1. Vikram, Pragyan to return for another tryst with the moon

Chandrayaan-3 lander, rover named after those in the previous mission; India’s third moon exploration mission slated for mid-July launch

India’s third moon exploration mission, slated for a mid-July launch, will share the names associated with the 2019 Chandrayaan-2 lunar adventure.

The Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) plans to retain the names of the Chandrayaan-2 lander and rover for their Chandrayaan-3 equivalents as well, ISRO Chairman S. Somanath told The Hindu. This means, the Chandrayaan-3 lander will bear the name Vikram (after Vikram Sarabhai, the father of the Indian space programme) and the rover, Pragyan.

Much to its disappointment, the ISRO had lost the Chandrayaan-2 lander-rover configuration and the payloads aboard after Vikram crashed on the lunar surface while attempting a soft landing. Earlier this month, Mr. Somanath announced ISRO’s plans to launch the third moon mission in mid-July aboard the LVM3 (formerly GSLV Mk-III) rocket from Sriharikota. A propulsion module will carry the lander-rover configuration to a 100-km lunar orbit. Once the Vikram lander module makes it safely to the moon, it will deploy Pragyan, “which will carry out in-situ chemical analysis of the lunar surface during the course of its mobility”, the ISRO said.

Scientific experiments

The lander, rover and the propulsion module will have payloads for performing experiments designed to give scientists new insights into the characteristics of earth’s lone natural satellite. The lander will have four payloads — Radio Anatomy of Moon Bound Hypersensitive Ionosphere and Atmosphere (RAMBHA), Chandra’s Surface Thermo physical Experiment (ChaSTE), Instrument for Lunar Seismic Activity (ILSA) and the LASER Retroreflector Array (LRA).

The six-wheeled rover will have two payloads — the Alpha Particle X-ray Spectrometer (APXS) and the LASER Induced Breakdown Spectroscope (LIBS).

In addition to these, there will be one payload on the propulsion module, the Spectro-polarimetry of HAbitable Planet Earth (SHAPE).

2. Obama’s remarks about minority rights in India surprising, says Minister

Nirmala Sitharaman says six Muslim-majority countries had faced U.S. ‘bombing’ during his tenure as U.S. President; alleges that Congress is raising ‘non-issues’, trying to vitiate country’s atmosphere

Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman on Sunday said the remarks made by former U.S. President Barack Obama about minority rights in India under the BJP government were surprising when six Muslim-majority countries had faced U.S. “bombing” during his tenure.

“I was surprised when Prime Minister [Narendra] Modi was talking about India in front of everyone, a former U.S. President was giving statements about Indian Muslims at that time,” Ms. Sitharaman said at a press conference at the BJP headquarters in New Delhi.

“Didn’t bombings happen in six countries — Syria, Yemen, Saudi and Iraq and other Muslim countries — during his term [as U.S. President]?” she asked. “When he makes such allegations, will the people trust him?”

She said Mr. Modi had received the highest civilian awards from 13 countries, including six with a predominantly Muslim population.

‘Organised campaigns’

Ms. Sitharaman alleged that “organised campaigns” were being run at the behest of the Opposition to level “baseless” allegations on the treatment meted out to minorities as it cannot defeat the BJP electorally under Mr. Modi.

In an interview to CNN on Thursday, Mr. Obama reportedly said if India did not protect the rights of “ethnic minorities”, there was a strong possibility that the country “at some point starts pulling apart”.

Ms. Sitharaman also took exception to allegations by the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), saying India wanted to maintain a good relationship with the U.S., but she was “surprised” to hear such statements. “We want good friendship with the U.S. But from there also, USCIRF’s comments about religious tolerance in India comes and the former President is also saying something,” she said. The Minister said it was also important to see who were the people behind them.

The Finance Minister alleged that the Congress was “deliberately” raising “non-issues” and levelling allegations “without facts” to vitiate the country’s atmosphere. “The Congress is running such campaigns and it was clearly visible in the last election and the previous election where they went to Pakistan seeking their help to change the government in India,” she said, while replying to questions on allegations of discrimination against minorities.

“I find this deliberate attempt to vitiate the atmosphere in the country because they think they cannot win against the development policies of Mr. Modi,” the Minister alleged.

“Going abroad, our Opposition do not talk in India’s interest because they cannot defeat Mr. Modi.” “These [targeting of Modi government over minority issues] are organised campaigns. Otherwise, why would countries accord such an honour to Prime Minister Modi and why would there be a distortion in understanding about how the minority population is part of the Indian mainstream,” Ms. Sitharaman said.

During his U.S. visit, Mr. Modi had said at a press conference how his government worked on ‘Sabka Saath, Sabka Vikas’ principle and did not discriminate against any community, the Finance Minister added.

3. The united States of India

In an important discussion in The Hindu (June 2, 2023), the scholars argued that what distinguishes the south from the north politically is its language of politics, its regional parties and their demand for more power to the States, its multiple languages and cultures, its countercultures built through various anti-caste, anti-Brahmin and rationalist movements, its higher economic status and its investment in education, modern institutions, industrial infrastructure, etc. while the north lagged in most of these aspects.

Linguistic movements

On similar lines, in 1956, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar argued that the north was conservative, superstitious and educationally backward, whereas the south was progressive, rational and educationally forward. He criticised Jawaharlal Nehru for practising Brahminical rituals. He did not spare President Rajendra Prasad for worshipping the Brahmins in Banaras, washing their toes, and drinking that water. Thus, Ambedkar wondered how, under such leadership, the south would tolerate “the rule of the north.” Even today, his observation seems pertinent considering how the north has nurtured hard-liner Hindutva politics, while the south has barred the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) from entering its political landscape. Thus, the perplexing question is: what makes the south such a formidable fortress where the BJP has no presence now?

To understand that, we must look at the most important historical factor that distinguishes the two regions: the linguistic nationality movements, which imagined India as a federation of nationalities. While the north imagined India as a homogenous nation that resonates with the Hindi-Hindu-Hindustan slogan, the south aspired to build India as a federation of nationalities. The print and publishing culture led to the formation of distinct linguistic public spheres in the south, which were further consolidated by cinema, mainly through the mediation of film stars such as M.G. Ramachandran (Tamil), N.T. Rama Rao (Telugu) and Rajkumar (Kannada). By the early 20th century, different linguistic communities in the south began to claim nationality status for themselves. The leaders were inspired by the political developments in Europe where, in the aftermath of major revolutions, new nations were founded based on linguistic identity with the political objective of achieving ‘popular sovereignty.’

Linguistic identity had proven to be secular, flexible and more inclusive than religious or racial identities, so the then Madras Presidency leaders consciously tried to cultivate it. The middle-class intelligentsia from the south recognised the crucial connection between language and liberal democracy. For a democracy to function, it is essential to employ the language of the common people in the domains of education, administration and judiciary, without which equality and justice cannot be realised. Also, to perform this new role, people’s languages needed to be modernised adequately. However, all these, it was believed, would be possible only when India was created as a federation of nationalities. These languages would perish if India were forced into a single homogenous nation. Even a cursory look at the condition of the languages of the south today makes it clear that such fears are vindicated. As early as 1913, Konda Venkatappayya and Pattabhi Sitaramayya, the leaders of the Andhra Mahasabha, warned the Congress party leadership against creating a unitary India, which, by default, would be based on the Hindu religious identity of the majoritarian population. Later, Puchhalapalli Sundarayya (Telugu), Annadurai and Periyar (Tamil), E.M.S. Namboodiripad (Malayalam), and much later, V.K. Gokak (Kannada) and others spoke and wrote on the importance of creating India as a federation.

The need for a strong bond

The Andhra Mahasabha leaders, in particular, argued that India was not a nation but a subcontinent of multiple nationalities (similar to the European Union), and a unitary India would be unsuitable for democracy, which required the sovereign-citizens to participate in the decision-making processes of the nation-state actively. They argued that no single language could facilitate such a process for the entire subcontinent. Moreover, a strong nation needs strong bonding among its people. But the population of the Indian subcontinent spoke multiple languages, so no single language could bind them all as a national community. The idea that Hindi could keep India together, a fallacy that continues even today, emanates from the gross misunderstanding that it could bind people who do not speak it. We know that the French language could unite the people who spoke it. Or Tamil could unite the people who used it in their everyday life. However, to believe that Hindi could unite people from Kerala and Punjab or West Bengal who do not speak that language is to believe in the impossible.

After independence, the Congress made peace with the south through a compromise formula of agreeing to create linguistic States with limited powers granted by the Constitution. Still, they were far from the nationalities envisaged by the Andhra Mahasabha. The right-wing Hindu groups vehemently opposed the idea of the federation and continue to do so as it would undermine their dream of creating a homogenous Hindu nation. In the end, while the Indian state has triumphed over the nationalities of the south, the ghosts of the latter continue to haunt the champions of the former, at least during elections.

4. Modi, Sisi ink deal on strategic partnership

India and Egypt on Sunday signed an agreement on a strategic partnership as Prime Minister Narendra Modi held bilateral talks with President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi in Cairo. The Government of Egypt bestowed the highest honour of the land — the Order of the Nile — on the visiting Indian leader and Mr. Modi described his first state visit to Egypt as “historic”.

“The four agreements that were signed during the visit (June 24-25) of the honourable Prime Minister — first, the most important, and a landmark development in the history of bilateral relationship was the signature on the strategic partnership between India and Egypt. It was signed by the Honourable Prime Minister Modi and the Honourable President El Sisi of Egypt,” Foreign Secretary Vinay Mohan Kwatra announced.

He said green and renewable collaboration will be an important part of future partnership with Egypt because of the importance that the two sides attach to clean energy.

5. Uneven progress: Stark inter-district disparities in Tamil Nadu

While Tamil Nadu leads in most socioeconomic indicators compared to other States, development is confined to certain pockets

Tamil Nadu is a standout performer along many socioeconomic indicators compared to most States. It features among the three best States in terms of the share of women who ever attended school, low infant mortality rate and the low share of stunted children. It leads the country in terms of gross enrolment ratio in higher education.

These numbers are part of the long-standing argument that the southern States generally perform better than other States, especially those in the north. While the argument holds merit, an analysis of district-level data shows that development is restricted to certain pockets of Tamil Nadu. The differences between advanced districts such as Chennai, Kanniyakumari and Coimbatore and relatively poor districts such as Ramanathapuram, Pudukkottai, Ariyalur, and Perambalur are vast in many of the socioeconomic indicators considered for this analysis.

This is the first story in a series of Data Points exploring inter-district disparities in southern States. In this edition, Tamil Nadu’s district-wise variations are analysed across eight indicators.

Chart 1 shows the share of households that used clean fuel (electricity, LPG/natural gas, biogas) for cooking in 2019-21. Close to 98% of households in Chennai used clean fuel compared to Pudukkottai’s 42%. The western districts — Coimbatore, Erode, Tirupur (>95% usage each) — were better off compared to many southern/eastern coastal districts such as Tiruvarur, Pudukkottai, and Nagapattinam (<60% usage each).

Chart 2 shows the share of households that used an improved sanitation facility in 2019-21. Kanniyakumari’s share was 96.2% compared to Viluppuram’s 53.8%. Most of the central districts including Ariyalur, Perambalur, Karur, Salem, Tiruchirappalli and south western districts such as Virudhunagar and Dindigul lagged behind with less than 70% of such households.

Chart 3 shows the share of children under 5 years who were stunted (low height for age) in 2019-21. In Karur, 33.6% of children were stunted compared to 18% in Tiruvallur. While northern coastal districts such as Chennai, Kancheepuram and Cuddalore were relatively better (with around 20% or less of stunted children), northern interior districts such as Vellore, Dharmapuri, and Krishnagiri were worse (more than 28%).

Chart 4 shows the share of women aged 20-24 years who married as teenagers. In the central districts of Salem and Perambalur, more than 21% were married as teenagers — much higher than the 1.9% in Chennai.

Chart 5 shows the share of schools which had a computer in their premises (2021-22). In many southern districts such as Thoothukudi, Tenkasi and Tirunelveli, the share was less than 65%, whereas it was nearly 90% in Chennai and Viluppuram.

Chart 6 shows the number of people employed in micro, small and medium enterprises (2020-21) for every one lakh people in the population. Most such companies were concentrated in Chennai, Tiruppur, and Coimbatore.

Chart 7 shows the latest estimates of the multidimensional poverty index (0: least poor, 1: most poor). The MPI measures deprivations across health, education and standard of living. Chennai and Kanniyakumari featured near 0 while Pudukkottai was the worst-performing district.

Chart 8 shows the net district domestic product at current prices in 2019-20 (in lakh). The northern coastal districts led by a wide margin while most of the southern/eastern coastal regions lagged far behind.