There was a time, not long ago, the English were only too happy and willing to go to any of the third world countries and pitch their tents there. Now they have come a full circle. Now they do not want to go anywhere; but they do not want anyone to come to their land either. The number of immigrants seeking asylum in Europe is on the increase. One of the biggest problems faced by a developed nation is the problem of immigration of the illegal variety. The problem facing the US is no exception. Most of the illegal immigration takes place in the US from Mexico. In a world ravaged by increasing poverty, lawlessness and climate change, the number of illegal migrations is alarmingly on the increase. After a couple false starts the UK hit on a novel idea to discourage illegal immigration – deport the illegal immigrants to a place that they would hate. Rwanda fits the bill like no other. A poor country like Rwanda also be happy to accommodate the children of a lesser God. UK also do not expect the illegal immigrants to gladly go and stay there. That would then amount them jumping from the frying pans to the fire considering the Rwanda’s economic condition compared to the UK. The British government anticipated that this measure would definitely apply a break to the virtual free flow of illegal immigration into the UK. This plan to send immigrants to Rwanda for asylum processing is a complex issue with significant ethical concerns. Critics argue that it violates international agreements on refugees where asylum seekers have the right to a fair and safe hearing in the country they reach first. Sending them to Rwanda undermines this right. Rwanda’s human rights record also raises serious questions about the safety and well-being of the migrants sent there. Reports of mistreatment of refugees and a history of authoritarian rule are also cause for concern. The policy aims to deter people from making dangerous journeys across the English Channel. However, critics argue that it preys on vulnerable people’s desperation, and it fails to address the root causes of migration itself. Those who argue in favour of this policy feel that it discourages people from using unsafe channels like small boats to reach the UK. They believe a stricter system is needed to handle unmanageable immigration. Some argue that it discourages those who bypass safe countries like France to claim asylum in the UK that is perceived as unfair to those who follow the rules. Proponents say the UK shouldn’t be expected to shoulder this burden alone by itself. The UK Supreme Court previously ruled that the policy was unlawful, but the government passed a new law in April 2024 to bypass these concerns. The policy’s legality and effectiveness remain debated. Rwanda, on the other hand appears to welcome the illegal immigrants of UK with open arms in return for the largesse they would receive from the UK for extending the favour of accepting these immigrants. I now change my earlier statement. These are not the children of a lesser God. They are the unwanted children of an unwanted God going to an unwelcome land!
We are used to people, particularly from the higher echelons of the society used to making perfunctory apologies in courts whenever they are caught red handed for some transgressions. The courts also feel that when the high and mighty of the land come to the court with folded hands contrived gestures with a tame apology should be good enough. Afterall, the courts also are to be seen as mighty as well as magnanimous. Recently in the Supreme Court this norm did undergo some palpable change. The Court was not satisfied with a routine apology with good reasons. The Court’s majesty was in full view when it repeatedly refused to accept the apologies offered by Yoga Guru Baba Ram Dev and his partner in crime Acharya Balakrishna. They were hauled up before the Court for publishing patently wrong and misleading advertisements for their home grown Ayurvedic products by denigrating the Allopathic line of treatment. The clairvoyants that they are, perhaps thought that they could get away after running down the efficacy of modern medicines. They had almost gone to town with the claim that they could repair even ‘broken hearts’ with their home-grown medicines. Repeated apologies by them did not satisfy the judges who also did not want a routine apology only to satisfy the court on the ground that they are playing with the health of gullible public even as the government (in this case the government of Himachal Pradesh) failed to crack the whip. Justice Hima Kohli had this say “The victim is always the public. We are concerned with all those FMCG companies who are taking their consumers and clients up and down the garden path, showing them very rosy pictures about what their products can do for them. People who pay good money for these products finally end up suffering at the cost of their health. That is absolutely unacceptable.” Patanjali Ayurved had claimed publicly that their medicine “Coronil” was the ideal panacea for Covid19! In the whole world no one could claim that that there was a medicine to cure this virus. This being what it is, the apex court’s action should serve as a notice to those who take people for a ride based on questionable remedies. Lo and behold. Just as I finish writing this piece, here comes the news that the Uttarakhand government has suspended the manufacturing licenses of 14 products made by Patanjali, the Yoga Guru’s flagship company for repeatedly publishing misleading advertisements about their efficacy according to the government order. The judges are considering whether to press contempt charges against Ramdev or not. Justice may be delayed; but when it comes, it pours! Unfortunately for the Yoga Guru, the justice system practiced in India is heavily oriented by western thoughts.
Donald Trump is a busy man these days hopping from one court of law to another. As a result, he does not even have the time required to continue with his campaign for presidency, the elections for which is less than a year away. By the cases in which he is the sole or primary defendant there is likely to be not enough time to campaign. But Trump is a complete political animal. From the court itself between the proceedings, he gets attracted to the arc lights and is always ready with his one-liners to impress those who are willing to listen to him. The rest comes to him naturally. He is victim of a rigged system, and the government of the day is only too ready and willing to frame the poor man with trumped up cases and shamelessly using the system to stop him from becoming the President again for which he is the most eminently suitable person. Currently, he is embroiled on an issue involving immunity for the President for whatever acts done by him while in office. One may be excused for this kind of a preposterous proposition. The implied logic for this kind of an omnibus amnesty for a President is that he could always be trapped into one controversy or other in the absence of such a general amnesty. So goes Trump’s argument. With this amnesty in place an American President can afford to take bold decisions without the fear of being dragged into criminal offences, especially after he demits office. He and his lawyers have borrowed this concept from the proceedings against Richard Nixon when the latter was charged with tampering with the evidence in the Watergate scandal way back in 1972. Nixon, a former President, was accused of attempting to conceal his involvement in a break-in at the Democratic National Committee headquarters located in the Watergate Office Building in Washington. According to Trump’s lawyers a President can be hauled up in courts of law only if he impeached first after finding him guilty. In the bargain a legal process is made subservient to a political process. It means that for a criminal act the Senate has to hold the President guilty and pronounce a sentence. Otherwise, he need not worry. During the hearing in this case the counsel for Trump admitted that a President can get away with murder – literally. This means that a US President can get away with murder if he orders one, while him being the President! Sometime somethings can sound stranger than fiction, almost bizarre. That is democracy in action as practiced by an autocratic President like Donald Trump! The Supreme Court is expected to deliver a verdict any time now. With a committed judiciary firmly in place in the US Supreme Court, Trump’s followers need not bother about dispensation of justice impartially without fear or favour. Such niceties are for the third world countries!
One law of Economics continues to be strong and uncontested. The new truism is that the US economy decides which direction the world economy should take. Ruchir Sharma, the noted economist, feels that the much awaited “soft landing” of the US economy is not about to happen so soon. He, like most other economists feel that it may now be a case of “no landing”. The US economy continues to defy gravity causing consternation among both the old school economists and the new. But why? According to Ruchir Sharma “perhaps the most overlooked explanation for American resilience is that, far more than other developed countries, the US kept stimulating its economy well after the recession of 2020 was over. By some estimates, fiscal stimulus accounted for more than a third of US growth in 2023. Without it, the US would not look like such a marvel compared with other developed economies”. Ruchir Sharma also feels that “As long as interest rates remain higher for longer, the US will be asking for worse trouble if it keeps running deficits close to 6 per cent of GDP; that is twice the pre-pandemic average for the US and six times the median for western Europe. The US cannot sustain such aggressive stimulus indefinitely, and government spending is already slowing”. It is like keeping the US economy on steroids unmindful of consequences. However, according to Jamie Dimon, CEO of JP Morgan one should be worried about the possibility of stagflation. Dimon feels that he is “still hopeful for the US economy to experience a soft landing, where growth slows but the economy avoids a recession even if inflation remains a little high, but he’s not certain that is the most likely outcome”. Inflation has been stubbornly elevated so far this year and a report showing growth slowed in the first three months of this year fanned fears of stagflation which occurs when the economy is weak or in recession, yet prices keep moving higher. Stagflation last occurred in the 1970s, when conditions were far worse than today. In 1975, for example, inflation topped 10 per cent while the unemployment rate peaked at 9 per cent. We all seem to be living in extraordinary times whether the famed economists agree or not. In the 1970s, the U.S. experienced stagflation, which was its worst economic performance since the Great Depression. Stagflation was caused by a number of factors, including Federal budget deficits, high unemployment, rising oil prices, and debt accumulation. As of August 2022, the U.S. inflation rate was 8.3%, which is higher than the central bank’s target of 2%. However, unlike in the 1970s unemployment remains low.
Here is a book recommendation for you. It was with a lot of foreboding and little expectation that I picked up the book “Chip Wars: The Fight for the World’s Most Critical Technology” authored by Chris Miller, an economic historian. When I started the book, it fully justified my initial apprehensions. In the beginning the book meandered through the troubled waters of the Taiwan straits with little to look forward to. Soon, it changed course justifying the author’s take on the journey of semiconductors: “The spread of semiconductors was enabled as much by clever manufacturing techniques as academic physics. Universities like MIT and Stanford played a crucial role in developing knowledge about semiconductors, but the chip industry only took off because graduates of these institutions spent years tweaking production processes to make mass manufacturing possible. It was engineering and intuition, as much as scientific theorising, that turned a Bell Labs patent into a world-changing industry.” Chris Miller, the author of the book, is an Assistant Professor of International History at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University. In this book he takes us through the checkered history of semiconductors. This book, according to the author, is “an epic account of the decades-long battle to control the world’s most critical resource—microchip technology”. Please permit me to quote once more from the book what has now become a truism – Moore’s Law – it states that the number of components on a single chip doubles every two years at minimal cost. While not actual science, it was an observation and extrapolation that has held steady since 1965. This book traces the amazing story of Taiwan’s extraordinary ascent – how one company – with a vision and with government financial support – can remake an entire industry. This book, among many other things, also traces the antecedents of three of the greatest innovators in the area of semiconductors, viz., Morris Chang, Gordon Moore and Bob Noyce. The book rightly concludes with this quote: “The chips they invented and the industry they built provide the hidden circuitry that has structured our history and will shape our future”. This book is an informative and engaging read on the critical topic of semiconductor chips. The book highlights how semiconductors have become fundamental to modern life and national security – they are everywhere from our phones to weapons systems. The geopolitics involved in this area between the US on the one hand and China on the other. The Chip is the new oil – of power. Simply put, the book is eminently readable like a non-fiction thriller. This makes the complex topic of Chips and Semi-Conductors accessible to a wider audience. When I finished the book, I got the distinct feeling that not reading the book would have made me an ignoramus though reading it does not make me an expert on Chips. When I completed, I definitely felt more enlightened, but not necessarily more knowledgeable on the complicated subject of chips and semiconductors. A remarkable book all the same.
I came across a talk show in which Mr Anil Swarup, the former Coal Secretary was discussing the coal situation in this country and how he had dealt with the issue when he was in government. A lot of credit had been given to him for having put this scam tainted public sector company back into commercial reckoning. I listened to what he had to say as I hold shares in Coal India. Over a period of time, particularly in recent times, I have seen the share prices of the company moving upwards. That normally does not happen in government owned companies, even if the companies make handsome profits. When the company makes profits, the Government would be the first in the queue to claim the dividends that the company must pay thereby making this almost like a tax on the company, because it is a government company and these dividends are required by the government to balance its budgets. He talked about the problems involved in increasing production in the coal mines. This process is a function of identifying the land, environmental forest clearances and evacuation of the population in at these collieries. He also gave in graphic detail the efforts of managers of the company going to nearby schools and find places where toilets could be dug – a public service initiative by a public limited company! Never mind the paradox of the coal mining company digging shitholes! He cheekily compared this situation to the Tata Steel’s famous tagline – “We also make Steel.” Anil Swarup’s adaptation of the tagline being “Coal India digs shitholes; but it also produces coal”. I realised that these bureaucrats can also have a sense of humour. By the time Swarup completed his interview he had one more observation to make that I also share. He was full of praise for Arun Jaitley who was the finance minister then and yet took the trouble of coordinating with other ministries including coal to get the government’s job done. I was reminded of my own two-bit in these very columns. Jaitley was the best Prime Minister, India never had!
Thank you.
Venkat R Venkitachalam
