top of page

By:

Correspondent

23 August 2024 at 4:29:04 pm

Democratic Paralysis

The Parliament has just concluded one of its more dispiriting Monsoon Sessions, and the spectacle should worry anyone who still believes that parliamentary democracy is about argument rather than obstruction. As India approaches her 80th year of Independence, the Opposition led by Congressman Rahul Gandhi has demonstrated that it can shout, protest and stall but appears increasingly incapable of doing the one thing Parliament actually exists for: debate. The most revealing episode was the...

Democratic Paralysis

The Parliament has just concluded one of its more dispiriting Monsoon Sessions, and the spectacle should worry anyone who still believes that parliamentary democracy is about argument rather than obstruction. As India approaches her 80th year of Independence, the Opposition led by Congressman Rahul Gandhi has demonstrated that it can shout, protest and stall but appears increasingly incapable of doing the one thing Parliament actually exists for: debate. The most revealing episode was the confrontation over the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Amendment Bill. The Opposition had a legitimate opportunity to scrutinise the legislation and corner Home Minister Amit Shah. Instead, disruption became the strategy. The FCRA Bill and other important legislative business were caught in the resulting paralysis. The session ended after repeated disruptions. More damaging for Gandhi and the Opposition was that Shah had said he was ready for a debate. Having spent days demanding that the Home Minister come to Parliament and answer questions, the Opposition was presented with precisely the opportunity it had demanded. Instead, Rahul Gandhi’s tepid response was that the Opposition was “not interested” in listening to a lecture. This is not merely political opportunism but an astonishing display of irresponsibility. A politician who demands that a minister speak and then refuses to let him speak has forfeited the moral right to complain that Parliament is not functioning. Gandhi cannot simultaneously claim that the government is afraid of scrutiny and then prevent the government from being scrutinised in the only place where that scrutiny carries constitutional weight. This is less an exercise in holding power to account than an exercise in avoiding accountability to the electorate for how Parliament is being used. There is something particularly reckless about converting Parliament into a stage for slogans while denying the country the substance of parliamentary argument. The Opposition does not have to agree with Shah or the government. It does not even have to be polite. But it has a responsibility to debate. Blocking debate is not dissent but a dereliction of parliamentary duty. The allegations that Gandhi or anyone else has been paid to disrupt Parliament are serious. But the deeper indictment requires no conspiracy theory. The record of disruption is visible for all to see. Gandhi’s own conduct provides sufficient cause for criticism. A political leader should be judged by what he does in the House, not merely by what he says outside it. A Parliament where the Opposition refuses to engage makes mockery of democracy in the truest sense of the phrase. India, on the eve of its 80th Independence Day, deserves a better and more constructive Opposition.

SCO Aims to Unite Regional Powers for Trade and Security Gains

Trade and Security Gains

Indian scholar and political commentator, Sudheendra Kulkarni, founder of the Forum for a New South Asia, has underscored the potential of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) to break the ice between India and Pakistan. Although bilateral talks between the two countries did not occur during the meeting, Kulkarni highlighted that the SCO’s first article calls for “mutual trust, friendship, good neighbourliness, and cooperation.” By adhering to these principles, the SCO could serve as a catalyst for renewed dialogue between India and Pakistan, he argued.


Kulkarni’s remarks come at a time when global trade and cooperation face significant hurdles because of rising protectionism, sanctions, and geopolitical conflicts. The SCO, which includes India, Pakistan, China, and Russia as key members, stands as a multilateral platform that can counter these challenges by promoting cooperation rather than competition. With India and Pakistan already members, the SCO provides a rare platform for the two nations to engage in regional trade, technology, and security, potentially overriding political differences.


One of the critical points that Kulkarni raised is the growing trade between India and China, which reached over $136 billion last year. Kulkarni believes that India and Pakistan could similarly benefit within the SCO framework. “We hope this will break the ice and open up India-Pakistan dialogue, even though no formal talks took place during this meeting,” he said. The SCO’s mandate to foster good neighbourly relations between member states could be instrumental.


According to Kulkarni, developing countries, particularly those in the SCO and BRICS (another multilateral group that includes India and China), should leverage these platforms to foster trade and technological cooperation that bypasses Western-dominated financial systems. In doing so, these nations can shield themselves from the adverse impacts of Western-imposed sanctions and protectionist policies, which have disrupted global markets and harmed developing economies.


Kulkarni’s critique of Western sanctions goes hand in hand with his call for a more equitable form of globalisation. “The illegitimate, dividing sanctions of Western powers go against the spirit of globalisation, starving developing countries of finance, investment, and access to markets,” he said. For countries like India and Pakistan, which face significant economic challenges, the focus should be on poverty alleviation and sustainable development—not on becoming pawns in the geopolitical games of global powers.


The SCO brings together nations from Eurasia and beyond, offering a framework for cooperation that sidesteps the entrenched political divisions seen in other international forums. Indian External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar, who described the recent SCO meeting as “productive,” highlighted key areas of cooperation, including business, medicine, food security, and climate action. These are precisely the kinds of issues that transcend borders and political differences, offering a path forward for India and Pakistan to work together under the SCO umbrella.


Moreover, Kulkarni emphasised China’s role in sharing its technological and infrastructural advancements with the world, particularly through initiatives like the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). If India and Pakistan can set aside their hostilities and engage with China constructively, the entire region could benefit from increased connectivity, technological innovation, and economic growth. The SCO’s emphasis on mutual benefit and regional cooperation aligns well with this vision, providing a framework for India, Pakistan, and China to collaborate on shared goals.


However, the long-standing rivalry between India and Pakistan, fuelled by border disputes, terrorism, and historical animosities, has often overshadowed efforts at regional cooperation. While the SCO provides a platform for dialogue, real progress will require sustained political will from both sides. Nonetheless, Kulkarni’s optimism offers a glimmer of hope that the SCO could be the venue where India and Pakistan start to re-engage, if not directly, then at least through shared multilateral objectives.


By participating actively in the SCO, India and Pakistan can diversify their economic and political alliances, reducing their dependence on Western-dominated institutions like the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. For Pakistan, which has been grappling with economic instability and political unrest, such engagement could offer a way out of its current crises. For India, it provides an avenue to assert itself as a major player in Eurasian geopolitics, independent of Western influence.


Ultimately, Kulkarni’s call for India and Pakistan to embrace the SCO’s potential is a timely reminder that in a world beset by conflict and division, multilateralism remains a viable path forward. The challenges of trade protectionism, sanctions, and geopolitical tensions are too complex for any one country to solve alone. As part of the SCO, India and Pakistan can work together—if not as allies, then at least as partners in the pursuit of shared regional stability and economic growth. If they can seize this moment, the SCO may become the platform where one of the world’s most enduring rivalries finally begins to thaw.


(The author is a senior journalist based in Islamabad. Views personal.)

Comments

bottom of page