More structural reforms are needed to maximise the bank recapitalisation effort

About ₹1 lakh crore is expected to be pumped into India’s 21 public sector banks by March, which the Centre hopes will enable them to extend fresh credit lines worth over ₹5 lakh crore to spur economic activity. Of the capital injection — the first half of an ambitious ₹2.11-lakh crore recapitalisation programme for ailing public sector banks announced last October — about ₹8,100 crore is from the government’s budgetary resources. Banks are expected to tap the markets for ₹10,300 crore, while recapitalisation bonds worth ₹80,000 crore are to be issued to finance the rest. Leaving aside the market-raising efforts by banks, over half the fresh capital of over ₹52,000 crore is being directed to the 11 public sector banks that the Reserve Bank of India has placed under the prompt corrective action, or PCA, framework. The RBI deploys the PCA to monitor the operation of weaker banks more closely to encourage them to conserve capital and avoid risks. For these entities, this capital offers a fresh lease of life as it will help meet regulatory requirements under the Basel-III regime as well as cushion them to an extent from possible haircuts on stressed loans that are going through the insolvency resolution process. State Bank of India, the country’s largest, and the nine others that are out of the RBI’s PCA net will receive nearly ₹36,000 crore in order to strengthen their lending capacity.

While announcing this package, the government has described each of the banks as “an article of faith”. Its assertion that no public sector bank will fail and that depositors’ money will remain safe should allay customers’ worry about the safety of their savings under the proposed Financial Resolution and Deposit Insurance legislation. Rating agencies have given the move the thumbs up, but remain unimpressed about governance reforms packaged with it. These include tweaks to existing systems for closer monitoring of big-ticket loans, identifying niche areas where a bank has strengths, restricting corporate exposure to 25%, and a new performance management system. Actual capital inflows will depend on their performance on these fronts and their ability to meet the government’s service priorities, including smoother credit flows to small businesses. More structural reforms may well be on the anvil in the second half of this recap plan, which RBI Governor Urjit Patel had described as providing a real chance to meet the banking sector’s challenges for the first time in a decade. Yet, the absence of any reference to consolidation through mergers is glaring. Moreover, while the government has repeatedly ruled out privatisation of these banks, the only one where it intended to offload its majority stake, IDBI Bank, has got the largest allocation of ₹10,610 crore. At best, this sends out mixed signals.

Comment on forgiveness by riko Mahato

Forgiveness must come on the one who had has decided to heal.
When somebody wrong you either by accident on purpose it can be hard to get over it.
Human never be able to Reconcile with the wrongdoer.
People these days take advantages and the repeat their mistakes and then comes to ask for forgiveness.

How does one behave and forgive such people?
Forgiveness maybe the last thing on your mind when someone does something truly Aircel to you but forgiveness is not just for them.

Holding on to that emotion for too long weekends a heavy burden to carry for your life.

Forgiveness has changed my life.
Accepting apologize from the people who have destroyed me for giving people when they have not ask for it.

But this was not easy something it hurts too much.

But I still think that there is a party for giving because it help to free yourself from hot is trapping you and holding you down.

It is a reminder of God's Love and faithfulness when you treat Idol with kindness even when they do not deserve it.

And it helps you just as much if not more when you're free you heard from that bitterness and pain giving someone another chance even when it is undeserved.

In essence you forgive them for yourself not just for them.
No that forgetting someone does not make you weak but gives you strength.

Thank you so much for receiving such beautiful comment in advice from me.

Quote of Sir Riko Mahato

Life is full of sorrow.

The world is full of sadness.

You can overcome this through meditation.

Free of bondage of world.

The independence can gain through good work.

Life is combination of appearece, knowledge,pain, science, and activities.

Wait and watch: on U.S. security strategy

ndia has unequivocally welcomed U.S. President Donald Trump’s announcement of the National Security Strategy (NSS) for his country during his tenure. To be sure, the positive words used in the international section of the 55-page strategy paper represent an affirmation of India’s stature, and acknowledge “India’s emergence as a leading global power”. It mentions plans to “encourage Indian economic assistance in the region”, and outlines U.S. support to India’s “leadership role in Indian Ocean security and throughout the broader region” as a priority. Mr. Trump’s views of China’s assault on the “sovereignty” of South Asian nations and of Pakistan’s continued support to terror groups are closely aligned with India’s concerns in the neighbourhood. It is significant that the U.S. has highlighted them. In its response, New Delhi has “appreciated the strategic importance” given to India as well as the common objectives that India and the U.S. now share. Predictably, the five countries singled out by the U.S. for criticism have not been as warm in their response. China has accused the U.S. of pursuing what it calls a “cold war mentality and the zero-sum game”. Russia has said that the strategy reeks of “imperialism” as the NSS accuses China and Russia of using their military might to deny America access to what it calls “critical commercial zones”. Pakistan, Iran and North Korea have also been dismissive.

India must be mindful, therefore, that in welcoming the U.S.’s categorisations of its security threats, it doesn’t unthinkingly get swept into an American clinch. To begin with, the U.S. articulation of its perceived challenges has swung wildly over the past year of the Trump administration. It would be wise to await a stabilisation in Mr. Trump’s policies, or at least concrete action to back its words. For example, while the U.S. has talked of countering China’s influence in South Asia, it has not backed this with actual financial assistance for infrastructure critical to the region. Equally, while Mr. Trump’s words on Pakistan and terrorism are sharp, the U.S. has yet to show its hand, either in terms of military action or withholding of coalition support funds. While the U.S. strategy deals with global concerns, the past year has seen American withdrawal from pacts ranging from the Trans-Pacific Partnership to the Paris agreement on climate change. A tough U.S. security strategy can only be realised through cogent policymaking — whether it is on Israel-Palestine, North Korea, Iran or Afghanistan, Mr. Trump has been publicly at odds with his key advisers. A watch-and-wait stance is still India’s best option to preserve the autonomous and pluralistic nature of its engagement in areas where the U.S. faces its greatest challenges.

Affirmative vote: on US' move on Jerusalem

he UN General Assembly vote on a resolution calling for the final settlement of Jerusalem through negotiations may have been pitched as a contest between Israel and Palestine; however, it became a referendum on U.S. President Donald Trump’s decision to recognise the city as Israel’s capital. The final outcome should force the U.S. to rethink its move, with 128 of the UNGA’s 193 member-countries voting for the resolution, and only nine against it. Among those voting for the resolution that “deeply regretted” the U.S. decision were its NATO allies, Germany, the U.K. and France, its Asian allies Japan and South Korea; its closest neighbours Canada and Mexico chose merely to abstain. The overwhelming majority ignored Mr. Trump and his UN Ambassador Nikki Haley’s threats that all countries that defied America would be ‘named and shamed’ and face cancellation of U.S. aid. The suggestion was that the U.S. would exact its revenge by refusing to support these countries when they next need it at the UN. Israel showed deep derision for the world body, which Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu referred to as a “house of lies”, while his UN envoy called the 128 countries “puppets forced to dance”. Such threats and epithets mark new lows in international diplomacy, and Israel and the U.S. come away looking like churlish bullies for issuing them. With all its weaknesses, the UN is a global collective, and it is imperative to acknowledge its mandate when such a large number of nations speak in one voice. The U.S. only recently asserted its intention to uphold the international rules-based order in its National Security Strategy document. It cannot now just walk away from both UN resolutions and its national commitment to the Israel-Palestine peace process by unilaterally changing its stand on the status of Jerusalem, without being accused of doublespeak.

By voting for the resolution, India has affirmed its traditional policy in favour of a negotiated settlement for Jerusalem as part of a larger two-state solution for Israel and Palestine. Although Prime Minister Narendra Modi avoided mentioning the contours of the settlement during his visit to Jerusalem in July this year, India’s support to the creation of a Palestinian state according to UN Resolution 181 (1948) was heavily underscored in his statement to the UN in November, just days before Mr. Trump’s decision. There had been some speculation that in the face of the U.S. threats over the resolution, as well as Mr. Netanyahu’s impending visit to India in January, India would dilute its support to those principles in favour of close strategic ties with both nations. In choosing to vote for the resolution at the UNGA, India has shown a clarity of purpose that also aligns with the broad global consensus.

Another fodder jolt: on Lalu Prasad's conviction

wenty years on, the Bihar fodder scam is still hounding Rashtriya Janata Dal leader Lalu Prasad. In 1997, he had to resign as Chief Minister after being charged with involvement in a conspiracy to fraudulently withdraw money from the treasury to pay non-existent suppliers of livestock feed. In 2013, he was sentenced to a five-year prison term in a case relating to the withdrawal of ₹37 crore from the Chaibasa district treasury. He remains disqualified from electoral contest as a result of that conviction, although he was granted bail by the Supreme Court in December 2013. His conviction on Saturday by a Central Bureau of Investigation court relates to withdrawals worth ₹84.50 lakh between 1994 and 1996 from the Deogarh treasury. As it has been established even in earlier trials that a large-scale scam had taken place in the name of purchasing fodder for cattle, any more convictions in one or more of the many cases spread across Bihar and Jharkhand will come as no surprise. Mr. Prasad had failed to convince the Supreme Court earlier this year that repeatedly trying him in respect of the treasury withdrawals in different districts violated his constitutional protection against double jeopardy. The court has ruled that different transactions ought to be established independently, even if the acts of embezzlement arose out of an overarching conspiracy. As Mr. Prasad awaits his sentence, which will be known on January 3, he is already in jail, along with 15 others. Instead of one, he now has two convictions against his name. He has to wait until a higher court exonerates him in both before he can regain eligibility to contest elections...

Mr. Prasad’s political fortunes have been fluctuating. He could take credit for the victory of the grand alliance of the RJD, the Janata Dal (United) and the Congress in the November 2015 Assembly election in Bihar, but that unity was short-lived. It was an allegation that went back to Mr. Prasad’s days as Railway Minister that ruptured the ties between his party and Chief Minister Nitish Kumar of the JD(U). Mr. Prasad and his family members were named in a First Information Report filed by the CBI that claimed that his wife Rabri Devi and son Tejaswi Yadav received a prime piece of property in Patna as a quid pro quo for a contract to develop and run two railway hotels. With Tejaswi Yadav refusing to resign as Deputy Chief Minister, Mr. Kumar quickly switched over to the BJP-led camp, to govern without the RJD’s support. This meant that Mr. Prasad’s influence as the leader of an 80-member legislature party was not as game-changing as it had appeared to be when the Mahagathbandhan was formed as an anti-Bharatiya Janata Party front in 2014. It may be too early to write off Mr. Prasad, who is perceived by some sections as a bulwark against communalism, but as the ghosts of the murky past return, his immediate political future looks bleaker. This jolt may not send him to political oblivion yet, but it may be one from which he will not recover easily.