Grand events, small gains

Despite holding two grand events in the last month, India has not gained anything significant on the diplomatic front. Neither ‘Howdy Modi’ in Houston nor Modi-Xi summit in Mamallapuram resulted in resolving outstanding issues in the bilateral relationships with the United States (US) and China... Therefore, what exactly did these two grand events achieve? Who was the real audience for both these events?Read the full article here.

Where is the debate on data privacy headed?

Even as India pushes for data decryption access from Big Tech for better law enforcement, there is a larger issue of how Big Tech is not quite the paragon of virtue when it comes to upholding user privacy.

If the Indian government does get social media platforms to part with user data, it should remember that with great power over the citizens comes a greater responsibility towards the citizens.

A lot has happened in privacy in recent memory. Perhaps most importantly, Attorney General K.K. Venugopal has argued in the Supreme Court that “They [internet platforms] can’t come into the country and say we will establish a non-decryptable system” and that “terrorists cannot claim privacy”. On the side of Big Tech, corporate products and policies keep moving towards privacy while instances of privacy violations continue to exist.Google released the next generation of Android earlier this month and included some important privacy protections. Google was then also fined $170 million for violating children’s privacy on YouTube. Google also open-sourced a differential privacy tool on GitHub to help protect private information. Facebook also made news in privacy, announcing a feature called ‘Off-Facebook activity’, allowing access to a summary of activity that Facebook has about you. Facebook then suffered a data leak (phone numbers) of 419 million users. Similarly, Amazon also took a significant step in allowing users to delete their data (voice and transcripts) from Alexa.What we are seeing here is that India’s idea of a digital world is beginning to diverge significantly from that of global platforms. The Indian government increasingly wants access to data on its citizens for purposes of law enforcement. When communications on platforms are encrypted (end-to-end or otherwise), it is impossible to track what information is being shared unless one has a decryption key. Failure to track fake news on WhatsApp has instigated lynch mobs and resulted in 27 reported deaths in 2017.The Attorney General is right in asserting that terrorists cannot claim privacy. However, tech does not bend selectively to reflect values. Platforms cannot decrypt messages for the bad guys while keeping encryption available for everyone else. Most companies around the world (not including China) have sided with the idea of privacy in communications. It helps build trust with the user and complements the power of the network effect. If tomorrow, Facebook and the Internet began to target you with ads on the basis of conversations you were having on WhatsApp, you would rightly be concerned. Platforms like WhatsApp (and Telegram, and Signal) are home to some of our most sensitive information. No one would like to, say, discuss their mental health issues with a friend on WhatsApp, only to have medicines recommended to them on every website they visit. Similarly, political protestors who express themselves through peaceful dissent would not like to have their messages read and used against them. Anonymity through encryption can be a shield for terror, but it is also an essential tool for people who may not be able to express themselves freely otherwise.The fines that Big Tech firms have historically been charged for privacy violations have not been large enough to significantly dent them vis-a-vis the revenues that they are making.What happens to end-to-end encryption is going to be subject to the beliefs and values held by the people in power. The government has been trying to push its agenda for months. Prior to asking Facebook to help the government in decrypting data, the government had asked intermediaries to enable traceability of messages. This was carried out by the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MEITY) that proposed amendments in the intermediary guidelines in December 2018. The final notification is due to be issued on January 15, 2020. During the same month, the Ministry of Home Affairs issued an order granting powers of “interception, monitoring, and decryption of any information generated, transmitted, received or stored in any computer” to ten Central agencies.None of this is implying that the government is looking to actively spy on you, but that with great power over the citizens comes a greater responsibility towards the citizens. For instance, when Edward Snowden broke the news of the NSA’s surveillance capabilities, he also stated that employees at the NSA intercepted personal nude photos and shared it with their colleagues, almost as a fake currency. The NSA, in a response to Forbes, neither confirmed nor denied the practice.Just as governments around the world have not been perfect with their conduct towards privacy, neither has big tech. While companies such as Facebook have supported and implemented end-to-end encryption, they have been repeatedly penalised for privacy violations. Big Tech is moving towards privacy at its own pace. Companies such as Google, Facebook, Amazon, and Apple have very different attitudes towards privacy. That is mostly because around the world, they have not been mandated to comply with a standard set of rules. Countries with huge user bases are yet to come up with data protection laws (read India). And on occasions where laws on data protection and privacy have existed, companies have felt perfectly at liberty to violate them and paying the fines, looking at it as a cost of doing business. Two things work in favour of Big Tech here. Firstly, the fines that they have historically been charged have not been large enough to significantly dent them with respect to the revenues that these corporations are making. Secondly, all of these companies are not transparent in their workings and functioning with privacy. So in all likelihood, not all violations of user privacy are being punished around the world. Thus, every violation escaped is essentially money saved for later fines.Regardless of all of this, anonymity in communications is worth having and fighting for. In the current version of the Internet, complete privacy in communications is a rare occurrence. Irrespective of where parties stand across the aisle, maintaining end-to-end encryption should be common ground.

This article was first published in The Hindu. Views are Personal.

Macaulay’s IPC was radical in 19th century. Now, shift power balance toward Indian citizens

According to a report in The Hindu Sunday, Home Minister Amit Shah has asked the Bureau of Police Research and Development to move ahead on reforming the Indian Penal Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure. When Macaulay drafted it in the 1830s, it was an exceptional piece of work. In the following decades, the colonial government modified it to serve its interests. While courts and legislatures have made many changes to the IPC over the past century, it now lacks overall coherence and comprehensiveness.Read more 

Cap on age limit for IVF could be allowed, but only with checks and balances

Septuagenarians in India using in-vitro fertilisation (IVF) technologies have met with mixed responses.

While IVF is becoming the most common infertility treatment, many countries, including the US, UK and Australia, have recommended age limits for accessing the technology.

India, however, currently has no laws restricting IVF access for women of advanced ages. Consequently, in the last three months, at least two IVF-assisted births by women in their 70s have been reported from Tamil Nadu and Rajasthan.The idea of a 70-year-old woman giving birth to a child shocks the sensibilities of a lot of people. Though there is no legal age restriction, the state-funded Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) advises an upper age limit of 50 years. In 2017, the ICMR proposed the IVF Bill to regulate access to IVF based on age, but the Bill is yet to be taken up by the Parliament. (Read more)

What does refusal to sign the Osaka Track mean for India?

The big decision here is whether or not India wants to share its data with anyone under any circumstances.India recently started sharing maritime data with countries in the Indian Ocean Region. The Information Fusion Centre is actively interacting with the maritime community and has already built linkages with 18 countries and 15 multinational/maritime security centres. On that note, it is worth relooking at India’s approach to data sharing and cross-border data flows.Technology is now a variable that defines relations between countries. Over the year, we have seen an increasing number of instances that reaffirm the existence of high-tech geopolitics. First, there was the US-imposed ban on Huawei technologies. Then the Americans considered imposing caps on H1-B visas for countries that implemented data localisation. One of the most important recent developments was at this year’s G20 summit where Japan’s Shinzo Abe presented the idea to have a multilateral broad framework for the sharing of data. It is worth analyzing India’s response to it.The agreement is called the Osaka Track. The idea is that member countries should be able to share and store data across borders without having to worry about security risks. The agreement has many notable signatories, such as the US, EU, and China. It is India’s response that is interesting. India, for better or worse, has not been big on data sharing. So much so, that recent news claimed that the government was considering getting a domestic messaging service for official communication. With this context in mind (as well as the draft e-commerce policy, data protection bill, and the RBI data localization notification), India refused to join the Osaka Track as a signatory. The questions for India here are, what does this mean for the future of Indian data, and how India is likely to conduct itself in this world of high-tech geopolitics?India’s reasons for not signing the pact are two-fold. Firstly, as the sentiment goes, data is national wealth. The idea here is to keep all data possible within Indian borders. Much like you would do be inclined to do with actual wealth. Secondly, as an official stated, India needs to better understand what free flow of data might mean. Having said that, India then wants to look at its domestic requirements and would like to see the issue of cross-border data flows discuss the same on a WTO (World Trade Organisation) platform. What the foreign policy is broadly saying here (to my understanding) is that it is not in India’s best interests to share its data right now. However, once the government has a better understanding of the Osaka Track, they might reconsider.In the broader global context, the Osaka Track is a step towards an emerging pattern. Data flows are likely to be increasingly regulated through economic blocs and not nations. Europe’s General Data Protection Regulation and Convention 108+ are the best examples of this. The Osaka Track was an opportunity for India to follow this trend and facilitate trans-border data flows. India’s rejection of it does not mean that other opportunities will not present themselves. Should India decide that data sharing is in its best interests, there are other platforms to make it happen on its own terms. One option to pursue this route would be to establish a data sharing law and standards under Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation (BIMSTEC). Sharing costs of storage and following common processing standards would give India an edge in data geopolitics. Just because it would make powerhouses such as the US rethink applying sanctions to all of BIMSTEC instead of India alone. BIMSTEC, of course, is also interchangeable. India could take the lead and establish a data sharing policy with SAARC (South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation) or with a different combination of countries it might prefer. The big decision here is whether or not India wants to share its data with anyone under any circumstances.If India is to treat data as wealth and not share it across borders, it may be time to consider what that might mean. An increasing number of government policies are treating data as an asset that should not be shared. Doing so is likely to come at the cost of being ostracised by the US. However, if India is to go ahead with this, it makes sense as citizens to ask the government how data is going to be used to achieve progress.While there are a lot of policy proposals on how data should be regulated in India, there aren’t many on how it is going to be used for economic development. Sharing data with countries and/or companies can often crowdsource the initiative for development, as it seems to be doing for security at The Information Fusion Centre. As Microsoft’s collaboration with the Telangana government proved by using data to optimise agricultural yields. However, if India decides to cut itself off as evidenced by the refusal to sign the Osaka Track, it is best to ask how crowdsourcing the initiatives will be substituted. While options to do so domestically might exist (such as releasing community data for entrepreneurs and Indian companies), there need to be indicators that they are being considered or carried out on a national level. Because if data is national wealth, then there needs to be a plan on how it should be used to achieve economic development and progress for the nation.This article was first published in the Asian Age. Views are personal.

India’s road to RCEP laden with China-related obstacles

Ten years ago, the question was whether India and China should sign a bilateral free trade agreement (FTA). Today, it is whether India should join the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP). There are two different but interconnected issues: the dominance of Chinese manufacturers in the export of goods; and the impenetrability of the Chinese market to Indian and other foreign companies. On the other hand, joining the RCEP might compel New Delhi to launch the second-generation economic reforms.Read more

नवे पुस्तक: मुसलमानी मुलखांतली मुशाफरी (लेखक : श्रीपाद रामचंद्र टिकेकर)

हे पुस्तक वाचून असा कोणाचाही गैरसमज होऊ शकतो की, हे पुस्तक केवळ राजकारणाविषयीच असावे, पण तसे नाही. इराक व इराणमधल्या समाजजीवनाकडे टिकेकर अगदी विचक्षण दृष्टीने पाहत होते. त्यामुळेच ते लिहितात की, इराणमध्ये वाहने रस्त्याच्या उजव्या बाजूने चालवली जात असली, तरीही इराकमध्ये ब्रिटिश सत्तेचा पराभव असल्याने वाहने डाव्या बाजूने चालवावीत असा नियम आहे. इराकमध्ये खजुराशिवाय इतर कोणतेही झाड दिसत नाही. तसेच बसरा शहरात कोठेही गटारे नाहीत व अगदी मोठ्या कालव्यांतसुद्धा घाणेरडे पाणी असते. लोकांच्या स्वच्छतेच्या सवयीविषयी टिकेकर लिहितात की, ‘अरब म्हणजे अगोदरच गलिच्छ व अमंगळ लोक. त्यात इकडील थंडीचे निमित्त मिळाले की, सहा-सहा महिने त्यांना स्नान मिळत नाही’. इराणमध्येही असाच प्रकार होता. तिथे तर एकाच कालव्यात एकमेकांपासून काही फूट अंतरावरच कपडे धुणे, भांडी घासणे व पाणी पिणे असे तिन्ही उद्योग बिनदिक्कतपणे चालले असायचे.पूर्ण लेख वाचण्यासाठी इथे क्लिक करा.

Do informal summits with China work?

The hopes of a harmonious, balanced relationship between India and China post-Wuhan have not been realised. In fact, little has changed in the overall trajectory of the Indo-China bilateral relationship of limited co-operation and strategic competition. Therefore, the Mamallapuram summit will make for good optics for both Xi Jinping and Narendra Modi, but it is doubtful whether there will be a tangible outcome for the two countries.Read the full article here.

What can Modi-Xi agree on to call their Mamallapuram meeting a success?

The Print’s daily roundtable TalkPoint posed a question connected to the Narendra Modi-Xi Jinping informal summit in Mamallapuram: What can Modi-Xi agree on to call their Mamallapuram meeting a success?Manoj Kewalramani, Fellow-China Studies at The Takshashila Institution, was among the discussants. Manoj argued:My expectations from the Modi-Xi summit are very low for mainly two reasons. First, it is essentially an informal summit with no clearly-defined agenda, therefore, there will be only a few concrete outcomes from the meet. Second relates to the situation between the two countries on fundamental issues in the last 6-8 months.China has been very slow to move on issues important to India such as membership in the United Nations Security Council or the Nuclear Suppliers Group. And it also took the Kashmir issue to the UN where it has zero locus standi. Even trade relations between India and China have been strained. So, the current environment is not conducive to this summit. However, it is always a good idea to keep engaging in dialogue.To call this meeting a success, Modi and Xi must arrive at the conclusion that both India and China are rising powers and not let their differences turn into disputes. Regarding the border issue, the best-case scenario would be a discussion on new confidence-building measures between the militaries of both countries to maintain peace and tranquillity. I see no concrete direction on trade besides the broad rhetoric on the matter. What one can also expect is people-to-people contact and talk about fostering a cultural relationship between the two ancient civilisations to ensure that India-China relations are organic as opposed to only being diplomatically driven by leaders at the top.Read the entire discussion on ThePrint.in website here.

Modi-Xi Summit: Don't expect a major breakthrough

While India and China will hold the second informal summit between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and President Xi Jinping today and tomorrow, events over the past few weeks have dampened the prospects of forward movement on the boundary dispute. The first informal summit between Xi and Modi in Wuhan in 2018 had provided a tentative new template for first stabilising and then advancing the bilateral relationship, which had come under increasing strain.Read the full article in Deccan Herald here

Indian economy needs structural reforms & behavioural change, not macroeconomic jargon

Okay, the Indian economy is in a slowdown and it is absolutely important for us to quickly get back onto the path of high growth. Economic output is the sum of consumer expenditure, investment, government expenditure and net exports. The best way to increase growth is to increase all four of the above. There is a need for technical discussion among macroeconomists, financial analysts, business journalists and policymakers, but it cannot be the only show in town.Read more

India should seek ‘hawkish balance’ through Quad

The Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad) received an upgrade last week when the foreign ministers of Australia, Japan, India and the US met at the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly. The Quad was conceived in 2007 to address the unconventional threats in the Asia-Pacific region. But China viewed this grouping as a ganging-up of the US and its allies to contain its rise. It protested against this arrangement and asked each country to explain the grouping’s objectives.Read more...

Reimagining Safety In A World With Nuclear Weapons

Prakash Menon talks about two very important and urgent matters and how they actually go hand in hand. Nuclear warfare and climate change. In this talk, you learn how we will find ourselves in the middle of a nuclear apocalypse if we don't implement change now.This talk was given at a TEDx event using the TED conference format but independently organized by a local community.Watch the video here

On India-Pakistan sparring at the UNGA

The Print’s daily roundtable TalkPoint posed a question: Does India-Pakistan sparring at UNGA bring any diplomatic benefit for either country?India does not gain anything by sparring with Pakistan at the UNGA. In fact, for a major power like India engaging in a war of words with Pakistan actually diminishes its status, re-hyphenates it with Pakistan, and demonstrates a lack of diplomatic foresight. Pakistan is a lesser power and India might actually gain more by ignoring Pakistan’s rhetoric at the UNGA than by responding to it.However, India’s tough posturing and appearing to send a ‘message’ to Pakistan at an international forum will have short-term gains domestically.With assembly elections due in Maharashtra and Haryana, domestic imperatives and people’s perceived requirements of a ‘tough posture’ are likely to influence India’s position on Kashmir and Pakistan at the UNGA.For Pakistan, provoking India to respond to its aggressive rhetoric is actually a victory. Pakistan would want to get the world to discuss India’s actions in Kashmir. Pakistan is also looking to score brownie points at the UNGA. India can negate Pakistani efforts by ignoring its rhetoric and instead focusing on other major issues such as climate change. So, it is not a good idea for India to fight with Pakistan at the UNGA. Read the entire discussion on ThePrint.in website here.

---

 

The hot risks of ‘Cold Start’

India’s controversial military doctrine is of limited use in a clash with Pakistan and should stay cold and underplayed.India’s military should privilege development of a military capability that allows for causing destruction without posturing. Long-range firepower from air, land and sea platforms provide more promise for retribution under the nuclear shadow than IBGs that, at best, could threaten and may mostly even flatter to deceive. Capabilities that support force application in ‘Other than War’ forms would act as a better deterrence.Read more

Donald Trump Endorsement: India's Calculated Move

Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s indirect endorsement of President Donald Trump for the White House is a calculated risk. India’s gains from the US in the next few months would determine the merit of this endorsement. But an unapologetic India doesn’t care about its grand old foreign policy’s dogmatic values and principles.Read More...

On the Howdy Modi event

The Print’s daily roundtable TalkPoint posed a question connected to the Indian PM’s Howdy Modi event in Houston: Is it smart diplomacy for PM Modi to align himself with Donald Trump’s campaign in Houston?Whether Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s endorsement of US President Donald Trump at the ‘Howdy, Modi’ event should be termed smart diplomacy depends on its real impact on the future of India-US relations. The event by itself carries immense symbolic value, and the world will take note of how far India-US relations have come. This is a positive outcome. However, an Indian Prime Minister taking an overt partisan position on US domestic politics will have negative consequences.First, this sets a precedent for any foreign leader to take sides in Indian elections or its politics. This could ultimately make it tough for India to manage its relations with other countries. Second, the Indian-American community faces the risk of being seen as more Indian and less American. Opponents of Donald Trump might even play up this line of thinking to reap political dividends in the 2020 US presidential elections. So, the costs involved are real.The backlash against China’s attempts to influence Australia’s domestic politics showed that once nationalist political sentiments take precedence in the host country, immigrant communities face the risk of being isolated and targeted.Read the entire discussion on ThePrint.in website here. 

Performing well in the sandbox won't be enough

RBI recently came up with a Draft Enabling Framework for Regulatory Sandbox in financial technology. For context, a sandbox is a framework that allows testing of innovations by private firms in a controlled environment. As far as developments in the fintech regulation space go, this is a good one. A sandbox allows players to run a pilot test on new products and services at a smaller scale with less capital than usually required. According to the draft, RBI will consider testing for innovative products and services in the following areas, Retail payments, Money transfer services, Marketplace lending, Digital KYC, Financial advisory services, Wealth management services, Digital identification services, Smart contracts, Financial inclusion products, Cybersecurity products. Some of these, especially the digital KYC and financial inclusion, are more front-facing than others. There is also a separate clause for innovative technologies that include, Mobile technology applications (payments, digital identity, etc.), Data Analytics, Application Program Interface (APIs) services, Applications under blockchain technologies, Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning applications. A notable exemption from the sandbox is cryptocurrencies. This is keeping in line with the report of the Inter-ministerial group that recommended banning private cryptocurrencies and proposed a fine of up to ₹25 crore as well as up to 10 years imprisonment. It echoes the stance of the report that encourages developments in blockchain and the distributed ledger technology in general. This is likely due to concerns that private cryptocurrencies can lead to macroeconomic instability and finance terror groups, both of which are fair concerns. There have been claims that the sandbox is available for a limited set of customers, only 10-12 companies. It is unclear whether that hypothesis is true. The eligibility criteria as specified in the draft states that the focus of the sandbox will be to encourage innovations where there is an absence of governing regulations; there is a need to temporarily ease regulations for enabling the proposed innovation; the proposed innovation shows promise of easing/effecting delivery of financial services in a significant way. This does not directly translate into having only 10-12 players. This should also act as a win for Facebook, and in all probability, WhatsApp. It is an open secret that WhatsApp has been keen to launch a payments service in India, dubbed ‘WhatsApp Pay’. However, over recent times, the regulatory climate has proved to be unfavourable to bring those efforts to fruition. The regulatory sandbox may serve as the ideal testing ground for the service before its release. A successful stint in the sandbox is not a guarantee to achieve regulatory approvals however, as the draft states. Companies and their services can perform well and still be denied clearance to launch at a national level. That is something firms like WhatsApp and Facebook will have to deal with. Any financial services that pass the sandbox will need to clear regulatory hurdles such as data localization guidelines laid out by RBI and the data protection bill (if and when it becomes law). There are two key things to keep in mind here. Firstly, the sandbox is likely to be of help to both newcomers into the market as well as incumbents who plan to try out new ideas in fintech. This includes innovative efforts to increase financial inclusion through services that rely on machine learning and AI. Thus, it is a boost to the fintech landscape overall and also on India’s AI front. The latter of which could use an injection in homegrown talent, applications, and infrastructure. Secondly, returns from the sandbox have the potential to pay off dividends in the short to long term, depending on how long the program lasts. The RBI, also to their credit has provided a set of risks and limitations in the draft. It includes the possibility of innovators losing time and flexibility because of due process. The need for regulatory approvals after sandbox testing and legal issues leading to consumer losses is also included. None of these risks is an argument for not having the sandbox. The sandbox proposed is an objectively good idea. Countries around the world, including Thailand, Singapore, and the US have tried it. In a fintech space that is growing and needs new innovation to foster better development in areas such as financial inclusion and creditworthiness, this is a welcome step. It is too early to say whether the idea will be successful, or whether it will face implementation challenges or end up leading to unintended consequences, such as favouring the incumbents over startups or making participation exclusive to a limited set of players. The idea is still in the draft stage and it could be a while before it is successfully carried out. The bottom line here is that despite all these considerations, it is better to have a sandbox than not have one.This article was first published in Deccan Chronicle. Views are personal.

What the Congress party needs is a palace coup

While the government of Narendra Modi and Amit Shah has received severe criticism for its policies, the Congress has largely been excused for its failure to effectively hold the end of opposition. The BJP has turned many parts of the Congress legacy into a debilitating political liability. My indictment of the Congress is threefold: most of its leaders do not know what they stand for, its organisation is hopelessly out of date, and it lacks the quality of top leadership that the situation demands.Read more

Stronger fiscal federalism

Former prime minister Manmohan Singh recently urged the Centre to do more to enhance the spirit of cooperative federalism. His comments were in the context of the changes made to the terms of reference to the 15th Finance Commission (15FC). These changes were made in July, quite late in the tenure of the 15FC, and especially when the final report was expected by the end of October.Read more