top of page

By:

Correspondent

21 August 2024 at 10:20:16 am

Broken Monopoly

For over two centuries, Mumbai’s Asiatic Society, founded in 1804, has stood as one of India's greatest repositories of learning. It has been a sanctuary of rare manuscripts and civilisational memory. Yet, its recent election will be remembered less for a change of office-bearers than for the collapse of an intellectual order that had come to mistake custodianship for ownership. The sweeping victory of Vinay Sahasrabuddhe’s Asiatic Tomorrow panel is not merely an institutional upset but a...

Broken Monopoly

For over two centuries, Mumbai’s Asiatic Society, founded in 1804, has stood as one of India's greatest repositories of learning. It has been a sanctuary of rare manuscripts and civilisational memory. Yet, its recent election will be remembered less for a change of office-bearers than for the collapse of an intellectual order that had come to mistake custodianship for ownership. The sweeping victory of Vinay Sahasrabuddhe’s Asiatic Tomorrow panel is not merely an institutional upset but a decisive sign of the steady unravelling of the Left’s long-standing monopoly over India’s intellectual establishments. The rhetoric preceding the election was revealing. Kumar Ketkar’s camp had warned darkly of a “BJP-RSS takeover” of the 222-year-old institution, portraying the contest as an allegedly existential battle to save scholarship itself. The implication was that if those outside a familiar ideological circle assumed control, then intellectual standards would apparently collapse. Such arguments have become the default refuge of a left establishment that has grown accustomed to treating public institutions as their private preserves. Judging by the emphatic verdict, many members evidently agreed. Winning by more than two to one in an institution is a decisive repudiation of an entrenched elite. The Asiatic Society is hardly unique. From the early decades after Independence, India’s commanding heights of academia, historical research, cultural institutions and social sciences gradually came under the influence of a remarkably homogeneous intellectual class belonging to a particular ideology. Many of these institutions evolved less into arenas of free inquiry than into ideological republics where only one worldview enjoyed overwhelming institutional privilege. Appointments, fellowships, editorial boards, research grants and academic recognition often circulated within the same intellectual networks. Those questioning established orthodoxies on Indian civilisation, nationalism, religion or history were frequently caricatured as reactionaries before their arguments were even heard. This ‘left-liberal’ gatekeeping shaped school textbooks, influenced public discourse and fostered the curious belief that only one ideological tradition possessed the authority to interpret India’s past. Dissent was tolerated only when it came from within the accepted ideological spectrum. Those outside it were routinely labelled ‘communal’ or worse. What has changed over the past decade is not merely electoral politics but the sociology of Indian intellectual life. As the Mumbai Asiatic election proves, these old networks no longer enjoy uncontested authority. Indians have become increasingly unwilling to accept that scholarship requires ideological certification from self-appointed guardians of public reason. The significance of the Asiatic Society election therefore lies beyond Mumbai. It signals that an era where a narrow intellectual establishment could plausibly claim to speak for scholarship itself while treating disagreement as heresy is now ending. The monopoly of a certain ideological persuasion has been definitively broken. For Indian academia, libraries and research institutions, that is not a loss but an overdue liberation.

Indian Shipbuilding A Must Win Marathon

Shipbuilding

With a coastline of 7500 KM, it is hard to imagine, that for the first 20 years (1947-1967) India had no ‘shipping ministry’. In 1967 a Shipping ministry “coupled” with ROAD transport was established. Since then, this ministry has been on a name changing ride, not once, not twice but six times. In 2009 the “ROAD Transport and Highways” was de-coupled and ‘Shipping’ ministry was formed. Turning point came in 2015 with a clear maritime vision for 2030 and 2047. Ministry was re-christened, aptly to Ministry of “Ports, Shipping and Waterways” in 2020.


Why is Shipbuilding important for a country?

a. A Shipyard becomes an opportunity hub and like a queen bee requires the support of an industrial colony to manufacture machinery and equipment.

b. National Shipyards support fleet renewal needs of the Navy.

c. Contributes to national GDP, increases inflow of FOREX.


Korea shipbuilding is 8% of GDP. Japan’s automobile industry is 2.9% of GDP. India’s shipbuilding a meagre 0.000578% of GDP. In context, India’s pharmaceutical industry, ranked third largest in the world is 1.72% of India’s GDP.


International Shipbuilding Market

The market is estimated to reach around USD 200 billion by 2029, growing at a CAGR of 4.84%. While India is at bottom with 0.07% of world share, behind Philippines 1.5% and Vietnam 1%, however on the positive side, India has done well in taking care of its defence needs, with 37 of 39 Naval ships being built in India yards. Rear Admiral S Shrikhande researching on maritime as a Fellow at Wollongong University, Australia, says “Shipbuilding in India needs both, serious incentivisation and dogged determination and not harping on being a big ship breaking country. That Garden Reach shipyard has a $54 million order for merchant ships from a German owner, is a good sign.”


Were Shipyards of 20th century in Flight mode?

Prominent shipyards in India were built in the colonial period. Mazagon Dock 1774, Garden reach 1884, Hindustan shipyard 1941 to cater to British navy and merchant fleet needs. Cochin shipyard 1972, Adani Katupalli 2013, Reliance Naval and Engineering, Rajula Gujarat 1997 and others have limited capacity, hence a lot more work to do. Capt. Subhangshu Dutt (Singapore) a mariner and now a shipowner, says “GOI should hold hands in any collaboration till the marriage with the foreign entity is reasonably stable. He also suggests that “new shipbuilding sites should be given to existing successful shipyards since they have decades of experience and talent. Consortium of 3 or more parties may also be good idea”.


Shipbuilding GOLD

As per SPLASH report the demand for LCO2 carriers could reach 2,500 ships by 2050. As per other estimates, 40% of global fleet of ships could have wind propulsion by 2050. A surge in such vessels is due to an unparallel waves of decarbonization in the shipping industry. Demand for ships with ‘carbon neutral’ badges, such as Dual fuel, Wind assisted, Nuclear fuel ships, Hydrogen powered ships, Liquified CO2 (LCO2) carrier, is outstripping supply. A must in the ‘bucket list’ of every Shipyard. Pinning down a standard ROI in shipbuilding is not easy, but experts suggest it could range from 4% to 15% for the high demand ‘carbon neutral’ ships. While an LNG new build vessel could cost US$ 250 million upwards.


International collaboration

On China’s shipbuilding success story, Manoj Pandalanghat (Singapore) a mariner and ship owner believes that “China has around 50 active Shipyards. Each have a few large dry docks. In each dock two or more large vessels are built simultaneously. Thus, a single yard is able to roll out 2/3 vessels/month, 36 vessels/year and 50 shipyards roll out 1800 vessels/year”.


China could be a jaldi-5, but India needs a sturdy Mount Fiji. Besides technology, Japanese bring the most important hand baggage of soft-skills and culture, essential for success from keel laying to delivery. Maruti’s is a standing example.


Food for thought for New Delhi

a. Expertise: Hire Naval Architects and shipbuilding experts with current international experience.

b. Government assistance: Land, Financial support, subsidies and timebound clearances.

c. Monitoring: PMO should monitor the first 5 to 10 years till Shipbuilding takes-off on this long-haul flight to destination 2047.


India’s Shipbuilding is expected to grow to $237 billion by year 2047. On a back of the envelope calculations this works out to about 4% of India’s 2047 projected GDP of $ 5 trillion. While cars are driven on roads, however the Ministry of roads and transport has little to do with “Automobile manufacturing”. On a similar note, ‘Shipbuilding’ as an industry has little to do with Ports, Shipping and Waterways, thus it may be worthwhile to consider a separate ‘Ship-building’ wing in the Ministry of Ports, Shipping and Waterways headed by a dynamic cabinet rank minister. Since 2047 targets are stiff and an uphill task, so in all probabilities, the officials in Ministry of Ports, Shipping and Waterways are likely to push beneath the carpet, delays and failures of Shipbuilding with sweet success stories of “Ports, Shipping and Waterways” and if this does happen then India will not only miss the Shipbuilding bus of 21st century but a lot more from a national security and strategic perspective.


(The author is a Shipping and Marine consultant. Member Singapore Shipping Association and empaneled with IMO as a specialist consultant. Views personal.)

Comments

bottom of page