Editor,
I often use Rapido for my daily commutes, finding it reliable and efficient for reaching my destinations on time. My preference is to book rides through the Rapido app, avoiding the unpredictability and high charges of riders operating independently. Engaging with these riders has given me insights into their lives and the challenges they face, which warrant serious consideration by our government.
Recently, a Rapido rider shared his story with me. He is a married man with two children, striving to provide for his family. While government regulations, such as permits, aim to organize and oversee operations, they come at a steep cost. The permit fee of Rs 5000 is burdensome, even for those already affiliated with Rapido. This fee seems more like an attempt by the government to profit from the youth struggling to earn a livelihood than a genuine effort to streamline the industry.
Moreover, the government’s interference isn’t limited to regulation. The rider mentioned that despite the launch of an OTT platform promoting local talent, there is a glaring lack of government-developed apps akin to Rapido, Ola, or Uber. Instead of facilitating the growth of these companies and motivating youth through technological innovation, the government seems intent on controlling the market, thereby stifling opportunities for young entrepreneurs.
Our conversation also touched upon the alarming state of pollution in Byrnihat, infamous for being one of the most polluted cities. Despite this notoriety, the government appears to turn a blind eye, allowing industries to operate unregulated and wreak havoc on the environment. This leniency starkly contrasts with the stringent measures imposed on young riders simply trying to earn an honest living.
As we were stuck in traffic, our discussion deepened my concern over the government’s priorities. It is high time the authorities learn from past mistakes and shift their focus towards the welfare of the youth. The government must balance regulation with support, fostering an environment where young people can thrive both economically and creatively.
Yours etc.,
R Sarki
Shillong
PM Modi’s balancing act
Editor,
Apropos of the editorial “Balancing in Russia ” (ST 10th July 2024) the recent visit of Prime Minister Narendra Modi to Moscow has raised eyebrows and sparked debate. Hours before Modi’s arrival in Moscow on July 8, 2024, Russia launched missiles on Ukraine, resulting in casualties, including children at a Kyiv Hospital. Despite this, Modi was all smiles as he posed for photos with Russian President Vladimir Putin. During his two-day visit, the two leaders hugged, engaged in informal talks over tea, and toured the grounds of Putin’s suburban residence. The visit of the Prime Minister of India matters.
The engagement of the Indian Prime Minister with the Russian President reaffirms long standing strategic and economic relations between India and Russia. It is an attempt to maintain the bilateral relationship while India deepens ties with the West.
Prime Minister Modi faces a delicate balancing act between the East (Russia) and the West (the U.S.). His visit aims to reassure President Putin about the importance of their relationship, even as India strengthens its partnership with the U.S. and faces pressure to distance itself from Moscow’s action in Ukraine.
Unlike some world leaders, the Prime Minister of India has not condemned Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. But the Prime Minister did emphasise that this era is not one of war. The Prime Minister’s visit coincided with North Atlantic Treaty Organization meetings in Washington, where defence cooperation took centre stage. Modi’s Moscow visit underscores enduring friendship with Putin’s Russia, even amidst geo-political complexities. Whether the Prime Minister of India is doing a tightrope walk or not, only time will tell.
Yours etc;
VK Lyngdoh,
Via email
Ponder over Agnipath scheme
Editor,
A few days ago, former Major General Yash Mor said in his post on X, “The ground reality of the life of an agniveer in barracks needs urgent attention. They are unhappy, ridiculed often and not very sure of their future.”
His post brought back memories of a sad incident in my life. I was a student of Class VII at that time, when my father was posted to another place. My father took me to a nearby school in our new locality and got me admitted. But I was ridiculed by some students on the first day in my new school. It was limited to psychological bullying, but I realised that even verbal abuse could drive a person to take his own life.
Now, what is the difference between those who bully fellow students in an educational institution and those who are being bullied? The latter are the newly admitted students while the former are not. This divide cannot be bridged even in those educational institutions where there is an identical uniform for all the students.
The problem of having two sets of students in an institution has been so annoying that in spite of having anti-ragging rules and vigilance by the teachers, the menace of bullying still exists.
Those students who bully others later join medical, engineering, armed forces, and other services. They carry with them this tendency. When the same situation occurs in an occupational space, like two sets of personnel – permanent and temporary or adequately trained and less trained – they may repeat what they did in educational institutions. Actually, such a divide in occupational status replicates the old and new divide among students.
Recently, a 22-year-old Agniveer allegedly shot himself dead with his service rifle while on sentry duty at the Agra air force station. He joined the air force in 2022. As per reports, he appeared to have been depressed after being denied leave because of a lack of manpower at the IAF station.
Agnipath is a short-term contractual scheme for the recruitment of soldiers. It was launched in June 2022. Under this scheme, soldiers, known as Agniveers, are recruited to the army, air force, and the navy on a short-term contractual basis for four years, after which 75 per cent of them are to be demobilised after the completion of four years. They are not entitled to gratuity or pension. It has created two types of soldiers.
In the first season in the Parliament after the election, Rahul Gandhi, leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, accused the government of having created two types of jawans – those who would receive pension after retirement and those who would not.
A war hero and gallantry award-winning former navy chief, Admiral Arun Prakash has questioned the combat efficiency of Agniveers. In a post on X, he asked, “A lot of attention is (rightly) being focused on in-service disparities and poor post-demob prospects of young Agniveers. But is anyone worried about the huge operational handicap imposed on combat units, forced to accept barely trained recruits, fit only for sentry duties?”
In response, army veteran Sachin Pawar said, “It’s crystal clear that the scheme is detrimental to the armed forces…”
The government needs to ponder over what former Major General Yash Mor said about the life of Agniveers in barracks because the divide in any place can cause problems. Moreover, what several veteran military officers pointed out about the operational handicap that this scheme may generate is another serious issue that cannot be ignored.
Yours etc.,
Sujit De,
Via email