In Focus by The Hindu The Hindu

Seven months into Israel’s military assault on Gaza, more than 34,000 Palestinian civilians have been killed, more than 78,000 wounded, and northern Gaza is facing a “full-blown famine” according to the UN. Earlier this week, there was a slight whiff of optimism in Gaza when Hamas announced that it had accepted a three-phase ceasefire proposal brokered by Qatar and Egypt, and Israel, too, sent a delegation to Cairo to discuss it further.
But in the interim, Israel ordered Rafah to be evacuated, launched aerial strikes on the city, and took control of the border crossing there, which was critical for sending humanitarian aid to Gaza. Meanwhile, President Biden has halted a major shipment of bombs headed for Israel, signalling that US weapons should not be used to target Palestinian civilians.
What exactly was the ceasefire proposal that Hamas accepted but Israel didn’t? Will the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s political future survive a ceasefire agreement at this stage of the conflict, when Israel’s self-proclaimed military objective of “destroying Hamas” hasn’t been met? Would the Biden administration’s pausing of the shipment of offensive weapons have any effect on Israel’s military plans going forward?

Guest: Stanly Johny, The Hindu’s International Affairs Editor.
Host: G. Sampath, Social Affairs Editor, The Hindu.
Edited by Sharmada Venkatasubramanian.

The delay by the Election Commission (EC) in sharing the aggregate polling data of the first and second phases of the ongoing Lok Sabha elections has evoked sharp questions from the Opposition and civil society. The EC released the final voter turnout figures for phase 1 after 11 days, and for phase 2 after four days. Moreover, it has only released turnout percentages – 66.14% in Phase 1 and 66.71% in phase 2. It is yet to release the actual numbers of voters who cast their vote.

The Election Commission has also not put out the absolute number of voters in each constituency, raising disturbing questions about the possibility of manipulation at the counting stage. Another issue that has been flagged is the sizeable difference in turnout figures between the close of polling day, and the date of announcement of final voter percentages.

So, what has traditionally been the EC’s practice with regard to sharing of electoral data? How much time is it supposed to take? What kinds of data does it share as a matter of course? And are the concerns about vote manipulation at the counting stage valid or misplaced?

G. Sampath is joined by MG Devasahayam, a former IAS officer who is also Coordinator, Citizens Commission on Elections.

A massive controversy has erupted in the world of spices, masalas and mixes, with products of two leading Indian players, MDH and Everest in the midst of this. The Hong Kong and Singapore governments suspended the sale and withdrew certain masalas of these two brands, stating that they contained higher than permissible limits of a pesticide, ethylene oxide. Multiple governments of other countries have now announced investigations into these products from India. After this, the Spices Board and the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India, or FSSAI announced a slew of measures for spices as well as other foods, to test for contamination and to ensure they are up to standards. 
In the meantime though, the FSSAI has been under criticism for another issue – the allowing of a ten-fold increase in maximum residue limit from 0.01 milligrams per kg to 0.1 in spices and herbs, in cases of pesticides not registered in India or in cases where the maximum limit is not defined in Indian or international regulations. 
What is going on with pesticides and masalas in India? How unsafe are the foods, especially processed foods that are sold in India? What are the regulations we have in place, and how effectively are these being implemented? Do we need a more stringent system to ensure food safety and public health in India? 

Guest: Dr Vandana Prasad, a community paediatrician and public health professional associated with the Public Health Resource Network 
Host: Zubeda Hamid 
Edited by Sharmada Venkatasubramanian. 

Political parties are in full campaign mode in India. There are three days to go for the third phase of polling as this podcast is being recorded. Campaign themes are more than evident as June 4 – the day for results – is exactly a month away. 
None other than Prime Minister Narendra Modi has launched scathing attacks on the Congress saying that it will take away SC, ST and OBC reservation quotas and hand it over to the Muslims. No such promise has been made in the Congress manifesto. 
Again, the Prime Minister in Gujarat said that if you have two buffalos, the Congress will take away one if it comes to power. Again, he said this was in the Congress manifesto. Again, such a promise is not to be found in the manifesto document. 
Pakistan has also re-entered the BJP’s campaign themes while Opposition parties are attacking the ruling party at the Centre on a range of issues. Nilanjan Mukhopadhyay joins us to discuss some of these issues and their implications for Indian democracy.

The Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India (IRDAI) has asked health insurance companies to offer their products to everyone, regardless of their age. Until now, health insurance was readily available for anyone up to the age of 65, with companies under no obligation to cover those older. But now IRDAI has said insurance firms can extend their health coverage to everyone regardless of their pre-existing medical conditions.
Both these changes are part of a wider set of reforms under the long term goal of “Insurance for All by 2047”, and they have mostly been welcomed as a positive development.
But there is always the fine print, and questions remain about how these measures will pan out in real life. Health coverage tends to get more expensive with age. Will senior citizens be able to afford the packages designed by private insurers? What do the norms say regarding the ‘waiting period’ for pre-existing conditions? And will these measures be enough to reduce out-of-pocket medical expenditure, which is one of the highest in the world in India?

Guest: Professor T Sundararaman, a public health expert, who has served as Executive Director of National Health Systems Resource Centre and as Dean and Professor at the School of Health Systems Studies at the Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS), Mumbai.
Host: G. Sampath, Social Affairs Editor, The Hindu.
Edited by Sharmada Venkatasubramanian.

In a setback to the Opposition INDIA alliance in Delhi, which is basically the alliance between the Congress and the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), Delhi Pradesh Congress Committee President Arvinder Singh Lovely has resigned from his post, and one of the reasons he has cited is his party’s tie-up with AAP.

Lovely’s resignation letter has put the spotlight on what is widely recognised as a big contradiction – an alliance between the Congress party, and a party that came into being to combat the kind of political decadence that the Congress allegedly represented. In fact, AAP leader Arvind Kejriwal has spent much of the last ten years targeting the Congress more than any other party, and in turn, the Delhi state leadership of the Congress has spent much of its energies targeting AAP. Furthermore, it is the Congress that’s the original complainant in the alleged liquor scam case that has landed Kejriwal in jail.

So, how does this alliance square with the founding credo of the Aam Aadmi Party? How can AAP explain this alliance to its supporters? Given that the two parties have suddenly found ‘anti-BJPism’ more attractive as a political plank than anti-corruption, does this alliance then indicate that the founders of AAP – several of whom are currently in jail on corruption charges – were fundamentally wrong in their understanding of political corruption?

G. Sampath is joined by Prashant Bhushan, Supreme Court advocate and a former leader with AAP.