Whatsapp 93125-11015 For Details
With the United States looking at expanding the purview of interview waiver for Indian citizens seeking US visa, the ambit of the “dropbox” facility, which is used to renew a US visa without an in-person interview, will now be expanded in several visa categories, including student visas, business and tourist visas, and skilled workers visas, according to a senior official from the US embassy in India.
The official said that in case a person has already obtained a visa in a certain category, she/he now becomes eligible for interview waiver, and can use the dropbox facility.
This move — subject to fulfillment of certain conditions — will significantly bring down waiting time for US visas in days to come, the official told the media.
While admitting that wait time for applicants has been unusually long in the post-coronavirus period, due largely to the huge backlog of applications and staffing problems, the official said steps are under way to iron out those issues.
By the summer of 2023, the US embassy expects visa processing to be back at pre-pandemic levels of around 1.2 million per year.
Elaborating on the dropbox facilities, the embassy official said that the in-person interview waiver will include even people whose B1 and B2 (tourist and business) visas have expired in the last four years.
Applicants of student visas, who have in the past travelled to the United States on tourist visas, can also seek an interview waiver, although they may be called for biometrics in case that wasn’t done earlier.
Besides expanding the dropbox facility, among other steps taken to ease visa wait time for Indians are adding consular staff and sending dropbox cases for processing elsewhere. According to the embassy official, wait time has already decreased from 450 days [15 months] to about nine months.
Before the pandemic, the average wait time, depending on the category of visa, varied between a few weeks (for most visas) to a few months in cases of B1/B2 visas in peak season.
At present, India ranks third — after Mexico and China — in terms of the total number of visas issued by the US, and it is anticipated that the country will take the second spot by next summer, the US embassy official said. India is “top priority” for Washington in this regard, he added.
On average, approximately 700 cases are being handled every day at present, and more than 82,000 visas were awarded to Indian citizens in the last one year, according to this official.
Already importing GM crop oil, fears unfounded Govt tells SC (Page no. 10)
(GS Paper 3, Science and Technology)
Pointing out that India is already “importing and consuming oil derived from GM (Genetically Modified) crops”, the Centre has told the Supreme Court that “opposition to such technology based on…unfounded fears of adverse impact is only hurting farmers, consumers and industry”.
In an affidavit filed in response to a plea challenging the clearance for environmental release of GM mustard, the Union Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change stated that mustard is “the most important oil and seed meal crop of India, grown in around 8-9 million hectares of land”.
It said that “seed replacement (farmer buying fresh seed) rates are around 63% and area under irrigation has increased to 83% of the total area under mustard”, but “despite all these investments, yields of mustard are stagnating”.
It said the present rate of edible oil consumption in India surpasses the domestic production rate. At present, India meets nearly 55% to 60% of its edible oil demand through imports, the government pointed out.
It submitted that the country is already importing and consuming large quantities of edible GM oil seeds. “Cotton grown in India is a GM crop and we annually produce around 9.5 million tonnes of cotton seed and 1.2 million tonnes of cotton oil consumed by human beings, and about 6.5 million tonnes of cotton seed [are] consumed as animal feed,” it said.
The ministry pointed out that annually, India imports about 55,000 metric tonnes of canola oil, largely from GM canola seeds, and nearly 2.8 lakh tonnes of soybean oil largely composed of GM soybean oil.
As India is importing and consuming oil derived from GM crops, opposition to such technology “based on such unfounded fears of adverse impact, is only hurting farmers, consumers and industry”.
Pointing out that the average prices of refined palm oil, soy oil and mustard oil are increasing continuously, the government said that India needs to be independent in oil production to meet the domestic consumption demand.
Increased edible oil prices will also lead to inflation…(and) an agricultural reform like growing GM oilseed crops like mustard will be useful.
It said the GM mustard hybrid, DMJ 11, for which clearance was given, has shown increased per-hectare yield by 25% to 30% over the traditional varieties and will help reduce India’s dependence on other countries and go a long way in realising the vision of self-reliance.
The government submitted that strengthening plant breeding programmes, including use of new genetic technology, is critical to meet emerging challenges in Indian agriculture and ensuring food safety.
The government explained that all stipulated biosafety tests were carried out on the GM mustard hybrid DMH-11 and its two parental lines before granting the permission and added that it was cleared subject to stringent terms and conditions to ensure environmental safeguards.
Ram setu National heritage tag (Page no. 10)
(GS Paper 1, Art and Culture)
The supreme Court allowed the Centre more time to submit its written response to a plea to declare the Ram Setu a national heritage monument even as it questioned the delay.
“Why are you dragging your feet?” Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud asked the Centre’s counsel as he sought time, saying the affidavit is ready but was awaiting the sanction from the relevant ministry.
Rajya Sabha MP Subramanian Swamy, who filed the petition, pointed out to the bench, also comprising Justices Hima Kohli and J B Pardiwala, that the government was yet to file the affidavit despite many directions in the past.
He said the matter has been going on since long but the government is not taking a stand. “They only have to say yes or no,” he added.
Swamy had filed a PIL against the Centre’s Sethusamudram Canal project, initiated when the UPA-1 was in power at the Centre. The project envisaged creation of a 83-km-long deep water channel, linking Mannar with Palk Strait, by dredging and removing the limestone shoals that formed part of the Ram Setu.The SC had stayed the work for the project in 2007.
In March 2018, the Union Shipping Ministry in an affidavit told the court that the government “does not want to implement” the proposed “alignment…considering” its “socio-economic disadvantages”.
The affidavit added that “the Government of India intends to explore an alternative to the earlier alignment of Sethusamudram Ship Channel project without affecting or damaging the Adam’s bridge/Ram Sethu in the interest of the nation.”
The Editorial Page
It’s payback time (Page no. 12)
(GS Paper 3, Economy)
At the ongoing COP 27 at Sharm El-Sheikh in Egypt, the IPCC has made it clear that climate catastrophe is unfolding. Global warming has already touched 1.1 degrees Celsius and extreme weather events are becoming more frequent and severe.
The current commitments and policies of different nations will lead to a temperature rise of 2.8 degrees by the end of this century. The window of opportunity to restrict global warming to 1.5 degrees seems to be closing rapidly.
To avert this, carbon emissions must come down 45 per cent by 2030 and touch net zero by 2050. Is this likely? No, as of now. Is it feasible? Yes.
The G-20 countries account for over 70 per cent of global carbon emissions. What they, especially the US and China, do in the next few years would determine the fate of humankind — their rapid decarbonisation would make the decisive difference.
It would also make it easier for the rest of the world to follow. The US, the preeminent global power, has critical responsibility. Its per capita carbon emissions, notwithstanding a sharp and encouraging decline from over 20 to 14.6 tonnes per capita, are still the highest in the world, that too by a wide margin. China is next at 8.4 tonnes per capita while Europe is at 6.8 tonnes per capita.
The problem is that on climate change, the US is internally divided with the Republicans still not seeing the need for immediate action. The US did not join the Kyoto Protocol and President Trump took the country out of the Paris Agreement (facilitated by Barack Obama’s leadership), which it has re-joined under Joe Biden. It took leadership on climate change last year, hosting a global summit, which affirmed the 1.5 degrees goal.
However, it took a year of intense effort and compromise for Biden to get the $369-billion dollar funding required for climate action, far less than what was proposed, and that too as a part of the Inflation Reduction Act.
With this, there is a possibility that the US’s climate commitment for 2030 which it announced last year, at COP26, may be achieved. But even that would be far too little.
The US must bring down its per capita emissions, first to the current European levels and then further. The new conservative Supreme Court in the US has recently ruled that climate action by the EPA (Environment Protection Agency) to mandate a progressive reduction in carbon emissions — which Obama had initiated, and which was yielding positive results — is legally not permissible without Congressional approval.
Standalone legislation on climate change does not appear feasible for the present. Biden’s electoral campaign promise for the US to have a fossil fuel electricity system by 2035 remains unfulfilled.
Unless scientists, climate activists and civil society worldwide succeed in persuading the Republicans to see reason, there is little hope.
China, having become the factory of the world, emits the most. It has declared 2060 as the year to achieve net zero after the West pledged carbon neutrality by 2050. It needs to reach net zero much earlier.
China has the capacity to do so, having acted strategically, and developed technologies and competitive manufacturing capacities across the entire range of renewable energy sectors, ranging from solar panels to electric vehicles (EVs) and batteries.
Ideas Page
Setback for social justice (Page no. 13)
(GS Paper 2, Polity and Governance)
The Supreme Court of India (SC) verdict upholding the 103rd Constitutional Amendment in Janhit Abhiyan v. Union of India 2022 should be regarded as nothing more than a temporary legal setback to the long trajectory of social justice.
I do not doubt that the present judgment will be overturned on the ground that it has irrevocably dented the basic structure of our constitutional framework. Nevertheless, constitutional repair seldom is carried out within the confines of courts alone; and it is important that these battles are endured across society at large.
The judgment suffers from serious infirmities. Firstly, the SC should introspect why it has taken nearly four years to deal with such an important issue with widespread social, political and legal ramifications.
During the course of the pendency of this case, the Union and states had begun implementing the quota of Economically Weaker Sections (EWS), thereby embedding it within the constitutional psyche. As such, undoing this had become increasingly difficult.
Some of the observations in the Janhit Abhiyan case around statements with regard to a time limit for reservations were surprising, given these issues were not central to the case itself.
It is also ironic that while affirming a reservation policy, individual judges have questioned the future of reservation itself. Nevertheless, all such statements must be regarded as obiter and without any binding effect on the future legal evolution of the core issues.
The present judgment is one of the most disappointing expositions of law on the judicial thinking around reservations. As recently as in January 2022, a Supreme Court bench led by Justice DY Chandrachud (Neil Aurelio Nunes vs. Union of India 2022) had explained how reservation was not at odds with merit and also the role of reservation in “remedying the structural disadvantages” faced by marginalised groups.
The Janhit Abhiyan judgment is at stark odds with this line of argument and instead regards reservation as a poverty alleviation scheme. Therein lies the most fundamental flaw in this judgment and one that goes to the roots of the basic structure of the Constitution.
In the long trajectory of constitutional evolution, the country has witnessed low points such as ADM Jabalpur vs. S.S Shukla, which have been rectified by later courts. It is not unforeseeable that Janhit Abhiyan judgment will be subject to similar scrutiny in the years to come.
Reservation is not a poverty alleviation mechanism. Reservation was always implemented to address representation or the lack thereof in educational institutions and public employment.
The Supreme Court has failed to recognise that the 103rd Constitutional Amendment has relied on economic criteria to extend reservations, something that has been expressly barred in law.
In Indra Sawhney vs Union (1992), it has been categorically held that in the determination of backwardness, economic condition can never be the sole criterion. The reason for this is that income is a variable factor and not a structural or systematic tool for discrimination.
Explained
India and the war in Ukraine (Page no. 15)
(GS Paper 2, International Relations)
In his first visit to Moscow since the Russian invasion of Ukraine, External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar conveyed that India “strongly advocates a return to dialogue and diplomacy”and is on the side of “peace, respect for international law and support for the UN Charter”.
This has been India’s stance since the beginning of the war that has upended global order and is now threatening to push the world towards recession.
However, the Indian position articulated by Jaishankar had a new element — he positioned India’s request from the vantage point of the “Global South”.
The Global South refers to the developing and less developed countries in Latin America, Asia, Africa and Oceania. Jaishankar said this region is “feeling the pain acutely” due to food, fertiliser and fuel shortages.
“As Prime Minister Modi conveyed to President Putin in Samarkand in September, this is not an era of war. The global economy is simply too inter-dependent for a significant conflict anywhere not to have major consequences elsewhere.
We are seeing a conflict that is coming on top of severe stresses created by two years of Covid. The Global South, especially, is feeling this pain very acutely.
India, therefore, strongly advocates a return to dialogue and diplomacy. We are clearly on the side of peace, respect for international law and support for the UN Charter,” he said.
Jaishankar’s Russian counterpart Sergey Lavrov did not address the issue, but appreciated India’s position on the Ukraine situation.
From New Delhi’s point of view, it has once again conveyed its disapproval of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, without condemning Russian actions explicitly.
India’s position that the respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity of states is an essential element of the international order has been perceived as a euphemism for New Delhi conveying to Moscow that it has violated these basic norms.
Indian officials point out that though New Delhi has abstained at UN votes, it is different from China and other countries that abstained — it has taken a clear position on respect for the UN Charter and international order.
As India has walked the diplomatic tightrope in the last eight months, many in South Block believe it has gained credibility on both sides by not parroting the talking points of either.
Content in national interest: What new TV broadcast guidelines say (Page no. 15)
(GS Paper 2, Government Policies and Interventions)
Starting Wednesday, satellite TV channels in India are required to broadcast at least 30 minutes of content daily on “themes of national importance and of social relevance”.
This is part of the ‘Guidelines for Uplinking and Downlinking of Satellite Television Channels in India, 2022’, which were approved by the Union Cabinet on September 28, the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting said in an order.
“The new guidelines have been amended after a gap of 11 years, and a number of steps have been taken for ease of doing business, as there are more than 870 channels operating in the country now. Based on our experience, these guidelines have been amended,” the Ministry said in a statement.
It is obligatory under the guidelines for all TV channels, including private channels, to “undertake public service broadcasting for a minimum period of 30 minutes in a day on themes of national importance and of social relevance”.
While the guidelines are already in force, Ministry officials said the channels will be given some time to conceptualise and create such content.
The Ministry will soon issue a specific advisory on the date it comes into effect, and on the time slots for the telecast of this content, the officials said.
The government has argued that since “airwaves/ frequencies are public property” they “need to be used in the best interest of the society”.
Representatives of several broadcasters, speaking on condition of anonymity, however, pointed out that while airwaves may be public property, they had paid hefty fees for their use — any binding guidelines that adversely impact their commercial interests may not, therefore, be fair.
The guidelines have identified eight “themes of national importance and of social relevance”: “education and spread of literacy; agriculture and rural development; health and family welfare; science and technology; welfare of women; welfare of the weaker sections of the society; protection of environment and of cultural heritage; and national integration”.
Once the guidelines are implemented, the Ministry will monitor the channels for the broadcast of this content. In case non-compliance is observed in the Ministry’s view, an explanation will be sought.
If a channel continues to be non-compliant, more steps can be taken based on specific advisories that will be issued from time to time, and on a case-to-case basis.
World
With CO2 emission likely to rise 1.5C target getting tougher finds report (Page no. 16)
(GS Paper 3, Environment)
Global carbon dioxide emissions is expected to continue to rise this year as well, further narrowing down the window of opportunity to keep the temperatures from rising beyond 1.5 degree Celsius, a new report released at the climate meeting on Thursday said.
At current trends, there was at least a 50 per cent chance that the 1.5 degree Celsius temperature target would be exceeded in the next nine years, the Global Carbon Project, which comes up with country level estimates of CO2 emissions every year during the climate conference, said. CO2 is the most common among the six major greenhouse gas emissions that are causing global warming.
The total carbon dioxide emissions, excluding those from land use changes and deforestation, are likely to be around 36.6 billion tonnes, about one per cent higher than the previous year, the report said. CO2 released from land use changes like deforestation would likely contribute another 3.9 billion tonnes, it said.
Among major emitters, India is estimated to see the biggest rise in its CO2 emissions, about 6 per cent from last year. Emissions are expected to decrease by about one per cent in China, the world’s largest emitter, and the European Union which, as a group is the third biggest emitter. But the United States, the world’s second biggest emitter it is projected to increase by 1.5 per cent, the report said.
In India, the emissions in 2022… are driven mostly by a 5 per cent increase in coal emissions. Emissions from oil are up sharply, with a projected rise of 10 per cent.
Projections from natural gas are projected to decline 4 per cent but contribute little to the total change as gas is a small part of the energy mix in India.
Global CO2 emissions had dropped significantly in 2020, compared to the previous year, due to the Covid19 pandemic, and had shown a marginal increase last year. This year’s emissions are likely to go beyond the 2019 levels.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, in its report released earlier this year, had said that global emissions (of all greenhouse gases combined, not just CO2) needed to peak by the year 2025 if the world had to retain any realistic chances of keeping the rise in temperatures below 1.5 degree Celsius.
A couple of months later, the World Meteorological Organisation that there was a 50 per cent chance that the global temperatures would temporarily go beyond 1.5 degree Celsius from pre-industrial times within the next five years.