Opinion | Centre must shed its stubbornness and green light foreign aid to Kerala

Flood victims carry relief material as they walk through a damaged area after floods, at Nelliyampathy Village. (Image: Reuters)

Viju Cherian

On Wednesday evening, India politely declined aid from foreign governments towards flood relief in Kerala.

The Centre’s decision is unfortunate as it comes at a time when Kerala is limping its way out of a disastrous flood, the worst in several generations. On humanitarian grounds, taking into account the sheer magnitude of devastation across 14 districts in Kerala, the Centre should allow foreign aid and must not take cover behind fig leaves of unwritten policies.

Putting to rest speculation over whether the Centre would accept the Rs 700 crore aid extended by the United Arab Emirates (UAE) towards flood relief in Kerala, the Ministry of External Affairs said, “In line with the existing policy, the government is committed to meeting the requirements for relief and rehabilitation through domestic efforts”.

A news report also suggested that New Delhi has asked its embassies to 'politely reiterate' India’s policy of not accepting foreign aid. This refusal shows an obduracy on the Centre’s part.

Related stories

Viju Cherian

Opinion Editor|moneycontrol.com

• 
  Gujarat shows an invincible BJP, Himachal Pradesh exposes chinks in its armour
• 
  Tharoor Vs Kharge | Congress’ intra-party democracy withers on the vine
• 
  By visiting Taiwan, Nancy Pelosi has called China’s bluff

Since the 2004 tsunami that hit the southern and eastern states, the Centre has rejected humanitarian aid from foreign governments, but this refusal to accept aid is not mandated by law. When it comes to international cooperation, the 2016 National Disaster Management Plan said the government 'does not issue any appeal for foreign assistance' but in the event of a foreign government offering assistance 'the Centre may accept the offer'.

The government is yet to give a concrete reason as to why it is against receiving foreign aid during the time of a disaster, but it is unlikely to be serious enough to justify this decision.

One of the reasons could be that foreign aid comes with conditions and requires monitoring reports to be sent back to the donor country. Accepting aid under such circumstances would be an arduous task for the government, especially at a time when its resources are stretched thin.

Another reason could be that the tag of an aid recipient takes away the sheen from India’s ‘rising superpower’ tag. Also, a government headed by a nationalist party could be averse to breaking India’s ‘self-reliant’ image.

Both are poor excuses. The Centre should shed its false pride because the task ahead of rebuilding Kerala is monumental. Aid in the form of every paise that’s extended towards Kerala is required.

At some level, foreign aid helps in building ties between two countries. India has over the years sent aid to various countries, including Pakistan, during their hour of crisis. Such aid can be seen as an extension of foreign policy outreach, but bare it of all its realpolitik, it’s basically a helping hand extended to people undergoing unimaginable pain and suffering.

In the case of UAE, beyond the prism of India-UAE diplomatic ties, Kerala and the UAE share decade old emotional ties. This was reflected by Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum, the Prime Minister of UAE, in his tweet asking people to help Kerala.

Initial estimates for relief, rehabilitation and resettlement by the Pinarayi Vijayan-led government stands at Rs 20,000 crore — a figure which Kerala Finance Minister Thomas Isaac said could rise once a detailed stocktaking of the damage is done. The state government had asked for an initial relief of Rs 2,000 crore from the Centre, which has released Rs 600 crore so far.

This amplifies the disappointment about the Centre’s decision to deny aid from the UAE. In offering Rs 600 crore as initial relief and denying UAE’s Rs 700 crore aid, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-led Centre is not only seen as being tight-fisted, but is also seen as obstructing aid from other sources. Isaac has criticised the Centre’s decision as 'a dog in the manger policy'.