12-06-2006, 03:03 AM
Thanks, Gauhar - For posting an article, which discusses matters of Economic development in Kashmir.
It is so refreshing to read a piece, which is sans the he said she said petulant acrimony that passes for debate in some circles, these days.
In my opinion, Kashmiris have a right to trade freely across the border and also attract investment, albeit with some caveats, from whoever we deem appropriate.
Given a free rein on all matters Economic, there is no reason that we cannot surpass Bangalore and Chennai in a decade or less. We have all the necessary infrastructure for becoming a top outsourcing/ off-shoring destination and, not just for the phone call type of work, but the high end value added technical work.
I cry myself to sleep many a night, when I think of the immense talent, which is wasting away in Kashmir, because of stifling bureaucratic regime imposed on us by some babu sitting on his over fed behind in Delhi.
Nusrat.
--------
Swaraj at Gulmarg
If goal is eco tourism, why this alien five-star culture?
DATELINE SRINAGAR ARJIMAND HUSSAIN TALIB
D�j� vu. The same story of Kashmir's prime land being leased out to non-State subjects, the same justifications of the government and the same Kashmiris up in arms. It is like a familiar tale being told again and again with the same result: people's resistance movement making government take to back foot but ultimately government having the last laugh.
After enormous public outcry, strengthened by Gulmarg people's stiff and clear cut resistance, government seems to have resorted to a volte-face yet again: trying to reassure that no land shall be leased out to non State subjects. But this stand is quite different than what is happening in the corridors of power these days.
One wonders what makes the government think of leasing out land to non State-subjects for development of tourist infrastructure. This decision is patently against the declared government policy of tourism promotion: encouragement of eco-tourism and its horizontal economic benefit and not vertical impact through participation of big businesses for development of 5-star hotels.
Government's argument that Kashmir's economy can't be compartmentalized and needs foreign investment is right in principle but what the government is actually doing is creating monopolies in an uneven field. Local partnership with foreign investment cannot be done for 100 per cent foreign ownership while locals retain zero ownership and are given jobs of sweepers and waiters!
In today's neo-liberal and globalised world free markets and foreign investments are the kind of realities which can hardly be wished away. Who would have imagined China being one of the biggest investors in Europe a few decades back? Who would have imagined Pakistani pickles and other cash crops freely available in markets in this Kashmir? Who would have thought India's Mittal acquiring Russia's largest steel maker � Arcelor � to become world's largest steel entity. Wasn't it difficult to imagine French media giants investing in Al Jazeera news channel to make it world's third largest news organisation or UAE's private port firm running one of Europe's largest ports?
But it is the reality of the first decade of this 21st century. Was something of this possible in the 60s or 70s? Kashmir's state of political economy would have to be seen from the same prism of 60s and 70s. Countries have taken decades to first consolidate their own industries, fine tune systems, nurture private entities, enhance their per capita incomes, achieve ideal states of population and economic growth rates and, most importantly, make people partners in growth and wealth creation through public ownership of business entities.
The problem with Kashmir is that we have achieved none of these goals � which are fundamental to any political economy before it brings in foreign capital that is intrinsically monopolistic. Foreign investment in any system must come in a level playing field. India and China, for instance, did so only when they were confident that their own business entities were in a competitive mode. They did so only through a mechanism of safeguards: majority stakes were kept with desi entities. Are we doing that?
What is being done with Kashmir through Gulmarg-type foreign capital invitations is akin to economic suicide. In simple words, this is not a level playing field where the local actors would be expected to compete financially with the non-local actors. The strong protest being spearheaded by the people of Gulmarg and supported by many political and civil society groups of Kashmir is conveying many messages in very certain terms. One, it is one of the rare mass-base people's resistance movement concerning economic issues in Kashmir. Two, it is a movement which is guided by both social as well as economic logic and rationale. Even if one goes by the face value of what the government is saying why is it going for outside investment in the tourism sector; it is a foregone conclusion that this step is patently against the interests of the Kashmiri people and no matter how the nuances of the deal are packaged, it is going to be an economic catastrophe for Kashmir.
We are aware of the fact that government's original plan was to lease out a few hundred kanals of land at prime tourist spots of Gulmarg, Pahalgam, Sonamarg, Dodhpathri and Bangus Valley to major Indian and international hotel and resort brands for developing hospitality and amusement infrastructure. In the face of huge public acrimony, the government chose to re-package its idea: that it would be first the State subjects of Jammu & Kashmir State who would be participating in the bidding of land which would start at Rs 1 million per kanal.
But even with the "State-subjects first" clause a lot of conditions apply: government would see if the party bidding for the lease was really the one that can deliver goods. Two, it is only after the party gets its infrastructure development plan approved by a "competent authority" that the party shall be allowed to go in. Three, even if the plan was approved the party must raise infrastructure within two years, failing which the lease would stand cancelled. Four, government would encourage local business entities entering into a joint venture kind of thing with outside agencies for management of these new tourist entities.
The problem is that the conditions and time deadline is such that it is almost impossible for any local business entity to complete construction within two years given the fact that these tourist spots remain snow-bound for about six months in a year. If these conditions are pre-meditated, designed to ensure that local business entities fail then leasing out land to non-Kashmiri business entities is inevitable. When the bidding starts at Rs 10 lakh a kanal, it is very probable that many local individual and business entities would be able to bid for any measure of land. Even if the final bid comes to Rs 20 lakhs, 500 kanals would mean Rs 100 crore. If we assume similar financial calculus to emerge for other four health resorts, that would mean Rs 500 crore in total. That is really no big deal for the State subjects individual or business houses to afford. And even if we add to that the infrastructure development costs � assuming that to be Rs 250 crores or so � it is still in the affordable range of the State subjects.
The ultimate solution lays in Kashmiri financial and business entities going public and raise money from the common people. Not to speak of a few hundred crores of rupees, thousands of crores of rupees can be raised from the primary market � which sadly nobody in the government seems ready to explore. Enormous sums of cash lie idle with banks in Kashmir. Thousands of crores of rupees is tied up with unproductive real estate assets. People have very limited avenues of productive investment.
The kind of Swaraj the people of Kashmir are advocating these days needs to be heard. Anything short of that would be tantamount to economic colonization.
(The columnist can be e-mailed at arjimand@...)
http://www.greaterkashmir.com/full_story.a...ItemID=6&cat=17
It is so refreshing to read a piece, which is sans the he said she said petulant acrimony that passes for debate in some circles, these days.
In my opinion, Kashmiris have a right to trade freely across the border and also attract investment, albeit with some caveats, from whoever we deem appropriate.
Given a free rein on all matters Economic, there is no reason that we cannot surpass Bangalore and Chennai in a decade or less. We have all the necessary infrastructure for becoming a top outsourcing/ off-shoring destination and, not just for the phone call type of work, but the high end value added technical work.
I cry myself to sleep many a night, when I think of the immense talent, which is wasting away in Kashmir, because of stifling bureaucratic regime imposed on us by some babu sitting on his over fed behind in Delhi.
Nusrat.
--------
Swaraj at Gulmarg
If goal is eco tourism, why this alien five-star culture?
DATELINE SRINAGAR ARJIMAND HUSSAIN TALIB
D�j� vu. The same story of Kashmir's prime land being leased out to non-State subjects, the same justifications of the government and the same Kashmiris up in arms. It is like a familiar tale being told again and again with the same result: people's resistance movement making government take to back foot but ultimately government having the last laugh.
After enormous public outcry, strengthened by Gulmarg people's stiff and clear cut resistance, government seems to have resorted to a volte-face yet again: trying to reassure that no land shall be leased out to non State subjects. But this stand is quite different than what is happening in the corridors of power these days.
One wonders what makes the government think of leasing out land to non State-subjects for development of tourist infrastructure. This decision is patently against the declared government policy of tourism promotion: encouragement of eco-tourism and its horizontal economic benefit and not vertical impact through participation of big businesses for development of 5-star hotels.
Government's argument that Kashmir's economy can't be compartmentalized and needs foreign investment is right in principle but what the government is actually doing is creating monopolies in an uneven field. Local partnership with foreign investment cannot be done for 100 per cent foreign ownership while locals retain zero ownership and are given jobs of sweepers and waiters!
In today's neo-liberal and globalised world free markets and foreign investments are the kind of realities which can hardly be wished away. Who would have imagined China being one of the biggest investors in Europe a few decades back? Who would have imagined Pakistani pickles and other cash crops freely available in markets in this Kashmir? Who would have thought India's Mittal acquiring Russia's largest steel maker � Arcelor � to become world's largest steel entity. Wasn't it difficult to imagine French media giants investing in Al Jazeera news channel to make it world's third largest news organisation or UAE's private port firm running one of Europe's largest ports?
But it is the reality of the first decade of this 21st century. Was something of this possible in the 60s or 70s? Kashmir's state of political economy would have to be seen from the same prism of 60s and 70s. Countries have taken decades to first consolidate their own industries, fine tune systems, nurture private entities, enhance their per capita incomes, achieve ideal states of population and economic growth rates and, most importantly, make people partners in growth and wealth creation through public ownership of business entities.
The problem with Kashmir is that we have achieved none of these goals � which are fundamental to any political economy before it brings in foreign capital that is intrinsically monopolistic. Foreign investment in any system must come in a level playing field. India and China, for instance, did so only when they were confident that their own business entities were in a competitive mode. They did so only through a mechanism of safeguards: majority stakes were kept with desi entities. Are we doing that?
What is being done with Kashmir through Gulmarg-type foreign capital invitations is akin to economic suicide. In simple words, this is not a level playing field where the local actors would be expected to compete financially with the non-local actors. The strong protest being spearheaded by the people of Gulmarg and supported by many political and civil society groups of Kashmir is conveying many messages in very certain terms. One, it is one of the rare mass-base people's resistance movement concerning economic issues in Kashmir. Two, it is a movement which is guided by both social as well as economic logic and rationale. Even if one goes by the face value of what the government is saying why is it going for outside investment in the tourism sector; it is a foregone conclusion that this step is patently against the interests of the Kashmiri people and no matter how the nuances of the deal are packaged, it is going to be an economic catastrophe for Kashmir.
We are aware of the fact that government's original plan was to lease out a few hundred kanals of land at prime tourist spots of Gulmarg, Pahalgam, Sonamarg, Dodhpathri and Bangus Valley to major Indian and international hotel and resort brands for developing hospitality and amusement infrastructure. In the face of huge public acrimony, the government chose to re-package its idea: that it would be first the State subjects of Jammu & Kashmir State who would be participating in the bidding of land which would start at Rs 1 million per kanal.
But even with the "State-subjects first" clause a lot of conditions apply: government would see if the party bidding for the lease was really the one that can deliver goods. Two, it is only after the party gets its infrastructure development plan approved by a "competent authority" that the party shall be allowed to go in. Three, even if the plan was approved the party must raise infrastructure within two years, failing which the lease would stand cancelled. Four, government would encourage local business entities entering into a joint venture kind of thing with outside agencies for management of these new tourist entities.
The problem is that the conditions and time deadline is such that it is almost impossible for any local business entity to complete construction within two years given the fact that these tourist spots remain snow-bound for about six months in a year. If these conditions are pre-meditated, designed to ensure that local business entities fail then leasing out land to non-Kashmiri business entities is inevitable. When the bidding starts at Rs 10 lakh a kanal, it is very probable that many local individual and business entities would be able to bid for any measure of land. Even if the final bid comes to Rs 20 lakhs, 500 kanals would mean Rs 100 crore. If we assume similar financial calculus to emerge for other four health resorts, that would mean Rs 500 crore in total. That is really no big deal for the State subjects individual or business houses to afford. And even if we add to that the infrastructure development costs � assuming that to be Rs 250 crores or so � it is still in the affordable range of the State subjects.
The ultimate solution lays in Kashmiri financial and business entities going public and raise money from the common people. Not to speak of a few hundred crores of rupees, thousands of crores of rupees can be raised from the primary market � which sadly nobody in the government seems ready to explore. Enormous sums of cash lie idle with banks in Kashmir. Thousands of crores of rupees is tied up with unproductive real estate assets. People have very limited avenues of productive investment.
The kind of Swaraj the people of Kashmir are advocating these days needs to be heard. Anything short of that would be tantamount to economic colonization.
(The columnist can be e-mailed at arjimand@...)
http://www.greaterkashmir.com/full_story.a...ItemID=6&cat=17