Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) — ✅ خرید وی پی ان ❇ ip ثایت vPn آی پی اختصاصی ◐

ژوئن 7, 2022

Explained: Delhi’s deep ties in Gulf were delinked from faith, now under strain

At a time India is carefully navigating the post-February 24 geopolitical flux, calibrating its stand on both sides of the divide over Ukraine, the derogatory references to Islam by spokespersons of the ruling BJP have put the country on the defensive on the global stage.
Qatar, Kuwait and Iran were the first to speak out Sunday, followed by Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Oman, the Gulf Co-operation Council and the Organisation of Islamic Co-operation. On Monday, special friend UAE in the Gulf, Bahrain and Indonesia in south-east Asia, also joined the increasing chorus of protests.
In the Gulf region that Prime Minister Narendra Modi takes personal credit for having turned around for India, Delhi has been in fire-fighting mode the last 48 hours. The silence of Turkey and Malaysia is some consolation but it is not clear how long that will hold. Al Azhar, the influential Islamic university in Cairo, denounced the statements as “terrorist action that helps to push the entire world to devastating crises and bloody wars”.

Indian envoys in the region find themselves battling an “image problem”, and trying to ensure that what was spoken on TV back home does not have an adverse fallout on the significant Indian diaspora in these countries: an estimated 6.5 million Indians who live and work in the region.Best of Express PremiumPremiumPremiumPremiumPremium
This is not the first time that anti-Muslim actions by Indians have resonated in West Asia.
In 2020, after the government singled out the Tableeghi Jamaat congregation in Delhi as a Covid super-spreader, leading to a spike in anti-Muslim conduct in India, Sheikha Hend bint Faisal Al Qasimi, an Emirati businesswoman described as a ruling family royal, in a tweet that tagged anti-Tableeghi tweets by an Indian living in Dubai, said: “Anyone that is openly racist and discriminatory in the UAE will be fined and made to leave”. In 2018, a Michelin-starred chef was fired for posting an anti-Islam tweet.
Recently, the film Kashmir Files was banned in the UAE briefly before being given permission for screening. Last week, Oman and Kuwait banned the new Akshay Kumar film Privthviraj.
🚨 Limited Time Offer | Express Premium with ad-lite for just Rs 2/ day 👉🏽 Click here to subscribe 🚨
The Modi government’s deference to the sensitivities of Islamic West Asia — the BJP suspended the two spokespersons – is in contrast to its curt dismissal of US concern about India’s minorities. Ironically, the relationship that Delhi has crafted in the Gulf before and after 2014 had little to do with religion. The current controversy has put that under a cloud.
“In the past, incidents of communal hate and violence were seen as part of India’s domestic politics. But when you make derogatory references to the Prophet and bring in his wife, you have crossed a red line,” said Talmiz Ahmad, who served as India’s ambassador to Saudi Arabia, UAE and Oman between 2000 and 2011.

“Earlier, when an incident such as the Babri Masjid demolition took place, there was faith that India remained committed to a democratic and plural order, but now there is a feeling that this aspect of India’s commitment has changed.”
In New Delhi, it is hoped that despite the outrage, the core of India’s bilateral relationships with each of these countries will remain unaffected, based as these relations are on the Indian economy, trade and investment, the sale of oil to India, and the huge Indian workforce, in which their religious affiliation has never played a big part.
India and UAE describe their relationship as a strategic partnership. A significant security component is now a part of India’s relationship with several Gulf countries, especially after ISIS burst on the scene in the region.

With ISIS cells in the Gulf, intelligence co-operation with Saudi Arabia and the UAE is reported to have led to the deportation from these countries of dozens of individuals of interest between 2014 and 2017. India and Gulf countries such as UAE, Saudi and Oman carry out joint military exercises.

In March, India and the UAE also signed a Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement, seen as a launching pad for a free trade agreement with GCC countries. That’s why the “boycottIndiangoods” hashtag that was trending on Sunday sent a wave of apprehension among those with stakes in businesses in the Gulf.
One immediate implication could be for employment, said Ahmad. “India was seen as a role model of a democratic, pluralistic and accommodative nation that had also achieved considerable progress and technological achievement. That has been affected badly,” he said.
In the foreign policy establishment, there is also concern that this could paper over the deep rifts between Pakistan, and its old allies Saudi and UAE given that Islamabad resented the growing proximity between these countries and New Delhi.

!function(f,b,e,v,n,t,s)
{if(f.fbq)return;n=f.fbq=function(){n.callMethod?
n.callMethod.apply(n,arguments):n.queue.push(arguments)};
if(!f._fbq)f._fbq=n;n.push=n;n.loaded=!0;n.version=’2.0′;
n.queue=[];t=b.createElement(e);t.async=!0;
t.src=v;s=b.getElementsByTagName(e)[0];
s.parentNode.insertBefore(t,s)}(window, document,’script’,
‘https://connect.facebook.net/en_US/fbevents.js’);
fbq(‘init’, ‘444470064056909’);
fbq(‘track’, ‘PageView’);
.

ژوئن 6, 2022

Hate and Apology | The Indian Express

One lesson from Sunday is that an electoral majority does not entitle a political party to believe there are no red lines to its conduct, that it can dismiss every criticism as petty pandering to a “vote bank”. The hate speech against Islam that two spokespersons of the BJP peddled so glibly, on a national television channel and on social media, is reprehensible but the truth is that it was no sudden eruption of bigotry. The BJP’s electoral victories since 2014, and especially after 2019, have emboldened party activists and others of the saffron brigade to an extent that they indulge in casual everyday anti-minority actions with the confidence that they have a free hand to do this. The government, from Prime Minister Narendra Modi down, and the party, from J P Nadda down, prefer silence as the baying gets more loud and shrill, as so-called dharam sansads advocate no less than mass murder and men, in saffron, claiming to redeem Hinduism, peddle hate and misogyny. Result: Every such act that is allowed to go unpunished and uncensured emboldens the next.
If the party acted to suspend spokespersons Nupur Sharma and Naveen Jindal on Sunday, it was because the anger against their remarks was not something that could be dismissed as expressions of “sickularism” but is resonating throughout the Islamic world threatening to upend India’s most important relationships, alliances key to its strategic imperatives that Prime Minister Modi himself has nurtured. But the condemnation of hate speech for the sake of international optics is like sticking a band-aid on a festering wound. In the diplomatic embarrassment that Vice-President M Venkaiah Naidu had to suffer while on an official visit to Qatar — the Indian envoy was summoned and lectured to — is the second lesson. Such conduct is no longer protected by silos, and has wider repercussions. Prime Minister Modi once claimed that the Congress was upset that he had good relations with the Islamic world. All it took was 30 seconds of unadulterated hate spewed by the party’s face on television to send that goodwill evaporating. External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar, whose erudition in Bratislava is being hailed as India’s coming-of-age speech, will have to provide a better explanation for the conduct of his colleagues than reasoning that they mark the rise of the “non-elites” and “India’s way” of “correcting historical wrongs”.
India has the second largest Muslim population in the world, and irrespective of the fact that the BJP does not need their votes, as a party in office, it needs to show by word and deed that it is a government of all communities. On social media, the “trads” — hardline Hindutva trolls — are tearing up the BJP for caving in to international pressure. They are invoking the liberal posters of Salman Rushdie and Charlie Hebdo and the principles of free speech. The Government will be mistaken if it thinks two sound-bites are the problem and two suspensions the solution. Hate speech is unacceptable in itself, from the mouths of ruling party members targeting a minority it mainstreams bigotry, causes dangerous divisions, and is against the national interest. It is time this message went out from the very top. This doesn’t — and shouldn’t — need a prod from an ally in the Gulf.
Best of Express PremiumPremiumPremiumPremiumPremium
!function(f,b,e,v,n,t,s)
{if(f.fbq)return;n=f.fbq=function(){n.callMethod?
n.callMethod.apply(n,arguments):n.queue.push(arguments)};
if(!f._fbq)f._fbq=n;n.push=n;n.loaded=!0;n.version=’2.0′;
n.queue=[];t=b.createElement(e);t.async=!0;
t.src=v;s=b.getElementsByTagName(e)[0];
s.parentNode.insertBefore(t,s)}(window, document,’script’,
‘https://connect.facebook.net/en_US/fbevents.js’);
fbq(‘init’, ‘444470064056909’);
fbq(‘track’, ‘PageView’);
.

می 30, 2022

Eight years on | The Indian Express

THE Narendra Modi government completing eight years is a moment to pause and look back — and ahead. When it came to power in 2014, a large swathe of Indian voters saw in the slogan of “achche din”, and in the BJP’s energetic bid to wrest power at the Centre under the leadership of a man who had made himself a name, and controversy, as chief minister, a promise for a break from the status quo. In the first five years, from rethinking the language of welfare to recasting nationalism and reworking foreign policy, the Modi government made an impact that led to its re-election in 2019 with a decisive majority. Looking back, the eight years of Modi’s rule so far have been dominated by the last three. And in these, the government’s record has been two-toned — it has shown resolve, boldness, and a capacity for navigating complexity in some areas but it has been stiff and unmoving in others.
The signal that the second term would be more change-making than the first was sent by the abrogation of Article 370 in Kashmir in August 2019. Only months after that, came the enactment of a law that made religion a criterion for citizenship for those in the neighbourhood seeking refuge. The next year, the government inaugurated the construction of the Ram temple at Ayodhya. But if the Modi government took these large, contentious steps, it also faced steep challenges. While the over a year-long farmers’ agitation on Delhi’s doorstep could be traced back to the farm laws it enacted in September 2020, the public health emergency that began with the Covid outbreak earlier that year, and this year’s Ukraine war, are problems it has been forced to step up to. On balance, the Modi government has shown a mature head in crisis, coming back after a period of paralysis during Covid’s second devastating wave, to set in motion a strikingly successful vaccination programme. It resisted pressures to provide more direct support to a people lacking in safety nets, but ran a comprehensive free rations programme, ensuring efficient and mostly corruption-free delivery. Amid the continuing economic slump and joblessness, it has signalled a recommitment to its privatisation programme, with the sale of Air India and the LIC IPO. With China, after the face-off in Galwan, and 15 rounds of talks later, it shows firmness and resolve. With the US, it is strategically — and boldly — strengthening areas of convergence in the Indo-Pacific, even as, on Ukraine, it has negotiated a position keenly conscious of competing priorities. All this, under the leadership of a prime minister whose popularity is burnished more strongly than before.
And yet, the maturity and nuance that the Modi government shows in the areas outlined above seem to elude it when it comes to others — be it its heavy-footed handling of the agitation against the CAA-NRC, its attempt to forcibly join the dots between those protests and the communal violence later in northeast Delhi, its use of the IPC to tar dissent, its weaponisation of Central agencies to target political opponents. Its ringing silence amid the bid to reopen the faultline that now stretches from Ayodhya to Gyanvapi and its failures to restore the political process in Kashmir are part of the same problem. A government capable of thinking afresh seems trapped in stale resentments when it comes to the imperative that lies at the heart of democracy: Trust between communities and a respectful place for minorities. With the Opposition weaker than it was, and not many countervailing institutions, the Modi government will need to find it in itself to course correct. For, the challenges of inflation and recession, Ukraine war, China’s sabre-rattling, expectations of the young — these call for a governance that includes all, that does not let ghosts of history hijack spirits of the future, that heals old wounds without rubbing them in. Eight years on, that’s the hope.
Best of Express PremiumPremiumPremiumPremiumPremium
!function(f,b,e,v,n,t,s)
{if(f.fbq)return;n=f.fbq=function(){n.callMethod?
n.callMethod.apply(n,arguments):n.queue.push(arguments)};
if(!f._fbq)f._fbq=n;n.push=n;n.loaded=!0;n.version=’2.0′;
n.queue=[];t=b.createElement(e);t.async=!0;
t.src=v;s=b.getElementsByTagName(e)[0];
s.parentNode.insertBefore(t,s)}(window, document,’script’,
‘https://connect.facebook.net/en_US/fbevents.js’);
fbq(‘init’, ‘444470064056909’);
fbq(‘track’, ‘PageView’);
.

می 24, 2022

Be clear on cotton | The Indian Express

After wheat, there is pressure building up for banning exports of raw cotton. The Narendra Modi government must resist any such demand emanating from domestic textile mills and the garment industry. There are at least three reasons why this is so. To start with, the output of one industry is often the input of another. In this case, cotton is spun by mills into yarn, which is further woven or knitted into fabric used for making garments. During the year ended March 31, 2002, India exported $2.8 billion worth of raw cotton, $5.5 billion of cotton yarn, $8.2 billion of cotton fabrics and made-ups, and $9 billion of cotton ready-made garments. Will spinning mills seeking a ban on cotton shipments agree to the same in respect of yarn? When exports are happening at every stage of the value chain, how can there be pick and choose on which one to disallow or promote?
Secondly, while it is true that cotton prices have risen by around 50 per cent since the start of 2022, this cannot be blamed just on exports — which are actually expected to halve in the current marketing season (October-September) compared to 2020-21. Domestic prices increasing to international parity levels should, by itself, slow down exports in the natural course. The Modi government did the right thing last month by scrapping the import duty on cotton. It should, in fact, remove the 10 per cent duty on yarn imports as well. The correct approach to tackling inflation, whether in wheat, cotton or yarn, is by allowing duty-free imports without putting fetters on exports. The third reason has to do with timing. Sowing of cotton has already started in Punjab, Haryana and Rajasthan. Plantings in Gujarat, Maharashtra, Telangana and other states will also take off with the arrival of the southwest monsoon rains. High prices would definitely incentivise farmers to expand acreage this time; banning exports will send the opposite signals to the ultimate detriment of the textile industry.
The real problem in cotton that needs addressing is yields. The introduction of Bt cotton in the early 2000s led to India’s production going up about 2.5 times to 398 lakh bales by 2013-14. Since then, it has been on a falling trajectory, with the latest output estimate for 2021-22 at below 325 lakh bales. The plants incorporating Bt genes have over time developed susceptibility to pink bollworm and whitefly insect pests, reducing yields and also farmer enthusiasm for growing cotton. The Modi government’s succumbing to uninformed lobby pressures against genetic engineering technologies has not helped matters. A clearheaded approach is required for this crop, which is a source of not just fibre (lint), but also food (cotton-seed oil) and feed (oil-cake).

مارس 6, 2022

Who wants a tough leader?

There is an American colloquialism that reads ‘when the going gets tough, the tough get going’.
I have always wondered what is ‘tough’. The word has different meanings in different contexts. ‘Tough’ can mean determination; ability to endure hardship; difficult (as in a tough game); or obstinate (as in a tough nut). Tough can also mean a bully or a rough and violent person.
🗞️ Subscribe Now: Get Express Premium to access the best Election reporting and analysis 🗞️
From Liberator to Tough
Usually, a democratically elected leader, loath to step down after long years in power, becomes ‘tough’. Hitler was before I was born. Growing up, I was dismayed to see Jawaharlal Nehru’s close friends turn from liberators into ‘tough’ leaders: Kwame Nkrumah, Josip Broz Tito, Gamal Abdel Nasser and Sukarno. Each one led the liberation struggle in his country, was elected by a popular vote, was admired by the people, but finally became ‘tough’ and buried democracy and his own legacy.
Jawaharlal Nehru was the sole exception among the five signatories of Panchsheel. Every election under his Prime Ministership — 1952, 1957 and 1962 — was a truly democratic election. His election speeches were lessons in democracy. The vast majority of the gathering did not understand English but sensed that he was talking about democracy, secularism, the difficult task of building a nation, eradicating poverty, the role of government and so on. Nehru was a loved leader, he never became ‘tough’.

The present world is full of tough leaders. None of them, if a free and fair election were held today, would be elected. Prominent tough leaders are Mr Jair Bolsonaro of Brazil, Mr Recep Erdogan of Turkey, Mr Abdul al-Sisi of Egypt, Mr Viktor Orban of Hungary, Mr Alexander Lukashenko of Belarus, Mr Kim Jong-un of North Korea, and dozens of others who are not known outside their country or their continent.
Mr Vladimir Putin is in a class of his own. So is Mr Xi Jinping. Both are ‘tough’ leaders who plan to rule as long as they live. As I write, the tough Russian leader is raining rockets and bombs on a helpless Ukraine. According to one count, there are 52 countries whose governments can be described as dictatorships.
Mr Modi Prefers ‘Tough’
In the election campaign in Uttar Pradesh, Mr Narendra Modi spoke approvingly of the need to elect ‘tough’ leaders. At a rally in Bahraich, Mr Modi said “when turmoil is prevailing in the world, India needs to be stronger and for difficult times, a tough leader is needed (The Economic Times, February 23, 2022)”. Incidentally, Bahraich is one of three districts in UP where, according to NITI Aayog, the poverty ratio is over 70 per cent.

Mr Modi clearly wanted the BJP’s leader in UP, Mr Adityanath, to be re-elected presumably because
Mr Adityanath is a ‘tough’ leader needed in these ‘difficult’ times. Mr Adityanath believes in enforcing law and order and brooks no opposition. ‘Encounters’ have official sanction. A criminal need not be brought before a court of law and punished, he can be shot down in an ‘encounter’. According to a report in The Indian Express (July 13, 2021), between March 2017 and June 2021, 139 criminals were killed in police encounters and 3,196 injured.
A favourite word of Mr Adityanath is ‘bulldozer’. On February 27, 2022, while addressing a rally at Karka Bazar in Sultanpur district, Mr Adityanath said, “we have developed this machine that builds express highways and also tackles the mafias and criminals. When I was coming here, I saw four bulldozers. I think there are five assemblies, we will send one to each, then everything will be fine” (India Today). In UP, to use bulldozers to raze buildings or vacate occupants (allegedly illegal), no court orders and no legal processes are necessary.
Mr Adityanath is so tough that
Mr Siddique Kappan, a journalist from Kerala covering the Hathras case of rape and murder, has been kept in jail since October 5, 2020. According to The Wire, since Mr Adityanath became chief minister, a total of 12 journalists have been killed, 48 physically assaulted and 66 booked for various charges or arrested. The tough chief minister persuaded his party not to give a ticket to a Muslim in any of the 403 constituencies, although Muslims constitute 20 per cent of the state’s population.
Under the tough leader, UP is poor, the people have become poorer and 40 per cent has been added in five years to the state’s debt, that stands at a humongous sum of Rs 6,62,891 crore.

Gentle and Wise
I think gentle leaders are the best. They are wise, speak softly, listen to the people, respect institutions and the law, celebrate diversity, work for harmony among the people and leave office quietly. They make the people’s lives better. They provide jobs, better education and healthcare. They are against war and address the challenges of climate change. There have been — and are — such leaders in the world. The incomparable Nelson Mandela was one. Other examples are former Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany, Prime Minister Jacinda Adern of New Zealand, Prime Minister Mark Rutte of Netherlands and a few others.
I don’t know what kind of leader UP, Uttarakhand, Punjab, Manipur and Goa will elect. If I had a vote in any of those states, I would vote for a gentle and wise leader.