Editorial

Are populous nations better off than those with a smaller population is a question that is not easy to answer. Generally speaking, a large population is difficult to manage and has its downsides, as it puts pressure on resources, the environment and governance. As more people compete for limited resources, conflict is inevitable. However, on the other hand, many nations are struggling with sluggish or negative population growth and are even inviting people from outside to settle. Even China, which we have replaced as the most populous nation, is reeling under the negative impacts of pursuing an aggressive population control regime. In India, we have charted a cautious course. While public campaigns like ‘Hum Do Hamare Do’ and many incentives for having small families have been offered, it has never been coerced, and the choice has by and large remained voluntary, except for a brief period during the Emergency in the 1970s when it was aggressively pursued by Indira Gandhi’s government. The result was resentment, and the government fell. However, now it appears that views on population growth have come full circle, and Andhra Pradesh is now actively promoting larger families. The Andhra Pradesh government’s decision to incentivise larger families marks a sharp shift in India’s long-standing population policy. With the State’s Total Fertility Rate (TFR) falling to 1.5 — well below the replacement level of 2.1 — concerns are growing over an ageing population and a declining young workforce. Under the proposed “Pillale Sampada” initiative, families opting for a third and fourth child may receive financial incentives.  The concern is not merely statistical. Falling fertility rates eventually reshape economies, labour markets and social structures. A shrinking young population means fewer workers, lower productivity, reduced tax revenues and increasing pressure on welfare systems. As elderly populations grow, governments face mounting healthcare and pension burdens without a sufficiently large workforce to sustain them. This is precisely the demographic trap confronting countries such as Japan, South Korea, Italy and Germany. Even China, once synonymous with strict population control through its one-child policy, is now struggling with rapid ageing and declining productivity. However, what is right for Andhra Pradesh at the moment may not be suitable for the rest of the country. India has a largely unemployed population, and pressure on resources is immense. It would be difficult to join the club of developed nations if population growth is not checked. Encouraging larger families without simultaneously expanding social infrastructure could deepen economic inequalities. Moreover, demographic realities differ sharply across India. Northern States such as Uttar Pradesh and Bihar continue to record relatively high fertility rates, while southern States are ageing faster due to better literacy, urbanisation and healthcare outcomes. The larger lesson is that population is neither a burden nor an asset in isolation. Its value depends on how effectively governments invest in education, healthcare, skill development and employment generation. (Source: The Pioneer)

Upholding its 2025 ruling on removing stray dogs from public spaces, the Supreme Court of India has now allowed euthanasia of rabid and dangerous dogs in the interest of public health and safety. The original judgment was seen as unrealistic given the massive investment and logistics involved in removing the dogs from spaces such as railway stations, hospitals, and highways, and rehabilitating them. In its latest order, the Court said the dogs picked up from these locations should not be released there even after vaccination and sterilisation. Municipal authorities in the country do not have the personnel for the job or the infrastructure to house these dogs. The Court has told the authorities to adopt legally permissible measures, including euthanasia, in cases of “rabid, incurably ill or demonstrably dangerous or aggressive dogs.” This is effectively a prescription to cull the dogs without discrimination because the Court’s condition that the decision should align with the assessment of qualified veterinary experts is likely to be observed in the breach. It risks entrusting the municipal staff with powers to act as the judge, jury, and executioner – killing the dogs will be seen as a convenient, legitimate response. Notably, the Court observed that there is a “discernible absence of sustained, systematic and incremental efforts to expand and strengthen the infrastructure to manage the dog population.” This situation is likely to remain. The Court ordered the setting up of a fully functional birth control centre in every district, equipped with the requisite infrastructure, trained personnel, and surgical facilities, and proposed an expansion of this setup. There is no clarity on timelines or other details in the directive. But what is certain is that most of the dogs around us will not live to see these centres. In its latest ruling, the apex court seeks to solve a problem created by people and civic authorities. Stray dogs have proliferated because of conditions caused by administrative failings. An effective implementation of the Animal Birth Control (ABC) Rules, 2023, with a firm focus on vaccination and sterilisation, remains the most viable solution to the problem. Public policy should, no doubt, prioritise human health and welfare, but it must also be humane and kind. It should not be hostile to life. It cannot breach the fundamental principle that the earth does not belong to human beings alone. Law and policy, designed around human existence, must not become tools to deny other living beings their rights. (Source: DH)

The Supreme Court’s questioning of its earlier verdict denying bail to Umar Khalid, in connection with the 2020 Delhi riots, exposes judicial mishandling that also extended the injustice the State meted out to him. Khalid and co-accused Sharjeel Imam have been in jail for over five years. Courts, including the Supreme Court, have rejected multiple pleas for bail.  On Monday, a bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan made it clear, while hearing another bail case, that an earlier rejection of bail by a two-judge bench violated principles laid down by a three-judge bench of the Court in Union of India vs. K A Najeeb (2021). In that case, the bench affirmed that bail is the rule and jail the exception, even in cases under the draconian Unlawful Activities [Prevention] Act (UAPA), if the trial is delayed. Pointing to earlier rulings that established the primacy of individual rights, the Court underlined the importance of compliance with these precedents. It observed that smaller benches have hollowed out the reasoning of larger benches without expressly disagreeing with them. These are strong comments that should guide the Court, especially its smaller benches, while hearing such cases. The continued incarceration of Khalid – accused of conspiracy in connection with the riots – defies reason and principles of justice, while the Union government appears determined to keep him in jail. The Court noted that pre-trial incarceration would begin to acquire a post-trial punitive character if prima facie accusations made by the investigating agency were accepted as true to deny bail. This happened in Khalid’s case, where the process became punishment. In a striking validation, a day after the apex court’s critique, a Delhi court dismissed Khalid’s interim plea for bail to take part in his uncle’s post-death rituals and to take care of his ailing mother. The Court did well to reiterate that the basic principle about bail also applies to UAPA cases. It said the right to personal liberty and speedy trial cannot be subordinate to the stringent bail provision laid down by Section 43-D(5) of the UAPA. It also pointed out that the conviction rate in UAPA cases is a low 2-6%. These observations are important in an environment where the State wields tools that can place fundamental rights under strain. The Umar Khalid case is a telling example of oppressive State conduct. It is rare that the Supreme Court questions its own judgment. These questions, raised on both technical and substantive grounds, must be heard and answered. (Source:  DH)  

Prime Minister Narendra Modi is on a whirlwind tour of five nations. He is visiting the United Arab Emirates, the Netherlands, Sweden, Norway and Italy. These are difficult times for the world, as supply lines are disrupted and energy uncertainties are playing havoc with the planning of emerging economies. This is not just a regular seasonal disruption, but the cumulative effect of the world economy undergoing a seismic change. Powerful nations such as the USA, China and Russia are busy establishing their respective hegemonies and working overtime to ensure that their national interests are best served. However, this has unleashed uncertainty, as no one knows for sure what comes next — Trump tariffs, the Ukraine war, or Chinese aggression in the South China Sea. In this scenario, a country like ours has to chart its own course. Modi’s international doctrine seems to stem from the erstwhile principles of non-alignment and neutrality, while staying out of power politics and, at the same time, connecting with countries that can not only provide what India needs but also offer markets for Indian goods and services. Prime Minister Modi has taken up the cudgels to spearhead the national campaign for self-sufficiency beyond borders. India is seeking investments, technology partnerships and greater strategic influence as it attempts to transform itself into a global manufacturing and innovation hub. Modi’s five-nation tour, is an exercise in diversifying imports and opening up to new avenues. The approach has found a ready partner in the Netherlands, where India and the Dutch government elevated bilateral ties to the level of a strategic partnership. The talks between Modi and Dutch Prime Minister Rob Jetten paved the way for cooperation and synergy on various issues. This move reflects the growing importance of the relationship beyond traditional trade. The partnership now extends into semiconductors, maritime security, renewable energy, artificial intelligence, defence cooperation and resilient supply chains. India’s efforts to build a domestic semiconductor ecosystem cannot succeed without partnerships of this nature. Modi’s pitch to Dutch companies to “design, innovate and manufacture in India” aligns directly with New Delhi’s broader ambition to reduce dependence on imports and integrate India into trusted global technology chains. The Scandinavian leg of the tour — particularly Sweden — was equally strategic. Nordic countries are global leaders in green technologies, sustainable urban planning, innovation ecosystems and clean energy transitions. India’s engagement with them is rooted in its need for advanced technological collaboration in areas such as hydrogen energy, climate resilience, smart manufacturing and digital governance. Sweden’s strong innovation-driven economy and Norway’s expertise in energy and maritime sectors make them natural partners for India’s developmental priorities. As India expands economic relations with European nations, it is also subtly balancing geopolitical equations by building diversified partnerships across the continent, reducing its dependence on the US and China. (Source: The Pioneer)

The visit of US President Donald Trump to China was closely watched by the world. The three-day visit during which Trump met Xi Jinping was laden with symbolism and expectations but ended with piecemeal declarations and no breakthroughs in bilateral relations or convergence on the major geopolitical issues confronting the world. The Trump visit at least reassured the world that the dialogue was still possible and that both nations had shown diplomatic courtesy to hear each other’s viewpoint. In recent times, the US-China relations have deteriorated sharply over trade disputes, Taiwan, and competing geopolitical ambitions. The Trump-Xi meeting was less about dramatic breakthroughs and more about restoring the diplomatic channels open at the highest level, should a need arise. The immediate outcome of the summit was the strengthening of the fragile trade truce reached earlier. The agreement to maintain lower tariffs and continue easing restrictions on critical sectors such as rare earth exports suggests that both sides are interdependent. Yet another major takeaway from the meeting was Trump’s invitation to Xi for another summit in the United States later this year, which indicates that both countries value continuous dialogue. This is a good sign, as the flash points in the world are many, and the world sits on a nuclear pile. But beneath diplomacy was economic brinkmanship at work.  Trump announced that China would purchase Boeing aircraft. This could be both an economic and a political glue.  The presence of major American business leaders—including executives from Boeing, Nvidia, Apple, and Tesla—shows that despite political rivalry, economic interdependence between the two powers remains intact. Yet the summit’s significance extended beyond commerce. Xi Jinping’s warning that mishandling Taiwan could place bilateral relations in “great jeopardy” reaffirmed Beijing’s hegemony in the South China Sea. Trump avoided public escalation on the issue during the visit. This restraint itself was meaningful. Both leaders appeared to realise that their tensions could destabilise not just Asia but the world order. The discussions on Iran were equally revealing. Trump claimed that China would assist diplomatic efforts and expand energy cooperation with the United States. In a world order that is volatile and fragmented, even limited cooperation between the two powers carries global importance. Perhaps the most important takeaway from the visit is the emergence of what Beijing described as a framework of “strategic stability.” Trump’s visit is a recognition that there are limits to how much you can afford to ignore China, and complete disengagement with the dragon is neither realistic nor desirable. The message to the world is therefore both reassuring and cautionary. While the structural tensions over technology, military influence, trade dominance, and Taiwan remain unresolved, the diplomatic channels are still open. The Trump-Xi summit was not a breakthrough in the diplomatic sense but an assurance that there is hope after all and that both powerful nations are willing to manage their rivalries with dialogue. (Source: The Pioneer)

With the Wrestling Federation of India (WFI) deferring Vinesh Phogat’s comeback to competitive events, the stand-off between the ace wrestler and the sport’s apex governing body in the country has taken a bitter turn. The WFI has issued a show-cause notice to the wrestler citing multiple grounds for her ineligibility including her alleged failure, as a retired athlete, to inform the United World Wrestling (UWW) six months ahead of her intended comeback. While Phogat has dismissed the charges raised in the notice, the WFI’s objectives will be under scrutiny, given that she has in the past questioned the functioning of the federation and its former chief and Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader, Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh. A double World Championships bronze medallist, Phogat is preparing for a strong return to the sport and reportedly has the 2028 Los Angeles Olympics in her plans. In its notice, the WFI also noted her disqualification from the final at the Paris Olympics in 2024, following a discrepancy related to her weight category. Phogat and her supporters see the show-cause notice as the WFI’s attempt to stop her from participating in the senior open ranking tournament in Gonda (May 10-12). The WFI is headed by Sanjay Singh, an aide of Brij Bhushan Singh, against whom Phogat and other women wrestlers had raised sexual harassment charges, in 2023. Recently, she also identified herself as one of Brij Bhushan Singh’s six victims. This raises questions about the timing of the federation’s move. Phogat is preparing to legally challenge the action against her. Some athletes have sought the Union government’s intervention in the matter. But nothing is likely to come out of that call – the former WFI boss prevailed at the height of the controversy, even when women wrestlers were staging protests against him on the streets. The controversy centres on a champion wrestler who has represented India on the global stage and brought multiple laurels to the country. An athlete of her stature deserves all the institutional support as she makes a comeback bid. It was upon the federation to provide Phogat this backing. Instead, it chose to invoke rules and raise unconvincing charges to make her return difficult. It must be noted that Phogat is also a Congress MLA from Haryana. Professionalism and transparency are non-negotiables in the administration of sport. When a high-performing world-class athlete faces such treatment from the administrators, it is a statement on how the system handles the sport and the sportsperson. (Source: DH)

Ten days after the Congress-led United Democratic Front (UDF) registered a landslide electoral victory in Kerala, the party’s high command chose V D Satheesan as the state’s new Chief Minister. The uncertainty that prevailed before the high command picked Satheesan did the party no good. The announcement was delayed because the central leadership backed All India Congress Committee (AICC) general secretary K C Venugopal, who did not contest the election, while the people clearly favoured Satheesan, who led the alliance to this resounding victory.  By prioritising a coterie’s interests above the party and the people, the leadership risked serious damage, given that Kerala is one of the Congress’s few remaining pockets of influence. Left to themselves, the leaders would have decided against the overwhelming will and verdict of the people. This lack of political judgment is even more striking because Congress has lost states when it imposed chief ministers on the people or removed them from office against public opinion. Its final decision is being hailed as a victory of consensus and the spirit of internal democracy, but the credit should go to the positions taken by the public and the allied parties, the residual good sense of some leaders, and a media consistently critical of this post-results power play. It must be said that even before the euphoria of a massive victory settles, the Congress leadership has lost some credibility. Satheesan was the face of the party and the UDF in the elections. He is not a dynast and is the first from his family to join politics. A leader who rose from the grassroots, the first-time Chief Minister has about three decades of political experience. He is seen by a large section of the cadre as a principled leader who would not cede space to communal interests. Satheesan is also the unlikely politician with a book: a voracious reader with a range of interests. The new Chief Minister will face multiple challenges in office. Financially, Kerala has just managed to stay afloat, while resisting the Centre’s unfriendly policies. The government will need a substantial revenue thrust to implement the five guarantee schemes announced during the campaign. The Lok Bhavan can be expected to be at odds with the government on many fronts. Satheesan may also face opposition from the party’s MLAs and even ministers, given the circumstances of his appointment. The high command must ensure that he gets the full backing in what could also be a crucial term for the party’s national footprint. (Source: DH)

The country’s Gen Z is outraged. The NEET paper leak has once again shocked the nation. This is not the first time that an examination promising admission to medical colleges has been compromised. A similar incident occurred in 2024 and now again in 2026, which speaks volumes about the audacity of those involved in the leak. The government took the right decision to scrap NEET UG 2026, but that does not redeem the situation, as it has erased the hard work of millions of students who sacrificed everything for this examination. It is merely damage control for a situation that should never have arisen in the first place. NEET is an important examination that carries the hopes and aspirations of the middle class and also provides the nation with the qualified pool of doctors it urgently needs. Parents spend lakhs on coaching and even relocate to help their children prepare for the exam. When a leak destroys those hopes, lives are shattered, leaving families in uncertainty and despair. The emotional trauma is enormous, with students burdened by the prospect of preparing all over again and potentially losing an entire year. Witnessing the same scandal repeat itself has deepened frustration and cynicism. The larger question is unavoidable: why does this keep happening? India has witnessed paper leaks in recruitment tests, state board examinations, police recruitment exams and now repeatedly in national-level entrance examinations. The problem is systemic. Examination mafias have evolved into organised criminal networks with political links, local protectors and insiders within institutions. Using sophisticated digital techniques, they earn crores of rupees. Yet investigations often end with the arrest of minor intermediaries while the masterminds remain untouched. This culture of impunity is even more worrying. While governments routinely promise “zero tolerance”, public confidence is steadily declining because accountability is rarely fixed. Merely making arrests is no solution; the entire ecosystem enabling such leaks must be dismantled. That means identifying officials who failed in supervision, exposing coaching-centre nexuses, tracking money trails and ensuring swift convictions of the real culprits. Unless the kingpins are punished, paper leaks will continue to reappear in new forms. The outrage among Gen Z is therefore understandable. Today’s students are digitally connected, politically aware and far less willing to quietly accept institutional incompetence. Social media has amplified their anger because many believe the system is rigged against sincere candidates.  India cannot aspire to become a ‘Vishwa Guru’ and a global knowledge powerhouse while its examination system repeatedly collapses. Competitive examinations are meant to be the great equaliser in a deeply unequal society. When they lose credibility, social trust itself begins to erode. India urgently needs a complete overhaul of examination security — stronger digital safeguards, encrypted paper distribution, tighter monitoring and a phased transition towards secure computer-based testing. More importantly, the government must instil confidence among young people that it is committed to protecting their interests. (Source: The Pioneer)

The cancellation of the National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET) is another blot on the record of the National Testing Agency (NTA), responsible for the conduct of some of India’s most important examinations. That many questions in a ‘guess paper’ were found among questions in the NEET-UG examination held on May 3 makes it more serious than the partial cancellation of the test in 2024. The handwritten ‘guess paper’ is likely to have reached thousands of candidates. The leak was detected only days after the test, raising the question of whether similar leaks have gone undetected in the past. While the new dates for the test are awaited, the schedules for student counselling, admissions, and the commencement of courses will be impacted. The NEET covers about 1.3 lakh medical course seats. About 22 lakh students took the test after months of preparation, which takes a financial, physical, and psychological toll on them. The cancellation and the subsequent retest will cause trauma to many candidates and involve extensive wastage of resources. When the NTA was created in 2017, it was envisioned to improve the examination system and make it a unified, national platform without the unevenness that marked state-level admission procedures. However, the agency has faced questions regarding its processes, charges of paper leaks, and ranking-related disputes. Though the government has assured that the system would be strengthened and safeguards put in place, the paper leak shows that no lessons have been learnt. The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has commenced an investigation, and multiple arrests have been made. Many questions need answering. Where and how did the leak take place? Why did the safeguards fail? After the 2024 incident, an expert committee headed by former ISRO chairman K Radhakrishnan was constituted to reform the NEET system. Were the committee’s recommendations, submitted in October 2024, implemented? Accountability must be established at all levels for this massive institutional failure, and action should be taken against everyone who played a role in it. Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan, too, cannot escape responsibility for this debacle. An examination of this scale presents a major challenge because it involves simultaneously holding the test in more than 5,000 centres. But the country has the requisite technical and logistical competence. This failure has occurred at the human level. Fixing the system is crucial to prevent future breaches and restore the credibility of the test. (Source: DH)  

While an intense heat wave is spreading across India, agriculture will be one of the sectors most severely impacted. A report from the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) has warned that heat events have posed a threat to the livelihoods and health of over a billion people worldwide. The impact will be severe in India, with predictions of a likely fall in yields of rice and wheat crops. The country has seen an early incidence of high temperatures in all climatic zones. Agriculture is highly climate-sensitive, and variations in heat levels can badly affect crops. The untimely heat waves are likely to curtail yields in important farming states such as Punjab, Haryana, and Uttar Pradesh. The wheat harvest is already over, and reports from farms are not encouraging. Rice is equally vulnerable. Rice cultivation is about to start, and the dry weather will affect seed germination, nursery preparation, and the growth of plants. Farmers will have to rely more on groundwater or irrigation where available, as higher evaporation will increase water loss. Irrigation facilities are inadequate in many areas of the country. It is not just the existing dry weather or the heat wave conditions in the coming weeks that will challenge agriculture. The entire monsoon season from June to September is likely to see a deficit in rainfall, and that can hurt the whole farming economy. The heat wave is not the only challenge. There is a serious shortfall in the supply of fertilisers. The war in West Asia has dealt a serious blow to the supply of fertilisers and important raw materials such as natural gas and ammonia that are used for fertiliser production. The closure of the Strait of Hormuz has disrupted a major share of the world’s fertiliser trade. Major producers such as Russia and China have cut down on exports to support domestic demand. China is a major supplier of fertilisers to India. India’s agriculture is likely to face pressure from two sides: heat and fertiliser shortages. Governments at both central and state levels should start taking measures to counter them. These include a focus on heat-resistant crops, counselling farmers, and supporting them in dealing with the impact. India has not made any progress in putting in place a system of climate-resistant agriculture on a permanent basis. Climate change and its challenges are going to be with us. There is a need to protect the country’s agriculture and economy from the impacts of climate change and other pressures more urgently than ever before. (Source: DH)