top of page

By:

Rajendra Joshi

3 December 2024 at 9:20:26 am

The Warning Beyond NEET

The Jantar Mantar protests exposed the widening gap between education, employment and growth. The month-long protest at Delhi's Jantar Mantar may have formally ended, but the political and economic questions it raised will linger. Triggered by the NEET paper leak, the movement became a major expression of youth discontent. What began as a demand for a fair examination system became a broader indictment of an economic model that promises opportunity but increasingly fails to deliver...

The Warning Beyond NEET

The Jantar Mantar protests exposed the widening gap between education, employment and growth. The month-long protest at Delhi's Jantar Mantar may have formally ended, but the political and economic questions it raised will linger. Triggered by the NEET paper leak, the movement became a major expression of youth discontent. What began as a demand for a fair examination system became a broader indictment of an economic model that promises opportunity but increasingly fails to deliver employment. The government initially treated the protests as a law-and-order issue. That changed when the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), the ideological fountainhead of the ruling establishment, publicly criticised police action and expressed solidarity with the students. The subsequent resignation of Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan, withdrawal of criminal cases and RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat's endorsement of the integrity and aspirations of India's Gen Z transformed the political narrative. The issue had moved beyond examination reform to whether India's development model is serving its young citizens. The NEET paper leak was merely the spark. The fuel had accumulated through rising educated unemployment, declining confidence in public institutions and growing frustration among millions of young Indians. Education is increasingly seen as an uncertain investment rather than a guaranteed pathway to opportunity. Every examination scandal reinforces the perception that merit alone is insufficient, while recruitment delays deepen the belief that the system is failing those who have done everything expected of them. India has celebrated its demographic dividend for nearly two decades, projecting its young workforce as its greatest competitive advantage. But demographic dividends are never automatic. They generate prosperity only when education is matched by employment, productivity and rising incomes. Otherwise, they become demographic liabilities that breed frustration rather than growth. The evidence suggests India is approaching that inflection point. GDP has expanded impressively over the past two decades, yet employment has failed to keep pace. Employment elasticity has weakened sharply. During the 1980s, every percentage point of GDP growth generated roughly half a percentage point increase in employment. Today the ratio is estimated at about 0.16, among the lowest for major emerging economies. Growth continues; jobs do not. This disconnect reflects India's growth strategy. Public policy has increasingly favoured capital-intensive industries through subsidies, tax incentives and investment support. Such sectors contribute to output and productivity but generate relatively fewer jobs. Agriculture continues to suffer from incomplete reforms and low productivity. Manufacturing has not expanded fast enough to absorb new workers, while artificial intelligence and automation are reducing opportunities in occupations once regarded as gateways to middle-class prosperity. India thus faces a paradox: it is producing more graduates while creating fewer opportunities to absorb them. The comparison with Asia is instructive. Vietnam and Bangladesh have pursued manufacturing-led growth that has generated substantially higher employment relative to economic expansion. Vietnam's employment-to-population ratio is estimated at nearly three-fourths, compared with about one-half in India. Vietnam has also moved into the upper-middle-income category, while India remains a lower-middle-income economy. These comparisons do not diminish India's achievements. They highlight the urgency of correcting structural weaknesses before they become politically destabilising. History demonstrates the risks of prolonged youth unemployment. The Arab Spring showed how educated but unemployed youth can transform political landscapes. More recently, political instability in Bangladesh and Nepal has reflected frustration among younger populations facing shrinking opportunities. India's democratic institutions are stronger, and its circumstances are different. Yet no democracy can indefinitely ignore the aspirations of its largest demographic group. The significance of Jantar Mantar lies here. India's Gen Z is organised, digitally connected and politically conscious. Social media transformed local grievances into a national movement within days, while traditional political parties largely responded after the sentiment had acquired independent momentum. The RSS intervention further complicated the government's challenge. Once protesting students found resonance within the ideological ecosystem closest to the ruling establishment, the issue ceased to be a partisan confrontation. It became an internal warning that India's youth expect credible institutions, transparent examinations and, above all, meaningful employment. The Centre's examination reforms are necessary but insufficient. Restoring the credibility of competitive examinations addresses only one symptom. The larger challenge is to redesign India's growth strategy around employment. Labour-intensive manufacturing, support for small and medium enterprises, investment in skills, higher-education reform and greater attention to employment outcomes must become central to economic planning. The Jantar Mantar agitation should not be remembered simply as the NEET protests. It marked a moment when India's youngest generation questioned the assumptions underlying the country's development model. Governments can manage protests and reform examinations. But unless economic growth translates into broad-based employment, similar movements will return. India's demographic dividend remains its greatest opportunity. It could equally become its greatest challenge. The warning has been delivered. The question is whether policymakers are prepared to listen.

Nepal’s Constitutional Amendments: A Debate on Reform and Stability

Updated: Oct 22, 2024

Nepal’s Constitutional

Nepal’s current political debate centres on the ruling coalition’s call for constitutional amendments. Led by the Nepali Congress and the Communist Party of Nepal-Unified Marxist Leninist (CPN-UML), the government argues that revisions to the constitution are necessary to address political and governance challenges. The amendments they propose include changes to the electoral system, tweaking the federal structure, and revisiting the nation’s secular status. They claim these reforms will lead to more inclusivity and stability in the long run.


On the other hand, the opposition, including several smaller parties, remains wary of such reforms. They argue that opening up the constitution to major changes could cause more harm than good, especially given Nepal’s complex political and ethnic landscape. There is a strong concern that amending the constitution without broad consensus could lead to political unrest and social division.


Key Amendment Issues

The debate over constitutional amendments revolves around three key issues:

Electoral System: There are calls to shift toward a more proportional representation system to ensure that smaller political parties and under-represented groups have a stronger voice in the political process. Currently, Nepal uses a mixed system, with some seats elected directly and others proportionally. The amendment would increase the number of proportionally elected representatives, giving smaller parties and marginalised groups more power. This change could bring more inclusivity, but critics also warn that it might further fragment an already divided political landscape.


Federalism: Nepal transitioned to a federal system in 2015, with the hope of decentralising power and promoting regional autonomy. However, challenges remain in balancing the power between the central government and the provinces. The proposed amendments aim to address these issues by altering the distribution of powers between the central and provincial governments to decentralise authority more effectively, empower regions, and address local governance issues. This would benefit provincial governments and historically under-represented regions, but it could also lead to conflicts over resource distribution and central control, especially in wealthier or politically dominant provinces. However, critics argue that such changes could destabilise the current system and weaken regional governance.


Secularism: Nepal has declared itself a secular state in its 2015 constitution, but this has been a topic of ongoing debate. Some groups, particularly those aligned with Hinduism, feel that secularism undermines the country’s religious heritage. While the current government has said that it’s not seeking to overturn secularism, there are discussions about refining the way secularism is addressed in the constitution to better reflect Nepal’s religious heritage, particularly its strong Hindu identity. While the state would remain secular, the changes might afford greater acknowledgement of Hindu traditions.


Challenges of Amending the Constitution

Amending a constitution is no small feat, especially in a country like Nepal, where political transitions have often been fragile. One of the main risks of making changes to the constitution is the possibility of increased political instability. The current constitution is only nine years old, and many fear that opening it up to amendments could lead to further fragmentation of the political landscape. Additionally, there are concerns about how these amendments could affect Nepal’s ethnic and regional balance. The federal structure, in particular, has been a sensitive issue since its implementation, and any changes to it could lead to discontent among certain provinces or ethnic groups.


Involvement of External Players: China’s Influence

Nepal’s geopolitical position between India and China means that any political or constitutional shift in the country attracts international attention. China, in particular, has been expanding its influence in Nepal over recent years, both economically and politically. Some analysts believe that the ruling parties’ push for constitutional reforms is also motivated by their desire to maintain a better relationship with China. As China continues to invest heavily in Nepal through its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), there is concern that China’s involvement could subtly influence the direction of Nepal’s internal political decisions, including amendments to the constitution.


The debate over amending Nepal’s constitution highlights the delicate balance between reform and stability. While there are clear opportunities for addressing political challenges and improving governance, there is also the risk of destabilising the fragile peace that has been built over the past decade. Nepal’s leaders must tread carefully, ensuring that any changes are made with broad consensus and careful consideration of the nation’s complex political and ethnic fabric.


For India, watching these developments closely is essential, as Nepal’s stability and progress directly affect the region. Constitutional reform is a big change, and it must be handled with extreme caution to avoid unintended consequences.


(The author is an expert in foreign affairs. Views personal.)

Comments

bottom of page