India

On August 13, Ibrahim el-Zakzaky arrived in India to receive medical treatment. Three days later, he returned to Nigeria having refused medical treatment. Upon his return, he was placed under arrest. He found his treatment in New Delhi to be unsatisfactory and objected to the tight security arrangements that had been put in place. He and some of his followers are claiming that the United States was behind his perceived poor treatment in India. Sheikh Ibrahim el-Zakzaky is a charismatic Shia preacher and founder of the Islamic Movement of Nigeria (IMN). He has been in government custody since 2015, though he has yet to face a trial. He is accused of inciting an attack on a military convoy; the incident led to the death of over three hundred IMN members, and to his and his wife’s arrest. Periodic IMN protests over his detention have sometimes led to deadly clashes with security services.  Not only is there no credible evidence of any American involvement in Zakzaky’s travel to India for medical treatment and his subsequent return, it is hard to think of anything less probable. The United States has no interests at stake in the nature of Zakzaky’s treatment. However, the notion that the United States has somehow manipulated the situation so that Zakzaky has not received the medical treatment he needs and deserves has become an urban legend in some Nigerian circles. Where the story of American involvement came from is not known. However, Iran is a credible hypothesis. Iran has long supported Zakzaky, and has provided him with funds. Given the poor bilateral relationship between Iran and the Trump administration, it is easy to imagine that some Iranian elements looked to exploit Zakzaky’s medical treatment (or the lack thereof) to score points against the United States.  Why have some elements in Nigeria bought in to the story of alleged American interference? Conspiracy theories about almost everything are common in Nigeria. So, too, is the sense that the United States is so powerful that it could certainly manipulate Zakzaky’s medical treatment in a third country with which Washington has good relations. Some Nigerians also have an exaggerated view of the importance of Nigerian developments in American official circles. Apparently, Zakzaky himself believes there was American involvement. This is not particularly surprising. He is hostile to the West, to secularism, and, at times to any Washington administration. He also knows that the bilateral relationship between the Trump and Buhari administrations is good. Hence alleged American involvement in his New Delhi adventures is convenient.

In August, the ailing Sheikh Ibrahim el-Zakzaky and his wife, who have been in government custody since 2015, were allowed to receive medical attention abroad. He touched down in Delhi on August 13. His visit has been mired in controversy.  Zakzaky, the founder and leader of the Shia Islamic Movement of Nigeria (IMN), is a headache for the Buhari administration. He had been imprisoned following a clash between security services and an IMN procession in 2015, which led to the deaths of hundreds of his followers and some members of his family. A raid on his home then led to his arrest. During the raid, he and his wife were injured, apparently severely, and there had been concern that the injuries would be lethal. Since then, he has been in government custody. Authorities insist that he and his wife have been receiving medical attention. Zakzaky has never been tried, and there have been regular IMN demonstrations calling for his release, often accompanied by bloodshed. In April and October 2018, and July 2019, there were deadly clashes with the security services. President Buhari overruled conditions imposed by the Kaduna state government regarding Zakzaky’s travel abroad for medical treatment. The site of Zakzaky and his wife’s arrest was Zaria, in Kaduna state, but the federal, not state, government has maintained custody over them. Apparently, Iran had been applying pressure on the Nigerian government regarding Zakzaky’s detention, and that played a role in the decision to allow him medical travel. Spokespeople for the Nigerian government, the Indian High Commissioner in Abuja, and the IMN have made contradictory statements about the visit. The heart of the matter appears to be that Zakzaky wanted freedom of movement and association in India. In other words, he viewed his arrival in India as a release from captivity, and that he could resume his political activity. The Nigerian view appears to be that he was in India solely for medical treatment, as, apparently his visa status dictates. A Nigerian government spokesman says he demanded to be taken to a hotel, rather than a hospital, and he has vociferously objected to being surrounded by security personnel. Whether the security is Nigerian or Indian is unclear from the reporting; there are also conflicting reports about whether the Nigerian and Indian security are cooperating. Zakzaky is saying that his situation in India is worse than it was in Nigeria, complaining about the level of security he has around him, his freedom of movement, and his ability to choose his doctors. He says he will go back to Nigeria; in reply, Nigerian spokesmen are saying that when he returns, he will be subject to prosecution. It appears that he and his wife are not now undergoing medical treatment. In an audio he made and released to his Nigerian followers on August 14, he says that he and his wife have bullets and shrapnel in their bodies that must be removed.  Zakzaky is a charismatic preacher with followers ranging from a few hundred thousand to millions. He advocates the overthrow of the Nigerian state and the establishment of a Shia republic similar to that of Iran. Iran has provided him and the IMN with diplomatic support and, it is widely believed, a significant financial subsidy. By and large, the Shia are despised by the Sunni Nigerian establishment, many of whom have close ties to Saudi Arabia. IMN processions and parades often have led to bloodshed when security services become involved. Each side blames the other for instigating conflict, but the security services appear to have been consistently heavy-handed in dealing with the Shia. At present, Zakzaky does not advocate violence.  There must be a concern that the Shia will be radicalized, perhaps by security service abuse, perhaps by Zakzaky’s death in custody. But the government’s decision to allow Zakzaky to travel for health reasons, though the outcome is not yet clear, was a long overdue but important first step. 

A turn toward Pakistan and away from India, as well as a race for the exits from Afghanistan, would be unwise.

The Indian government’s surprise move to strip autonomy from part of Kashmir heightens tensions with Pakistan over the disputed region.

Welcome to “Women Around the World: This Week,” a series that highlights noteworthy news related to women and U.S. foreign policy. This week’s post, covering July 22 to August 1, was compiled by Alexandra Bro, Mallory Matheson, and Rebecca Turkington.

Tough issues in diplomacy can't be solved on the fly, and require careful attention to the facts and to history.

Yesterday news broke that Pakistani police had arrested Hafiz Saeed, founder of the UN- and U.S.-designated terrorist group Lashkar-e-Taiba.

This week: Huawei anticipating a revenue hit amid continued U.S. crackdown; Facebook announced new cryptocurrency; reported U.S. cyber attacks on Russia’s power grid; Apple considering shifting supply chain out of China; and India to review data storage laws   

Arjun Reddy is an intern with the international economics program at the Council on Foreign Relations.  In the 1960s and 70s, India—and much of the developing world outside of sub-Saharan Africa—underwent an agriculture transformation called the Green Revolution. The development of high yield varieties of maize, wheat, and rice combined with the introduction of chemical fertilizer, expansion of irrigation infrastructures, and use of modern management techniques led to an explosion in agricultural productivity, arguably saving a billion lives. Today, the agricultural industry only contributes 15 percent of India’s GDP. Other sectors, especially services, have made up much of the growth in the Indian economy over the last few decades. The agricultural industry remains so important in India because it employs around 44 percent of India's working population, forming, by far, the largest industry in terms of employment. In 2018, farmers around the country protested the low food prices, export curbs, and anti-inflation policies that were devastating their livelihoods. Waves of farmer suicides also drew attention to mounting agrarian distress. The inefficiencies of farms in India is well documented, but the ways that farmers go to market also presents opportunities for improvement. The government’s original solution for farmers to move their produce down the supply chain was through selling to ‘mandis’—a Hindi word for market. In most states, mandis were created after various states wrote their own Agricultural Produce Market Committee (APMC) acts. These acts created physical marketplaces where farmers (or private actors who purchased from farmers) could bring their produce to sell to licensed agents. These agents were supposed to be paid on commission by bringing goods to auction for traders in the mandi who, in turn, eventually sold to distributors. In practice, however, traders at these mandis notoriously employ methods to cheat farmers, through means such as rigged weighing machines, poor auction transparency, and unauthorized charges. Agents also often act as creditors and purchase crops at low prices from farmers as a form of repayment, thereby skirting the regulations. This, combined with high input costs, often trap farmers in debt spirals, with farmer debt-to-asset ratios increasing 23 percent between 1992 and 2013. Mandis also have poor storage infrastructure and high participation fees representing costs passed on to both farmers and end consumers. Due to weak government oversight, mandis—which were set up to help farmers—instead often act as a cartel-like monopsonists, extracting profits from farmers and consumers alike. Beginning in the early 2000s, these abuses led many states to attempt to reform the mandi system. The nature and efficacy of the reforms have varied widely, and have included allowing private mandis, bulk purchases, and contract farming. For example, short-term success was seen with PepsiCo setting up pre-agreed contract prices and access to drip irrigation techniques, access to land management experts, and financial tools for potato farmers. The farmers made less risky money and became more efficient; Pepsi received cheap potatoes for its Lay’s brand chips. However, this arrangement eventually soured when PepsiCo sued farmers in Gujarat over the non-sanctioned use of patented potatoes. Though these reforms did not solve the underlying problems farmers face, they represented a step in the right direction. In India, the average farm is less than three acres (versus a U.S. average of 442), and farmers are often unable to negotiate properly due to their fractured organization. Amongst a slew of possible solutions—such as deregulating ownership laws to facilitate consolidation or intensely investing in agricultural infrastructure—there is one model that has already had great success in India: the co-operative. For instance, the dairy industry is led by large brands like Amul and Nandini, consortiums of dairy farmers developed during the “White Revolution” in the 1940s. These co-operatives originally functioned with farmers providing milk at collection points where they are issued a receipt. The co-op can then sell to traders, vendors, or directly to consumers. Expenses like salary, transportation, storage, and marketing are paid out of revenues, with the profit being paid back to farmers proportionally to the milk they contribute, accounting for 80 to 82 percent of revenue at Amul, Gujarat’s co-operative. The access to information and negotiating power that comes from consolidation allows farmers to make more from each ounce of milk they produce. Co-operatives can negotiate directly with large purchasers of produce, or at least shorten the supply chain, thereby cutting out many layers of inefficient bureaucracy that currently plague the mandi system. For the dairy industry, this system increased both the dairy supply and farmer salaries. Such pooling also helps farmers better utilize financial tools critical to the industry. Access to credit and insurance for India’s farmers is incredibly difficult. Banks—many of which are state-owned in India—are difficult for farmers to borrow from as they have strict risk requirements and face recurring government loan waivers that hurt their balance sheet. Instead, the vast majority of farmers receive credit from private sources with very high interest rates and collateral demands. A system that does away with the same information and negotiating power disparities by operating through a co-op allows financial institutions to diversify their risk to an extent, and in time might even allow it to be done in-house. Co-operatives can also help farmers access modern agricultural technologies, lower input costs, and better management techniques. India’s success in the White Revolution resulted in an increase in dairy output, lower prices, and increased profit for farmers. India is a country where both farmers and consumers suffer. High prices, food waste, and widespread malnourishment have held back the country’s development. By cutting out a corrupted system of middlemen and traders, co-operatives might be able to feed India’s growing population and ensure that farmers don’t get caught in debt traps.

The Five Questions Series is a forum for scholars, government officials, civil society leaders, and foreign policy practitioners to provide timely analysis of new developments related to the advancement of women and girls worldwide. In this interview Megan Fallone, the director of Barefoot College International, highlights how the Solar Mamas' initiative has empowered women and poor communities around the world.

Welcome to “Women Around the World: This Week,” a series that highlights noteworthy news related to women and U.S. foreign policy. This week’s post, covering May 18 to May 28, was compiled by Rebecca Hughes, Alexandra Bro, and Rebecca Turkington.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Hindu nationalist party resoundingly won the general election following a divisive campaign, but it is not yet clear how the results should be interpreted.

Welcome to “Women Around the World: This Week,” a series that highlights noteworthy news related to women and U.S. foreign policy. This week’s post, covering May 9 to May 16, was compiled by Rebecca Hughes and Rebecca Turkington.