eradicated in the quest to commodify and standardise human behaviour and everything we do?

The billionaire class who are pushing this agenda think they can own nature and all humans and can control both, whether through geoengineering the atmosphere, for example, genetically modifying soil microbes or doing a better job than nature by producing bio-synthesised fake food in a lab.

They think they can bring history to a close and reinvent the wheel by reshaping what it means to be human. And they think they can achieve this by 2030. It is a cold dystopian vision that wants to eradicate thousands of years of culture, tradition and practices virtually overnight.

And many of those cultures, traditions and practices relate to food and how we produce it and our deep-rooted connections to nature. Consider that many of the ancient rituals and celebrations of our forebears were built around stories and myths that helped them come to terms with some of the most basic issues of existence, from death to rebirth and fertility. These culturally embedded beliefs and practices served to sanctify their practical relationship with nature and its role in sustaining human life.

As agriculture became key to human survival, the planting and harvesting of crops and other seasonal activities associated with food production were central to these customs. Freyfaxi marks the beginning of the harvest in Norse paganism, for example, while Lammas or Lughnasadh is the celebration of the first harvest/grain harvest in Paganism.

Humans celebrated nature and the life it gave birth to. Ancient beliefs and rituals were imbued with hope and renewal and people had a necessary and immediate relationship with the sun, seeds, animals, wind, fire, soil and rain and the changing seasons that nourished and brought life. Our cultural and social relationships with agrarian production and associated deities had a sound practical base.

Prof Robert W Nicholls explains that the cults of Woden and Thor were superimposed on far older and better-rooted beliefs related to the sun and the earth, the crops and the animals and the rotation of the seasons between the light and warmth of summer and the cold and dark of winter.

We need look no further than India to appreciate the important relationship between culture, agriculture and ecology, not least the vital importance of the monsoon and seasonal planting and harvesting. Rural-based beliefs and rituals steeped in nature persist, even among urban Indians. These are bound to traditional knowledge systems where livelihoods, the seasons, food, cooking, processing, seed exchange, healthcare and the passing on of knowledge are all inter-related and form the essence of cultural diversity within India itself.

Although the industrial age resulted in a diminution of the connection between food and the natural environment as people moved to cities, traditional ‘food cultures’ – the practices, attitudes and beliefs surrounding the production, distribution and consumption of food – still thrive and highlight our ongoing connection to agriculture and nature.

‘Hand of god’ imperialism

If we go back to the 1950s, it is interesting to note Union Carbide’s corporate narrative based on a series of images that depicted the company as a ‘hand of god’ coming out of the sky to ‘solve’ some of the issues facing humanity. One of the most famous images is of the hand pouring the firm’s agrochemicals on Indian soils as if traditional farming practices were somehow ‘backward’.

Despite well-publicised claims to the contrary, this chemical-driven approach did not lead to higher food production according to the paper ‘New Histories of the Green Revolution’ written by Prof Glenn Stone. However, it has had long-term devastating ecological, social and economic consequences (see Vandana Shiva’s book ‘The Violence of the Green Revolution’ and Bhaskar Save’s now famous and highly insightful open letter to Indian officials).

In the book ‘Food and Cultural Studies’ (Bob Ashley et al), we see how, some years ago, a Coca Cola TV ad campaign sold its product to an audience which associated modernity with a sugary drink and depicted ancient Aboriginal beliefs as harmful, ignorant and outdated. Coke and not rain became the giver of life to the parched. This type of ideology forms part of a wider strategy to discredit traditional cultures and portray them as being deficient and in need of assistance from ‘god-like’ corporations.

What we are seeing in 2020, is an acceleration of such processes. In terms of food and agriculture, traditional farming in places like India will be under increasing pressure from the big-tech giants and agribusiness to open up to lab-grown food, GMOs, genetically engineered soil microbes, data harvesting tools and drones and other ‘disruptive’ technologies.

The great reset includes farmerless farms being manned by driverless machines, monitored by drones and doused with chemicals to produce commodity crops from patented GM seeds for industrial ‘biomatter’ to be processed and constituted into something resembling food. What will happen to the farmers?

Post-COVID, the World Bank talks about helping countries get back on track in return for structural reforms. Are tens of millions of smallholder farmers to be enticed from their land in return for individual debt relief and universal basic income? The displacement of these farmers and the subsequent destruction of rural communities and their cultures was something the Gates Foundation once called for and cynically termed “land mobility”.

Cut through the euphemisms and it is clear that Bill Gates – and the other incredibly rich individuals behind the great reset – is an old-fashioned colonialist who supports the time-honoured dispossessive strategies of imperialism, whether this involves mining, appropriating and commodifying farmer knowledge, accelerating the transfer of research and seeds to corporations or facilitating intellectual property piracy and seed monopolies created through IP laws and seed regulations.

In places like India – still an agrarian-based society – will the land of these already (prior to COVID) heavily indebted farmers then be handed over to the tech giants, the financial institutions and global agribusiness to churn out their high-tech, data-driven GM industrial sludge? Is this part of the ‘own nothing, be happy’ bland brave new world being promoted by the WEF?

With the link completely severed between food production, nature and culturally embedded beliefs that give meaning and expression to life, we will be left with the individual human who exists on lab-based food, who is reliant on income from the state and who is stripped of satisfying productive endeavour and genuine self-fulfilment.

Technocratic meddling has already destroyed or undermined cultural diversity, meaningful social connections and agrarian ecosystems that draw on centuries of traditional knowledge and are increasingly recognised as valid approaches to secure food security (for example, see Food Security and Traditional Knowledge in India in the Journal of South Asian Studies). The massive technocratic transformation currently envisaged regards humans as commodities to be controlled and monitored just like the lifeless technological drones and AI being promoted.

But do not worry – you will be property-less and happy in your open prison of mass unemployment, state dependency, track and chip health passports, cashlessness, mass vaccination and dehumanisation.

The diaspora in politics: the world offers a lesson for India

S Faizi


India is excited about an Indian origin Kamala Haris getting elected as the Vice President of USA. Kerala was particularly excited the other day when Priyanca Radhakrishnan, a first generation migrant from Kerala was appointed as a minister in the new government of  Jacinda Arden of New Zealand. Neither in the case of Kamala nor Priyanca almost no one in their respective  countries questioned their ‘foreignness’. This is in sharp contrast to India where a key political asset of a political party that has now come to power is the foreign origin of a leader of their opposite camp.

Has an Indian become prime minister in a foreign country, was a rhetorical refrain of the now-moderate LK Advani in the 1999 parliament election campaign meetings, to attack Sonia Gandhi. It was as if he was ignorant of the political life of the Indian diaspora; the Congress too seemed to be uninformed. The Congress party did not give him an informed response but was using in their campaigns an article I wrote in a newspaper about the political positions people of Indian origin holding in their adopted countries.

The world has been open and tolerant to Indian immigrants entering politics and holding key political positions, both in developing countries and developed countries, and in nearly all regions of the world. This is when we have no single political leader of foreign origin in India other than Sonia Gandhi and she is attacked more on account of her ethnic origin than for her alleged wrongs. It is not that we have a shortage of naturalised Indians of foreign origin and their descendants. I am happy to see Priyanca in sari and wearing bindi which her non-Indian voters did not find acceptable, while Sonia Gandhi has to entirely distance herself from her Italian cultural roots.

While the countries of the world are open and welcoming to Indians landing there, whether as indentured labourers of yore or modern day economic immigrants, the ideas of exclusion and ostracization inherent in our culture expresses itself when it comes to foreigners holding public offices in our country. The millennia old theologically ordained caste system that ostracises a large body of Indians cannot be readily welcoming to people of foreign origin even as we benefit from the liberal minds of foreign societies. The elevation of Indian origin persons to political positions in foreign lands is surprisingly large and is beyond the caste and religious barriers often found in India.

Singapore elected a Keralite as its president long before a Keralite was elected as the president of India.  No one in Singapore opposed Devan Nair on the basis of his descent or his religion in a country where the Indian fecundity was at play, like anywhere else. (The only response to the Indian fecundity has been Lee Kuan arranging ‘match-making’ luxury voyages to the Chinese origin young people!). And years later one more president of Indian descent, S R Nathan, was elected. Malaysia always has 4-5 ministers of Indian descent in the cabinet, reflecting country’s splendid diversity. Fiji too has several ministers of Indian descent.

Mauritius, a fairly prosperous country off the coast of Africa, had several presidents and prime ministers of Indian origin. The current prime minister is Pravind Jugnauth of Indian descent. The last president was the Indian origin Aminah Gurrim-Fakim who succeeded the Indian origin Kailash Purryag. No one questioned them on their ethnic identity nor does anyone in the country makes the Hindu population growth, which is close to 50 per cent, an issue.

Salim Ahmed Salim, whose mother was of Indian origin, was the prime minister of Tanzania, and later headed the Organisation of African Unity. South Africa always had 3-4 ministers of Indian origin since its liberation into democracy. The Indian community had also played an important role in the freedom movement of the country. UK has three cabinet ministers of Indian origin while the prime minister of Portugal Antonio Costa whose father is Indian. No one in Portugal made an issue the foreign descent of this socialist leader, nor did anyone in Ireland raise questions about the ethnic origin of   Leo Varadkar, their young prime minister, whose father was from India. Imagine how these ethnic questions would have been made an issue in India if leading politicians had such foreign blood relation.

Canada has four ministers of Indian origin and there are 22 MPs too. Justin Trudeau had commented that he had more Sikhs in his ministry than Modi had, such a comment by an Indian PM about a hypothetical population group of foreign descent could trigger a harangue in the country and the next election would be fought on this issue. President Irfaan Ali of Guyana is half Indian, and so was the former president Jagan Cheddi. Long time Secretary General of Commonwealth Sridath Ramphal was of Indian origin from Guyana. Kamala Prasad Bissessar of Indian descent had been a prime minister of Trinidad and Tobago while Noor Mohamad Hassanali of Indian origin had been a president.

This is a wonderful story of success of the Indian diaspora, achieved through hard work and dedication. And it also happens so because the world is by and large open and tolerant unlike what is injected into the Indian psyche by some political forces. Interestingly, the authors of these achievements are representative of the composite India, the rainbow of different languages, ethnic groups and religions, and not like the domination of a few privileged social groups. The diaspora, the beneficiaries of host  societies that value diversity and tolerance, should vigorously seek to contribute to the efforts to transform India too into such a society that truly value diversity and tolerance, especially in these trying times for the country. Lest their own future abroad is at stake as the discrimination and atrocities in India are gaining global attention.