&w=3840&q=100)
Best of BS Opinion: Why acting early matters in both policy and life
There's a strange kind of hesitation we all carry. A loose thread on a favourite shirt. A creeping pain in the back molar. A message we keep meaning to send. Tiny thorns, really. But left alone, they fester. Till the shirt tears, the tooth aches, and the friendship sours. We're often so desperate to avoid discomfort that we let it multiply. But if there's one universal truth, it's this: pulling the thorn early hurts less than pretending it's not there. Let's dive in. Take India's long-stretched journey to self-reliant defence. After decades of Hindustan Aeronautics Limited flying solo, and often flying late, the Defence Ministry has finally brought in a new model for the fifth-gen stealth AMCA jet project. Public and private players can now jointly bid, ending HAL's monopoly, notes our first editorial. It's a thorn pulled early, a move that may sting HAL today but promises faster skies tomorrow.
But while the sky opens up, the ground drowns. The monsoon's rude early arrival on May 26 swamped Mumbai, again. Warning systems blinked red, but drains were already clogged, trains already halted. The rains don't wait for infrastructure excuses. And with 70–80 per cent of our urban water bodies vanished, as our second editorial highlights, Indian cities can't afford to delay climate-resilient planning any longer. Monsoon pain is no longer seasonal; it's systemic. And the longer we postpone climate action, the deeper the rot will set.
Globally, thorns are sprouting fast. Amita Batra writes how Trump's tariff tantrums have flung trade into chaos. Allies, rivals, even US firms are unsure which sector gets hit next. Mini-deals and retaliatory tariffs now dominate the trade discourse. Instead of trying to dodge each jab, the world may need new, rules-based trade formats, ones that can hold up even when leaders don't.
But how we spend our days also shapes what thorns we choose to ignore. Amitava and Gopal Saha, analysing the latest Time Use Survey, show how India's youth are spending more time working and less on self-care or socialising. Women, despite entering the workforce in growing numbers, still carry the weight of unpaid domestic work. Until that imbalance is addressed, gender equality remains just a polite fiction.
Finally, Neha Bhatt reviews Deconstructing India's Democracy: Essays in Honour of James Manor, a timely reminder that Indian democracy too carries deep thorns: centralisation, shrinking civil liberties, and majoritarian politics. But its essays argue that hope lies in resistance, decentralisation, and reimagining the liberal idea. It's a call to action — not in comfort, but in urgency.
Stay tuned and remember, waiting doesn't numb the thorn, it only infects the wound!
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Economic Times
29 minutes ago
- Economic Times
India's FY25 economic growth hits four-year low of 6.5%, Q4 GDP beats estimates
India's economic growth slowed to a four-year low of 6.5% in FY25, despite a stronger-than-expected Q4 performance of 7.4%. Key officials remain optimistic about India's growth potential, expecting it to remain the fastest-growing major economy. Factors like robust industrial activity, rural demand, and government spending helped navigate global trade disruptions, with the IMF projecting India's economy to surpass Japan's. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads India's economic growth in FY25 hit a four-year low of 6.5 per cent, slowing down sharply from the 9.2 per cent growth recorded in FY24. However, Q4 GDP growth beat estimates after accelerating to 7.4 per cent but it couldn't save the economy from posting its slowest growth since New Delhi's key officials have backed India's growth potential and vouched that the country will retain its title as the fastest-growing major economy in the full-year growth remained within official projections, as private investment remained subdued amid global the quarter ending March 31, 2025, India's growth stood was fastest in the four quarters, on the back of robust industrial activity and sustained global trade tensions grew larger by third quarter had seen growth rise to 6.2 per cent, revised upward from an earlier estimate of 5.6 per cent, showing resilience amid global fourth quarter was marred by global trade disruptions led by Trump's tariffs and escalation of the Russia-Ukraine war. However, the Indian economy powered through the storm on the back of pick up rural demand and healthy government the latest growth figures continue to keep New Delhi in the race of fastest economies in the world. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) also expects India's economic size to surpass Japan's by the end of the year, reaching $4.18 trillion.A notable divergence between GDP and gross value added (GVA) was expected with the latter stripping out taxes and subsidies for a clearer picture of underlying economic activity. The GVA stood at 6.4 per Morgan, for instance, estimated March quarter GDP growth at 7.5%, but GVA growth at a more modest 6.7%.Some analysts said that the higher-than-expected GDP print might be a reflection of a fall in government subsidies, which could inflate the headline number without reflecting equivalent real economic the external challenges, the Indian economy remains relatively healthy due to its limited reliance on global goods trade, recent tax cuts, controlled inflation and a potentially softer interest rate environment.'While external uncertainties—such as supply chain disruptions and energy market volatility—pose challenges, India continues to benefit from strong service sector performance, a stable banking system, and improving manufacturing output under schemes like PLI,' said Dr. Manoranjan Sharma, Chief Economist at Infomerics Valuations and Ratings February 2025, the RBI had, for the first time in five years, cut the repo rate by 25 bps, a move expected to aid India's growth inflation dropped to a near six-year low of 3.16% in April, and a favourable monsoon forecast is expected to help stabilize food prices—factors that could allow the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) to consider a rate cut in ahead, the RBI has projected 6.5% growth for the fiscal year beginning April 1, 2025.'On the inflation front, CPI is expected to moderate from 4.9% in FY25 to 4.3% in FY26, aided by easing food prices, prudent monetary policy, and a normal monsoon forecast. However, inflationary risks persist because of global commodity prices and any escalation in geopolitical tensions,' said Sharma.
India Today
30 minutes ago
- India Today
Not just water, money too flowed from India to Pakistan as part of Indus treaty
"I have stuck my neck out to secure funds from various friendly governments," an impatient and anxious World Bank president, Eugene Black, told Indian and Pakistani negotiators in April 1959. He needed to break the impasse over the agreement over the Indus waters. Time was running out, and an agreement could not be reached for the potential Indus Waters Treaty even after eight long years of impasse ended only after India and other donor countries agreed to pay $1 billion ($10 billion today, factoring in inflation). Of this, India paid $174 million ($1.6 billion today) to paved the way for the signing of the Indus Waters Treaty in 1960. Under the agreement, Pakistan was granted exclusive rights over the western rivers, the Indus, Chenab, and Jhelum, while India retained unrestricted use of the eastern rivers, the Ravi, Beas, and billions of gallons of water continued flowing into Pakistan, millions of dollars also flowed from India to Pakistan for the next 10 years, as compensation for India's exclusive access to the eastern almost six decades later, the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) is again in the spotlight. Following the deadly terror attack in Pahalgam, India announced the suspension of the IWT. Pakistani and Pakistan-trained terrorists killed 26 civilians, mostly Delhi said Pakistan's actions violated the treaty's foundational principles of goodwill and friendship. Prime Minister Narendra Modi echoed this stance, saying, "blood and water cannot flow together", as the treaty was kept in abeyance until Pakistan credibly and irrevocably ceased support for terrorism. This marked the first time since its signing in 1960 that India paused the urged India to reconsider the suspension of the pact, citing its critical role in supporting 80% of its agricultural water needs. Despite a ceasefire agreement on May 10 after a mini-war, India has kept the IWT in abeyance, with reports indicating that it will be fast-tracking projects on the western rivers to tap the suspension of the IWT came after India's patience was tested regularly by Pakistan and its gave Pakistan both water and money, but Pakistan returned the favour with this backdrop, it's worth revisiting the treaty's circumstances, how negotiations took shape, the rationale behind India's payment to Pakistan, how the payout of $174 million was arrived at through intense bargaining, and how Pakistan ultimately let India's then Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, down even after the IWT was signed. The Indus Waters Treaty was signed in 1960 by the Government of India, led by Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru (L), and Pakistan's President Ayub Khan. (Image: World Bank) WHY WAS INDUS WATERS TREATY NEEDED?The Partition of India in 1947 split the Indus River System, which had long irrigated vast farmlands, between India (the upper riparian) and Pakistan (the lower riparian). By 1948, India's use of the river waters triggered a panic in the newly-formed Islamic Republic. An interim agreement was signed, but Pakistan said it remained 1956, as PM Nehru prepared to dedicate the Bhakra Dam on the Sutlej River to the nation, tensions with Pakistan escalated sharply. The risk of a war loomed."Take up Arms" and "A Black Day" were the headlines in Lahore's Urdu newspapers, noted Niranjan Das Gulhati, the chief Indian negotiator and technical advisor during the formulation of the World Bank stepped in to mediate a long-term challenge was immense: to divide a single, integrated water system between two hostile neighbours. The solution took shape in the form of the IWT, in what would become one of the most complex international water-sharing agreements. The Indus River originates in Tibet near Lake Mansarovar, flows northwest into Ladakh, then enters Gilgit-Baltistan in Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir, then traverses the length of Pakistan from north to south, and drains into the Arabian Sea near Karachi. (India Today File) advertisementFORMAL PROPOSAL AND THE FIRST DEADLOCK OF INDUS WATERS TREATYNegotiations formally began in May 1952, facilitated by the World Bank. The process moved in 1952 to 1954, a working party of engineers from both countries, along with World Bank officials, developed technical proposals. In 1954, the Bank presented its formal proposal, suggesting a division: India would get exclusive use of the Eastern rivers, and Pakistan the Western rivers (Indus, Jhelum and Chenab).Pakistan accepted the principle but insisted on a massive replacement plan to offset the loss of Eastern river said it would not fund this entire plan, leading to a deadlock, noted Niranjan Das Gulhati in his 1973 book, Indus Waters Treaty: An Exercise in International 1955 and 1958, negotiations stalled India and Pakistan remained wasn't until 1959 that a breakthrough seemed year, officials of the World Bank (then called the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development), including its President Eugene Black and Vice President WAB Iliff, undertook intensive shuttle diplomacy between New Delhi, Karachi (Pakistan's capital until 1959), Washington DC and London. The Indus Waters Treaty negotiations spanned eight arduous years, from 1952 to 1960, involving intense mediation by the World Bank. WAB Iliff (R), as Vice-President of the World Bank, played a crucial role in mediating the treaty, and ultimately signed the agreement on behalf of his organisation. (Images: World Bank) INDIA RESISTED SHARING PAKISTAN'S FINANCIAL BURDENPakistan's demand for aid was rooted in the fact that it had lost access to the canals and their networks fed by the Eastern rivers, some of whose headworks were then laid in India. To survive agriculturally, it needed to build new infrastructure to tap the Western rivers: link canals, dams, and barrages. The estimated cost exceeded $1 World Bank began seeking contributions from major powers. The United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and Germany pledged funds. But the treaty couldn't move forward unless India, gaining exclusive rights over the Eastern rivers, also agreed to initially the World Bank argued that India was benefiting by securing exclusive rights and therefore should bear part of the replacement cost. The Bank also made it clear that without India's contribution, the treaty would collapse. Camels on a dry riverbed of the Indus River in central Sindh. Pakistan depends on the Indus Basin for nearly 80% of its agricultural water needs, making it the lifeline of the country's farming and food security. (Image: Reuters) WHY PAKISTAN WANTED MONEY AFTER INDUS WATERS TREATY?In May 1959, Iliff told Gulhati, India's chief negotiator, that Eugene Black had put his credibility on the line, saying, "A stage has been reached. If the negotiations are to break down, I should know immediately; otherwise my reputation with these governments would be at stake".The World Bank secured commitments from friendly nations based on India's assumed participation. If India refused to pay, the deal would fall apart."Before I left Washington in the third week of April, Iliff told me that, in New Delhi, Black would propose to the Prime Minister [Nehru] that India should pay $250 million as her contribution towards the cost of works to be built in Pakistan. I said that this was much too high a figure," Niranjan Das Gulhati wrote."However, the horse-trading in New Delhi was to be limited to the range of $158 million, which sum we considered fair, and $250 million, which Iliff regarded as a fair deal. Pakistan was hardly concerned as the Bank was undertaking to underwrite the entire cost of her works from assistance by friendly countries," he closed doors, Iliff and Indian officials, including then Finance Secretary, BK Nehru, debated the numbers. After much back and forth, they settled on $174.8 million (62.06 million pound).India would pay 10 equal annual instalments into the Indus Basin Development Fund, managed by the World Bank, until 1970. The fund financed Pakistan's massive infrastructure projects like the Mangla Dam and various link contribution was earmarked specifically for Pakistan's "replacement works" under the Indus Basin Development Contributions to Indus Basin Development Fund (1960)ContributorFinal Contribution (Approx.)United States$315 millionWorld Bank (IDA & Loan)$250 millionUnited Kingdom$90 millionCanada$70 millionAustralia$20 millionGermany (West Germany)$12 millionNew Zealand$6 millionIndia83 crore (approx $62 million)Pakistan (self-financed)$100 million (approx)Total Estimated CostOver $1 billionPAKISTAN REMAINS HOSTILITIE DESPITE INDUS WATERS TREATYWith the finances sorted, the treaty was finally signed on September 19, Nehru and Pakistan's President General Ayub Khan formalised the agreement in Karachi. World Bank Vice-President WAB Iliff signed it on behalf of his idealist in Nehru hoped that this IWT would usher in a new chapter in India-Pakistan relations. He believed that resolving this vital issue could pave the way for cooperation on other issues, including just months later, Gulhati, in his book, recalled Nehru telling him: "I had hoped that this agreement would open the way to settlement of other problems, but we are where we were".Four years after signing the IWT, in 1964, Pakistan's replacement works exceeded initial estimates. A supplementary agreement was signed to raise additional funds from donor countries. India did not pay again, as its financial obligation had already been fulfilled under the terms of the original treaty in the massive diplomatic and financial effort India put into the IWT, Pakistan continued to challenge and bleed India on several fronts. The Pahalgam attack was the latest of Pakistan's five years after the IWT was signed, Pakistan dragged India into a war after it infiltrated Kashmir and parts of spirit of goodwill that Nehru hoped the treaty would foster quickly retrospect, while the Indus Waters Treaty is still hailed globally as a successful case of water diplomacy, it came at a high cost for India, not just in terms of water allocation, but also in hard just with money, India paid with goodwill and trust too, only for Pakistan to repeatedly betray it. This very pattern of Pakistan's behaviour is what the Narendra Modi-led government, by suspending the Indus Waters Treaty, has now attempted to InMust Watch
Time of India
33 minutes ago
- Time of India
Trump surrendering to Putin? US Special Envoy for Ukraine and Russia says NATO's eastward expansion can be stopped
Will Trump say yes to Putin? Live Events Trump can take a strong stand (You can now subscribe to our (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel US President Donald Trump 's administration is ready to discuss NATO's expansion eastwards to meet one of the major demands of his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin before the ceasefire in the war against Ukraine. Lt Gen Joseph Kellogg (retd), the US Special Envoy for Ukraine and Russia, in an interview to ABC News admitted that Ukraine's proposal to join the western military alliance is one of the points that Russia has been raising during the has been firm on stopping Ukraine from becoming a NATO member, which the Russians believe is a red line that should not be crossed. Gen Kellogg stated that the issue of Ukraine's desire of joining NATO is not even being discussed within the military bloc."Well I think, it's a fair concern and we have said that repeatedly. We have said that that to us Ukraine coming into NATO is not on the table. And we're not the only country that says that. You know I can probably give you four of the countries in NATO and it it takes 32 of the 32 to allow you to come into NATO. We've seen other countries say "we're not too sure about that." And that that's one of the issues that Russia will bring up, and they're only talking Ukraine. They're talking the country of Georgia, they're talking Moldova," Gen Kellogg replied when about what Russia's the US Special Envoy for Ukraine and Russia quickly added that the decision on NATO's proposed expansion was only for President Trump to take. "We can stop the expansion of NATO coming close to your (Russian) border. That's a security concern from them. But that's a presidential decision. It's not my decision to make, and these are things we go to the President and say Mr President this is what we talked about. This is what everybody's willing to do. Are you willing to accept that, are you willing to go with it. Then you know hopefully then we'll have a negotiation," he asserted."Hopefully then we'll have a negotiation, a discussion between President Trump, President Putin and (Ukrainian) President (Volodymyr) Zelenskyy, and get an end state to this and stop the killing."The two warring sides - Ukraine and Russia - have shared their memorandums with the US team which will now create a single document before the talks in Türkiye's capital Istanbul on Monday (June 2). Officials from the UK, France and Germany, too, would be part of the a big confidence-building measure Ukraine and Russia exchanged 1,000 POWs each after talks on May 16. But things have moved slowly with the Russian side pressing on with its over three-year-long offensive against Kellogg also highlighted that the two sides have lost a massively large number of troops and civilians in the war which has at times threatened to engulf the entire European continent."Their numbers on both sides when you add them together both wounded and dead are conservatively are about 1.2 million. That is a stunning number I mean this is war at an industrial strength level," he also cautioned Putin against underestimating President Trump and voiced the US administration's"President just said this week that that Putin is playing with fire by refusing to engage in these ceasefire talks even as he's saying this Russian forces are making small gains on the battlefield. So what happens when Putin plays with fire? Well, I think it's a huge mistake to do that with Donald Trump, I think one of the things you want to one thing you should never underestimate Donald Trump. The second is never put him in a position that he thinks he's being used and and I think his frustration is that he's put forward some reasonable proposals and reasonable discussions, and he's seen a level of of unreasonableness that really frustrates him. It frustrates me as well," he launched its special military offensive, the term used for Moscow for attacking Ukraine, in February 2022 and the war has dragged on with both sides indulging in a bruising battle. In spite of NATO nations supplying western weapons to Ukraine, Kiev has been unable to push back the Russian too, has been unable to achieve his stated aim of "denazifying" Ukraine which is about overthrowing the Zelenskyy government and capturing all the Russian speaking regions of the country. He has also on several occasions threatened the western world of a nuclear war if they intervened in the war directly.
