GS Analyst: Daily Current Affairs

Context:

Renowned Carnatic musician T.M. Krishna has been awarded the prestigious Sangita Kalanidhi award by The Music Academy, Madras, sparking a polarized debate within the music community due to his dual role as an artist and activist.

Artistic Innovation and Activism:

• Challenging orthodoxies:M. Krishna's artistry is marked by a blend of tradition and innovation, challenging orthodoxies while staying rooted in classical Carnatic music.
• Inclusivity and social justice: As an activist, Krishna amplifies the voices of marginalized communities, challenging societal norms and advocating for inclusivity and social justice.
• Traditional mix: His performances are characterized by a mix of traditional compositions and unconventional choices, provoking both admiration and controversy.

Reactions and Polarization:

• Divide: The awarding of the Sangita Kalanidhi to Krishna has ignited a polarized response within the music community, with divisions along ideological and political lines.
• Different versions: Some musicians and enthusiasts support Krishna's activism, seeing it as a necessary evolution of the art form, while others criticize him for allegedly politicizing classical music.
• Societal division: The controversy highlights deeper societal divisions, including debates over caste, religion, and political ideology, reflecting broader tensions within Indian society.

The Role of the Artiste:

• Role of artist in society: The debate surrounding Krishna's award underscores broader questions about the role of the artist in society and the intersection between art and activism.
• Need to address issues: While some argue for the autonomy of art from politics, others advocate for artists to use their platform to address social issues and effect change.
• Balance: Ultimately, the challenge lies in finding a balance between artistic expression and social responsibility, recognizing that art has the power to both reflect and shape society.

Context

Amidst the overshadowing conflict in Gaza and the subsequent strain on regional political dynamics in the Persian Gulf, the first anniversary of the China-mediated peace accord between Saudi Arabia and Iran in March 2023 went relatively unnoticed. The diplomatic focus and international attention remain captivated by the ongoing war in Gaza, underscoring the entanglement of various global actors and their vested interests in the region.

China's Mediation Efforts:

• Positive portrayal of Xi Jinping's effort: Chinese President Xi Jinping's efforts to facilitate détente between Saudi Arabia and Iran are portrayed positively in China's state-controlled media, emphasizing China's advocacy for peace in the Middle East.
• Endorsement of an international mediation organization: China endorses the establishment of an international mediation organization, backed by countries like Algeria, Pakistan, and Sudan, aiming to leverage its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) to enhance its geopolitical influence.
• Cautious approach in regional conflicts: Despite its absence from the Red Sea crisis and cautious approach, China's involvement in regional mediation reflects its strategic interest in safeguarding its economic interests while projecting an image of a responsible international actor.

Geopolitical Aims and Challenges:

• Positioning as an alternative to Western interventionism: China seeks to position itself as an alternative to Western interventionism in the Middle East, aspiring to increase its geopolitical weight and challenge long-standing American influence.
• Selective support for the Palestinian cause: However, China's selective support for the Palestinian cause and its reluctance to condemn Hamas demonstrate challenges in its mediation diplomacy and navigating complex regional dynamics.
• Challenges in mediation diplomacy: China's cautious approach and limited involvement in high-stake conflicts reflect its risk-averse strategy and the absence of viable alternatives to Western-centric policies in the region.

China's Role as a Utilitarian Superpower:

• Displacement of American hegemony: China's approach to regional mediation underscores its aspirations to displace American hegemony without fully committing to replace it, positioning itself as a 'soft hegemon' rather than an assertive superpower.
• Perception of hollow mediation efforts: Despite its economic clout and strategic interests, China's mediation efforts are perceived as hollow, lacking substantive solutions to longstanding geopolitical flashpoints such as the Israel-Palestine conflict.
• Utilitarian status as a superpower: China's role in the Middle East highlights its utilitarian status as a superpower, where it remains a hedging option for regional actors while grappling with challenges in offering viable alternatives to Western-centric policies.

Context:

The Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA), 2019, has been notified and faces a legal challenge in the Supreme Court on grounds of violating Article 14 of the Constitution, which guarantees equality.

Classification Test:

• Reasonable classification: The classical 'reasonable classification' test is used to judge violations of equality, assessing whether a clear distinction exists between classes and if it serves a legitimate governmental objective.
• Exclusion: While the CAA's classification based on persecuted minorities from geographically connected nations may seem legally sound, concerns arise due to exclusions and the religious basis of discrimination.
• Fail to capture the true essence of equality: The classification test, imported from the U.S., has become integral to equality jurisprudence but may not adequately address concerns of arbitrary exclusion based on religion.

Requirement for Comprehensive Understanding:

• Re-understanding of equality: There's a need for a comprehensive re-understanding of equality under Article 14, beyond the traditional 'treating equals equally and unequals unequally' approach.
• Opportunity to redefine: The Court should delve deeper into the state's justifications for exclusions and actively engage with values inherent in Article 14 to ensure constitutional promises are upheld.
• Robust constitutionalism: By scrutinizing the Act's provisions against constitutional principles, the Court can ensure a clear distinction between inviolable rights and the criteria used to assess their infringement.