9 PM Daily Brief – June 29th,2020

Good evening dear reader.

Here is our 9pm current affairs brief for you today

9 PM for Main examination

GS-2

1. On Jammu and Kashmir Domicile Law
2. Resolving border disputes in South Asia
3. Making sense of China’s calculations
4. Understanding China’s actions in Ladakh

9 PM for Preliminary examination

FACTLy

1.On Jammu and Kashmir Domicile Law

Source: The Hindu

Syllabus: GS-2- Functions and responsibilities of the Union and the States, issues and challenges pertaining to the federal structure, devolution of powers and finances up to local levels and challenges therein.

Context: The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) had issued the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation (Adaptation of State Laws) Order, 2020 which defines Domicile Criteria for UT of J&K.

Permanent Residents of Jammu and Kashmir

• Article 35A of the Indian Constitution empowered Jammu and Kashmir legislature to define state’s permanent residents and their special rights and privileges. The law was inserted in the Constitution through a Presidential order of 1954.
• J&K defined its permanent residents as all persons born or settled within the state before 1911 or after having lawfully acquired immovable property and residence in the state for not less than 10 years or prior to that date.All emigrants from Jammu and Kashmir, including those who migrated to Pakistan are considered state subjects. The descendants of emigrants are considered state subjects for two generations.
• Further, the law prohibited non-permanent residents from settling permanently in the state, acquiring immovable property, government jobs, scholarships and aid.
• Article 35A was scrapped in august 2019. In March 2020, the concept of “permanent resident of the State” was discontinued in J&K.

What is the new J&K domicile rule?

Under the new rules, a person has to fulfil the following conditions to be deemed to be a domicile of the Union Territory (UT) of J&K:

• The person has resided in J&K for 15 years or has studied in the state for seven years and appeared in either the Class 10 or the Class 12 examination in J&K (or)
• The person is registered as a migrant by the Relief and Rehabilitation Commissioner (Migrants) in the UT of J&K (or)
• They are children of Central Government Officials, Officials of PSUs and among others who have served in J&K for a total period of ten years (or)
• The children of residents of J&K who reside outside the Union Territory in connection with employment or business but whose parents fulfil any of the above conditions will also be entitled to domicile status.

Positive Implication of the new Domicile Rule: Refugees from Pakistan, sanitary workers resettled from other parts of India and Gorkhas who arrived as soldiers before Independence were not given permanent resident status leading to a denial of opportunities to them in education, employment and politics. The new domicile rules will give employment and educational rights to the marginalised.

Concerns over new Domicile Rules:

• The amended domicile law was made in exercise of power under the J&K Reorganization Act 2019 that has been challenged in a number of petitions before the Supreme Court of India
• According to two main political parties in J&K, the new domicile rule will change the demography of J&K by allowing immigrants.
• Further, there are concerns that there could be dispossession of land and a shrinking of economic opportunities for local people.

 2.Resolving border disputes in South Asia

Source –The Hindu

Syllabus – GS 2 – India and its neighborhood- relations

Context – In the backdrop of troublesome territorial assertions, the South Asian region needs to be rethought of as a region of regions.

Ongoing territorial assertions:

1. Kalapani dispute between India and Nepal
2.  Ladakh – Galwan valley dispute between India and China

Issues witnessed in solving the territorial dispute

1. State-centrism– State-centrism, within the assumption of a South Asia, has given the state structure the propriety to be the sole arbiter of disputes, if any, among communities and regions falling within the territorial limits of nation states. This means that territorial boundaries are valued more than lives, livelihoods and the well-being of the people located at the edges of nation states.
2. Region is contested idea– The term “region” seems to be a contested idea in a South Asian context as none of the South Asian states has ever recognized and respected the idea of regional identity or regional politics. South Asia needs to be rethought, not as a region of states, but as a region of regions.

Reason for equating South Asia as region of region:

1. Lifestyle of people– The people living at the edges of nation states within South Asia does not actually belong to any of the two nation states. Or in other words, they belong to both the states at the same time as they frequently move from one nation to other for economic livelihood, to meet their ethnic relatives etc.
2. Success of regional groupings– The state centric view of nations and mere rhetoric of regional cooperation is going to endanger the future of other regional experiments such as the Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation (BIMSTEC) or the Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Nepal (BBIN) sub-regional initiative.

Way Forward– Both India and Nepal as well as other South Asian countries need to rethink South Asia as a region of regions before they submit to the enticements of a new language of “regional cooperation” to solve existing issues and for peace in region.

3.Making sense of China’s calculations

Source: The Hindu

Syllabus: GS-2 India and its neighbourhood- relations.

Context: A direct confrontation between India and China has resulted in the number of casualties in Galwan Valley.

Background:

• On June22-23, the Corps Commanders of India and China appeared to reach a mutual consensus to disengage and embark on lowering tensions through a gradual and verifiable disengagement.
• The Chinese posts in the Galwan area are being restored in bigger size than before.

It would be judicious to view Galwan faceoff as signifying a new and fractious phase in China-India relations.

Appearing of new Normal in India-China relations:

• The debate on the Indian side: It has been limited to betrayal of China in its violation of the status quo. For example- Former PM accused China of brazenly and illegally seeking to claim parts of Indian Territory such as the Galwan Valley and Pangong Tso.
• Reaction of China: It has been consistent that India must move out of Galwan. The incident at Galwan cannot be viewed as a mere replay of what took place in Depsang (2013), Chumar (2014) and Doklam (2017).
• New and Different situation:
  • China’s assertion of its claims needs careful analysis. For example- Point 14 in LAC gives China a virtual stranglehold over the newly completed and strategically significant, Darbuk-Shyok-Daulat Beg Oldie Road, which leads on to the Karakoram Pass.
  • Changing status quo:By keeping the whole of Galwan Valley by China.
• Existence of Ambiguity regarding the LAC in this sector:
  • The Chinese claim line is that of November 1959 while for India the LAC is that of September 1962.
  • By its unilateral declaration, China is seeking to settle the matter in its favour.

India is not able to fully understand the Chinese actions.

Shortcomings in dealing of India with China:

• Importance of Aksai Chin:
  • Charge against Indian administration: While China has consistently asserted its claims over the whole of Aksai Chin, India has chosen to overlook China’s more recent postures in this region.
  • Strategic importance: Aksai Chin provides direct connectivity between two of the most troubled regions of China, viz., Xinjiang and Tibet which does not seem to have been adequately factored into our calculations.
  • Overlooking China’s reservations: Indian policy makers overlooked the fact that for China’s military planners, the carving out of Ladakh into a UT posed a threat to China’s peace and tranquility.
• On intelligence assessment:
  • Timing and nature of China’s actions:It should have aroused keen interest in intelligence circles about China’s strategic calculations. The Chinese build-up in the area did not require any great intelligence effort as there was little attempt at concealment by the Chinese.
  • India also possesses high quality imagery intelligence (IMINT) and signals intelligence (SIGINT) capabilities, distributed between the National Technical Research Organisation, the Directorate of Signals Intelligence of the Ministry of Defence and other agencies, which made it possible to track Chinese movement.
  • Weakness in interpretations of available intelligence: It failed to provide a coherent assessment of China’s real intentions. While India’s technological capabilities for intelligence collection have vastly increased in recent years, the capacity for interpretation and analysis has not kept pace with this.
  • China preoccupation: The analyst should also consider that for China, India is feeling emboldened because of its growing strategic alignment with the US.
  • Weakening of intelligence assessment system: Due to the decision of the National Security Council Secretariat (NSCS) to dismantle the Joint Intelligence Committee which has the principal responsibility for intelligence assessment and analysis concerning China.
• Limitations of summit meets:
  • The preference given recently to Summit diplomacy over traditional foreign policy making structures does not prove to be beneficial.
  • India’s Summit diplomacy has tended to marginalise the MEA with regard to policy making.
  • The general tilt towards the US has resulted in an imbalance in the way the MEA perceives problems and situations.

Way Forward

The Indian Policy makers should consider all the relevant intelligence gathering to understand the actions of China.

 4.Understanding China’s actions in Ladakh

Source: The Indian Express

Syllabus: GS 2-India and its neighbourhood- relations

Context: The motive behind China’s incursion in Ladakh is to push India to settle the boundary issue and cede Aksai Chin to China.

Pattern of China’s experiments of settling borders:

• The Chinese border negotiation tactics are generally blended “incentives with coercion”.
• With Kazakhstan: China settled for a third of territories it claimed and Kazakhs admitted that they had gained. Also, Kazakhstan denounced Uyghur separatism and curb anti-China activities.
• With Kyrgyzstan: Kyrgyzstan ceded 1,20,000 hectares in a dubious exchange for Chinese assistance.
• With Tajikistan: China claimed some 28,000 sq km and Tajikistan surrendered 1,100 square miles in 2010.
• China ultimately gained a bit of land, nixed the Uyghur issue and pushed its economic agenda by making Xinjiang a pivotal link to the Eurasian markets.

China’s tactics are fuelling tensions and resentments across Asia. China’s past border tactics offer some examples to Chinese strategy.

Conveying message by China through Ladakh incursions:

Dealing of boundary issues between India-China:

• India-China agreement in 2005: 
  • They agreed on a new set of guiding principles to settle the vexed boundary dispute through the Special Representative (SR) level talks.
  • China has been seeking a substantive adjustment concession especially on Tawang.
  • India probably prefers having a marginal modification in the current alignment of the boundary.
• China push for a settlement (March 2013):
  • Motive behind China’s 19-km intrusion in Depsang in April 2013: To press India to show urgency and redouble efforts to settle the boundary issue.
• Despite 22 rounds of special representative-level talks, a framework agreement still eludes these talks.

China’s recent actions in Ladakh are also related to its growing domestic uncertainties and about future plans in Xinjiang and Tibet that border Ladakh.

Problems for India:

• China seems to be pushing for a formal settlement along the LAC in Ladakh where they have nothing to lose.
• It may not involve swapping India’s claims over Aksai Chin for China’s claims over Arunachal Pradesh which is thought to be a pragmatic thing to accept.
• Chinese may be making a tricky move to let India forego its claim over Aksai Chin and de-linking Ladakh from the overall boundary dispute.
• Then, India will have to give up not only Aksai Chin but also cede its notional claim over the Skyasgam valley and the Menser Enclave (five villages) near the Mansarovar Lake.
• China’s “minimal demand” that Tawang is non-negotiable had been aired through Chinese academics.

Way Forward

• Ceding Aksai Chin would fundamentally alter the status of J&K and Ladakh. By implication, India would have to forget about PoK and Gilgit-Baltistan as well.
• India should tread carefully unless both sides are willing to make a move for grand bargaining.

9 PM for Preliminary examination

Click on “Factly articles for 29th June 2020”

https://factly.forumias.com/factly-articles-for-29th-june-2020/