Editorial 1 : The five guidelines to a Dragon-Elephant tango
Context
The formulation of ‘five mutuals’ can help bring China-India relations back to a stable and sound track.
Five guidelines of ‘Mutuals’
- China and India are close neighbours. We learned from each other in ancient times, shared weal and woe in modern times, and have a common cause of rejuvenation today.
- China-India relations have become one of the most important bilateral relations.
- President Xi Jinping and Prime Minister Narendra Modi attach great importance to China-India relations, and have reached an important consensus that China and India are not rivals or threats to each other, but are partners in cooperation and development opportunities.
- China and India should adhere to mutual respect, mutual understanding, mutual trust, mutual accommodation and mutual accomplishment.
- The “Five Mutuals” provide a significant path for us to implement the above consensus.
- They should also be the guiding principles for the two big neighbours to get along well.
- Against the backdrop of profound changes unseen in a century, I believe that the “Five Mutuals” are conducive to bring China-India relations back to a stable and sound track.
- Mutual respect is the prerequisite for the development of China-India relations.
- Both China and India have their own uniqueness in terms of dietary habits, lifestyles, cultural traditions and development paths.
- However, these differences did not impede us from attracting and inspiring each other in history.
- In the new era, it is of even greater significance for us to view each other with an open mind, respect each other’s development path, social system and role on the world stage, and jointly promote development and prosperity of the two countries, the region and the world.
- Mutual understanding is the basis of the development of China-India relations.
- The two peoples empathised with and supported each other in their respective struggles for national independence and liberation.
- China understands India’s aspiration for national rejuvenation, and supports India’s foreign policy of strategic autonomy.
- No country understands better than China what a great cause it is to enable more than 1.4 billion Indians to live a good life, and how much effort it requires.
- We need to further promote dialogue and communication at all levels in various fields, encourage the two peoples to have more exchanges, and promote mutual understanding and political trust, so as to consolidate the political and public foundation for the development of bilateral relations.
- Mutual trust is the key to the development of China-India relations.
- The international situation is more volatile and uncertain than before. More and more people have realised that as being among the largest developing countries, China and India should avoid mutual suspicion and attrition in order to rise together.
- We need to view bilateral relations from a strategic perspective, form the right perception of each other, view each other’s strategic intentions objectively, and stick to the right vision — that China and India are partners and development opportunities to each other instead of being rivals or threats.
- We could work together for peaceful coexistence and insist on resolving disputes in a peaceful manner.
- With political trust, not even the Himalayas can stop us from strengthening friendly exchanges.
An ‘all-round relationship’
- Mutual accommodation is the guarantee of the development of China-India relations. China and India are neighbours who cannot be moved away.
- It is natural for us to have differences and frictions. The key is to form a correct perception of differences and handle them in a proper manner.
- As we both inherit the political wisdom of ancient oriental civilisations, it is believed that we can find effective ways to mutually accommodate each other’s core interests and major concerns, properly handle differences through dialogue, and reach a mutually acceptable solution.
- Meanwhile, our relationship is all-round and cannot be defined by certain differences, and our cooperation cannot be disrupted by a single incident.
- Mutual accomplishment is the direction of the development of China-India relations.
- As important emerging economies, China and India are both at a critical stage of national development and revitalisation, and enjoy broad common interests and the space for cooperation.
- China is advancing Chinese modernisation on all fronts, which will provide new opportunities to the world. India also has the vision of “Viksit Bharat 2047”.
From the principles of peaceful coexistence
- The “Five Mutuals” carry forward and further develop the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence, and echo the “mutual respect, mutual sensitivity and mutual interests” proposed by the Indian leader.
- They are also a useful guide for both sides to implement the important consensus reached by the two leaders.
- As two great ancient civilisations, both sides can look beyond the horizon and steer bilateral relations in the right direction, and jointly usher in a new future.
- President Xi Jinping stated that if China and India speak with one voice, the whole world will listen.
- Prime Minister Modi said India and China are “two bodies with one spirit”. A “Dragon-Elephant Tango” is the only correct choice for the two sides.
Conclusion
Under the strategic guidance of the two leaders, both sides have enough wisdom and the capability to handle bilateral relations well and forge a right path for the neighbouring countries to coexist in harmony and develop hand in hand.
Editorial 2 : Weakest first
Context
Allowing sub-quotas to least advanced among SCs deepens social justice.
The affirmative action
- The jurisprudence of affirmative action has been evolving constantly.
- From a notion of formal equality rooted in a general principle of non-discrimination, it has reached a point where the aim is substantive equality.
- Reservation is no more seen as an exception to the equality norm, but as a deepening of the idea of equality by embracing diversity and accommodation of those suffering from historical and social disabilities.
- The latest Supreme Court judgment allowing States to classify Scheduled Castes (SC) into groups and give preferential treatment to the weaker and more backward among them is in line with this progression.
- By a majority of 6:1, the Court has rejected the idea that the SCs constitute a single homogenous class and that sub-classification will violate the equality rule.
- The verdict dislodges a 2005 Constitution Bench judgment (E.V. Chinnaiah vs AP) that had struck down an Andhra Pradesh law classifying SC communities into groups as unconstitutional.
- The Court had then ruled that once the President notifies the list of SCs under Article 341, Parliament alone could modify it by law, and that States were barred from “tinkering” with the list.
- This judgment was cited by the Punjab and Haryana High Court while quashing a preferential sub-quota for Balmikis and Mazhabi Sikhs within the SC quota.
- When the matter came to the apex court, a Bench doubted the correctness of E.V. Chinnaiah and referred the question to a larger Bench.
The verdict
- The majority verdict is based on a clear recognition that SCs do not constitute a homogeneous class.
- Under the Presidential List, they have a common constitutional status, but it does not mean that there are no differences in the extent of backwardness among them.
- A history of untouchability is indeed a common feature among them, but there is historical and empirical evidence that the level of advancement is not uniform.
- States are empowered to further identify the weaker sections among SCs and extend beneficial treatment.
- Four judges have taken the view that excluding the “creamy layer” among the SCs from reservation benefits is necessary to give full effect to the principle that the weakest should get the benefits of affirmative action and not be elbowed out by those more advanced than them.
- Applying the ‘creamy layer’ concept, hitherto confined to OBCs may not be easy.
- Justice B.R. Gavai, who writes in support of the exclusion of the better-off among the SCs, also notes that the creamy layer norms cannot be the same as those prescribed for the OBCs.
Conclusion
The exclusion of the more advanced sections among Dalits was not an issue before the Bench, and the opinions may be non-binding as of now. While excluding the creamy layer may happen some day, the focus should be on the marginalised among Dalits getting adequate representation.
