Over-dependence on Chinese Telecom companies like Huawei is detrimental for Indian Telecom sector

In the wake of growing tensions with China, Indian telecom sector is grappling with new challenges related to implementation and  selection of wireless infrastructure in the country. Historically, India has been dependent on Chinese firms (such as Huawei and ZTE) for the roll out of telecom infrastructure.  

However, industry stakeholders are now maintaining caution over Chinese engagement in the possible roll out of 5G technology in the country. Amid Covid-19 crisis, China's global image has taken a severe hit due to its suspicious conduct in hiding the spread of virus.  

China's track record of intellectual property rights violations have further aggravated its issues with US. As a result, US & European countries have banned Huawei and ZTE amid growing concerns of espionage and snooping. In February 2014, Huawei and ZTE were also reported to have hacked BSNL network and the matter was discussed in the parliament. An inquiry commission was formed to investigate the matter, however, the report hasn't been submitted till today. 

With Chinese manufacturers controlling 75% share of the Indian telecom infrastructure market, the current situation in the telecom sector looks grim. Since Huawei has significant investments in the sector, it desperately wants to be part of 5G auction process. On the contrary, US has banned Huawei in the US market and don't want it to be a part of Indian Telecom market, as this can also facilitate the Chinese manufacturer to gain proxy access to US equipments.

Interestingly, IIT Madras, IIT Hyderabad and IIT Delhi have exhibited their capabilities in 5G technology. While IIT Madras developed an indigenous 5G test bed in 2018, IIT Delhi has set up a 5G lab in collaboration with Ericsson. Unfortunately, the government only allocated ₹250 crore for the development of such a prominent next generation platform.

The government committed a strategic error in ignoring domestic innovations in 5G, which has amplified the existing telecom crisis in India. Moreover, engagement with Chinese manufacturers will adversely impact security of India's wireless infrastructure.

Apart from IIT innovation labs, Reliance JIO claims to have developed 5G solution, which will be available for deployment in 2021. Other players such as Vodafone and Airtel have been dependent on Huawei for their 3G and 4G platforms. With government deciding to keep Huawei out, operating costs of these communication service providers will increase considerably.

In national interest, the government can adopt the following measures to safeguard Telecom infrastructure domain in the absence of Chinese firms:

• Increase government spending on IIT innovation labs in order to facilitate mass adoption. 
• Establish a separate PSU or form a new team of engineers under BSNL for 5G rollout.
• Form partnership agreements with other global telecom infra majors such as Samsung, Apple and Ericsson to seek knowledge sharing in 5G rollout.
• Neutralize attempts of 5G monopolization by firms such as Reliance Jio to safeguard consumer interests. 

Calls for 'Make in India' or 'Vocal for local' will gain credibility only if government encourages domestic innovation, which later develops capabilities to replace foreign technologies. 

Withdraw minority specific reservations at Minority institutions, funded by tax payers money, to bring parity in education system

Minority institutions across India receive grants from government and channelize a large percentage of these funds for the welfare and benefits of minorities such as Christians, Muslims, Jains, Parasis etc. Such inconsistencies rip-off the right of hard-working and meritorious hindu students to receive benefits of better education from these institutes.

Despite having a meritorious record, majority Hindu students are left out from these educational institutions only because of their religious background. With 50% of the seats reserved for minorities, general category Hindu students have to fight for remaining seats. This is the prevalent trend among so called prestigious minority colleges such as St Stephens, St Xaviers, Jesus & Mary College, Loyola College etc.

In a recent tweet, Dr Swamy highlighted St Stephens case to prove the disparities in the system. The tweet calls for a re-look at the existing education system with the purpose of introducing further reforms. 

Minority institutions, especially the aided Christian & Muslim universities are not even bound by government rules on caste based reservation. As these institutions don't comply with such reservations, the entire burden of uplifting students from backward classes is borne by state and Hindu administered private universities. 

Hindus account for max percentage of tax revenues, yet their hard earned money is channelized into minority institutions which practice open discrimination against the same majority. These discrepancies have resulted in the spread of Madrasas and Christian education institutions.

Minority institutions are also responsible for building up the anti-India narrative (eg: anti-CAA protests by Jamia Milia, AMU and St Stephens), which is an irritant within the country. They need continuous monitoring with multiple checks to prevent spread of anti-India sentiment. Negligence in this regard can create unnecessary divide, tensions and instability in the country. Therefore, a carrot and stick policy will be more suitable while handling such institutions.

India's prevailing governance system and existing political setup don't seem to care about bringing the desired changes. Forget domination, majority Hindus are not even provided a level playing field in their own homeland. Such blatant digression of secularism won't be found in any other secular country.

Don't permit foreign universities to set up branches in India: BJP leader, Dr Subramanian Swamy

BJP government has come up with a new education policy (NEP), which is being lauded across different sections of society. NEP 2020 has replaced 34 year old National Policy on Education, framed in 1986. 

Although seen as a mixed bag by educationists, NEP does cover certain aspects that will be game changer in the long run. For example, inclusion of pre-schooling years in the school structure, mother tongue as a medium of instruction up to Class V and increasing government spend on education to 6% of GDP are some path breaking reforms.

On the flip side, making higher education institutes as multi-disciplinary centres of learning could adversely impact the specialized identity of engineering and technical colleges. Typically, Arts and sciences subjects don't gel well in higher education institutes that build their reputation through specialization.

Moreover, allowing foreign universities to set up campuses through 100% FDI route could adversely impact the functioning of domestic institutes. Although the FDI proposal was first cleared in UPA rule, Modi government reversed the decision in 2014 due to Dr Swamy's intervention. 

Now, BJP government has cleared the UPA era FDI proposal of foreign universities which risks the existence of domestic institutes operating through limited resources. Dr Swamy's opposition to this proposal is mainly due to the source of funding of these foreign universities. The US department of education (DOE) is already investigating the funding sources of Ivy league universities such as Harvard and Yale.

According to US DOE, both the universities have received funding of US$ 6.5 billion from countries like China, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and UAE. In this context, these Ivy league institutions seem to have lost their original character and values, which formed the basis of their foundation.

Allowing full FDI in higher education is against national interests due to the following reasons:

• Some of the Foreign Universities have questionable sources of funding
• Adverse impact on the functioning of domestic institutes
• Foreign Universities will build their own narrative within the country which may be contrary to India's principles, values and culture.
• Usually FDIs are driven by objectives of profitability and expansion rather than knowledge transfer
• FDI neglects the concept of Universalism of education

Given the above context, FDI in education may not necessarily yield the stated objectives and could be counter-productive to nationalistic sentiments.

  

Withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan and its geo-strategic implications for India

On February 29, 2020, US signed a peace deal with Taliban, which would entail complete withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan. The peace deal will help US to significantly reduce its economic and human resource costs that are attached with military presence in a foreign country. Given the fragile nature of Afghanistan democracy, the country's future minus US presence, is seen with uncertainty and fear.

Even though US presence in Afghanistan subdued Taliban's influence in the country, its network with international terror organizations like Al Qaeda, ISIS and Pak based groups like Jaish-E-Mohammed and Lashker-E-Taiba remained active. For example, the recent attack on a Sikh Temple in Kabul resulting in loss of 27 Sikh lives, is considered to be coordinated effort of multiple terror outfits. 

With Taliban bidding time for complete withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan, changing dynamics in the war ravaged country could be highly disruptive for South Asia. Absence of US troops will give a free hand to Pakistan to dominate Afghanistan. Pakistan's ISI has already played an instrumental role in brokering the peace deal between US and Taliban. The deal has given recognition to Taliban as an authorized stakeholder in Afghanistan's governance. 

At present the terror strikes are limited, however, US withdrawal will remove the pressure valve, which can have a potentially blasting effect. 

China's growing belligerence, coupled with increasing influence of Pakistan in the Afghanistan region, will multiply India's problems. Pakistan's poor financial situation has made it subservient to China's business and geo-political interests in the region. As a result, a joint military op of China, Pak and Taliban against India is highly probable in the next six to nine months. 

Taliban and Pakistan based terror groups have set up multiple joint training centres in southern and central Afghanistan. The purpose will be to launch joint terrorist strikes in different cities of India. As per a recent report by United Nations, nearly 6,500 Pakistani nationals are fighting alongside terrorist groups in Afghanistan.

Prior to withdrawal of troops, US did seek India's help in establishing military presence in the strife torn country. However, Indian leadership looked the other way and now the situation seems more volatile than ever before. Indian military presence in Afghanistan was highly advantageous for the Geo-political security of the region and would have served Indian security interests. Moreover, US was willing to provide financial support and advanced weaponry to India.

According to Dr Subramanian Swamy, benefits of a Indian military presence in Afghanistan significantly outweigh the ensuing costs. On the contrary, costs (in the form of terror strikes) could be significantly high for not setting up military base in the region.  

Hypothetically, India's acceptance of US offer for mediation in Afghanistan would have accrued the following benefits:

• Protection of Indian investment in Afghanistan
• Continuous monitoring of terrorist activities in the region
• Subdued influence of Pakistan in Afghan politics
• Prevention of the formation of a coalition or alliance of terrorist organizations, which could be adverse to India's security interests
• Rise in global standing and India's emergence as a strong regional power
• Control over China's aggressive maneuvers in Ladakh and other border regions.

In national interest, current ruling dispensation needs to realign its strategy towards Afghanistan. Any confusion with respect to India's geo-political strategy and the path forward may result in isolation and instability in the region.

How India's first Prime Minister, Nehru drifted India away from United States after Independence?

Post India's independence, US was ideologically inclined to develop close and strategic ties with India. US perceived India to be a natural partner since both the countries shared democratic values. 

During the same phase, Mao Zedong, leader of CCP, took control of China in a military coup in 1949. This meant a drastic shift in China's political ideology in favor of Communism. Such transition wasn't acceptable to Americans, who then became desperate to expel China out of United Nations Security Council (UNSC) and were willing to give this seat to India.

As a result, then US secretary of state, John Foster, made the offer of UNSC seat to Indian Ambassador, Vijay lakshmi Pandit. When the US offer was communicated to Nehru, he declined it terming it as a trap by Americans. Despite America's friendly overtures, Nehru remained adamant over allowing China to retain the UNSC seat, under the pretext that not doing so would hurt Chinese sentiments. 

Apart from UNSC seat, US was willing to include India in its prestigious Marshall Plan which was a dedicated economic recovery package for the entire Europe and Japan after World War II. Acceptance of this offer would have propelled India into the league of developed nations within 10-15 years. However, Nehru declined this offer under the garb of Non-aligned movement, rather he chose to adopt Socialist economic model of five years plan.

Nehru failed to see US preference of India over China, which could have catapulted our country to world stage. On the contrary, he preferred to restrict India's role as that of a regional power in Asia. Nehru's reluctance to accept American friendship convinced US that India is most likely sitting in Soviet camp.  

Therefore, developing relationship with rogue nations like Pakistan became a geo-political compulsion for US. In an era, where world was waking up to a Cold war between two strong blocs, establishing presence in South Asia was essential for US. Consequently, Pakistan became a US ally and received considerable financial aid and weaponry in return, which was grossly misused. 

Nehru's restricted vision and affinity towards socialism stagnated India's economic, political and technological stature in the world. Hope history doesn't repeat!    

CBI Enquiry in Sushant Singh Rajput murder mystery is the need of the hour!

Sushant Singh Rajput woke up in the morning, went for a walk, spent some time on his Playstation, took a glass of juice, went inside his room and then committed suicide?? Even a layman can understand that the suicide doesn't seem to be a perfect conclusion of prior sequence of events. 

Shockingly, Mumbai Police arrived at such a pre-determined conclusion even before it began investigations. The bright and an upcoming actor didn't even leave a suicide note behind, then what was the hurry on the part of the Police to declare Sushant's death as a suicide? 

Only after strong public pressure, Mumbai police was forced to initiate investigation in Sushant Singh Rajput's so-called suicide. Nonetheless, Police summons and consequent interrogation of Bollywood biggies looks like an eyewash to douse the rising flames of justice among public.

In a recent letter to PM Modi, Dr Swamy demanded PM's intervention in the matter as the Maharashtra state government seems reluctant in handing over the case to CBI.  A CBI enquiry will possibly help to restore public confidence in such a sensitive and high profile case. A simple instruction by PM to Maharashtra state governor could possibly do the job. Dr Swamy's intervention will undoubtedly increase pressure on Mumbai Police. According to Dr Swamy, simultaneous investigations by Mumbai Police and Bihar Police is not feasible, therefore, CBI enquiry is the only way forward. 

Ace lawyer, Ishkaran Bhandari, who has fought many cases under Dr Subramanian Swamy, has sent letters to Mumbai Police over the nature of investigations. Through his letters, Ishkaran has appealed to Police to cover the following points in the investigation process:

• The Police shall collect, preserve and inspect all the cell phone data from mobile towers located in the vicinity of Sushant Singh's apartment. Negligence in this regard will result in loss of vital information.
• As per some sources, Mumbai Police didn't even seal Sushant Singh Rajput's apartment after his death. Such a lapse in the investigation process is fraught with risks such as loss of clinching evidence.
• A thorough forensic examination of items such as laptops, smartphones and other gadgets must be done.

Sushant's case has striking similarities with Jiah Khan suicide case. Both actors were in a jovial mood before their so-called suicide and did not exhibit signs of depression, which has been so vociferously claimed as the cause of suicide.

Just four days prior to Sushant's death, his ex-Manager, Disha Salian also died after falling from 14th floor of a building in Malad West. However, Mumbai police completed investigations and declared Disha's death as a freak accident within THREE days. This implies that Disha's case was closed one day before Sushant Singh Rajput's suicide. One wonders what was the reason to close Disha Salian's case in such a haphazard manner?? Is it a coincidence that Disha's case was closed just a day before Sushant Singh Rajput's death? It is another matter that her accidental death also looks similar to Divya Bharti's suicide. 

Interestingly, the late actress' husband Sajid Nadiadwala personally wrote a letter to Home Ministry to impose a ban on circulation of Sushant Singh Rajput's suicide photos. Is this an attempt to suppress evidence that proves Sushant's death as nothing but a cold blooded murder?

Mumbai Police earlier attempted to hush up Sushant Singh Rajput's matter as a mere suicide, which shakes public trust in its ability to conduct an impartial probe. Since, Bollywood is perceived to be close to underworld, Sushant Singh Rajput's case has nationwide implications. Therefore, an impartial CBI enquiry is the need of the hour!!  

Rajiv Gandhi Foundation scam was first exposed by Dr Swamy in 2015

In 2015, Dr Swamy had filed a complaint with Urban Development Ministry regarding RGF's illegal occupation of a building at Raisana road. The building was initially meant to be used as Congress headquarters, however, in 1991, Rajiv Gandhi Foundation, headed by Sonia Gandhi, usurped this prime property located in Delhi. 

Dr Swamy also uncovered the financial discrepancies and dubious funding pattern of RGF. For example, RGF's shady sources of donations (foreign embassies and Zakir Naik) were highlighted many times by Dr Swamy.  

Zakir Naik, known for his provocative and communal speeches, was brainwashing peaceful elements through his channel, PeaceTV. Only after Dhaka Cafe blast, the government woke up to reality and then banned his channel. However, Dr Swamy had already exposed Zakir Naik's ₹50 lakh donation to RGF in 2011, which is now even confirmed by ED's investigations. 

RGF has also received donations from foreign embassies (like China) for a long period of time. These devastating realities of Rajiv Gandhi Foundation were exposed by Dr Subramanian Swamy way back in 2015 and then 2016. Surprisingly, BJP government did not deem it necessary to probe the activities of RGF. 

Following collage provides details of Dr Swamy's Tweets from 2015 till 2020, where he has constantly warned about RGF's suspicious activities.

It is now proved that Dr Swamy is the original whistle blower of RGF scam and in BJP's moment of distress, his exposure has somewhat rescued the party from the current mess. How else, could BJP divert public attention from it's failure to control Covid-19 spread and the goof-up in its foreign policy with China?

Without doubt, BJP's policy has been to drum beat against Congress scams, which will help the party to dodge serious questions regarding it's failures. Five years have passed since Dr Swamy exposed Rajiv Gandhi Foundation scam, however BJP only woke up now??

While the government has set up an inter-ministerial committee to investigate the RGF matter, BJP's track record suggests that real action still looks like a daydream.