The lockdown is hard for women with disability

As a girl of 15, Nidhi Goyal wanted to be a portrait artist. Then she became visually-challenged, and turned to activism. “I was 16,” she says about losing sight to a rare genetic condition called retinitis pigmentosa. “It was a struggle and I was slipping into depression until I looked at my own privilege.” She then decided to “do something about it”.

Now 34, the Mumbai-based founder and director of Rising Flame, a non-profit committed to changing the lives of people, especially women and girls with disabilities, finds herself on the UN Women executive director’s civil society advisory group and president of the Association of Women’s Rights in Development.

Before the coronavirus disease (Covid-19) upended the world, women with disabilities were undergoing their own lockdown, invisible and shut out from the rest of the world. Now, the walls are closing in. “Women with disability have been fighting to get out of their houses as their families worry about letting them navigate alone,” says Goyal. “Now, we are under lockdown again.”

Many of the problems are not unique to women, but apply to all people with disabilities. In some cases, caregivers are not able to reach those who depend on them. Access to medicine and groceries is difficult. Therapy and rehabilitation are on hold. And how do you even begin to practise social distancing if you need help to wash your hands?

But Covid-19 has also reinforced what many people with disabilities believe: They are invisible to society. When policymakers talk about vulnerable people, they refer to older populations and those with underlying conditions like diabetes. People with disabilities have not always specifically been included as vulnerable. “When there’s a crisis, who do we forget? Those we always forget,” says Goyal.

This exclusion is evident also in the global discussion on a spike in domestic violence during the lockdown. But how many women with disabilities face violence at home? Nobody knows. How do you reach them? No one has a clue.

According to the International Disability Alliance, one in five women lives with some form of disability, with an inordinate proportion in developing countries among low-income groups. These women face layers of prejudice that stem from gender, poverty, a lack of education and social prejudice. Often denied sexual and reproductive rights, they are at greater risk of sexual assault and violence.

To counter some of this sense of despair and isolation, Rising Flame has, through every Saturday in April, organised “house parties” (Vella Panti). These have included, a book reading session, movies and podcasts. “It was important for us to remind the community they are not alone,” says Goyal.

The fear, once Covid-19 is behind us, is that the “new normal” might for disabled women end up being the old normal where they struggle to be heard. “I’m concerned that marginalised groups that have always been left out will be excluded again,” says Goyal. “It’s time we took matters in our hand

India is safe for all Indians, across faiths

At the dawn of the enlightenment era in Europe, traditionalists were divided into two camps. One camp believed that universal laws are unchangeable and hence they should be considered supreme. The other camp of traditionalists insisted that since god is omniscient and omnipotent, only he is supreme. This second camp had spearheaded the anti-enlightenment campaign and become anti-West and anti-modernity. The West and modernity are not the same. But traditionalists continued to reject both because they are seen as going against their belief of the omnipotence of god. Such orthodoxy can be found in eastern religions too, but they largely believe in the omnipresence of the divine. Hence, they regard universal laws to be divine also.

In the present coronavirus pandemic context, I am invoking this to highlight “God will save us” propaganda of some ill-informed religious leaders. The challenge today is not in tracking down Maulana Saad Kandhalvi, the head of the Tablighi Jamaat’s Nizamuddin Markaz. The real challenge is to encourage an unknown number of participants at the Markaz event in March who are hiding in different places, including in some mosques, to come forward. Several of them are foreigners. A number of participants at the Markaz tested positive and are undergoing treatment. But the remaining ones, who refuse to come out for voluntary testing, are a threat not only to themselves, but to the community and beyond.

Besides the misplaced orthodoxy of the omniscience and omnipotence of god and the propaganda of a conspiracy against Islam, the other factor that is preventing these participants from coming out is the stigmatisation of the coronavirus disease (Covid-19). But this is misplaced. It is just a virus for which the vaccine is yet to be found.

Stigmatisation in the individual context will result in suffering for the individual. But if the stigma is extended to a community or a religion, it leads to larger consequences. Recall what happened in Italy. The initial stigmatisation of the Chinese as the carriers of the virus led to a reaction among the liberals of voluntary hugging and deliberate intermixing with the Chinese. The mayor of Florence, Dario Nardella, launched a “Hug a Chinese” campaign on February 1. While there is no conclusive evidence to show that the campaign was responsible for the rise of Covid-19 in Italy, it was an ill-conceived campaign at a time when social distancing should have been the norm.

There will be a conservative reaction to stigmatisation too. If a community is blamed for it, then the reaction would be further ghettoisation. The radicals will get an upper hand. Those trying to communalise the discourse must understand this. What Maulana Saad did was akin to what Dario did in Florence. Around the time that the Markaz event was being held, people had voluntarily refrained from celebrating the most boisterous of all festivals like Holi. Prime Minister Narendra Modi had taken the initiative of cancelling Holi celebrations at his residence. Many other festivals such as Baisakhi, Bihu and Vishu were all converted into private events. The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) cancelled its annual conclave of over 1,500 delegates in the second week of March for the first time in its history. But Maulana Saad decided to go ahead, and his decision had consequences.

His thoughtless actions are what the majority of Indians are condemning. Efforts are on to locate and encourage the participants and those who subsequently came in contact with them to come forward for voluntary testing. Just as the Markaz and Maulana Saad don’t represent the entire Muslim community, a few reckless rants spewing venom against Muslims on social media don’t represent Indian society. It is here that the campaign about Islamophobia becomes misplaced and intriguing.

Teaching tolerance to India is like carrying coals to Newcastle. Close to 200 million Muslims live in India. They live in peace, enjoying equal, if not preferential, treatment. No Indian leader has endorsed communal propaganda. Prime Minister Narendra Modi has upheld the unity of 1.3 billion Indians. The RSS chief, Mohan Bhagwat, said: “If some people, out of fear or anger, refuse to follow the guidelines, it shouldn’t lead to blaming of their entire community”.

He also decried efforts to create a wedge between the communities by cautioning, “Some people will use this anger to divide the nation. We shouldn’t allow that to happen. Every sensible member should come forward to encourage their respective communities to follow the rules”.

India is safe for all its 1.3 billion people, including Muslims. We are all together in this fight against the virus. Unfortunately, we also face a challenge from a growing breed of “Modiphobes”. Many of them are Indian. For them, the removal of Article 370, which was applicable to Muslims, Hindus and Buddhists in Jammu and Kashmir, becomes an anti-Muslim act. The Citizenship (Amendment) Act, which doesn’t affect a single Indian, becomes anti-Muslim. This is because they are blinded by their hatred for Modi and so attempt to build a false narrative. And many well-meaning people end up falling for this

India is staring at a crisis greater than Covid-19. It is time to open up

India has extended the national lockdown — but admittedly, with a range of relaxations across zones. But the government should have been more liberal in its opening up. Other than the key districts in the severely hit red zones, which are still struggling with a high percentage of coronavirus cases (Covid-19), the rest of the country needed to be given space to breathe again.

If there is one conclusion, I have drawn from travelling across the breadth of six states for close to 50 days, it is this. A greater calamity than Covid-19 — humanitarian, social and economic — is imminent if a uniformly imposed lockdown is continued any further.

This is not to argue that the initial clampdown and enforced physical distancing did not serve its purpose. Data scientists have confirmed that the number of infections would have been substantially higher had the decision not been taken to effectively shut down the nation.

But five weeks on, we know that, to start with, India is a global outlier in the number of fatalities from the pandemic. Immunologists such as Dr Siddhartha Mukherjee say the scientific reasons for this are unclear. Others such as Kiran Mazumdar Shaw of Biocon argue that it may be our demographics (we are a distinctly younger nation) or our previous exposure to zoonotic viruses. Whatever the reasons, the present death rate is not higher than that of other diseases that claim Indian lives every day. On the contrary, if you look at the fact that 1,300 Indians die from tuberculosis (TB) every day, and as many from cancer, the fatality rate of the coronavirus so far does not even come remotely close.

In the meantime, apart from the impoverishment of migrant workers and the ignominy they have been subjected to, there are other grave crises emerging. Key among them is the lack of access to health care for poor citizens. In Agra, I met with the family of RV Singh Pundhir, a retired middle-class resident with a chronic kidney disease, who was denied his scheduled weekly dialysis. He was asked to get tested for the virus first. By the time his result came (he tested negative), he died. In Aligarh, I met five young girls who cremated their father, a poor tea vendor and long-term TB patient. He could not get an ambulance or medical intervention in time. Similar stories have emerged across states, including in Delhi, Haryana and Punjab. Several public hospitals have been converted into Covid-19-only facilities, and are thus off-limits for patients. Beds may be reserved for poor patients in private hospitals, but travel to India’s smaller towns and you will find many of these hospitals non-operational. Personnel are either not showing up to work or the fear of criminal action in the case of Covid-19 cases emanating from their premises has made several institutes wary.

As we wait to return to life, the biggest gear shift needed is in that of attitude. While aggressive contact tracing and quarantine are still essential, we cannot treat testing positive as a doomsday scenario. Up until now, we have been shutting down entire entities — housing societies, hospitals, factories, workplaces — if even one person tests positive. Instead, science tells us to isolate the individual and those who came into direct contact with her; not to throw the baby out with the bath water. If every positive case triggers panic, we shall never be able to rebuild our lives or our nation.

There are bigger problems now to tackle: How to kickstart the economy should have all our attention. If we do not send workers back to their villages with dignity, a reverse migration by them could mean that factories will find it impossible to reopen. And let’s not forget that millions of Indian children have been edged out of the school system as classes go online. Only 27% of Indian homes have one member with access to the Internet, according to National Sample Survey Office data of 2014.

As Adar Poonawalla, the chief executive officer of India’s Serum Institute, which is working on producing a Covid-19 vaccine, points out, the biggest flaw in a uniformly imposed lockdown is that it quarantines healthy people. We have to nuance our approach; what’s needed is not a sledgehammer that clamps down, but a sieve that sifts those who really need medical help from those who can just stay at home for a fortnight and get better.

The present paranoia is ironically preventing people from testing. Private laboratories in the Capital confirm that the twin fears of societal stigma and being placed in an inhospitable quarantine centre are making people hesitant to test. In other words, the more we treat coronavirus victims as criminals instead of mundane contractors of a disease, the tougher it will be for India to fight the pandemic effectively.

Five weeks of the lockdown has served its purpose. It has also served its time. The lockdown must ease. More of this will be a cure worse than the disease.

Towards a graded exit,,The relaxations are positive. But the economy needs help

•  

Never before in history, anywhere in the world, has a country of India’s population, size, and social and economic complexity shut down for 54 days. On Friday, the government extended the lockdown, which was supposed to end on May 3, for another two weeks, but with significant relaxations. This is more a graded exit plan spread over two weeks than a blanket extension of a hard lockdown. But it has been done without commensurate economic stimulus and a relief package, exposing a gap in India’s governance systems.

This newspaper supported and called for a national lockdown in March. Given what was then known about the coronavirus disease (Covid-19), social distancing was the only way to slow down the rate of the spread of the infection. And while it is impossible to know the extent to which the disease would have spread in the absence of the national lockdown, it can be said with certainty that if more human-to-human interaction was allowed, India would be staring at far higher numbers today. This period has also been used to ramp up testing (though it needs to increase even more); create Covid-19 facilities; come to a consensus on an effective model to deal with the disease; and strengthen the health care infrastructure of the country. This model of “ruthless containment” relies on testing, isolation and quarantine.

The calibrated exit is also welcome. It would have been impractical, even dangerous to have everything start up all at once. Even in the so-called red zones, enough activities have been allowed, albeit with an emphasis on safeguards. But what is perplexing is the delay in announcing an economic package. No country — even with the most resources — could have coped with a lockdown of this magnitude and the shocks to the supply chains and demand, and the impact on unemployment. India’s weak growth even before the lockdown started, and an inordinate, almost inexplicable, delay in announcing a comprehensive fiscal stimulus to support economic activity has been a glaring weakness — and the economic cost of this is being incurred every day by a range of stakeholders. The government must address this immediately, as India prepares to slowly return to business...

Pranam

Viruses don’t respect borders. Come together

Global efforts to fight the coronavirus disease (Covid-19) have come to a critical point. Solidarity and cooperation are the most powerful weapons against the disease. The ferocity of this highly infectious, fast-spreading pandemic has rarely been seen in the past. Facing this unprecedented challenge, no country has the perfect solution. Countries are striving to explore the most effective measures based on their national situations. What is needed most in this process is mutual respect, understanding and cooperation.

China was the first to report the outbreak and stand up to this challenge. We established a centralised and efficient command system, undertook comprehensive and thorough control and lockdown measures, and tried our best to prevent the epidemic from spreading. Medical and community workers, volunteers and others made great sacrifices in the fight against the epidemic. China has been releasing information and sharing the viral genome sequences. Since the outbreak, we have updated information daily and held nearly 200 press conferences to disseminate information about the government’s efforts.

Meanwhile, China offered proposals for global cooperation to overcome the challenge. At the extraordinary G20 leaders’ summit on Covid-19, President Xi Jinping set out four proposals for a global war against the virus, forging a collective response for control and treatment, supporting international organisations in playing active roles, and strengthening macroeconomic policy coordination.

China has provided support to the international community, working closely with the United Nations, the World Health Organization and other organisations. We have had 83 medical experts on video conferences with 153 countries, and sent 14 medical teams to 12 countries that were facing a difficult situation. We have also provided over 140 countries and international organisations with medical supplies, and signed commercial procurement contracts with more than 60 countries and organisations. What we have done is based on the belief of building a community with a shared future for humankind in keeping with China’s tradition of reciprocation.

China and India have maintained communication and cooperation on epidemic prevention and control. Prime Minister Narendra Modi sent a letter of condolence to President Xi. The leaders attended the G20 summit on Covid-19. State councillor and foreign minister Wang Yi had conversations with external affairs minister S Jaishankar twice, exchanging views on anti-epidemic cooperation.

This reminds me of the touching stories of Dr DS Kotnis, who went to China to support the war of resistance against Japanese aggression and died there. This year marks the 110th birth anniversary of Dr Kotnis. We must carry forward his spirit of internationalism and cooperate in fighting the epidemic. At a critical moment in China’s battle against the pandemic, the Indian government provided medical supplies to China. Indians have shown their support in various ways.

Since the outbreak in India, China shared its experiences in epidemic prevention, control and treatment with India through video conferences. As sister provinces and cities, Guangdong province and Chongqing city have, respectively, donated medical materials to Gujarat and Chennai. Alibaba, Fosun and other Chinese enterprises and charities have assisted India with medical supplies such as protective masks, suits, medical gloves and ventilators. China has provided India with assistance for its commercial procurement in China. The civil aviation administration of China has opened a “green channel” and approved 35 new Indian cargo flights to deliver medical supplies.

Viruses respect no borders, and epidemics do not distinguish between races. Only by working together can we win this battle. Finger-pointing or scapegoating is not the way. Such moves will divide the international community, lead to prejudice against specific ethnic groups and hurt the shared interests of the world. We must reject all ideological biases and attempts at labelling the virus, politicising the response, and stigmatising any specific country.

India is fighting the pandemic under the leadership of PM Modi. The Indian government has taken a series of decisive and strict prevention and control measures which have delivered positive outcomes. India’s victory in this is of great significance to the global fight against Covid-19.

As a friend, neighbour and partner, we sincerely wish India success. China and India are ancient civilisations with populations accounting for nearly 40% of the world. China is willing to work together with India to win this battle, safeguard global and regional public health security, and contribute to greater care for our common homeland.

A road map for India’s exit from the lockdown

Prime Minister (PM) Narendra Modi is in an unenviable position. Many state governments and most commentators want the lockdown to continue as new cases mount, including in areas hitherto free from the coronavirus pandemic.

Mathematically, even with the rate of doubling going up to over 11 days, because of the large numbers, or base effect in statistics, new cases will continue to increase substantially. At the same time, there is the issue of the livelihoods of over 400 million persons; many above the poverty line are liable to slip back due to the income shock of lost earnings.

Approximately 65% of the Indian economy is in the unorganised sector. What makes the situation worse is that over 90% of the workforce is informal with limited welfare entitlements. In fact, but for the Jan Dhan Yojana (cash transfer measures that have benefitted around 350 million people, including farmers, rural workers, poor pensioners, construction workers, low-income widows) and Ayushman Bharat (free medical cover up to ~500,000 for 40% of the population), India would have been facing a catastrophic situation. However, in the absence of a universal basic income or unemployment benefits, the economy, which is now operating at around 40%, must be restarted to provide income for the vulnerable population, and prevent millions of others from falling between the cracks.

The key question that PM Modi faces is how to unwind the lockdown without endangering the lives of millions of Indians. One of the co-authors of this piece (Maurice Kugler), along with a colleague, developed six options for the United States (US), and we attempt to apply these to India.

The surest way of controlling the pandemic is to keep the shutdown going till a vaccine is developed and the entire population immunised. The second option is for it to be eased off gradually, and as the curve flattens, its health and economic trade-offs both fall in the mid-range. The third option is a more aggressive version of the second, allowing for greater opening, but retaining the possibility of reintroducing a complete lockdown if the infection rate picks up. Under the fourth option, antibody tests are to be carried out and those who are immune can be allowed to move around freely. Under the fifth option, the entire population is to be tested once every two weeks. The sixth option requires contact tracing and widespread testing where cases are detected.

The first is not an option that India can afford as it would likely take 12-18 months for the vaccine to be available. Similarly, the fourth and fifth options can be ruled out for financial and logistical reasons and non-availability of enough test kits.

The trouble with the third option is that while its health costs are probably lower than the second, economic recovery would be more uncertain and distant. The outcomes could be volatile. It could leave policymakers with little room to manoeuvre and lessen their credibility with the people.

The only viable route for India would be to roll out a modified second option, allowing for greater opening faster, but with strict protection measures, along with the sixth option. Since the virus has a demographic preference (infants and the aged), an alternative is to keep these age-groups locked down. This is not possible in the Indian context, and the best way is to use geography as a determinant. This approach has already started in India with the identification of hotspot localities — the district is too large a geographical area to be a viable unit of disaggregation and would unnecessarily penalise millions.

The other is contact tracing backed by mass testing, if any positive case is identified. In reality, hotspots, as a concept, have limitations and we should be looking for “hot” persons. Therefore, the use of Aarogya Setu, and the procurement of adequate testing kits, personal protective equipment, and ventilators (including from domestic sources) has to be stepped up by an order of magnitude. Contact tracing is not going to be easy with even Singapore failing to get 20% of its population enrolled. But India has no option.

However, India’s imminent emergence from the lockdown will only be meaningful if the government and the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) adopt extraordinary and unorthodox policies. India should not worry about a one-time large fiscal deficit, and instead, carry out structural reforms in agriculture (open up markets, bring in forward trading) and industry (make acquiring land easier, encourage hiring, simplify taxation systems).

Similarly, despite the RBI loosening up monetary policy, banks will not be able to step up lending because of existing high-levels of non-performing assets. Learning from the US Federal Reserve, which is directly buying below-investment level corporate bonds, the RBI, with the government, should create a public sector entity that can pick up part of the equity of micro, small and medium enterprises that are otherwise sound, deploying their capital to reduce their term loans. Once companies recover, the equity held can be sold and costs recovered, where feasible.

The joint roll-out of the second and sixth options and the adoption of aggressive fiscal and monetary policies should enable India to ride out the worst of the pandemic, setting the stage for economic recovery later in the year.

The passing away of an iconRishi Kapoor belonged to a film family. But he stood apart for his sheer talent.

When Rishi Kapoor first emerged on the big screen — playing a young student who fell in love with his teacher in Mera Naam Joker — his acting talent was noted and he won a national award. But he also evoked curiosity for his lineage — he was Raj Kapoor’s son and Prithvi Raj Kapoor’s grandson. Belonging to what many may consider Bombay cinema’s first family is what gave Rishi Kapoor the opportunity to enter the world of cinema.

But it is truly a testament to his acting prowess that Kapoor so quickly outgrew this element of his identity. With Bobby, and a range of other romantic films in the 1970s, he emerged as a film icon with his own independent identity, loved by fans, particularly women, and praised by critics for his timing. He excelled in both, films where he was the solo star, as well as in multi-starrers. But Kapoor’s biggest strength was his ability to evolve. After a somewhat rough patch in the 1990s and an indifferent attempt at direction, he found his niche playing character roles of his age. Be it as the hero’s father or elderly friend, or an underground don, or middle-class protagonist, or most powerfully, a Muslim in contemporary India (Mulk), Kapoor brought his distinctive touch to each role. Admirers also got to know the man behind the actor through his outspoken tweets in recent years.

Kapoor’s death — he had been battling cancer — on Thursday and the outpouring of grief it evoked is a testament to how much he meant to so many people. He has left behind an incredible body of work spanning close to five decades. But few things made him more proud than his son, Ranbir Kapoor’s, success. The family tradition will live on, but Rishi Kapoor will stand apart.