Nevertheless, such a political crisis is not new to the country. Italy has always been at the centre of political turmoil for decades. It is quite evident with the fact that the country has seen about 60 governments since WWII. Conte and Renzi’s drift has been known to the public for a long time, and hesitation escalating was very much anticipated. So far, the drift was kept at bay by this centre-left coalition due to the coronavirus emergency. However, the pandemic situation has also now escalated, and it seems that it outlasted the political goodwill. [2]

Why Did the Problem in Italian Politics Start?

The reason for this drift started due to the approach of Conte and Renzi concerning financial matters. [3] Back in 2020, the GDP of Italy slumped by about 10% due to COVID-19. [4] Adding on to that, was a stimulus package that was given by the European Union (EU) worth €750 billion that was allocated to several EU nations. In July 2020, Italy was allowed to get the lion share of the EU stimulus package, amounting to over €200 billion (about $243 billion) in a grant and low-interest loans. [5] Because of such loans, Italy is now the second most debt-ridden economy after Greece. [6]

For weeks, Matteo Renzi had criticized the plan laid out by Conte to use the EU funds to use these handout purposes and less on serving the health needs. Even when the plan was improved on Tuesday night as per the request, Matteo Renzi was still not satisfied. Finally, the usage of €200 billion worth of that package was approved during the night of about 12th and 13th January 2021 by the lawmakers. However, the lawmakers of the Italia Viva abstained from voting on it. Also, two members of resigned including Elena Bonetti, the former minister for family and equal opportunities.  Both Conte and Renzi have a different opinion on how this recovery money given by the European Union should be used.

It increased the difference between Renzi and Conte, as the issue became a matter of political vote bank and both the centrists are competing for the same voters. [7]

Matteo Renzi’s move has been met with a mixed response, ranging from anger to confusion to chaos. One opinion poll even suggested about 70% of the Italians feel that this move by Renzi is not due to the difference of opinion, but rather for his political gain. Some experts also state that this move by Renzi may be due to him being side-lined by the coalition in recent times. [8] So, Renzi was doing nothing but using this opportunity to improvise on his political gains.

However, on Wednesday, Renzi argued in a news conference that dealing with the pandemic also meant “solving problems, not concealing them,” He has taken issue with Conte’s strategy for rebuilding Italy’s tattered economy.

Nonetheless, it cannot be denied that Matteo Renzi is a very well-known political figure in Italian politics and holds an even more crucial role in the current government headed by Giuseppe Conte.

Why Renzi Is Crucial to the Italian Government?

Italia Viva was formed by Matteo Renzi in September 2019, after he quit the centre-left Democratic Party. After the populist right-wing League Party’s departure, Renzi and his party played a significant role in forming the coalition government by Conte. The coalition government comprises the centre-left Democratic Party, Five Star Movement (MS5) and the left-leaning parliamentary group called Free and Equal.

According to recent polls, even though Renzi has only 3% public support, his party Italia Viva has 30 lawmakers in the lower house and 18 lawmakers in the upper house, thereby making them a junior coalition partner.

Way Ahead

Renzi had elected as the Prime Minister in 2014. So, he understands how the situation prevails while on that post and how politics needs to be done to rule the state. Not only that, but he also has been known for mediating conflicts among parties having varied political inclination- ensuring that the far-right parties are out of power by making sure that a coalition is created between populist and centre-left parties. 

With the decision of Renzi, there are only a few alternative options that can be viable for moving ahead in this situation. First, that Conte and Renzi come to a compromise by keeping the current coalition government. In other words, without escalating the situation, Conte needs to convince Renzi to support the government. It is still possible as Renzi is still. However, if this does not happen, the country would be on the brink of losing a government in the middle of a pandemic. Alternatively, the Conte government can go through a no-confidence motion. If he loses, the situation of Conte’s government will be like Schrödinger’s cat. In other words, Conte would only be left as the caretaker of the government, and he would also not have much power over Renzi. However, a coalition is still possible. After all, with a lack of public support, Renzi would not want to put his 48 lawmaker seats at risk. Nonetheless, if this not, the situation may move ahead in a different path.

Second, if the coalition government does not move ahead, then considering the pandemic, a government of national unity will be sought to be created by President Sergio Mattarella.

Third, the country could go ahead with the national vote. It would mean that the country may end up going into an election right in the middle of the pandemic. In case of an election, either Conte would win the third term as the Prime Minister, or the far-right wing parties would form the government. The far-right in Italian politics comprises of the League Party and the Brothers of Italy. They have been gaining support for the past few years and hold about 40% of the electoral vote. So, in case an election happens and the far-right wins, then there Italy will have the most anti-European government in Western Europe. [9]

In this way, one can state that Italy is currently in such a political situation that it will not be suitable for the nation if escalated. [10] Hence, sorting out the differences is the best possible way out of this situation.

References:

[1] Italy – COVID-19 Overview – Johns Hopkins. coronavirus.jhu.edu/region/italy

[2] Harlan, Chico. “Italy’s Government Falls into Chaos, Further Complicating the Covid Response.” The Washington Post, WP Company, 13 Jan. 2021, www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/italy-government-renzi-conte/2021/01/13/dd65f6bc-55c6-11eb-acc5-92d2819a1ccb_story.html.

[3] Roberts, Hannah. “Italy’s Coalition Fights for Control of EU Recovery Cash.” POLITICO, POLITICO, 5 Jan. 2021, www.politico.eu/article/matteo-renzi-giuseppe-conte-coalition-government-recovery-fund-cash-coronavirus/.

[4] Amaro, Silvia, and Sam Meredith. “Italy’s Government in Crisis after Former PM Pulls Support for Ruling Coalition.” CNBC, CNBC, 13 Jan. 2021, www.cnbc.com/2021/01/13/renzi-italys-government-in-crisis-after-former-pm-pulls-support.html.

[5] Speak, Clare. “How Italy Plans to Spend €209 Billion of EU Money.” Thelocal.it, 17 Sept. 2020, www.thelocal.it/20200917/more-growth-lower-tax-for-families-italy-sets-out-plan-for-spending-eu-recovery-fund.

[6] Samuelson, Robert. “Opinion | Why Italy’s Debt Matters for Everybody.” The Washington Post, WP Company, 24 May 2020, www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-italys-debt-matters-for-everybody/2020/05/24/12b2f310-9baf-11ea-ac72-3841fcc9b35f_story.html.

[7] Roberts, Hannah. “Italy’s Coalition Fights for Control of EU Recovery Cash.” POLITICO, POLITICO, 5 Jan. 2021, www.politico.eu/article/matteo-renzi-giuseppe-conte-coalition-government-recovery-fund-cash-coronavirus/.

[8] Bozza, Claudio. “Sondaggio: Crisi Di Governo Incomprensibile per Un Italiano Su 2. E per Il 73% Renzi Persegue i Suoi Interessi.” Corriere Della Sera, Corriere Della Sera, 13 Jan. 2021, www.corriere.it/politica/21_gennaio_13/crisi-governo-italiano-due-non-capisce-motivi-il-73percento-renzi-persegue-suoi-interessi-59b0ac42-5515-11eb-89b9-d85a626b049f.shtml.

[9] Zampano, Giada. “Giorgia Meloni Is Rising Star on Italy’s Far-Right Stage.” AP NEWS, Associated Press, 18 Oct. 2019, apnews.com/article/fa37b62daab246f2a9ccb0887284aaee.

[10] “Italy’s Government in Crisis after Junior Coalition Partner Quits.” Euronews, 13 Jan. 2021, www.euronews.com/2021/01/13/italy-s-government-close-to-collapse-amid-row-over-covid-recovery-cash.

The post ITALIAN POLITICS: FALLOUT OF ITALY’S GOVERNMENT appeared first on WISER WORLD.

To say that these are cases that India forgot might be a stretch since cases like Minerva mills v Union of India, Rameshwar Prasad v Union of India are pretty well known and keep popping up in references every other day. Even the Bajaj v KPS Gill case was widely discussed by the media.

Overview of The Book

Each case takes a few pages at most and is more like a summary than a detailed description of what happened. If you’re looking for a more in-depth analysis, then this book isn’t it. But it’s a good collection of cases.

One of the things I want to talk about is the sharp contrast in the outcomes of two court cases. In the case of Tukaram v State of Maharastra (Mathura case), two policemen raped a tribal girl in the police station and the supreme court acquitted both of them and made disgusting statements that conflated absence of injury with consent. Ignoring that a person under police custody cannot even be considered to have consented, the court also ignored every principle of common sense or justice in this case.

Contrast this with the Bajaj v KPS gill case where Bajaj a senior government officer was slapped on her arse by KPS gill. She won the case all the way to the supreme court, despite the supreme court letting KPS Gill off with a small fine and overturning his 3-month imprisonment sentence given by the lower court.

It is rare for those who aren’t privileged or well off to get justice in India because the system is stacked against them. Another interesting fact is the coverage of the ‘liberal English media’ (The Hindu, Indian Express, Deccan Herald) on the Bajaj v Gill case. one would have thought they would have taken the side of Bajaj, but they were full of sympathy for KPS Gill and his ‘misfortune’ and were interested in praising his role in clearing the militancy in Punjab and felt it was the injustice that he was being punished by the courts for a different crime. Even Tavleen Singh defended Gill and tried to portray this as an over-reaction by Bajaj.

After the horrible judgement by the supreme court in the Mathura case, there were huge protests by women and massive outcry by civil society. Then the Supreme court in a face-saving measure decided to issue future guidelines by not requiring corroborating evidence (other than the statement of the victim) for such cases by making an even more Retarded justification behind those guidelines.

>>>The court reasoned its decision on the basis that Indian women were different from women in the ‘Western World’, and were unlikely to concoct an allegation of sexual assault. Women in the West could be driven by economic motives, ‘psychological neurosis’, vengeance or jealousy to fabricate allegations. An Indian woman, conscious of the ‘danger of being ostracised’, the ‘reflect[tion] on her chastity’ and other factors, was unlikely to do so.

The book also mentions cases like Naga People’s movement of Human rights v Union of India which talks about how the supreme court did not do anything to declare AFSPA unconstitutional or even dilute some of its guidelines in light of egregious human rights violations being committed. The Court also did nothing to fight for the rights of citizens against the draconian TADA act which was being misused by the police to file cases against anyone they wanted to target. In many cases, if they were angry that someone got bail, they would slap a TADA case.

We are seeing a parallel of that currently with the BJP government using NSA act to throw people like Dr Kafeel Khan or Sharjeel into prison.

One point I’d like to make is that in the case of the TADA, it was not the Supreme court that helped protect the citizen but the PV Narasimha Rao government which set up an NHRC commission. They did not do this because they cared about the citizens but because they were worried about an international backlash on the rampant custodial deaths/torture/human rights violations in India.

So sometimes it is a good thing for people around the world to raise their voice on issues anywhere and hope that those governments at least pretend to care about their image and do something. Instead of crying about outsiders interfering, maybe it is a good idea to focus on what they are saying and whether there is merit to it than focusing on who is speaking out. International pressure has been instrumental in helping the cause of human rights across the world.

About the Author: The Cases that India Forgot  

Dr. Chintan Chandrachud is an associate in Quinn Emanuel’s London office which he joined the firm in 2016.  His practice deals with matters on complex commercial litigation, tax litigation and international arbitration.

He possesses a PhD from the University of Cambridge on the subject of judicial review in India and the United Kingdom. His academic qualifications include postgraduate degrees from Oxford and Yale. He is also the author of Balanced Constitutionalism: Courts and Legislatures in India and the United Kingdom.

The post THE CASES THAT INDIA FORGOT — Book Review appeared first on WISER WORLD.

“It is very difficult for a woman to make up her mind to enter politics. Once she makes up her own mind then she has to prepare her husband and her children and her family. Once she has overcome all these obstacles and applies for the ticket then the male aspirants against whom she is applying makeup all sorts of stories about her. And after all, this when her name goes to the party bosses, they do not select her name because they fear losing that seat”

The above quote of late Sushma Swaraj gives a glimpse of reality that how women have to face so many problems and criticisms while entering politics.

Since pre-independence to till now it has been seen that women are always marginalized in the mainstream of politics and in decision making as well as in getting an important position in the political organization and also in our society. But it has been seen that men and women also played an equal role for the development of the nation, they have worked shoulder to shoulder in pre-independent as well as in post-independent India.

Indian constitution is one of the strongest law that provides equal opportunity to both men and women in socio-economic and political aspects. But our societal norms, customs and patriarchal set up treated them as subordinate to men. Their financial dependency upon men also keeps them away from political activities or affiliations. United Nation’s 2008 survey shows that India marked the lowest number of women’s participation in parliament i.e. 9.1%. Even a country like UAE marked better than India in the perspective of women’s participation in parliament i.e. 22.5%. It was seen that the 15th Lok Sabha election has recorded 59 women as a member of parliament highest since independence. India ranked 148 out of the 193 nations with 11.48 percent women in the lower house and 11 percent in the upper house.

Government Initiatives and Constitutional Provisions

The Women’s Reservation Bill which allows 33% of reservation for women in the elected bodies but the bill is still reserved in the Lok Sabha after it was passed from the Rajya Sabha. As it has been already stated that the constitution provides equal opportunity to all citizens of India, the constitution also called the state to take measure to neutralize the socio-economic, political, educational and political disadvantages faced by women.

• Article 14 – It guarantees equality before the law and equal protection of law within the territory of India.
• Article 39(b) – has provision for equal pay for equal work for both men and women.
• Article 325 and 326 – They guarantee political equality equal right to participation in political activity and right to vote respectively.

Success Stories of Indian Women in Politics

There are many stories of success of Indian women in ancient, medieval as well as in the modern period. It is believed that administration and politics both are the arenas of men. However, in India, we have seen that many women have played and are still playing an important role in both the above-mentioned areas. Late Indira Gandhi has served the nation as the first PM of India and her daughter in law Mrs Sonia Gandhi is the present president of Indian National Congress and was the former chairperson of UPA. The first Indian to serve as the President of the United Nations General Assembly was a woman, Vijay Lakshmi Pandit. States like West Bengal, Tamil Nadu, Delhi, Gujarat, Jammu and Kashmir have had women as a chief minister in past. The highest decision making of CPI(M) i.e. Polit Bureau has two women representative out of its thirteen members body.

If we compare between two foremost national parties INC and BJP in respect of giving the nomination to female candidates, it shows that INC nominates more female candidates than BJP. It was in 2009 co-incidentally when both the parties gave the nomination to an equal number of female candidates i.e. 43.

Obstacles to Women Participation in Politics and the Role of Media in Changing the Societal Mindset

One of the main obstacles is the societal obstacle. It is mainly believed that the main work of a female is to do household chores and child care and keep herself within the boundary of the house. Managing the outside world is the work of a male. It is also believed that women have a lack of ability in case of giving leadership.

Due to the advancement of news media, print media and social media are playing an important role in changing the mindset of society. Women participating in mainstream politics not just of political awareness but also the role of media in breaking the stereotyped image of women. Undoubtedly media has played a vital role in creating awareness among women and in empowering them up to some extent. Media helps women in identifying and adopting the ways of self-actualization. Women are also becoming active in the journalism profession previously they were seen rarely in journalism. It is also criticized to sensationalize the issues and use women as a commodity for seeking the attention of viewers. Women’s image is seen as submissive to men. Women’s issues rarely got space in the leading stories of front pages.

Conclusion

From the above discussion, we can come to the conclusion that in spite of facing obstacles women in India is coming in the forefront and started demanding their own rights in various fields and many political and apolitical women organizations are acting as their agent in upholding their demands. One of the key thing that acts as an obstacle for women’s political participation in India is the lack of education. Women will come to know about their rights and privileges when they will get the proper education. With the objective of gender empowerment Government of India in 2014 formed a commission named National Mission of Empowerment of Women, but this project was not up to the mark.

Side by side governmental help is for the uprising of women empowerment. As discussed earlier there are my constitutional provisions which provide equality between men and women. Recently in Kerala, the Sabarimala case is an example of governmental help that provided to the women. For many decades women were not allowed to enter into the Sabarimala temple but the LDF government protested against this and provide the equal right to women as like men to enter into the temple.

Media has to some extent plays an important for women empowerment and truly highlighting their status in society. Establishment of women panchayat and 33% reservation of women into the local bodies is acting as an encouragement to women for taking part in politics and in the decision making process.                  

Reference

Alam Shah, January 2015, International journal of advanced in management and social sciences, Volume 4, no.1, page 78.

Nisha M.Ameen, Vezhaventhan. D,2018, International journal of pure and applied mathematics, volume 120 no. 5, page no. 4726.

Nisha M Ameen, Vezhaventhan.D 2018, International journal of pure and applied mathematics, volume 120 no. 5, page no.4728.

Kumar Amit, Dhamiya Somesh, Dhamiya Arun, December 2016, SIBM Pune research journal, volume XII, Page no. 6,

Alam Shah, January 2015, International journal of advanced research in management and social sciences, Volume 4 no.1, Page no. 81-82.

Nisha M.Ameen, Vezhaventhan.D, 2018, International journal of pure and applied mathematics, volume 120 no.5, page no. 4721.

The post WOMEN IN POLITICS AND JOURNALISM IN INDIA appeared first on WISER WORLD.

Reasons behind the rise of populism

To counter populism, we must counter the reasons that led to the rise of populism. One of the main reasons has been economic inequality – it gives leaders a foundation to base their populist ideals on and comes with a section of the population that is extremely frustrated and can easily subscribe to the aforementioned populist ideals. This is similar to what happened in the United States of America when Donald Trump was elected as President. He used the idea of the political elites ruling the country to garner votes. This idea can be summed up very well through a quote from his inaugural address, “For too long, a small group in our nation’s capital has reaped the rewards of government while the people have borne the cost.” 

Secondly, populism is characterised by a call for homogenizing societies. This stems from disapproval of pluralism and people with lower educational levels are more susceptible to believing anti-immigration ideas. Populist leaders often pretend to address the whole nation but often are referring solely to their supporters. They refer to their supporters as “we the people” or some variation of this. These leaders can tend to alienate one or more particular groups in order to demonize these groups and portray them as “the other”. Usually, these groups are immigrants, people of colour or gender and sexual minorities. 

Main characteristics of populist leaders

The wide spectrum of populism and the geographical diversity of populist nations can make it difficult to identify who is a populist leader. Every leader who refers to the nation as “we the people” doesn’t automatically become a populist leader. Populist leaders can be characterized by their two things – the first being the alienization of a certain sect of people. As described above, populist leaders can only rise to power if they have a group – either external, but mostly internal to their countries – that they can demonize. Europe has seen an increase of negative portrayals of immigrants in populist advertising.

Secondly, populist leaders will often believe in a radical centralization of power – they use speeches which make them seem God-like. Populist governments have one central figure whose charisma and revolutionary capabilities are presented as the saviour from the continued oppression of political elites.

The Threat and the Solution

Populist rhetoric and the marginalization of communities can pose a serious threat to democracy. Populist rhetoric is often spread through misinformation which undermines the transparent workings of a government. Populism often fuels much more dangerous political mishaps in our societies. Perhaps the most dangerous example of this is Europe in 1930s. Hitler’s populist tendencies included villainizing Jews, the disabled and every “non-Aryan” person, along with charismatic and larger-than-life speeches. Populism fuelled fascism and right now it is fuelling the alternative far-right in western liberal democracies. 

Populists vehemently oppose experts or more specifically scientific professionals. Jan-Werner Müller, a professor of politics at Princeton University writes in The Guardian, “Populists are not by definition liars. They are only committed to one particular empirical falsehood: the notion that they, and only they, represent what populists often call “the real people” – with the implication that other politicians are not only corrupt and “crooked”, but traitors to the people, or, as Trump has often put it, “Un-American”. This is very characteristic of populists – creating “the others” and differentiating themselves form this. Not listening to scientists and the educated strata of the society can have grave consequences – such as the half-baked response of the American government in dealing with the coronavirus.

The solution to populism lies in solving the issues that cause it. Economic inequality and anti-immigration ideas are issues that go beyond the sphere of one country. While domestic attempts to combat these are necessary, they are not always effective when you have a populist government that benefits from these issues. Moreover, these issues are highly affected by events of globalization, international trade and migration. Hence, the nature of these issues makes it such that international cooperation becomes necessary. 

The United Nation Secretary-General, António Guterres said that multilateralism is the key to combating populism.  While this is certainly true, the international community has several more concrete things they can do. Pushing for the elimination of corruption and curbing the spread of misinformation is crucial. Corruption plays a huge role in keeping populist leaders in control. The principles of the United Nations Convention against Corruption can be applied in the discussion surrounding populism. Secondly and perhaps most importantly, populism can be curbed by educating the general public on the ideas of democracy and pluralism. The biggest strength of populist leaders is the insecurity or lack of awareness of citizens that they exploit. In this sense, if people are educated on the principles of democracy and moved way from set ideas of homogeneity, it can make populist leaders a rarer phenomenon.

Conclusion

Populism can cause the eradication of democratic principles. Populists come to power through acting on the weakness of the people and their lack of awareness. If we are to counter populism, we have to make the people aware of the aforementioned democratic principles and promote pluralism. However, while populism is combated, the negative effects or consequences of populism needs to be dealt with. Countries need to include disadvantaged groups in political discussions, such as by changing methods of representation. Calls for radically anti-immigration policies need to be disregarded especially in a time when so many countries are plunged in internal conflicts. 

The post RIGHT-WING POPULISM AND ITS RISE appeared first on WISER WORLD.

According to the World Bank, women make up 49.5 percent of the world’s population, however, there are only 3 countries (Rwanda, Bolivia and Cuba) in the world that have 50 percent or more women in Parliament in single or lower houses. It is important to identify why women don’t get into politics to combat these reasons and lead to the betterment of the whole society. 

Social Barriers

Firstly, the underrepresentation of women is caused by social barriers before their entry into politics. The general populace’s ideas of traditionally feminine characteristics are incompatible with the characteristics that people in positions of powers need to have. This does two things – from their childhood, girls are not encouraged to be leaders as much as boys are. They are instead taught to be docile and homely and puts them at a disadvantage from the very beginning. Parents, even today, bring up their daughters and sons in different ways. Since women are never made to believe that they can suit leadership roles, as well as men, can, they become less likely to enter politics. Moreover, this gender stereotyping leads to another phenomenon – when we eventually do see women in power, it causes people “discomfort” due to the mixture of two supposedly incompatible set of characteristics. This sentiment can be summed up by Alexandra Ocasio Cortez’s quote – “The idea that a woman can be as powerful as a man is something that our society can’t deal with.”

Unequal Starting Points

The traditional differences in the way that men and women are brought up also leads to a difference in their professions. Men are much more likely to have better careers and be in more positions of power. For example, there are less than 5 percent of women who head Fortune 500 companies.  This inequality can be a huge hindrance to entry in politics. Resources and money are important to become potential candidates for parties. There is not just a disparity in material resources, but also immaterial resources, such as time (women have to take on the burden of household responsibilities more), self-confidence (due to the earlier mentioned different upbringing for women which doesn’t help build their image as a leader) and networks. 

Often times political parties recruit their candidates from the corporate world. However, this is a field dominated by men which means that they have the upper hand in forming the right networks. This obviously makes it more likely that more men, rather than women enter politics. Moreover, political gatekeepers tend to be most often men who tend to recruit political candidates via their male-dominated networks.  Therefore, the fact that people who are into politics are mostly men kind of creates a cycle that prohibits women from getting into politics. 

Removal of men from political photographs shows the dire need for more women in politics.

Continuation in the Political Field

The gender stereotyping and the way we differently bring up men and women means that even if, despite these hindrances, a woman does get into politics, continuation is difficult. The discomfort that the voter base has with women in power means that they are held to a different standard to those of men. Female leaders are held more accountable than their male counterparts and the media is much harsher on them.

This uneven punishment is because the media and the people involved subconsciously do not think that women are cut out for politics, which makes them tougher on women in case they fail. The media especially can continue to treat female politicians poorly. The way the media presents female politicians shows us that they are not as worthy to be in power as men are, or that their priorities are supposed to be different – they are asked more questions about their families and personal relationships than male politicians are, and have their personal lives invaded. Their appearances are also given more importance than their substance. Despite all of these, some women still rise to enter politics.

Conclusion

Therefore, it is important for us to promote the representation of women in politics. But simply doing this is not enough – it is also important to promote it in the correct way. When we do commend women in politics, we tend to do it through a narrow scope – we view these achievements as individual efforts of exceptional women, whereas the truth is that there are also numerous parties at play here – women in political party backrooms, riding associations and women’s organizations.  Recognizing the efforts of everyone in promoting women’s participation is the first step to make sure we have more women and a better democracy.

Moreover, the discussion of female representation cannot end here. Caste, economic status, sexual orientation are all factors that affect the experiences of women in politics. Women from lower castes or lower economic strata will have a much harder time becoming politically successful. Similarly, the experience of a trans woman or a non-heterosexual woman is bound to be tougher due to ingrained biases. Representation of women in politics does not only help better women’s issues but leads to a betterment of society as a whole – in areas where Indian panchayats are headed by women, the number of drinking water projects was 62 percent higher than in areas with men-led panchayats. This is why it’s crucial to encourage women in politics and facilitate discourse related to this.

The post WHY DO WOMEN NOT GO INTO POLITICS? appeared first on WISER WORLD.

The Process of the Presidential Election

Before talking about the two candidates, it is important to understand how the election process works since it is very different from that of India. The election for the President of the USA is done separately from the legislative (The Senate and House of Representatives). The two main parties, Republicans and Democrats have small primaries and caucuses which are meetings of sorts in various states all over the country to decide the candidate from their party. When the two candidates are chosen, debates and campaigning is done, followed by voting. An electoral college is formed by the states of America and elections are held. Different states have different strengths for their college, keeping in mind the population of the particular state. The total number of seats is 538 and to become the President, a candidate needs to cross 270 seats. Since the division of seats is done on population, states like California and New York carry much more weight. The process from this point is more confusing. If a candidate wins the majority of the seats in a particular state, instead of the number of seats he has won goes into his account, but rather it is the total number of seats in the state that go into his account and it is said that he has ‘won the state’. For example, California has the most number of seats with 55 and hypothetically, if Biden wins 38 seats in the state, he gets the majority of the state. Not only that, in the total count he will get 55 seats to his name. Overall, whichever candidate reaches 270 seats in the college becomes the President. Now, let us look at the candidates.

 As of now, we have two candidates. Donald Trump from the Republican Party and Joe Biden from the Democratic Party as the leading candidates. The campaign has not gone into full swing as of now and the presidential debates are yet to be held. All this said; let’s look at the two candidates.

 The Incumbent – DONALD TRUMP

Starting with the incumbent Donald Trump; he has had little to no opposition when it comes to being endorsed by the Republican Party. The main reason behind this is the simple fact that he is the incumbent and has maintained a certain level of support in his key demographics. He has higher approval ratings than any other politician from the Grand Old Party (GOP) or the Republicans. Nonetheless, not every member has shown unequivocal support. Former presidential candidate from the Republican Party, Mitt Romney had voted to convict Trump during the infamous impeachment trials of early 2020. The economy has played to his advantage, at least before the pandemic and Trump does not shy away from taking the credit. Nonetheless, there are a few things that have played a role in the fall of his approval ratings. At the forefront, we have the mismanagement of the coronavirus outbreak in America. Currently, 4.1 million people have contracted the disease and considering that Trump has previously ridiculed the ability of the virus to spread and not impose restrictions has reflected the lack of leadership. Second, we have an issue that has not been at the forefront of Presidential elections for the last 3-4 races. The issue of race and institutionalized racism has taken America by a storm and Trump has not managed to control it. He has not openly talked about facing the issue of race but has called the protestors thugs and terrorists. Even though bold stances like this worked in 2016, they do not seem to be effective this time around when the issue is as sensitive as a race. With these things in mind, let’s look at the Democratic nominee and former Vice President under the Obama administration, Joe Biden.

The Nominee – JOE BIDEN

Joe Biden was relatively late to coming forward with his candidature if we compare it to the likes of Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, who had been talking about their campaign for long before the start of the democrat party’s caucuses.  This lack of early preparation was seen during the Iowa caucus and the primary in New Hampshire in which Biden didn’t perform very well. But eventually, things started to fall in place, with the regular debate over Sanders electability and Warren’s early withdrawal, Biden was eventually selected to be the Democratic presidential nominee. All this proposes the question that is Biden the best that Democrats have to offer, to go against Trump. Now even though a lot of voters think that his policies may not be as radical or as glaring as those of Sanders and Warren, he has been gaining the popular vote time and again. The political scientists within the party say that people just consider Biden to be more electable. Even though there are some question marks over his leadership ability and his ability to talk to people in a sense which creates a different political wave (something Trump did pretty well in 2016). Nonetheless, we have seen during the Obama presidency what Biden is capable of in terms of team management and keeping his administration smooth. Further, Biden is gaining more edge in political leadership after he had openly criticised the current President over his handling of the pandemic and the protests. All this is something that the political scientists have talked about the two leaders and there are differences in opinion. But one thing that is not as subjective is the polling data that various news agencies have collected.

Status of Polling Data and Opinion Polls

The latest polling data, as of 9th June by RealClearPolitics shows a lead in favour of Biden by 6 points as he stands on 46%, as opposed to Trump’s 40% approval rate. Similarly, NPR (+8), NY Times (+14), Fox News (+12) and Quinnipiac(+15) all suggest Biden having a huge lead over the president. It is important to mention that the past few months have shown Trump’s worst approval ratings during his tenure, going down to 38%. He, without a doubt, will improve his ratings and consequently improve his numbers in the poll. So, it is not advisable to consider Biden to be the new President, just yet. Also, a data as general as this one is not usually considered to be a clear indicator of who will be winning, as was seen back in 2016 when Hilary had an advantage of 4-5% by the same data  To better understand the polling data we need to divide the data into two different categories. The first is the situation in the swing states and secondly, the situation of the key demographics and the handling of various issues. An important note is that a lot of states are considered to be predominantly Red (Republican) and Blue (Democrats) states. This division is done, keeping in mind the dominance of the said party in the state in the previous elections as well as the general polling data. The states which do not fall under this category are the swing states. In the upcoming election, seven states have been identified by most of the political scientists as the swing states. These are Arizona, Florida, Wisconsin, North Carolina, Georgia, Michigan and Pennsylvania. Different networks consider different states to be swing states but on average these 7 states have been the most common. It is important to note that Trump won all of these states back in 2016. It is also worth mentioning that Biden has led the state of Texas which has been predominantly a red state, and so Trump is expected to win the state back even though a lot of journalists have started to consider Texas to be a swing state. Data between 17th and 22nd June collected by NY Times/Siena poll shows a huge advantage for Biden.  Comparing the current numbers to that of 2016, we see that Trump has completely lost Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, which he won by margins of less than 1 point, and is now trailing by 11, 11 and 10 respectively. Moving on North Carolina and Arizona have shown a smaller advantage as Biden leads by 9 and 7 points respectively. Florida is an interesting state which is considered vital for Trump’s re-election and he won it narrowly in 2016 by 1.6 but is currently trailing by 6 points. All this said, one has to keep in mind two things. First that most of these polls showed an advantage for Hilary as well but she lost these battleground states but second, her advantage was not as big as that of Biden. One would not be surprised if Trump manages to cut down the advantage in these swing states and also manage to win one or two conservative states, but will this be enough for him to regain presidency?

Going by the same source, looking at the key demographics, Biden leads by 74 points with black voters, 39 points with Hispanic voters, 34 points with young voters (18-29), 22 points and 18 points with independent voters. This shows a key advantage that will play in the favour of Biden. Back in 2016, Trump won the election with a huge advantage, running up to 70 points, with independent voters, men, older voters and white people. This time the gap has cut so much that Biden leads in 3 of Trump’s key demographics i.e. independent, men and older voters. This seems like a much more negative trend than one would have predicted. Moving on, key issues like COVID and racial issues have highly favoured Biden. People have started to doubt Trump’s leadership in these two aspects and considering that these are the two main issues of 2020 for America, Biden does seem to be favoured. On the other hand, Trump is preferred when it comes to immigration, economy and job creation. Trump has made it a point to claim the growth of the US economy before the pandemic to his benefit and that seems to be in his favour.

Conclusion

Even though we are just 3-4 months before the elections happen, all of these are predictions and pre-election polls. A lot of things like the presidential debates, widespread campaigning and the actual Election Day turnout, all can change the way things stand today. This was seen back in 2016 to work in favour of Trump but that was because the difference between the two candidates was too small. That may not be the case this time but nothing can be said with certainty. Kanye West has pulled out of the race and it will be fair to say that he did not have much ground before as well. As of now, even though the polls indicate one thing, anything can happen. There is without a doubt a bit of uncertainty and just like 2016, the door is still open for both candidates to win the White House. 

The post USA POLITICS – ANALYSES OF THE USA’s ELECTION 2020 appeared first on WISER WORLD.

Some major updates to cover in today’s Indian Foreign Policy Report are as follow:

India’s Mission Sagar in the Indian Ocean Region

With that spirit in mind, India has recently launched, ‘Mission Sagar’ on the 10th of May. The mission is India’s way of assisting nations in the Indian Ocean Region, in their fight against COVID-19. In this mission, assistance was provided by the INS Kesari, that sailed to the Maldives, Mauritius, Madagascar, Comoros, and Seychelles, to deliver material assistance and in particular, medical assistance to Mauritius and Comoros. The successful completion of the mission can be seen as a major milestone, in terms of India’s new foreign policy of increased engagement in the Indo-Pacific and the Western Sectors of the Indian Ocean. The mission is also in line with the Prime Minister’s policy of SAGAR (Security and Growth for all in the Region). Mission Sagar is one particular example of increased Indian activities in the spheres of maritime security, cooperation, and navigation security, as the country transitions from a passive maritime actor to an exceptionally active one, with an equally important say in the Indo-Pacific, one of the most coveted and disputed regions in the world.

Bi-annual Exchange of Prisoner List Between India and Pakistan

As India has constantly tried to increase its presence on the international stage, it has found itself at an impasse with its neighbours on a multitude of issues. However, amidst this highly taut and tense environment, India and Pakistan recently exchanged a list of prisoners on the 1st of July. The exchange of lists is in accordance with the 2008 agreement, where the nations exchange a list of prisoners bi-annually, which is on the 1st of January and the 1st of July. The Indian lists contain 265 Pakistani civilians and 97 fishermen. On the other hand, the list issued by Pakistan contains 54 Indian civilians and 270 fishermen. Furthermore, to expedite the process, the Indian government has provided the nationality verification details of 7 civilians and 106 fishermen. Lastly, to show India’s commitment to the bilateral process, the central government has asked the Pakistan authorities to confirm the nationality status of 88 Pakistani prisoners in Indian custody.

India-China Dialogue Between Special Representatives

As mentioned earlier, India finds itself in an extremely precarious position when it comes to both its neighbours. However, the statement is especially true regarding its relationship with China over the Actual Line of Control. The escalation in violence in the Galwan Valley and the loss of life of Indian and Chinese soldiers was the first since 1975. This extremely volatile situation has both the governments scratching their heads as to what needs to be done next to diffuse the simmering atmosphere. China has chosen to strike a blow against India when it is busy dealing with the surge in casualties as a result of the COVID pandemic. However, in the last few months, India has chosen to follow a hardline stance against the Chinese. This has visibly resulted in increased violence on the border regions and has led to a campaign within the Indian polity advocating the ban of all Chinese products and applications.

However, recently there was a dialogue between the special representatives of the two countries. During the conversation, Ajit Doval, India’s National Security Advisor and H.E Wang Yi, State Councillor and Minister of Foreign Affairs for China, had an in-depth exchange of views on the border issue. During the discussion, several important points were highlighted, the first among them being that peace and tranquillity were essential for the further development of bilateral relations. Hence, it was agreed upon to disengage and pull back all troops from the Line of Actual Control and complete de-escalation on the India-China border. Secondly, both sides agreed to respect the Line of Actual Control and vowed to not take any unilateral action in the region.

India-Russia Bilateral Relations

In a further effort to strengthen bilateral relations, the Indian Prime Minister had a telephonic conversation with the President of the Russian Federation, wherein they discussed several strategic topics of interest to both nations. Mr Modi also used this opportunity to congratulate the President on the successful completion of the parade, marking the 75th anniversary of the end of the Second World War. More importantly, Mr Modi felicitated President Putin on the recent constitutional vote, through which President Putin has consolidated his power till 2036. The Prime minster further recalled the participation of an Indian contingent in the parade in Moscow, as a sign of friendship. Lastly, the Indian Government expressed their enthusiasm for hosting President Putin, later in the year during the bilateral summit.

India’s Participation at the ‘Strengthening Consensus for Peace’ in Afghanistan

Afghanistan over the last many decades has been turned into a complete war zone, with the presence of uninvited international actors. However, in the last two years, there have been constructive steps taken by both the Afghan government and the United States of America to bring the Taliban to the negotiation table in an effort to end the violence and bring lasting peace to the region. Lately, the Islamic Republic hosted a regional meeting, by the name of, ‘ Strengthening Consensus for Peace’. The meeting was chaired by the Afghan President, H.E Dr Mohammad Ashraf Ghani. The conference recorded participation by 20 countries and international organizations. During the conference, India expressed support for establishing a constitutional order in Afghanistan and unequivocally stated the importance of putting an end to terrorist sanctuaries and safe havens for destructive forces in Afghanistan.

Indian Nomination to the United Nations Security Council

Lastly, India recently secured its position as a non-permanent member of the United Nations Security Council, with a vote of 184 out of 192. However, to fill in the seat of the Ambassador/Permanent Representative to the United Nations and other international organizations in Geneva, Shri Mani Pandey, who currently serves as the Additional Secretary in the Ministry of External Affairs has been appointed.

Conclusion

Looking at India’s foreign policy from a macro perspective, we come to see that India has consistently tried to create an environment of inclusiveness then whether it be in the Indo-Pacific or the Western sectors of the Indian Ocean Region. India’s willingness to corporate and emerge as a regional power is a visible thought of its efforts in Afghanistan and its strategic partnerships with countries like the Russian Federation and France. In the last two decades, China has developed by leaps and bounds and has emerged not as a regional power but as a global hegemon. This has overshadowed nations like India, owing to China’s aggressive policies. Hence, while India tries to extend its reach globally, it has locked horns with China recently in the Galwan Valley region. The Indian and the Chinese sides seem to be ideologically clashing with each other over the Indo-Pacific, one of the most disputed regions of the world. It is India’s capabilities to fight off both the COVID 19 and the Chinese aggression, that will define the India that emerges in the near future.

Also Read: INDIA’S FOREIGN POLICY REPORT – EDITION #2

The post INDIAN FOREIGN POLICY REPORT – EDITION #1 appeared first on WISER WORLD.