Iran’s deal and Middle East politics -- An Article from Al Jazeera

After three rounds of talks in less than two months, Iran and six world powers have reached a preliminary agreement in Geneva on curbing Tehran’s nuclear programme in exchange for some sanctions relief. The breakthrough came amid a history of failed negotiations, and could be the first step towards a detente between Western powers and Iran after 35 years of hostility. Noticeably, the agreement came less than three months after Iran’s new President Hassan Rouhani committed to changing Iran’s relationship with the world.

The deal will have immediate regional and international ramifications, and once a long term deal is reached, possibly within a few months, rapprochement between Washington and Tehran is likely to pave the way towards major realignment in the greater Middle East region.

It’s also expected to open the way towards the recognition of Iran’s regional role starting with Syria, Iraq, the Gulf region, and eventually in Afghanistan.

As the US downsizes its overall military presence, it expects the Iranian leadership to be less of a nuisance and more cooperative towards crisis management in the greater Middle East.

And it seems, many in Tehran, and among its supporters, are pleased to see Iran replace Saudi Arabia or Israel as a reliable intermediary for the United States in the region.

Some argue that this is all wishful thinking and will prove short-lived considering the decades’ long antagonism and ideological differences. Others argue that in the long term, Iran (and Turkey) could prove more useful as US clients/partners than Israel and Saudi Arabia, considering their regional weight and historic importance.

The new deal will have serious ramifications on at least seven regional fronts:

Iran

The Islamic Republic is at the heart of any future regional shifts of power. US failures in Afghanistan, and more importantly in Iraq and Syria, have already strengthened Iran’s hand. And the newly gained confidence in Tehran will be further enhanced by the removal of economic sanctions, and buttressed by a bigger role in a weakened region.

Question: How will Iran’s rehabilitation and opening to the West affect the balance of power within the country and the future of the mullahs’ rule?

Syria  

Iran’s expected participation in the Geneva-2 negotiation over Syria’s future is its first reward for “good behaviour”. A staunch supporter of Bashar al-Assad, with its special forces fighting alongside his regime, Tehran is likely to ensure Assad’s survival, and along with Russia, assist in his rehabilitation as an acceptable regional leader. Tehran and Moscow are eager to end the war and shift the emphasis from ousting Assad to “fighting terrorism” in Syria.

·   Question: What does a greater Iranian role in Syria mean to the struggle of Syrians for freedom from dictatorship, and the outcome of the horrific civil war there?

Iraq 

The country is in a quagmire 10 years after the military invasion. It’s terribly polarised between Sunni and Shia forces and hundreds – even thousands – of people are killed every month by suicide bombings. Tehran exercises major influence in the country, over Nouri al-Maliki’s government, and among the Shia majority. And as of late, the authoritarian Maliki has emerged as an indispensable link between Tehran and Washington as he spearheads the fight against “extremist Sunni groups”.

·         Question: Considering its new vigour, will Iran’s support for Maliki lead him to an even greater monopoly of power and deeper divisions in the country?

  

Saudi Arabia

The wars in Iraq, Syria and the conflict in Lebanon – in addition to the upheaval of the predominantly Shia majority in Bahrain – have deepened the rift between Riyadh and Tehran. Judging from criticism made recently by Saudi intelligence chief Bandar bin Sultan, who is Washington’s ally in the Kingdom, the Saudi leadership is the most alarmed with the potential US-Iran detente and the rise of an unrestrained Iran on the Middle East stage. Further, Saudi-Iranian antagonism will lead to major sectarian escalation with incalculable price for the region.

·         Question: Will the hardening theological triangle - Saudi, Iran and Israel – take the region to new historic lows as the danger of sectarian conflict looms large in the region?

Afghanistan

As the US withdraws/redeploys outside the country in 2014 – after a 13 year war – leaving behind only residual forces through 2024, Washington can use all the help it can get to maintain control. With a certain influence over Afghanistan’s northern regions, Tehran could be of assistance if it chooses to help stabilise Afghanistan and deter the return of the Taliban.

·         Question: Having briefly helped US forces fight against the Taliban after 2001, will Tehran cooperate once again with the US?

Palestine/Lebanon

Palestine is a domestic redline for both Washington and Tehran and, therefore, expect little or no change to the occupation of Palestine where they’ve agreed to disagree. Tehran has already lost much influence among the Islamist Palestinian factions due to its support of the Assad regime; its only influence remains with Hezbollah.

·      Question: Will Iran’s Lebanese ally emerge stronger or weaker from the Syrian civil war, and will it become a Lebanese, and not an Israeli menace?

Israel

For the foreseeable future, Israel will continue to be the only nuclear power in the region. But Israel is no less annoyed by a resurgent Iran than it is by its nuclear development, especially the fact that Tehran has already acquired the nuclear know-how. Some suggest that this could lead to new unspoken Israeli alliance with the so-called moderate Sunni regimes, ie, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Jordan, Egypt, against their common nemesis, Iran.

·         Question: Since Israel is particularly eager for such an arrangement, will such alliances finally see the light of day and what repercussion will that have on the region?

 India’s stand

India has welcomed the deal that Iran and six world powers clinched on Sundaycurbing the Iranian nuclear programme in exchange for initial sanctions relief.

“As the agreement between Iran and the P5 plus 1 has been agreed to just a while ago we are in the process of obtaining details from our interlocutors, however, based on initial information available at this stage I can say that India welcomes the prospect of resolving questions related to Iran’s nuclear program,through dialogue and diplomacy,” India’s ministry of external affairs spokesperson Syed Akbaruddin told

Pub Adm: Game Theory and the Prisoner's Dilemma

Game Theory

• ·         Game theory is a classic mathematical model of analyzing real world problems. It was proposed by legendary mathematician Dr. John von Neumann.

• ·         It is one of the most important tools used by corporations, governments, militaries and computer game designers these days for strategic decision making in “real life” as well as real life-like situations.
• ·         Game theory is called into play whenever there are several players whose actions are interdependent.
• ·         It is the genesis of revolutionary changes in economic theory, the study of evolution and biology and has recently been applied in the automobile industry as well. The fields of sociology and psychology also have dedicated streams for creating datasets using game theory.
• ·         The key aspects of game theory revolve around identification of process participants, their various quantifiable options (choices), consideration of their preferences and subsequent reactions. If all these factors are carefully thought of, then the task of modeling the problem by game theory along with identifications of all possible situations becomes easier.
• ·         Think of coalition political parties tussling over power sharing in government.

·  Cooperative Game Theory is often used in politics and international relations because, invariably, power plays a big role in determining the strength of a nation. The neoliberation in international relations has greatly benefitted from game theory.

Brief History of Game Theory

• ·         The mathematical theory of games was first developed by John von Neumann and Oskar Morgenstern in the 1940s, but its applicability was limited to parlor games.
• ·         John Nash, the subject of the 2001 Oscar-winning movie A Beautiful Mind transformed game theory into a more general tool that enabled the analysis of win-win and lose-lose scenarios, as well as win-lose situations. Nash enabled game theory to address a central question: should we compete or cooperate?

• ·         Game Theory remains at the cutting edge of economic theory, with game theorists winning the Noble Prize in Economics in 1994, 1996, 2005, 2007 and 2012. For his path-breaking dissertation that revolutionized economics and many other disciplines, John Nash won the Nobel in 1994, along with game theorists John Harsanyi and ReinhardSelten.

• ·         William Vickrey won the Noble in 1996 for his pioneering, work in incentives, asymmetric information, and auction theory, all crucial to the advance of effective strategy in a world of influence – like chess, football, military strategy and business.

• ·         Thomas Schelling and Robert Aumann won the 2005 Nobel for the game-theoretic work in conflict and cooperation, including contributions on credible commitments and repeated games. In the committee’s worlds, such contributions have made Game Theory “the dominant approach” to the analysis of conflict and cooperation.

• ·         Leonid Hurwicz, Eric Maskin and Roger Myerson won the 2007 Nobel prize for their work in mechanism design theory, a branch of game theory that extends the application of game theory to how different types of rules, or institutions, align individual incentives with overall social goals. Their work on allocation mechanisms has had a significant impact on the design of auctions, social welfare systems and many organizations.

• ·         Most recently, in 2012, the Nobel was awarded to Lloyd Shapley and Alvin Roth for their work using Game Theory for economic engineering. Both addressed how to match different agents as well as possible. Shapely used cooperative game theory to study and compare different matching methods. Roth built on Shapley’s theoretical work by showing empirically the conditions for the functioning of important markets in practice, and he demonstrated that stability is the key to understanding the success of particular market institutions.

• ·         Another form of Game Theory is the Coalitional model, where the payoffs of a group or coalition take precedence over individual player’s payoff. Assume a recently concluded election in which no individual political party has majority to form a government.

• ·         This model can actually analyse and find the best group or coalition so that the payoffs are maximized. This is different from co-operative model in the sense that here even a small individual political party can enjoy more power and influence than a larger party. The only thing that is never disclosed is the process of negotiations by which the individual players formed a group of coalition.

• ·         Many Public Relation agencies, marketing firms and direct selling firms use elements of Game Theory to narrow down their target consumer base. It improves their focus area by giving a relatively clearer picture of the methods that can be employed to deal with customers.

• ·         An international program run by the US secret service agencies known as “Prism” uses a software model based on Game Theory to ascertain predictability of terrorist activities, identities and their possible locations. The program gathers data from numerous sources such as international Internet gateways, satellites, social networking sites, emails, chats and messengers. The data is then fed into the program to create a spectrum of information about possible terrorist attacks in USA and elsewhere.

• ·         The Game Theory is criticized for being a limiting factor in expanding one’s vision and intuitiveness. Not to forget the fact that Game Theory largely bases its results in an isolated environment where only the players participating in the game are considered to be solely responsible for the outcome of the game. Evolutionary scientists and many physicists also claim that the Game Theory works largely against the basic principles of human and universal evolution. According to them, the existence of over billion living species of differing characteristics is a classic example which defies rationality at its best.

• ·         Criticism notwithstanding, the game theory is regarded as extremely useful by researchers in political science.

• ·         Useful our useless, the debate continues as do developments in this field of applied mathematics. This is also a fairly large group of supporters who claim to have benefitted from Game Theory.

 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

GOVERNMENT'S WHITE PAPER ON BLACK MONEY

GOVERNMENT'S WHITE PAPER ON BLACK MONEY

The "White Paper on Black Money"(PRESS RELEASE, DATED 16-5-2012) presents the different facets of black money and its complex relationship with policy and administrative regime in the country. It also reflects upon the policy options and strategies that the Government has been pursuing in the context of recent initiatives, or need to take up in the near future, to address the issue of black money and corruption in public life.

It contains following topics

1. Defining 'Black Money'

2. Factors Leading to Generation of Black Money

3. Ways of Generating Black Money

4. Estimates of Black Money Generated in India

5. Estimates of Black Money Stashed Abroad

6. Illicit Money transferred outside India: Reports of the IMF and GFI

7. INSTITUTIONS TO DEAL WITH BLACK MONEY

8. Evolution of Strategies to Control Black Money in India

9. Joining the Global Crusade against Black Money

10. Creating an appropriate legislative framework

11. Setting up Institutions for Dealing with Illicit Money

12. Developing Systems for Implementation

13. Results Achieved

14. THE WAY FORWARD

For complete text please see http://www.taxmann.com/TaxmannFlashes/flashst21-5-12_DTL_2.htm?aa= 

Geopolitics of India

---

India has entered a period of uncertainty. India’s business environment in the next decade is expected to be influenced as much by external geopolitical factors, as by the country’s initiatives in the area of economic, social, political and judicial reforms.

While reforms are very much within the realm of choices that India can make, it is necessary to examine if and to what extent India can influence the emerging geopolitical outlook. The developments that would shape this outlook may not necessarily be easily determined based on an analysis of present trends. They are more likely to be a series of discontinuities; therefore, there is a need to identify key uncertainties. In order to do this, one needs to take a view that transcends the traditional India- Pakistan prism and consider broader developments that may have an impact on India’s geopolitical outlook.

India’s geopolitical needs have to be examined in a world order where the United States has supremacy in military ideology and economy; NATO is the predominant military coalition in the world; democracy is at least notionally accepted as the universal ideology of governance; the free market is the dominant instrument of conducting economic relations; and technology is the greatest driver of economic growth.

It is a paradigm where elite societies seek to maintain security in a disorderly and volatile world, where regional powers such as China, Russia and Iran seek to protect their sovereignty and influence. Constructive non-state actors such as NGOs, as well as destructive non-state actors, such as terrorist groups, are challenging the present economic and political structure. The way that these groups are managed in the next few years will be a key determinant of the geopolitical outlook, not just for India, but also for the whole world.

We are in a phase in history where the new rules of conduct of international relations are being framed with the doctrine of pre-emption, subordination of sovereignty and primacy of prosperity. The nation-state remains the primary principle for organizing societies, though it is increasingly being challenged by forces within and outside its control. Economics and information have emerged, in addition to the military, as the main currencies of power.

It is an era where the theater of primary geopolitical action has shifted from Europe to Asia, an era in which developments in Pakistan, Central and West Asia, and China will determine India’s geopolitical outlook more than its immediate neighbours in South Asia. These events provide India with both a challenge and an opportunity to influence the shape of the decade to come. The manner in which India makes decisions relating to its foreign policy and strategic neighborhood will determine its future.

Four Scenarios

Four scenarios comprising alternative policy mixes that India may choose within the framework of directions set by identified drivers are developed. These include American ambitions in Asia, internal dynamics in West Asian countries, China’s economic resurgence, polarization in Pakistan, risk of a war over water between India and Pakistan, changing approach to international relations, and economic disparities within the country.

The policy mix chosen by India will very much depend on the vision of the country. From 1950 to 1990, India had a vision of itself as a self-reliant, non-aligned, secular state, albeit disregarding its economic potential. From 1991 to 2001, India viewed itself as a globalizing economy, but an increasingly fractious society. From 2002 to 2020, India would like to see itself transform from a developing to a developed country.

There are four possible scenarios for India’s geopolitical outlook for the future. The first compares India to a Frog in the Pond, who looks at the sky above him, muses about it, but is essentially focused on the pond that he lives in. India looks at the big wide world, muses about its permanent membership at the UN Security Council, but conducts its geopolitics very much from an Indian-Pakistani prism. The domestic ramification of this is that it favors a development strategy, which benefits the top 20%—really 2%—of the people, ignoring the vast Indian population.

In this scenario, U.S. Secretary of State, EU officials, Chinese and Japanese leaders regularly visit India but they want to discuss strategic stability in South Asia and the resumption of India- Pakistan talks. They do not consider it relevant to engage India in core decisions on global issues, except as a courtesy.

On the other hand, India maintains normal relations with China and Iran, mostly in trade, but does not consider nurturing strategic relations with these countries as a bargaining chip in its negotiations with the U.S. and EU.

In economics, India is known as the cost-effective supplier of IT services. In 2010, she earns US$50 billion in exports, but employs only a little over 1 million professionals. Indiais still not seen as a large market but merely a supplier of cheap factors of production

The second scenario is that of the Cobra in the Hole. Like a cobra which is secure in its own dwelling, and is not concerned about the outside world, except for the prey that he surreptitiously grabs and eats in the security of his own home, India decides to adopt an inward-looking mold. It focuses on domestic growth and stability. It does not want to have any negotiation with other countries on any issue, except where it is almost essential and when it is seeking an occasional export opportunity to bolster its exchange reserves.

In this scenario, the government elected in 2004 decides to put its own house in order through a domestic economic revival. It announces tough carrot-and-stick approaches to deal with terrorism, crime, and other law and order issues.

Foreign policy is managed by the professional foreign office. India’s participation in SAARC is nominal. The president represents the country at SAARC government summits from 2004 to 2009.

Meanwhile, Pakistan continues to discuss Kashmir. India makes it clear that it will have no talks with Pakistan on this or any other issue. It strengthens defense forces on the border to pre-empt any Pakistani attack and gives security agencies a free hand to deal with terrorists in a brutal manner. India abrogates Article 370 in Jammu and Kashmir.

India is least bothered about the tumultuous changes in China and the Middle East. It introduces stiff conservation measures to ensure its energy security and encourages companies to invest in local oil and gas fields. India accedes to all the global economic and environmental treaties but refuses to accede to any security treaty. It also restricts the entry of international human rights organizations and the media to the country. In order to protect itself from global uncertainty and irrational Pakistan, India advances its nuclear weapons and missile program, against global criticism.

The third scenario is that of a Calf in the Shadow of its mother, depending on the latter for food and security. Here, India joins U.S.-led Western alliance and agrees to toe the line without question. New governments in Washington and New Delhi decide to enter into a security pact in view of the nearing collapse of Pakistan and strong sense of insecurity all over South Asia.

India offers independence to the Kashmir valley under U.S. advice, and against domestic protests. FBI is put in service to assist the central government to control opposition at home. The World Bank and other multilateral organizations offer India a huge amount of long-term soft loans to develop urban infrastructure, power, and education. All restrictions on foreign trade and investments are lifted. The rupee is convertible on the capital account. India restricts its dialogue with Russia, China and Iran to economic and technical issues.

The politicians with a rural base have very little access to the prime minister who spends most of his time on foreign policy issues. The opposition also takes a leaf from the bookof the ruling party and their leaders cultivate senate staffers and academics in Washington.

India’s growth rate goes up to 8%, exports increase and a sense of prosperity arrives in the country by 2010. There are protests in rural areas against growing disparities, but the government manages cohesion by corruption and terrorism by counter-terrorism. Between 2006 and 2010, the biggest problem is terrorism. India now not only attracts terrorist attacks on its own account, but also for being an ally of the Western coalition.

The fourth scenario is that of the Lion in the Emblem (the three-faced lion in India’s national emblem), which believes in the victory of principles, and confidently perceives the whole world in all directions. Similarly, India re-formulates its geopolitical vision with confidence and commitment to certain principles.

There is a sustained effort to transform the agrarian economy into a productive, well-respected sector, creating employment with high returns for millions of new entrants in the rural labor market. There is substantial decline in youth propensity for crime and terrorism.

At the same time, there is a sustained effort to improve the technological edge of the economy by shifting the focus of the IT sector from maintenance to product development, and by developing biotechnology in both pharmaceuticals and agriculture.

India launches Resolution, Reconciliation and Reconstruction initiatives in Jammu and Kashmir, the northeastern states and Naxalite-affected parts of central and northern India. Preventive measures are introduced in eastern Gujarat, Bihar and UP. All political parties emphasize genuine secularism and enter into an all-party accord to refrain from using caste and communal cards for electoral purposes.

India develops close relations with Europe, Russia, Iran, China and the U.S., and asserts its right to have independent relations with other countries. In 2006, Indian diplomacy launches an initiative for a new world order, with a Marshall Fund-type global transfer mechanism to reduce gaps in resources and know-how. India gathers the support of Russia, China and West Asian countries for this proposal. In 2009, the new U.S. administration endorses these ideas. In 2012, new institutions are created. In 2015, India is in the top bracket of the World Competitiveness Index. G-8, which had become G-9 with the inclusion of China in 2010, is made G-10 in 2015. India is its new member.

International Conferences on Disaster Management

---

The two major confrences that has been instrumental is suggesting guidelines and framework for Disaster Management, are Hyugo Framework and Yokohama strategy.

Hyogo Framework for Action 

The UN World Conference on Disaster Reduction (WCDR) was held from 18-22 January 2005, at the in Kobe, Hyogo Prefecture, Japan. Approximately 4,000 participants attended the WCDR, including representatives from 168 governments including more than 40 ministers, 78 UN specialized agencies and observer organizations, 161 non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and 562 journalists from 154 media outlets. The WCDR aimed to increase the international profile of disaster risk reduction, promote its integration into development planning and practice, and strengthen local and national capacities to address the causes of disasters that hamper development in many countries.

The World Conference on Disaster Reduction was held from 18 to 22 January 2005 in Kobe, Hyogo, Japan, and adopted the present Framework for Action 2005-2015: Building the Resilience of Nations and Communities to Disasters (here after referred to as the “Framework for Action”).

The Conference provided a unique opportunity to promote a strategic and systematic approach to reducing vulnerabilitiesand risks to hazards.It underscored the need for, and identified ways of, building the resilience of nations and communities to disasters. The newly outlined Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA) 2005-2015, aims at guiding stakeholders towards “Building the Resilience of Nations and Communities to Disasters”, It also focuses on Disaster Risk Reduction through five priorities for action:

1. Ensure that Disaster Risk Reduction is a national and a local priority with a strong institutional basis for implementation.
2. Identify, assess and monitor disaster risks and enhance early warning
3. Use knowledge, innovation and education to build a culture of safety and resilience at all levels
4. Reduce the underlying risk factors
5. Strengthen disaster preparedness for effective response at all levels.

The Yokohama Strategy

The Yokohama Strategy for a Safer World: Guidelines for Natural Disaster Prevention, Preparedness and Mitigation and its Plan of Action (“Yokohama Strategy”), adopted in 1994, provides landmark guidance on reducing disaster risk and the impacts of disasters.

The review of progress made in implementing the Yokohama Strategyidentifies major challenges for the coming years in ensuring more systematic action to address disaster risks in the context of sustainable development and in building resilience through enhanced national and local capabilities to manage and reduce risk.

The review stresses the importance of disaster risk reduction being underpinned by a more pro-active approach to informing, motivating and involving people in all aspects of disaster risk reduction in their own local communities. It also highlights the scarcity of resources allocated specifically from development budgets for the realization of risk reduction objectives, either at the national or the regional level or through international cooperation and financial mechanisms, while noting the significant potential to better exploit existing resources and established practices for more effective disaster risk reduction.

Specific gaps and challenges are identified in the following five main areas:

(a) Governance: organizational, legal and policy frameworks;

(b) Risk identification, assessment, monitoring and early warning;

(c) Knowledge management and education;

(d) Reducing underlying risk factors;

(e) Preparedness for effective response and recovery.

These are the key areas for developing a relevant framework for action for the decade 2005–2015.

Land Acquisition Act : By Jojo Mathews

Land Acquisition Act

Jojo Mathews

---

The post liberalization economic milieu in India has resulted in a ravenous appetite for space (land) to meet the demands for the industrialization, infrastructure building, urban expansion and resource extraction. Land acquisition for development has become the simmering issue for policy makers. The names like Singur, Nandigram, Kalinganagar, Jaitapur and Bhatta Parsaul have become epitomes of the social conflict and theaters for political action. A pertinent overwhelming question that lies at the centre of the land acquisition issue is: how should be landowners compensated when the state seizes private land for developmental needs? The recently passed Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act is a positive step to address the issues in this context. This Act although can be termed as progressive vis-à-vis the previous legislation (Land acquisition Act of 1894) but is not short of flaws.

Since the last decade our growth strategy has revolved around the concept of “inclusive growth”. It has been recognized by the policy makers that benefits of economic growth have not been equitably distributed among the diverse section of the society. Growth is inclusive when it creates economic opportunities along with ensuring equal access to them. In various developmental and mining projects there are plethoras of examples in the country wherein the local communities have been further marginalized in the name of development. According to Jairam Ramesh, minister for rural development, as many as three to four crore tribals from mineral-rich areas in Central India like Jharkhand, Odisha and Maharashtra, had been the victim of development induced displacement. Is it justified to come up with a development project which grossly violates the rights of the vulnerable local communities?  Shouldn’t there be the law of land that protects the rights and assets of the local communities from the arbitrary actions of politico-bureaucratic-mafia nexus?  The present Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act should be seen in this context.

To sustain the growth story, development projects are the need of the hour. In such scenario the land acquisition has become a stark reality. However, the land acquisition for the development projects must ensure that the fruits of development are shared equitably by diverse sections of the society. Development at the cost of local communities will create more problems than the solutions in the long run. A just, humane, participatory, consultative and pro-poor rehabilitation and resettlement policy must be ancillary to the land acquisition. Ironically, prior to this Act we did not have a proper Rehabilitation and Resettlement policy in place. The land acquisition was regulated by the archaic and anachronic Land Acquisition Act of 1894 which seriously suffered from the colonial hangover. The purpose of the law was to merely expedite the acquisition of land. The Act inter alia had following serious defects:

1. The Act only deals with the compensation and not rehabilitation of people whose land has been acquired. The Act was silent on the issue of resettlement and rehabilitation of those displaced by acquisition of land. The compensation was to be made at the market prices.
2. The provision for payment of compensation was there only for individuals with legal ownership
3. The act was silent about the compensation to landless labors, forest land cultivators, forest produce collectors etc as they cannot claim legal ownership over the land.
4. The provision for compensation for the community owned assets like forests, pastures, ponds, wells etc was not there.

The present Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act has tried to address many of these defects. The Act has enhanced the compensation rates; the minimum compensation has now been fixed at four times the market price in rural areas and twice the market price in urban areas. The act envisage mandatory Rehabilitation and Resettlement package  for all eminent domain acquisitions as well private purchases of over 100 acres in rural areas and 50 acres in urban areas. The Act unlike its predecessor has the provision for the compensation for not only to the landowners but for the livelihood losers as well, which include annuities, transportation allowance, land for land, a portion of capital gains from resale, and the land. The Act also put stringent restrictions on the acquisition of the multi-cropped land. Procedural safeguards have also been introduced, including social impact assessment, adequate notification and consent of at least 80% of the affected community. A new bureaucracy that may have five different layers or authorities will be created to manage the new process.

Flaws

The present law although progressive, but is not short of flaws. The law has fixed the compensation at four times the market price in rural areas and twice the market price in urban areas. Nonetheless, the land markets in the country are underdeveloped and largely work on opaque procedures and norms. As per the law, the compensation shall be fixed from the average of the sale price for fifty percent of the sale deeds in the preceding 3 years. While the estimate seem to be appreciable it can be misleading since the price quoted in the sale deeds are most often low to evade the stamp duty during the transactions. 

The law mandates the Rehabilitation and Resettlement package for all eminent domain acquisitions as well private purchases of over 100 acres in rural areas and 50 acres in urban areas. It’s a progressive step. But in the densely populated states like Kerala, West Bengal etc even acquisition of 10 acre of land can effect large number of families.

For the tribal communities, the forests and community owned assets are the integral part of lives.   In the present law the loss is calculated merely in the financial terms and not ecological or cultural terms. The issue is relevant in the context of large scale conversion of forest areas for mining projects and alienation of the tribal community from their livelihood sources in several regions.

In nut shell it can be concluded that over all this is a good Law which can help India to come out of the policy paralysis. Many major projects were stuck due to the inability to acquire land. Even though the cost of land for industries will increase, due shares for the landowners are ensured in the Act which is very crucial in the Indian Context. Land is the only asset for many in India. According to many experts, till now Indian Industry enjoyed a lot of cheap land at the expense of poor farmers and tribals. Now the Industry will have to pay for the land. For the first time, the rights of the ‘sons of the soil’ are duly protected.