The successful organisation of the G20 Summit in India is undoubtedly an achievement for the country. However, it would be erroneous to claim, as some do, that the G20 presidency came to India solely due to the stature of Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
For those who may not be familiar with the functioning of the G20, it’s important to note that the presidency is allocated to each member country through a rotational system organised into five groups of member countries. When a particular group’s turn arrives, the eligible member country from that group engages in negotiations with fellow members to secure the presidency. Indonesia held the previous presidency, and the next one is slated for Brazil. This time around, India found itself in line for the presidency, and Prime Minister Modi, as the head of the government, assumed the privilege of holding this position until November of this year.
As the holder of the presidency, Modi had the privilege of setting the agenda for the G20 summit. Given his vision for India as a Hindu rashtra and his commitment to this ideal, he chose to declare “Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam” as the summit’s overarching theme. This concept, rooted in the Upanishads, embodies the idea that “the world is one family.” Remarkably, the G20 member countries embraced this theme, affirming its acceptance on the global stage.
Ironically, despite PM Modi’s invocation of the world as a unified family, there exists within India itself a stark contrast in treatment for certain regions, such as Manipur. While the summit unfolded in Delhi, ethnic violence in Manipur persisted. It’s understandable that Modi remained relatively silent on the Manipur issue while hosting foreign heads of government and dignitaries during the summit. However, even before the summit commenced, Modi had been notably reticent about addressing the concerns in the North East state, save for a fleeting mention on a couple of occasions. This disparity suggests that while he may espouse the concept of the world as a family, for some, like Manipur, this sentiment seems to be excluded.
Moreover, it’s worth noting that PM Modi has, on several occasions, fallen short in offering the expected support from the family’s head to various groups within India. This includes the farmers who staged year-long protests in pursuit of their demands and the women wrestlers who courageously sought action against their grievances regarding sexual harassment by the former president of the Wrestling Federation of India. Such instances raise questions, suggesting either that certain segments of India are not considered part of the family, or that the head of the family has failed to fulfill their expectations.
Additional ironies within the G20 Summit declaration, concerning India, come to light. The declaration emphasises the importance of inclusive development, a crucial aspect, especially for India. In a recent report from the World Bank, India’s standing on the inclusive development index was revealed to be lower than that of its neighbouring countries, Pakistan and China.
Our nation’s standing on the hunger index, currently at 102, is a source of profound concern and something we should feel ashamed of. Additionally, a 2019 UNICEF report highlighted a disheartening statistic: 47 per cent of our youth are not on the path to acquiring the necessary education and skills required for future employment in 2030.
Instead of equipping our youth for better employment prospects, several organisations aligned with Modi’s ideology seem to engage them in activities fueled by hatred and violence under the guise of religion. Regrettably, these endeavors divert our youth away from productive pursuits and, in contrast, keep them entangled in counterproductive activities, including an excessive reliance on social media platforms either to consume or propagate misinformation.
Modi assumed office in 2014 with a pledge, among other commitments, to repatriate the black money held in Swiss banks upon his ascent to power. As his second term in office nears its conclusion, this promise remains unfulfilled. Interestingly, the summit declaration now underscores the need to bolster asset recovery management as a means to combat corruption. It’s worth noting that Switzerland, although not a G20 member, has received invitations to participate in the past.
The G20 summit declaration highlights the imperative to curtail food wastage, yet it’s noteworthy that the host country itself is grappling with this issue. The 2021 Food Waste Index Report from the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) reveals that India wastes approximately 50 kg of food per person each year. Additionally, there have been recurring reports of food stock wastage in India, primarily attributed to inadequate storage facilities.
India must promptly take decisive actions to translate the aspirations articulated in the declaration into domestic reality. This involves tackling food security challenges and facilitating access to affordable, safe, nutritious, and wholesome diets, with the ultimate goal of progressively realising the right to adequate food. It is undeniable that a substantial portion of our population still lacks access to affordable and nutritious food, with a significant number of individuals struggling to secure even one substantial meal a day.
It’s indeed ironic that while the declaration advocates for development in harmony with environmental protection, we find ourselves inflicting severe and irreversible harm on our environment. This damage is exemplified by the relentless deforestation and hillside excavation undertaken in the name of progress. The environmental devastation witnessed in Joshi Math serves as a poignant illustration of the adverse consequences resulting from our aggressive encroachment upon fragile ecosystems.
India must unveil a comprehensive plan aimed at fulfilling its commitment, as outlined in the declaration, to restore a minimum of 30 per cent of all ecosystems currently experiencing degradation. Furthermore, it should intensify its endeavours to attain land degradation neutrality by the year 2030.
Two aspects of the declaration stand out prominently: one pertains to support for refugees, and the other addresses religious tolerance. It’s essential to scrutinise these points in the context of the government’s stance on the Rohingya crisis and the propagation of religious animosity, a concern evident among several members of the ruling party.
(The writer can be reached at dipaknewslive@gmail.com)
