Indian-American Nominated By Biden As Envoy For Religious Freedom

President Joe Biden has nominated an Indian-American, Rashad Hussain, as the Ambassador-at-Large for International Religious Freedom, and if approved by the Senate he will be the first Muslim to head US diplomacy for advancing religious liberties.

Making the announcement on Friday, the White House said that Biden is appointing a Pakistani American Khizr Khan to be a member of the US Commission on International Religious Freedom (USICRF), along with two others.

The USICRF publishes the annual report of religious freedom around the world as it advocates for religious freedom around the world and designates violators of religious liberties.

Hussain is the Director for Partnerships and Global Engagement at the National Security Council has worked as a Senior Counsel in the Justice Department’s National Security Division.

Like many Biden appointees, Hussain is an alumnus of President Barack Obama’s administration in which he served as the US special envoy to the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) and the US special envoy for Strategic Counterterrorism Communications.

“Rashad also spearheaded efforts on countering antisemitism and protecting religious minorities in Muslim-majority countries,” the White House said.

Hussain, who has a law degree from Yale University and a master’s in Arabic and Islamic Studies from Harvard University, has also worked with the House of Representatives Judiciary Committee.

The position of Ambassador-at-Large for International Religious Freedom was set up by the Congress within the State Department with the mandate to “advance the right to freedom of religion abroad, to denounce the violation of that right, and to recommend appropriate responses by the US Government when this right is violated.”

Khan is a lawyer who is the founder of the Constitution Literacy and National Unity Project. His son, US Army Captain Humayun Khan, was killed in action in Iraq.

As one of the speakers at the Democratic Party’s National Convention that nominated Hillary Clinton as the party’s nominee for president in 2016, Khan criticised the Republican Party candidate Donald Trump saying he “consistently smears the character of Muslims.”

Trump made a snide comment suggesting that because of that religion, the captain’s mother did not speak at the convention and it evoked strong criticism for attacking “Gold Star” parents � as the parents of military personnel killed in action are reverentially called in the US.

An Indian American, Anurima Bhargava, is a member of the USICRF as one of the three members appointed by Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Three others are appointed by the leader of the Senate.

The Indian American Muslim Council (IAMC), a Washington, D.C. based advocacy group dedicated to safeguarding India’s pluralist and tolerant ethos today commended President Biden’s administration for nominating Mr. Rashad Hussain to serve in key religious freedom role at the U.S. Department of State. “IAMC also welcomes the appointment of Mr. Khizr Khan and Rabbi Sharon Kleinbaum to the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF)” a statement issued by the group stated.

Welcoming the nomination and new appointments, Syed Afzal Ali, President of IAMC said: “The deep experience of Mr. Rashad Hussain and Mr. Khizr Khan in advocating for rights of minorities will further bolster religious freedom for all people, especially in India, where Muslims and Christians are facing continuous persecution due to their faith.”

“While IAMC welcomes the latest nominations and appointments,  more needs to be done by President Biden’s administration to ensure that  human rights and religious freedom is part of its broader diplomacy. It is in the US interest to have geopolitical stability around the world, and especially in South Asia. IAMC is eager to help the incoming Ambassador and the two USCIRF appointees in addressing the issues of minorities in India.”

Secretary Blinken’s Assessment Of Indian Democracy Is Not Compatible With Ground Reality

“The most remarkable democratic election in the world, in many ways , is here in India” Blinken told a press conference.  As a pravasi Indian I wish these were true statements and I want India to be known this way among the nations of the world.  Blinken either believes this to be true or he was ignoring the truth for the sake of international diplomacy.  Since there is no freedom of the press in India only polished news comes out.

Blinken would have simply gone with a political argument ignoring the reality on the ground.  Either way, based on the facts on the ground Blinken was either misguided or as the UCA (United Catholic Asian) news quotes it was Blinken’s blinkered vision of India to suit Modi.  These words would have been soothing for the ears of Mr. Modi and his party.

However, this does not give justice to hundreds of Christians and other minorities who sacrificed their lives due to the quest of the ruling party to declare India as a Hindu state. The poor departed souls must have been churning in their graves when they hear such statements.  The injustices suffered by the 84-year-old Fr. Stan Sway alone should have been reason enough for Mr. Blinken to have been more cautious in his statements about human rights and respect for democratic principles by the government of India.

According to Reuters, on July 23, 2021 a senior State Department official said that  U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken will raise human rights issues with officials in India when he visits the country next week.  If Secretary Blinken was aware of human rights violations in India, how can he take an about-turn stand after 12 hours of air travel to India?  USCIRF (United States Commission on International Religious Freedom) recommends India as one of the Countries of Particular Concern (CPC) as India is listed by Open doors as the tenth most violators of human rights in the world.  Now Secretary Blinken will have to accept or reject the recommendations of the State Department’s own report by the bureau of democracy human rights and labor.

We hope and pray that Secretary Blinken will have the wisdom to do the right thing.  Of course, no one is happy about such a rating for India, but due to the stubborn stand of several nationalists in the Modi administration, this may be the only medicine for them to respect the basic human rights and religious freedom of minorities.

India had a good beginning after the independence which adopted the principles of pluralism and secularism.  However, the evils of the caste system and the supremacy ideologies of the majority squeezed out any decency that was left in the political system in India by the ruling majority of the Modi government.

The current government has been suppressing all kinds of freedom in India including individual and press freedoms.  Anyone criticizing any act of the government is termed as anti-national and they will be jailed indefinitely without the chance for a bail hearing.  Such atrocities are unheard of in a decent democracy.  What is the basis for Secretary Blinken’s assessment that India is a remarkable democracy?  Facts on the ground state otherwise.  All he needs is to talk to anyone of the church leaders in India to find the real situation.

Is the election process in India rigged?  Don’t know for sure unless there is a reliable process for recounts or investigations.  The EVM (electronic voting machines) in India are always under the control of the government where chances for abuses are real.  However, without blaming anyone, we should go back to paper ballots as adopted by many civilized nations.

Who ever may be ruling India we must have peace and harmony.  This is possible only if the ruling majority respects the interests of the minority.  Citizens to follow religious faith of their choice in India has become a challenge under Prime Minister Modi’s watch.  If India has to prosper, she has to get rid of the caste system.  We appeal to the government of India not to pass any more laws that hurt the interest of the minorities.  In the meantime, until India reverses all its unjust laws, US State Department must include India in the list of CPC nations to encourage India to go back to her roots and give all Indians the same rights and privileges under the law.

Veena Reddy First Indian-American To Be Made USAID’s India Mission Director

Veena Reddy, an Indian American United States Foreign Service officer with the US Agency for International Development has been named USAID India Mission Director. She was previously Cambodia Mission Director.

“Today, Veena Reddy was sworn-in as our new Mission Director. She will be the first Indian-American to lead USAID-India, representing the best of both countries, and aims to bolster US-India’s development partnership leveraging her unique experiences and leadership,” tweeted USAID.

“Best wishes, Veena USAID-India. India-USAID partnership has the potential to make a difference to the lives of people not only in India and US, but across the world!” tweeted India’s Ambassador to the United States Taranjit Singh Sandhu.

Reddy – a corporate attorney by profession – arrived in Cambodia in August 2017 and oversaw a staff of 75 as well as USAID programs in the food security, environment, health, education, child protection, and democracy and governance sectors. She has served as Deputy Mission Director in Haiti, where she oversaw post-earthquake reconstruction efforts, elections support, economic growth, food security interventions, hurricane response, and the development of a new strategy, USAID said.

Prior to this posting, she served in Washington as an Assistant General Counsel, covering legal matters for USAID’s programs in Asia, Middle East, and Afghanistan, and Pakistan. She has also served in USAID missions in Pakistan, the Central Asian Republics, and Central America.

An Indian American, Raj Shah, was appointed as the 16th Administrator of USAID by President Barach Obama in November 2009 and he served in that position for six years. President Donald Trump had named an Indian-American lawyer, Sue Ghosh Stricklett, to head the Asian operations of the USAID as its Assistant Administrator.

Revamped UN System Crucial For A Changing World

From an international humanitarian perspective, the first half of 2021 has been disappointing. We’re no further ahead in ending the conflict in Syria and Yemen. From the fledgling democracy that it had become, Myanmar has descended into what most of its people had hoped was a bygone era of military rule. And in Ethiopia, where its Prime Minister, Ably Ahmed, was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2019, armed conflict in Tigray is preventing the 2020 winners of the very same prize, the World Food Programme, from delivering the food needed to stop at least 350,000 Ethiopians from starving to death.

These are not the only conflicts raging in 2021. There are many in Africa and a few still linger on in Asia and South America. And once again, Afghanistan, the country that defied Alex the Great, the Brits, the Russians and now the Americans and NATO, is set to move center stage on the humanitarian front.

Since its founding in 1945, Canada has always looked to the United Nations to head off armed conflict and to alleviate the human suffering that it causes. That includes preventing the use of hunger as a weapon of war. Canada’s contribution to UN peacebuilding has dropped considerably since 1970, when its proposal for 0.7% of a donor country’s GNI was accepted as the target for foreign aid. Nevertheless, it is still among the top five donors to the World Food Programme. Canadians expect the UN to do its job.

UN Secretary General, Antonio Guterres and WFP Executive Director, David Beasley, have repeatedly warned that unless war and armed conflict is ended, people could starve to death in several countries. They have appealed to the leaders of opposing sides and those fighting proxy wars to let UN humanitarians and their NGO partners do their job. In early February 2021, soon after the fighting started in Ethiopia’s Tigray Region, David Beasley visited Addis Ababa.

He was assured that immediate access to Tigray would be granted for WFP and other humanitarian workers, as well as safe passage for its convoys of food aid trucks. Well, that didn’t happen for months. The first WFP plane with humanitarian workers only landed in Makelle, Tigray’s capital, on July 22. As for the convoys of WFP food aid trucks, they’re frequently attacked or blocked en route and don’t have anything like free passage.

So why is the UN so ineffective at ending conflicts, or even getting access granted for humanitarian supplies? It’s all to do with the principles on which the UN was founded: noninterference in the internal affairs of sovereign States. So, are UN humanitarians just supposed to stand by when a government decides to attack and kill off some of its citizens, or let large numbers starve to death when famine looms? No, not since the World Summit of 2005, when governments unanimously adopted R2P or the Responsibility to Protect.

In the aftermath of the 1994 Rwanda genocide and the 1995 Srebrenica massacre, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan insisted that the traditional notions of sovereignty had been redefined: “States are now widely understood to be instruments at the service of their peoples”, he argued. In his report “We the People” on the role of the United Nations in the 21st Century, he posed the following question: “If humanitarian intervention is, indeed, an unacceptable assault on sovereignty, how should we respond to a Rwanda, to a Srebrenica – to gross and systematic violations of human rights that offend every precept of our common humanity?”

Yet despite the widespread human suffering in Syria, Yemen, Myanmar and Ethiopia, the Responsibility to Protect has not been invoked. More work needs to be done on R2P, including an expansion of its scope. So too on “humanitarian intervention”, which does not always require the deployment of foreign forces to mitigate human suffering.

And the voluntary agreement by P5 Security Council members (Britain, China, France Russia and the United States) to withhold their veto power when resolutions to stop genocide and crimes against humanity are being considered is another ad hoc effort to prevent the wholesale slaughter of humankind. But with more and more ordinary people around the world standing up and making it known to their governments that crimes against humanity and dying from starvation is not acceptable, it is clear that the piecemeal approach that we’ve cobbled together over the last half-century falls well short of today’s expectations. A total overhaul and reorganization of the UN humanitarian system is required as a first step.

In September, when the UN General Assembly reconvenes, Antonio Guterres will be reconfirmed as UN Secretary General. For the next 5 years, he will have the opportunity to bring about some the changes to the UN System that he keeps speaking about without having to worry if any of the P5 will oppose his second term in office. He will have to move fast on Agenda 2030, the 17 Sustainable Development Goals, or SDGs. With less than a decade to go, these are far from being attained. We must reduce inequality; it’s a major cause of conflict.

Covid-19 is the biggest challenge the world has faced since the Spanish Flu, a century ago. It has affected everyone and everything we do. It has increased the number of food insecure people around the world by149 million, according to WFP; so close on 1 billion of us now go to bed hungry. And despite anti-Covid vaccines having been developed in record time, variants will keep emerging and we’ll be playing catch-up for years to come.

Climate change, an even bigger challenge, is already on us and is set to intensify. Extreme weather has devastated parts of north-western America and neighbouring Canada this Spring resulting in unbearably high heat and wildfires. Abnormal floods in China and Germany have resulted in unusually high mortality and devastated towns and cities in both countries.

So, while 2021 will end up as a disappointing year for multilateralists, the challenges that lie ahead in 2022 and beyond will be even greater. Despite the odds, UN humanitarians and their NGO partners have already saved many lives in 2021. But years of experience show that a revamped United Nations System is critical if we are to deal effectively with the challenges of the 21st century.

Trevor Page, resident in Lethbridge, Canada, is a former Director of the World Food Programme. He also served with the UN refugee agency, UNHCR and what is now the UN Department of Political and Peace Building Affairs.

 

 

Ajay Ghosh Chronicles Journey Of Indian American Physicians In A Book Charting Success Story/Rise Of Indian Americans

WhileIndian American physicians play a critical role, serving millions of patients in the United States, leading the policies and programs that impact the lives of millions today, it has been a long and arduous journey of struggles and hard work to be on the top of the pyramid,” writes Ajay Ghosh, Editor of the www.theunn.com and the Media Coordinator of American Association of Physicians of Indian Origin (AAPI) in a new book, released in New Delhi last month and is due for release in the United States next month.

Edited by the Delhi-based veteran journalist and foreign policy analystTarunBasu, the evocative collection titled, “Kamala Harris and the Rise of Indian Americans,” captures the rise of the Indians in the US across domains by exceptional achievers like Shashi Tharoor, a former UN public servant-turned Indian politician, and top diplomats like TP Sreenivasan and Arun K Singh. Sixteen eminent journalists, business leaders and scholars have contributed essays to the timely and priceless volume, which charts the community’s growing and influential political engagement. The book was released July 15 by New Delhi-based publisher Wisdom Tree and is available in the U.S. via Amazon. Basu describes the book as an “eclectic amalgam of perspectives on the emerging Indian-American story.”

This evocative collection—of the kind perhaps not attempted before—captures the rise of Indian-Americans across domains, by exceptional achievers themselves, like Shashi Tharoor, the ones who have been and continue to be a part of the “rise,” like MR Rangaswami and Deepak Raj, top Indian diplomats like TP Sreenivasan and Arun K Singh, scholars like Pradeep K Khosla and Maina Chawla Singh, and others who were part of, associated with, or keenly followed their stories. “With 100,000 Indian American doctors; over 20,000 Indian American hoteliers; with a growing number of Indian American CEOs employing an estimated 3.5 million people worldwide; with one in three tech startups having an Indian American founder, and one is ten tech workers being of Indian origin, only sky is the limit for the enterprising community,” writes Basu, who is now the president of New Delhi-based think tank Society for Policy Studies, said.

A collector’s item, this eye-opening saga of a diaspora, which is possibly amongst the most successful and enterprising globally, would not only prove to be highly readable and insightful for a wide readership, but also immensely substantive for scholars and people in governance. As a long-time analyst of India’s foreign policy, Basu has tracked international relations across multiple Indian governments, having traveled widely with eight Indian prime ministers.

Basu has maintained a keen interest in the accomplishments of Indians abroad and has kept close touch with the community. The purpose of this anthology of essays edited by him is to bring to the global eye the unfolding saga of four million Indians in the United States. Indian Americans currently are just 1% of the US population but are expected to rise to 2% by 2030. Portraying the rise of the Indian American physicians as a strong and influential force in the United States, Ajay Ghosh chronicling their long journey to the United States and their success story, in a Chapter titled, “Physicians of Indian Heritage: America’s Healers” takes the readers to the times of Dr. AnandibaiJoshi, the first documented physician of Indian origin who had landed on the shores of the United States in 1883.

The arrival of Dr. YellapragadaSubbarow in the early 20th century, who has been credited with some of the biggest contributions in more than one basic field of science—biochemistry, pharmacology, microbiology, oncology, and nutritional science, portrays the discrimination and injusticesinflicted by the mainstream Medical professionals in the US. The story of the present day “Covid Warriors” who work as frontline healthcare workers treating millions of patients across the nation during the current Covid pandemic, and the thousands of others who lead the cutting-edge research and pioneer modern medical technology to save the lives of critically ill patients around the world, shows to the world, how through hard work, dedication and vision, they have earned a name for themselves as “healers of the world.”

Through the lens of AAPI and its remarkable growth in the past 40 years, Ajay Ghosh, a veteran journalist in the US, who has seen and experienced how the Indian-American physicians have gone beyond their call of duty to meet the diverse needs of the larger American community, by dedicating their time, resources and skills during national disasters and family crises, says, “The importance and high esteem with which physicians of Indian heritage are held by their patients is self-evident, as they occupy critical positions in the healthcare, research and administrative policy positions across America.” Their contributions to the US, to India and to the entire world is priceless, he writes, as “they have made their mark in institutions from Harvard Medical School to Memorial Sloane Kettering Cancer Center to the Mayo Medical Center.”

The Indian American community is the most educated with the highest median income in the US and has excelled in almost every area it has touched―from politics to administration, entrepreneurship to technology, medicine to hospitality, science to academia, business to entertainment, philanthropy to social activism. The election of Vice President Kamala Harris has put the global spotlight like never before on the small but high-achieving Indian-American diaspora.

Highlighting the achievements of Indians in America, Basu, who is the founder-editor of news agency IANS, saidthat the community’s success serves as a ‘model’ for other nations. “A community that has made its mark with its culture of hard work, risk-taking, inclusive attitude, and passion for excellence can only be rising to greater prominence, making them a global diasporic “model community” for other nations whose governments are studying the success stories of the Indian American community with great interest.

“Indian Americans are most talked about because they live in the world’s most powerful and richest nation, a shining exemplar of meritocracy, and yet Indians have excelled in almost every area they touched – public affairs to administration, entrepreneurship to technology, medicine to hospitality, science to academia, business to entertainment, philanthropy to social activism,” Basu explained, highlighting the achievements of Surgeon-General DrVivek Murthy, Virgin Galactic’s SirishaBandla, and Samir Banerjee, who lifted the Wimbledon boys’ singles title recently.

“The nomination — and subsequent election — of the U.S.-born Indian origin Kamala Harris put the media spotlight on the small, but respected and high-achieving Indian American community,” writes Basu in his preface. “It is a fascinating and inspiring story of how an immigrant population from a developing country, with low education levels, became the most educated, highest-earning ethnic community in the world’s most advanced nation in almost a single generation,” he said, noting that Indian Americans have made their mark in almost every field, from the traditional trifecta of science, engineering and medicine, to the arts, academia, philanthropy, and, increasingly, politics.

Veteran journalist Aziz Haniffa wrote a preface, noting that Harris had initially bypassed the radar of the Indian American community at the start of her political career. Shashi Tharoor wrote, noting Harris’s multiple identities. “For the thousands of little Black girls who made ‘My VP Looks Like Me’ T-shirts go viral over the next few days, Harris represented an expansion of their horizons.” “Over the past decade, I watched as, one by one, the world’s most powerful technology titans announced an Indian would be their new CEO,” wrote Rangaswami, a venture capitalist and founder of the Sand Hill Group.

Other contributors for the include: former Indian ambassadors TP Sreenivasan and Arun K. Singh; Deepak Raj, chairman of Pratham USA; businessman Raj Gupta; hotelier Bijal Patel; Pradeep Khosla, Chancellor of UC San Diego; scholar-professor Maina Chawla Singh; Sujata Warrier, Chief Strategy Officer for the Battered Women’s Justice Project; Shamita Das Dasgupta, co-founder of Manavi; and journalists Arun Kumar, MayankChhaya, Suman GuhaMozumder, Ajay Ghosh, VikrumMathur, and LaxmiParthasarathy.

The book is now available at: https://bit.ly/HarrisIA – Amazon India book link, and at https://bit.ly/HarrisIndAm – Amazon USA link

“All People Deserve To Have A Voice In Their Government And Be Treated With Respect” US Secretary Blinken Declares During Visit To India

Democratic values and free citizenry define India, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinkensaid in New Delhi, during his first ever visit to India after the Biden Administration was installed in Washington, DC.  At a press conference after holding bilateral talks with his counterparts in India on Wednesday, July 28, 2021, Secretary Blinken said the United States views India through the prism of common democratic values and that there are challenges that can be ‘ugly’ that need to be dealt through “corrective mechanisms.”

“Our shared values and democratic traditions were part of our conversation,” Blinken said. “The relationship is so strong because it is a relationship between two democracies. Americans admire Indians’ commitment to rights, democracy and pluralism. Indian democracy is powered by its freethinking citizens. I approach this with humility. U.S. has challenges too. The search is for a more perfect union which means we are not perfect. Sometimes, the challenges can be painful, even ugly,” said Blinken to a question about ‘backsliding’ of democratic values in India. Blinken pointed at the free press and independent judiciary as part of the “corrective mechanism” that can repair challenges to democracy.

Blinken arrived in India on July 27th to discuss strengthening Indo-Pacific engagement, seen as a counter to China, as well as New Delhi’s recent human rights record and other issues. Blinken’s visit included meetings with Prime Minister Narendra Modi and senior officials on Wednesday, and was held just days after his No. 2 diplomat, Wendy Sherman, was in China for face-to-face talks.

Earlier, at a civil society roundtable held by Antony Blinken, Inter-faith relations, the farmers’ protest, freedom of expression and the Pegasus spyware issue were discussed by the participants.

Blinken, in his first visit to the country since joining US President Joe Biden’s administration, discussed supplies of COVID-19 vaccines, the security situation in Afghanistan as well as India’s human rights record.

Speaking to a group of civil society leaders at a New Delhi hotel, Blinken said that the relationship between the United States and India was “one of the most important in the world”. And he added, “The Indian people and the American people believe in human dignity and equality of opportunity, the rule of law, fundamental freedoms including freedom of religion and belief … these are the fundamental tenets of democracies like ours. And of course, both of our democracies are works in progress. As friends we talk about that.”

The role of civil society in India also figured in the discussions, with Blinken saying in his opening remarks that democracies such as the US and India need a vibrant civil society if they are to be “more open, more inclusive, more resilient, more equitable.” He added that “all people deserve to have a voice in their government and be treated with respect”. GesheDorjiDamdul, director of the Tibet House in New Delhi; Inter-Faith Harmony Foundation of India head KhwajaIftikhar Ahmed; Representatives of the Ramakrishna Mission and Sikh and Christian organizations were part of the round table, where the seven representatives spoke and shared their concerns about the situation in India.

Concerns over the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA), the deteriorating security situation in Afghanistan and China’s aggressive actions were also raised by the seven civil society representatives who joined the roundtable with the theme “Advancing equitable, inclusive, and sustainable growth and development”, according to participants who declined to be named. “The farmers protest, CAA, restrictions on the media, freedom of expression, rights of minorities, inter-faith relations and the Pegasus surveillance issue were all raised by the representatives but there was no substantial discussion on these matters,” said another participant.

Ahead of Blinken’s visit, the US had said it intended to raise human rights and democracy during his engagements in New Delhi. The US has in the recent past spoken out on issues such as the situation in Kashmir and movements such as the farmers’ protest on the outskirts of Delhi. Following the globally conducted investigation by several media outlets on Pegasus, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken  said that he would discuss human rights and democracy during his two-day visit to India in a constructive way.

“I will tell you that we will raise it, and we will continue that conversation, because we firmly believe that we have more values in common on those fronts we don’t,” Acting Assistant Secretary for South and Central Asian Affairs, Dean Thompson told reporters during a conference call last week. With specific mention to the Indian government’s usage of Pegasus, Thompson said that the US is concerned with the idea of using spyware against a civil society, journalists or anybody for that matter. He also said that the US does not have a particular insight on this issue but they have been quite vocal about ensuring companies do not sell such pieces of technology.

Blinken said India and the US should continue to stand together as leading democracies at a time when global threats to democracy and international freedoms are increasing. Both sides talk about issues such as democracy as friends “because doing the hard work of strengthening democracy and making our ideals real is often challenging”, he said.

Media reports state thatBlinken flagged the concerns of the US regarding democracy and human rights during his talks with external affairs minister S Jaishankar.Asked about these issues at a joint media interaction with Jaishankar, Blinken said shared values and democratic traditions “were very much a part of our conversation today.” He described Indian democracy as a “force for good in defense of a free and open Indo-Pacific and a free and open world” and said both countries have “self-righting mechanisms” made up of free citizens of different faiths, a free media and independent courts powered by a system of free and fair elections.

Jaishankar said he made three points to Blinken, including the fact that the “quest for a more perfect union applies as much to the Indian democracy as it does to the American one”.Ahead of Blinken’s visit, India’s foreign ministry said the country was proud of its pluralistic traditions and happy to discuss the issue with the top US diplomat.Modi’s government has faced allegations it has suppressed dissent, pursued divisive policies to appeal to its Hindu nationalist base and alienated Muslims, the country’s biggest minority.

Opponents of Modi’s ruling Hindu nationalist party have accused it of squashing dissent and introducing policies aimed at refashioning a multi-faith democracy into a Hindu nation that discriminates against Muslims and other minorities. Modi has also been accused of trying to silence voices critical of his administration’s handling of the massive pandemic wave that tore through the country in April and May.India routinely denies criticism of its human rights record and has rejected criticism by foreign governments and rights groups that say civil liberties have shrunk in the country.

Referring to efforts in the US to become a “more perfect union,” Blinken said that “sometimes that process is painful, sometimes it’s ugly, but the strength of democracy is to embrace it”. Blinken also tweeted about “India’s pluralistic society and history of harmony” and said civil society “helps advance these values.” SecretaryBlinken announced an additional $25 million in US government funding to bolster India’s vaccine program. Blinken told a press conference following delegation-level talks between the two sides that the financing will help save lives by bolstering vaccine supply networks across India, since the country has yet to reach a double-digit mark in the percentage of completely immunized individuals.

“This funding will contribute to saving a life by strengthening vaccine supply chain logistics, addressing misinformation, vaccine hesitancy and helping to train more health care workers,” he said.The latest support from the US Agency for International Development (USAID) comes on top of the US government’s announcement of more than $200 million in Covid-19 assistance. Blinkenemphasized that the two governments are committed to putting an end to the Covid-19 pandemic in India and the US.

The New Delhi talks were expected to lay the groundwork for a summit of the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue – comprising Australia, India, Japan and the US – later this year, Indian media reported. Washington has long viewed India as a key partner in efforts to blunt increasing Chinese assertiveness in the region. The U.S. and India are part of the Quad — a group that also includes Japan and Australia — allies in the region helping deal with China’s growing economic and military strength.

The 9/11 Era To End As US Combat Forces To Leave Iraq By 2021 End

President Joe Biden has decided to formally conclude the US combat mission in Iraq by the end of the year, another step toward winding down the two prolonged military engagements that began in the years following the September 11 terror attacks. Biden told reporters in the Oval Office alongside Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi that the US mission in Iraq will shift.  “I think things are going well. Our role in Iraq will be … to be available to continue to train, to assist, to help, and to deal with ISIS — as it arrives. But we’re not going to be, by the end of the year, in a combat mission,” the President later said.

“We support strengthening Iraq’s democracy and we’re anxious to make sure the election goes forward in October,” Biden added alongside the politically embattled prime minister. “And we’re also committed to our security cooperation, our shared fight against ISIS. It’s critical for the stability of the region and our counter-terrorism cooperation will continue, even as we shift to this new phase we’re going to be talking about.” Unlike Biden’s decision to withdraw all American troops from Afghanistan, the end of the combat mission comes at Iraq’s urging. The country is caught in a balancing act between anti-American factions in the country, Iranian-backed militias and the stabilizing presence of the American military.

It will also not result in the withdrawal of US troops from the country, as has happened in Afghanistan. There are currently 2,500 US troops in Iraq, and officials declined to say how that number would change following Monday’s announcement. The US and Iraq are expected to announce the US mission will fully shift to an advisory role by year’s end — meaning some of the changes to the current levels could come on paper only. Still, the two decisions are the best illustrations of Biden’s effort to shift American foreign policy away from decisions made nearly two decades ago. Instead, he wants to focus on threats from China, where a top American diplomat traveled this week for a tense set of meetings.

American troops and their coalition allies first invaded Iraq in 2003 on the premise the government led by Saddam Hussein had developed weapons of mass destruction. The weapons were never found. Biden voted to authorize force against Iraq as a senator, and even joined then-President George W. Bush in the White House East Room when he signed the resolution. He later criticized how the Bush administration handled the war. Then-President Barack Obama announced a withdrawal of troops from the country in 2011. But they returned in 2014 to help combat Islamic State terrorists. Biden was largely responsible for the Iraq portfolio as vice president, traveling to the country at multiple points and engaging its various political factions.

His own son Beau served as a reservist in the country before his death from brain cancer in 2015. Biden has said he suspects that exposure to toxins produced in military waste burn bits led to his son’s condition. Ahead of the first meeting between the two leaders, their governments held technical talks on Thursday and Friday as part of the strategic dialogue between the two countries. As part of Monday’s meeting, Biden will stress continued diplomatic and humanitarian support for Iraq, including a plan to provide the country 500,000 doses of Pfizer’s Covid-19 vaccine.

The shift away from the combat mission is not a major adjustment for the US presence in the region, which already focuses much of its effort on advising and assisting the Iraqi military.  In recent months, US troops in Iraq have been targeted by Iranian drone strikes, prompting back-and-forth retaliatory action. The tensions were dramatically escalated when then-President Donald Trump ordered a strike killing QasemSoleimani, Iran’s top commander, during a visit to a Baghdad airport. While not marking a significant change in troop levels, the symbolic shift away from Iraq is still a notable one for the President. In defending his decision to withdraw from Afghanistan, Biden has repeatedly said it is time to focus on threats from today and not from 20 years ago.

Like in Afghanistan, the results of the 18-year US presence in Iraq are mixed. “Nobody is going to declare ‘mission accomplished,'” a senior administration official said, a reference to the enormous banner unfurled behind Bush on the USS Abraham Lincoln aircraft carrier when he declared combat operations in Iraq over three months after US troops first entered the country. “The goal is the enduring defeat of ISIS,” the official said. “We recognize you have to keep pressure on these networks as they seek to reconstitute, but the role for US forces and coalition forces can very much recede, you know, deep into the background where we are training, advising, sharing intelligence, helping with logistics.”

For the US president, the announcement marks the end of another war that began under former President George W Bush. This year he said US troops would leave Afghanistan.  Speaking at the White House, Biden told his Iraqi counterpart “our counter-terrorism co-operation will continue even as we shift to this new phase.”  Kadhimi responded: “Today our relationship is stronger than ever. Our co-operation is for the economy, the environment, health, education, culture and more.” He has insisted no foreign combat troops are needed in Iraq.

US-led forces invaded Iraq in 2003 to overthrow President Saddam Hussein and eliminate weapons of mass destruction that turned out not to exist. Then President George W Bush promised a “free and peaceful Iraq”, but it was engulfed by a bloody sectarian insurgency. US combat troops eventually withdrew in 2011. However, they returned at the request of the Iraqi government three years later, when IS militants overran large parts of the country.

Joe Biden’s Approval Rating Stays Steady For 6 Months

President Joe Biden’s presidency is now six months old. You’d be forgiven if you didn’t realize how long Biden has been in office because Biden doesn’t generate anywhere near the same news interest (see Google searches) as his predecessor, former President Donald Trump, did. The lack of a topsyturvy first few months has translated to Biden’s approval rating. It’s been the most stable for any president since the end of World War II.

This, indeed, has been the story of the Biden presidency from a popularity standpoint. At every point at which I’ve checkedin to see how Biden is doing from a historical perspective, nothing seems to shake his approval ratings. Right now, Biden’s average approval rating rests at around 53%, no matter how you calculate said average. Over the course of Biden’s first six months in office, his approval rating has never risen above 55% or fallen below 51% in an average of polls. It was 53% in April and 54% in May.

To give you an idea of what a narrow lane Biden’s approval rating is in, you only need to look at history.  Prior to Biden, the average range for post-World War II presidents in their first six months in office was 14 points. Biden’s range is less than a third of that. Nearly every other president saw his maximum and minimum approval rating differ by about greater than 7 points or more. (Lyndon Johnson’s gap was about 5.5 points.)  Former President Donald Trump’s range was 10 points, and he was thought to have an approval rating that was historically stable.

Biden, though, hasn’t really picked up any new supporters since the election. His approval rating matches his vote share (51%) and favorable rating in the exit polls (52%) nearly perfectly. On the other hand, it’s been noticeable how Biden’s relative ranking on approval rating has risen the more time has gone on. Biden’s initial approval rating was near the bottom (only beating Trump) back in January.

Today, it beats Trump, Gerald Ford and Bill Clinton’s. Barack Obama and George W. Bush’s approval ratings are within the margin of error of Biden’s approval rating. With increased polarization, Biden’s approval rating probably has a better chance of not significantly moving during his presidency than it may have in an earlier era.

On the polarization front, Biden has to be pleased that Democrats still seem to stand firmly behind him. It’s hard to find any reputable poll where his approval rating among Democrats is below 90%. In the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll, for instance, it’s 94%. No other president in the post-World War II era had an approval rating at this point within his own party as Biden has now. That’s not to say it’s all groovy for Biden.

The percentage of people firmly behind Biden seems to have shifted down a little bit. In the AP-NORC poll, for example, 25% and 26% of the public strongly approved of him in their last polls. In every poll of theirs before the most recent, more than 30% of the public strongly approved of Biden. Likewise, in an average of live interview polls, the percentage of the public who strongly approved of Biden went from 31% in both January and February to 27% now.

A big question going forward is whether this signals that Biden’s base may not be as strong as it appears at first glance. Another bad piece of news for Biden is that the opposition to him seems to have hardened. Biden’s disapproval rating is now in the low to mid-40s than the mid-30s it was back in January. This reflects more people going from undecided to disapproving of Biden.

If Biden was hoping that his efforts in the first six months of his presidency would bring over new supporters, he is mistaken — at least for the moment. Of course, Biden would probably accept not gaining any supporters, as long as he doesn’t lose any. His approval rating is still above water, and that’s certainly better than his predecessor.

US Congress Begins Investigation Into January 6th Capitol Attack

The centerpiece of the hearing opening a congressional investigation into the Capitol insurrection on July 27th was the emotional testimony given by four front-line police officers who were protecting lawmakers, staff members and visitors at the Capitol complex on Jan. 6 when an angry mob threatened their lives. It’s been nearly seven months since the US Capitol building was breached by hundreds of Donald Trump supporters to reject Joe Biden’s 2020 presidential victory. Since the 6 January attack, Trump has been impeached by the House of Representatives, put on trial in the Senate and acquitted for his role in inspiring the event.

The officers painted a bleak and disturbing picture of not only the hate and violence they faced that day, but also of how Republicans actually view law enforcement. Members of the GOP are willing to trample — quite literally, in some cases — on one of the last remaining pillars of the party they purport to support rather than acknowledge the truth that Donald Trump lost the election fair and square. The appalling display Tuesday goes to show just how comprehensive is the revisionism party leaders are engaging in, while Trump continues to tout these deceitful views.

More than 535 people who entered the Capitol have been arrested on charges like assaulting police officers, impeding an official proceeding and trespassing. More than 300 suspected participants are still unidentified. This week marks the beginning of the first full congressional inquiry into the attack, held by a select committee of the US House of Representatives. The select committee – a temporary panel formed for this specific purpose – will aim to provide a complete and authoritative account of the attack.

Originally, Democrats wanted a special independent commission like the one that investigated the 11 September 2001 attack on the World Trade Center and Pentagon. Such a panel would have had an equal number of former officeholders chosen from both parties. Legislation to form this commission passed the House of Representatives in May with unanimous backing from Democrats and 35 of 211 Republicans. But the proposal died in the Senate, despite support from six Republicans. Opponents – such as Minority Leader Mitch McConnell – warned that a commission would become a “purely political exercise” and would not “promote healing”.

In response, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi formed the select committee. It has hand-picked members and, as with an independent commission, has subpoena power. Unlike a commission, however, it has mostly Democrats because they are in the majority. Only two Republicans – Liz Cheney of Wyoming and Adam Kinzinger of Illinois – voted to form the committee.  The set-up is akin to what happened in 2014, when Republicans, then in control of the House, created the select committee to investigate the 11 September 2012 attack on the US consulate in Benghazi, Libya.

That committee called dozens of witnesses over more than a year – including an eight-hour questioning of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in October 2015 – and became a sharply partisan affair, with Democrats arguing that Republicans were primarily intent on damaging Mrs Clinton during her presidential campaign. Arguably, it worked: the hearings revealed the existence of her private email server, which became a flashpoint in the 2016 election.

The hearings are set to begin with testimony from two Capitol Hill and two Washington, DC police officers who were on duty during the attack. Democrats may hope that their first-hand account of the violence will provide a visceral punch to begin proceedings that, as of yet, have little in the way of detail or organisation. Rumours have swirled that the committee could subpoena senior members of the Trump administration and the Republican leadership in Congress in an attempt to learn more information about the president’s activities as the Capitol assault was unfolding.

The committee could also delve into some of the right-wing groups that planned the demonstrations and whose members took part in breaching the Capitol. But there’s no guarantee that Democrats will be able to compel testimony if witnesses don’t cooperate. There’s also no clear timeline for how long the hearings will take. Few believe congressional Democrats will want this to stretch into next year, when the entire House of Representatives and a third of the Senate’s seats are up for election.

Membership controversy

Shortly after the House approved the select committee, Pelosi named eight of its members – including Adam Schiff of California and Jamie Raskin of Maryland, who served as the managers of Trump’s first and second impeachment trials. Bennie Thompson of Mississippi – who had helped craft the original bipartisan commission proposal – chairs the committee. She also appointed Republican Cheney, who had been stripped of her Republican House leadership position earlier in the year because of her outspoken criticism of Trump.

Last week, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy announced the names of the five members he had selected for the committee, which included Jim Jordan, the Ohio congressman known for his theatrical speeches defending Trump during his two impeachment hearings. In a surprise move, Pelosi rejected Jordan and Jim Banks, the Indiana congressman chosen to be the committee’s most senior Republican. She said she made the move “with respect for the integrity of the investigation” and “concern about statements made and actions taken” by the Republicans picked.

McCarthy quickly suggested this was a sign that the real purpose of the committee was to attack Trump and damage Republicans. Pelosi has since added Republican Kinzinger, bringing its total membership to 10 – with more names possible before committee opens Tuesday. McCarthy, for his part, has threatened to sanction any Republicans who join the committee.

Political fallout

Pelosi’s decision to block Jordan and Banks from the committee may end up being a high risk-reward manoeuvre. Republicans have howled their objection, and Jordan is already sending out fundraising emails saying he was unjustly targeted by the Speaker. If the Democrats become too aggressive in their attacks, it could help drive up Republican turnout in next year’s elections – and, perhaps cost them their House majority. Many on the left, however, welcomed the decision to side-line the bombastic Jordan and celebrated Pelosi’s exhibition of the kind of raw political muscle they’ve yearned for.

Pelosi may also end up highlighting the divide between the majority of Republican officeholders who support Trump and the handful of holdouts who have criticised the former president for his post-election actions. These hearings will give the latter a high-profile platform to make the case that their party is better off without Trump. A final verdict will be delivered in the 2022.

US Lawmakers Urge Action on Pegagus

In the context of Modi government snooping on diplomats, activists, political opponents and the media, U.S. lawmakers are growing increasingly alarmed by reports that the Israeli firm NSO Group leased military-grade spyware to authoritarian regimes around the world, who allegedly used it to hack the phones of politicians, journalists, human rights activists and business executives.

Rep. Tom Malinowski, who has been at the forefront of demands that Saudi Arabia be held accountable over the murder of Jamal Khashoggi, told Haaretz that he is considering legislation aimed at regulating the private spyware industry. “I’ve been following this for a while, so I’m not at all surprised that the reporting has uncovered evidence of what any rational person would have assumed to be true given the NSO Group’s client list and potential uses of sensitive technology,” the New Jersey Democrat said.

“I’m glad it’s getting the attention it deserves because this is an industry that is currently completely unregulated — which is a scandal in itself. This kind of sensitive hacking and surveillance technology should not be sold by private companies to the highest bidder on the open market,” Malinowski added. “The problem goes well beyond one company. There’s an industry that has been created to meet a demand for this technology and it’s enabled by the lack of regulation. What they are doing is technically legal; the point is it should not be,” he noted.

Malinowski, who serves on the House Foreign Affairs and Homeland Security Committees, said NSO Group needs to come clean following the company’s firm rejection of the revelations. “The categorical denials, combined with a refusal to provide any information about who their clients are, should be unacceptable to the U.S. government and other governments seeking to prevent the proliferation of this technology,” he said, adding that “their denials suggest either unbelievable credulity or arrogant dishonesty. “A fundamental principle should be that authoritarian governments cannot receive this kind of technology. What NSO Group is saying right now is equivalent to saying ‘we sold silencers to the mafia, but don’t worry, they’re only using it for target practice,” Malinowski continued. “I don’t care what promises are signed on a piece of paper, these are governments that do not distinguish between dissent and terrorism.

When they say they will use the technology against terrorists, they are saying they will use it against journalists.” “I do think responsibility is first and foremost with the United States government. I’d love to see Israel work with the U.S. and other democratic countries to establish some rules governing this trade, but I wouldn’t expect the Israeli government to do this alone,” said Malinowski, who also previously served as Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor. “The U.S. should lead this effort, and I expect this to be the case moving forward.” While Malinowski is calling for the swift development of rules that would enable companies like NSO Group to be held accountable, he notes there are already tools that can be implemented — namely the Khashoggi Ban, a sanction and visa restriction established by the Biden administration that would target anyone believed to have targeted dissidents outside the borders of their country on behalf of a foreign government.

“The U.S. does have tools to prohibit companies and investors from doing business with entities like NSO Group. Sanctions should be explored and possibly implemented. We can’t deal with this on a case-by-case basis, however,” Malinowski said. “We need much more clear rules for the industry that signal that people cannot be monetizing their talents by selling sensitive technology to authoritarian states. Malinowski is not the only U.S. lawmaker to call for action following the reporting on NSO Group. Sen. Ron Wyden, who has previously called for investigations into whether technology sold by NSO Group and other foreign surveillance companies was involved in the hacking of U.S. citizens, raised the topic during a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing this week.

“There’s got to be some accountability for spies for hire. And that is going to be a central part of this discussion,” Wyden said, echoing his comments to the Washington Post that “these spy-for-hire firms are a threat to U.S. national security, and the administration should consider all options to ensure that federal employees are not targeted.” A U.S. State Department official told Haaretz that they have no announcements concerning visa restrictions. “The United States condemns the harassment or extrajudicial surveillance of journalists, human rights activists, or other perceived regime critics,” the official said.

“Just as states have the duty to protect human rights, businesses have a responsibility to respect human rights. Thus, they should ensure that their products or services are not being used by end users to abuse fundamental freedoms,” the official added. Rep. Joaquin Castro, a member of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and vice chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, called on Congress to investigate “this threat to democracy,” adding that his office is working with the San Antonio-based family of Paul Rusesabagina, currently imprisoned in Rwanda. His daughter’s phone was among those hacked by NSO Group’s Pegasus spyware, according to The Guardian.

He said he did not want to speculate without evidence regarding linkage between NSO Group‘s client list and countries with whom Israel improved diplomatic ties under former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, but noted that he “would assume if the Israeli government assumes export licenses, that it knows where products are being exported to.” Democratic lawmakers have called on the Biden administration to consider placing NSO Group on an export blacklist, saying that recent revelations of misuse reinforced their conviction that the “hacking-for-hire industry must be brought under control”.

The statement by four members of Congress followed reports by the Pegasus project, a collaboration of 17 media organisations including the Guardian, which investigated NSO, the Israeli company that sells its powerful surveillance software to government clients around the world. The leak at the heart of the Pegasus project contained tens of thousands of phone numbers of individuals who are believed to have been selected as candidates for possible surveillance by clients of NSO. The numbers included those of heads of state such as the French president, Emmanuel Macron, government ministers, diplomats, activists, journalists, human rights defenders and lawyers.

NSO has also said the data has “no relevance” to the company, and has rejected the reporting by the Pegasus project as “full of wrong assumptions and uncorroborated theories”. It denied that the leaked data represented those targeted for surveillance by the Pegasus software. NSO has said the 50,000 number is exaggerated and said it was too large to represent individuals targeted by Pegasus. The company has also said that its government clients are contractually mandated to use Pegasus to target suspected criminals and terrorists and has said it would investigate any allegations of abuse.

AP-NORC Poll Finds, Many Republicans Uneasy About GOP’s Future

Most Republicans want former President Donald Trump to have at least some influence over their party’s direction even as many who side with the GOP say they are uneasy about its future. A new poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research captures widespread unease among Republicans over everything from the direction of the country to the state of American democracy and, in particular, President Joe Biden. Just 15% approve of the way Biden is handling his job, and 66% continue to say the Democrat was illegitimately elected, a lie perpetuated by Trump that underscores his persistent grip on GOP voters.

Republicans have plenty of concern about their own party, too. Fewer than half of Republicans, 41%, say they are optimistic about the GOP’s future. Just 13% say they are “very” optimistic. And one third, 33%, say they are pessimistic. Just a few seats shy of majorities in the House and the Senate, Republican leaders hope they are within striking distance of retaking control of Congress in next year’s midterm elections. But the findings about the party’s lukewarm optimism could be an early warning sign of lagging enthusiasm among Republican voters, particularly without Trump on the ballot after he helped lift congressional candidates in 2020.

That’s despite the fact history has shown the president’s party almost always loses seats in the midterm elections and despite the general enthusiasm about the party’s long list of potential 2024 candidates. Some Republicans in especially competitive states said they are increasingly disillusioned with the political process. “It’s frustrating,” said Dennis Herzog, 36, a contractor who lives in Reedsville, Wisconsin, of the constant bickering between the parties. While he describes himself as a staunch Republican, he said he’s disenchanted by “the whole system in general.” “It’s nonstop,” he said. “I don’t care who is in office. Just do what’s right for the people and stop picking certain sides.”

Republican leaders have spent much of this year trying to rile up voters, pointing to concerns about inflation and stoking culture wars over issues including immigration, election conspiracy theories and critical race theory, an academic framework that examines history through the lens of racism.  That’s doing little to appeal to people like 28-year-old Nicholas Blethrow, a Republican who lives in Orange County, California, and described the state of his party as “pretty much a disaster.” Blethrow, who did not vote for Trump in 2016 or 2020, said he was frustrated by his party’s ongoing efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election, which he calls “ridiculous,” along with some of its members’ opposition to COVID-19 vaccinations and continued embrace of the former president. “Clearly there’s a lot of people that enjoy him. But I don’t think it’s good,” he said.

Other Republicans disagree. The poll shows that Trump remains a commanding figure in the party. While most former presidents tend to cede the spotlight after leaving office, Trump has continued to assert his power, holding rallies, making endorsements and teasing a 2024 comeback run. While 60% of the public overall has an unfavorable view of Trump, 76% of Republicans view him favorably. And most would like to see him maintain at least some degree of influence over the GOP going forward.

Nearly half of Republicans, 47%, say that Trump should exert “a lot” of influence over the future of the party, and another 34% say he should have “a little” influence. Just 18% say Trump should have none at all. “I think he did a lot of good for the party,” said George Hunter, 61, who lives in Washington state outside Seattle and runs an online store. Hunter was among the minority of Republicans who said he felt optimistic about the party’s future given what he sees as Democrats’ failures on crime, foreign policy and the economy and his expectation that Republicans will sweep contests next November. “After the next election, I think things will be better. I think the Democrats will lose their majorities. That way Biden will get less done than he wants,” he said.

For Herzog, who describes the current political situation as “quite the mess,” pessimism is driven, in part, by concerns about the economy, especially inflation, and the rising cost of his supplies. He said he knows of businesses that are talking about closing their doors because they can’t find workers and he doesn’t understand why the government keeps sending out additional relief payments. But he’d also like to see his party embark on a new direction. “I think there needs to be a switch in the Republican Party,” he said. “There’s got to be a happy medium between the old schoolers,” he said, and a new generation. “You have to find some middle ground.”

As for the 2020 election, the poll shows that 62% of Republicans say it’s “extremely” or “very” important that investigations into the election continue, even though no substantiated evidence has emerged to support Trump’s claims of mass election fraud, which have been dismissed by numerous judges, including some he appointed, state election officials and his own attorney general. Just 38%, in contrast, say it’s “extremely” or “very” important to continue investigations into the events of Jan. 6, when a group of Trump’s supporters violently stormed the Capitol building, trying to halt the transition of power.

Like Democrats, few Republicans, only 10%, say democracy is working “extremely” or “very” well in the country today. But Republicans are more negative than Democrats; 63% of Republicans say democracy is not working well. Just 17% say they think the nation is headed in the right direction. As for other Republican leaders, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell faces mixed reviews from his party, viewed favorably by only about 4 in 10 Republicans; roughly as many dislike him. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy is more popular than not with Republicans, though about half say they don’t know enough about him to form an opinion.

Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., who voted for Trump’s second impeachment and has since emerged as one of his top Republican critics, has the inauspicious distinction of being rated favorably by more Democrats than Republicans, 47% versus 21%. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., who has drawn headlines with her incendiary comments and conspiracy peddling, remains largely an unknown, even within her own party. While 29% of Republicans have a favorable opinion, 48% say they don’t know enough about her to say.

Why COVID-19’s Origins Must Be Investigated

The theories vary widely in credibility and likelihood, but no one is really sure how COVID-19 became the world’s worst health crisis. But researchers should dig deeper into the origin of the virus that has caused the world pandemic to prepare for future viral outbreaks, according to Peter Hotez, MD, PhD. He is dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine and co-director of the Texas Children’s Hospital Center for vaccine development in Houston.

COVID-19 is not the first serious viral outbreak in the 21st century and it is unlikely to be the last, he said during a recent episode of “AMA COVID-19 Update.” To be prepared for the next outbreak, medical researchers need to understand the development and growth of current one, he said. Ongoing research over the past 10 years actually helped the medical research community respond quickly to the pandemic with treatment and vaccines, Dr. Hotez said. COVID-19 marks the third “major coronavirus epidemic” of the 21st century, he explained.

“We had SARS, the original coronavirus pandemic/epidemic. Severe acute respiratory syndrome rose out of Guangdong province in South China in 2002 and then spread to Toronto and caused a lot of deaths and havoc in the city of Toronto, shut down the city for a while in 2003. “Then we had MERS, Middle Eastern respiratory syndrome, in 2012 and that has lasted a few years. It went into South Korea and caused a hospital-associated outbreak there. Again, very high mortality and a lot of deaths,” he said.

In aftermath of other epidemics

As a result, researchers expected another coronavirus epidemic or pandemic, though not necessarily one as bad as the COVID-19 outbreak. “This was the worst by far,” he said. Researchers anticipated the initial outbreak from China where the preceding epidemics occurred, but were surprised it came from Central China, not Southern China, as was the case with the 2002 SARS epidemic, he said.

The biggest surprise, however, was the public reaction and the belief that the disease did not arise naturally, but from some sort of laboratory leak or manipulation. He said that charge didn’t make sense because the other similar outbreaks were clearly natural, not the result of laboratory issues. “Look, it’s not impossible, but here’s what we need to do. The most important thing is to uncover the origins and the only way you are really going to do that, whether it’s lab leak or otherwise, is to do an outbreak investigation. And we know how to do this,” he said. Visit the AMA COVID-19 resource center for clinical information, guides and resources, and updates on advocacy and medical ethics.

More investigation in China

“We need to bring in a team of scientists that are working Hubei province—international scientists, U.S. scientists, working with Chinese scientists to collect saliva, blood samples from bats, from other potential secondary animal sources, from humans and really trace the origins of COVID-19.”

Why bats, rather than other common animals?

“We know bats have an important role because coronaviruses are found naturally in bats. Bats are natural hosts to other catastrophic viruses. … So, the point is that understanding how the bat ecology interfaces with other animal reservoirs as a second intermediate host, or how the viruses jump from bats to people or bats to another animal to people,” he said. All of this is critical to evading the next coronavirus pandemic, he said.

“I don’t see how you could think about designing prevention strategies without having some understanding of that,” he said. While Dr. Hotez has pushed back on “outrageous conspiracy theories of sending infected Chinese abroad” to intentionally spread SARS-CoV-2, he added that the role of the Chinese government and its researchers should be examined. The slow flow of information and lack of transparency in the early days of the pandemic may have led to a slower medical response.

Get the latest news on the COVID-19 pandemic, vaccines, variants and more reliable information directly from experts and physician leaders with the “AMA COVID-19 Update.” You can catch every episode by subscribing to the AMA’s YouTube channel or the audio-only podcast version.

Have Democrats Become A Party Of The Left?

The current condition of the Democratic Party presents an apparent paradox. On the one hand, the party’s ideological composition has shifted to the left. In the quarter century since Bill Clinton’s first term, moderates’ share of the party has fallen from a plurality of 48% to just 35% while liberals’ share has doubled from 25% to 51%. 2020 was the first time ever that liberals constituted an outright majority of the party.

On the other hand, moderates contributed more votes to Joe Biden’s victory than did liberals, as has been the case for winning Democratic presidential candidates for decades. The difference between these two measures is easily explained. Despite expanding by 6 percentage points since Jimmy Carter’s defeat in 1980, self-identified liberals still constitute the smallest portion of the electorate, as has been the case for four decades—as the following table indicates.

While most liberals are Democrats, many moderates are either Republicans or Independents. (In 2020, nearly half of Independents described themselves as moderate, compared to just 20% who think of themselves as liberal.) Biden did slightly better among liberals and Democrats in 2020 than Hillary Clinton did in 2016, but he did much better than she did among moderates and Independents. He increased the Democrats’ share of the moderate vote from 52 to 64%, expanding their margin from 12 percentage points to 30 points. And he increased Democrats’ share of Independents from 42 to 54%, turning a 4-point loss in 2016 into a 13-point advantage in 2020.

Thus, at the national level, a winning Democratic coalition relies on legions of voters who are neither Democrats nor liberals. Successful Democratic presidential candidates must win strong—not narrow—majorities of moderate voters, and they must at least keep it close among Independents. Table 2 shows the electoral coalitions of recent Democratic presidents. Note that all of them rely on votes from moderates.[1]

Democratic primary voters seem to recognize this reality. The last time Democrats nominated the contender who stood farthest to the left was in 1972, and the results of the general election did not encourage them to repeat this experiment. Despite the party’s steady shift to the left over the past quarter century, Democrats have been forced to take electoral reality into account when they select their presidential nominee. One might think that Democrats’ incentives would be very different in subnational jurisdictions where they enjoy strong majorities. But as the recent mayoral primary in New York City shows, this is not necessarily so.

Despite the fact that Rudy Giuliani led New York City for two mayoral terms, followed by Mike Bloomberg for three terms, many observers persist in viewing New York City as the most liberal big city in America, with the possible exception of San Francisco. It came as a surprise to them that in the recent mayoral race, the winner and the strong second place finisher were not the most left-wing candidates. The winner, Eric Adams, ran as a law-and-order centrist and establishment politician; the second-place finisher, Kathryn Garcia, ran on her experience in city government. Left-wing voters coalesced around Maya Wiley, who won the endorsement of Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Ortiz. Wiley came in third, and Andrew Yang, another moderate candidate who allied himself with Garcia in the campaign’s closing weeks, finished fourth.

Whether one looks at the first-round results or the dynamics of the ranked-choice voting process that the city used, the overall picture remains the same. If political opinions were evidence-based, the NYC results would make it a little harder for Fox News and their viewers to argue that Democrats are a party of socialists who want to let crime run amok, give away your money, and teach your children that all whites are racists.

Let’s look more closely at the results of this revealing primary contest.

On the initial ranked-choice ballot, the centrist candidate, Eric Adams, racked up a substantial first ballot lead over the second-place finisher, Maya Wiley, heiress to the Sanders/AOC wing of the Democratic party. Wiley came in only a few points above the third-place finisher, another centrist, Kathryn Garcia. As the field was winnowed in subsequent rounds, Garcia overtook Wiley for 2nd place, leaving a contest between two relatively moderate candidates, Garcia and Adams, in the final round.

Because this was the first mayor’s race conducted using ranked choice voting, there were no exit polls conducted, so scholars have had to go back to an old-fashioned way of understanding election results by making inferences based on geography. The results in the five boroughs of New York tell an interesting story. While Adams did not do well in upscale Manhattan, he won the less affluent African American sections of Brooklyn, Queens, and the Bronx. And he did so by specifically repudiating calls to “defund the police,” declaring at one point that was a conversation being pushed by “a lot of young white affluent people.”

Most minority communities, it turns out, want both more policing and better policing, and Adams hit this sweet spot with special credibility as a former reform-minded police officer. Like Biden before him, Adams seems to have understood that ideas fashionable on the activist left don’t always work for the voters who are most likely to be affected by rising crime rates.[2] Even in NYC, it turns out, Democrats need to balance the views of mostly white progressives with those of working-class voters, many of them racial and ethnic minorities, who focus on the conditions they experience every day in their communities and put concrete results ahead of ideological correctness. As Democrats look ahead to 2022 and 2024, when social and cultural issues will be hotly contested, this lesson should not be forgotten.

Rahul Gandhi Accuses Modi Of ‘Treason,’ Demands Home Minister’s Resignation

Congress leader Rahul Gandhi has accused Prime Minister Narendra Modi of “treason”, called for the resignation of Union Home Minister Amit Shah, and demanded a judicial probe into allegations of surveillance using Pegasus spyware. Gandhi’s name has been featured in the list of potential targets. On Friday, Gandhi claimed all his phones were being tapped. “Pegasus is classified by the Israeli state as a weapon, and that weapon is supposed to be used against terrorists. The Prime Minister and the Home Minister have used this weapon against the Indian state and our institutions. They have used it politically, they have used it in Karnataka,” Gandhi told reporters. “The only word for this is treason.”

Pegasus took center stage in Parliament, leading to repeated adjournments of both Houses Gandhi’s name has been featured in the list of potential targets. Phones of at least five of Gandhi’s close friends and aides, including AlankarSawai and Sachin Rao, were also identified as potential targets using the spyware.

Two numbers belonging to Gandhi were picked as candidates for possible surveillance, media reports said. Gandhi claimed all his phones were being tapped. Responding to Gandhi’s remarks, the Bharatiya Janata Party said the Congress leader should “submit his phone to a probe agency if he thinks it was tapped”. BJP spokesperson RajyavardhanRathore claimed the Congress was using the issue to stall Parliament.

 

The government has maintained that the media reports around the Pegasus spyware are intended to malign the country, as part of an “international conspiracy.” Whereas, several Opposition leaders have ramped up their protests against the alleged surveillance, leading to the adjournment of the monsoon session multiple times and the suspension of TMC MP Shantanu Sen. A list of 300 Indians and 50,000 people worldwide was released in a global collaborative investigation, spearheaded by French journalism nonprofit Forbidden Stories and Amnesty International. The presence of an individual’s phone number in the data set accessed by the group, however, is not evidence of hacking, which can only proved by a forensic analysis of the corresponding device.

Academic Freedom In India Under Threat

A group ofacademicnsia in the United States — scholars, activists and students of South Asian studies and adjacent fields — have formed the South Asia Scholar Activist Collective to fight back against what they called the threat to academic freedom from Hindutva groups. The homepage of the SASAC includes a “Hindutva Harassment Field Manual,” which is the Collective’s first project.

“The Hindu right has attacked U.S.-based scholars for the past few decades, attempting to dissuade and discredit academic research, and the assaults have intensified recently,” says an article explaining the rationale behind the Collective. “In the past year, one historian of South Asia here had his parents “swatted”; another scholar battles a lawsuit by a Hindu group that is a subject of her current research. Others in the field have received violent threats, sometimes prompting police involvement,” it goes on to add.

“Such hate seeks to undermine our genuine, nuanced research, which presents a vision of South Asian history, religions and cultures as multifaceted and pluralistic. In so doing our scholarship undercuts Hindutva’s project to remake India and Indian history.” “…The manual defines Hindutva and explains how its political ideology is distinct from the broad-based faith tradition of Hinduism. It covers common features of Hindutva attacks, including how such assaults are often coordinated and how Hindutva hate frequently intersects with other prejudices, including misogyny and casteism.”

Audrey Truschke, associate professor of History at Rutgers University, New Jersey, told indica News that she took the initiative to form the SASAC in the early spring on 2021. “Many of us have been targets of harassment by the Hindu Right for years; some of our colleagues have been targets for decades. Many of us have long provided support in individual cases and on an informal basis. The acceleration in Hindu Right attacks on academics over the past several years inspired me to participate in a more formal collective,” Truschke said.

“In some cases, I am aware of individuals who have orchestrated harassment campaigns against me, including ones that resulted in threats of violence against me and my family,” she said. “I have reported such individuals to law enforcement. Often, however, Hindutva attacks rely on anonymity and the illusion of widespread outrage that is manufactured, as the Hindu Harassment Field Manual covers in the Organized Harassment section,” she added. Another professor who is part of the collective is Rohit Chopra, who teaches at Santa Clara University in California. He said he used to have over 75,000 followers on Twitter but has been blocked for his free speech.

Chopra has written several books, including The Virtual Hindu Rashtra: Saffron Nationalism and New Media; Inter-religious Marriages Among Muslims: Negotiating Religious and Social Identity in Family and Community; and Technology and Nationalism in India: Cultural Negotiations from Colonialism to Cyberspace. He told indica News: “I used to get a lot of attacks from the Hindu Right; spam and Twitter trolling — such as ‘this person is anti-Hindu’, and far right propaganda. So, I have experienced this in a small way.”

He said that many non-Indian scholars get a lot of the far more vicious attacks. “What is happening now is completely one-sided,” he said when asked why he joined the Collective. “On the other side there are hundreds of individuals who write and give you death threats.” He cited the murders of journalist Gauri Lankesh and activists such as MM Kalburgi, Govind Pansare by far right groups in India.  Chopra took aim at the Hindu American Foundation, accusing it of claiming monopoly over the Hinduism. “This is deeply troubling, They are policing who can talk about Hinduism, they are policing what can be said. But who gave them the authority?” Chopra said.

“In that sense having this kind of a resource is a really important thing. It’s really welcoming,” said Chopra on the formation of the SASAC. He said, “I am not saying what scholars write should not be criticized, in fact freedom of expression is the heart of the university. If you look at the debates of the scholars they really get into the nitty gritty.” On the Indian-American support to right-wing groups, he said: “The hypocrisy is amazing if you want to vote for Joe Biden who supports secularism and minority rights, the right to freedom of worship in the American context and In the Indian context you want to deny religious and caste minorities those rights.”

He added: “So, resources offered at SASAC are going to help to combat well-orchestrated attacks that need some kind of organizational basis… These threats are every cleverly worded they’ll tweet: Hey if a professor has to die tomorrow, I won’t feel sorry.’ Not directly saying, ‘we will kill you’.”

Mat McDermott, senior director, communications, Hindu American Foundation defending on ‘claiming a monopoly on Hindu thoughts’ told the media, “HAF does not at all claim a monopoly on Hindu thought, nor believe we are the gatekeepers on who gets to comment on Hindusim. While we do take issue with the acdemic conclusions and interpretations of some of the work done by members of the SASAC, that is the nature of academic freedom and free speech — both of which we support.” “Expressing differences of opinion is not the same as attempting to stifle academic inquiry and is certainly not harassment, which is something HAF has never taken part in not has encouraged any of our supporters to do. Any accusation or insinuation that we have done so is categorically false,” McDermott said.

Snooping In India Indicates, Fundamental Freedom In India Is In Serious Jeopardy

“The alleged snooping in India using Israeli spyware Pegasus of opposition leaders, journalists, activists, and constitutional scholars is one more indication that fundamental freedoms in India are in serious jeopardy” said George Abraham, Vice-Chairman of the Indian Overseas Congress, USA. What we have been witnessing over the last six years is the steady deterioration of the rule of law and undermining of democracy, and the government must be held accountable” added Mr. Abraham.

One of the most prominent people on the list is Rahul Gandhi, leader of the Indian National Congress and a vehement critic of the Modi Administration on their undemocratic policies. In a statement, Mr. Gandhi said, “ targeted surveillance of the type you describe, whether in regard to me, other leaders of the opposition or indeed any law-abiding citizen of India is illegal and deplorable.”

It is becoming evident that power is all that matters to the current leadership at the Centre, and they may stoop to any low to snatch it even at the cost of undermining constitutional freedom and individual liberties. News reports suggest that key political players, including the then deputy chief minister Parameswara and the personal secretaries of then Chief Minister H D Kumaraswamy and former Chief Minister Siddaramaiah, may have been potential targets of surveillance by the Pegasus spyware in the run-up to the collapse of the Congress-JD (S) alliance government in 2019. If these reports are accurate, it is undermining the democratically run election process and severe violations of constitutional provisions these authorities are sworn to uphold.

The Biden administration has condemned the harassment and ‘extra-judicial surveillance of journalists and others in reaction to the story. “The United States condemns the harassment of extra-judicial surveillance of journalists, human rights activists, or other perceived regime critics,” a White House spokesperson stated.

Significantly, the list includes a woman who made sexual harassment allegations against India’s former Chief Justice, whose turnaround from a critic to a supporter of the Modi regime policies has surprised many. It may very well make a case study about how skeletons in the closet of any individual can be unearthed and weaponized to extract concessions or demand behavioral changes. It is a sad state of affairs in India today that reveals how much the world’s largest democracy has deteriorated under the BJP rule.

Persecutions Against Christians Continue Under Modi

Before the year 2021 had reached its halfway mark, some of the most powerful forces in modern India prepared to counter the Christian – and Muslim – presence in India, with discussions and statements on how to rid the country of “padri” [Hindi of the Latin Padre, father or Christian priest, pastor or clergy], pushing a massive 145 incidents of religious persecution against Christians, including three murders, into the background. That the incidents, and the threats, took place even as the country, still reeling from the impact of the first wave of the Corona Virus pandemic, was struck anew by the second wave, which struck the country, particularly the metropolitan cities including the national capital New Delhi, the worst hit.

In the hill town of Chitrakoot on the border of the states of Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh, held holy according to the epic Ramayana, the top echelons of the RashtriyaSwayamSewakSangh [RSS], the ideological mother of the Bharatiya Janata Party and the main grassroots force behind the government of the Prime Minister, Mr Narendra Modi, met in a secret conclave. The main agenda, according to the authoritative Hindi newspaper and TV group DainikBhaskar, was to launch a campaign with the slogan “Chadaraur Father Mukt Bharat” (An India liberated from Chadar (Cloth Sheet symbolizing Muslims) and Father (Christian Priests).

The threat of such campaigns has accompanied promises — or threats – of bringing in legislation in Parliament against conversion. One such Bill listed in Parliament is moved by RSS spokesman and member of the Upper House [Rajya Sabha] Mr Rakesh Sinha. Indeed, as reported by other news outlets, one of the other things that the Sangh spoke about was to propose to the Modi government to bring a nationwide anti-conversion law. The violence, detailed in the report, itself was vicious, widespread and ranged from murder to attacks on church, false cases, police immunity and connivance, and the now normalised social exclusion or boycott which is becoming viral.

An analysis of the 145 cases recorded by the Evangelical Fellowship of India’s Religious Liberty Commission and its associate Helplines and activists, documents three murders, attacks or desertion of 22 churches / places of worship, and 20 cases of ostracization or social boycott in rural areas of families which had refused to renege on their Christian faith and had stood up to mobs and political leaders of the local majority community.

True to the pattern of previous years, Madhya Pradesh topped the list with 30 cases. The state, which has large pockets of forest lands where Adivasis, or Tribals live, was amongst the earliest to enact anti-conversion laws, which it has periodically applied on the ground with increasing viciousness. The neighbouring state of Uttar Pradesh, continued to be a dangerous place for Christians too with 22 cases. Karnataka and Chhattisgarh, also polarised by a decade of religiously divisive political campaigns, documented 14 and 13 cases each. Violence against Christians by non-state actors in India stems from an environment of targeted hate. The translation of the hate into violence is sparked by a sense of impunity generated in India’s administrative apparatus.

COVID-19, which has severely impacted data collection, grassroots investigations and even a measure of solidarity with victims in distant villages, seems to have given the police a ruse not to register cases – police have generally been loath to register cases. Access to courts for relief was restricted too. The violence was also facilitated by the absence of civil society on streets as activists were unable to travel because of lockdowns restrictions and because of the collapse of the media.

The most alarming development has been the expansion and scope of the notorious Freedom of Religion Acts, which are popularly known as the anti-conversion laws, earlier enforced in 7 states, to more states ruled by the Bharatiya Janata Party. Once targeting only Christians, they are now armed also against Muslims in the guise of curbing ‘Love Jihad’. This is an Islamophobic term coined some years ago to demonise marriages between Muslim men and non-Muslim women, particularly those belonging to the Hindu upper castes. The laws ostensibly punish forced or fraudulent religious conversions. But in practice, they are used to criminalise all conversions, especially in non-urban settings.

Uttar Pradesh has become the eighth state in India to enforce an anti-conversion law. Similar laws are in force in the states of Odisha, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, Jharkhand and Uttarakhand. The states of Arunachal Pradesh and Rajasthan have passed anti-conversion laws that are not in force for various reasons, and Tamil Nadu has passed and repealed its anti- conversion law. Christian activists fear that the expanding footprint of the anti-conversion laws bring a step closer the BJP’s manifesto promising a nation-wide law to check evangelisation by “missionaries”, a term designed to impute western conspiracy to Christianise Dalits, Tribals and others in rural areas, small towns and urban slums.

The most bizarre incident which caught the eyes of the international media took place on 19 March 2021 in Jhansi, Uttar Pradesh, when four nuns from the Delhi Province of the Sacred Heart Society (SH) were arrested while on their way to Odisha from Delhi. The incident occurred while the train in which they were traveling stopped at 6.30 pm at Jhansi railway station. A group of religious extremists, who were returning from a pilgrimage, unjustifiably accused them of religious conversion and caused trouble. They challenged the faith of the women and raised religious slogans. Subsequently police arrived at the spot and arrested the women without paying any heed to their side of the story. Around 150 religious radicals accompanied the women in procession to the police station. The terrified nuns were released at 11.30 pm after the intervention from advocacy groups convinced police that the nuns were innocent and had credible documents to prove their story.

There was perhaps some consolation for religious minorities in recent pronouncements by various courts of law in the land. A Haryana court held that “hate speech is violence,” as other courts said reiterated that the health of the Indian democracy depended much on the health of its minorities. Helping the judicial sentiment was the national outrage over the custodial death of Jesuit priest and social activist Fr Stan Swami who’d been detained und the stringent Unlawful Activities Prevent Act in which the arrested can be held for long periods without bail pending trial which may begin years later. Responding to several writ petitions, the Supreme Court of India has agreed to examine the constitutional validity of laws enacted by Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand but has said that the laws need to be first challenged in the respective high courts.

EFIRLC appeals to the Government of India and the respective State Governments of the States named in the report to ensure the rule of law and the security of religious minorities in India. We especially appeal to the State Governments of Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Karnataka and Chhattisgarh to deal stringently with the various right-wing organizations operating in these states whose primary agenda is to create an atmosphere of fear among the Christian community and other religious minorities. For further information, please write to mail@efirlc.org

Modi Govt. Comes Under Fire For ‘Extrajudicial Surveillance’ Of Journalists, Activists, Regime Critics

The Pegasus report kicked up a storm on the first day of the Monsoon Session of Indian Parliament as several Opposition leaders condemned the Prime Minister Narendra Modi government, stating the spyware was being used to snoop on journalists and politicians in the country. India’s main Oppoision party Leader Rahul Gandhi is among dozens of Indian politicians, journalists, activists and government critics who were identified as potential targets of an Israeli-made spyware, media reports say.

More than 1,000 phone numbers in India were among tens of thousands worldwide selected as possibly of interest to clients of NSO Group, maker of the Pegasus spyware, according to a group of media outlets. The leaked list was shared with the news outlets by Forbidden Stories, a Paris-based journalism nonprofit, and Amnesty International. The identities behind around 300 of the Indian phone numbers were verified by the media outlets.

The Biden administration has condemned the harassment and ‘extrajudicial surveillance’ of journalists and others in reaction to reports published by a consortium of news websites that Israeli company NSO Group’s spyware, Pegasus, was used for illegal hacking and surveillance of individuals, including in India. “The United States condemns the harassment or extrajudicial surveillance of journalists, human rights activists, or other perceived regime critics,” a White House spokesperson said in response to a question on what U.S. President Joe Biden’s position on the issue was.

The news reports on Pegasus say that in addition to actually or potentially targeting journalists, leaders of the opposition in India, and others, a database of phone numbers that allegedly belonged to the NSO Group contained the numbers of two U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) officials in New Delhi and employees of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. “Just as states have the duty to protect human rights, businesses have a responsibility to respect human rights, including by ensuring that their products or services are not being used by end-users to abuse fundamental freedoms,” the spokesperson said.

While reports of Indian politicians and journalists being targets of surveillance operations carried out with the help of Pegasus spyware took centre-stage on Monday, French newspaper Le Monde reported that several Delhi-based diplomats were also on the list of potential targets for phone hacking from 2017-2021, along with a phone associated with Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan. Media organizations in the 17-member consortium published more details of the leaked database allegedly belonging to Israeli technology company, the NSO group, that developed Pegasus. U.S.-based Washington Post, UK-based The Guardian and The Wire in India reported that the telephone numbers of a British High Commission official and two officials of the American Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and employees of international NGOs like the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation were also in the database of those targeted.

New Delhi has hostile relations with China and Pakistan at present, and their diplomats are under close watch, but it is significant that the list included several countries that India has very friendly ties with as well. They include a woman who made sexual harassment allegations against India’s former chief justice, as well as Tibetan Buddhist clerics, Pakistani diplomats and Chinese journalists, the reports said. More than 50,000 phone numbers of citizens clustered mainly in Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Hungary, India, Kazakhstan, Mexico, Morocco, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates have been studied as a part of the international collaboration by NGOs and media organisations investigating phone surveillance using Pegasus.

The government has denied any wrong doing or carrying out any unauthorized surveillance, but has not confirmed or denied whether it has purchased or deployed Pegasus spyware. The Indian government reiterated in a statement to the Washington Post that “allegations regarding government surveillance on specific people has no concrete basis or truth associated with it whatsoever”. India’s Home Minister Amit Shah said the reports aimed to “humiliate India at the world stage, peddle the same old narratives about our nation and derail India’s development trajectory.”Critics say that the world’s largest democracy has become increasingly authoritarian under Prime Minister Modi, with the government accused of seeking to silence dissent. Rahul Gandhi, from the main opposition Congress party, told the media that if the allegations were correct, it was “an attack on the democratic foundations of our country.”

Danish Siddiqui, India’s Pulitzer Prize-Winning Photographer Killed In Afgahnistan

Pulitzer Prize-winning Indian photojournalist Danish Siddiqui was killed on Friday, July 16th while covering a clash between Afghan security forces and Taliban fighters near a border crossing with Pakistan. As per reports, he was killed while on assignment in southern Afghanistan after coming under fire by Taliban militiamen. Siddiqui, who was 38 years old, had been embedded with Afghan special forces in southern Kandahar province when he was killed along with a senior Afghan officer, Reuters reports. Siddiqui was part of a Reuters team to win the 2018 Pulitzer Prize for Feature Photography for documenting the Rohingya refugee crisis.

Siddiqui was reporting from Afghanistan as U.S. forces complete their withdrawal, ordered by President Biden to wrap up by Sept. 11. As the U.S. leaves, the Taliban — long held at bay by American might — have been rapidly capturing territory, leading to concern that the Afghan government could collapse. Siddiqui reported to his editors earlier on Friday that he had sustained a shrapnel wound to the arm during a clash between Afghan troops and the Taliban at the town of Spin Boldak, but that he had been treated for the injury, according to Reuters. Later, as he was interviewing local shopkeepers, the Taliban attacked again, the news agency said, quoting an Afghan commander

“We are urgently seeking more information, working with authorities in the region,” Reuters President Michael Friedenberg and Editor-in-Chief Alessandra Galloni said in a statement. “Danish was an outstanding journalist, a devoted husband and father, and a much-loved colleague. Our thoughts are with his family at this terrible time.” SaadMohseni, the CEO of Afghanistan’s MOBY Group, the largest media company in the country, described Siddiqui as “an extremely brave and talented journalist” and said his death “tragically demonstrates the dangers that journalists in Afghanistan face for doing their jobs.”

Mohseni said that Afghan journalists were being killed or threatened. “Despite these dangers, they continue to do their work, reporting on the fighting that is consuming the country, on the human rights violations that are proliferating, and on the urgent humanitarian needs of the people of Afghanistan,” he said. Working for Reuters since 2010, Siddiqui covered the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the Rohingya refugees crisis, the Hong Kong protests and Nepal earthquakes. Siddiqui extensively covered the brutal second wave of the coronavirus pandemic in April and May as it ripped through India’s cities and villages.

In one of his last pictures, Siddiqui photographed a member of Afghan special forces firing at Taliban fighters at a check post in Afghanistan’s Kandahar province. Siddiqui was embedded as a journalist since earlier this week with Afghan special forces in Kandahar. In recent months, Siddiqui chronicled a growing COVID-19 wave that swept through India, killing thousands. The assignment was not without controversy, as some in India expressed outrage over photos showing mass cremations of those who died from the disease.

Siddiqui’s pictures of mass cremations of Covid-19 victims at funeral grounds in Delhi went viral. The funeral pyres burning round-the-clock and cremation grounds running out of space told the story of a death toll unseen and unacknowledged in official data by India and the state governments. Siddiqui travelled to smaller cities and villages to chronicle the unfolding tragedy. In April 2020, Siddiqui covered the exodus of tens of thousands of migrant workers from India’s cities following a sweeping lockdown to prevent the spreading of coronavirus.  Sprawled together, men, women and children began their journeys at all hours of the day. They carried their paltry belongings – usually food, water and clothes – in plastic bags. The young men carried tatty backpacks. When the children were too tired to walk, their parents carried them on their shoulders.

In August 2017, a deadly crackdown by Myanmar’s army on Rohingya Muslims sent hundreds of thousands fleeing across the border into Bangladesh. They risked everything to escape by sea or on foot a military offensive which the United Nations later described as a “textbook example of ethnic cleansing”. Siddiqui is best known for his work covering the Rohingya refugee crisis in Bangladesh, for which he and his co-workers won journalism’s top prize in 2018. The Pulitzer board cited the “shocking photographs that exposed the world to the violence Rohingya refugees faced in fleeing Myanmar.” “I shoot for the common man who wants to see and feel a story from a place where he can’t be present himself,” Siddiqui once wrote of his photography.

India Bans Mastercard From Issuing New Cards In Data Storage Row

MUMBAI (Credit/Reuters) -The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) on Wednesday indefinitely barred MastercardInc from issuing new debit or credit cards to domestic customers for violating data storage rules, dealing a blow to the U.S. company in a key market. In a notification, the RBI said Mastercard had not complied with data storage rules from 2018 that require foreign card networks to store Indian payments data “only in India” so the regulator can have “unfettered supervisory access”.

“Notwithstanding lapse of considerable time and adequate opportunities being given, the entity (Mastercard) has been found to be non-compliant with the directions,” the RBI said. Mastercard said it was “disappointed” with the RBI’s decision and that it had provided regular updates on its compliance with the rules since 2018. “We will continue to work with them to provide any additional details required to resolve their concerns,” it said in a statement late Wednesday. The ban takes effect on July 22. The move comes less than three months after India’s central bank barred American Express and Diners Club International, owned by Discover Financial Services, from issuing new cards due to similar violations.

But unlike American Express, which is a relatively small player in India, companies such as Mastercard and Visa have partnered with many Indian banks that offer cards using the U.S. firms’ payments network. In 2019, Mastercard said it was “bullish on India”, announcing $1 billion in investment over the next five years, in addition to its earlier investment of $1 billion from 2014-2019. “It does leave a big vacuum in credit cards and can come as a good opportunity for Visa … Banks will have to start re-negotiating the deals and this will be a blow for Mastercard,” said Ashvin Parekh, an independent financial services consultant.

The RBI’s decision will not impact existing customers of Mastercard, and the company should advise all card issuing banks in India to comply with the order, the RBI added. The RBI directive in 2018 sparked an aggressive lobbying effort from U.S. companies, which said the rules would increase their infrastructure costs and hit their global fraud detection platforms, but the central bank did not relent. The order comes as companies such as Mastercard and Visa also face growing competition from domestic payments network Rupay, which has been promoted by Prime Minister Narendra Modi. In 2018, Mastercard told the U.S. government that New Delhi’s protectionist policies were hurting foreign payment companies, Reuters has previously reported.

Widespread Persecution Of Religious Minorities In India Highlighted At International Religious Freedom Summit

Speakers at the International Religious Freedom summit here this week detailed how the Indian government is intentionally stoking Hindu nationalism, which has caused widespread persecution of religious minorities, enactment or reactivation of laws designed to curtail or deny citizenship, control or prohibit interfaith marriages, silence NGOs by freezing their bank accounts, and state-sponsored Islamophobia campaigns that encourage mob violence against non-Hindus.

They were speaking at a panel discussion on “Religious Freedom in India: Challenges & Opportunities,” organized by the Indian American Muslim Council (IAMC), a Washington, DC-based nonprofit that advocates for human rights, religious freedom and civil liberties in both the US and India.Click here to see their presentations. (Note: Presentations by U.S. Senator Markey and Reps. Newman and Levin were the subject of a separate news release.) Anurima Bhargava, a commissioner with theU.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, said that for the past two years, the commission has recommended the U.S. State Department designate India as a Country of Particular Concern (CPC), like Pakistan and Burma, because of the systematic, ongoing, and egregious violations of religious freedom in India.

IAMC this week led an initiative to have a Joint Resolution approved at the summit that also calls for the State Department to designate India a CPC. The resolution was supported by more than 30 signatories and is being transmitted to the office of Secretary of State Antony Blinken. Ms. Bhargava pointed out that the Citizenship Amendment Act and the National Register of Citizens are limiting or eliminating pathways for Muslims to be able to demonstrate their citizenship, which can lead to them being wrongfully detained, deported, or worse, rendered stateless. With those laws, India is acting much like Myanmar, in how the latter systematically discriminated against the Rohingyas leading up to their genocide.

Further, the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act is designed to limit or eliminate dissent, while the Foreign Contributions Regulation Act can freeze the bank accounts of NGOs and religious organizations that traditionally have worked to promote unity, harmony and understanding in India. “The other area that is of concern, which we have documented in our reports, are the anti-conversion laws,” she said. “Essentially how I describe this is an attack on any kind of interfaith, interreligious engagement. A third of Indian states have these kinds of laws that limit or prohibit religious conversion to protect the dominant religion from any perceived threats from religious communities and religious minorities.”

“And so we’re seeing a situation the UAPA (Unlawful Activities Prevention Act) doesn’t really allow dissent and it is very high standard for someone to get bail or to be able to come out of being incarcerated, so people can be detained and held for quite a long time without being charged, as in the case of 84-year-oldFather Stan Swamy, who lost his life last week in an Indian prison because of Parkinson’s and COVID,” she said. In addition to naming India a CPC, the USCIRF has also recommended that individuals at the state and the national level who have fomented hate, but also have implemented policies that are targeting religious communities, be sanctioned, whether in economic or in visa actions.

Joanne Lin, National Director ofAmnesty International USA, detailed how the Indian government used the Foreign Contributions Regulation Act and other means to essentially shut down Amnesty International’s offices in India by freezing its bank account. “The shuttering of Amnesty India is just one example of the Indian government activating an overbroad legal framework to crush human rights defenders who dare to challenge grave abuses of state authorities,” she declared. “The Indian government has leveraged financial and other institutions to strip human rights from religious minorities, to crush dissent and to silence advocates for freedom of religion and expression.

“The U.S. government should call for the release of human rights defenders and other critics, many of whom have been held for over a year without being charged,” she said. “In addition, Amnesty calls for the investigation and prosecution of those responsible for attacks carried out by vigilante mobs, and police officers against Muslims during the February March 2020 violence in Delhi, which occurred in the context of protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act.  These steps are necessary to ensure that religious freedom is a reality for all people in India regardless of their religion.”

State-sponsored Islamophobia in India is anti-Muslim racism and a tool of oppression, declared Tabassum Haleem, CEO,Islamic Networks Group. In her presentation, Ms. Haleem pointed out tropes used to denigrate and motivate hatred of Muslims include, “Muslims don’t belong” in India, and “Muslims are terrorists,” with some Hindu nationalists calling for a Trump-like Muslim ban, and others declaring “Muslims did no favor by staying here,” and “very few Muslims are patriotic.” It was even widely alleged that Muslims were intentionally spreading COVID-19, an enormous lie that resulted in discrimination, repression, persecution and violence against Muslims. And sadly, interfaith marriages have been criminalized clearly as a means of ensuring racial and ethnic “purity,” of the majority.

The Rev. Evangeline Anderson-Rajkumar of theEvangelical Lutheran Church in America, who is a Dalit (the lowest class), referring to the ruling Hindu class, declared, “In this class hierarchy, to consider oneself upper class is such a myth. There is nothing upper about the upper class.” She lamented that because freedoms for religious minorities are being so eroded, and in many cases eliminated, the Indian Constitution is becoming increasingly irrelevant. “We know that for people to have dignity and worth is a God-given reality. But we have a situation in India where the prominent Hindutva forces can actually challenge that and deny whole peoples of their ability to reflect the image of God, and the possibility of them even being considered as a worthy human, of being human. And this is the crux of the whole problem of caste consciousness.”

Explained AnantanandRambachan, professor of religion,St. Olaf Collegein Minnesota, “Because the Hindu condition is so internally diverse, it generally exemplifies an open and hospitable attitude toward religious diversity. One of the pillars of Hinduism is the belief in the unity of the oneness of God, even though this God is spoken of in many ways. God’s oneness implies the oneness of the human community.”

He also made these salient points:

  • “All beings are part of a single human community, and must be treated with dignity, justice and compassion, and be accorded equal rights.”
  • “Hindutva betrays the core theological commitment of Hinduism by ascribing unequal worth on the basis of religious identity and by seeking to deprive them of equal rights in the civic sphere.”
  • “There is an ancient and a powerful tradition of hospitality to religious diversity in the Hindu tradition, which made it possible to accommodate a wide diversity of religious beliefs and practices, and to offer shelter to persecuted religious groups for centuries.”
  • “There are teachings in the Hindu tradition that offer solid ground for diversity, for justice, for dignity, and for the equal worth of all human beings. We must lift up these Hindu teachings.”

The Indian American Muslim Council has welcomed the news about the Biden administration’s imminent announcement of an ambassador-at-large of international religious freedom. The post has been vacant since January 20 of this year, and is a requirement of the 1998 International Religious Freedom Act.

U.S. Accuses China Of A Massive Cyber attack On Microsoft

The White House is publicly blaming China for an attack on Microsoft’s Exchange email server software that compromised tens of thousands of computers worldwide, allowing hackers to gain access to troves of sensitive data. Separately, the Department of Justice announced Monday that a federal grand jury in May had indicted Chinese nationals accused of working with official sanction from Beijing to break into computer systems belonging to U.S. companies, universities and governments.

The cyberattack on Microsoft, which is believed to have begun in January, reportedly injectedcomputers with malwarethat secretly monitored systems belonging to small businesses, local and state governments and some military contractors. As part of the attack, an unidentified American company was also hit with a high-dollar ransom demand, according to a senior Biden administration official.

U.S. allies are also blaming China for cyber attacks

The official, who briefed reporters late Sunday, said the U.S. would be joined by the European Union, the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Japan and NATO in condemning Beijing’s Ministry of State Security for the malicious cyberattacks. EU policy chief JosepBorrell in a statement on Monday said the hacking was “conducted from the territory of China for the purpose of intellectual property theft and espionage.” U.K. Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab said China’s actions represent “a reckless but familiar pattern of behavior. The Chinese Government must end this systematic cyber sabotage and can expect to be held [to] account if it does not,” Raab said in a statement.

In a tweet, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said that the alliance “stands in solidarity with all those affected by malicious cyber activities, including the Microsoft Exchange Server compromise. We call on all states, including China, to uphold their international obligations & act responsibly.” The announcements follow heightened concern over ransomware attacks that the White House has blamed on Russian hackers and highlights how the West’s traditional Cold War rivals have stepped up pressure in cyberspace in recent years.

The Biden administration official said that China’s Ministry of State Security employed criminal contract hackers “to conduct unsanctioned cyber operations globally, including for their own personal profit.” Although the U.S. says criminal gangs of hackers with links to Russian intelligence carried out such audacious ransomware attacks as the one that caused Colonial Pipeline – a major U.S. petroleum distribution network – to shut down temporarily, China’s outright hiring of contract hackers is “distinct,” the official said.

“The United States has long been concerned about the People’s Republic of China’s irresponsible and destabilizing behavior in cyberspace,” the official said. Such hacks pose a serious economic and national security threat to the U.S. and its allies, the official said. “Their operations include criminal activities, such as cyber-enabled extortion, crypto-jacking and theft from victims around the world for financial gain. In some cases, we’re aware of reports that PRC government-affiliated cyber operators have conducted ransomware operations against private companies that have included ransom demands of millions of dollars,” the official said.

Although no sanctions against China have been announced, the U.S. has “raised its concerns” with Beijing, the official said. “The first important piece is the publicly calling out the pattern of irresponsible malicious cyberactivity, and doing it with allies and partners.” Previously, a spokesperson for China’s Foreign Ministry has said that Beijing “firmly opposes and combats cyber-attacks and cyber theft in all forms” and cautioned against “groundless accusations” that China is involved in such attacks, according to The Associated Press.

The Department of Justice said in a statement that a federal grand jury in San Diego had indicted four nationals and residents of China with “a campaign to hack into the computer systems of dozens of victim companies, universities and government entities in the United States and abroad between 2011 and 2018.” The indictment, unsealed Friday, alleges a conspiracy to steal data with a “significant economic benefit to China’s companies and commercial sectors, including information that would allow the circumvention of lengthy and resource-intensive research and development processes.”

The four individuals worked with China’s Hainan State Security Department “to obfuscate the Chinese government’s role in such theft by establishing a front company, Hainan Xiandun Technology Development Co., Ltd.,” which has since been dismantled, the Justice Department said. The FBI, National Security Agency and the U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency issued a joint advisory Monday laying out ways that government agencies and businesses could protect themselves from such attacks.

US Holds UNICEF Monopoly For 74 Years – In A World Body Where Money Talks

UNITED NATIONS, Jul 19 2021 (IPS) – With Henrietta Fore’s decision last week to step down as UNICEF Executive Director, her successor is most likely to be another American since that post has been held– uninterruptedly — by US nationals for almost 74 years, an unprecedented all-time record for a high-ranking job in the UN system. The seven U.S. nationals who have headed the UN children’s agency since its inception in 1947 include Maurice Pate, Henry Labouisse, James Grant, Carol Bellamy, Ann Veneman, Anthony Lake and Henrietta Fore. Pate held the job for 18 years, from 1947 to 1965, and Labouisse for 14 years, from 1965 to 1979. No other agency has had a national stranglehold on such a senior position in the 76-year history of the United Nations.

As for individuals monopolizing office, Dr Arpad Bogsch, another US national, held the post of director general of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) in Geneva for 24 long years (1973-1997). But more recently, however, the professional life span of senior officials in the UN secretariat is mostly five years, with a possible extension for an additional five years. Since money talks, the US has continued to stake its claims for the UNICEF job, primarily as its largest single financial contributor. But that claim also applies to several UN agencies, which depend on voluntary contributions, and where some of the high-ranking positions are largely held by donors or big powers, mostly from Western Europe, or China and Russia.

James Paul, former Executive Director at the New York-based Global Policy Forum (1993-2012) and a prominent figure in the NGO advocacy community at the United Nations, told IPS much is at stake in the appointment of the head of a major agency in the UN system. Powerful governments battle over prestige and the shaping of policy, he said, pointing out, that “interest is intense now, as the appointment of a new head of UNICEF comes up”. “Observers inevitably wonder: what country gets the post, what is the region of the appointee, what ethnic or national group does this person represent, what is the person’s gender identify, and finally, last but not least, what is the policy inclination and administrative record of the person selected?” said Paul, author of “Of Foxes and Chickens”—Oligarchy and Global Power in the UN Security Council (2017).

He said some candidates may be serious people with years of experience while others may be personal friends of a powerful head of government. How will the selection process work and how much pressure will be put on those with a say over the appointment process: the UN Secretary General and Executive Boards or committees? he asked. In the early years of the UN, he said, there was a tendency to appoint male candidates who were US nationals. The US government often acted very bluntly about getting its way and it threatened many times to withhold funding or punish UN officials if its candidate was not selected. Two well-known cases of US hegemony are UNICEF, the UN Children’s Fund, and UNDP, the UN Development Programme.

UNICEF is notorious because its Executive Director has been a US national continuously since the organization’s founding 74 years ago, said Paul. Now that the current head is stepping down, the question inevitably arises – will Washington once again be able to get its way? Admittedly, it did make one concession over the years. Under pressure in 1995 to accept a very accomplished Scandinavian woman, the US agreed to drop its male candidate. Washington then proposed a woman and turned up the heat. Carol Bellamy, the US candidate, was eventually appointed. The present head, Henrietta Fore, is also a woman but she too carries a US passport, said Paul.

Former UN Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali (1992-1996), who had a love-hate relationship with the US, tried to break the US monopoly back in 1995. But he failed. In his book “UN-Vanquished–a US-UN saga,” (1999), Boutros-Ghali says he was thwarted by then US President Bill Clinton and US ambassador Madeline Albright. Clinton wanted William Foege, a former head of the US Centres for Disease Control, to be appointed UNICEF chief to succeed James Grant, also an American. Since Belgium and Finland had already put forward “outstanding” women candidates — and since the US had refused to pay its UN dues and was also making ”disparaging” remarks about the world body — “there was no longer automatic acceptance by other nations that the director of UNICEF must inevitably be an American man or woman,” said Boutros-Ghali.

“The US should select a woman candidate,” Boutros-Ghali told Albright, “and then I will see what I can do,” since the appointment involved consultation with the then 36-member UNICEF Executive Board. ” Albright rolled her eyes and made a face, repeating what had become her standard expression of frustration with me,” he writes. When the US kept pressing Foege’s candidature, Boutros-Ghali says that “many countries on the UNICEF Board were angry and (told) me to tell the United States to go to hell.” The US eventually submitted an alternate woman candidate: Carol Bellamy, a former director of Peace Corps. Although Elizabeth Rehn of Finland received 15 votes to Bellamy’s 12 in a straw poll, Boutros-Ghali said he asked the Board president to convince the members to achieve consensus on Bellamy so that the US could continue a monopoly it held since UNICEF was created in 1947. And thereby hangs a tale.

According to the latest published figures, total contributions to UNICEF in 2020 were over US$7 billion. The public sector contributed the largest share: US$5.45 billion from government, inter-governmental and inter-organizational partners, as well as Global Programme Partnerships. The top three resource partners in 2020 (by contributions received) were the Governments of the United States of America (US$801 million), Germany (US$744 million) and the European Union (US$514 million). As UNICEF’s largest donor, the US was considered “an indispensable partner”. “Our partnership with the US Government is broad and diverse, spanning humanitarian and development programmes across key areas of UNICEF’s work, including health; education; early child development; water, sanitation and hygiene; nutrition; child protection; gender equality; HIV and AIDS; immunization; and research programmes,” according to UNICEF.

Samir Sanbar, a former UN assistant secretary-General and head of the Department of Public Information, told IPS the argument over the post of UNICEF Executive Director was the first clash between Boutros-Ghali and Ambassador Albright who otherwise was very friendly, as both were “former professors”. As Boutros-Ghali once quipped: “I may be America’s yes man (as he was described in the Arab press when he was elected secretary-general) but certainly not, yes sir “. Initially, American UNICEF Executive Directors like Henry Labouisse and James Grant proved their value not merely by bringing U.S. funds but by their proven accomplishments, said Sanbar.

Guterres, an experienced politician, will most likely explore options: perhaps await proposals from the Biden Administration while keeping open possible interest by members of the Security Council like Norway–and others, which could offer a substantive contribution, as long as its candidate is a woman, said Sanbar who had served under five different secretaries-general during his longstanding UN career. Paul pointed out that UNDP provides an interesting basis for comparison. It had a US head (the title is Administrator) for thirty-two years consecutively, from its founding in 1967.

In 1999, when the moment for a new appointment arose, the UN membership stepped up pressure for a more diverse pool of candidates. At last, the magic spell of US dominance broke, as Mark Malloch Brown of the UK got the nod. And since 1999, there hasn’t been a single US national in that post of UNDP Administrator. That was a sign that Washington’s grip on the UN was slipping and that its global influence was waning – slowly perhaps but unmistakably. A capable woman from New Zealand, Helen Clark, was one of the new breed, along with a Turk, Kemal Dervis, and a German, Achim Steiner, who currently holds the post. But not all US nominees have turned out badly, said Paul.

James Grant, was a widely-respected head of UNICEF, and Gus Speth won plaudits as head of UNDP. But symbolism is important in a multi-lateral organization with a world-wide membership and a very diverse constituency. “No matter how competent the US candidate might be, and no matter how independent-minded, color-coded and engendered, it is time for UNICEF to get a non-US Executive Director. The world of 1947 has long gone. US hegemony is not what it was.” “A bit of fresh air at UNICEF is long overdue,” declared Paul.

(ThalifDeen is the author of a newly-released book on the United Nations titled “No Comment -– and Don’t Quote Me on That.” Peppered with scores of anecdotes-– from the serious to the hilarious-– the book is available on Amazon worldwide. The link to Amazon via the author’s website follows: https://www.rodericgrigson.com/no-comment-by-thalif-deen/)

Over 4 In 10 Of Modi’s New Council Of Ministers Have Criminal Cases, 90% Are Millionaires

If being a criminal is a qualification in Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government, he has proved it by inducting 42% of those with criminal records into the Union Council of Ministers in the reshuffle he has carried out last week. The proportion of Union ministers who have declared criminal cases against them has risen by 3 percentage points after the expansion, a report by poll rights group Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) stated.ADR has cited election affidavits to highlight the cases against the ministers.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi hit the reset button to bring in 36 new faces in his Council of Ministers, taking the tally to 78, just a notch short of the statutory limit of 81. Of these 78, however, as many as 33 ministers (42%) have criminal cases against them. Of these, 24 have serious ones related to murder, attempt to murder and robbery, a report published by poll rights group Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) stated. ADR found that around 90% members of the new Union cabinet (70 ministers) are millionaires, meaning that they have declared total assets amounting to over Rs 1 crore. Four ministers — Jyotiraditya Scindia (over Rs 379 crore), Piyush Goyal (over Rs 95 crore), Narayan Rane (over Rs 87 crore), and Rajeev Chandrasekhar (over Rs 64 crore) — have been categorized as “high asset ministers”, which means they have declared assets worth more than Rs 50 crore.

Jyotiraditya Scindia is the richest among the Council of Ministers having assets worth around Rs 380 crore. The average worth of assets per minister has been found to be around Rs 16.24 crore, the report noted. The cabinet ministers who have the least amount of assets are: Pratima Bhoumik from Tripura (around Rs 6 lakh), John Barla from West Bengal (around Rs 14 lakh), Kailash Choudhary from Rajasthan (around Rs 24 lakh), Bishweswar Tudu from Odisha (around Rs 27 lakh), and V Muraleedharan from Maharashtra (around Rs 27 lakh). Analysing the educational qualification of the new ministers, the report stated a majority of them (21) are post-graduates. Nine ministers have a doctorate, while 17 each are graduates and professional graduates. Two ministers have only passed their Class VIII exams, three Class X and seven others Class XII.

No Muslim face in Modi cabinet revamp, Naqvi remains lone face

The Nearly 400 million Muslim population in India has a single Member representing the community in the Hindutva Ministry of Prime Minister Modi. And the Christian community is not represented. With Prime Minister Narendra Modi pledging ‘sabka saath, sabka vikas and sabka vishwas’ mantra, his cabinet’s lone Muslim face Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi will have the responsibility of winning the hearts of minorities and taking forward the ‘development without appeasement’ policy.

The Narendra Modi cabinet reshuffle did not see any Muslim being inducted, despite a few aspirants in the fray, and Minority Affairs Minister Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi remains the community’s lone representative in the Union Cabinet. BJP’s Rajya Sabha member Zafar Islam was one of the aspirants but could not find a place while after the resignation of M.J. Akbar, there was speculation that one person from the community could be inducted. Congress spokesperson Meem Afzal said: “There should be no expectation from the BJP as the second largest minority is not on their agenda.”

Community leaders are of the same view. Majlis-e-Mushawarat President Navaid Hamid said: “Muslims don’t expect anything from the BJP except they follow the constitutional mandate… the more they ignore, the more they discriminate, the more they are exposed about their prejudice and vicious agenda against most persecuted, the most marginalised, and the most discriminated community in the country. Even if they have given any more representation, Indians would have not expected any good that from Muslim man for the betterment of the community.”

Regarding Afghanistan, India Opposes Seizure Of Power By Force

India’s External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar presented the Indian view at a meeting of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation. He said the world is against the ‘seizure of power by violence and force’ and wouldn’t ‘legitimize such actions’ Earlier, and he called on members of the grouping to act against terrorism and financing. Jaishankar and Atmar discussed the latest developments in Afghanistan shortly after arriving in Dushanbe. They also discussed the fight against terrorism and for stability throughout the region. The meeting provided the two sides with an opportunity to discuss security issues.

India has presented a three-point roadmap for an end state in Afghanistan. It includes cessation of violence and attacks and political dialogue for a settlement. External affairs minister S Jaishankar presented the Indian view at a Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) Contact Group meeting. Although Mr. Jaishankar has been at the same venue as the Pakistan Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi at least twice in the past few months, the SCO meeting marks the first time he will be in the room with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi, since the two met in Moscow last September, when they agreed to de-escalate tensions at the Line of Actual Control.

However, the agreement has yet to be fully implemented on the ground. The MEA declined to comment on whether Mr. Jaishankar and Mr. Wang will have a separate meeting at either of the two venues that both will travel to. The focus of both meetings is expected to be the deteriorating security situation in Afghanistan and regional solutions for the country in the wake of the U.S. and NATO troops pull-out, said organizers. The statement will be of particular importance as the Taliban has stepped up violence in the country, and Taliban militants claim they are taking over more towns and cities from the Afghan forces, which led to India pulling all its staff out of the Kandahar Consulate on Saturday. Afghanistan was high on the agenda of Mr. Jaishankar’s meetings in Tehran and Moscow last week as well.

In Tashkent, Uzbekistan President Shavkat Mirziyoyev will make a greater push for trade connectivity between South and Central Asia, including discussing the importance of the Chabahar project with India and signing a transit trade agreement (TTA) with PM Khan that will give Uzbekistan access to Pakistani ports, benefitting trade with Afghanistan as well. “Afghanistan is not just a neighbor, but a part of our region. Presently it is seen by some as a source of problems and threats, but it is also a source of possibilities, and the President feels that the foremost purpose of this conference is to strengthen connectivity, including through Afghanistan,” Uzbekistan Ambassador to India Dilshod Akhotov told The Hindu in an interview. He added that Afghanistan would be included in the Uzbekistan-India-Iran trilateral in the future, and plans for a Preferential Trade Agreement (PTA) with India were also under consideration.

“The most important goal is for Uzbekistan, which the only double landlocked country in the world other than Liechtenstein, to build a bridge to the South Asian region. Through our southern neighbors we want to access the seas, and the closest is the Indian ocean,” Mr. Akhotov added. At the conference entitled “Central and South Asia: Regional Connectivity, Challenges and Opportunities”, Mr. Mirziyoyev will project Uzbekistan as the Central Asian fulcrum and key country in the Intra-Afghan peace process, that has, in the past, hosted Taliban delegations for talks.

Mr. Ghani and Mr. Khan will participate together at the inaugural session of the Conference on Friday, which will be addressed virtually by UN Secretary General Guterres, and followed by a plenary session with speeches by Mr. Jaishankar, Chinese FM Wang Yi, Russian FM Sergey Lavrov, and ministers and senior officials from other Central Asian countries, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka (virtually), Gulf States, the U.S. and the European Union. Afghanistan’s foreign minister has said the world is against ‘seizure of power by violence and force’ Jaishankar also offered suggestions for the future course of negotiations to find a settlement in Afghanistan. He said there would have to be a compromise between approaches involving Qatar, Russia, and Turkey.

New Delhi’s foreign secretary said ‘peace negotiations in earnest is the only answer’ Jaishankar met with his counterparts from China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Pakistan, Russia, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan. Additionally, the meetings were attended by countries with observer status with SCO.

2021 Had 154 Incidents Of Violence Against Christians In India

This year, 2021, hasn’t been any difference to Indian Christians in practicing their faith in their own country except that Indian Christians across globe came together to establish an exclusive day for themselves on July 3rd and launched a decade of celebrations (2021-2030) to honour 2000th anniversary of the earthly ministry of Jesus Christ.

One hundred and fifty-four (154) incidents of violence were reported on UCF toll-free helpline number: 1-800-208-4545 against Christians across India. January witnessed the highest number of incidents with 34 followed by 28 in June, 27 in March, 26 in April, 21 in February and 16 in the month of May.

Two North Indian states Chhattisgarh and Jharkhand have recorded 22 incidents of violence against Christians in these six months followed by 19 in Uttar Pradesh and 17 in Karnataka. Other states which are witnessing violence against Christians for their faith are: Madhya Pradesh (15), Odisha (12), Maharashtra (9), Tamil Nadu (6), Punjab (6), Bihar (6), Andhra Pradesh (4), Uttarakhand (3), Delhi (3), Haryana (2), Gujarat (2), Telangana (1), West Bengal (1), Assam (1) and Rajasthan (1).  Over one thousand (1137) calls were attended to at UCF helpline number and provided much needed solace to them through advocacy and assisting in reaching their grievances to the concerned authorities. Through these interventions the team could manage to obtain release of 84 persons from detention. Also 29 places of worship were reopened or continue to have prayer services. But, sadly, as always 18 FIRs could only be registered against the violence perpetrators.

Mob violence led by a crowd of a-hundred-two-hundred accompanied by a police team arriving at a place of worship disrupting the prayer or church service beating up faithful and pastors including women and children have become a culture. This is despite slew of directions to the government from the Supreme Court of India led by then CJI, Dipak Misra to stop the horrendous acts of mobocracy.

Over six hundred (603) women were injured in these incidents and over four hundred Tribals (223) and Dalits (202). One hundred and fifty-two (152) incidents of mob attacks/violence were reported in these six months. Eighteen (18) incidents of causing damage to the places of worship/ churches too were reported. Police or/and other concerned authorities disallowed the assembly of people for religious activities under one pretext or the other.

Seven (7) fresh cases were filed under the Freedom of Religion Act in this year. Though such laws in certain states have been in force since 1967 – over 50 years now – but till today, no one, not a single Christian have been convicted for forcing any one to convert. Moreover, census after census have shown that Christian population remained 2.3 percent of India’s population of 136.64 Crores (2019).

UCF toll-free helpline number: 1-800-208-4545 was launched on 19th January 2015 with the aim of upholding fundamental freedom and promotion of values of justice, liberty, equality and fraternity of India. The helpline helps people in distress, especially those who are not aware of the law of the land and the system by guiding them how to reach out to the public authorities and by providing the way to legal remedies.

10% Of Global Population Were Undernourished During Covid

Nearly one tenth of the global population, between 720 million people and 811 million, were undernourished last year, according to a UN report. Global hunger levels have skyrocketed because of conflict, climate change and the economic impact of the Covid-19 pandemic; and one in five children around the world is stunted, said the report titled, ‘The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2021’ released on Monday. New data that represents the first comprehensive global assessment of food insecurity carried out since the pandemic began, indicates that the number of people affected by chronic hunger in 2020, rose by more than in the previous five years combined, Xinhua news agency reported.

Reversing this situation will likely take years if not decades, according to the World Food Programme (WFP), Food and Agriculture Organization, the International Fund for Agricultural Development, World Health Organization and Unicef. “The pandemic continues to expose weaknesses in our food systems, which threaten the lives and livelihoods of people around the world,” the heads of those agencies wrote in this year’s report. Some 418 million of the undernourished people last year were in Asia and 282 million were in Africa, according to the report.

Globally, 2.4 billion people did not have access to sufficiently nutritious food in 2020 – an increase of nearly 320 million people in one year. The report also highlights how climate change has left communities in developing countries most exposed to hunger – despite the fact that they contribute little to global CO2 emissions. These poorer nations are also the least prepared to withstand or respond to climate change, said WFP’s Gernot Laganda, who added that weather-related shocks and stresses were “driving hunger like never before”.

This suggests that “it will take a tremendous effort for the world to honor its pledge to end hunger by 2030”, the agencies said in a statement, in a call for food production to be more inclusive, efficient, resilient and sustainable. Children’s healthy development has suffered too, with more than 149 million under-fives affected by stunting and 370 million missing out on school meals in 2020, because of school closures during the coronavirus pandemic. Today, 150 million youngsters still do not have access to a school lunch, said WFP, which urged countries to restore these programs and put in place “even better (ones) that give children and communities a future”.

“The (report) highlights a devastating reality: the path to Zero Hunger is being stopped dead in its tracks by conflict, climate and Covid-19,” said WFP Executive Director David Beasley. Children’s future potential “is being destroyed by hunger”, he insisted. “The world needs to act to save this lost generation before it’s too late.” In September, the UN will convene a Food Systems Summit with the objective of launching bold new actions to build healthier, more sustainable and equitable food systems around the world. In the lead-up to this pivotal event, the UN is inviting stakeholders from all sectors, across all food systems, to get involved.

This report presents the first global assessment of food insecurity and malnutrition for 2020 and offers some indication of what hunger might look like by 2030, in a scenario further complicated by the enduring effects of the pandemic. It also includes new estimates of the cost and affordability of healthy diets, which provide an important link between the food security and nutrition indicators and the analysis of their trends. Altogether, the report highlights the need for a deeper reflection on how to better address the global food security and nutrition situation.(IANS)

Biden Offers Support As Food Shortages, COVID-19, Instagram Are Driving Forces Behind the Cuba Protests

President Joe Biden on Monday called protests in Cuba “remarkable” and a “clarion call for freedom,” praising thousands of Cubans who took the streets to protest food shortages and high prices amid the coronavirus crisis — one of the island’s biggest antigovernment demonstrations in recent memory.

The pandemic’s blunt impact on Cuba’s economy, already struggling under the Trump-era tightening of sanctions, has brought the island to the brink of its worst food shortages in 25 years. Empty supermarket shelves, the crippling pandemic and recent access to social media allowing Cubans to openly share their outrage all helped lead to Sunday’s rare protests against the communist regime. Thousands marched in Havana and other cities to protest the lack of food and COVID-19 vaccines, with many demanding an end to the 62-year-old dictatorship, chanting “Freedom!” and “Enough!” Social media posts showed some protestors overturning police cars and looting supermarkets. Cuban security forces cracked down, arresting more than 80 people, including some well-known activists and dissidents.

In a televised address to the nation on Monday, Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel, who took over the presidency from his mentor Raul Castro in 2018, blamed the demonstrations on the U.S.’s “policy of economic suffocation” and accused the “Cuban-American mafia” of provoking social unrest in the country. In the heart of Miami’s Cuban-American community on Sunday, more than 5,000 people demonstrated in solidarity with the protestors, with Mayor Francis Suarez calling for a U.S.-led intervention.

Díaz-Canel’s response to the protests is “straight out of Fidel and Raul’s playbook, by accusing these people of being mercenaries, and saying we need to get our counter-protestors out into the streets,” says Paul Hare, a former British ambassador to Cuba. “But this couldn’t have happened a few years ago. This coordinated, island-wide protest…is the first real Internet age, social media challenge that he’s faced.”

President Joe Biden lent his support to the protestors on Monday, but he did not mention the U.S. sanctions on the nation that he pledged to review during his campaign. “We stand with the Cuban people and their clarion call for freedom and relief from the tragic grip of the pandemic and from the decades of repression and economic suffering to which they have been subjected by Cuba’s authoritarian regime,” Biden said in a statement. The White House declined to detail any potential policy changes towards Cuba.

While Cuba’s socialized health care system first appeared to cope with the pandemic better than many of its wealthier neighbors, dispatching its highly trained doctors to other countries, the economic fallout was severe. The island’s crumbling state-run economy, already hurting from former President Donald Trump’s toughened trade embargo, shrank 11% last year. As tourism dried up, and with it the hard currency many had come to depend on, the country suffered its worst food and medicine shortages since the fall of the Soviet Union. With the lack of foreign currency limiting access to fuel and fertilizer, this year’s harvest of sugar, an important export, barely reached two-thirds of the planned production, the smallest crop in more than a century. Widespread power outages have left many Cubans with increasingly severe blackouts. Meanwhile, COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations have surged.

“It was only a matter of time. Frustration and despair had accumulated, and this Sunday the streets exploded,” dissident Cuban blogger Yoani Sanchez wrote, describing how the “spark from San Antonio de los Baños,” where the protests began, had “ignited in the dry grass of social anger.” On Instagram, Cubans across the world shared an image that said in big white and red letters “Asking for help isn’t a crime, denying it is.”

The fast escalation has put a spotlight on the Biden Administration’s drawn-out review of U.S. Cuba policy, and apparent reluctance to reverse Trump’s measures. Biden was Vice President when President Barack Obama and Raul Castro agreed to re-establish diplomatic relations in 2014, leading to the first face-to-face discussion between leaders of the two countries in half a century. The historic detente also eased or lifted many restrictions on business with and travel to Cuba. When direct flights to Cuba reopened in 2016, American tourists flooded the island. Most Cubans welcomed the valuable influx of U.S. dollars, which benefited drivers to restaurant owners to average families who were able to rent out rooms to tourists. Internet usage rapidly expanded with the rise in income, and in 2018 Cubans were able to get full online access on their mobile phones for the first time.

But the relationship quickly deteriorated under Trump. Citing his campaign promise to reverse Obama’s measures, which he said empowered and enriched Cuba’s communist regime, his Administration put in place 240 sanctions and economic measures, including a ban on American cruise ships stopping in Cuba, prosecution of foreign companies that do business with the country, and a blacklist of several Cuban companies. The latter included Fincimex, the financial institution used by Americans to send vital remittances to their families on the island.

In 2017, after alleged sonic attacks left more than two dozen Americans stationed in Havana with mysterious brain injuries, the Trump Administration also drastically cut U.S. diplomatic staff. (Cuba has denied responsibility for the injuries, whose cause has not yet been determined.) The State Department followed with a travel warning telling Americans to avoid traveling to Cuba. According to Cuban officials, all of Trump’s measures cost the island more than $20 billion. “The damage to the bilateral relationship during this time has been considerable, and the economic harm to Cuba immense,” Johana Tabalada, a senior foreign ministry official, said in January 2021.

“We stand with the Cuban people and their clarion call for freedom and relief from the tragic grip of the pandemic and from the decades of repression and economic suffering to which they have been subjected by Cuba’s authoritarian regime,” Biden said in an earlier statement Monday. “The Cuban people are bravely asserting fundamental and universal rights.”

Eric Michael Garcetti Nominated To Serve As US Ambassador To India

President Joe Biden has nominated Los Angeles Mayor Eric Michael Garcetti to serve as the American ambassador to India. Indian American organizations welcomed the announcement, made Friday, July 9, calling it an opportunity for the Indian diaspora to work together to continue bridging US-India ties. Garcetti, 50, born and raised in the San Fernando Valley, has been mayor of Los Angeles, the second-largest city in the US, since 2013.Garcetti’s nomination has long been anticipated. He needs Senate confirmation to get the position. If he makes it, he will be the first sitting Los Angeles mayor to leave the position voluntarily in more than 100 years, according to the Los Angeles Times

Prior to his election to the Los Angeles City Council, Garcetti was a visiting instructor of international affairs at the University of Southern California, and an assistant professor of diplomacy and world affairs at Occidental College. His academic work focused on ethnic conflict and nationalism in Southeast Asia and Northeast Africa.

On accepting the nomination Garcetti posted a statement on the city’s website: “I love Los Angeles and will always be an Angeleno. I want you to know that every day I am your mayor, I will continue to lead this city like it is my first day on the job, with passion, focus, and determination. I have committed my life to service –– as an activist, as a teacher, as a naval officer, as a public servant and, if confirmed, next as an ambassador. Part of that commitment means that when your nation calls, you answer that call. And should I be confirmed, I’ll bring this same energy, commitment, and love for this city to my new role, and will forge partnerships and connections that will help Los Angeles.”

Welcoming Garcetti’s nomination MR Rangaswami, a Silicon Valley-based entrepreneur, investor, and founder of Indiaspora, stated in a press note, “We are excited that President Biden has nominated a reputed leader who has proven himself on several fronts. “It speaks volumes to the importance of the U.S.-India relationship that a close and trusted ally of President Biden may be America’s point person in Delhi.”

According to Sanjeev Joshipura, Indiaspora’s executive director, “Mayor Garcetti recognizes the importance of international cooperation and how to bring different actors together on the world stage.” Neil Makhija, executive director of IMPACT, another Indian American non-profit organization, said, “Ambassadorship to India is a critical position for strengthening ties between the world’s largest and the world’s oldest democracy, and President Biden has made an excellent choice in Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti.” He added, “Mayor Garcetti’s credentials and national stature make him an excellent pick for the ambassadorship to India, a position that is critical to key American priorities like the global COVID-19 crisis, climate change, and immigration.

“As mayor, Eric Garcetti oversaw the vaccine deployment in the nation’s second-largest city, where over 50% of people over the age of 16 are now vaccinated. Garcetti understands the urgency and reality of addressing climate change, and is familiar with geopolitics of the Indo-Pacific region from his service in the US Navy.” The ongoing trade war between the two countries reached its lowest point in 2018 when India imposed tariffs on 28 products in retaliation to the U.S. government’s imposing of heavy tariffs on aluminum and steel from India. Earlier that year, the U.S. ended its generalized system of preferences for India, a program that allowed for duty-free exports of certain products.

Former President Donald Trump called India “the tariff king,” saying: “When we send a motorcycle to India, it’s a 100 percent tariff. When India sends a motorcycle to us, we brilliantly charge them nothing.” On defense, Rossow noted: “Mayor Garcetti will have a particularly steep learning curve to cover our defense relationship with India.” He referred to military exercises, finding a comfortable “strategic pathway,” pending defense sales, and the evolution of Quad, an initiative by the U.S., Japan, Australia and India to get Covid vaccines to the developing world. Garcetti’s close ties to Biden could accelerate Quad’s strategy, predicted Rossow.

The veteran India expert acknowledged that Garcetti presently has no relationship to India nor to Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. His views on contentious issues, such as India’s treatment of its minorities, or his position on statehood for Jammu and Kashmir are unknown. However, the two-term mayor serves on the executive committee of Human Rights Watch, which has been critical of the Modi government. Indiaspora founder MR Rangaswami cheered Biden’s announcement. “It is good for India to have an ambassador from the U.S., who is a Rhodes scholar and familiar with geopolitics.”

Narendra Modi Drops 12 Ministers, Inducts 43 In Major Cabinet Reshuffle

In a massive Cabinet reshuffle on Wednesday, July 6th, India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi dropped 12 senior ministers and inducted a younger team aimed at refurbishing his government’s image after widespread criticism of its handling of the COVID-19 pandemic. Fifteen Cabinet ministers and 28 junior ministers were sworn in by President Kovind at a ceremony in the presidential palace. Eight junior ministers were elevated to Cabinet rank.

Hours after 43 leaders took oath as ministers in the RashtrapatiBhavan, the Centre allocated portfolios to the newly inducted ministers. While Home Minister Amit Shah will be in charge of the newly created Ministry of Cooperation, Ashwini Vasihnaw has been given ministries of Railways, Communications and Electronics and Information Technology. KirenRijiju will be the new Minister of Law and Justice. Health Minister Dr. Harsh Vardhan, whose response to the epidemic came under close examination, Education Minister Ramesh PokhriyalNishank, Law and Electronics and Information Technology Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad and Environment Minister Prakash Javadekar were among those who resigned hours ahead of the reshuffle. Prasad was involved in a bitter row with Twitter over India’s new internet regulations, which digital activists say could curtail online speech and privacy. He has been replaced by Ashwini Vaishnaw.

Mansukh Mandaviya replaces Dr. Vardhan as the new Health Minister, says a statement by the president’s office. He is from Modi’s home state of Gujarat. Modi retained Home Minister Amit Shah, Defense Minister Rajnath Singh, Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman and External Affairs Minister SubrahmanyamJaishankar. Other key portfolios were given to KirenRijiju (Law and Justice), Hardeep Singh Puri (Petroleum and Natural Gas), Bhupender Yadav (Environment), Anurag Singh Thakur (Information and Broadcasting) and Dharmendra Pradhan (Education).

JyotiradityaScindia — one of the BJP’s high-profile acquisitions from the Congress — has been given charge of the Civil aviation ministry at a time the sector is struggling under the Covid onslaught. The ministry was once handled by his father MadhavraoScindia, who died in a plane crash in 2001. It is the first Cabinet reshuffle since Modi was returned to power for a second term in 2019. The government is facing increasing criticism for its handling of the pandemic. Vardhan, who was in charge of the Health Ministry as well as the Science and Technology Ministry, led the response to the pandemic.

“In one clean sweep, you have senior ministers being removed. The government has admitted by these changes that it has failed miserably in handling the pandemic as it should have,” said NilanjanMukhopadhyay, a well-known journalist and political analyst. As the country braces for a third wave of Covid following a debilitating second surge, Mansukh Mandaviya has been given the challenge of leading the containment efforts as the head of the crucial health ministry. His junior minister will be DrBharatiPawar. In addition, he would retain the Ministry of Chemical Fertilizers.

More than half of India’s reported 400,000 coronavirus deaths — the third most of any country — have occurred over the past two months as the delta variant of the virus tore through the nation and overwhelmed its already strained health system. New cases are on the decline after exceeding 400,000 a day in May, but authorities are preparing for another possible wave and are trying to ramp up vaccinations. The reshuffle also came after the defeat of Modi’s Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party in April elections in key West Bengal state, a test of its handling of the pandemic.

Modi will face another major test of his popularity in legislative elections in Uttar Pradesh, Goa, Manipur, Punjab and Uttarakhand states in February and March next year, which may prove to be a bellwether for his party’s fate in 2024 national elections. “I congratulate all the colleagues who have taken oath today and wish them the very best for their ministerial tenure. We will continue working to fulfil aspirations of the people and build a strong and prosperous India,” PM Modi had tweeted after the oath ceremony this evening.

RASHTRAPATI BHAVAN

PRESS COMMUNIQUE

The President of India, as advised by the Prime Minister, has directed the allocation of portfolios among the following members of the Council of Ministers :-

Shri Narendra Modi Prime Minister and also in-charge of:

Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions;

Department of Atomic Energy;

Department of Space;

All important policy issues; and

All other portfolios not allocated to any Minister

 CABINET MINISTERS

1. Shri Raj Nath Singh Minister of Defence
2. Shri Amit Shah Minister of Home Affairs; and

Minister of Cooperation

3. Shri Nitin Jairam Gadkari Minister of Road Transport and Highways
4. Smt. Nirmala Sitharaman Minister of Finance; and

Minister of Corporate Affairs

5. Shri Narendra Singh Tomar Minister of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare
6. Dr. Subrahmanyam Jaishankar Minister of External Affairs
7. Shri Arjun Munda Minister of Tribal Affairs
8. Smt. Smriti Zubin Irani Minister of Women and Child Development

CABINET MINISTERS (CONTD.)

9. Shri Piyush Goyal Minister of Commerce and Industry;

Minister of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution; and

Minister of Textiles

10. Shri Dharmendra Pradhan Minister of Education; and

Minister of Skill Development and Entrepreneurship

11. Shri Pralhad Joshi Minister of

Parliamentary Affairs;

Minister of Coal; and

Minister of Mines

12. Shri Narayan Tatu Rane Minister of Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises
13. Shri Sarbananda Sonowal Minister of Ports, Shipping and Waterways; and

Minister of AYUSH

14. Shri Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi Minister of Minority Affairs
15. Dr. Virendra Kumar Minister of Social Justice and Empowerment
16. Shri Giriraj Singh Minister of Rural Development; and

Minister of Panchayati Raj

17. Shri Jyotiraditya M. Scindia Minister of Civil Aviation
18. Shri Ramchandra Prasad Singh Minister of Steel
19. Shri Ashwini Vaishnaw Minister of Railways;

Minister of Communications; and

Minister of Electronics and Information Technology

CABINET MINISTERS (CONTD.)

20. Shri Pashu Pati Kumar Paras Minister of Food Processing Industries
21. Shri Gajendra Singh Shekhawat Minister of Jal Shakti
22. Shri Kiren Rijiju Minister of Law and Justice
23. Shri Raj Kumar Singh Minister of Power; and

Minister of New and Renewable Energy

24. Shri Hardeep Singh Puri Minister of Petroleum and Natural Gas; and

Minister of Housing and Urban Affairs

25. Shri Mansukh Mandaviya Minister of Health and Family Welfare; and

Minister of Chemicals and Fertilizers

26. Shri Bhupender Yadav Minister of Environment, Forest and Climate Change; and

Minister of Labour and Employment

27. Dr. Mahendra Nath Pandey Minister of Heavy Industries
28. Shri Parshottam Rupala Minister of Fisheries, Animal Husbandry and Dairying
29. Shri G. Kishan Reddy Minister of Culture;

Minister of Tourism; and

Minister of Development of North Eastern Region

30. Shri Anurag Singh Thakur Minister of Information and Broadcasting; and

Minister of Youth Affairs and Sports

 

MINISTERS OF STATE (INDEPENDENT CHARGE)

1. Rao Inderjit Singh Minister of State (Independent Charge) of the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation;

Minister of State (Independent Charge) of the Ministry of Planning; and

Minister of State in the Ministry of Corporate Affairs

2. Dr. Jitendra Singh Minister of State (Independent Charge) of the Ministry of Science and Technology;

Minister of State (Independent Charge) of the Ministry of Earth Sciences;

Minister of State in the Prime Minister’s Office;

Minister of State in the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions;

Minister of State in the Department of Atomic Energy; and

Minister of State in the Department of Space

 

MINISTERS OF STATE

1. Shri Shripad Yesso Naik Minister of State in the Ministry of Ports, Shipping and Waterways; and

Minister of State in the Ministry of Tourism

2. Shri Faggansingh Kulaste Minister of State in the Ministry of Steel; and

Minister of State in the Ministry of Rural Development

 

3. Shri Prahalad Singh Patel Minister of State in the Ministry of Jal Shakti; and

Minister of State in the Ministry of Food Processing Industries

4. Shri Ashwini Kumar Choubey Minister of State in the Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution; and

Minister of State in the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change

5. Shri Arjun Ram Meghwal Minister of State in the Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs; and

Minister of State in the Ministry of Culture

6. General (Retd.) V. K. Singh Minister of State in the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways; and

Minister of State in the Ministry of Civil Aviation

7. Shri Krishan Pal Minister of State in the Ministry of Power; and

Minister of State in the Ministry of Heavy Industries

8. Shri Danve Raosaheb Dadarao Minister of State in the Ministry of Railways;

Minister of State in the Ministry of Coal; and

Minister of State in the Ministry of Mines

9. Shri Ramdas Athawale Minister of State in the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment
10. Sadhvi Niranjan Jyoti Minister of State in the Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution; and

Minister of State in the Ministry of Rural Development

11. Dr. Sanjeev Kumar Balyan Minister of State in the Ministry of Fisheries, Animal Husbandry and Dairying

 

12. Shri Nityanand Rai Minister of State in the Ministry of Home Affairs
13. Shri Pankaj Chaowdhary Minister of State in the Ministry of Finance
14. Smt. Anupriya Singh Patel Minister of State in the Ministry of Commerce and Industry
15. Prof. S. P. Singh Baghel Minister of State in the Ministry of Law and Justice
16. Shri Rajeev Chandrasekhar Minister of State in the Ministry of Skill Development and Entrepreneurship; and

Minister of State in the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology

17. Sushri Shobha Karandlaje Minister of State in the Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare
18. Shri Bhanu Pratap Singh Verma Minister of State in the Ministry of Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises
19. Smt. Darshana Vikram Jardosh Minister of State in the Ministry of Textiles; and

Minister of State in the Ministry of Railways

20. Shri V. Muraleedharan Minister of State in the Ministry of External Affairs; and

Minister of State in the Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs

21. Smt. Meenakashi Lekhi Minister of State in the Ministry of External Affairs; and

Minister of State in the Ministry of Culture

22. Shri Som Parkash Minister of State in the Ministry of Commerce and Industry

 

23. Smt. Renuka Singh Saruta Minister of State in the Ministry of Tribal Affairs
24. Shri Rameswar Teli Minister of State in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas; and

Minister of State in the Ministry of Labour and Employment

25. Shri Kailash Choudhary Minister of State in the Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare
26. Smt. Annpurna Devi Minister of State in the Ministry of Education
27. Shri A. Narayanaswamy Minister of State in the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment
28. Shri Kaushal Kishore Minister of State in the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs
29. Shri Ajay Bhatt Minister of State in the Ministry of Defence; and

Minister of State in the Ministry of Tourism

30. Shri B. L. Verma Minister of State in the Ministry of Development of North Eastern Region; and

Minister of State in the Ministry of Cooperation

31. Shri Ajay Kumar Minister of State in the Ministry of Home Affairs
32. Shri Devusinh Chauhan Minister of State in the Ministry of Communications

 

33. Shri Bhagwanth Khuba Minister of State in the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy; and

Minister of State in the Ministry of Chemicals and Fertilizers

34. Shri Kapil Moreshwar Patil Minister of State in the Ministry of Panchayati Raj
35. Sushri Pratima Bhoumik Minister of State in the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment
36. Dr. Subhas Sarkar Minister of State in the Ministry of Education
37. Dr. Bhagwat Kishanrao Karad Minister of State in the Ministry of Finance
38. Dr. Rajkumar Ranjan Singh Minister of State in the Ministry of External Affairs; and

Minister of State in the Ministry of Education

39. Dr. Bharati Pravin Pawar Minister of State in the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare
40. Shri Bishweswar Tudu Minister of State in the Ministry of Tribal Affairs; and

Minister of State in the Ministry of Jal Shakti

41. Shri Shantanu Thakur Minister of State in the Ministry of Ports, Shipping and Waterways
42. Dr. Munjapara Mahendrabhai Minister of State in the Ministry of Women and Child Development; and

Minister of State in the Ministry of AYUSH

43. Shri John Barla Minister of State in the Ministry of Minority Affairs

 

44. Dr. L. Murugan Minister of State in the Ministry of Fisheries, Animal Husbandry and Dairying; and

Minister of State in the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting

45. Shri Nisith Pramanik Minister of State in the Ministry of Home Affairs; and

Minister of State in the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports

 

 

Eric Adams Wins NYC Democratic Mayoral Primary

Brooklyn Borough President Eric Adams, a former police captain, has won New York City’s Democratic mayoral primary, according to The Associated Press. With nearly all of the absentee ballots finally counted by the city’s Board of Elections, Adams—a former police officer who would be the city’s second Black mayor—bested former Sanitation Commissioner Kathryn Garcia by about 8,500 votes, or one percentage point— 50.5 percent to 49.5 percent.

New York’s second Black mayor if he is elected in November’s general election over the Republican nominee, radio host Curtis Sliwa, because winning the primary in the heavily Democratic city is tantamount to winning the election. This was the city’s first major primary to use a ranked choice voting system meant to avoid costly runoffs and in which voters could order their top five choices, with their ballot moving to their next pick if their previous one was eliminated until one candidate claimed 50 percent support. Adams had led by nearly 15,000 first-choice votes after in-person voting concluded, and held on after about 125,000 thousand absentee ballots were counted and ranked choices tallied in an election run in the shadow of the pandemic that ravaged the city last year.

Adams, who grew up in Bushwick and was beaten by the police as a teen before joining the department himself to try to reform it from within, ran a campaign promising to restore New York to New Yorkers who’ve been left behind by decades of progress and gentrification. He gave a fiery speech on Martin Luther King Day at the Rev. Al Sharpton’s National Action Network in 2020, where he ripped newcomers to the city who are “hijacking your apartments and displacing your living arrangements” and told them to “go back to Iowa! You go back to Ohio! New York City belongs to the people that [were] here and made New York City what it is.”

He also focused on rising gun violence as a threat of prosperity and security as some other candidates, including Wiley, in effect ran against the NYPD in the aftermath of last summer’s George Floyd protests. His big step towards city hall comes as Republicans blame a spike in homicides across a host of US cities for the “defund the police” movement advocated by liberal Democrats. The Democratic governor of New York state, Andrew Cuomo, on Tuesday declared a disaster emergency order to address rising gun violence there.

Police figures last month showed crime in the city rose by 22% in the past 12 months and shootings were up 73%. Adams, 60, is a moderate Democrat who denounced the “defund the police” movement during the campaign. On the stump, he sought to tread a fine line between promising to reform the New York Police Department (NYPD) and keeping New Yorkers safe from crime. Adams told supporters on the night of last month’s primary election: “If black lives really matter, it can’t only be against police abuse. It has to be against the violence that’s ripping apart our communities.”

About one in four of the city’s roughly 3.7 million Democrats voted, meaning that Adams is on track to become the next mayor of a city of nearly 8.5 million on the basis of just over 400,000 votes. Sadly, that’s a significant improvement on the “mandate” claimed by de Blasio, who won the 2013 Democratic primary with about 260,000 votes. The unpopular Mr de Blasio, a Democrat, is leaving office at the end of this year due to term limits. Adams is the overwhelming favorite for November’s election given that registered Democrats outnumber Republicans in the city by seven to one. David Dinkins was the first black mayor of New York City, serving from 1990-93.

Adams told CNN in an interview Wednesday morning that “it’s extremely exciting right now that, you know, just an everyday blue-collar worker, I like to say, is going to potentially become the mayor of the city of New York.” “This city is like many of our cities in America, we’re ready to finally look after working class people. And I’m going to be the mayor to symbolize that, partner with the other mayors across this country,” he said.

Death Of Indian Jesuit Stan Swamy Throws Light On Abuse Of India’s Anti-Terrorism Laws

The body of 84-year-old Indian Jesuit priest Stan Swamy, who died under detention, was cremated on July 6 after a court asked Jesuit officials to follow prison rules. Father Stan Swamy was championing the rights of indigenous and marginalized people in eastern India’s Jharkhand state, breathed his last at the Holy Family Hospital in Bandra, Mumbai, where he was admitted for treatment over a month ago. Father Swamy was a Jesuit for 64 years, and a priest for 51 years.

The body of Father Swamy, who died of post-Covid-19 complications on July 5 in church-run Holy Family Hospital in Mumbai, was taken to a government crematorium after a requiem Mass. “Although he was free from Covid-19, we have been asked by the court to follow prison rules,” Jesuit Father Joseph Xavier said at the end of the July 6 funeral service after announcing the decision to cremate the priest’s body.  Father Swamy’s body was cremated in an electric crematorium at around 6.30pm after the funeral Mass, Father Joseph told UCA News on July 7.

Dr. Stanislaus D’Souza SJ, the Jesuit Provincial of India, said: “With a deep sense of pain, anguish and hope we have surrendered Fr Stan Swamy, aged 84, to his eternal abode.”The funeral service and Mass was led by Father Arun De Souza, Jesuit provincial of Mumbai, at St. Peter’s Church in Bandra, a Mumbai suburb. Only some 20 people attended the service because of Covid-19 restrictions.  Jesuits said the ashes will be carried to Ranchi town in eastern India where the missionary priest was based and to Jamshedpur town, the base of his Jesuit province. Father Stanislaus Arulswamy, known popularly as Stan Swamy had Parkinson’s disease, developed a pulmonary infection, post-Covid-19 complications in the lungs and pneumonia, according to the hospital’s medical director Ian D’Souza.  India’s National Investigation Agency (NIA) that is tasked with fighting terrorism and sedition under the controversial Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), arrested Father Swamy on October 8 from Bagaicha, a Jesuit social action center on the outskirts of Ranchi, the capital of the eastern state of Jharkhand.

The following day, he was lodged in Taloja Jail, near Mumbai.  He was arrested for alleged links with Maoist insurgents who were said to have been behind the caste-based violence in BhimaKoregaon village in Maharashtra state in January 2018, in which one person was killed and many others injured.  Fifteen others, including scholars, lawyers, academicians, cultural activists and an ageing radical poet, have also been implicated in the same case. Father Swamy who suffered from Parkinson’s disease had difficulty in even sipping water from a glass and depended on co-prisoners for his other basic needs.  Besides, he also had hearing impairment and other age-related ailments.

The NIA court denied him bail twice, forcing him to twice move the Bombay High Court for bail. In the second week of May, the priest’s family members sought his release on grounds that he had contracted Covid-19 and was unable to even speak to his lawyers.  While hearing his bail plea on health grounds on May 21 through a video linkup, the Bombay High Court sensed Fr. Swamy’s failing health, and offered him treatment in a government or private hospital.  But the Jesuit turned down the offer, saying all he wanted was bail to go back to his home.  “I would rather suffer, possibly die very shortly if this were to go on,” he said.  He explained that when he arrived at the prison, his bodily systems “were very functional”, but in the over 7 months in prison, “there has been a steady, slow regression” of his health.

JCSA said “the Bombay High Court was hearing some petitions, seeking bail and a constitutional challenge to a section of UAPA, on July 5 when his lawyer announced Stan Swamy’s death.” “He suffered a cardiac arrest at 4.30 am on Saturday, and deteriorated thereafter,” JCSA said. The Archdiocese of Ranchi where Father Swamy served hailed him as  “a champion of tribal rights, a fighter for justice and a symbol of courage”.  “The fact that this sick man suffering with Parkinson disease was arrested at the age of 84, refused bail for over 7 months, not even allowed a sipper and finally contracted COVID in jail, itself is a sad reflection on those who got the innocent man arrested and the courts that refused to give him bail,” said a statement signed by

Archbishop Felix Toppo of Ranchi and Auxiliary Bishop Theodore Mascarenhas.  “The ‘caged parrot’ now sings in heaven but its blood is on our hands,” they wrote,   “May the hand of God intervene to bring justice to all innocent victims of insensitivity, vindictiveness and injustice. We have lost Fr. Stan Swamy but we still hope in the God of justice,” they added.The Jamshedpur Jesuit Province, to which Father Swamy belonged, also expressed “a deep sense of pain, anguish and hope” at the death of the “servant in mission of justice and reconciliation”. In a Facebook post, Father Jerome Cutinha noted that the “author of life” had given Father Swamy “a mission to work among the Advasis [indigenous], Dalits [downtrodden] and other marginalized communities so that the poor may have life and life to the full, with dignity and honour”. “The Society of Jesus [Jesuits], at this moment, recommits itself to take forward the legacy of Fr. Stan in hits mission of justice and reconciliation,” Father Cutinha wrote.

“We are deeply saddened at the passing away of Fr. Stan Swamy. We give thanks to God for Fr. Stan’s life and commitment to the poor indigenous people and their struggles,” wrote Cardinal Oswald Gracias of Bombay in a brief statement.  “Fr. Stan’s arrest was very painful,” lamented the cardinal who is President of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of India (CBCI).   “Under the Indian criminal law, one is innocent until proved guilty,” he wrote. “Fr. Stan’s case did not even come up for hearing. We were eagerly waiting for the case to be taken up and the truth to come out,” the cardinal wrote.

Fr. Swamy’s commitment

Father Swamy has denied all charges against him saying BhimaKoregaon is “a place that I have never been to in all my life.” However, sensing his imminent arrest, he had released a video message explaining his situation.  He said that what was happening to him was not something unique or happening to him alone. “It’s a broader process that is taking place over the country.”  Prominent intellectuals, lawyers, writers, poets, activists and student leaders, he said, “are all put into jail just because they have expressed dissent…”.

This however did not dim his resolve to pursue his convictions.  “I am happy to be part of this process because I am not a silent spectator,” he said in the video.  He explained that with the creation of Jharkhand state in 2000, there were issues, such as displacement and land alienation because of mining, factories townships and dams”, in which the people who owned that land were not consulted.  He engaged young activists to resort to the country rulings or laws that empowered the indigenous people in issues regarding their lands and territories.

The death in India of an octogenarian human rights activist who was denied bail even as his health deteriorated in prison has sparked anger across the country, with critics decrying the government’s alleged misuse of anti-terrorism laws. For decades, he fought for the human rights of India’s marginalized and indigenous groups, speaking and writing in depth about caste-based injustices.

India’s caste system was officially abolished in 1950, but the 2,000-year-old social hierarchy imposed on people by birth still exists in many aspects of life. The caste system categorizes Hindus at birth, defining their place in society, what jobs they can do and who they can marry. In October last year, Swamy was arrested and charged under the country’s anti-terrorism laws, which critics have described as draconian.

Stan Swamy was among 16 renowned activists, academics and lawyers who were charged under a draconian anti-terror law in what came to be known as the BhimaKoregaon case.  Prison authorities were criticized for denying him access to basic amenities such as a straw and sipper – a plastic drinking beaker with a spout or straw – which he needed to drink water because of hand tremors caused by Parkinson’s. The Elgar Parishad case is related to inflammatory speeches made at a conclave held in Pune on December 31, 2017, which, the police claimed, triggered violence the next day near the Koregaon-Bhima war memorial located on the outskirts of the western Maharashtra city. The police had claimed the conclave was organized by people with alleged Maoist links.

Human Rights Violated: Modi Regime Abuses Power

Stan Swamy’s arrest sparked outrage worldwide, prompting several opposition politicians, national and international rights groups to demand his release. The others accused in the case termed Stan Swamy’s death an “institutional murder” and held the “negligent jails, indifferent courts and malicious investigating agencies” responsible for it. As a mark of protest, 10 of the co-accused in the case – Rona Wilson, SurendraGadling, SudhirDhawale, Mahesh Raut, Arun Ferreira, Vernon Gonsalves, GautamNavlakha, AnandTeltumbde, Ramesh Gaichor and SagarGorkhe – went on a one-day fast in the Taloja jail on Wednesday.

They informed about the protest to their family members, who released a statement saying all Elgar case prisoners have blamed the NIA and the Taloja jail’s former superintendent KaustubhKurlekar for the death of Father Stan Swamy. They believe that “the separation of Stan Swamy from them is a deliberate institutional murder,” the release said. The statement alleged that the NIA and Kurlekar never missed a single opportunity to “harass” Stan Swamy, whether it was the “ghastly treatment” inside the jail, the haste to transfer him back from hospital to jail or even protesting against trivial things like a sipper (which Stan Swamy required due to his medical conditions).

“It is these that have caused the death of Stan Swamy and therefore, for this institutional murder, NIA officials and Kurlekar should be tried under Section 302 (murder) of the Indian Penal Code,” the statement said, while demanding a judicial inquiry into his death.

The statement said the family members of the accused will submit these demands to Maharashtra Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray through the Taloja jail administration. It also said that though these accused were lodged in different barracks, they met on Tuesday and shared their memories of Father Stan Swamy, and also observed a two-minute silence as a mark of tribute to him. Three women accused in the case- SudhaBharadwaj, Shoma Sen and JyotiJagtap – are currently lodged at the Byculla prison in Mumbai.

The United Nations Human Rights on Tuesday issued a statement on his death and detention, criticising India. The international body tweeted, “We are saddened and disturbed by the death of 84-year-old human rights defender Father Stan Swamy, after prolonged pre-trial detention. With Covid-19, it is even more urgent that states release every person detained without sufficient legal basis.” In its statement, the UN Human Rights’ office of the high commissioner had said that Father Stan had been held in pre-trial detention without bail since his arrest, charged with terrorism-related offences in relation to demonstrations that date back to 2018.

“High Commissioner Michelle Bachelet and the UN’s independent experts have repeatedly raised the cases of Father Stan and 15 other human rights defenders associated with the same events with the Government of India over the past three years and urged their release from pre-trial detention. The High Commissioner has also raised concerns over the use of the UAPA in relation to human rights defenders, a law Father Stan was challenging before the Indian courts days before he died,” the UN statement said. “We stress, once again, the High Commissioner’s call on the Government of India to ensure that no one is detained for exercising their fundamental rights to freedom of expression, of peaceful assembly and of association,” Bachelet said in her statement.

An international alliance of civil rights groups has blamed the administration of Prime Minister Narendra Modi for the death of an 84-year-old Jesuit social activist who died under detention. Human rights defender Father Stan Swamy’s death on July 5 while awaiting trial has deeply shocked and outraged global civil society alliance CIVICUS. A slew of opposition politicians, rights groups and academics, have expressed sadness for his death — as well as anger for the laws under which he was arrested and denied bail. Critics have long accused India’s government of increasingly using anti-terrorism laws as a means to quell any form of dissent.

Harsh Mander, a prominent Indian rights activist called Swamy’s death a “tragedy for the nation.” “A cruel state jailed him to silence his voice, the judiciary did nothing to secure his freedom,” he said on Twitter. International figures have spoken out as well — the European Union’s special representative for human rights said the EU had been “raising his case repeatedly with authorities,” calling Swamy a “defender of indigenous people’s rights.”

MeenakshiGanguly, South Asia director of Human Rights Watch, said Swamy’s arrest highlights “a degree of cruelty and callousness that is shameful.” “The counter terror law is draconian. We see it is being used rampantly to jail peaceful critics without bail,” Ganguly said. “It was for the courts to decide if Swamy was guilty, but in repeatedly stifling bail, the authorities chose not to protect,” the “fragile, ailing” activist, she added.

The priest’s death “is a result of the persecution he has faced by the Modi government after revealing abuses by the state,” the group said in a press statement. “Swamy’s death is a tragic loss for civil society and highlights the dangerous situation for other human rights defenders currently in jail in India,” said Lysa John, CIVICUS secretary-general. “Human rights activism and criticism of the state should not amount to the equivalent of a death sentence.”

Thousands of activists, political leaders and Indian citizens have taken to social media to pay tributes to Stan Swamy.  Many also expressed anger at the way he was jailed during Covid-19 and repeatedly denied bail. The government said Swamy’s arrest followed “due process under law”. Historian Ramachandra Guha called his death “a case of judicial murder“.  Leader of the main opposition Congress party Rahul Gandhi tweeted that “he deserved justice and humaneness”:

Indian American organizations have condemned the death of Father Stan Swamy, the 84-year-old defender of indigenous peoples’ rights in India, calling it a blot on India’s consciousness. “It is a dark day for democracy in India, and the national leadership and members of the judiciary should hang their heads in shame” questioning the failure of freedom of expression in a democratic nation,” George Abraham, vice-chairman of the Indian Overseas Congress, said in a statement.

In his last bail hearing in May, Swamy had predicted his death. “I would rather suffer, possibly die here very shortly if this were to go on,” he told the judges. The Indian Express newspaper said Swamy’s death had “left the highest institutions of India’s justice system diminished”.”In the nearly nine months of his incarceration, till his death, the ailing activist came up – again and again – against the heavy hand of the state, an unresponsive judiciary and a broken prison system,” the newspaper said in an editorial. Chief Minister Hemant Soren of the eastern state of Jharkhand – where Swamy lived and worked – said the federal government “should be answerable for absolute apathy and non provision of timely medical services, leading to his death”.

PM Modi Is A ‘Predator of Press Freedom’

Prime Minister Narendra Modi is in the list of 37 heads of state or government that the global body Reporters Without Borders (RSF) has identified as ‘predators of press freedom’. The entry against Modi notes how his “close ties with billionaire businessmen who own vast media empires” has helped him spread his nationalist-populist ideology through continued coverage of his “extremely divisive and derogatory” speeches.

India is ranked 142nd out of 180 countries in RSF’s 2021 World Press Freedom Index. RSF is the world’s biggest NGO specialising in the defence of media freedom, which is regarded as a basic human right to be informed and to inform others. Modi joins the likes of Pakistan’s Imran Khan, Saudi Arabia’s crown prince Mohammed bin Salman, Myanmar’s military head Min Aung Hlaing and North Korea’s Kim Jong-un, along with 32 others who “trample on press freedom by creating a censorship apparatus, jailing journalists arbitrarily or inciting violence against them when they don’t have blood on their hands because they have directly or indirectly pushed for journalists to be murdered.” This is the first time since 2016 that RSF is publishing such a list. Seventeen of the heads identified as ‘predators’ are new entrants. Thirteen of the 37 in the list are from the Asia-Pacific region.

Seven of the list’s world leaders have been a part of it since it was first published in 2001 and include Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad, Iran’s Ali Khamenei, Russia’s Vladimir Putin and Belarus’s Alexander Lukashenko. The latter has gained credence as a ‘predator’ since the dramatic rerouting of a plane to capture critique and journalist Roman Protasevich. Bangladesh’s Sheikh Hasina and Hong Kong’s Carrie Lam are the two women identified as ‘predators’. For each of the predators, RSF has compiled a file identifying their ‘predatory method,’ their press release notes. The list also highlights how each ‘predator’ censors and persecutes journalists, and their ‘favourite targets’ – the kinds of journalists and media outlets they go after, along with quotations from speeches or interviews in which they ‘justify’ their predatory behaviour.

Modi’s entry notes that he has been a “predator since taking office” on May 26, 2014 and lists his ‘predatory methods’ as ‘national populism and disinformation’. His favourite targets, RSF says, are ‘sickulars’ and ‘presstitudes’. The former is a word which the Hindu rightwing and supporters of Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party use to slam viewpoints that are ‘secular’ – a word which is also in the Preamble of the Indian constitution – and not ostensibly rightwing Hindu-adhering. The latter is an amalgamation of ‘press’ and ‘prostitute’ – intended to indicate with the help of misogyny that media critical of Modi is a sellout.

The following is how the RSF describes Modi’s impact on the free press:

After becoming Gujarat’s chief minister in 2001, he used this western state as a laboratory for the news and information control methods he deployed after being elected as India’s prime minister in 2014. His leading weapon is to flood the mainstream media with speeches and information tending to legitimise his national-populist ideology. To this end, he has developed close ties with billionaire businessmen who own vast media empires.

This insidious strategy works in two ways. On the one hand, by visibly ingratiating himself with the owners of leading media outlets, their journalists know they risk dismissal if they criticise the government. On the other, prominent coverage of his extremely divisive and derogatory speeches, which often constitute disinformation, enables the media to achieve record audience levels.

All that is left for Modi is to neutralise the media outlets and journalists that question his divisive methods. For this, he has a judicial arsenal with provisions that pose a major threat to press freedom. For example, journalists risk the possibility of life imprisonment under the extremely vague charge of sedition. To round off this arsenal, Modi can count on an army of online trolls known as “yodha” (the Hindi word for “warriors”), who wage appalling hate campaigns on social media against the journalists they don’t like, campaigns that almost routinely include calls for the journalists to be killed.

The note also points out the murder of journalist Gauri Lankesh, in 2017, was a significant victim of Hindutva, “the ideology that spawned the Hindu nationalist movement that worships Modi.” It also notes like women journalists like Rana Ayyub and BarkhaDutt, who have been critical of Modi, receive the brunt of virulent attacks, including doxxing and call for gang-rapes. As a rule, any journalists or media outlets that question the prime minister’s national-populist ideology are quickly branded as “sickular” – a portmanteau of “sick” and “secular” – and are targeted by “bakht,”

Modi devotees who bring lawsuits against them, defame them in the mainstream media and coordinate online attacks against them. Recently, RSF had been critical of the “absurd charges” of “criminal conspiracy” brought against The Wire, Twitter India, and journalists Rana Ayyub, Saba Naqvi and Mohammed Zubair in connection with tweets and reports on an attack against a Muslim elderly man in Ghaziabad.

(Courtesy: Thewire.in)

How Biden Won In 2020, How Trump Kept The Race Close, And What It Tells Us About The Future

As we saw in 2016 and again in 2020, traditional survey research is finding it harder than it once was to assess presidential elections accurately. Pre-election polls systemically misjudge who is likely to vote, and exit polls conducted as voters leave the voting booths get it wrong as well.

Now, using a massive sample of “validated” voters whose participation has been independently verified, the Pew Research Center has published a detailed analysis of the 2020 presidential election. It helps us understand how Joe Biden was able to accomplish what Hillary Clinton did not—and why President Trump came closer to getting reelected than the pre-election surveys had predicted.

How Joe Biden won

Five main factors account for Biden’s success.

  1. The Biden campaign reunited the Democratic Party. Compared to 2016, he raised the share of moderate and conservative Democrats who voted for the Democratic nominee by 6 points, from 85 to 91%, while increasing the Democratic share of liberal Democrats from 94 to 98%. And he received the support of 85% of Democrats who had defected to 3rd party and independent candidates in 2016.
  2. Contrary to the fears of some Democrats, Biden maintained solid support among African Americans. Biden received 92% of the Black vote, statistically indistinguishable from Hillary Clinton’s 91% in 2016. His support among Black women was never in doubt, but President Trump’s alleged appeal to Black men turned out to be illusory. (His share of the Black male vote fell from 14% in 2016 to 12% in 2020 while Biden raised the Democrats’ share from 81% to 87%.) African Americans confirmed their status as a unique group of voters for whom the contemporary Republican Party holds no discernible appeal.
  3. As his supporters for the Democratic nomination had hoped, Joe Biden appealed to the center of the electorate across party lines. He did 10 points better than Hillary Clinton among Independents, and he doubled her showing among moderate and liberal Republicans. He improved on her performance among two swing religious groups—Catholics (up 5 points) and mainline Protestants (up 6). Most important, he raised the Democratic share of suburban voters by 9 points, from 45 to 54%, and among White suburban voters, from 38 to 47%.
  4. Biden regained much of the support among men that Hillary Clinton lost in 2016 while retaining her support among women. He won 48% of the male vote, up from Clinton’s 41%, and 40% of White men, compared to her 32% share. He expanded Democrats’ margin of victory among white college-educated men from 3 to 10 points. He even managed to raise the Democratic share of the white working-class men’s vote—the heart of the Trump coalition–to 31%, versus Clinton’s weak 23% showing. By contrast, Biden could do no better than Clinton’s showing among women overall, and he actually lost ground among white working-class women.
  5. Biden’s candidacy continued the shift of educated voters towards the Democratic Party. Among voters with a B.A. or more, Biden got 61% of the vote, up from 57% in 2016. This total included 57% of white voters with a college degree or more, 69% of Latinos, and 92% of African Americans. The shift of educated voters continues the recent pattern of large differences between more- and less-educated voters. The gap in support for Biden among whites with and without college degrees was 24 points; among Hispanics with and without college degrees, 14 points. By contrast, there was no education gap whatever among Black voters.

How Trump kept it close

Despite (or perhaps because of) non-stop controversy about his policies and personal conduct, President Trump managed to raise his share of the popular vote from 46% in 2016 to 47% in 2020. His core coalition held together, and he made a few new friends.

  1. The core coalition. Trump’s consistent appeals to his base bore fruit. His campaign for reelection was supported by 94% of Republicans, up from 92% in 2016; by 84% of White evangelical Protestants, up from 77%; and by 65% of rural voters, up from 59%. At the same time, he held the support of about two-thirds of whites without college degrees, and his support among white women rose from 47 to 53%.
  2. New friends. The changing Hispanic vote is perhaps the most notable feature of the 2020 election. Although many observers believed that Mr. Trump’s tough policies at the border would drive Hispanics away from his candidacy, his share of the Hispanic vote jumped by 10 points, from 28 to 38%. This increase accounts for a portion of the gains he made among urban voters, his share of whom increased by 9 points, from 24 to 33%. In another surprise, his support among young adults ages 18 to 29 improved by 7 points, from 28 to 35%.

Longer-term prospects

With electoral mobilization at a peak for supporters of both political parties, turnout surged to its highest level in a century. The Democratic vote total increased by 15.4 million over 2016; the Republican total, by 11.2 million. In future elections, much will depend on whether mobilization is symmetrical, as it was in 2020, or asymmetrical, as it is when one party is enthusiastic while the other is discouraged or complacent.

This said, Republicans are facing a structural dilemma. For the most part, their coalition depends on groups—notably whites and voters without college degrees–whose share of the electorate is declining. Moreover, as elderly Americans, who now tend to be supportive of Republican candidates, leave the electorate, they will be replaced by younger cohorts whose views of the Republican Party are far less favorable. Among voters under age 30, Joe Biden enjoyed a margin of 24 points over Donald Trump, and political scientists have found the voting patterns formed in this cohort tend to persist.

There are potential countervailing forces, however. If the Democratic Party is regarded as going beyond what the center of the electorate expects and wants, Democrats’ gains among suburban voters and moderate Republicans could evaporate. And if Democrats continue to misread the sentiments of Hispanics, who now constitute the country’s largest non-white group, their shift toward Republicans could continue. There is evidence that among Hispanics as well as whites, a distinctive working-class consciousness is more powerful than ethnic identity.

As my colleague Elaine Kamarck has observed, Hispanics could turn out to be the Italians of the 21st century—family-oriented, hardworking, culturally conservative. If they follow the normal intergenerational immigrant trajectory rather than the distinctive African American path, the multi-ethnic coalition on which Democrats are depending for their party’s future could lose an essential component.

Despite these possibilities, Republicans have made scant progress at the presidential level over the past two decades, during which they gained a popular vote majority only once. In the four most recent elections, their share of the popular vote has varied in a narrow range from a high of 47.2% in 2012 to a low of 45.7% in 2008. Despite labelling Mitt Romney a “loser,” Donald Trump failed to match Romney’s share of the popular vote in either 2016 or 2020. Trump’s gains in some portions of the electorate have been counterbalanced by losses in others. If Republicans cannot move from their current politics of coalition replacement to a new politics of coalition expansion, their prospects of becoming the country’s governing majority are not bright—unless Democrats badly overplay their hand.

(William A. Galston is Ezra K. Zilkha Chair and Senior Fellow – Governance Studies

BillGalston)

U.S. And China Can Co-Exist Peacefully

Kurt Campbell, White House coordinator for the Indo-Pacific, gave a briefing and participated in a conversation with the Asia Society Tuesday morning that provided the clearest picture yet of the Biden administration’s approach to Asia. In a wide-ranging discussion with Asia Society President and CEO and Asia Society Policy Institute (ASPI) President Kevin Rudd, ASPI Vice President Wendy Cutler, and ASPI Vice President for International Security and Diplomacy Daniel Russel, Campbell spoke at length about U.S. strategy toward the Indo-Pacific and toward China, which he said represented a departure from the approach favored by former U.S. President Donald Trump.

Campbell explained that a “new cold war” was a not a suitable way to frame the U.S.-China relationship, even though it has adversarial aspects. “There will be periods of uncertainty — perhaps even periods of occasional raised tensions,” he said. “Do I believe that China and the United States can coexist peacefully? Yes, I do. But I do think this challenge is going to be enormously difficult for this generation and the next.”

 One potential flashpoint in this challenge is Taiwan, which China views as an irrevocable part of its territory. Campbell stressed that the Biden Administration stands by the “One China Policy” and does not recognize Taiwan as an independent country — but he explained that the island should not be ignored by the international community or shut out of multilateral collaboration where it can make contributions. “We fully recognize and understand the sensitivities here,” he said.  The conversation also covered trade policy, where the U.S. is “quietly exploring” trade initiatives in Asia; China’s bullying approach to Australia, and fielded questions on how the imminent withdrawal of the U.S. military from Afghanistan will play out in the region.

The in-depth conversation underscored the Biden administration’s deep commitment to engagement with Asia. “For the first time in our history, the Indo-Pacific will be the center of our regional focus,” Campbell said. But, he added, the Biden administration’s top priority was domestic renewal here in the United States, a polarized country still emerging from the COVID-19 pandemic. “When people ask what the most important thing to do in Asia or in the world is, it sounds tired but is in fact the case: to recover at home,” he said.

Chinese Communist Party Celebrates 100 Years Of Leading China To Be A Super Power

A hundred years ago, sometime in July 1921, 13 young men gathered in the Chinese city of Shanghai to found a tiny political grouping: the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Today that party rules a quarter of humanity, presiding over the second biggest economy and second-best funded military in the world. What stands out in the history writing project in China is that the same party, over the course of a 100 years of its existence, has approached the history of China and that of its own differently at different moments in time.

According to Rana Mitter, an analyst and expert on China, “The combination of factors that the CCP has brought together in today’s China has no exact parallel in history.” He says, the first factor is authoritarian government. The CCP has never been keen on liberal democracy, but in the past decade it has been explicit that it regards its one-party state as a meritocratic alternative to liberal democracy, not a stepping stone toward it. In the past year, the party has drawn attention to its successful suppression of Covid-19 in China under its own political system, and contrasted it with what party-aligned voices have called the democratic West’s failure to respond.

The second is the creation of a consumerist lifestyle. Back in the Cold War, then-US Vice President Richard Nixon and Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev clashed in the “kitchen debate” over which system, capitalism or communism, could create a better lifestyle for ordinary people. In that case, most people might say the US has been the clear winner. But today, China’s emerging middle class can point to a lifestyle that is far beyond anything their parents or grandparents might have imagined. They have some of the world’s most sophisticated mobile phones, they go on vacation to glamorous locations within China (the tropical paradises of Hainan or Dali), and they live in some of the fastest-growing cities on earth.

Of course, this is still just one part of the population. There is plenty of poverty all over China, and even for well-paid urbanites, there are many problems ranging from expensive mortgages to lack of pensions. But the creation of the party’s idea of the “Chinese dream” is a reality for many of the new middle class. The third element the CCP has brought to bear is its global ambition. Back in the 1980s, Deng Xiaoping, the paramount leader who followed Mao Zedong, advised that China should lie low and bide its time, getting rich first and only seeking global glory later on.

Thirty years later, today’s party general secretary and national president, Xi Jinping, has made it clear that the CCP needs to make a splash in the world. The party’s global ambitions take many forms. They include the Belt and Road Initiative — the label given to the plan to provide loans for infrastructure development across Asia, Africa, and even Latin America. China also has sought more influence at the United Nations, including in key institutions such as the World Health Organization. Trade agreements are also part of the plan. The Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership is a free-trade agreement that puts China at the heart of an economic network across the Asia-Pacific; the US is not a member.

Finally, but perhaps most significantly, the CCP is using technology to change society both at home and abroad. China spent 2.4% of its GDP on research and development in 2020, and the technology produced by this investment has both military and civilian uses: For instance, artificial intelligence can be used by the security services to pinpoint dissidents via specific technologies like facial recognition, but it can also turn up consumer insights from the vast e-payments system that is making cash more and more outdated in China.This serves the party’s purposes, giving people everyday convenience while generating huge amounts of data that, many predict, will allow for unprecedented political control.

In 2012, soon after he became General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), Xi Jinping gave a speech at a foreign press briefing on what he sees as the road ahead for China. Ironically, in an address dedicated to the future of China, it was history that stood out as the focal point. Xi pointed to China’s “five thousand years and more of evolution as a civilization” in which the nation had made “indelible contribution to the progress of human civilization”. He also spoke about the hardships and sufferings endured by China in modern history and how “since its founding, the Communist Party of China had made great sacrifices and forged ahead against all odds.”

The role of history has been paramount in a China led by the Communist Party. Journalist Ian Johnson in his essay, ‘The presence of the past- A coda’ (2016), takes stock of this when he writes, “Communism itself is based on historical determinism: one of Marx’s points was that the world was moving inexorably towards Communism, an argument that regime builders like Lenin and Mao used to justify their violent rise to power.”

The CCP has succeeded in holding onto power because it is an unashamedly nationalist party. It believes that China was weakened in the 19th century because it did not have a clear idea of what kind of state it wanted to be. The CCP fiercely guards its territorial boundaries, and it regards criticism of its internal actions as “interference” with its sovereign rights. In the past year, there has been global alarm at the constraining of rights regarding free speech and democratic activism in Hong Kong under the National Security Law of 2020, as well as the detention of Uighur citizens in what the government terms “re-education” camps in the western province of Xinjiang. (The party also maintains the stated goal of reuniting Taiwan with mainland China and has laid controversial claims on disputed territories in the South China Sea.)

“What’s interesting with the CCP is that you see from a very early stage, a very conscious decision that artists and intelligentsia, or cultural production of which history writing is a part, had to serve the interests of the party,” says Arunabh Ghosh, historian of Modern China at Harvard University. He explains this relationship between the professional historian and the state historically, when he suggests that there exists a 1000-year-old history in China of employing bureaucrats through a meritocratic exam. “What that means is that intellectuals have been employed in the imperial project in a systematic way,” he says, adding that the legacy of this system has affected the relationship between the intellectual and the state right down to the present government under Xi.

What also stands out in the history writing project in China is that the same party, over the course of a 100 years of its existence, has approached the history of China and that of its own differently at different moments in time. As the party evolved, so did its relationship with the past. What was marginalized under Mao is now glorified by Xi, critical moments of CCP’s history suppressed or recovered to suit the party, while leaders, once crucial to the party, are now deemed as uncomfortable faces in its memory. While on one hand discussing episodes such as the Cultural Revolution and the Tiananmen Square protests is almost taboo, on the other hand important leaders of the CCP who later fell out with the party like Gao Gang and Liu Shaoqi are erased from history text books.

The significance of Mao in the history of modern China can never be overemphasized. Mao to China was what Stalin was to the Soviet Union. He was the founder of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) in 1949, and yet under him the country experienced some of the bloodiest and most controversial episodes in its history. After coming to power, Mao consolidated his control over the country through campaigns against landlords and counter-revolutionaries. His anti-rightist campaign between 1957 and 59 is known to have led to the execution of hundreds and thousands of critics of the party. The Great Leap Forward, an economic and social campaign initiated by Mao in 1958 to reconstruct the Chinese agrarian economy according to a Communist model resulted in what is believed to be the greatest famine in the history of the country.

Then came the Cultural Revolution, a movement that lasted for 10 years and led to unprecedented class violence and destruction of cultural artefacts. A 1994 report in the Washington Post suggests that Mao was responsible for more than a 100 million deaths, caused by the dozen or so campaigns launched by him between 1949 and 1976 when he died. The year 1989 is yet another landmark moment in the history of modern China. A student protest that began on account of the sudden death of CCP general secretary Hu Yaobang, soon turned into a movement centered on broader issues such as corruption, democracy, freedom of the press and the like. Thousands of students marched down to Tiananmen Square and as the protests kept developing the administration responded with both placatory as well as hardline tactics. On June 4, the government declared Martial Law and an estimated 300,000 troops of the PLA were called in to suppress the protest. Estimates of the number who died range from 1000 to 3000 and several others were wounded. The suppression of the Tiananmen protests was widely condemned by the global community.

This period of domestic turmoil received a further shock when the Soviet Union disintegrated between 1988 and 1991. “The message that a lot of the CCP leaders took was that if this can happen to the Soviet Communist Party, then this can happen to us, and how do we then prevent it from happening,” says Ghosh. One of the things that the party did very consciously after the crackdown at Tiananmen is to change the content of education. Thereafter, one of the campaigns it mounted in the early 1990s is the Patriotic Education Campaign. The primary goal of the campaign was to construct a historical memory of China in which the CCP had played a major role in the country’s independence and the influence that foreign countries had on it.

Scholars agree that what began in the 90s, has reached new heights under the Xi Jinping years. One way of doing so for the party is to promote itself aggressively as the defender of Chinese culture and traditions. Interestingly, till the 90s, most of these traditions were labeled as ‘feudal superstitions’. The glorification of China’s ancient past is best illustrated by Xi’s embrace of Confucius, the sixth century Chinese philosopher. Ironically, the party under Mao, had tried to uproot Confucian thought from Chinese society as they believed it to be a feudal leftover that hindered the growth of socialism. Xi, in contrast, visited the hometown of Confucius soon after taking over the role of president, and pledged to read Confucian texts. The following year, he became the first Communist Party leader to commemorate Confucius’ birth anniversary.

In recent years, China has emerged assertive in its territorial claims, for instance, over the East and South China Seas. At the same time it is also interested in shaping international organisations. For that effect the CCP uses the narrative of the war and its defeat of Japan to claim an elevated place in the postwar global order. As Mitter notes, Chinese thinkers argue, “China, like the United States, should be able to draw on its own record as one of the victorious allied powers to define its own vision of the region. Like other allies, China also seeks to legitimise its own behaviour and give itself prestige by virtue of its contributions to the wartime victory.”

Bipartisan Senators Reach $1.2 Trillion Infrastructure Deal

President Joe Biden and a bipartisan group of senators announced last week they had reached a framework $1.2 trillion infrastructure deal after a White House meeting just before Congress was about to leave town for a two-week recess. Speaking in the White House driveway, surrounded by smiling senators from both parties, Biden said, “They have my word, and I’ll stick with what they proposed, and they’ve given me their word as well — and where I come from, that’s good enough for me.” “We made serious compromises on both ends,” Biden said. “They did not — and I understand their position — the Republicans did not want to go along with the human infrastructure that I talk about, and we’ll see what happens in the reconciliation bill and the budget process,” he said. “If we get some compromise there and if we can’t, see if I can attract all Democrats to the position where they can move it on the dual track.”

Later on, Biden touted the deal in formal remarks from the White House East Room. “I said many times before, there’s nothing our nation can’t do when we decide to do it together, do it as one nation. Today is the latest example of that truth, in my view,” Biden began. “I’m pleased to report that a bipartisan group of senators, five Democrats, five Republicans, part of larger groups — have come together and force an agreement that will create millions of American jobs and modernize our American infrastructure to compete with the rest of the world in 21st century.” After touting the expansive package, Biden emphasized that it all comes without an increase on the gas tax, without fees on electric vehicles and “without raising a cent from earners below $400,000.”

Biden said, though the deal isn’t exactly what he wanted, nor is it exactly what Republicans had in mind, the fact that they did reach a bipartisan, consensus makes their agreement all the more significant. “Let me be clear, neither side got everything they wanted in this deal. That’s what it means to compromise. And it reflects something important. Reflects consensus. The heart of democracy,” Biden said. The deal would see $1.2 trillion in spending over eight years, including $579 billion in new spending over the first five years. The senators, saying all sides had compromised and no one got everything they wanted, said they needed to head back to Capitol Hill to work out details.

“Today we are announcing the framework for a historic investment in infrastructure,” said Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, one of the lead negotiators. “This is roads and bridges but also lots of other kinds of infrastructure including broadband, including our water system and rail system.” He praised the bipartisan effort. “I’m pleased to see us come together on a core infrastructure package. This is not non-infrastructure items, without new taxes, and with the commitment from Republicans and Democrats alike that we’re going to get this across the finish line,” Portman said.

“No one got everything they wanted in the package. We all gave some to get some — because what we did was put first the needs of our country,” said KyrstenSinema, D-Ariz. “We are delighted to go back to the Hill and begin earning more support from both Republicans and Democrats to get this bill across the finish line.” GOP Sen. Susan Collins called it the largest infrastructure package in U.S. history. She said the Senate has worked for decades to reach an infrastructure deal, so it’s “important” to show on the world stage that bipartisanship is possible in the U.S.

“We’ve agreed on the price tag, the scope, and how to pay for it. It was not easy to get agreement on all three, but it was essential,” she said. “It was essential to show the American people that the Senate can function, that we can work in a bipartisan way, and it sends an important message to the world as well, that America can function, can get things done.” Once the bill’s language is nailed down, it will have to pass through both chambers of Congress before Biden can sign the legislation — which Democrats warn will only come if a separate, reconciliation bill focused on “human infrastructure” is also approved.

Earlier Thursday, Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., told Capitol Hill reporters that 21 senators and Biden’s White House negotiators had reached an agreement on the plan’s “framework,” the same language other other senators used late Wednesday. Asked what areas still need to be worked out, Manchin said, “That’s why we’re going to go talk to President Biden.” “President Biden is the ultimate person that will have to sign off on this, to make sure he’s comfortable, and he wants a bipartisan deal,” Manchin said. “It’s a matter now, was the president comfortable.” Biden has been hoping for a bipartisan plan that can serve as landmark legislation for his presidency.

After Senate’s Failure, House Plans To Launch Probe Of Insurrection By Trumpists

The Democratic party led US House of Representatives will launch a new investigation of the Jan. 6 Capitol insurrection with the approval of a special committee to probe the violent attack. Split along party lines, the House launched a new investigation of the Jan. 6 Capitol insurrection on Wednesday, approving a special committee to probe the violent attack as police officers who were injured fighting former President Donald Trump’s supporters watched from the gallery above. The vote to form the panel was 222-190, with Republicans objecting that majority Democrats would be in charge. The action came after Senate Republicans blocked creation of an independent commission that would have been evenly split between the two parties.

Emphasizing the importance that Democrats attached to the vote, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told lawmakers in the chamber: “We will be judged by future generations as to how we value our democracy.” The panel will be led by Democrats, with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi appointing a chairperson and at least eight of the committee’s 13 members. The resolution gives Pelosi a possible say in the appointment of the other five members as well, directing that they will be named “after consultation” with House Republican leader Kevin McCarthy.

In a memo to all House Republicans, No. 2 House Republican Steve Scalise urged his members to vote against the resolution, saying the committee “is likely to pursue a partisan agenda” in investigating the siege by former President Donald Trump’s supporters. Republicans want to move on from the insurrection — and Trump’s role — and Scalise and McCarthy have declined to say whether Republicans will even participate. Pelosi moved to form the committee after Senate Republicans blocked the creation of a separate independent and bipartisan panel that would have been evenly split between the parties and modeled after a commission that investigated the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

The speaker has said that it was her preference to have an independent panel lead the inquiry, but that Congress could not wait any longer to begin a deeper look at the insurrection. “It is clear that January 6th was not simply an attack on a building, but an attack on our very Democracy,” Pelosi said in a letter to colleagues Wednesday morning. “It is imperative that we seek the truth of what happened.” The GOP role in the probe, and the appointments to the panel, could help determine whether the committee becomes a bipartisan effort or a tool of further division. Two Senate committees issued a bipartisan report with security recommendations earlier this month, but it did not examine the origins of the siege, leaving many unanswered questions about the events of the day.

McCarthy is facing pressure to take the investigation seriously from police officers who responded to the attack as well as from Democrats and even some of his fellow Republicans. Officers who responded that day, including Metropolitan Police Officers Michael Fanone and Daniel Hodges and Capitol Police Officer Harry Dunn were expected to attend the vote in the House Gallery, according to Pelosi’s office. Dozens of officers suffered injuries as Trump’s supporters pushed past them and broke into the building to interrupt the certification of President Joe Biden’s victory. Fanone has described being dragged down the Capitol steps by rioters who shocked him with a stun gun and beat him. Hodges was crushed between two doors. And Dunn has said that rioters yelled racial slurs and fought him in what resembled hand to hand combat as he held them back.

Seven people died during and after the rioting, including Babbitt and three other Trump supporters who suffered medical emergencies. In addition to Sicknick, two police officers died by suicide in the days that followed. Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, has also publicly pressured McCarthy. “I hope he appoints people who are seen as being credible,” he said Sunday on CNN.  Trump was twice impeached by the House and twice acquitted by the Senate, the second time for telling his supporters just before the insurrection to “fight like hell” to overturn his defeat to Biden.

Pelosi has not yet said who will lead the panel, but one possibility is House Homeland Security Committee Chair Bennie Thompson, D-Miss. Thompson said Tuesday that it would be an honor to serve as chair and that it’s Pelosi’s call if she wants to have a say on the Republican members. “They had an opportunity to really engage,” Thompson said of Republicans who voted against the bipartisan commission. “And they didn’t. So they can’t now come back and say, ‘Oh, that’s not fair.’” Many Republicans have expressed concerns about a partisan probe, since majority Democrats are likely to investigate Trump’s role in the siege and the groups that participated in it. Almost three dozen House Republicans voted last month for the legislation to create an independent commission, and seven Republicans in the Senate have also supported moving forward on that bill. But that was short of the 10 Senate Republicans who would be necessary to pass it.

Trump Organization Indicted With Tax Crimes

The Trump Organization’s chief financial officer, Allen Weisselberg, surrendered to the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office on July 1st after a grand jury indicted him and former President Donald Trump’s company, Trump Organization in a case over its business dealings. The charges, handed up by a New York grand jury, stem from a scheme to pay compensation to Weisselberg and possibly others “off the books” by the Trump Organization. They are expected to be unsealed in court Thursday afternoon in Manhattan, one Trump representative told NBC News.

A Trump Organization spokesperson called the indictments politically motivated and said Weisselberg “is now being used by the Manhattan district attorney as a pawn in a scorched-earth attempt to harm the former president. The district attorney is bringing a criminal prosecution involving employee benefits that neither the IRS nor any other district attorney would ever think of bringing,” the spokesperson said. “This is not justice; this is politics.”

Both the Manhattan district attorney and the New York Attorney General’s Office obtained the indictments, two people familiar with the matter told NBC News on Wednesday. A spokesperson for the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office declined to comment Wednesday on a report that indictments had been filed.

Though former President Donald Trump faced multiple federal and state prosecutorial inquiries during his administration, the district attorney’s indictment would be the first to charge his namesake company, the Trump Organization, for conduct that occurred when he led it.  Trump himself is not charged, his attorney has said.

Trump Is 4th Worst President In US History, Historians Say

C-SPAN released its 2021 Historians Survey of Presidential Leadership on June 30th, its fourth since 2000 — and the first to include Donald Trump. The survey organizers have assembled a broad ideological and demographic spectrum of 142 presidential historians and professional observers of the presidency invited to participate. The results from the survey suggest, Donald Trump is not our worst president. James Buchanan has held a lock on the bottom spot as the worst president in US history. Trump ranks in 41st place among the 44 US Presidents, with three presidents beneath him. Historians deemed him the fourth worst of the 44 former presidents, with Andrew Johnson and Franklin Pierce rated below him.

The scores, rendered by 142 independent historians looking at 10 criteria like “crisis leadership” and “performance within context of times,” range from 897 (out of a possible 1,000) for the top-rated president, Lincoln, to Buchanan’s 227. Trump got 312. “The case for Buchanan as the worst president in American history is, after all, a very strong one,” writes Thomas Balcerski, a historian and was among the 142 presidential historians who were part of the current study, rating the best and the worst presidents in US history. From unwise meddling into the affairs of the Supreme Court during the Dred Scott case — he allegedly influenced the court’s ruling that Black people are “not included, and were not intended to be included, under the word ‘citizens’ in the Constitution” — to his role in the struggles that split his own Democratic Party in two, Buchanan blundered badly when the nation needed a steady hand to guide the ship of state, states Balcerski.

Buchanan presided over the secession of seven Southern states from the Union and declared himself unable to stop it. “It is beyond the power of any president, no matter what may be his own political proclivities, to restore peace and harmony among the states,” he said in his annual message to Congress in 1860. “Wisely limited and restrained as is his power under our Constitution and laws, he alone can accomplish but little for good or for evil on such a momentous question.” The idea that Donald Trump would surpass James Buchanan for last place had seemingly become standard thinking by 2021. A veritable torrent of opinion pieces arguing for the historical magnitude of Trump’s failures — such as those in the The Washington Post and in the Atlantic — make the point.

In December 2020, a Fox News poll found that 42% of voters said history would remember Trump as one of the worst presidents. Of course, this initial polling about Trump’s place in history took place before the riot at the Capitol on January 6, 2021, the ramifications of which are ongoing. A recent Gallup poll on the question, conducted over January 4 to 15, 2021, revealed that fully six in 10 Americans thought Trump would be rated either “below average” or “poor.”

According to Balcerski, Trump scored highest in Public Persuasion — no surprise given his once massive Twitter following — and Economic Management — again, unsurprising given the historically large tax cuts passed earlier in his term. However, he scored dead last among all presidents in both Moral Authority — perhaps as a result of his two impeachments — and Administrative Skills, equally expected, given his administration’s disastrous handling of the Covid-19 crisis. But Trump’s ranking also implicitly relies on comparison to his immediate predecessor. Back in 2017, nearly half of Americans polled thought Barack Obama’s presidency would go down as either “outstanding” or “above average.” In the 2017 C-SPAN Historians Survey of Presidential Leadership, Obama ranked 12th overall, and he has now cracked the top 10, coming in at 10th place. Certainly, Obama continues to cast a long shadow over his successor.

But even as Trump’s relative underperformance ensured a low ranking, his failures as president did little to raise the profile of other poorly ranked presidents. In fact, the needle had hardly budged among the bottom quartile of presidents. Besides Buchanan, Andrew Johnson (43rd), Franklin Pierce (42nd), and William Henry Harrison (40th) join Donald Trump in the bottom five of the 2021 poll. So why didn’t Donald Trump take over James Buchanan for the bottom spot? Perhaps the most powerful explanation is a version of historical inertia. Once historians have decided a president’s place in history, they rarely leave the basement of American history.

At the same time, there have been some notable exceptions of historical reevaluation. Ulysses S. Grant, who placed 33rd in 2000, now sits comfortably at 20th place. In Grant’s case, his efforts to suppress the Ku Klux Klan through the Enforcement Acts of 1870 and 1871 increasingly stand out for their executive vigor and courage. Beyond inertia, however, a longer view of history also explains why Trump did not finish last. While it may have been common to call Trump the worst president in American history, the passions of the immediate moment tend to cool over time. Perhaps, too, historians take a somewhat longer view of events.

It’s hard to know how Trump will be ranked in the years ahead. He may follow a course similar to George W. Bush, who landed 36th overall in the 2009 C-SPAN survey, but just 12 years later, he now sits considerably higher, standing at 29th overall. By contrast, Richard Nixon finished 25th in the 2000 poll, but he had dropped considerably, down to 31st place since then. Mark K. Updegrove of the New York Times writes, “It’s too early to draw a dispassionate view of Mr. Trump’s single term. Normally it takes at least a generation for the appraisals of historians to become rooted in more reasoned judgment. In a poll conducted by Arthur Schlesinger in 1962, Dwight Eisenhower, just a year out of office, tied with the forgettable Chester Arthur for 20th out of the 29 presidents measured. Likewise, in a survey done two years after leaving the White House, Ronald Reagan placed 28th out of 37 presidents.”

Balcerski writes, “As for me, I ranked Donald Trump number 43 out of the 44 presidents scored, ahead only of Andrew Johnson, a man to whom he has been often compared. And I placed James Buchanan two spots above the blatantly racist and politically recalcitrant Johnson. But like American democracy itself, mine was just one vote of many. For now, at least, James Buchanan remains our worst president. Whether Donald Trump will surpass him as our worst president in the long run, only time can tell.”

Longest Ever US War Abroad To End In Weeks: Only 1,000 US Troops To Remain In Afghanistan

The United States could complete its troop withdrawal from Afghanistan within days, CNN quoting US officials reported last week.  “This makes the current week a critical one for President Joe Biden’s campaign to end America’s longest war even as US military officials warn the country could devolve into civil war,” CNN wrote. A defense official insisted to CNN that the number of US troops in Afghanistan for embassy protection and airport security would not exceed 650 for now. “This week could be a critical week in the withdrawal and end of the retrograde process,” he said. As many as 1,000 US troops could remain in the country after the formal withdrawal to assist in securing the US Embassy in Kabul and the city’s airport, a senior administration official told CNN, and it is now unclear how long North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) troops will remain.

A formal conclusion this week to the US military withdrawal, or retrograde, would mark an astonishingly quick end to a process that Biden initiated in April when he ordered the military to leave by September 11. Pentagon spokesman John Kirby said the US withdrawal will not necessarily mean the end of NATO’s Resolute Support mission in Afghanistan, despite NATO’s decision in April to start and complete its own troop drawdown within a few months. “It is my understanding with the completion of the retrograde of US forces, retrograde, withdrawal, of US forces from Afghanistan, with accepting, of course, whatever is left behind to protect our diplomatic presence, that that does not necessarily mean the end of Resolute Support,” Kirby told reporters on Tuesday.

US officials say there were some 2,500 US troops in Afghanistan, plus hundreds of additional special forces who are not publicly acknowledged when Biden made his decision in April to withdraw them. This comes in the middle of a surge in violence as the Taliban has increased its activities since the start of the US-led forces pull out on May 1.
As the Taliban have taken control of several districts across the country, US intelligence assessments have suggested the country’s civilian government could fall to the militant group within months of US forces withdrawing.

Meanwhile, a top US general, Austin Miller has warned hat the worsening violence could lead to civil war, CNN reported citing news reports. Gen. Austin S. Miller said the rapid loss of districts around the country to the Taliban — several with significant strategic value — is worrisome. He also cautioned that the militias deployed to help the beleaguered national security forces could lead the country into civil war. “A civil war is certainly a path that can be visualized if this continues on the trajectory it’s on right now, that should be of concern to the world,” he said. Biden acknowledged the growing challenges last Friday during a visit from President Ashraf Ghani, noting the “senseless violence” and saying, “It’s going to be very difficult,” but he is not rethinking his plans to withdraw US troops, White House press secretary Jen Psaki said Tuesday

As deadly clashes in Afghanistan continue to intensify, hundreds of more civilians have taken up arms against the Taliban in support of the government forces in several Afghan provinces. People in over ten Afghan districts have taken up arms against the Taliban in just a week following the back-to-back fall of dozens of districts to the group. In meetings at the White House last week with President Ashraf Ghani and Abdullah Abdullah — the Afghan official tasked with making peace with the Taliban, President Joe Biden said the U.S. was committed to humanitarian and security assistance to Afghanistan, White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said. But the president also said that keeping U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan defied a peace deal the Trump administration negotiated with the Taliban and that wasn’t a risk he was prepared to take.

“Given the timeline set by the prior administration, that if we did not withdraw our troops, U.S. men and women would be facing fire from on the ground and that was not something as the commander in chief, that he felt was acceptable,” Psaki said. Washington signed a peace deal with the Taliban in February 2020. It laid out the promise of a U.S. withdrawal and commitments by the Taliban to ensure Afghanistan does not harbor militants that can attack the United States. The details of those commitments have never been made public.

Biden has announced a series of measures to provide assistance to the South Asian country amid troop withdrawal, including donating three million doses of the Johnson and Johnson vaccine to the people of Afghanistan through the COVAX facility. Additionally, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) is also supporting Afghan efforts to respond to the critical shortfalls in oxygen and medical ventilation support by providing emergency and structural assistance.

India Is The World’s Biggest Vaccine Maker. Yet Only 4% Of Indians Are Vaccinated

When Mumbai began lifting its coronavirus lockdown this month, Rekha Gala could finally reopen her late father’s photocopy and stationary store, which she runs with her siblings in a jumble of low-slung businesses north of the city center. They’d been closed for nearly three months. They needed to recoup business. But she was terrified. Gala had lost both her parents to other illnesses in the past year and several neighbors to COVID-19. She’d only been able to get her first vaccine dose, which she knew wouldn’t fully protect her from getting ill. So she strung a rope across her shop’s open doorway. Customers point at merchandise through the front window, and Gala passes things to them across the rope. Even so, business is “not even 50%” of what it was before the pandemic, she says.

“Small businesses like ours, we’re struggling to survive,” Gala says. “But we also need to take precautions for ourselves – and take vaccines if we can get them.” A medical worker observes COVID-19 patients in a sports stadium converted into a care facility. At the peak of the pandemic in India, there were over 400,000 cases — and 4,500 deaths — a day. Numbers are now starting to decline. On Tuesday, India confirmed 37,566 new coronavirus cases — less than a tenth of what it was seeing at its peak last month. As the country emerges from the world’s biggest and deadliest COVID-19 outbreak, scientists and policy makers say vaccinations will be key to India’s safety, confidence and economic recovery. Small business owners like Gala agree. But so far, only about 4% of people in India are fully vaccinated. And scientists say another COVID-19 wave may hit India this fall.

The Government’s Insufficient Order

That’s a surprising position for the country that’s home to the world’s biggest vaccine manufacturer, the Serum Institute of India. It has long churned out more vaccine doses by volume than any other company, even before the coronavirus pandemic. A technician at India’s Serum Institute, the world’s largest manufacturer of vaccines, waits to collect vials containing vaccine after they pass through a machine that checks for bottling and vaccine substance deficiencies. For a number of reasons, the supply of COVID vaccines for Indians has fallen short. So far only 4% of the population has been vaccinated.

Last spring, Serum’s CEO Adar Poonawalla made a gamble: He began mass-producing several COVID-19 vaccines even before clinical trials revealed which ones would work. He concentrated on one in particular – the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine. He knew it would be useful in low resource countries because it doesn’t require ultra-cold refrigeration. Adar Poonawalla is the CEO of the Serum Institute of India, the world’s largest vaccine manufacturer. In late April, amid rising public anger over shortages of vaccines, Poonawalla left India for the United Kingdom. He told a British newspaper he faced “threats and aggression” from VIPs in India who couldn’t get their shots. He returned to India in June.

In late 2020, clinical trials yielded positive results. Countries around the world began granting emergency authorization to the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine, and the World Health Organization followed suit. By then, the Serum Institute already had tens of millions of doses ready to distribute. Poonawalla promised half of his production to his home country of India. Confident with that pledge from Serum, the Indian government set ambitious goals at the start of its COVID-19 vaccination campaign in January. But it didn’t order enough doses. It wasn’t until Jan. 11 — five days before India’s national vaccination drive began – that the government ordered its first batch of Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine from the Serum Institute. And it was an order for just 11 million doses – in a country of nearly 1.4 billion people. The government also pledged to order another 45 million from Serum and a smaller number of doses of another vaccine from another Indian company, Bharat Biotech.

At the time, coronavirus cases had hit record lows in India. So there wasn’t much urgency. Opinion polls revealed some vaccine hesitancy among the public. And the government was still negotiating with Serum for better prices before ordering more. The Indian government eventually did up its order and even donated tens of millions of doses as a gesture of goodwill to neighboring countries – and, analysts say, to compete with Russia and China, which have been selling and donating their own vaccines around the world. Then a second wave of COVID-19 exploded across India – and the country desperately needed those vaccines it had given away.

‘A Series Of Missteps’ Amid Increased Demand

Throughout April and May, Indians died of COVID-19 in record numbers. Many couldn’t get ambulances. Hospitals ran out of oxygen. At its peak, India was confirming more than 400,000 coronavirus cases a day and more than 4,500 daily deaths. But the real numbers may be many multiples higher because coronavirus testing collapsed too. Amid rising demand for vaccines at home, the Indian government quietly cut back on vaccine exports in April, redirecting those doses to the domestic population. “It’s unofficial of course, but India is going to be using all the vaccine manufactured in the country,” says MaliniAisola, one of the leaders of the All India Drug Action Network (AIDAN), a health-care watchdog. “There is nothing left for export.”

In late May, Serum acknowledged that it would be unable to supply coronavirus vaccines to COVAX, the WHO’s program to distribute vaccines to lower-income countries, until the end of this year. Serum was supposed to be the program’s biggest supplier. In addition to COVAX, dozens of countries had placed orders with Serum and in some cases even paid for vaccines they never received. A worker surrounded by boxes of vaccines in the cold storage unit of the Serum Institute of India. In addition to manufacturing the AstraZeneca coronavirus vaccine, the institute produces vaccines for measles, tetanus and many other diseases. But the supply of COVID vaccines for India — and COVAX, the global vaccine program — has been problematic.

Meanwhile in India, even with all of Serum’s output redirected domestically, there still wasn’t enough. Hundreds of vaccine centers across the country were forced to close temporarily in April and May for lack of supplies. Hundreds of thousands of Indians who’d managed to get a first dose couldn’t get a second one. On May 1, shortages were further exacerbated when the Indian government opened up vaccinations to all adults age 18 and up – without enough supply. At the time, health and frontline workers still hadn’t all been inoculated. Huge lines formed at vaccine centers across the country, and thousands of them ran out of shots and had to shut again.

In mid-May, the government also lengthened the interval between doses of the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine, requiring people to wait 12 to 16 weeks for a second dose. The government denies it was rationing vaccines, and defended the interval decisionas based on scientific data. But members of the government’s own scientific advisory board told Reuters they did not back the decision. “Unfortunately I think there has been a series of missteps. The current situation was not entirely unforeseeable,” Aisola says. “There was always going to be a large amount of vaccine required to immunize a huge population, and the government really should have made efforts not just in terms of purchasing but also efforts early on to utilize unused capacity.

She says unlike the United States, which invoked the Defense Production Act to bolster vaccine production, India failed to use government authority to ramp up manufacturing and also exported or gave away early supplies. It also allocated 25% of its vaccine supply to private clinics, where prices were out of reach for a majority of Indians.

“What Happens When You Put All Your Eggs In One Basket”

Serum had pledged to ramp up its production, telling NPR in early March that it would soon be churning out 100 million doses of Oxford-AstraZeneca per month. That never happened. The company has been producing 60 to 70 million doses per month instead. It has cited price caps by the Indian government, lack of raw material exports from the U.S. – and a fire that damaged part of its facility. “It’s a demonstration of what happens when you put all your eggs in one basket,” says Milan Vaishnav, director of the South Asia program at the Carnegie Endowment in Washington D.C. “Frankly, the Serum Institute’s story — what they’re telling to the U.S. government, what they’re telling to the government of India, what they’re saying publicly — those stories don’t match up.”

In late April, amid rising public anger over shortages of vaccines, Poonawalla left India for the United Kingdom. He told a British newspaper he faced “threats and aggression” from VIPs in India who couldn’t get their shots. A spokesperson for Poonawalla told NPR he returned to India in late June. While NPR interviewed him in summer 2020, he has refused several requests for a follow-up interview.

Signing Up For A Vaccine: ‘Definitely A Challenge’

Amid high demand and low supply, it’s been difficult to book vaccination appointments in India. Initially, all appointments had to be booked on a government website or app called CoWIN. But they’re notoriously buggy. When NPR visited a vaccination center north of Mumbai back in late January, even hospital administrators were having trouble using CoWIN, amid power cuts. Social media has been full of comments by users exasperated by glitches on the app and website. So Berty Thomas took matters into his own hands. He’s a computer programmer who, in the wake of these glitches, built two apps – one for the under-45 age group, and another for those over 45. (On CoWIN, vaccine eligibility is different for those two groups.) Thomas’ apps essentially monitor CoWIN and alert users when slots for appointments open up. His service sends out a text message instructing users when to get online and book. More than 3.5 million people in India have used Thomas’ tools – and a few others have since emerged too.

“On one hand, I like that the government is doing a technology-driven vaccine rollout. There needs to be a central database where they know who is getting vaccinated,” Thomas says. “But at the same time, there are places where people do not have access to internet. So this is definitely a challenge.” Hundreds of millions of Indians lack smartphones or regular access to the internet. Several tens of millions of Indians also are unable to read. At first, the CoWIN app was only in English – spoken by a minority of Indians — but it has since expanded to 12 languages. Earlier this month, all government vaccination centers began accepting walk-ins for registration. “I tried and tried but for months I wasn’t able to book a shot online,” one man told local TV, relieved that he could finally register in person at a clinic in the capital New Delhi.

Modi Hits Back At Criticism

Prime Minister Narendra Modi has come under widespread criticism for problems with the country’s vaccine rollout. He was also attacked for holding election rallies – with scant social distancing – as coronavirus cases were rising in April. His approval ratings have dipped. After several weeks of silence, Modi gave a televised address to the nation on June 7 in which he hit back at some of the criticism. “We should remember that our rate of vaccination is faster than many more-developed countries, and our tech platform CoWIN is also being appreciated,” Modi said. He’s right in terms of real numbers: India has administered more than 330 million vaccine doses. But most of those are first doses. The vaccines used in India require two. So India has a long way to go before a majority of its nearly 1.4 billion people have some protection.

Modi also announced a major policy reversal: Starting on June 21, everyone in India age 18 and up became eligible for free COVID-19 shots. Previously, Modi’s central government agreed to vaccinate only those aged 45 and up at no cost — and left it to individual states to obtain and provide vaccines for younger people, often for a fee. Aisola, the public health advocate, says she approves of the reversal. It’s something the Indian government should have done from the beginning rather than leaving it to individual states to try to procure vaccines on the global market, she says. “Centralized bulk procurement is really the most efficient way to keep the price low, and also to optimize public resources,” Aisola says.

Finally, A Record Vaccination Day

On June 21, India administered some 8.6 million shots – a daily record for any country except China. Officials said it was possible because fresh supplies that the government had ordered during April and May are now finally coming online. “This is a new chapter in the war on corona,” India’s home minister Amit Shah told supporters that day in the western state of Gujarat. But an analysis of state data by local media shows states ruled by Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party, or BJP, may have withheld vaccinations in the preceding days in order to achieve that one-day record.

India’s health minister claims all Indian adults will be able to get fully vaccinated by the end of this year. But even with increased supply, that target may be too ambitious, experts say. “If we are able to give two doses to all the vulnerable, and if we can give one dose to the rest of the population, then we are in real good shape,” says Dr. GiridharaBabu, a Bengaluru-based member of the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR), which is basically India’s equivalent of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Babu says he hopes that by late July, India might be able to vaccinate up to 10 million people a day.

Vaccinating quickly, ‘preparing for a third wave.’

Dr. Daksha Shah isn’t taking any chances. She’s a municipal health official in Mumbai — where, despite declining infections, she’s setting up new field hospitals. “We’re slowly opening up the economy, plus doing the vaccination drives — but at the same time, we are keeping a watch on daily positivity [rates] and on bed occupancy in the hospitals,” Shah says. “So we are preparing for the third wave also in case it happens.” India’s second COVID-19 wave was spread in part by attendees at a huge religious gathering in April on the banks of the Ganges River. Again this month, thousands of faithful gathered there to take a ritual dip in the river they consider most holy – despite local rules banning large gatherings.

“We have taken a bit of risk in coming here,” one devotee told local TV. “But we have taken all the safety precautions, like masks and hand sanitizers.” Meanwhile, whenever you make a phone call in India these days, you hear a similar message: “Wear your mask properly, wash your hands frequently, and yes, do not forget to take your vaccine on your turn.” It’s a COVID safety message from the government that plays before the ringtone for all phone calls. Hundreds of millions of Indians would like to heed that call – including Rekha Gala, the photocopy shop owner in northern Mumbai. But she’s still waiting her turn for a second dose of COVID-19 vaccine. And she only managed to book an appointment for her first dose, with help from a local politician. She reached out to him after having trouble booking an appointment on CoWIN.

“The government is trying its best, but sometimes you have to go around and use your connections. It’s difficult. We have to take care,” Gala says. Right after she got her first dose, the government changed the rules, and she has to wait 84 days for her second dose. She says she just hopes another wave of COVID-19 doesn’t hit Mumbai before that.

(NPR producer Sushmita Pathak contributed to this story from Hyderabad, India.)

US Election Reforms Bill Killed By Senate Republicans

Republicans in the US Senate have torpedoed a Democratic bid to implement nationwide election rules, a cherished priority of President Joe Biden’s party.The huge bill – which sought to make it easier for Americans to vote – ended up deadlocked 50-50 along party lines. President Joe Biden said the issue was the “fight of his presidency”, but some Democrats accuse him of not fighting hard enough.Advocates say the bill would have been the most far-reaching election measure since the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

It comes as Republican-led states advance proposals – which Mr Biden has depicted as racially discriminatory – to tighten election laws, and as former President Donald Trump, a Republican, continues to peddle unfounded claims that the 2020 election was stolen from him. The Democrats’ For the People Act passed the House of Representatives in March in a near party-line vote, with one Democrat joining all Republicans in opposing the bill. But 60 votes are needed in the 100-member Senate to advance most legislation, and the upper chamber is evenly split 50-50 between the two parties.

A procedural vote to open debate on the legislation was defeated by a tally of 50-50, falling short of the 60 votes needed to succeed. Democrats were united in favor of the vote after securing support from Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, but Republicans were united against it, causing the measure to fail to advance. Democratic senators have pitched the legislation a necessary counter to state-level efforts to restrict voting access, but Republicans have decried it as a partisan power grab and a federal overreach into state voting and election systems.

The bill’s failure to move forward will force Democrats to confront the question of what else they can do to press the issue and will likely trigger a fresh outpouring of calls from progressives to eliminate the legislative filibuster, which requires most bills to get the votes of at least 10 Republicans given the current Senate makeup. The votes are not there, however, to eliminate the filibuster with Manchin and several other moderate Democrats opposed.

The effort by Democrats to pass the voting legislation comes in the aftermath of former President Donald Trump’s “Big Lie” that the 2020 presidential election was stolen and as Republican-controlled legislatures have pressed ahead with new state laws imposing limits on voting. As of May, state legislators in 48 states had introduced more than 380 bills with restrictive voting provisions, according to a tally from the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University.The Senate took up an amended version of legislation that passed the House in March. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell made clear on Monday afternoon that the legislation was destined to fail in the Senate, promising they would give it “no quarter.”

McConnell accused Democrats of trying to make election laws benefit their party, saying, “They’ve made it abundantly clear that the real driving force behind S1 is a desire to rig the rules of American elections permanently, permanently in Democrats’ favor,” rather than protecting the rights of voters. The legislative package that passed the House calls for far-reaching ethics and government changes that would impact Congress, the president and even the Supreme Court. It would institute an ethics code for the US Supreme Court that would apply to justices and would implement measures intended to prevent presidential conflicts of interest. It would stop lawmakers from using taxpayer money to reach settlements in employment discrimination cases stemming from their own actions. The bill also takes aim at Citizens United, the landmark 2010 Supreme Court decision, by calling for a constitutional amendment to overturn the ruling, which opened the door to unlimited spending by corporations and unions to influence elections.

Iran’s Newly Elected President Takes Hard LineTowards US, Joe Biden

EbrahimRaisi ,Iran’s president-elect staked out a hard-line position in his first remarks since his landslide election victory, rejecting the possibility of meeting with President Joe Biden or negotiating Tehran’s ballistic missile program and support of regional militias. The comments by EbrahimRaisi offered a blunt preview of how Iran might deal with the wider world in the next four years as it enters a new stage in negotiations to resurrect its now-tattered 2015 nuclear deal with global powers.

When asked about Iran’s ballistic missile program and its support of regional militias, EbrahimRaisi described the issues as “non-negotiable.” Judiciary chief EbrahimRaisi also described himself as a “defender of human rights” when asked about his involvement in the 1988 mass execution of some 5,000 people. It marked the first time he’s been put on the spot on live television over that dark moment in Iranian history at the end of the Iran-Iraq war.

Tehran’s fleet of attack aircraft date largely back to before the 1979 Islamic Revolution, forcing Iran to instead invest in missiles as a hedge against its regional Arab neighbours, who have purchased billions of dollars in American military hardware over the years. Iran also relies on militias like Yemen’s Houthis and Lebanon’s Hezbollah to counterbalance against enemies like Saudi Arabia and Israel, respectively.

Raisi, a protégé of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has been sanctioned by the U.S. in part over his involvement in the mass executions. His victory in the balloting last Friday came amid the lowest turnout in the Islamic Republic’s history. Millions of Iranians stayed home in defiance of a vote they saw as tipped in Raisi’s favor.Of those who did vote, 3.7 million people either accidentally or intentionally voided their ballots, far beyond the amount seen in previous elections and suggesting some wanted none of the four candidates. In official results, Raisi won 17.9 million votes overall, nearly 62% of the total 28.9 million cast.

Raisi’s election puts hard-liners firmly in control across the government as negotiations in Vienna continue to try to save a tattered deal meant to limit Iran’s nuclear program, at a time when Tehran is enriching uranium at 60% its highest levels ever, though still short of weapons-grade levels. Representatives of the world powers party to the deal returned to their capitals for consultations following the latest round of negotiations on Sunday. Top diplomats from nations involved in the talks said that further progress had been made Sunday between Iran and global powers to try to restore a landmark 2015 agreement to contain Iranian nuclear development that was abandoned by the Trump administration. They said it was now up to the governments involved in the negotiations to make political decisions.

Raisi’s election victory has raised concerns that it could complicate a possible return to the nuclear agreement. The international efforts to bring Iran back in compliance with the 2015 nuclear deal that came apart after former US President Donald Trump abandoned continued in Vienna on Sunday even as the world powers brace for a more hardline administration in Tehran.

Senior diplomats from China, Germany, France, Russia and Britain met at a hotel in the Austrian capital for the final meeting of the sixth round of talks in Vienna. Iran’s deputy foreign minister for political affairs said that almost all documents pertaining to the nuclear deal have been negotiated and that the diplomats would return to their home countries for further consultations with their governments and take a final call. But apprehension remains over the incoming Iranian president of EbrahimRaisi, who won an election that offered only a veneer of choice to the public.

Raisi is the first Iranian president sanctioned by the U.S. government even before entering office, over his involvement in the 1988 mass executions, as well for being the chief of the Iranian judiciary, which has a penchant for capital punishment and disdain for due process. Israel’s new Prime Minister Naftali Bennett warned Sunday that Raisi’s election was “the last chance for the world powers to wake up before returning to the nuclear agreement and to understand who they’re doing business with”. “These guys are murderers, mass murderers,” he added.

Biden administration officials are insisting that the election of a hard-liner as Iran’s president won’t affect prospects for reviving the faltering 2015 nuclear deal with Tehran. But there are already signs that their goal of locking in a deal just got tougher. Optimism that a deal was imminent faded as the latest talks ended Sunday without tangible indications of significant progress. And on Monday, in his first public comments since the vote, incoming Iranian President EbrahimRaisi rejected a key Biden goal of expanding on the nuclear deal if negotiators are able to salvage the old one.

At the same time, Raisi is likely to raise Iran’s demands for sanctions relief in return for Iranian compliance with the deal, as he himself is already subject to U.S. human rights penalties. “I don’t envy the Biden team,” said Karim Sadjapour, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace who has advised multiple U.S. administrations on Iran. “I think the administration now has a heightened sense of urgency to revise the deal before Raisi and a new hard-line team is inaugurated.”

Antonio Guterres Appointed To 2nd Term As UN Secretary General

The UN General Assembly has appointed Antonio Guterres to a second term as the Secretary General to lead the world body through the crisis of the Covid-19 pandemic and the fight against global warming, which he has made his priority. After being sworn-in to his second term, Guterres said that he would work for a “breakthrough” for a world at “a critical moment in history”. The world is “at the cusp of a new era”, he said. “We are truly at a crossroads, with consequential choices before us. Paradigms are shifting. Old orthodoxies are being flipped.”

The 193-member General Assembly’s resolution adopted by acclamation said that in “appreciation for the effective and dedicated service rendered to the United Nations”, it approved the Security Council recommendation to give the former Portuguese Prime Minister another five years starting in January as the world’s top diplomat. Security Council President Sven Jurgenson said that Guterres confirmed to the highest standards of competence and integrity. The Assembly’s endorsement of the Council’s recommendation was only a formality because, in reality, the five permanent members of the Council through their veto powers control the selection and reappointment of the Secretary General.

Guterres ran unopposed because none of the self-nominated candidates was sponsored by a member nation. India, which is a non-permanent member of the Security Council, supported Guterres’s re-election there and in the Assembly. After a meeting with Guterres last month, India’s External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar tweeted that New Delhi “values” his leadership and would back his re-election. Guterres said: “We are writing our own history with the choices we make right now.” But he warned, “It can go either way: breakdown and perpetual crisis or breakthrough and prospect of a greener, safer and better future for all.”

However, he said that there were hopeful signs and “we feel a new momentum everywhere for an unequivocal commitment to come together to chart a course towards a better future” because of the pandemic’s lessons of “our shared vulnerability, our inter-connectedness and the absolute need for collective action”. The cooperation seen now in the fight against Covid-19 may not have been possible a decade ago, he said. He said that the world was beset by “geostrategic divides and dysfunctional power relations” that are manifest in “too many asymmetries and paradoxes”.

They have to be met head-on and “we also need to be aware of how power plays out in today’s world when it comes to the distribution of resources and technology”, he said. The global proliferation of mistrust is another problem that should not be allowed to overwhelm the world, he added. Guterres displayed masterful diplomacy in navigating a deeply polarised Council without antagonising the permanent members while managing the reflexive opposition of former US President Donald Trump to the UN and China’s aggressive diplomacy.

Earlier this month announcing the Council’s recommendation for a second term for Guterres, Jurgenson described him as a “bridge-builder”. Seven of Guterres’s predecessors were re-elected and only Boutros BoutrosGhali, an Egyptian, was limited to a single term because of Washington’s opposition. During the Covid-19 crisis, Guterres pursued the equitable distribution of vaccines and other resources while fighting disinformation, and set an agenda for post-pandemic rebuilding to put the world back on track in pursuit of the UN’s sustainable development goals.

His first term was marked by his passionate advocacy of fighting global warming, which he has called an existential threat to humanity, and a top agenda item. Guterres, who was a UN High Commissioner for Refugees, was the surprise consensus candidate in 2016 when the bets were on a woman, likely from East Europe, getting the job that had been held only by men and never by a East European. In his first bid in 2016, he received the essential approval of the Security Council after six straw polls in which he outlasted 12 candidates, seven of them women.But this time Guterres, who was nominated by Portugal, had no official rivals as the Security Council did not recognise at least seven other self-nominated candidates — including Arora Akanksha, a Canadian of Indian descent — because they lacked the backing of any nation.

The requirement for sponsorship by a UN member is not unambiguously stated in the UN Charter or its regulation, but the Council and the Assembly considered it a de facto qualification based on tradition. The Assembly resolution appointing Guterres to a second term, said it was “guided by the principles of transparency and inclusivity” as set out in its 2015 resolution that established a modicum of openness to a process that had been shrouded by backroom deals. The Assembly required the candidates to appear before it to make a pitch for their election.

This time only Guterres came before the Assembly to layout his vision for his second term and the others were excluded because they were not recognized. Jugenson and General Assembly President VolkanBozkir have maintained that a nomination by a member state is necessary — a requirement that would prevent a stampede of self-nominated candidates demanding equal time at the General Assembly with the officially nominated candidates.

Of the self-nominated candidates, only Rosalia Arteaga, a former President of Ecuador, had any shred of credibility and the self-nominations were publicity stunts. Akanksha, 34, is an employee of the UN Development Programme who made a splashy campaign video pitching her youth and the need for change at a UN weighed down by a sclerotic bureaucracy. Although she received media coverage, she could not get the support of even her country, Canada, or of India and Saudi Arabia, where she had lived earlier.

(Arul Louis can be reached at arul.l@ians.in and followed @arulouis)

During 1st Trip Abroad, Biden Pitched For America, Welcoming Wary Allies

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Joe Biden spent his first trip overseas highlighting a sharp break from his disruptive predecessor, selling that the United States was once more a reliable ally with a steady hand at the wheel. European allies welcomed the pitch — and even a longtime foe acknowledged it. But while Biden returned Wednesday night to Washington after a week across the Atlantic that was a mix of messaging and deliverables, questions remained as to whether those allies would trust that Biden truly represents a long-lasting reset or whether Russian President Vladimir Putin would curb his nation’s misbehaviors.

Biden’s mantra, which he uttered in Geneva and Brussels and on the craggy coast of Cornwall, England, was that “America was back.” It was Putin, of all people, on the trip’s final moments, who may have best defined Biden’s initial voyage overseas. “President Biden is an experienced statesman,” Putin told reporters. “He is very different from President Trump.” But the summit with Putin in Geneva, which shadowed the entire trip and brought it to its close, also underscored the fragility of Biden’s declarations that the global order had returned.

Though both men declared the talks constructive, Putin’s rhetoric did not change, as he refused to accept any responsibility for his nation’s election interference, cyberhacking or crackdown on domestic political opponents. At the summit’s conclusion Biden acknowledged that he could not be confident that Putin would change his behavior even with newly threatened consequences. Biden’s multilateral summits with fellow democracies — the Group of Seven wealthy nations and NATO — were largely punctuated by sighs of relief from European leaders who had been rattled by President Donald Trump over four years. Yet there were still closed-door disagreement on just how the Western powers should deal with Russia or Biden’s declaration that an economic competition with China would define the 21st century.

“Everyone at the table understood and understands both the seriousness and the challenges that we’re up against, and the responsibility of our proud democracies to step up and deliver for the rest of the world,” Biden said Sunday in England. As vice president and chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Biden had trotted the globe for more than four decades before he stepped off Air Force One and onto foreign soil for the first time as commander in chief. His initial stop, after a speech to thank U.S. troops stationed in England, was for a gathering with the other G-7 leaders.

The leaders staked their claim to bringing the world out of the coronavirus pandemic and crisis, pledging more than 1 billion coronavirus vaccine doses to poorer nations, vowing to help developing countries grow while fighting climate change and backing a minimum tax on multinational firms. At the group’s first face-to-face meeting in two years because of the pandemic, the leaders dangled promises of support for global health, green energy, infrastructure and education — all to demonstrate that international cooperation is back after the upheavals caused by the pandemic and Trump’s unpredictability. There were concerns, though, that not enough was done to combat climate change and that 1 billion doses were not nearly sufficient to meet the stated goal of ending the COVID-19 pandemic globally by the end of 2022.

The seven nations met in Cornwall and largely adhered to Biden’s hope that they rally together to declare they would be a better friend to poorer nations than authoritarian rivals such as China. A massive infrastructure plan for the developing world, meant to compete with Beijing’s efforts, was commissioned, and China was called out for human rights abuses, prompting an angry response from the Asian power. But even then, there were strains, with Germany, Italy and the representatives for the European Union reluctant to call out China, a valuable trading partner, too harshly. And there a wariness in some European capitals that it was Biden, rather than Trump, who was the aberration to American foreign policy and that the United States could soon fall back into a transactional, largely inward-looking approach.

After Cornwall, the scene shifted to Brussels where many of the same faces met for a gathering at NATO. Biden used the moment to highlight the renewed U.S. commitment to the 30-country alliance that was formed as a bulwark to Moscow’s aggression but frequently maligned by his predecessor. He also underscored the U.S. commitment to Article 5 of the alliance charter, which spells out that an attack — including, as of this summit, some cyberattacks — on any member is an assault on all and is to be met with a collective response. Trump had refused to commit to the pact and had threatened to pull the U.S. out of the alliance. “Article 5 we take as a sacred obligation,” said Biden. “I want NATO to know America is there.”

When Air Force One touched back down in Washington, Biden again faced an uncertain future for his legislative agenda, the clock ticking on a deadline to land a bipartisan infrastructure deal as the president was confronted with growing intransigence from Republicans and mounting impatience from fellow Democrats. But Biden and his aides believe he accomplished what he set out to do in Europe. The most tactile of politicians, Biden reveled in the face-to-face diplomacy, having grown frustrated with trying to negotiate with world leaders over Zoom. Even amid some disagreements, he was greeted warmly by most of his peers, other presidents and prime ministers eager to exchange awkward elbow bumps and adopt his “build back better” catchphrase.

At the end of each day, Biden would huddle with aides, including Secretary of State Tony Blinken and national security adviser Jake Sullivan, eagerly going over a play-by-play of the day’s meetings and preparing for the next. Aides padded his schedule with some down time to pace the 78-year-old president, though there were still a few missteps, including some verbal flubs and when he simply neglected to announce a Boeing-Airbus deal in front of the European Council. His summit with Putin, coming three years after Trump sided with the Russian leader over U.S. intelligence agencies when those two men met in Helsinki, loomed over the trip, with the cable networks giving it Super Bowl levels of hype. Aides wanted to confront Putin early in the presidency, with some hope of reining in Moscow and reaching some stability so the administration could more squarely focus on China.

There were no fireworks in their summit near the Swiss Alps, and the nations agreed to return ambassadors to each other’s capitals and took some small steps toward strategic stability. But while Biden was able to deliver stern warnings to Putin behind closed doors, he also extracted few promises. In the Russian president’s post-summit remarks, he engaged in classic Putin misdirection and what-about-ism to undermine any of the United States’ moral high ground. In his own Geneva news conference, Biden stood against a postcard-perfect backdrop of a tree-lined lake, taking off his suit jacket as the sun beat down from behind, so bright that reporters had trouble looking directly at the president.

Once more, Biden declared that America was back, but he also soberly made clear that it was impossible to immediately know if any progress with Russia had, in fact, been made. “What will change their behavior is if the rest of world reacts to them and it diminishes their standing in the world,” Biden said. “I’m not confident of anything; I’m just stating a fact.”

(Madhani reported from Geneva.)

Against GOP Objections ‘Obamacare’ Survives

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court’s latest rejection of a Republican effort to dismantle “Obamacare” signals anew that the GOP must look beyond repealing the law if it wants to hone the nation’s health care problems into a winning political issue. Thursday’s 7-2 ruling was the third time the court has rebuffed major GOP challenges to former President Barack Obama’s prized health care overhaul. Stingingly for Republicans, the decision emerged from a bench dominated 6-3 by conservative-leaning justices, including three appointed by President Donald Trump.

Those high court setbacks have been atop dozens of failed Republican repeal attempts in Congress. Most spectacularly, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., flashed a thumbs-down that doomed Trump’s drive to erase the law in 2017. Along with the public’s gradual but decisive acceptance of the statute, the court rulings and legislative defeats underscore that the law, passed in 2010 despite overwhelming GOP opposition, is probably safe. And it spotlights a remarkable progression of the measure from a political liability that cost Democrats House control just months after enactment to a widely accepted bedrock of the medical system, delivering care to what the government says is more than 30 million people.

“The Affordable Care Act remains the law of the land,” President Joe Biden said, using the statute’s more formal name, after the court ruled that Texas and other GOP-led states had no right to bring their lawsuit to federal court. “It’s not as sacred or popular as Medicare or Medicaid, but it’s here to stay,” said Drew Altman, president of the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation. “And it’s moved from an ideological whipping boy to a set of popular benefits that the public values.”

Highlighting the GOP’s shifting health care focus, in interviews and written statements Thursday, more than a dozen Republican lawmakers called for controlling medical costs and other changes, but none suggested another run at repeal. Congressional Republicans hadn’t even filed a legal brief supporting the latest Supreme Court challenge. “Just practically speaking, you need 60 votes in a Republican Senate, a Republican president, right? And we’ve tried that and were unable to accomplish it,” said Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., a leading voice on health care in the GOP.

Polling shows the risks in trying to demolish Obama’s law. A Kaiser poll showed Americans about evenly divided on the law in December 2016, just after Trump was elected on a pledge to kill it. By February 2020, 54% had a favorable view while 39% disapproved. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., and other top Republicans issued a statement illustrating one line of attack the party is preparing — trying to handcuff all Democrats to “Medicare for All,” a costly plan for government-provided health care backed by progressives that goes beyond what Biden and many in the party have proposed.

Congress should “not double down on a failed health care law or, worse, move towards a one-size-fits-all, socialist system that takes away choice entirely,” the Republicans said. The GOP should focus on health issues people care about, like personalized care and promoting medical innovation, not repealing the health care law, said David Winston, a pollster and political adviser to congressional GOP leaders.

“Republicans need to lay out a clear direction of where the health care system should go,” Winston said. “Don’t look backward, look forward.” Most people have gained coverage from either Obama’s expansion of the government-funded Medicaid program for lower-income people or from private health plans, for which federal subsidies help offset costs for many. The law’s most popular provisions also include its protections for people with preexisting medical conditions from higher insurance rates, allowing people up to age 26 to remain covered under their parents’ plans and requiring insurers to cover services like pregnancy and mental health.

Key requirements like that are “locked in concrete,” said Joseph Antos, a health policy analyst at the conservative American Enterprise Institute. The political opening for Republicans would be if Democrats push hard for things like lowering the eligibility age for Medicare to 60 because for many conservative-leaning voters, he said, “that’s a sign of government pushing too far” into private marketplace decisions. Yet serious problems remain. Nearly 29 million Americans remained uninsured in 2019, and millions more likely lost coverage at least temporarily when the COVID-19 pandemic hit, according to Kaiser. In addition, medical costs continue rising and even many covered by the law find their premiums and deductibles difficult to afford.

In response, Biden’s $1.9 trillion COVID-19 relief package enacted in March expanded federal subsidies for health insurance premiums for those buying coverage. His infrastructure and jobs proposal being negotiated in Congress includes $200 billion toward making that permanent, instead of expiring in two years. But his plan includes none of his more controversial campaign trail proposals to expand health care access, like creating a federally funded public health care option or letting Medicare directly negotiate drug prices with pharmaceutical companies. While those proposals are popular with Democratic voters, they face tough odds in a closely divided Congress.

Still, Republicans gearing up for 2022 elections that will decide congressional control must decide where their next focus will be. One GOP strategist involved in House races, speaking on condition of anonymity to describe internal thinking, said the party should focus on issues like the economy and border security that register as higher voter concerns. A Gallup poll showed that in May, 21% of the public ranked the economy as the country’s top problem, with health care registering at just 3%.

Other Republicans say the Supreme Court’s rejection of the latest repeal attempt will clear the political field for them to refocus their health care attacks on Democrats. “Now it’s Medicare for All that will be a top health care issue playing a role in campaigns,” said Chris Hartline, spokesperson for the National Republican Senatorial Committee, the Senate GOP’s campaign arm.

(Associated Press writers Alexandra Jaffe in Washington and Tom Murphy in Indianapolis, Ind., contributed to this report.)

Thumps Up Modi Over Yoga

“Yoga fever grips the world, and the credit goes to Narendra Modi” This was the heading of a prominent blog (wionews.com).On a great way, despite the receding Corona pandemic, Indians celebrated an ancient tradition that grew into a global phenomenon, in front of Red Fort, on submarines and mountaintops, in schools and parks, by the dozens and by the thousands. Last Monday marked the 7thInternational Day of Yoga, a yearly event created by Prime Minister Narendra Modi to highlight yoga within India and worldwide.

Today, to our pride, India has already patented its ownership of Yoga and the credit definitely, goes to Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Whether the opposition agrees or not, Narendra Modi helped yoga attain the global status it deserved. According to Indian Prime Minister Modi, Yoga became a medium of self-confidence. It made people believe that they could fight with COVID-19. While in the USA, the Consulate General of India, New York, partnered with the Times Square Alliance to host the International Yoga celebrations in Times Square on Sunday. Over 3,000 people attended the day-long event, which was themed ‘Solstice.’

Yoga for Peace and Harmony was organized by the Embassy of India, Paris, in front of the Eiffel Tower and Wall of Peace.   WHO is about to launch M-Yoga app globally; Yoga focuses on mental well-being, says PM Modi that elevates its significance to a higher level indeed.Today, Yoga is not seen as just a practice native to India, but as India’s gift to the world, and everyone has made it their own: said Union Minister of State for AYUSH Kiran Rijiju

It is known globally that Yoga is an ancient Indian practice that helps in maintaining physical and mental well-being, and over the years, it has found popularity in other countries as well. During this lockdown & pandemic period, yoga can be ideal  to adopt as a lifestyle habit.Yoga exercises help us build a strong physical, mental and spiritual balancing system. Combining breathing and meditation, it acts as the best element to take care of our mind and body.  Different  forms of yoga can help us to stay physically strong and mentally serene. With Yoga we can motivate others in our family & social circle to do, as it could help them get through these times safely & healthily. Just like jogging in the park or 30 minutes of  gym exercising, Yoga brings its own benefits to the table, which can be practiced  by people of all ages. Meticulously yoga provides you with a holistic sense of health, which is especially required during these times.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi proposed marking a day as the International Day of Yoga in his speech at the UN General Assembly during 2014 , and the proposal was endorsed by 175 member states, by which the United Nations recognized June 21 as the day to celebrate Yoga. Yoga has become the talk of the town worldwide ,and hence the healing aspect of Yoga is being looked at in scientific research being conducted across the world. Numerous studies are being conducted on the benefits of Yoga and on its positive impact on the body.

In spite of too many criticism hovers around, no doubt, Modi’s attempts to promote yoga is part of PM’s broader push to tap Indian traditions as a source of national pride and international influence.  A career in Yoga is also considered as a great choice nowadays. A person can opt for Yoga as a full-time course offered at various universities to make it a profession. Even in western countries, who were reluctant in accepting Indian traditions so far, have advanced ahead in embracing the concept and benefits of Yoga as an exercise.

For politicians sharing Modi’s views on yoga’s roots in ancient Vedas and philosophy, yoga’s origins and its enormous secular popularity add up to “the perfect vehicle to create a shared national consciousness,” The question of yoga’s parentage, the product of thousands of years of history and multiple religious and geographic influences, is vividly complex.That is why, On Tuesday, PinarayiVijayan Chief Minister of Kerala emphasized that yoga was not a part of any religion and should be practiced with a free and secular mind.

“Some people have been trying to hijack yoga by reciting ‘suktas.’ Such attempts should be checked as yoga is not a religious ritual. There should not be any misunderstanding that it is part of any religion. Yoga should be practiced with a free and secular mindset,” the CM stressed. Undoubtedly, Indians have a hidden tendency to look at everything suspiciously; whether any other religion or party is behind any social programs – forget it. Yoga is purely for physical and mental wellness- India wholeheartedly endorsed it

Modi Delivers Keynote Address At The 5th Edition Of Vivatech

The Prime Minister, Shri Narendra Modi delivered the keynote address at the 5th edition of VivaTech today via video conference. The Prime Minister was invited as a Guest of Honour to deliver the keynote address at VivaTech 2021, one of the largest digital and startup events in Europe, held in Paris every year since 2016.

Speaking on the occasion, the Prime Minister said that India and France have been working closely on a wide range of subjects. Among these, technology and digital are emerging areas of cooperation. It is the need of the hour that such cooperation continues to grow further. It will not only help our nations but also the world at large. Shri Modi mentioned Infosys providing tech support for the French Open tournament and collaboration involving French companies like Atos, Capgemini and India’s TCS and Wipro as examples of IT talent of the two countries serving companies and citizens all over the world.

Modi pointed out that where convention fails, innovation helps. During the pandemic, said the Prime Minister, digital technology helped us cope, connect, comfort and console. India’s universal and unique bio-metric digital identity system – Aadhar – helped to provide timely financial support to the poor. “We could supply free food to 800 million people, and deliver cooking-fuel subsidies to many households. We in India were able to operationalise two public digital education programes- Swayam and Diksha – in quick time to help students”, the Prime Minister informed.

The Indian leader praised the role of the start-up sector in meeting the challenge of the pandemic. The private sector played a key role in addressing the shortage of PPE kits, masks, testing kits etc. Doctors adopted tele-medicine in a big way so that some COVID and other non-COVID issues could be addressed virtually. Two vaccines are being made in India and more are in the development or trial stage. The Prime minister indicated that indigenous IT platform, Arogya-Setu enabled effective contact tracing. The COWIN digital platform has already helped ensure vaccines to millions.

Modi said that India is home to one of the world’s largest start-up eco systems. Several unicorns have come up in the recent years. India offers what innovators and investors need. He invited the world to invest in India based on the five pillars of: Talent, Market, Capital, Eco-system and, Culture of openness. The Prime Minister also stressed the strengths like, Indian talent pool, mobile phone penetration and Seven Seventy-Five million internet users, highest and cheap data consumption in the world and the highest use of social media to invite investors to India.

The Prime Minister also enumerated initiatives like state-of-the-art public digital infrastructure, five hundred and twenty three thousand kilometres of fibre optic network linking One hundred and fifty six thousand village councils, public wi-fi networks across the country. He also elaborated on efforts to nurture a culture of innovation. There are state-of-the-art innovation labs in Seven Thousand Five Hundred schools under the Atal Innovation Mission, the Prime Minister informed. Talking about the disruption in different sector over the past year, the Prime Minister insisted that disruption does not have to mean despair. Instead, the focus should be kept on the twin foundations of repair and prepare. “This time last year, the world was still seeking a vaccine. Today, we have quite a few. Similarly, we have to continue repairing health infrastructure and our economies. We in India implemented huge reforms across sectors, be it mining, space, banking, atomic energy and more. This goes on to show that India as a nation is adaptable and agile, even in the middle of the pandemic” Said Shri Modi.

Modi stressed the need for insulating our planet against the next pandemic. Ensuring we focus on sustainable life-styles that stop ecological degradation. Strengthening cooperation in furthering research as well as innovation. The Prime Minister called upon the start-up community to take the lead in working with collective spirit and a human centric approach to overcome this challenge. “The start-up space is dominated by youngsters. These are people free from the baggage of the past. They are best placed to power global transformation. Our start-ups must explore areas such as: Healthcare. Eco-friendly technology including waste recycling,

Agriculture, new age tools of learning”, said the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister emphasized that France and Europe are among India’s key partners. Referring to his conversations with President Macron, in summit with EU leaders in Porto in May, The Prime Minister said that digital partnership, from start-ups to quantum computing, emerged as a key priority. “History has shown that leadership in new technology drives economic strength, jobs and prosperity. But, our partnerships must also serve a larger purpose, in service of humanity. This pandemic is not only a test of our resilience, but also of our imagination It is a chance to build a more inclusive, caring and sustainable future for all,” concluded the Prime Minister.

Tamil Nadu CM Stalin’s Economic Council Has World’s Top Luminaries

The Tamil Nadu government will constitute an Economic Advisory Council to guide chief minister MK Stalin to chart out a rapid and inclusive economic growth path for the state, said Governor BanwarilalPurohit on Monday, June 21st.A white paper detailing the true state of Tamil Nadu’s finances will be released in July, said Governor BanwarilalPurohit during the first session of the 16th state legislative assembly in Chennai. And it comprises an impressive lineup of leading economic experts from all over the world. We’re talking Nobel laureate Esther Duflo (in pic) of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), USA, former RBI governor RaghuramRajan, former chief economic advisor to the central government Dr Arvind Subramanian, development economist Jean Dreze and former Union finance secretary Dr S Narayan as council members.

The council will provide general guidance on economic and social policy, social justice and human development-related issues, and in matters related to equal opportunities for women and well-being of underprivileged groups.It will also make suggestions to boost growth, employment and productivity across all sectors, as well as act as a sounding board for ideas that might resolve roadblocks to development. As the first step towards bringing down the overall debt burden and improving fiscal position, a white paper detailing the true state of the state’s finances would be released in July so that the people are fully informed.

The Tamil Nadu government will form an economic advisory council comprising Nobel laureate Esther Duflo of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), USA, and former Reserve Bank of India governor RaghuramRajan, to advise the chief minister. The other members of the council will be former chief economic advisor to the central government Arvind Subramanian, development economist Jean Dreze and former Union finance secretary S Narayan, Governor BanwarilalPurohit announced in his ceremonial address during the first session of the 16th state legislative assembly in Chennai on Monday.

“Based on the recommendation of the council, the government will revitalise the state’s economy and ensure that benefits of economic growth reach all segments of society,” Purohit said. He said the government will focus on improving the fiscal position and bringing down the debt burden. A white paper detailing the true state of Tamil Nadu’s finances will be released in July. During the first session of the 16th state legislative assembly in Chennai. The governor said while the Tamil Nadu government under MK Stalin would maintain a cordial relationship with the Union government, it would still fight for the rights of states.

The government has constituted a committee chaired by Justice AK Rajanto to study the adverse effects of the National Eligibility Cum Entrance Test (NEET) on socially and educationally backward students, the governor said. Purohit announced that ‘Singara Chennai 2.0’ programme would be launched to provide world-class infrastructure and services in Greater Chennai Corporation. He also said the government would ensure speedy completion of phase two of metro rail.

Governor said the availability of medical infrastructure including oxygen beds has been substantially enhanced on a war-footing. “The Tamil Nadu government will urge the Union government to make necessary laws and amendments to grant Indian citizenship to Tamil refugees from Sri Lanka,” the governor said. He said the government is committed to transparency and accountability in temple management. “A state-level advisory committee for all major Hindu temples will be constituted to enhance the facilities for devotees, improve the maintenance of temples and to advise on related issues,” he said.

He added that the reservation policy of the state is 100 years old and has stood the test of time, delivering true social justice. “The 69% reservation currently available in Tamil Nadu will be continued and protected.” Purohit concluded his speech by saying DMK-led government will be a people’s government and not the party’s.

Modi Government Is Riddled With Abject Failures Both Short Term As Well As Long Term

The pandemic no doubt was sudden and brutal but the way it was  managed was  simply catastrophic. When we compare COVID related deaths and death rates of India versus  the second largest democracy, the USA and other neighbors we find that  the leaders of India have  failing miserably in saving Indian lives. According to the latest statistics from New York Times,    India’s COVID related deaths have been significantly higher when compared to  other countries and in the nearby region. At the peak, the number of weekly average death was 4454 on May 23, 2021. On June 12, this was 3303. The tragic  part is it increased after June 9 when this average was 2177.

For the USA, this average has been 370 on June 12. Since the population of India is roughly 4 times of the USA, the death rate in India should have been 4×370 or around 1600. This means the death rate in India has been twice of that of the USA despite aid coming from all over the world to save Indian lives.

The weekly average death rate in Bangladesh has been just 30 on June 121. India’s population is about 8.7 times larger than Bangladesh which implies that India’s weekly average death rate should have been just 330. At the peak death rate in Bangladesh on April 23, the average figure was just 981 which implies that the peak weekly average death rate in India should have been 850. For Pakistan, the peak weekly death rate was 140 on April 28 and on June 12 it was 61  Since population of India is 6 times that of Pakistan it implies that the even per Pakistan’s standard, the peak weekly deaths in India should have been 850 (140×6) and on June 12 it should have been 360 (61×6)1.  It is really shameful, that with population adjustment made, India has been performing 10 times worse than its immediate neighbors Bangladesh and Pakistan in handling Covid death rates and at the peak (worst time of both the countries compared) also India was 5 times worse than them.

The GDP Debacle

On GDP also India’s performance has been dismal. As per the latest data, the growth rate of India has been -7.3% for the fiscal year 2021 (4/20 to 3/21). US and China are much bigger economies than India and they also had COVID almost on the same scale as India. However, their economies grew at the rate of 2.6% and 8.4% respectively. It is clearly the dismal failure of Modi government because of  its  regressive and myopic economic policies.

Another issue of major concern is the alarming Balance of Trade Deficit with China as a Cause of sluggish GDP growth of India.  It is  being touted that “Trade between China and India soared 70.1% in US dollar terms in the first five months of this year to $48.16 billion, according to Chinese customs data released on Monday. Specifically, Chinese exports to India grew 64.1% year-on-year from January to May, while imports surged 90.2%,” the tabloid Global Times reported2. The trade deficit during the same first five moths of 2021 has been$45 billion, which is 1.5% of India’s GDP. Since GDP = Consumption + Investment + Government Expenditure + Balance of Trade, India’s GDP is down by 1.5% in just five months of trade with China. This implies that for the whole year at this rate of trade deficit with China, India’s 3.6% of GDP would taken away by China.

It is very surprising that Modi Government seems oblivious to  this drain on India’s economy. President Trump imposed heavy import duties on China in the year 2018 and that has been continued under Biden administration, but the Indian Government is not even realizing this problem. What kind of Finance and Commerce Ministers this government has that they are not even understanding that with this kind of trade deficit, India’s GDP can’t grow? Only under this government with India-China trade volume of $87.6 billion in 2020, China overtook the US to become India’s largest trading partner despite a bloody conflict along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) and the rising anti-China sentiment. All Asian tigers and both China and Japan achieved miracles because of trade surpluses, but Modi government does not even realize that India’s wealth is being drained by China! Even one of the richest and the most powerful country, the USA could not survive the economic drain on US GDP caused by trade deficit with China. This problem must be discussed in Parliament. This is absolutely urgent.

Failure to tackle  Inflation and reduce unemployment:

India’s inflation for the year 2020 was 6.2% which is far above the stated goal of 4%. The Government’s failure on Unemployment reduction too is stark and glaring.  Over 10 million (1 crore) Indians have lost their jobs because of the second wave of Covid-19, and around 97 per cent of households’ incomes have declined since the beginning of the pandemic last year, Centre for Monitoring Indian Economy (CMIE) chief executive Mahesh Vyas said on Monday4. The total figure of unemployed labour  has been 3.5 crores or 350 million.

Besides, the abysmally short-sighted policies of the government have accentuated the problem of Stagflation. India has experienced the worst of both the worlds during the current regime. Since the relationship between inflation and unemployment has historically been inverse in many parts of the world including India under Dr Man Mohan Singh’s government (also known as Phillips Curve), India under Modi government has seen higher inflation and higher unemployment as discussed above. This means stagflation is the special feature of this government because of its wrong economic policies.

The  inequality monster: India’s inequality had increased. Only two business houses of Gautam Adani and Mukesh Ambani have been accumulating wealth by exploiting the rest of India. As already discussed, that 97% of Indians have become poorer while the wealth of MukeshAmbani has tripled since the formation of this government in 2014 and Gautam Adani’s wealth has increased by about 30 times. As per Forbes records, Gautam Adani’s wealth was just $3.5 billion in March 2016 which jumped to $75 Billion on June 13, 2021. This kind of immense richness over just 5 years is not possible without government (Prime Minister in particular) favoring him.

The callous, insensitive and prejudiced Government under Modi has made a mockery of Governance and exposed the Indian nation and its people to the hydra of inflation, unemployment, crippling economy, a debilitating trade deficit and failing and a sinking health care system.

The present Government still has 3 more years to go before it faces the people in a general election. It is time for some serious course correction by the Modi Government, for the sake of its own survival and but more importantly for the people of India. Let us hope that the Modi Government shakes off the ignorance and arrogance, strategizes by putting the people of India first and performs with heart, mind and muscle in the second half of their thus far catastrophic tenure.

Sources:

Number in Subscript is the source number listed below:

  1.   https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/india/
  2. https://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/trade-with-india-jumped-by-over-70-in-2021-shows-china-s-customs-data-101623143023368.html
  3. https://www.statista.com/statistics/271322/inflation-rate-in-india/
  4. https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/second-wave-left-1-crore-indians-jobless-97-households-incomes-dipped-report-101622507233717.html
  5. https://www.forbes.com/profile/gautam-adani-1/?sh=492d278c5b0e

(RajendarDichpally is the  National General Secretary – Indian Overseas Congress, USA)

Biden And Putin At Geneva Summit Make A New Beginning, But Issues Remain

US President Joe Biden and Russian President Vladimir Putin held their first face-to-face meetings on June 16, 2021 at a historic summit in Geneva.At the end of their talks,first such meeting since 2018, both the leaders praised their talks, but have made little concrete progress.Biden said the tone of the talks were “positive,” and he told Putin that certain US “critical infrastructure” should be off-limits for cyberattacks. Putin described the summit as “constructive,” saying both countries will begin consultations on cybersecurity and US and Russian ambassadors will return to their diplomatic posts.

Disagreements were stated, said Biden, but not in a hyperbolic way, and he said Russia did not want a new Cold War.Putin said, Biden was an experienced statesman and the two “spoke the same language.” The talks lasted four hours, less time than was scheduled.Biden said they did not need to spend more time talking and there was now a genuine prospect to improve relations with Russia. The two sides agreed to begin a dialogue on nuclear arms control. They also said they would return ambassadors to each other’s capitals – the envoys were mutually withdrawn for consultations in March, after the US accused Russia of meddling in the 2020 presidential election. However, there was little sign of agreement on other issues, including cyber-security, Ukraine and the fate of Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny,

“I really do think — not me, but I think we, the country, has put a different face on where we’ve been and where we’re going, and I feel good about it,” Biden said to the press, reflecting on his first foreign trip as President before boarding Air Force One. “There was a summary done by him and by me of what we covered. Lavrov and Blinken talked about what we covered. We raised things that required more amplification or we made sure we did not have any misunderstandings. It was after two hours there, we looked at each other like, ‘okay, what next?’ What is going to happen next is we’re going to be able to look back, look ahead in three to six months and say, did the things we agree to sit down and work out, did it work? Are we closer to a major strategic stability talks and progress? … That’s going to be the test. I am not sitting here saying because the President and I agreed we would do these things that all of a sudden it’s going to work. I’m not saying that. What I am saying is that I think there’s a genuine prospect to significantly improve the relations between the two countries, without giving up anything on principles and values.”

Biden also reiterated that “there were no threats” during the meeting. “Just simple assertions made…  Just letting him know where I stood, what I thought we could accomplish together, and what, in fact, if there were violations of American sovereignty, what would we do,” Biden said.The US and Russia released a joint statement on Wednesday following the summit between the countries’ two leaders, noting that “even in periods of tension,” the two nations share goals of “ensuring predictability in the strategic sphere, reducing the risk of armed conflicts and the threat of nuclear war.”

“The recent extension of the New START Treaty exemplifies our commitment to nuclear arms control. Today, we reaffirm the principle that a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought,” the statement said. “Consistent with these goals, the United States and Russia will embark together on an integrated bilateral Strategic Stability Dialogue in the near future that will be deliberate and robust. Through this Dialogue, we seek to lay the groundwork for future arms control and risk reduction measures.” US President Joe Biden boarded Air Force One and departed Geneva en route to Washington, DC, following his summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

G7 Summit Leaders Offer United Front To Address Global Issues

Leaders of the world’s largest economies unveiled an infrastructure plan Saturday for the developing world to compete with China’s global initiatives, but there was no immediate consensus on how forcefully to call out Beijing over human rights abuses. Citing China for its forced labor practices is part of President Joe Biden’s campaign to persuade fellow democratic leaders to present a more unified front to compete economically with Beijing. But while they agreed to work toward competing against China, there was less unity on how adversarial a public position the group should take.

Canada, the United Kingdom and France largely endorsed Biden’s position, while Germany, Italy and the European Union showed more hesitancy during Saturday’s first session of the Group of Seven summit, according to a senior Biden administration official. The official who briefed reporters was not authorized to publicly discuss the private meeting and spoke on condition of anonymity. In his first summit as president, Biden made a point of carving out one-on-one-time with the leaders, bouncing from French president Emmanuel Macron to German chancellor Angela Merkel to Italian prime minister Mario Draghi, a day after meeting with British Prime Minister Boris Johnson as if to personally try to ward off memories of the chaos that his predecessor would often bring to these gatherings.

Macron told Biden that collaboration was needed on a range of issues and told the American president that “it’s great to have a U.S. president part of the club and very willing to cooperate.” Relations between the allies had become strained during the four years of Donald Trump’s presidency and his “America first” foreign policy.Merkel, for her part, downplayed differences on China and the Nord Stream 2 pipeline which would transport natural gas from Russia to Germany, bypassing Ukraine.“The atmosphere is very cooperative, it is characterized by mutual interest,” Merkel said. “There are very good, constructive and very vivid discussions in the sense that one wants to work together.”

Competing with Belt and Road

White House officials have said Biden wants the leaders of the G-7 nations — the U.S., Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Japan and Italy — to speak in a single voice against forced labor practices targeting China’s Uyghur Muslims and other ethnic minorities. Biden hopes the denunciation will be part of a joint statement to be released Sunday when the summit ends, but some European allies are reluctant to split so forcefully with Beijing.

China had become one of the more compelling sublots of the wealthy nations’ summit, their first since 2019. Last year’s gathering was canceled because of COVID-19, and recovery from the pandemic is dominating this year’s discussions, with leaders expected to commit to sharing at least 1 billion vaccine shots with struggling countries. The allies also took the first steps in presenting an infrastructure proposal called “Build Back Better for the World,” a name echoing Biden’s campaign slogan. The plan calls for spending hundreds of billions of dollars in collaboration with the private sector while adhering to climate standards and labor practices.

It’s designed to compete with China’s trillion-dollar “Belt and Road Initiative,” which has launched a network of projects and maritime lanes that snake around large portions of the world, primarily Asia and Africa. Critics say China’s projects often create massive debt and expose nations to undue influence by Beijing.Britain also wants the world’s democracies to become less reliant on the Asian economic giant. The U.K. government said Saturday’s discussions would tackle “how we can shape the global system to deliver for our people in support of our values,” including by diversifying supply chains that currently heavily depend on China.

Not every European power has viewed China in as harsh a light as Biden, who has painted the rivalry with China as the defining competition for the 21st century. But there are some signs that Europe is willing to impose greater scrutiny.Before Biden took office in January, the European Commission announced it had come to terms with Beijing on a deal meant to provide Europe and China with greater access to each other’s markets. The Biden administration had hoped to have consultations on the pact.

But the deal has been put on hold, and the European Union in March announced sanctions targeting four Chinese officials involved with human rights abuses in Xinjiang. Beijing responded with penalties on several members of the European Parliament and other Europeans critical of the Chinese Communist Party. Biden administration officials see an opportunity to take concrete action to speak out against China’s reliance on forced labor as an “affront to human dignity.”

While calling out China in the G-7 communique would not create any immediate penalties for Beijing, one senior administration official said the action would send a message that the leaders were serious about defending human rights and working together to eradicate the use of forced labor. An estimated 1 million people or more — most of them Uyghurs — have been confined in reeducation camps in China’s western Xinjiang region in recent years, according to researchers. Chinese authorities have been accused of imposing forced labor, systematic forced birth control, torture and separating children from incarcerated parents.Beijing rejects allegations that it is committing crimes.

Johnson, the summit host, also welcomed the leaders from “guest nations” South Korea, Australia and South Africa, as well as the head of the United Nations, to the summit to “intensify cooperation between the world’s democratic and technologically advanced nations.” India was also invited but its delegation is not attending in person because of the severe coronavirus outbreak in the country.

Hundreds of environmental protesters took to the Cornish seaside early Saturday in a bid to draw the attention to climate issues. A crowd of surfers, kayakers and swimmers gathered on a beach in Falmouth for a mass “paddle out protest” organized by Surfers Against Sewage, a group campaigning for more ocean protections. The leaders took steps to transition away from the use of coal, committing to spend $2 billion to help developing nations move off the fuel by funding job training and technology improvements. Japan had expressed reluctance to slow the construction of new coal fired plants. China remains a big funder of the technology.

Biden ends the trip Wednesday by meeting in Geneva with Russia’s Vladimir Putin. The White House announced Saturday that they will not hold a joint news conference afterward, which removes the opportunity for comparisons to the availability that followed Trump and Putin’s 2018 Helsinki summit, in which Trump sided with Moscow over his own intelligence agencies. Only Biden will address the news media after the meeting. Putin, in an interview with NBC News, said the U.S.-Russia relationship had “deteriorated to its lowest point in recent years.”He added that while Trump was a “talented” and “colorful” person, Biden was a “career man” in politics, which has “some advantages, some disadvantages, but there will not be any impulse-based movements” by the U.S. president.(AP)

At the end of the Summit, leaders made the following statement — Our shared agenda for global action to build back better:

“We, the leaders of the Group of Seven, met in Cornwall on 11-13 June 2021 determined to beat COVID-19 and build back better.  We remembered everyone who has been lost to the pandemic and paid tribute to those still striving to overcome it. Inspired by their example of collaboration and determination, we gathered united by the principle that brought us together originally, that shared beliefs and shared responsibilities are the bedrock of leadership and prosperity.  Guided by this, our enduring ideals as free open societies and democracies, and by our commitment to multilateralism, we have agreed a shared G7 agenda for global action to:

End the pandemic and prepare for the future by driving an intensified international effort, starting immediately, to vaccinate the world by getting as many safe vaccines to as many people as possible as fast as possible. Total G7 commitments since the start of the pandemic provide for a total of over two billion vaccine doses, with the commitments since we last met in February 2021, including here in Carbis Bay, providing for one billion doses over the next year. At the same time we will create the appropriate frameworks to strengthen our collective defences against threats to global health by: increasing and coordinating on global manufacturing capacity on all continents; improving early warning systems; and support science in a mission to shorten the cycle for the development of safe and effective vaccines, treatments and tests from 300 to 100 days.

Reinvigorate our economies by advancing recovery plans that build on the $12 trillion of support we have put in place during the pandemic. We will continue to support our economies for as long as is necessary, shifting the focus of our support from crisis response to promoting growth into the future, with plans that create jobs, invest in infrastructure, drive innovation, support people, and level up so that no place or person, irrespective of age, ethnicity or gender is left behind. This has not been the case with past global crises, and we are determined that this time it will be different.

Secure our future prosperity by championing freer, fairer trade within a reformed trading system, a more resilient global economy, and a fairer global tax system that reverses the race to the bottom. We will collaborate to ensure future frontiers of the global economy and society, from cyber space to outer space, increase the prosperity and wellbeing of all people while upholding our values as open societies. We are convinced of the potential of technological transformation for the common good in accordance with our shared values.

Protect our planet by supporting a green revolution that creates jobs, cuts emissions and seeks to limit the rise in global temperatures to 1.5 degrees. We commit to net zero no later than 2050, halving our collective emissions over the two decades to 2030, increasing and improving climate finance to 2025; and to conserve or protect at least 30 percent of our land and oceans by 2030. We acknowledge our duty to safeguard the planet for future generations.

Strengthen our partnerships with others around the world. We will develop a new partnership to build back better for the world, through a step change in our approach to investment for infrastructure, including through an initiative for clean and green growth. We are resolved to deepen our current partnership to a new deal with Africa, including by magnifying support from the International Monetary Fund for countries most in need to support our aim to reach a total global ambition of $100 billion.

Embrace our values as an enduring foundation for success in an ever changing world. We will harness the power of democracy, freedom, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights to answer the biggest questions and overcome the greatest challenges. We will do this in a way that values the individual and promotes equality, especially gender equality, including by supporting a target to get 40 million more girls into education and with at least $2¾ billion for the Global Partnership for Education.

We shall seek to advance this open agenda in collaboration with other countries and within the multilateral rules-based system. In particular, we look forward to working alongside our G20 partners and with all relevant International Organisations to secure a cleaner, greener, freer, fairer and safer future for our people and planet.”

The Future Of NATO In An Order Transformed

As U.S. President Joe Biden returned from his Europe tour, seeking to rally the leading democracies, a looming question is the future role of NATO. As the alliance contemplates the conclusion to its 20-year operation in Afghanistan, it confronts serious questions about its roles and relevance from political camps on both sides of the Atlantic. The starting point for the alliance must be to recognize that it leaves Afghanistan in a world entirely transformed from when it entered. NATO started operations in Afghanistan at the height of American unipolarity, at the peak of the Western dominance of the international system. It leaves at a moment when the West is constrained internally and challenged externally, including by authoritarian powers of growing capacity — and perhaps growing coordination.

FOUR REGIONS

To chart its future role in this world, NATO needs to start by addressing the core question of its geographical scope. It should start in Europe. NATO was born as an instrument to protect Europe and the democratic West from a threat from Moscow. Its first task in 2021 and beyond must be to protect Europe and the democratic West from a threat from Moscow. That threat is nowhere near as severe as it was during the Cold War and it is of very different character, but it is a threat nonetheless and a complex one, involving gray operations like the Skripal attack, political interference, and nuclear saber-rattling. It would be the height of irony if in seeking to respond to China or other new challenges, NATO failed to mount an adequate response to Russia. Not all the instruments to respond to Russia are in NATO’s hands; many of them reside with the European Union. But that is a bureaucratic and institutional distinction that can be overcome; the broader point is that Europe working with the United States must restore a sense of collective defense against Moscow’s efforts to weaken the West. NATO has a vital role in that.

Coordination on Russia policy was extraordinarily difficult during the Trump administration; it must now be central to U.S.-Germany, U.S.-U.K., and U.S.-EU/NATO dialogues. That includes the contentious issue of Ukraine’s future Euro-Atlantic integration.

But the geopolitical challenge to the democratic West doesn’t end in Europe. The second vital region is Asia. That is of course essentially a China question, and that in turn is an economic, technological, values, and military question. Whether or not NATO has an institutional role in Asia remains to be determined, though Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg has argued that NATO’s new strategic concept must address the challenge that both Russia and China pose to a rules-based order. As we see key NATO members like Britain and France increasing their maritime presence in the Indo-Pacific, it’s a central question for the alliance’s future. Put this starkly: If the United States views China as its core strategic challenge and NATO is its most important alliance, what happens to NATO if there’s no match between those two? NATO has to find a way to add value, whether by contributing to U.S.-led crisis management planning in Asia, or through a focus on technological and economic resilience — ideally, both. That includes a focus — in close coordination with the EU — on China’s economic statecraft and political influence in Europe itself.

Third, NATO will have to address whether it has a continuing role in Central Asia or the Middle East. Whereas NATO’s rise to an Article 5 defense of the United States after the September 11 attacks was an extraordinarily important political act, NATO’s operational performance in the wider Middle East has been mixed. That’s in large part because NATO lacks a dynamic, effective political mechanism through which to lead its in-country engagements; it is military-led, not multi-dimensional. (There have of course also been challenges at the operational level.) The wider history of civil war management and counterterrorism response tells us that closely integrated political, military, and development strategy is what’s required. Those are not NATO’s strengths.

A fourth region that should be on NATO’s agenda is the Arctic. We have now firmly passed the point where the Arctic is primarily a question of climate change, commerce, and scientific cooperation. All those continue, but the Arctic is now also a zone of military pre-positioning and tension. As Russia beefs up its air and naval presence in Murmansk and beyond and China begins to tiptoe into a wider “dual-use” presence, NATO has useful assets and the critical geography to bring to bear, especially those countries on NATO’s northern flank, like Norway, Canada, and the U.K. (as well as the U.S. of course).

FOUR ISSUES

In tackling the issues of those geographical regions, NATO also needs to confront challenges of coherence and capacity. Two decades of focus on counterterrorism and stabilization efforts in Afghanistan have not left NATO well-equipped, well-trained, or well-postured to confront new dynamics of great power rivalry. NATO needs to reorient and retool itself.

First, with regards to technology. NATO has become the most advanced international mechanism for responding to cyberattacks. That’s important and should be sustained, but to confront future challenges the alliance has to go deeper on questions of artificial intelligence (AI) and its application to the military domain. Not all members of NATO will bring much to this table; but a core group of countries — including smaller members with niche capabilities — could work with the U.S. to develop critical AI-infused deterrent capacity.

Second is interoperability. NATO developed in important ways its engagement with non-NATO members in Afghanistan, notably Australia, the Gulf Arab states, Singapore, and South Korea. And it’s also had some limited experience in interoperability with countries like India in the Shared Awareness and De-confliction (SHADE) counterpiracy operations off the Somali coast. But whether or not it can have a sustained mechanism for interoperability with non-NATO members, especially Asian powers, in the absence of a major operational action like Afghanistan is a challenge, one that’s central to its future.

Third, is the looming internal question — i.e. Turkey and Hungary. These cases are primarily portrayed in terms of the erosion of democracy, and that’s a real question to be sure; but NATO has had non-democracies or weak democracies in its ranks before. Weak democracy is one thing, buying Russian weapon systems or otherwise supporting Russian – or Chinese – strategy, is rather another. NATO needs to be resolute that behavior that strengthens Russia’s hand in Europe (or elsewhere) will come at a steep cost — as French President Emmanuel Macron recently hinted.

Last, but perhaps most importantly, NATO members will ultimately have to grapple with the question of European strategic autonomy. Asked the other way around, they have to address the issue of U.S. reliability. Here, it’s worth highlighting that NATO came through the Trump experience far less scarred than many other multilateral arrangements; the alliance has deep support in the U.S. defense establishment and in Congress. Still, the issue looms over the question of NATO’s future.

In my view, it’s the wrong way to ask the question. The right way is: If we start seeing genuine collaboration between China and Russia to challenge the West, is NATO capable of responding? Can NATO mount two strategic operations at the same time, say in response to an acute U.S.-China crisis in the western Pacific and a simultaneous Russian move on a sliver of the Baltics? The first might be U.S.-led, but usefully buttressed by European naval and economic assets, and the second could be Europe-led, but reassured and buttressed by the United States, including in terms of nuclear posture. That is not currently the concept nor the premise for command and control arrangements, but it’s well within the capability of NATO members to produce such an arrangement. A NATO capable of responding in those terms would be a NATO fit for the strategic challenge in front of us.

Ousting Longest Serving PM, Israel Gets New Government

The long and divisive reign of Benjamin Netanyahu, the dominant Israeli Prime Minister who led the nation for a long dozen years, officially ended, as the country’s Parliament gave its vote of confidence to a precarious coalition government stitched together by widely disparate anti-Netanyahu forces. Benjamin Netanyahu’s record 12-year run as Israel’s prime minister ended on Sunday, June 13th with Israeli Parliament approving a new “government of change” led by nationalist Naftali Bennett, an improbable scenario few Israelis once could have imagined. Israel’s Parliament, the Knesset, approved the new government by just a single vote — 60 to 59, with one abstention. Naftali Bennett took the oath of office as prime minister.

Under the coalition deal, Bennett, a 49-year-old Orthodox Jew and high-tech millionaire, will be replaced as prime minister in 2023 by centrist YairLapid, 57, a popular former television host. With his far-right Yamina party winning only six of parliament’s 120 seats in the last election, Bennett’s ascension to the premiership was a political jaw-dropper.They lead an eight-party alliance ranging from left to right, from secular to religious, that agrees on little but a desire to oust Mr. Netanyahu, the longest-serving leader in the country’s history, and to end Israel’s lengthy political gridlock.

Meanwhile, reports here suggest, Israel’s fragile new government has shown little interest in addressing the decades-old conflict with the Palestinians, but it may not have a choice.Jewish ultranationalists are already staging provocations aimed at splitting the coalition and bringing about a return to right-wing rule. In doing so, they risk escalating tensions with the Palestinians weeks after an 11-day Gaza war was halted by an informal cease-fire. Prime Minister Naftali Bennett’s best hope for maintaining his ruling coalition — which consists of eight parties from across the political spectrum — will be to manage the conflict, the same approach favored by his predecessor, Benjamin Netanyahu, for most of his 12-year rule. But that method failed to prevent three Gaza wars and countless smaller eruptions.

That’s because the status quo for Palestinians involves expanding settlements in the occupied West Bank, looming evictions in Jerusalem, home demolitions, deadly shootings and an array of discriminatory measures that two well-known human rights groups say amount to apartheid. In Gaza, which has been under a crippling blockade since the Hamas militant group seized power in 2007, it’s even worse. “They talk about it being a government of change, but it’s just going to entrench the status quo,” said Waleed Assaf, a Palestinian official who coordinates protests against West Bank settlements. “Bennett is a copy of Netanyahu, and he might even be more radical.”

Bennett said little about the Palestinians in a speech before being sworn in on Sunday. “Violence will be met with a firm response,” he warned, adding that “security calm will lead to economic moves, which will lead to reducing friction and the conflict.” Environment Minister Tamar Zandberg, a member of the dovish Meretz party, told Israeli television’s Channel 12 that she believes the peace process is important, but that the new government has agreed, “at least at this stage, not to deal with it.”

The government faces an early challenge on JabalSabeeh, a hilltop in the northern West Bank where dozens of Jewish settlers rapidly established an outpost last month, paving roads and setting up living quarters that they say are now home to dozens of families. The settlement, named Eviatar after an Israeli who was killed in an attack in 2013, was built without the permission of Israeli authorities on land the Palestinians say is privately owned. Israeli troops have evacuated settlers from the site three times before, but they returned after an Israeli was killed in a shooting attack nearby early last month.

Clearing them out again would embarrass Bennett and other right-wing members of the coalition, who already face fierce criticism — and even death threats — for allying with centrist and left-wing factions to oust Netanyahu. Meanwhile, Palestinians from the adjacent village of Beita have held regular protests against the settlement outpost. Demonstrators have thrown stones, and Israeli troops have fired tear gas and live ammunition. Three protesters have been killed, including 17-year-old Mohammed Hamayel, who was shot dead Friday. Initial reports said he was 15.

“I always taught him you should stand up for your rights without infringing on the rights of others,” his father, Said, said at a mourning event attended by dozens of villagers. He described his son as a popular teenager who got good grades and was a natural leader. “Thank God, I’m very proud of my son,” he said. “Even in martyrdom he distinguished himself.” Israel captured the West Bank, east Jerusalem and Gaza in the 1967 Mideast war, territories the Palestinians want for a future state. The settlements are seen by the Palestinians and much of the international community as a major obstacle to peace because they make it nearly impossible to create a contiguous, viable state of Palestine alongside Israel.

Every Israeli government since 1967 has expanded the settlements, and this one is unlikely to be an exception. Bennett briefly served as head of a major settler organization, and his party is one of three in the coalition that strongly support settlements.

Bill Introduced Allowing Doctors on J-1 Visas to Stay Longer in Rural Communities

U.S. Senators Amy Klobuchar, D-Minnesota; Susan Collins, R-Maine; Jacky Rosen, D-Nevada; and Joni Ernst, R-Iowa have reintroduced bipartisan legislation to increase the number of doctors able to work in rural and medically underserved communities, Klobuchar’s office said in a news release. The Conrad State 30 and Physician Access Reauthorization Act would allow international doctors to remain in the U.S. upon completing their residency under the condition that they practice in areas experiencing doctor shortages.  Senator Angus King (I-ME) is an original co-sponsor along with Senators John Thune (R-SD), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV), Chris Coons (D-DE), and Roy Blunt (R-MO).

“We must provide opportunities for American-trained and educated physicians to remain in the country and practice in areas where there is an unmet need for quality care,” said Senator Collins. “By expanding access to health care in our rural and underserved communities, this bipartisan bill would promote healthier lives and ensure that families across the country receive the health care they deserve.”

“Over the last 15 years, the Conrad 30 program has brought more than 15,000 physicians to underserved areas, filling a critical need for quality care in our rural communities – a need that was highlighted during the coronavirus pandemic,” Klobuchar said in a statement. “Our bipartisan legislation would allow doctors to remain in the areas they serve, improving health care for families across the nation while retaining talent trained and educated here in the United States,” she added.

At the beginning of the coronavirus pandemic, Klobuchar led a bipartisan group of 19 senators and 29 members of the House in a letter to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services calling on the administration to waive restrictions that prevent doctors on certain employment-based visas from providing medical services in rural areas. She also led a letter to USCIS with 24 senators and 13 members of the House, urging the administration to resume premium processing for doctors seeking employment-based visas.

“The American Medical Association strongly supports this bill that would ensure all patients, regardless of where they live, have adequate opportunities to be treated by skilled physicians in their local communities,” said Dr. Susan R. Bailey, President of the American Medical Association. “The COVID-19 pandemic has shown the importance of rural and underserved areas having sufficient access to physicians and quality health care. Strengthening the Conrad 30 program is a vital part of making access happen.”

“Now more than ever, the U.S. must offer incentives and opportunities to trained physicians to work in areas of the country where we desperately need more excellent healthcare providers. The Conrad State 30 and Physician Access Reauthorization Act is a bipartisan effort to begin tackling our national physician shortfall, with a targeted focus on our rural and underserved area,” said Kristie De Peña, Vice President of Policy at The Niskanen Center.

“The latest extension of the Conrad State 30 Program will expire later this year, which is why we urge action to extend this critical program. Without timely reauthorization, patient access to care in the many communities that have benefited from these physicians may be threatened,” said Stacey Hughes, Executive Vice President of the American Hospital Association. “We also support the program improvements contained in the Conrad State 30 and Physician Access Reauthorization Act as part of this extension and stand ready to work with you and your colleagues to move this legislation forward.”

“NRHA applauds Senators Klobuchar, Collins, Rosen, and Ernst for reintroducing the Conrad State 30 and Physician Access Reauthorization Act. Rural Americans face greater health care workforce shortages than their urban counterparts, so we are proud to support this bill, which will help support the recruitment of physicians and the delivery of vital health care services in rural America,” said Carrie Cochran-McClain, Chief Policy Officer at the National Rural Health Association.

“Many highly trained hospitalists are immigrants and as COVID-19 has proven, they are crucial to our healthcare system, particularly in rural and underserved communities.  The Society of Hospital Medicine (SHM) strongly supports the Conrad State 30 and Physician Access Reauthorization Act to help ensure these communities have the healthcare workforce necessary to care for the patients who need them,” said Eric Howell, MD, MHM, CEO of the Society of Hospital Medicine.

Currently, doctors from other countries working in America on J-1 visas are required to return to their home country for two years after their residency has ended before they can apply for another visa or green card. The Conrad 30 program allows doctors to stay in the United States without having to return home if they agree to practice in an underserved area for three years. The “30” refers to the number of doctors per state that can participate in the program.

This legislation extends the Conrad 30 program for three years, improves the process for obtaining a visa, and allows for the program to be expanded beyond 30 slots if certain thresholds are met, while protecting small states’ slots. The bill also allows the spouses of doctors to work and provides worker protections to prevent the doctors from being mistreated. A version of the bill was included as an amendment in the comprehensive immigration bill that passed the Senate in 2013. The bill has received the endorsement of the Federation of American Hospitals, American Medical Association, the Niskanen Center, the American Hospital Association, the National Rural Health Association, the Association of American Medical Colleges, and the Society of Hospital Medicine.

Biden Administration Announces First National Strategy For Domestic Terrorism

While international terrorism has received much attention across the nation, recent events,  including the January 6th violence on Capitol has made it urgent to address and tackle domestic terrorism. Responding to the newer realities, the Biden administration has released its first national strategy for domestic terrorism. The White House published its first national strategy for responding to domestic terrorism, five months after the 6 January attack on the US Capitol.

The national security council framework describes the domestic terrorism threat as more serious than potential attacks from outside the US, but also underlines the need to protect civil liberties and states that the approach must be “ideologically neutral”.

  • How will it work? The strategy has four pillars, writes Washington DC bureau chief David Smith, which include: understanding and sharing information about domestic terrorism threats, preventing Americans from being recruited, incited and mobilised, deterring and disrupting activity before violence and long-term contributing issues.
  • Meanwhile, Mitch McConnell, the Senate minority leader, said on Monday that it was “highly unlikely” he would allow Biden to fill a supreme court vacancy in 2024, a presidential election year, if Republicans regained control of the chamber.
  • Extremist Republican congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greeneapologized for comparing the House mask rule to the Holocaust.
  • Plus, how Republicans hold near total control – including the governorship and the legislature – in 23 US states.

Another Federal Holiday Added: Juneteenth, Commemorating The End Of Slavery

The US Senate has unanimously passed on June 15th, a measure that would establish a federal holiday for Juneteenth, the day that marks the end of slavery in Texas.The bill now heads to the Democratic-led House, where it is likely to be approved, although the timing remains uncertain. Unanimous Senate passage was an anticlimactic culmination to a long effort to commemorate Juneteenth, the day that enslaved Black people in Galveston, Tex., received news on June 19, 1865, that they had been freed by the Emancipation Proclamation — more than two years after President Abraham Lincoln had signed it.

“Juneteenth commemorates the moment some of the last formerly enslaved people in the nation learned they were free,” said Senate Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.). “Making Juneteenth a federal holiday is a major step forward to recognize the wrongs of the past — but we must continue to work to ensure equal justice and fulfill the promise of the Emancipation Proclamation and our Constitution.” The effort gained significant ground in the last Congress, but a July 2020 attempt to pass the bill establishing the holiday was foiled when Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) objected to its passage and GOP Senate leaders opted not to expend scarce floor time to get around his objection.

Johnson objected to the cost of granting federal workers an additional paid holiday, and he proposed amendments that would offset the cost by either removing Columbus Day from the list of paid federal holidays or subtracting a day from federal workers’ paid leave. That proposal prompted sharp criticism from conservative commentators such as Tucker Carlson, who last year accused Johnson and another Republican, Sen. James Lankford (Okla.), of “trying to cancel Columbus Day.”In a statement Tuesday, Johnson said that while he remained concerned about the cost, which he pegged at $600 million a year, he did not intend to object again.

The Congressional Budget Office has not delivered an official cost estimate for the bill. Johnson’s estimate is based on the wages and salary that would be paid to the federal workforce for the day off, plus overtime for those who would work that day. Had Johnson not withdrawn his objection, the legislation probably would have faced a tougher path to reaching the Senate floor, since bills that do not have unanimous consent require more time for debate, and the chamber’s leaders have focused that time instead on voting rights, infrastructure and other key parts of their legislative agenda.

Juneteenth is the oldest nationally celebrated commemoration of the ending of slavery in the United States.From its Galveston, Texas origin in 1865, the observance of June 19th as the African American Emancipation Day has spread across the United States and beyond.

Today Juneteenth commemorates African American freedom and emphasizes education and achievement. It is a day, a week, and in some areas a month marked with celebrations, guest speakers, picnics and family gatherings. It is a time for reflection and rejoicing. It is a time for assessment, self-improvement and for planning the future. Its growing popularity signifies a level of maturity and dignity in America long over due. In cities across the country, people of all races, nationalities and religions are joining hands to truthfully acknowledge a period in our history that shaped and continues to influence our society today. Sensitized to the conditions and experiences of others, only then can we make significant and lasting improvements in our society.

India Blames Twitter For Not Complying With Local Laws

NEW DELHI (AP) — The standoff between the Indian government and Twitter escalated Wednesday when the country’s technology minister accused the social media giant of deliberately not complying with local laws. Technology Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad said Twitter has chosen “the path of deliberate defiance” when it comes to following new internet regulations that digital activists have said could curtail online speech and privacy in India.

“If any foreign entity believes that they can portray itself as the flag bearer of free speech in India to excuse itself from complying with the law of the land, such attempts are misplaced,” Prasad said in a series of tweets.The Indian government has been at odds with major social media websites over a new set of sweeping regulations that give it more power to police online content. It requires companies to erase content that authorities deem unlawful, comply with government takedown orders, help with police investigations and identify the originators of “mischievous information.”

Under the new laws, social media websites and tech companies will also have to remove content within 36 hours after an administrative or legal order is issued. Their employees can be held criminally liable for failing to comply with the government’s requests.Twitter said in a statement Tuesday that it was making every effort to comply with the new regulations. The company said it had appointed an interim chief compliance officer in India, a requirement under the new regulations, and will soon notify India’s Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology.

The new rules also require social media platforms to appoint what the government calls grievance officers to handle complaints from law enforcement agencies. Prasad, the IT minister, also accused Twitter of bias and said it was labeling some content as manipulated media, “only when it suits its likes and dislikes.” In May, leaders from Modi’s party tweeted parts of a document they said was created by the main opposition Congress Party to discredit the government’s handling of the pandemic. Some Congress leaders complained to Twitter, saying the document was forged. In response, Twitter marked some posts as “manipulated media.”

Twitter rules apply “manipulated media” tags to posts that have been “deceptively altered or fabricated.” The new internet regulations, announced in February, are among many challenges social media companies face after Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s pushed back against criticism that its new rules restrict online speech.Modi’s government has sought for years to control social media and has often directed Twitter to take down tweets or accounts that appear critical of his party and its leaders, including his administration’s handling of the pandemic. Twitter has complied with most of those orders.

The friction has intensified recently, with the government threatening social media companies with legal action and their employees with prison time if they refuse to comply with the takedown directives.Initially, Twitter expressed concern about what it called “the potential threat to freedom of expression” when the new rules came into effect late last month.

Nagaraj Naidu Appointed As New UN President-Elect’s Chef de Cabinet

India’s Deputy Ambassador to United Nations Nagaraj Naidu will be the Chef de Cabinet of the President-elect of the 76th session of the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) Abdulla Shahid. This is for the first time that an Indian diplomat has been given this post, and his tenure will be for one year.The post is similar to chief of staff, or like in the Indian system, PM’s principal secretary.On June 7, Abdulla Shahid, Maldivian Foreign Minister President-elect of the 76th session of the UN General Assembly. He got 143 votes out of the 191 ballots cast in the 193-member General Assembly, winning against Afghanistan former Foreign Minister DrZalmaiRassoul, who got 48 votes.

“Today, I have appointed Ambassador Thilmeeza Hussain as Special Envoy of the PGA, and Ambassador Nagaraj Naidu Kumar as my Chef de Cabinet. They will be instrumental in delivering my vision for the #PresidencyOfHope,” Shahid tweeted.The General Assembly is the main deliberative, policymaking and representative organ of the United Nations. Comprising all 193 Member States of the UN, it provides a unique forum for multilateral discussion of international issues including peace and security,” Naidu said.

“It is indeed a privilege and an opportunity to serve under the leadership of President-elect Abdulla Shahid. We are looking forward to a Presidency of hope, Naidu told PTI. Shahid, accompanied by Naidu, met current General Assembly President VolkanBozkir on Wednesday to thank him for his support during the election and discuss the next steps. “Thank you Mr President, for sharing your insights and your experiences with me. We are both committed to a smooth and seamless transition to #UNGA76,” he tweeted.

An Indian Foreign Service Officer of the 1998 batch, Mr. Naidu is a fluent Chinese speaker and has served in China in four separate stints.Between 2000 and 2003, he had served at the Indian Embassy in Beijing, he served as Third and Second Secretary (Special Projects;) while between 2003 and 2006, he served as Consul (Political and Commercial) at the Indian Consulate in Hong Kong.From 2009 to 2012, he served as First Secretary and Counsellor (Economic & Commercial Affairs) at the Indian Embassy in Beijing. He took over as the Consul General at the Indian Consulate in Guangzhou, China from 2013 to 2015.From 2015 to 2017: After his return to the Foreign Ministry in New Delhi, Ambassador Naidu served as the Joint Secretary/Director General of the Economic Diplomacy Division in the Ministry of External Affairs.

During his term, the Economic Diplomacy Division of the MEA was given the “SKOCH Platinum First Prize for Smart Governance” in 2017. Mr. Naidu was also the National Coordinator for establishing the International Solar Alliance in India. He also served as a Board member in a number of Public Sector organizations including India Trade Promotion Organization (ITPO), Water & Power Consultancy Services Ltd. (WAPCOS), Invest India, and Indian Institute of Foreign Trade (IIFT).

From 2017 to 2018,Naidu served as Joint Secretary/Director General of the Europe West Division. During this period, Naidu was responsible for India’s bilateral political engagement with the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Ireland, Belgium, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Andorra, San Marino, Monaco and the European Union.Naidu has a Master’s Degree in Law and Diplomacy from Fletcher School of Law & Diplomacy (Class of 2008). He is married to Padmaja and has two children.

Youth Demand Action on Nature, Following IUCN’s First-Ever Global Youth Summit

On the occasion of World Environment Day, 5 June 2021, IPS features and opinion editorials focusing on Environment and Youth. Theunn reproduces the voices by youth at the UN Youth Summit on Environment

Following almost two weeks of talks on issues such as climate change, innovation, marine conservation and social justice, thousands of young people from across the globe concluded the first-ever International Union for Conservation of Nature’s (IUCN)One Nature One Future Global Youth Summit with a list of demands for action on nature.Under three umbrella themes of diversity, accessibility and intersectionality, they are calling on countries and corporations to invest the required resources to redress environmental racism and climate injustice, create green jobs, engage communities for biodiversity protection, safeguard the ocean, realise gender equality for climate change mitigation and empower underrepresented voices in environmental policymaking.

“Young people talk about these key demands that they have and most of the time, they are criticised for always saying ‘I want this,’ and are told ‘but you’re not even sure you know what you can do,’” Global South Focal Point for the Global Youth Biodiversity Network (GYBN) SwethaStotraBhashyam told IPS. “So we linked our demands to our own actions through our ‘Your Promise, Our Future’ campaign and are showing world leaders what we are doing for the world and then asking them what they are going to do for us and our future.”

Bhashyam is one of the young people dedicated to climate and conservation action. A zoologist who once studied rare species from the field in India, she told IPS that while she hoped to someday return to wildlife studies and research, her skills in advocacy and rallying young people are urgently needed. Through her work with GYBN, the youth constituency recognised under the Convention on Biological Diversity, she stated proudly that the network has truly become ‘grassroots,’ with 46 national chapters. She said the IUCN Global Youth Summit, which took place from Apr. 5 to 16,gave youth networks like hers an unprecedented platform to reach tens of thousands of the world’s youth.

“The Summit was able to create spaces for young people to voice their opinions. We in the biodiversity space have these spaces, but cannot reach the numbers that IUCN can. IUCN not only reached a larger subset of youth, but gave us an open space to talk about critical issues,” she said. “They even let us write a blog about it on their main IUCN page. It’s called IUCN Crossroads. They tried to ensure that the voice of young people was really mainstream in those two weeks.”

The United Nations Secretary-General’s Envoy on Youth, JayathmaWickramanayake, told IPS that the Summit achieved an important goal of bringing institutions and political conversations closer to young people. During her tenure, Wickramanayake has advocated for a common set of principles for youth engagement within the UN system, based on rights, safety and adequate financing. She said it is important for institutions to open their doors to meaningful engagement with young people.“I remember in 8th or 9th grade in one of our biology classes, we were taught about endangered animal species. We learned about this organisation called IUCN, which works on biodiversity. In my head, this was a big organisation that was out of my reach as a young person.

“But having the opportunity to attend the IUCN Summit, even virtually, engage with its officials and engage with other young people, really gave me and perhaps gave other young people a sense of belonging and a sense of taking us closer to institutions trying to achieve the same goals as we are as youth advocates.”The Youth Envoy said the Summit was timely for young people, allowing them to meet virtually following a particularly difficult year and during a pandemic that has cost them jobs, education opportunities and raised anxieties.

“Youth activists felt that the momentum we had created from years of campaigning, protesting and striking school would be diluted because of this uncertainty and postponement of big negotiations. In order to keep the momentum high and maintain the pressure on institutions and governments, summits like this one are extremely important,” Wickramanayake said.Global Youth Summit speakers during live sessions and intergenerational dialogues. Courtesy: International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)

Other outcomes of the Global Youth Summit included calls to:

  • advance food sovereignty for marginalised communities, which included recommendations to promote climate-smart farming techniques through direct access to funding for marginalised communities most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change and extreme events,
  • motivate creative responses to the climate emergency, and
  • engineer sustainable futures through citizen science, which included recommendations to develop accessible education materials that promote the idea that everyone can participate in data collection and scientific knowledge creation.

The event was billed as not just a summit, but an experience. There were a number of sessions live streamed over the two weeks, including on youth engagement in conservation governance, a live story slam event, yoga as well as a session on how to start up and scale up a sustainable lifestyle business. There were also various networking sessions.Diana Garlytska of Lithuania represented Coalition WILD, as the co-chair of the youth-led organisation, which works to create lasting youth leadership for the planet.

She told IPS the Summit was a “very powerful and immersive experience”. “I am impressed at how knowledgeable the young people of different ages were. Many spoke about recycling projects and entrepreneurship activities from their own experiences. Others shared ideas on how to use different art forms for communicating climate emergencies. Somehow, the conversation I most vividly remember was on how to disclose environmental issues in theatrical performances. I’m taking that with me as food for thought,” Garlytska said.For Emmanuel Sindikubwabo of Rwanda’s reforestation and youth environmental education organisation We Do GREEN, the Summit provided excellent networking opportunities.

“I truly believe that youth around the world are better connected because of the Summit. It’s scary because so much is going wrong because of the pandemic, but exciting because there was this invitation to collaborate. There is a lot of youth action taking place already. We need to do better at showcasing and supporting it,” he told IPS.Sindikubwabo said he is ready to implement what he learned at the Summit. “The IUCN Global Youth Summit has provided my team and I at We Do GREEN new insight and perspective from the global youth community that will be useful to redefine our programming in Rwanda….as the world faces the triple-crises; climate, nature and poverty, we made a lot of new connections that will make a significant positive change in our communities and nation in the near future.”

The Global Youth Summit took place less than six months before the IUCN World Conservation Congress, scheduled forSep. 3 to 11. Its outcomes will be presented at the Congress.Reflecting on the just-concluded event, the UN Secretary-General’s Envoy on Youth is hoping to see more of these events. “I would like to see that this becomes the norm. This was IUCN’s first youth summit, which is great and I hope that it will not be the last, that it will just be a beginning of a longer conversation and more sustainable conversation with young people on IUCN… its work, its strategies, policies and negotiations,” Wickramanayake said.

(Picture & Caption By IPS: The United Nations Secretary-General’s Envoy on Youth, JayathmaWickramanayake, told IPS that the Summit achieved an important goal of bringing institutions and political conversations closer to young people. Clockwise from top left: JayathmaWickramanayake, SwethaStotraBhashyam, Emmanuel Sindikubwabo, DianaGarlytska. Courtesy: International Union for Conservation of Nature)

Biden’s First Ever Visit Abroad: Strengthening Alliance With NATO

President Biden embarks this week on the first foreign trip of his presidency to attend a series of European summits. He’ll attend the meeting of the Group of Seven nations (G-7) in Britain. Then, he’ll head to a NATO summit in Brussels.

President Biden embarks this week on the first foreign trip of his presidency to attend a series of European summits. He’ll attend the meeting of the Group of Seven nations (G-7) in Britain. Then, he’ll head to a NATO summit in Brussels where he’ll rub shoulders with the majority of the European Union’s leaders. All of that will precede what is likely to be a tense encounter with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Geneva on June 16. After spending the past five months focused on domestic affairs and battling the pandemic, Biden will try to demonstrate how his administration is “restoring” U.S. leadership on the world stage.

In an op-ed for the Washington Post published on Saturday, the U.S. President promised to shore up Washington’s “democratic alliances” in the face of multiple crises and mounting threats from Moscow and Beijing. The U.S. will stand with its European allies against Russia, President Joe Biden has promised ahead of the first face-to-face meeting with Vladimir Putin.Most recent American presidents have selected North American neighbors for their first cross-border trips, though former President Donald Trump, whose penchant for unilateral action and open skepticism of the NATO alliance unsettled American allies, made his first overseas stop in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. For Biden, the first trip is meant to turn the page from Trump’s approach to alliances.

“It’s both a practical chance to connect with key allies and partners on shared opportunities and challenges,” said Yohannes Abraham, the chief of staff and executive secretary of the National Security Council, in an interview with the AP. “But also it’s an illustration of something that the president has been clear about that the transatlantic alliance is back, that revitalizing it is a key priority of his, and that the transatlantic relationship is a strong foundation on which our collective security and shared prosperity are built.”

“We are standing united to address Russia’s challenges to European security, starting with its aggression in Ukraine, and there will be no doubt about the resolve of the U.S. to defend our democratic values, which we cannot separate from our interests,” he wrote.“President Putin knows that I will not hesitate to respond to future harmful activities,” he said. “When we meet, I will again underscore the commitment of the United States, Europe and like-minded democracies to stand up for human rights and dignity.”Since taking office in January, Mr. Biden has ramped up pressure on the Kremlin, and his comments likening Mr. Putin to a “killer” were met with fierce criticism in Moscow.

But both leaders have expressed hopes that relations can improve, with the Russian President saying on Friday he expected a “positive” result from the talks.Mr. Biden in his weekend op-ed also stressed that Washington “does not seek conflict” — pointing to his recent extension of the New START arms reduction treaty as proof of his desire to reduce tensions.“We want a stable and predictable relationship where we can work with Russia on issues like strategic stability and arms control,” he wrote.

US To Donate 25 Million Doses of Covid Vaccine To Countries Impacted

President Joe Biden announced Thursday the U.S. will donate 75% of its unused COVID-19 vaccines to the U.N.-backed COVAX global vaccine sharing program, acting as more Americans have been vaccinated and global inequities have become more glaring.

President Joe Biden announced Thursday the U.S. will donate 75% of its unused COVID-19 vaccines to the U.N.-backed COVAX global vaccine sharing program, acting as more Americans have been vaccinated and global inequities have become more glaring.Of the first tranche of 25 million doses, the White House said about 19 million will go to COVAX, with approximately 6 million for South and Central America, 7 million for Asia and 5 million for Africa. The doses mark a substantial — and immediate — boost to the lagging COVAX effort, which to date has shared just 76 million doses with needy countries.

Overall, the White House aims to share 80 million doses globally by the end of June, most through COVAX. But 25% of the nation’s excess will be kept in reserve for emergencies and for the U.S. to share directly with allies and partners.“As long as this pandemic is raging anywhere in the world, the American people will still be vulnerable,” Biden said in a statement. “And the United States is committed to bringing the same urgency to international vaccination efforts that we have demonstrated at home.”

U.S. National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan said the U.S. “will retain the say” on where the doses distributed through COVAX ultimately go.“We’re not seeking to extract concessions, we’re not extorting, we’re not imposing conditions the way that other countries who are providing doses are doing; we’re doing none of those things,” said Sullivan. “These are doses that are being given, donated free and clear to these countries, for the sole purpose of improving the public health situation and helping end the pandemic.”

The remaining 6 million in the initial tranche of 25 million will be directed by the White House to U.S. allies and partners, including Mexico, Canada, South Korea, West Bank and Gaza, India, Ukraine, Kosovo, Haiti, Georgia, Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, and Yemen, as well as for United Nations frontline workers.Vice President Kamala Harris informed some U.S. partners they will begin receiving doses, in separate calls with Mexican President Andres Manuel LópezObrador, President Alejandro Giammattei of Guatemala, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, and Prime Minister Keith Rowley of Trinidad and Tobago. Harris is to visit Guatemala and Mexico in the coming week.

The long-awaited vaccine sharing plan comes as demand for shots in the U.S. has dropped significantly — more than 63% of adults have received at least one dose — and as global inequities in supply have become more glaring.Scores of countries have requested doses from the United States, but to date only Mexico and Canada have received a combined 4.5 million doses. The U.S. also has announced plans to share enough shots with South Korea to vaccinate its 550,000 troops who serve alongside American service members on the peninsula. White House COVID-19 coordinator Jeff Zients said that 1 million Johnson & Johnson doses were being shipped to South Korea Thursday.

The growing U.S. stockpile of COVID-19 vaccines is seen by many overseas and at home not only as a testament to America’s achievement but also its global privilege.Tom Hart the, acting CEO of The ONE Campaign, called the Thursday announcement a “welcome step” but said the Biden administration needs to commit to sharing more doses. “The world is looking to the U.S. for global leadership and more ambition is needed.”

Biden has committed to providing other nations with all 60 million domestically produced doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine., which has yet to be authorized for use in the U.S. but is widely approved around the world. The U.S.-produced doses have been held up for export by an ongoing safety review by the Food and Drug Administration, said Zients.The White House says the initial 25 million doses will be shipped from existing federal stockpiles of Pfizer, Moderna and Johnson & Johnson vaccines. More doses are expected to be made available to share in the months ahead.

As part of its purchase agreements with drug manufacturers, the U.S. controlled the initial production by its domestic manufacturers. Pfizer and Moderna are only now starting to export vaccines produced in the U.S. to overseas customers. The U.S. has hundreds of millions more doses on order, both of authorized and in-development vaccines.The White House also announced Thursday that it is lifting restrictions on sharing vaccines produced by AstraZeneca, as well as Sanofi and Novavax, which are also not authorized in the U.S., allowing the companies to determine for themselves where to share their doses.

Crucial Voting Rights Bill Needs Lifeline To Move Forward

Sen. Joe Manchin announced that he will vote against Democrats’ expansive election and ethics reform bill, dealing a blow to one of his party’s top priorities. In an op-ed published in the Charleston Gazette-Mail, the West Virginian warned that “partisan voting legislation will destroy the already weakening binds of our democracy” and reiterated that he will not vote to scrap or modify the legislative filibuster.“Voting and election reform that is done in a partisan manner will all but ensure partisan divisions continue to deepen,″ Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia wrote in a home-state newspaper, the Charleston Gazette-Mail. He wrote that failure to bring together both parties on voting legislation would “risk further dividing and destroying the republic we swore to protect and defend as elected officials.”

The bill would restrict partisan gerrymandering of congressional districts, strike down hurdles to voting and bring transparency to a murky campaign finance system. Among dozens of other provisions, it would require states to offer 15 days of early voting and allow no-excuse absentee balloting.Democrats have pushed the legislation as the antidote to a wave of restrictive state voting laws sweeping the country, many inspired by former President Donald Trump’s false claims of fraud in his 2020 election loss. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., has pledged to bring the election bill to a vote the week of June 21, testing where senators stand. But without Manchin’s support, the bill has no chance of advancing. Republicans are united against it.

Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin was unswayed by civil rights leaders who implored him to rethink his opposition to a sprawling election bill that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said is crucial to countering a “Republican assault on our democracy.” Manchin, from deeply Republican West Virginia, told reporters, “I don’t think anybody changed positions,” in a meeting he described as “excellent.” A participant said Manchin was “fairly well dug in.”The bill, known as HR1, is a top priority for Democrats and is viewed by many in the party as the antidote to a wave of Republican-backed laws being passed on the state level that restrict people’s ability to vote. It touches on almost every aspect of voting and was already passed by the House.  But Manchin threw a wrench into the works when he said he would oppose the bill. That effectively dooms the measure in a narrowly divided Senate where it is universally opposed by Republicans.

His decision sent voting rights groups and members of his own party scrambling for options, raising the prospect that no voting legislation would pass Congress to address what experts say is the greatest attack on voting rights in generation. Manchin has said “inaction is not an option” when it comes to voting rights. But he has exasperated fellow Democrats and voting rights groups by insisting his support for any legislation would be contingent on some Republicans voting for it as well. He also opposes eliminating the 60-vote requirement to break a filibuster, a step that would allow Democrats to pass the legislation without Republican votes.

“We may get to a point where the dialogue reaches a dead end,” the Rev. Marc Morial, who attended Tuesday’s meeting with Manchin, told CNN. “And Joe Manchin was fairly well dug in.” Pelosi had told House Democrats there is no substitute for the bill.“It is my hope that the passage of (the bill) will create a legacy for all of us who want to strengthen our democracy,” the California Democrat wrote in a letter to colleagues before Manchin announced he wouldn’t support the bill.  Now Democrats and voting rights groups are grasping for an alternative.

Some said they’d follow Manchin’s suggestions and get behind a narrower piece of legislation known as HR4 that updates the Voting Rights Act to reinstate a requirement that new voting laws and legislative districts in certain states be subject to federal approval. Others said they wanted to increase the pressure on Manchin. Still others insisted that Democrats needed to bring HR1 to the Senate floor this month, even it it’s certain to fail, to draw attention to Republican opposition and Manchin’s.

“It’s going to get messy,” said Fred Wertheimer, president of the good-government organization Democracy 21, who helped draft HR1 in 2017. “What Manchin said is not the final word, as far as we’re concerned.  “I don’t believe he is prepared to go down in history as the senator that denied millions of eligible citizens, and in particular people of color, the opportunity to vote.”The Rev. William Barber II, a key liberal activist who leads the Poor People’s Campaign, represented the breadth of liberal anger at Manchin, tweeting Monday that his group would lead a march in West Virginia to “challenge Manchin.”

Only one Republican senator, Alaska’s Lisa Murkowski, has signed onto Manchin’s preferred Voting Rights Act update, an indication of how politics on the issue have shifted since the Senate unanimously renewed the Voting Rights Act in 2006. And the newly aggressive constellation of conservative voting groups that mobilized against H.R. 1 say it will now campaign to keep the GOP united against HR4 as well.“The end result of HR4 is the same — it’s a federal takeover of the election system,” Jessica Anderson, executive director of the conservative policy organization Heritage Action for America, said in an interview. “As long as you have consensus on the right, standing together in lockstep, you’re not going to have a bipartisan break.”

“They are not showing a readiness to stand up and do what’s right, so the notion you could get 10 of them to come along is farfetched,” said Rep. John Sarbanes, D-Md., a primary sponsor of HR1. “You are not going to get real change without filibuster reform.”

G-7 Summit: Reality And Expectations

The upcoming G7 Summit in Cornwall, UK from June 11 to 13 is perhaps the first international event, in the backdrop of the continuing Covid pandemic, when the leaders from the worlds wealthiest countries — the US, Japan, Germany, the UK, France, Italy and Canada — will be meeting with leaders from India, Australia, South Africa and South Korea face to face for the first time in the last one-and-a-half year.The leaders from the most advanced nations of the G7 meet regularly to try to determine the course the world will follow, with their own interests taking a backseat.

Expectations from the summit

There is a lot of optimism ahead of the gathering in Cornwall. US and UK government sources have briefed that the G7 will demonstrate that “the West ain’t over just yet”. The optics are bound to be promising. For the US it’ll give a chance to prove that ‘America is back’, while for the UK it’ll help to give a boost to its ‘Global Britain’ strategy.On the agenda are the autocratic challenge from Russia and China, climate change, the global vaccine rollout and trade. In addition Myanmar, Indian democracy and its minorities, instability in Sahel region, Israel-Palestinian conflict and change of guard in Israel are also expected to occupy the agenda.

A move, spearheaded by US President Joe Biden, to set a minimum global corporate tax rate to help states reclaim resources lost to tax havens seems promising. Also the British proposal to transform the G7 into a “D10” of democracies has been achieved, the participation of guests from India, Australia, South Korea and South Africa will reinforce a sense that the West is open to alliance-building again.Meanwhile, the G7 finance ministers reached a “historic” deal on taxing multinational companies, last week in London. They agreed to counter tax avoidance through measures to make companies pay in the countries where they do business., besides ratifying a global minimum corporate tax rate to counter the possibility of countries undercutting each other to attract investments. UK Chancellor Rishi Sunak described these as “seismic tax reforms” and said that it will help create a fairer tax system fit for the 21st century.

Preparations for the summit

The foreign ministers from D-10 met face-to-face for the first time in two years in May earlier, following a coronavirus-extended pause, to prepare for the summit and in the communique issued after the meeting listed 82 points which will try to grab the attention of G7 or D10 leaders. In addition the issues discussed were NATO’s withdrawal from Afghanistan, Iran, China and the threat posed by Russia.Meanwhile, Britain’s Foreign Office has said a key part of the June summit will be plans to boost girls’ education and women’s employment after the Covid pandemic would be a key topic.

G7 nations are expected to sign up to new global targets that aim to get 40 million more girls into school in low and lower-middle-income countries by 2026. The aims also include getting 20 million more girls reading by the age of 10. The countries are setting up a $15-billion fund, to be administered by developing countries over the next two years.However, the trade unionists and the wider environment movement in the UK have sounded the bugle against G7’s inability to take any concerted action on climate change. In a statement they asserted that the vaccine apartheid response to the Covid threat might be replicated in their approach to the climate crisis.

They further assert that if the world’s wealthiest countries continue to move too slowly to curb their own carbon emissions, continue to invest in and boost fossil fuel energy and production, fail to make a just transition at home while denying the global South the resources it needs to deal with climate impacts, their pretensions to “global leadership” will fail the test.A $100 billion a year transfer to the developing world to make transition possible was pledged at Copenhagen and built into the Paris Agreement to be met by 2020. But it has not been done.They further assert that this commitment is a tiny fraction of the $3.8 trillion that global banks have invested in fossil fuels since the Paris Agreement, and less than a tenth of the combined G7 military budget of $1,043bn last year.

Post-summit scenario

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson plans to use the G7 Summit to increase cooperation between the world’s democratic and technologically advanced nations. Between them, the 10 leaders represent more than 60 per cent of the people living in democracies around the world.The UK will also host several meetings throughout the year between government ministers from the G7, both virtually and in different locations across Britain. These meetings will cover economic, environmental, health, trade, technology, development and foreign policy issues.

Observers are of the view that post-summit the western world may be transformed into one where it may lose its supremacy and China may pull ahead of the West technologically and economically, secondly the West could reassert itself by investing in green industries to renew its economies and societies in the backdrop of the lessons learnt from the Covid pandemic and thus China might be neutralised, thirdly a more Eurasian Europe may emerge, due to the eclipse of both the US and UK and it’ll be drawn towards Asia’s growing economic influence. For India, the summit offers a chance to further reinforce its relationship with the UK by signing a trade treaty and for Mr Modi to establish a rapport with Biden to ensure a fruitful bilateral relationship, and to some extent this seems possible. (IANS)

China Hosts ASEAN Ministers, With Message For Quad

China is hosting foreign ministers from the 10 ASEAN countries on Monday and Tuesday, with Beijing pushing for closer economic cooperation and aligning COVID-19 recovery efforts even as it looks to push back against the recent regional outreach of the Quad grouping. Chinese officials have in recent weeks stepped up criticism of the Quad — the informal India, Australia, Japan and United States grouping — and of Washington in particular. During recent visits to Sri Lanka and Bangladesh, China’s Defence Minister called on both countries to reject “military alliances” — a term that some Beijing are using to describe the Quad, but a label that the group rejects.

China’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson Wang Wenbin said in a statement the China-ASEAN foreign ministers meeting, in the city of Chongqing, would mark the 30-year anniversary of relations and also “focus on combating COVID-19, promoting economic recovery, [and] better dovetail[ing] strategic plans.” A vaccine passport connecting China and ASEAN countries is also being discussed. China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi will hold bilateral meetings with all the visiting ministers, and also chair a meeting of the Lancang-Mekong Cooperation (LMC) with Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, Thailand and Vietnam.

Deepening economic cooperation, particularly following the signing of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) trade deal, would be China’s focus, analysts in Beijing said, even as it grapples with disputes over the South China Sea. Recently, China and the Philippines have clashed over the presence of Chinese vessels near a disputed reef, while Malaysia alleged the intrusion of 16 Chinese aircraft into its airspace.The Communist Party-run Global Times on Monday blamed the U.S. for those tensions rather than China’s moves that prompted the protests from the Philippines and Malaysia. Countries “see clearly that quarrels on South China Sea are not the biggest threat to regional stability; it is the U.S., whose warships frequently sail through the sensitive waters and try to force ASEAN countries take sides to confront China,” the newspaper wrote.

After the first Quad leaders’ summit held in March and the announcement of a regional vaccine initiative, many Chinese analysts framed ASEAN as a key space where Chinese and Quad initiatives may rub up against each other.China “cannot rule out the possibilities that Quad members will further rope in ASEAN members to counter China as Southeast Asia is of great significance to the US’ Indo-Pacific Strategy,” wrote Yuan Zheng, senior fellow of the Institute of American Studies at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. “Yet ASEAN will not easily take sides.”

The framing of the Quad as “an Asian NATO” by Beijing has been criticised by the group’s members. India’s External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar in April described the using of words such as “Asian NATO” as “a mind game which people are playing”.ProPublica: Many of the uber-rich pay next to no income tax

Jaishankar On A Mission To US, Urging Covid Help

With India grappling with the ferocious second wave of Covid-19, External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar is on a vaccine mission to the United States as India fights shortages of doses amidst a virulent second surge.

WashingWith India grappling with the ferocious second wave of Covid-19, External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar is on a vaccine mission to the United States as India fights shortages of doses amidst a virulent second surge.Jaishankar met with several high ranking officials at the UD administration, including US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan, US Trade Representative Katherine Tai, Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines, USAID Administrator Samantha Power top American lawmakers from both the Democratic and Republican parties, and top American business leaders in Washington DC. Jaishankar is the first Indian Cabinet minister to visit the US after Joe Biden became President on January 20.

At the meetings with the US leaders, Jaishankar discussed vaccine cooperation, contemporary security challenges, support for efficient and robust supply chain, among others. While there was no readout after the meetings, sources said that vaccine cooperation was one of the key areas of conversation between the two sides.Jaishankar’s in-person meetings come days after US President Joe Biden announced that the US will begin shipping 20 million doses of Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna, and Johnson & Johnson’s Covid-19 vaccines to unspecified needy countries by June-end, in addition to 60 million shots of AstraZeneca.

Although Washington has not yet decided how these 80 million doses will be distributed, India is likely to be one of the beneficiaries — be it AstraZeneca, which is already made and distributed in India as Covishield, or the ones by Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna, and Johnson & Johnson, or a mix. AstraZeneca’s vaccine is not authorized for use in the United States yet. The US had cited faults in a plant in Baltimore that is manufacturing both the AstraZenenca and J&J vaccines.Jaishankar arrived in New York Sunday, May 23rd  and met UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres and travelled to Washington on May 26th, where he met with Blinken, focusing on vaccine cooperation between the two countries. While India is struggling with a shortage of vaccines, the US has surplus vaccines and raw materials needed to manufacture them.

Blinken described Jaishankar as “my friend and colleague”. “The United States and India are working together on so many of the most important challenges of our time and ones that are putting a profound impact on our lives,” he said. “We are united in confronting Covid-19 together, we (are) united in dealing with the challenge posed by climate change, to partner together directly, through Quad and other institutions in the United Nations in dealing with many of the challenges that we face in the region and around the world,” Blinken said. “The partnership between the United States and India is vital. It’s strong. And I think it’s increasingly predominant,” he said.

Echoing Blinken, Jaishankar said, “We have a lot of issues to discuss. But our relations have grown stronger over the years and I’m very confident we’ll continue to do so, but I also want to take the opportunity to express to the Secretary and through him to the administration of the United States for the strong support and solidarity at a moment of great difficulty for us.”At this point, Blinken said, “We remember, in the earlier days of the pandemic, India was there with the United States. Something we’ll never forget. And now we want to make sure that we’re there for and with India.” Jaishankar and Blinken have spoken at least four times in the past three months, twice in the last fortnight, and once at the Quad Foreign Ministers’ meeting through video-conferencing.

During Jaishankar’s wide-ranging discussions with NSA Sullivan, the two countries agreed that people-to-people ties and shared values are the foundations of the US-India strategic partnership that is helping to end the pandemic, supporting a free and open Indo-Pacific, and providing global leadership on climate change. “Pleased to meet Jake Sullivan. Wide-ranging discussions including on Indo-Pacific and Afghanistan. Conveyed appreciation for US solidarity in addressing the Covid challenge. India-US vaccine partnership can make a real difference,” Jaishankar said in a tweet after the meeting.

“Our people-to-people ties and our values are the foundation of the US-India partnership and will help us end the pandemic, lead on climate, and support a free and open Indo-Pacific,” Sullivan wrote on Twitter after the meeting. After his meeting with US Trade Representative Katherine Tai, Jaishankar tweeted: “Welcomed her positive stance on IPR (Intellectual Property Rights) issues & support for efficient and robust supply chains.”Jaishankar said that he had a “warm meeting” with US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, during which they discussed further developing strategic and defense partnership between the two countries and exchanged views on “contemporary security challenges”.

In a statement issued by USAID, it was reported, “The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) Administrator Samantha Power met with Indian External Affairs Minister Dr. S. Jaishankar to discuss urgent shared priorities for development and humanitarian assistance during the current surge of COVID-19 across India. Administrator Power and Minister Jaishankar discussed areas for important collaboration on pandemic response efforts in India, as well as strategies to catalyze private capital to save lives, counter the spread of the pandemic, and strengthen health systems for the future. The two leaders also discussed opportunities to strengthen developmental cooperation through the Quad and with India’s Development Partnership Administration, including through collaboration with third-country partners in the Indo-Pacific, Africa, and other regions.”

Jaishankar also had meetings with the top American business leadership hosted by the US India Business Council and the US India Strategic and Partnership Forum. Jaishankar also met influential American lawmakers from both the Democratic and Republican parties and discussed developments about Quad and the cooperation on vaccines with them. He tweeted that he had “good conversations” with co-chairs of the House India Caucus, Congressman Brad Sherman and Rep. Steve Chabot.“The US Congress has been a tremendous pillar of support as India meets the Covid challenge,” he said.

Talking with former US National Security Advisor General HR McMaster in ‘Battlegrounds’ session on ‘India: Opportunities And Challenges For A Strategic Partnership’ at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution, New York, Jaishankar acknowledged  that it is “a very stressful time” for India due to the pandemic.Jaishankar stressed the need for countries to look beyond their national interests to global good. “If countries, especially large countries, pursue their national interest, disregarding everything else, I think the world is going to have some big problems,” he said.

“The number one question on everybody’s mind today is Covid, and the worry which people have — do we have accessible, affordable vaccines? Now, we can’t have a world which is part-vaccinated and part-neglected, because that is not going to be safe. So how do we get through the global challenges in a global way?” Jaishankar said, adding, “I think that’s the big question.”

Israel’s Longest Serving PM Netanyahu’s Regime May End

While Bennett and his new partners, headed by opposition leader YairLapid, still face some obstacles, the sides appeared to be serious about reaching a deal and ending the deadlock that has plunged the country into four elections in the past two years.

With the announcement by a former ally of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that he would seek to form a coalition government with the Opposition,Israel’s longest serving Isreali’s leader’s regime may come to an end, media reports here suggested/ The ultra-nationalist leader Naftali Bennett said his party would join talks to form a governing coalition with centrist party leader YairLapid. The dramatic announcement by Naftali Bennett, leader of the small hardline Yamina party, set the stage for a series of steps that could push Netanyahu and his dominant Likud party into the opposition in the coming week.

“It’s my intention to do my utmost in order to form a national unity government along with my friend YairLapid, so that, God willing, together we can save the country from a tailspin and return Israel to its course,” Bennett said.Bennett, 49, who leads the Yamina party, made his announcement in a televised address. “Mr Netanyahu is no longer trying to form a right-wing government because he knows full well that there isn’t one. He is seeking to take the whole national camp, and the whole country, with him on his personal last stand,” he said. “I will do everything to form a national unity government with my friend YairLapid.”

While Bennett and his new partners, headed by opposition leader YairLapid, still face some obstacles, the sides appeared to be serious about reaching a deal and ending the deadlock that has plunged the country into four elections in the past two years.They have until Wednesday to complete a deal in which each is expected to serve two years as prime minister in a rotation deal, with Bennett holding the job first. Lapid’sYeshAtid party said negotiating teams were to meet later Sunday.

Bennett, a former top aide to Netanyahu who has held senior Cabinet posts, shares the prime minister’s hard-line ideology. He is a former leader of the West Bank settlement movement and heads a small party whose base includes religious and nationalist Jews. Yet he has had a strained and complicated relationship with his one-time mentor due to personal differences.Bennett said there was no feasible way after the deadlocked March 23 election to form a right-wing government favored by Netanyahu. He said another election would yield the same results and said it was time to end the cycle.

“A government like this will succeed only if we work together as a group,” he said. He said everyone “will need to postpone fulfilling part of their dreams. We will focus on what can be done, instead of fighting all day on what’s impossible.”If Bennett and Lapid and their other partners can wrap up a deal, it would end, at least for the time being, the record-setting tenure of Netanyahu, the most dominant figure in Israeli politics over the past three decades. Netanyahu has served as prime minister for the past 12 years and also held an earlier term in the late 1990s.

In his own televised statement, Netanyahu accused Bennett of betraying the Israeli right wing and urged nationalist politicians not to join what he called a “leftist government. A government like this is a danger to the security of Israel, and is also a danger to the future of the state,” he said. Netanyahu is desperate to stay in power while he is on trial. He has used his office as a stage to rally his base and lash out against police, prosecutors and the media.

Despite his electoral dominance, Netanyahu has become a polarizing figure since he was indicted on charges of fraud, breach of trust and accepting bribes in late 2019. Each of the past four elections was seen as a referendum on Netanyahu’s fitness to rule, and each ended in deadlock.In order to form a government, a party leader must secure the support of a 61-seat majority in the 120-seat Knesset, or parliament. Because no single party controls a majority on its own, coalitions are usually built with smaller partners. Thirteen parties of various sizes are in the current parliament.

While Bennett’s Yamina party controls just seven seats in parliament, he has emerged as a kingmaker of sorts by providing the necessary support to secure a majority. If he is successful, his party would be the smallest to lead an Israeli government.Lapid already faced a difficult challenge, given the broad range of parties in the anti-Netanyahu bloc that have little in common. They include dovish left-wing parties, a pair of right-wing nationalist parties, including Bennett’s Yamina, and most likely the Islamist United Arab List.Although Arabs make up some 20% of Israel’s population, an Arab party has never before sat in an Israeli coalition government.

Israeli media reported that under the proposed terms of the deal, Mr Bennett would replace Mr Netanyahu, 71, as prime minister and later give way to MrLapid, 57, in a rotation agreement. The arrangement has not been officially confirmed. The proposed coalition would bring together factions from the right, the left and the centre of Israeli politics. While the parties have little in common politically, they are united in their desire to see Mr Netanyahu’s time in office come to an end.

The prime minister, who is on trial for fraud, fell short of a decisive majority at a general election in March. It was the country’s fourth inconclusive vote in two years – and again Netanyahu failed to secure coalition allies. After Netanyahu’s failure to form a government, Lapid was then given four weeks to cobble together a coalition.YohananPlesner, president of the Israel Democracy Institute, said Netanyahu will try to undermine those efforts until the end. Even if Lapid and Bennett manage to put together a government, Netanyahu is unlikely to disappear, Plesner said.Netanyahu could remain as opposition leader, working to exploit the deep ideological differences among his opponents to cause the coalition to fracture. “History teaches us it would be unwise to write him off,” he said.

Eric GarcettiLikely To Be Named US Envoy ToIndia

President Biden is said to nominate Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti,50 to be the U.S. ambassador to India; and former senior State Department official Nicholas Burns to serve as his ambassador to China. With these selections, Biden is turning to a longtime political ally and a seasoned diplomat to serve in two of the country’s highest-profile diplomatic postings.

Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti,50, is likely to be nominated as U.S. ambassador to India by President Biden. The Associated Press reported last week that Biden is expected to announce that Garcetti will be picked for the post, citing a person familiar with the matter.Biden, who has yet to announce any of his picks to fill ambassador posts, has been planning to roll out the list all at once, a strategic move that has allowed speculation to build around several likely nominees. Sources also stated, former senior State Department official Nicholas Burns to serve as his ambassador to China, according to a person familiar with the matter.With these selections, Biden is turning to a longtime political ally and a seasoned diplomat to serve in two of the country’s highest-profile diplomatic postings.

It was not clear when either nomination would be announced, according to the person familiar with the matter, who was not authorized to publicly comment on the matter and spoke on condition of anonymity. The White House declined to comment on either Garcetti or Burns and noted that “no one is final until they’re announced.”Garcetti and Burns, if confirmed by the Senate, would come to their postings at high-pressure moments in the U.S. relationships with India and China. Garcetti, if confirmed, would be dispatched to India as it has been overwhelmed by a surge in coronavirus infections and deaths. India’s death toll is the third highest reported in the world after the U.S. and Brazil, and true numbers are thought to be significantly greater.

Garcetti had considered a 2020 White House bid and later on, became part of Biden’s inner circle, emerged as a widely discussed possibility to join Biden’s Cabinet last year. But he took himself out of the running, saying the raging coronavirus crisis made it impossible for him to step away.The two-term mayor would leave LA with an uneven record. He has been credited with continuing a transit buildup in a city choked with traffic, establishing tougher earthquake safety standards for thousands of buildings, and steering the city through the deadly pandemic as it became a hot spot for infections. Cases have fallen steeply in the city and some restrictions have been rolled back, consistent with the trajectory in the state.

Garcetti’s popularity has slipped in recent years, and Black Lives Matter protesters had banged drums outside his official residence earlier this year to urge Biden not to choose Garcetti for a Cabinet position. Garcetti was overmatched by a crisis of homelessness that became a national embarrassment despite the massive jump in government spending to fight it. Many streets and sidewalks remain cratered and crumbling, despite his early pledge to make fixing them a cornerstone of his administration.In picking Garcetti, the president would be rewarding a loyalist who was one of his national campaign co-chairs, who served on the committee that vetted his pool of vice presidential contenders, and who served as one of several co-chairs for Biden’s inaugural committee.

Garcetti was elected mayor in 2013 and reelected in 2017. He is serving a longer second term — of 5½ years, as opposed to four — because voters in 2015 backed a one-time change in the city’s election dates. Garcetti’s possible departure for India comes as the city slowly recovers from the economic devastation of the COVID-19 pandemic and grapples with an ongoing homelessness crisis.The overseas position, if it goes to the mayor, will be viewed as a reward to a longtime supporter of Biden’s. The India posting would allow the politically ambitious Garcetti to burnish his foreign policy credentials ahead of a possible future White House run. That’s a conspicuous gap on his resume — the Ivy League graduate and Rhodes scholar has spent two decades in city government, either as mayor or a city councilman.

S. Jaishankar Discusses Covid Vaccines, Terrorism At UN

India’s External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar has offered India’s support to UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres for his re-election during a meeting in New York at which they discussed a range of issues from Covid-19 vaccines to terrorism.In a tweet after the meeting May 25, Jaishankar said that he told Guterres that India “values” his leadership and conveyed its support for his election to a second term. The global crisis of the Covid-19 pandemic featured prominently in their discussions.

Jaishankar tweeted that they emphasized the importance of finding “urgent and effective global vaccine solutions” and the critical need to ramp up the vaccine supply chain to “ensure greater production and fairer distribution.”With India set to assume the rotating presidency of the Security Council in August, their meeting covered a wide range of issues.In a series of tweets on the meeting, Jaishankar said that they talked about “regional challenges in India’s neighborhood” and “shared our concerns about ensuring that the gains of the last two decades in Afghanistan are adequately protected.”

U.S. President Joe Biden is pulling out the nation’s troops from Afghanistan after a 20-year deployment even as terrorist activities continue raising fears of regional instability.In his tweets Jaishankar said, “Countering terrorism and radicalization remain priorities for the entire region.”Jaishankar said that he “highlighted India’s constructive role” in the Security Council and “conveyed priorities of our presidency in August.” He added, “Maritime security and technology for peacekeeping address the needs of the day.”

A spokesperson for India’s UN Mission said that India planned to hold high-level meetings on those topics during its presidency. Jaishankar also noted that Guterres expressed “appreciation of India’s peacekeeping operations including at Goma, DRC (Democratic Republic of Congo) recently.”India peacekeepers based in Goma have been involved in rescue operations after the eruption of the Mount Nayargongo volcano displaced several thousand people in the region last week. Several hundred people are also missing following the calamity.

Climate change, a topic that Guterres gives top priority to, also was discussed, Jaishankar tweeted. “Greater resources are essential for larger ambitions (in setting goals for combatting climate change). Financing will determine our seriousness and credibility,” he added.The spokesperson for India’s UN mission said that Jaishankar “apprised the Secretary General of India’s efforts to meet its Paris commitments (on curbing greenhouse emissions), enhance renewable energy goals, as well as its leadership role in the International Solar Alliance and Coalition for Disaster Resilient Infrastructure.”

Jaishankar “underlined our strong development partnership with Africa, Small States and Small Island Developing States,” the spokesperson said. “The Secretary-General conveyed his appreciation for the consistent role played by Indian peacekeepers in support of international peace and security. Their response in aiding the people of Goma in the Democratic Republic of Congo following the volcanic eruption was recognized,” the diplomat added.In the discussion of fighting Covid-19, they felt that “the proposal by India and South Africa for a temporary waiver of vaccine patents “can also contribute to greater production and more equity,” the spokesperson said. The U.S. has agreed to the waiver, but it is facing opposition from several countries including Germany.

Guterres’s spokesperson Stephane Dujarric said that they “discussed a number of issues relating to peace and security” but said he had no further details on those topics. He also said that they discussed the Covid situation and the development of vaccines.Guterres is running for re-election with no credible opposition and in the election India gets two votes, one in the Security Council and another in the General Assembly. A Canadian of Indian descent, Arora Akanksha, has declared she is running for the office, as have at least five others, but lacking a government sponsorship, their candidacy has not so far been accepted officially.

China Comes Under Scrutiny As Study Backs Lab Theory For Covid Origin

Amid calls for a fresh probe into the origins of Covid-19, a new study has claimed that Chinese scientists created the virus in a laboratory in Wuhan and then tried to cover their tracks by reverse-engineering versions of the virus to make it look like it evolved naturally from bats.The virus has no “credible natural ancestor” and was created by Chinese scientists who were working on a gain-of-function research in a Wuhan lab, The Daily Mail reported on Sunday, citing a research paper compiled by British expert Angus Dalgleish and Norwegian scientist Birger Sorensen.

Incidentally, gain-of-function projects, which involve tweaking natural viruses to make them more infectious, were banned in the US during the Obama years.The research claims scientists took a natural coronavirus “backbone” found in China’s cave bats and spliced onto it a new “spike”, turning it into the Covid-19 virus. The researchers also claim to have found “unique fingerprints” in Covid-19 samples that they say could have arisen from manipulation in a laboratory.

The authors claim they had prima facie evidence of retro-engineering in China for a year. The study alleged “deliberate destruction, concealment or contamination of data” at Chinese labs. In the paper that is likely to be published in the journal Quarterly Review of Biophysics Discovery, Dalgleish and Sorensen claim to have concluded how Chinese scientists built the tools to create the coronavirus.

President Joe Biden’s directive to the US intelligence community to redouble their efforts to collect information to facilitate a definitive conclusion on the origin of Sars-CoV-2 has angered China, which said on Thursday that the US is playing politics. The country, where the virus was first detected in late 2019, again dismissed the theory that it could have leaked from a laboratory in Wuhan, ground zero of the pandemic.India on Friday backed calls for further investigation into the origin of Covid-19, and sought the cooperation of China and other parties for such studies, days after US President Joe Biden gave intelligence agencies 90 days to submit a fresh report at a time when scientists are seeking deeper examination of a theory that the virus may have originated in a lab.

External affairs ministry spokesperson ArindamBagchi said that a World Health Organization (WHO)-led study into a virus’s origin was an “important first step”, and more studies were needed to reach “robust conclusions”.“WHO convened global study on the origin of Covid-19 is an important first step. It stressed the need for next phase studies as also for further data and studies to reach robust conclusions,” Bagchi said in a statement. Without naming China, he added, “The follow up of the WHO report and further studies deserve the understanding and cooperation of all.”

British intelligence agencies believe it is “feasible” that the pandemic began with a virus leak from the Chinese lab, The Sunday Times reported on Sunday, prompting vaccines minister NadhimZahawi to demand that the World Health Organization must fully investigate the origins of the deadly virus.

US Debates Fairest Way To Share Spare Vaccine

WASHINGTON (AP) — In April, the Biden administration announced plans to share millions of COVID-19 vaccine doses with the world by the end of June. Five weeks later, nations around the globe are still waiting — with growing impatience — to learn where the vaccines will go and how they will be distributed.To President Joe Biden, the doses represent a modern-day “arsenal of democracy,” serving as the ultimate carrot for America’s partners abroad, but also as a necessary tool for global health, capable of saving millions of lives and returning a semblance of normalcy to friends and foes alike.

The central question for Biden: What share of doses should be provided to those who need it most, and how many should be reserved for U.S. partners?The answer, so far at least, appears to be that the administration will provide the bulk of the doses to COVAX, the U.N.-backed global vaccine sharing program meant to meet the needs of lower income countries. While the percentage is not yet finalized, it would mark a substantial — and immediate — boost to the lagging COVAX effort, which to date has shared just 76 million doses with needy countries.

The Biden administration is considering reserving about a fourth of the doses for the U.S. to dispense directly to individual nations of its choice.The growing U.S. stockpile of COVID-19 vaccines is seen not only as a testament to American ingenuity, but also its global privilege.

More than 50% of Americans have received at least one dose of the vaccine, and more than 135 million are fully vaccinated, helping bring the rate of cases and deaths in the U.S. to the lowest level since the earliest days of the pandemic.Scores of countries have requested doses from the United States, but to date only Mexico and Canada have received a combined 4.5 million doses. The U.S. also has announced plans to share enough shots with South Korea to vaccinate its 550,000 troops who serve alongside American service members on the peninsula.

The broader U.S. sharing plan is still being finalized, a White House official said, having been the subject of policy debate inside the White House and across the federal government, and also involving COVAX and other outside stakeholders like drug manufacturers and logistics experts.

“Our nation’s going to be the arsenal of vaccines for the rest of the world,” Biden said on May 17, when he announced the U.S. pledge to share more doses. He added that, compared to other countries like Russia and China that have sought to leverage their domestically produced doses, “we will not use our vaccines to secure favors from other countries.”Still, the partnership with the South Korean military points to the ability of the U.S. to use its vaccine stockpile to benefit some of its better-off allies. It was not clear whether South Korea would pay for its doses from the U.S. Most of the other doses were expected to be donated.

Samantha Power, the new USAID administrator, provided the first indication of the likely allocation last week in testimony on Capitol Hill.She told the Senate Appropriations Committee that “75% of the doses we share will likely be shared through COVAX. Twenty-five percent of whatever our excess supply is that we are donating will be reserved to be able to deploy bilaterally.”

Administration officials cautioned that Biden had not yet signed off on the precise split and that it could still change.. The White House official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal plans, said the administration would be working in coming days to synchronize its supplies with the global vaccine sharing organizations.Biden has committed to providing other nations with all 60 million domestically produced doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine. That vaccine has yet to be authorized for use in the U.S. but is widely approved around the world. The U.S.-produced doses will be available to ship as soon as they clear a safety review by the Food and Drug Administration.

The president also has promised to share 20 million doses from existing production of Pfizer, Moderna and Johnson & Johnson vaccine stocks. Even more doses are expected to be made available to share in the months ahead.As part of its purchase agreements with drug manufacturers, the U.S. controlled the initial production by its domestic manufacturers. Pfizer and Moderna are only now starting to export vaccines produced in the U.S. to overseas customers. The U.S. has hundreds of millions more doses on order, both of authorized and in-development vaccines.

“It’s obviously challenging because so many countries face this need right now,” Power said, calling the decision of where to send doses “an urgent question.”The decision, she continued, hinges on some combination of “the relationship we have with the countries, the public health and epidemiological scientific trajectory of the disease, and a sense of where the vaccines can do the most good, the infrastructure and readiness of countries to receive vaccines.”

The U.S. under Biden also has pledged $4 billion to COVAX, led by Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations and the World Health Organization, to help it procure and distribute vaccines. COVAX has committed to sharing the doses with more than 90 countries, including many with which the U.S. has tumultuous relations.Leaving it to COVAX to decide how the bulk of the U.S.-provided doses are distributed is seen by the administration as the most equitable way to determine who benefits. It also could allow the U.S. to avoid any political fallout that might come from sharing the vaccine directly with adversaries.

“It’s not only a symbol of American values — it’s smart global health policy,” said Tom Hart, acting CEO of the ONE Campaign, which has pressed the Biden administration to move faster to develop its global sharing plan. “An outbreak in North Korea or Iran or somewhere else where we might have tensions, viruses travel no matter where they’re flourishing, and I don’t want a variant cooking up in some remote part of the world, anywhere in the world, which then might get around the current vaccines that we’ve got.”

Even if the bulk of the U.S.-shared doses are distributed through COVAX, Power told senators, “It will be very clear where those doses are coming from.”“People will be very clear that these are American doses coming as a result of American ingenuity and the generosity of the American people,” she added.Globally, more than 3.5 million people are confirmed to have died from the coronavirus. The U.S. has seen the largest confirmed loss of life from COVID-19, at more than 594,000 people.

China Allows 3 Kids Per Couple

China’s ruling Communist Party has said, it will ease birth limits to allow all couples to have three children instead of two in hopes of slowing the rapid aging of its population, which is adding to strains on the economy and society.The ruling party has enforced birth limits since 1980 to restrain population growth but worries the number of working-age people is falling too fast while the share over age 65 is rising. That threatens to disrupt its ambitions to transform China into a prosperous consumer society and global technology leader.

A ruling party meeting led by President Xi Jinping decided to introduce “measures to actively deal with the aging population,” the official Xinhua News Agency said. It said leaders agreed ”implementing the policy of one couple can have three children and supporting measures are conducive to improving China’s population structure.”Leaders also agreed China needs to raise its retirement age to keep more people in the workforce and improve pension and health services for the elderly, Xinhua said.

Restrictions that limited most couples to one child were eased in 2015 to allow two, but the total number of births fell further, suggesting rule changes on their own have little impact on the trend.Couples say they are put off by high costs of raising a child, disruption to their jobs and the need to look after elderly parents.Comments on social media Monday complained the change does nothing to help young parents with medical bills, low incomes and grueling work schedules known popularly as “996,” or 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. six days a week.

“Every stage of the problem hasn’t been solved,” said a post on the popular Sina Weibo blog service signed Tchaikovsky. “Who will raise the baby? Do you have time? I go out early and get back late. Kids don’t know what their parents look like.”Another, signed Hyeongmok, joked bitterly: “Don’t worry about aging. Our generation won’t live long.”

China, along with Thailand and some other Asian economies, faces what economists call the challenge of whether they can get rich before they get old.The Chinese population of 1.4 billion already was expected to peak later this decade and start to decline. Census data released May 11 suggest that is happening faster than expected, adding to burdens on underfunded pension and health systems and cutting the number of future workers available to support a growing retiree group.

The share of working-age people 15 to 59 in the population fell to 63.3% last year from 70.1% a decade earlier. The group aged 65 and older grew to 13.5% from 8.9%. The 12 million births reported last year was down nearly one-fifth from 2019.About 40% were second children, down from 50% in 2017, according to Ning Jizhe, a statistics official who announced the data on May 11.

Chinese researchers and the Labor Ministry say the share of working-age people might fall to half the population by 2050. That increases the “dependency ratio,” or the number of retirees who rely on each worker to generate income for pension funds and to pay taxes for health and other public services.Leaders at Monday’s meeting agreed it is “necessary to steadily implement the gradual postponement of the legal retirement age,” Xinhua said.It gave no details, but the government has been debating raising the official retirement ages of 60 for men, 55 for white-collar female workers and 50 for blue-collar female workers.

The potential change is politically fraught. Some female professionals welcome a chance to stay in satisfying careers, but others whose bodies are worn out from decades of manual labor resent being required to work longer.The fertility rate, or the average number of births per mother, stood at 1.3 in 2020, well below the 2.1 that would maintain the size of the population.

China’s birth rate, paralleling trends in other Asian economies, already was falling before the one-child rule. The average number of children per Chinese mother tumbled from above six in the 1960s to below three by 1980, according to the World Bank.Demographers say official birth limits concealed what would have been a further fall in the number of children per family without the restrictions.The ruling party says it prevented as many as 400 million potential births, averting shortages of food and water. But demographers say if China followed trends in Thailand, parts of India and other countries, the number of additional babies might have been as low as a few million.

Rise OfAntisemitism Globally &What’s Next For Israel-Palestinian Relations And Development?

American University experts are available for commentary and analysis of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the rise of antisemitism in the United States and Europe. Experts available for comments include:

Dan Arbell, scholar-in-residence in the Dept. of History, is a 25-year veteran of the Israeli Foreign Service, serving in senior posts at the United Nations and in the United States and Japan, and holding senior positions at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Headquarters in Jerusalem.

Arbell said, “In the aftermath of the ceasefire, the U.S. is devoting diplomatic efforts to reinforce calm on the ground, establish a dialogue between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, and advance assistance for Gaza rehabilitation and reconstruction.  For this purpose, U.S. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken will visit the region this week and will hold talks with Israeli, Palestinian, Egyptian and Jordanian leaders.  It will be the first visit by a U.S. Secretary of State to Ramallah, after a four-year disconnect between the U.S. and the Palestinian leadership under Trump.”

Kurt Braddock is an assistant professor at the School of Communication and faculty fellow with the Polarization and Extremism Research and Innovation Lab. He is available to comment on extremist groups and how they communicate, and the growth of antisemitism in Europe. He is also an expert in the persuasive strategies used by violent extremist groups to recruit and radicalize audiences targeted by their propaganda.

Michael Brenner is director of AU’s Center for Israel Studies and professor of Jewish History and Culture at Ludwig-Maximilian-University in Munich. His research bridges Europe and the United States, focusing on the history of the Jews from the 19th to the 21st century, including the Shoah and the State of Israel. Brenner can comment on the foundations and history of the current conflict, issues related to the Holocaust and to Jewish life in Europe, and rising antisemitism.

Brenner said, “As a result of the war in Israel and Gaza, Jews elsewhere are under attack. We see this most clearly in Europe and the U.S., where anti-Israel extremists attack synagogues, shout anti-Jewish slogans, and use antisemitism imagery. When this happens, it clearly crosses the line of any legitimate criticism of the actions of the Israeli government. This is pure antisemitism and endangers Jewish life.”

Hrach Gregorian is the Administrative Director of the International Peace & Conflict Resolution Program at American University’s School of International Service. He is an expert on conflict resolution and peacebuilding with field experience in the Middle East, Africa, the Balkans, Central and East Asia.

Kareem Rabie is assistant professor of anthropology and the author of Palestine is Throwing a Party and the Whole World is Invited: Capital and State Building in the West Bank. The book focuses on the political economy of state-building and development, and how they impact the relationship of the West Bank to Israel. Rabie explores how international aid is being reconfigured and rerouted towards private development in order to stabilize markets and formalize present political conditions. Rabie’s work speaks to both potential outcomes of perpetual reconstruction in Palestine, and what it might mean for just and humane solutions to ongoing political problems.

Guy Ziv, assistant professor in the School of International Service, is an expert on U.S. foreign policy toward the Middle East, U.S.-Israel relations, and Israeli-Palestinian peacemaking. He is the author of Why Hawks Become Doves: Shimon Peres and Foreign Policy Change in Israel. His opinion articles have appeared in leading American and Israeli newspapers, including The Baltimore Sun, CNN.com, Haaretz, The Jerusalem Post, and USA Today. He frequently appears as a commentator in major media outlets, such as Al Jazeera, BBC, CNN, and Sky News.

In its 128-year history, American University has established a reputation for producing changemakers focused on the challenges of a changing world. AU has garnered recognition for global education, public service, experiential learning and politically active and diverse students, as well as academic and research expertise in a wide range of areas including the arts, sciences, humanities, business and communication, political science and policy, governance, law and diplomacy.

Amidst Tensions, Biden-Putin Summit Planned

A face to face meeting between President Joe Biden and  Russian President Vladimir Putinhas been planned in Geneva, Switzerland  The summit would cover a “full range of pressing issues” as the US seeks to “restore predictability and stability” to its Russian relations.

The White House has announced a face to face meeting between President Joe Biden and  Russian President Vladimir Putinin Geneva, Switzerland, on June 16th. That comes at the tail end of Biden’s already scheduled trip to the United Kingdom for the G7 summit and Brussels for a meeting of NATO leaders, giving the president plenty of time to hear from US allies before sitting down with Putin.

White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki, in a statement announcing the meeting, said the summit would cover a “full range of pressing issues” as the US seeks to “restore predictability and stability” to its Russian relations. That echoes comments Secretary of State Antony Blinken made during a meeting with his Russian counterpart, Sergei Lavrov, in Iceland last week, as he said Biden’s goal was a “predictable, stable relationship with Russia”.

A full slate of topics – and tension

When Biden and Putin meet, they’ll have plenty to talk about. A short list of subjects includes arms control, climate change, Russian military involvement in Ukraine, Russia’s cyber-hacking activities, including the 2020 SolarWinds attack on US government and private computer networks, and the attempted poisoning and jailing of Russian dissident Alexei Navalny.

Those conversations seem destined to be fraught, as Biden and Putin have traded verbal barbs amid rising tensions in the past months.In an interview in March, Biden agreed with the description of Putin as a “killer”, prompting Russia to temporarily recall its ambassador to the US and Putin, in turn, to say it takes one to know one, before dryly wishing Biden “good health”.

There’s little expectation of any tangible results from this meeting, aside from the hopes it will lead to improved relations and understanding between the two leaders.

Sanctions imposed and waived

Contributing to the current US-Russia tensions are new penalties the Biden administration imposed last month as punishment for the Solar Winds hacking, which included new limits on transactions between US financial institutions and the Russian government as well as sanctions on Russian businesses and the expulsion of some Russian diplomats in the US.

If those sanctions were a diplomatic “stick”, the announcement last week that the Biden administration would waive congressionally mandated sanctions on the nearly completed Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline between Russia and Germany could help ease US-Russia tensions in the run-up to June’s summit. (It also avoids irritating Germany, which could be an equally important concern for the Biden administration, which is intent on repairing US-EU relations.)

The Trump factor

If predictability and stability are part of Biden’s goal, it will mark a sharp contrast from the four years of the Trump presidency, which began with allegations – confirmed by the US intelligence community – that Russia had meddled in the 2016 presidential election and was behind cyber-attacks on the Democratic Party and its presidential nominee, Hillary Clinton.Those attacks cast a shadow on much of the Trump presidency, leading to Robert Mueller’s special counsel investigation and revelations of contact between members of the Trump campaign and Russian nationals (although the investigation found no evidence of co-ordination between the two camps).

When Trump and Putin had their first and only one-on-one summit in Helsinki, Finland, in July 2018, Trump controversially stated that he believed Putin’s insistence that Russia was not involved in election hacking, despite US intelligence conclusions to the contrary.During his presidential campaign and throughout his time in office, Trump expressed admiration of, and a sympathetic ear toward, Putin, although his administration did – after some delay – follow through with congressionally mandated sanctions on Russia.

Biden’s fine line

The rhetoric of the Biden administration toward Russia has been markedly different, even if its actions have not always matched the stronger words. That has led to some criticism of the White House’s Russia policies from both political friends and adversaries.

Following the Nord Stream 2 waiver announcement, Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairman Bob Menendez, a Democrat, said he didn’t see how the move helped “counter Russian aggression in Europe”.And shortly after the White House summit information was made public, Republican Senator Ben Sasse hit Biden’s Russia policy on a number of fronts, including the recent move by Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko to intercept a passenger jet in order to capture a dissident journalist.

“We’re rewarding Putin with a summit?” he said in a statement. “Putin imprisoned Alexei Navalny and his puppet Lukashenko hijacked a plane to get Roman Protasevich. Instead of treating Putin like a gangster who fears his own people, we’re giving him his treasured Nord Stream 2 pipeline and legitimising his actions with a summit. This is weak.”

US-Russia summits are always diplomatic high-wire acts, with US presidents having to walk a fine line as the world looks on. Biden, as a former vice-president and long-time foreign relations expert in the Senate, has plenty of experience in the diplomatic arena and seems to relish developing one-on-one chemistry with world leaders.The Geneva summit will be one of the biggest in-person tests of his political career, however.

Covid and (Lack of) Management and Acceleration of the Crisis in India

A summary of the presentation/talk by this writer via a Zoom Meeting at an Online Interaction with Shri DIGVIJAYA SINGH,” Senior Congress Leader & Member of Indian Parliament, Rajya Sabha on “PANDEMIC EFFECT ON URORGNIZED SECTOR AND CONGRESS RESPONSE,” organized by All India Unorganized Workers Congress in India on Sunday, May 23rd, 2021.

During the meeting, Mr. Arbind Singh, National Chairman of AIUWC welcomed the participants and invited Ajay Ghosh,  Chief Editor of the Universal News Network and BasvarajSankin, Head of Indian Overseas Congress in Spain to address the audience. Mr. Anshu Antony, Chair of the All India National Congress Party’s Training Wing introduced Mr. Ghosh to the audience.

Following the presentations, Mr. DigvijaySingh addressed the audience and responded to the concerns shared by the members of AIUWC, during which Mr. Singh responded to questions raised by AIUWC state presidents and Regional Coordinators.Below is the detailed address by Mr. Ajay Ghosh at the Event:

Covid-19 is notoriously hard to control, and political leaders are only part of the calculus when it comes to pandemic management. However, where leaders of the nations have responded adequately and planned and executed actions to prevent the spread and mitigate and eradicate the pandemic, the cases have been well contained. New Zeeland, Taiwan, Denmark, and some of the European countries and the United States under the current Biden administration are such examples of visionary leadership, protecting the people and saving lives from the pandenmic.

The US under Trump, several south American nations and India fall under the category of those world leaders who have made little effort to combat outbreaks in their country, whether by downplaying the pandemic’s severity, disregarding science or ignoring critical health interventions like vaccines, social distancing and masks.

India, which has been a shining example of development, freedom and fast growth, is the new epicenter of the global pandemic, recording some 400,000 new cases per day by May 2021. However grim, this statistic fails to capture the sheer horror unfolding there. Covid-19 patients are dying in hospitals because doctors have no oxygen to give and no lifesaving drugs that could save millions of lives. The sick are turned away from clinics that have no free beds.

In January 2021, Modi declared at a global forum that India had “saved humanity … by containing corona effectively.” In March, his health minister proclaimed that the pandemic was reaching an “endgame.” Covid-19 was actually gaining strength in India and worldwide—but his government made no preparations for possible contingencies, such as the emergence of a deadlier and more contagious Covid-19 variant.

The net result of such complacency and lack of vision and planning: Covid pandemic is killing thousands daily, crushing India’s modest health system, causing crippling shortages of doctors, nurses, medicines, even oxygen. Hospitals and medical professionals have put out urgent notices that they were unable to cope with the rush of patients.

How did we land here facing such a critical stage?

With India experiencing a devastating second wave of the coronavirus pandemic, questions are being asked about how the country — which is home to the world’s largest vaccine manufacturer — got to this tragic point.The second wave of Covid-19, with the spiraling cases and deaths across cities and towns, making India currently the world’s worst pandemic-affected country, have now dented India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s image in India and around the world for the poor vision, poor planning, and mismanagement of the most deadly virus in over a century.

India is now in a living hell. A new “double mutant” variant, named B.1.617, has emerged in a devastating coronavirus second wave which has seen hospitals run out of beds and oxygen. Mortuaries are so full that bodies are justify to decompose at home.A recent story in TIME magazine titled, “’This Is Hell.’ Prime Minister Modi’s Failure to Lead Is Deepening India’s COVID-19 Crisis” pointed out how India has mismanaged and sent misleading messages.

After declaring ‘victory’ over Covi, the Prime Minister and other political leadership spent their time organizing a blitzkrieg of election rallies in West Bengal and Assam without wearing masks and while exhorting large crowds to gather.When Covid was spreading rapidly in several states, killing thousands daily, the BJP leaders led by Modi were campaigning in poll bound states neglecting the responsibility to coordinate efforts to contain the spread of the deadly virus.

The Guardian newspaper wrote: “Like Donald Trump, Mr Modi would not give up campaigning while the pandemic raged. India went ahead with five state elections in April, and an unmasked MrModi held huge rallies. Mr Modi’s brand of Indian exceptionalism bred complacency. A presumption of national greatness has led to a lack of preparedness, most notably in vaccine production.”

People are dying in their hundreds in India because of a lack of medical oxygen and other supplies in the country’s overloaded hospitals. An investigation by Indian news website Scroll.in revealed that the country’s government waited until October 2020, eight months after the pandemic began, to invite bids for a $27 million contract to place oxygen generation systems inside more than 150 district hospitals. Six months later, most still aren’t up and running. Several states across the nation have expressed despair as most hospitals have run short of Oxygen.

Modi also allowed a religious festival that draws millions to proceed from January to March. Public health officials now believe the festival may have been a super-spreader event and was “an enormous mistake.”“The Uttarakhand chief minister declared on March 20, “nobody will be stopped in the name of COVID-19 as we are sure the faith in God will overcome the fear of the virus.” Hundreds of thousands of Hindu devotees showed up each day for a dip in the Ganges as part of the KumbhMela pilgrimage in Haridwar, Uttarakhand.

There has been certainly a big lapse from the complacent government and the general public, paying scant regard for the social-distance norms while the state machinery ignored enforcing norms.International media have criticized Indian states for attempting to hide the death rate. In the state of Uttar Pradesh workers were pictured covering the crematorium with tin sheets. The Wire news portal published an article titled, “Varanasi: Cremation, Burial Grounds Show About 50% of COVID-19 Deaths Aren’t Officially Recorded.”

In Gujarat, the Prime Minister’s home state, crematoriums are burning day and night, while the state refuses to acknowledge the high number of deaths. The Gujarat high court has demanded the state government reveal the accurate count of COVID-19 patients and deaths.The government is blatantly lying on official figures of the grim reality.As Modi touted his successes last year, India—the world’s largest vaccine manufacturer—sent over 100 million vaccine doses to 68 countries around the world. Yet just 1.9% of India’s 1.3 billion people had been fully inoculated against COVID-19 by early May.

In the race to produce and secure vaccines for Indians, Modi regime failed miserably. India invested too little in vaccine against Covid production. While epidemiologists, specialists and opposition leaders have long urged Modi to give approvals for foreign vaccines, the decision to give emergency use license to the Russian manufactured Sputnik V vaccine was only taken in the second week of April.Indian government had ordered 21 million doses of Covishield from the Serum Institute at the end of February this year but didn’t indicate when or if it would buy more, then it ordered an additional 110 million doses in March 2021 when infections started to rise.

When the vaccine rollout slowed, there was no effort or coordination with the states as Modi’s cabinet indulged in a blame game with ministers from opposition parties.Against the skepticism for vaccines by a vast majority of Indians, Modi government has done too little to reinforce public health messaging. The vaccine rollout became a global PR campaign for Modi’s leadership—in March, an Indo-Canadian group sponsored billboards erected in Canada thanking Modi for exporting Indian-made vaccines abroad—even while many Indians were apprehensive about their efficacy and side effects.

While the pandemic is raging across the nation and India is seeking help, medical and financial, Prime Minister Narendra Modi laid the foundation stone of the new Parliament building and a new Residence for the Prime Minister at an estimated cost of Rs. 971 crore. Why is the Modi Government spending billions of Dollars on the project, which could be better directed to fighting COVID-19 and repairing the pandemic-battered economy.

The sudden and abrupt lock down promulgated by Modi even before the 1st wave of the pandemic hit India caused enormous problems for millions of poor. It lies with the upper-middle-class Indians who were last year banging plates from their high-rise windows and lighting candles to praise Modi and celebrate the success of the unplanned lockdown—while poor migrant workers lost their jobs and had to leave the cities. While the rich booked themselves in hospitals using their contacts, the govt. cared little to alleviate the sufferings of the millions of the daily wage earners did not offer any monetary help.

While people are seeking help desperately, India has shut down its doors to get help by and through the NGOs abroad. The government of India implemented a set of bureaucratic regulations by amending a law called Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA) in the middle of the pandemic. Hundreds of charities and other non-governmental organizations (NGOs) across India are now required to have special permission under this law to receive any donations from overseas.

The new amendment put in place last September mandates the charities to open a new bank account at a particular New Delhi branch of the State Bank of India before March 31, 2021, regardless of where the charity is located or operating from. Though many charities have managed to open this account in New Delhi, they have run into bottlenecks and red tape. As a result they are unable to receive much needed funds to help the suffering  people in the middle of this pandemic.

The current stringent FCRA rules that were put in place by the Government are jeopardizing many donor’s plans to provide equipment like oxygen concentrators and other essential supplies from around the world in providing needed help to hospitals especially in rural areas.

Many Indian-American community and charity organizations in the United States say they are not able to send funds to NGO partners in India thanks to a newly amended law even as that country gasps from a tsunami of a second wave of the coronavirus pandemic.Many US-based non-profits said the Narendra Modi government’s action in regulating of foreign funds was arbitrary.The NGO members and have also pointed to the alleged slow processing of paperwork by State Bank of India (SBI), and are asking the Indian government to revise the deadline so that they can help the country in its time of acute need. Earlier, donations could be received in any bank where the NGO had a designated FCRA account.

NGOs now cannot sub grant their foreign contributions to another NGO even if they have FCRA registrations as was the case earlier. This has been a blow for many NGOs who have been working collaboratively on various programs and projects. Thisd impedesCovid relief work, including making direct cash transfer to low-income families of the Covid deceased, often an earning member.

GOPIO chapters in India are yet to get the permission FCRA. For example, it is going to be more than two years since GOPIO-Kochi, a duly registered nonprofit organization, applied to receive funds from outside, especially from GOPIO International which collected funds for the 2018 Kerala flood relief. The chapter’s application is still pending and we have not been able to send the money collected to our chapter yet.

A large number of nonprofit community organizations are raising funds for India, including to send oxygen concentrators which are badly needed all over India. The government must immediately remove all hurdles to get this medical equipment and supplies to the hospitals which need them urgently.

Suppressing Truth and Penalizing Media and Voice of the Public:

At times, Prime Minister Narendra Modis government has seemed more intent on removing criticism on Twitter than trying to control the Covid-19 pandemic, a premier medical journal The Lancet has said in an editorial. “Modi’s actions in attempting to stifle criticism and open discussion during the crisis are inexcusable,” Lancet said.

The Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME) estimates that India will see a staggering 1 million deaths from Covid-19 by August 1.If that outcome was to happen, Modi’s government would be responsible for presiding over a self-inflicted national catastrophe,” Lancet said in a scathing criticism of the government.

India squandered its early successes in controlling Covid-19. Until April, the government’s Covid-19 taskforce had not met in months. The consequences of that decision are clear before us, and India must now restructure its response while the crisis rages. The success of that effort will depend on the government owning up to its mistakes, providing responsible leadership and transparency, and implementing a public health response that has science at its heart.

But above all it lies with Narendra Modi, the Prime Minister of India, who calls himself the servant of 1.3 billion Indians, yet who has criminally abdicated his responsibility. At this critical juncture in its history, Indians have been left to fend for ourselves

Mismanagement?

  1. Complacency and lack of visionby the Indian Govt.
  2. Poor planning and lack of preparedness
  3. Lack of transparency and lack of foresight
  4. Intimidating and penalizing critics, including the media and those expressing their views on social media platforms
  5. Favoritism and lack of will to help the poor and the powerless: siding with the businesses and political supporters at the cost of the poor
  6. Blaming the opposition and those who criticize the government rather than an attitude of dialogue, open mindedness, collaboration, and cooperation
  7. An attitude of “I know it all” rather than the willingness to listen to the scientific community and professionals, and make amends for the wrongs committed
  8. Suppressing and denying the NGOs, particularly the minority communities from receiving foreign funds through the short sighted FCRA regulations, and in the process denying much needed help to millions who would have benefitted from such resources from abroad
  9. Lack of political will to contain market forces from hijacking medical supplies and hiking up the prizesfor essential medical suplies
  10. Prioritizing the image of the party and the leaders in power over the needs of the nation of the people.
  11. Lack of thoughtfulness and taking decisions arbitrarily and abruptly not reflecting on the consequences of govt. actions on millions of people

Some Suggestions For Action

  1. India must reduce SARS-CoV-2 transmission as much as possible by educating the public about the necessity of masking, social distancing, halting mass gatherings, quarantine, and testing
  2. Transparent: as cases continue to mount, the government must publish accurate data in a timely manner, and forthrightly explain to the public what is happening and what is needed to bend the epidemic curve, including the possibility of a new federal lockdown
  3. Genome sequencing needs to be expanded to better track, understand and control emerging and more transmissible SARS-CoV-2 variants
  4. The botched vaccination campaign must be rationalized and implemented with all due speed. Increasing vaccine supply (some of which should come from abroad) and setting up a distribution campaign that can cover not just urban but also rural and poorer citizens, who constitute more than 65 per cent of the population (over 800 million people).
  5. The government must work with local and primary healthcare centers that know their communities and create an equitable distribution system for the vaccine.
  6. Expand the production and supply of oxygen and import while lifting unnecessary restrictions
  7. Stop middlemen and business from raising the prizes of medical supplies, oxygen and much needed treatment for Covid, at this hour of crisis. Punish those who inflate the prize of these essentials
  8. Open more centers, use schools and other institutes in every village and town to provide health care and treat covid patients
  9. India has a large number of medical professionals. Use the newly graduates and who are in the final years of Medical schools and Nursing programs to fill the shortage of medical professionals to treat covid patients
  10. There are thousands of not for profit organization and individuals abroad who want to help their suffering sisters and brothers in India. Make it easier for them help India as she bleeds. Relax FCRA rules and make it easier for them to send money.
  11. India Needs to act on a war footing, using all possible resources and work collaboratively, using all sections, the political parties, the ruling and the opposition together, the medical professionals, hospitals and academicians, research institutes, the media and the public, in a transparent manner, putting the safety, security and well being of the people before that of the interests of the ruling party.

Biden Signs Covid-19 Hate Crime Act

Following overwhelming support from both chambers of Congress, President Biden signed legislation last week that addresses hate crimes throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, with particular emphasis on the increase in violence against Asian Americans.

At an event in the East Room of the White House, Biden thanked lawmakers for coming together to pass the legislation. He said standing against hatred and racism, which he called “the ugly poison that has long haunted and plagued our nation,” is what brings Americans together.”My message to all of those who are hurting is: We see you and the Congress has said, we see you. And we are committed to stop the hatred and the bias,” he said.

Indian-American civil rights organizations have welcomed President Joe Biden signing into law the Covid-19 Hate Crime Act.  Sim J Singh, senior policy and advocacy manager at the Sikh Coalition, welcomed the law adding an online hate-crime reporting system. It will be be great for the communities of color which face a language barrier as well as a culture barrier in communicating with law enforcement, he said. “To curb hate crimes, we need accurate data. Having this data will help to identify the prevention strategies required to keep our communities safe,” Singh told indica News.

He also welcomed the passage of the Jabara-Heyer NO HATE Act along with the Covid-19 Hate Crime Act that was signed by President Biden. The NO HATE Act was named in honor of two victims, Khalid Jabara and Heather Heyer, whose murders were prosecuted as hate crimes but not appropriately included in hate-crime statistics. “This marks the first necessary step towards resolving the longstanding problem of hate in our nation,” Singh said, referring to the Jabara-Heyer Act.  He said it was made possible after years of advocacy by civil rights organizations.

The Sikh Coalition was among the first organizations to support the Jabara-Heyer NO HATE Act when it was first introduced in 2019, and again when the new Congress reintroduced it in April 2021.Singh said that the Sikh Coalition also offered inputs in language that was added to the law.

Highlighting the rise in hate crime after 9/11, said, Singh said the Sikh Coalition has always advocated for better hate-crime reporting and victim support services. And since the FBI started collecting hate-crime data in 2015, anti-Sikh hate crimes have seen, on average, a year over year increase exceeding 100 percent.

“We are now documented by the FBI as the top five most targeted faith group,” Singh said. “What we know from our own reporting that shocking figure still only captures fraction of the hate-crime that Sikhs experience in the United States. “Our organization has been advocating for a long time for the need to prove hate-crime reporting data because data is going to help determine what policy are being effective and what is not,” he said.

“The passage of today’s law is the first step in understanding that data and acknowledging hate-crime to law enforcement but we have a long way to go.“We need to see more training in hate-crime initiatives. We need to see stronger enforcement of hate-crime laws and we need also to make sure that loopholes in the deferral law are fixed, mixed murder hate-crime be persecuted as well,” Singh said.

Samir Kalra, managing director, Hindu American Foundation, applauded “Congressional leaders and President Biden for passing and signing into law this important bipartisan legislation.” “The bill squarely confronts the anti-Asian and anti-Indian sentiments that have been rising in America and which is exacerbated by the Covid-19 pandemic,” Kalra said. “Out of all that hate and negativity was born a good, positive piece of legislation that all Americans can be proud of, especially Asian Americans.

SrutiSuryanarayanan, research & communications associate at South Asian Americans Leading Together (SAALT) told the media, “While we are pleased to see a stronger response and acknowledgment of hate violence that is driven by racist policy and rhetoric from the government, we hoped that the lessons of the Movement for Black Lives would guide our policy makers to find solutions that do not continue to reply on increased law enforcement,”

Vice President Kamala Harris said: “Racism exists in America. Xenophobia exists in America. Anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, homophobia, transphobia, it all exists. This bill brings us one step closer to stopping hate, not just against Asian Americans, but for all Americans.”

Politics With STEM In Virginia Public Schools

My second son Stephen Palathingal  graduated from the University of Virginia School of Engineering and Applied Science, a couple of days ago. He has accepted a job offer with Capital One in their software engineering department, where he did his internship last year. His elder brother Xavier Palathingal graduated from the same program six years ago, and currently works for Google.

Our family of four, all engineers and STEM graduates, coming from very middle-class backgrounds, made our lives possible on advanced math and technology, that too ALL in public schools and universities. The advanced math classes starting from 8th grade at Fairfax County Public Schools played the most important role in producing my two computer engineer children. I am immensely proud to watch them work with world-class technology experts from India and China, at companies like Amazon, Google, and now Capital One.

Lack of technical talent in America is a well-established fact. It is time for America to up its game in STEM education, not watering it down. If these advanced math courses are not there in public schools, the rich will go to private schools and get them, while the children of common folks like me will be left with mediocre public education. As a result, we will NOT be able to break the barriers due to our humble beginnings in this country. And, America will continue to remain dependent on foreign talent.

It is painful to watch the current liberal-socialist government in Virginia trying to remove advanced level math courses from its public schools. I remain fully committed to fighting this utter stupidity in the name of “equity” and “feel good for all”, for political benefits and vested business interests.

Quality public schools are what made me, my wife Asha Palathingal, and our kids, and 100s and 1000s of other immigrants, break the barriers, and realize the American dream. That is exactly what I am planning to continue to advocate for, just like I did in 2019 when I ran for Fairfax County School Board.

The mainstream fake media and the Virginia government are backpedaling on their laughable proposal now since they fear an Asian American backlash in the November election. That means the pressure that we are putting on is working.

Vote them out on November 2nd, and “Save Math” for Virginia and America!  And, believe me, “Math is not a racist word”! ?https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1309725846096295&id=100011766761465

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/virginia-drop-advanced-math-courses-before-11th-grade-equity

US Urges ‘Transparent’ WHO Inquiry Into Covid Origins

The US health secretary has urged the World Health Organization to ensure the next phase of investigation into Covid-19’s origins is “transparent”.Speaking to a ministerial-level WHO meeting, Xavier Becerra said international experts should be allowed to evaluate the source of coronavirus.US media reports suggest growing evidence the virus could have emerged from a laboratory in China.

Covid-19 was first detected in 2019 in Wuhan, in central Hubei province.Since then, more than 167 million cases and 3.4 million deaths have been reported worldwide.In March this year, the WHO issued a report written jointly with Chinese scientists on the origins of Covid-19, saying the chances of it having started in a lab were “extremely unlikely”. The WHO acknowledged further study was needed.

But questions have persisted and reports attributed to US intelligence sources say three members of the Wuhan Institute of Virology were admitted to hospital in November 2019, several weeks before China acknowledged the first case of the new disease in the community.

Beijing has angrily rejected the reports, repeatedly suggesting the virus may have come from a US laboratory instead. Speaking to the WHO on Tuesday, US Secretary for Health and Human Services Xavier Becerra did not mention China by name. But he made it clear the US expected more rigour from the next stage of any investigation.

“The Covid-19 pandemic not only stole a year from our lives, it stole millions of lives,” Mr Becerra said in an address to the World Health Assembly, a conference organised by the WHO.He added: “Phase 2 of the Covid origins study must be launched with terms of reference that are transparent, science-based and give international experts the independence to fully assess the source of the virus and the early days of the outbreak.”

The White House said on Tuesday that it expected from the WHO an “expert-driven evaluation of the pandemic’s origins that is free from interference or politicisation”.

Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and US President Joe Biden’s chief medical adviser, has maintained he believes the virus was passed from animals to humans, though he conceded this month he was no longer confident Covid-19 had developed naturally.

The lab leak claims were widely dismissed last year as a fringe conspiracy theory, after then-President Donald Trump said Covid-19 had originated from the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Many US media outlets described such claims as debunked or false.

On Tuesday, Mr Trump sought to take credit in an emailed statement to the New York Post. “To me it was obvious from the beginning but I was badly criticized, as usual,” he said. “Now they are all saying: ‘He was right.'”(Courtesy: BBC News)

Does Indian PM Narendra Modi Really Need A New House?

Rajpath (King’s Avenue), in the centre of the Indian capital, is to Delhi’ites what Central Park is to New Yorkers, or the Champs-Elysees to Parisians.The manicured lawns on either side of the wide ceremonial boulevard are a place for thousands to gather to soak up the winter sun or have an ice-cream on summer evenings.But the 3km (1.8 mile)-long road, stretching from RashtrapatiBhavan, the presidential palace, at one end to the India Gate war memorial at the other, now resembles a massive dust bowl.

The area is dotted with craters and mounds of earth – barricades stop people from getting close to men in reflective vests and yellow hard hats who are laying sewage pipes and tiled footpaths. A sign warns against taking photos and videos.The work is part of the Central Vista project – a vast redevelopment plan that includes a new parliament, new homes for the vice-president and prime minister and multi-storey office blocks. It’s expected to cost upwards of 200bn rupees ($2.7bn; £2bn).

The project has been mired in controversy since it was announced in September 2019, with critics saying the money could be better spent on people’s welfare or cleaning up Delhi’s air, which is among the filthiest in the world.The government rejects those arguments, saying Central Vista will be a major boost to the economy. Urban Development Minister Hardeep Singh Puri has said it will generate “large-scale direct and indirect employment” and make all Indians “proud”.

Construction work is continuing even as India battles a devastating second wave of Covid-19, which has fuelled further public resentment. Critics have questioned Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s priorities, comparing him to “Nero fiddling while Rome burns“.

Opposition leader Rahul Gandhi has called it a “criminal waste” and urged Mr Modi to focus instead on dealing with the pandemic. In an open letter to Mr Modi, scholars criticised the project as an extravagant waste of resources “that could be used to save lives”.Much scorn has been reserved in particular for the PM’s new house, due for completion by December 2022.

“This is pure escapism,” historian Narayani Gupta told the BBC. “At a time when the pandemic is killing thousands, crematoria are full and graveyards have run out of space, the government is building castles in the air.”

Where does the PM live now?

By all accounts, Mr Modi’s current accommodation is pretty fancy.The 12-acre complex on LokKalyan Marg (formerly Race Course Road), with five bungalows and sprawling lawns, is some 3km from the presidential palace and parliament.

Besides the PM’s residential quarters, the complex has accommodation for guests, offices, meeting rooms, a theatre and a helipad. A few years ago, an underground tunnel was built to connect it to nearby Safdarjung airport.”The Indian PM occupies an entire street – in Britain, 10 Downing Street is just a door with a number,” says Delhi-based architect Gautam Bhatia.

The property was chosen by Rajiv Gandhi in 1984. Intended to be temporary, it has been home to all Indian prime ministers ever since.”Gandhi used three bungalows, the fourth and the fifth were added later on as the requirement to host more staff and security personnel grew,” says political analyst Mohan Guruswamy, a regular visitor over the years.”It’s a relatively new construction,” says Gautam Bhatia. However, it has been repeatedly refurbished “at a great deal of expense”.

In recent years, Indians have had glimpses inside the closely-guarded complex as Mr Modi’s office released videos of him feeding peacocks, doing yoga or pushing his mother’s wheelchair.

What do we know about the new house?

It will be centrally located in Delhi’s power corridor – between the RashtrapatiBhavan at one end and the Supreme Court at the other, with parliament just across from the PM’s house.

According to government documents, the prime minister will occupy 10 four-storey buildings on a 15-acre plot between the president’s house and South Block, where offices of the PM and defence ministry are currently located. Rows of barracks built by the British in the 1940s and currently used as temporary offices will be demolished.

But further details about the residence are scarce. In an email to the BBC, project architect Bimal Patel’s office said “for security reasons we cannot share the details/blueprints with you”, refusing to say how much it would cost.Architects, conservationists and environmentalists have criticised the authorities for a “lack of transparency”.

“There have been no proper public hearings and the project details keep evolving so there is no clarity,” said one architect, Anuj Srivastava.Another, Madhav Raman, said building “such a massive structure” so close to South Block – a protected monument designed by leading 20th Century British architects Edwin Lutyens and Herbert Baker – was a cause for concern.

“The Archaeological Survey of India rules stipulate that there should be a minimum distance of 300m from a heritage structure but the new PM house will be just 30m away. There are also lots of trees on the plot, what will happen to them?”

So why does Mr Modi want to move?

Authorities say the PM’s present home is “not well-located”, is “difficult to secure” and needs “better infrastructure that is comfortable, efficient, easy to maintain and cost-effective”.They say it should be located in “close proximity” to his office since road closures during his travels “cause major disruptions to city traffic”.But Mohan Guruswamy believes the new house has more to do with Mr Modi’s ambition.

“All real decision-making takes place in the PM’s house. He has a staff of hundreds and they clear 300 files a day. “He has centralised power in his hands. He is creating a presidential form of government and he needs a bigger building – a White House or a Kremlin.”

MrGuruswamy says Indian prime ministers have always lived in “buildings at the back”. But with his new home, Mr Modi wants to put himself in the centre of Delhi’s power corridor.”But separation of power has to be physical too. He’s not just making a new home, he’s rearranging the institutions of government. Architecture changes the nature of power.”

What will happen to the Rajpath area?

Rajpath is a public space popular for recreation and also for protests and candle-light marches.And even though the government insists that it will remain a public space, critics say it’s unlikely that large gatherings would be allowed because of the proximity to the PM’s house.

Historian Narayani Gupta says the multi-storey office buildings, which will replace popular cultural centres like the Indira Gandhi National Centre for the Arts, the National Museum and the repository of our modern history, the National Archives, would overshadow India Gate and drive away people.

“They are moving rare manuscripts and fragile objects to temporary locations. How do we know that there won’t be any damage?”KanchiKohli, of the think tank Centre for Policy Research, says land in Delhi is designated for specific purposes – such as recreational, semi-public or government – and authorities can’t just take over an area and change its use.”This is a land grab.”

What is the government saying?

Minister for Urban Development Hardeep Singh Puri has defended the project.Rejecting criticism of government priorities during the pandemic, he said the project cost was 200bn rupees over several years “while the government has allocated nearly twice that amount for vaccination”.In a series of recent tweets, he asked people to “not believe in fake photos and canards about ongoing work at Central Vista Avenue”.

“The transformed Central Vista will be a world class public space,” he said, adding “it will eventually be something every Indian will be proud of”.A senior bureaucrat who did not want to be named said MrPuri was trying to “defend the indefensible”.

“I do not doubt that the end result will be something every Indian will be proud of, but I do believe that the timing is completely wrong. What is the tearing hurry to erect yet another building when all around us people are dying?” (Courtesy: BBC News)

Not Racism: Just Ignorance vs. Brutality

“If you have been the victim of a crime of violence, an unprovoked attack or a sexual assault, you may be able to pursue a claim for damages through the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority (CICA). Incidents of police beating up citizens and those in essential services owe their origins to man’s striving for superiority and power, but their anger towards other common people just walking outside demonstrate their superiority,  partly with an attitude towards other nationalities.” While there is no discrimination prevails, sometimes stray incidents disrupts our trust in the law enforcing machinery as exceptions.

Madison: City officials have agreed to pay $ 1.75 million in compensation to Suresh Bhai Patel, an Indian national who was brutally beaten after failing to give an accurate answer when questioned by police, for walking out of his son’s home in the United States.

The incident took place on February 6, 2015. Suresh Bhai had come from India to look after his grandson just 11 days back.. Suresh Bhai, who did not know English, was approached by two policemen and asked why he was roaming outsides. Patel gestured that he did not know English and pointed out that his son’s house was nearby. Police say he then put his hand in his pants pocket, and police misunderstood for grabbing a gun. Patel was immediately grabbed from behind and hit the ground.

Patel, who sustained severe spinal injuries in the fall, had to stay in hospital for days. His son Chirag Patel said he had to spend a lot of money on treatment because he did not have any medical insurance. The son filed a private lawsuit against Madison City and two police officers on February 15, 2015, alleging that his father could never walk again without assistance.

In May, the case was referred to U.S. District Court. The court ruled that Patel, who weighed 139 pounds and was 57 years old, need not have been detained and questioned. The police could not even realize that he was not a threat to the community. Following this, an agreement was reached with the City Attorney. The incident was strongly protested by people of Indian descent, especially the Patel community around the world, commenting that the compensation is too low for beating up an ignorant old man and leaving him paralyzed for the rest of his life.

 

As Violence In Israel-Palestine Escalates, Will Two-State Solution Be Possible?

The current crisis between Israelis and Palestinians in East Jerusalem, between Arabs and Jews in cities inside Israel, and between Israel and Hamasunravelling has its roots in the political dysfunction of both Israel’s party system and the Palestinian national movement’s decayed one-party dictatorship.

The current crisis between Israelis and Palestinians in East Jerusalem, between Arabs and Jews in cities inside Israel, and between Israel and Hamas, is not analogous to any of the previous rounds of violence inflicted on Palestinian and Israeli civilians by their increasingly feckless and bankrupt political leaders. This is not another 2014, or another 2009, or another Second Intifada. It is something new. This is what the death of the two-state solution looks like.

The current unravelling has its roots in the political dysfunction of both Israel’s party system and the Palestinian national movement’s decayed one-party dictatorship. But the precipitating event was the move by Israel’s government, last spring, to include annexation of West Bank territory in its coalition agreement, pending the resolution of the urgent COVID-19 pandemic.

For years, hardliners on both sides of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, often including officials, have sought to erase or at least to blur the Green Line — the line that separated Israel from Jordan and Egypt before June 4, 1967, which is also the line that delineated Israel’s post-1967 occupation of the West Bank and Gaza. Officials erase the line from government and textbook maps, and activists wield slogans like “from the river to the sea,” or “no settlement is illegal.” Against such pressures, from 1993 until last year, stood the commitment of both Israeli and Palestinian leaders to negotiating an end to conflict through territorial compromise. Negotiated territorial compromise, more recently shorthanded as a “two-state solution,” is what extremists on both sides were pushing against with their expansionist policies, maps and slogans. And now, at last, they have succeeded.

The movement of Israeli political leaders in 2020 — with the enthusiastic support of U.S. President Donald Trump — toward ending Israel’s Oslo commitment to negotiating territory and borders pushed the conflict to the edge of a precipice. The prospect of Israeli annexation of West Bank territory was another deep cut into the already tattered legitimacy of the Palestinian leadership in Ramallah, and it began to unravel the intricate web of Israeli-Palestinian security, economic, and regulatory coordination in the West Bank. When annexation was put on hold in August 2020, some of that cooperation resumed. But the official Israeli abandonment of negotiated compromise, alongside continued settlement expansion and the forcible relocation of Palestinian families in East Jerusalem and communities in the West Bank, made a new crisis almost inevitable. It made inescapably obvious what was already clear to many: that the Oslo framework was exhausted, and the rationale for the prevailing order in the West Bank, including the existence of the Palestinian Authority, was defunct.

The 27 years since the Oslo Declaration in 1993, for better or worse, put boundaries around a conflict that had generated major wars in every decade since 1948, along with countless acts of international and cross-border terrorism and assassination. This is not to minimize what outlived Oslo. Those 27 years saw periods of military conflict and terrorist violence that cost thousands of Israeli and Palestinian lives, along with the entrenchment of Hezbollah and Hamas, continuous Israeli expansion of Jewish settlements and the Jewish population in the West Bank, and severe restrictions on the ability of Palestinian residents of the West Bank and Gaza to live lives free of structural violence. The Palestinian Authority, created by the Oslo Accords to hold a sublease on certain responsibilities of the Israeli occupation during the negotiating period, was corrupted by its cooperation with the occupation but also by its graft, infighting, lack of accountability, and increasingly its repression and autocracy.

And still, throughout this period, the vision of a two-state solution, and the commitment of Israeli and Palestinian leaders — backed by the United States — to negotiate that compromise, also established a certain degree of clarity, predictability, and constraint in relations between Israelis and Palestinians. The injustice and violence of occupation, in which about five million people, between the West Bank and Gaza Strip, lack either citizenship or self-determination, are daily features of this reality. And yet, until now we could not begin to understand what boundaries the formal commitment to a negotiated solution put around the behavior of the two communities living cheek-by-jowl in the land both claim as their own.

The different zones of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict evident this past month — in East Jerusalem, in the streets of Israeli cities, in Gaza and in the skies over Israel — reveal just how badly those boundaries in the conflict have been breached. Palestinians in East Jerusalem, in Lod, and in Gaza all hold very different status under Israeli law and policy. But in different ways, all of them are frustrated, even enraged, both at the obstreperous supremacy advanced by ideological Jewish activists against these Palestinians’ rights, freedoms, and interests, and at the callously unequal treatment they receive at the hands of Israeli authorities. And in the wake of the riots and vigilantism in Jerusalem, Lod, Jaffa, Bat Yam and more, it’s also clear that too many Israeli Jews have come to see all of these Palestinians — whether fellow citizens or not — as their enemies.

The bankruptcy of political leadership on both sides is another reason why this crisis is so much worse, and so much more widespread, than previous episodes. Israel has held four elections in two years — and may now be on its way to a fifth, since coalition negotiations have been derailed by the violence and the political posturing around it. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s “anti-solutionism” fuels regular rounds of crisis even as it enables him to retain his hold on power despite his simultaneous trial on corruption charges. And Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas’s hold on power is likewise loosening — infighting within his own party torpedoed his plans for a new election that could have strengthened the legitimacy of his movement and his leadership. Instead, Hamas is able to use its rocket fire on Israeli civilians to usurp the narrative, to claim international attention and engagement, and likely also to win material benefits for itself and for Gaza Palestinians as part of an eventual ceasefire. And Israeli ministers can focus their narrative at home and abroad on defending Israeli civilians from Hamas attacks instead of the shredded fabric of Israeli society and the polarized dysfunction of its politics. This violence, redefined as another Israel-Hamas war, is all upside for the extremists and all downside for the forces of negotiated compromise and peaceful coexistence, both inside Israel and beyond the Green Line.

The latest escalation of violence demonstrates the folly of trying to marginalize this conflict for Israel, for its new Arab friends, and for the Biden-Harris administration. They may all prefer to focus on cooperation in pursuit of what they see as higher priorities. But the current crisis threatens to overturn their fragile consensus, further destabilize a fragile region, and divert the new U.S. administration’s attention from other foreign policy goals. And what we are now seeing, what Israelis and Palestinian civilians are now suffering, was more likely than not this year, as I noted in a Center for a New American Security report I published with Ilan Goldenberg and Michael Koplow in December.

A two-state outcome to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is indeed a distant prospect — but the horrific alternative is now clear. It is time for leaders in Israel, in Palestine, in the region, and around the world to take that lesson to heart, and commit to assiduous efforts to get Israelis and Palestinians back on the long, arduous path toward a negotiated resolution.

(Tamara CofmanWittes is a Senior Fellow – Foreign Policy, Center for Middle East Policy at Brookings Institute)

South Asians for America Launched

South Asians for Biden, a formidable community outreach program has now formally relaunched itself as South Asians for America with a virtual kick-off May 6 evening, featuring several Indian American political activists.

South Asians for Biden, a formidable community outreach program that played a key role in supporting and helping elect Biden-Harris ticket in 2020 has now formally relaunched itself as South Asians for America with a virtual kick-off May 6 evening, featuring several Indian American political activists.

South Asians for America (SAFA) is a national, grassroots organization dedicated to the education, advocacy, engagement, and mobilization of the South Asian Democratic community in the United States at the local, state, and federal levels, by increasing the civic engagement, political participation, and network of South Asians.South Asians for America (SAFA) is an idea that originated with the merger of two organizations, an original SAFA which was primarily an advocacy organization and South Asians for Biden (SAB), a grassroots organization which helped educate, engage and mobilize the South Asian Community to help elect President Biden in the 2020 General Election.

The new organization aims to harness the momentum of its grassroots efforts during the 2020 election, which propelled President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris to the White House, and flipped the Senate with the wins of Democrats Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock in Georgia. SAFA is now aiming to get behind Democratic candidates in the House and Senate who are contesting in the 2022 midterm election.

Neha Dewan, who served as the national director for South Asians for Biden and national co-chair for South Asians for Hillary in 2016, will serve as SAFA’s national director. The organization’s advisory council includes Rep. Ro Khanna, D-California; Virginia state Senator Ghazala Hashmi; Ravi Chaudhury, who served in the Obama/Biden Administration on the President’s Advisory Commission on AAPIs, where he developed strategies for Asian American veterans and their families; and Hayward, California city councilwoman Aisha Wahab.

“One of the most significant trends we’re seeing is more South Asians running for office,” said Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, D-Illinois, at the May 6 event. The congressman first ran for office in 2012, losing spectacularly to Iraq war veteran Tammy Duckworth. In 2016, when Duckworth ran for the Senate, Krishnamoorthi ran for her vacated seat and earned her endorsement.

The new SAFA was launched in early 2021 to build on the momentum and energy of South Asian Democratic Community engagement nationwide during the General Election in 2020 and Georgia Senate Special Election in 2021 in a strategic manner, to increase the political power, networks and capital of South Asians in the United States. SAFA has constituted several areas of focus to work on, leading to the upcoming 2022 elections to the Congress, Senate and State and local bodies:

  1. POLITICAL ENGAGEMENT & ADVOCACY

Provide guidance on navigating local, state and national Democratic Party structures, and facilitate networking with party leadership for grassroots engagement, job opportunities and advocacy

  1. COMMUNITY ORGANIZING TRAINING & CAMPAIGNS

Provide training in community organizing skills (phonebanking, textbanking, canvassing, postcard writing) & mobilize South Asian Democratic Community to engage in national, state, local & issue based campaigns

  1. CANDIDATE RECRUITMENT & TRAINING

Recruit South Asian Democrats interested in running for office at the local, state, and federal levels, and provide training and resources necessary to run a successful campaign

  1. STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIPS

Build strategic partnerships with organizations representing South Asian, AAPI & other communities of color nationwide to promote greater civic engagement & political power

  1. YOUTH EDUCATION & ENGAGEMENT

Build the next generation of leaders from within the South Asian community through mentorship and training, to encourage public service and promote diversity in government

Misinformation Surges Amid India’s COVID-19 Calamity

The man in the WhatsApp video says he has seen it work himself: A few drops of lemon juice in the nose will cure COVID-19. “If you practice what I am about to say with faith, you will be free of corona in five seconds,” says the man, dressed in traditional religious clothing. “This one lemon will protect you from the virus like a vaccine.”

False cures. Terrifying stories of vaccine side effects. Baseless claims that Muslims spread the virus. Fueled by anguish, desperation and distrust of the government, rumors and hoaxes are spreading by word of mouth and on social media in India, compounding the country’s humanitarian crisis.“Widespread panic has led to a plethora of misinformation,” said Rahul Namboori, co-founder of Fact Crescendo, an independent fact-checking organization in India.While treatments such as lemon juice may sound innocuous, such claims can have deadly consequences if they lead people to skip vaccinations or ignore other guidelines.

In January, Prime Minister Narendra Modi declared that India had “saved humanity from a big disaster by containing corona effectively.” Life began to resume, and so did attendance at cricket matches, religious pilgrimages and political rallies for Modi’s Hindu nationalist party.Four months later, cases and deaths have exploded, the country’s vaccine rollout has faltered and public anger and mistrust have grown. “All of the propaganda, misinformation and conspiracy theories that I’ve seen in the past few weeks has been very, very political,” said Sumitra Badrinathan, a University of Pennsylvania political scientist who studies misinformation in India. “Some people are using it to criticize the government, while others are using it to support it.”

Distrust of Western vaccines and health care is also driving misinformation about sham treatments as well as claims about traditional remedies.Satyanarayan Prasad saw the video about lemon juice and believed it. The 51-year-old resident of the state of Uttar Pradesh distrusts modern medicine and has a theory as to why his country’s health experts are urging vaccines.

“If the government approves lemon drops as a remedy, the … rupees that they have spent on vaccines will be wasted,” Prasad said. Vijay Sankeshwar, a prominent businessman and former politician, repeated the claim about lemon juice, saying two drops in the nostrils will increase oxygen levels in the body.While Vitamin C is essential to human health and immunity, there is no evidence that consuming lemons will fight off the coronavirus. The claim is spreading through the Indian diaspora, too.

“They have this thing that if you drink lemon water every day that you’re not going to be affected by the virus,” said Emma Sachdev, a Clinton, New Jersey, resident whose extended family lives in India. Sachdev said several relatives have been infected, yet continue to flout social distancing rules, thinking a visit to the temple will keep them safe.

India has also experienced the same types of misinformation about vaccines and vaccine side effects seen around the world. Last month, the popular Tamil actor Vivek died two days after receiving his COVID-19 vaccination. The hospital where he died said Vivek had advanced heart disease, but his death has been seized on by vaccine opponents as evidence that the government is hiding side effects.

Much of the misinformation travels on WhatsApp, which has more than 400 million users in India. Unlike more open sites like Facebook or Twitter, WhatsApp — which is owned by Facebook — is an encrypted platform that allows users to exchange messages privately.

The bad information online “may have come from an unsuspecting neighbor who is not trying to cause harm,” said Badrinathan, the University of Pennsylvania researcher. “New internet users may not even realize that the information is false. The whole concept of misinformation is new to them.”Hoaxes spread online had deadly results in 2018, when at least 20 people were killed by mobs inflamed by posts about supposed gangs of child kidnappers.

WhatsApp said in a statement that it works hard to limit misleading or dangerous content by working with public health bodies like the World Health Organization and fact-checking organizations. The platform has also added safeguards restricting the spread of chain messages and directing users to accurate online information.

The service is also making it easier for users in India and other nations to use its service to find information about vaccinations.“False claims can discourage people from getting vaccines, seeking the doctor’s help, or taking the virus seriously,” Fact Crescendo’s Namboori said. “The stakes have never been so high.”

Modi Government Accused Of Hampering Relief Efforts By Christian Charities With Mandating More Red Tape

Federation of Indian Christian Association of North America (FIACONA), an advocacy organization working to defend the religious freedom of Christians and other minorities in India accused the Government of India of hampering the efforts of non-governmental agencies (NGOs). The government of India implemented a set of bureaucratic regulations by amending a law called Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA) in the middle of the pandemic. Christian charities and other non-governmental organizations (NGOs) across India are required to have permission under this law to receive any donations from overseas.

The new amendment put in place last September mandates the charities to open a new bank account at a particular New Delhi branch of the State Bank of India before March 31, 2021, regardless of where the charity is located or operating from. Though many charities have managed to open this account in New Delhi, they have run into bottlenecks and red tape. As a result they are unable to receive much needed funds to help the suffering  people in the middle of this pandemic.

“The current stringent FCRA rules that were put in place by the Government are jeopardizing many donor’s plans to provide equipment like oxygen concentrators and other essential supplies from around the world in providing needed help to hospitals especially in rural areas” said Koshy George, President of FIACONA. “Unless the Modi Government shows more flexibility towards charitable donations from abroad by suspending some of these bureaucratic provisions of the FCRA, more lives would be lost as a result” Mr. George cautioned.

These FCRA regulations were put in place for the purpose of monitoring and controlling minority charitable and educational institutions as part of the Hindutva agenda to minimize their appeal and reduce their influence on the society at-large.  The secular NGOs who would not toe the government  line also paid a price.  However, NGOs affiliated with Hindu nationalist groups continue to collect money from unsuspecting donors in Western Countries and channel their funds mostly towards sectarian work without any hindrance from authorities.

FIACONA appeals to the Government to suspend these rules that created the current impediments and submit them later for a panel review to ease the restrictions on a permanent basis so that the needy will not suffer in a future crisis.

U.S. International Religious Freedom Report: India Encouraged to Consult Religious Communities

International Religious Freedom senior official Dan Nadel, speaking at a news conference to announce the annual International Religious Freedom Report at the State Department in Washington, DC, on May 12, 2021, said: “When laws are passed, when initiatives are undertaken that are done without effective consultation with these communities, it creates a sense of disempowerment…the best way to address that is to engage in that direct dialogue between government and civil society, including religious communities.” (Andrew Harnik/POOL/AFP via Getty Images)

A senior State Department official dealing with religious freedom said the U.S. is regularly engaging with Indian officials on protecting the rights of minorities and the government has opportunities to address the concerns of civil society groups.Briefing reporters about the 2020 Report on International Religious Freedom May 12, Daniel Nadel said: “With respect to India, I think there’s genuine opportunities there for the government to address some of the concerns they hear from Indian civil society through greater dialogue and engagement.

“We do regularly engage with Indian government officials at all levels, encouraging them to uphold human rights obligations and commitments, including the protection of minorities, in keeping with India’s long tradition of democratic values and its history of tolerance.”The report said that among the issues discussed with officials were “the Muslim community’s concerns about the CAA (Citizenship Amendment Act), difficulties faced by faith-based (religious) NGOs in the wake of amendments to the FCRA (Foreign Contributions Regulation Act), and allegations that Muslims spread Covid-19.”

Nadel, the senior official in the State Department’s Office of International Religious Freedom, said that the U.S. encourages the Indian government to consult “religious communities, these outside actors” on passing laws to avoid alienating them.”When laws are passed, when initiatives are undertaken that are done without effective consultation with these communities, it creates a sense of disempowerment; at times, of alienation. And the best way to address that is to engage in that direct dialogue between government and civil society, including religious communities.”

The annual report, which is mandated by Congress, did not grade India nor deliver an overall verdict on the state of religious freedom in the country.It listed incidents involving attacks on minorities taken from reports by the media and religious and civil society groups, and legislative actions.

Releasing the report, Secretary of State Antony Blinken said: “Our promise to the world is that the Biden-Harris administration will protect and defend religious freedom around the world. We will maintain America’s longstanding leadership on this issue.”He acknowledged that “anti-Muslim hatred is still widespread in many countries, and this, too, is a serious problem for the U.S.”

Among the incidents it lists were the protests in February 2020 against the CAA, which it said “became violent in New Delhi after counter-protesters attacked demonstrators. According to reports, religiously motivated attacks resulted in the deaths of 53 persons, most of whom were Muslim, and two security officials.”Another incident it mentions is the Islamic TablighiJamaat organization’s conference last year in New Delhi, which the report said the government and media initially blamed for some of the spread of the novel coronavirus.

But the report also said that “in an online address to the nation on April 26, Mohan Bhagwat, the leader of the RSS, called on Indians not to discriminate against anyone in the fight against Covid-19. In a reference to the March TablighiJamaat conference, he asked people not to target members of a ‘particular community’ (i.e., Muslims) ‘just because of the actions of a few’.”Some of the incidents listed in the report relate to actions taken against Muslim and Christian groups over alleged violation of Covid regulations in holding religious services.

However, the report also listed the deaths of two Christians, P. Jayaraj and his son Bennicks, in police custody after they were arrested for allegedly keeping their shop open in violation of a curfew as if those were religious violence.The report mentions two cases of Hindu women being killed for refusing to convert to Islam and of Christian women “forcibly” converted.It noted Amnesty International India ending operations in the country “after the government froze its bank accounts in response to a FCRA investigation that the NGO says was motivated by its critical reporting against the government.”

Chicago Indian Community Stands in Solidarity with Israel

Hundreds of Hindu Americans stood in solidarity with the Jewish community, showing their steadfast support to Israel against the Hamas terror attack during an event jointly organized by: Stand with Israel and US India Friendship Council on May 17th.

A peaceful vigil led Dr. Bharat Barai, Peggy Shapiro, Amitabh Mittal, VandanaJhingan and other community leaders, brought together people from both the Hindu and Jewish American diaspora who condemned the attacks by Hamas targeting residential areas in Israel and united in one voice to demand peace in the region.
A Similar kind of interfaith peaceful vigil was organized in the Northbrook suburbs of Chicago a few days ago. Jews community leaders have thanked Hindu Americans for not only understanding but also coming out in large numbers to support Israel at a time when many countries and media houses are attacking it for defending its right to protect its citizens.

Hindu American community leader Dr. Barai addressed the gathering and said that they are here today to stand with the people of Israel who are targeted by constant rocket attacks from Gaza. He also said that Hamas terrorists have not only destroyed houses and killed innocent civilians in the state of Israel but are also terrorizing people of Gaza. After decades of experiencing wars, people of Israel and Gaza deserve to live in peace, and Dr. Barai expressed the solid commitment of the Hindu community to continue supporting Israel and the demand for peace in the region through this difficult situation.

Jew community leader Peggy Shapiro came out with her friends to join the vigil. In her address, she said that she is speechless and grateful to see support for the wonderful Indian and Hindu community in Israel. She said people might be shouting about hate but we are singing together for love and peace and our message of peace needs to prevail if we want the world to survive. She called Hindu and Indian community members their brothers and sisters and at the time when Israel and Jew’s people feel alone, she felt great support in knowing that we stand together.

Hindu community leader VandanaJhingan said that Indian and Israel share great friendship and that is the reason Hindu American community came out in large numbers to show their support to Israel, as this is what true friends do.Amitabh VW Mittal a board member of US India Friendship council and Gen Secretary of Vishwa Hindu Parishad, stated: If we in the world are all against terrorism and spread of it, we need to stand with Israel while its been attacked and has all right to defend its citizens from attacks by the Terrorist organization Hamas, who cowardly uses civilians as shield.

The peaceful vigil was later joined by Ms Ariella Rada, Consul for Economic and Community Affairs of the Israel consulate who thanked everyone who participated in the vigil and also updated them about the ground situation. She said that at the time when all the heat and hate is against Israel, it is heartwarming to see so many people gathered in support and that the world needs to know that Hamas is the reason for this crisis and Israel is just trying to protect its citizens.

Links:
Ms Ariella Rada speaking
https://drive.google.com/file/d/165IGscrkWi1Op3WvMVd2Oj89l5R7FpxT/view

DrBarai and Peggie Shapiro
https://www.facebook.com/vjhingan/videos/1983299678511762

Modi Govt Holds Up Funds From US To Indian NGOs As Covid Rages

Many Indian-American community and charity organizations in the United States say they are not able to send funds to NGO partners in India thanks to a newly amended law even as that country gasps from a tsunami of a second wave of the coronavirus pandemic.Many US-based non-profits said the Narendra Modi government’s action in regulating of foreign funds was arbitrary.The NGO members and have also pointed to the alleged slow processing of paperwork by State Bank of India (SBI), and are asking the Indian government to revise the deadline so that they can help the country in its time of acute need.

On September 28, 2020, the Indian government amended its Foreign Contribution Regulation Act or FCRA, which regulates the steps that India-based nonprofits must follow in order to receive foreign funding, including from US-based foundations and corporations.“Two important things changed with the amendments,” AtulSatija, CEO, GiveIndia, which has been working on the ground in India, explained to indica News.

“Firstly, every NGO in the country had to set up an FCRA designated account at the main branch of State Bank of India in New Delhi to receive all foreign donations. Earlier, donations could be received in any bank where the NGO had a designated FCRA account.

“Second,” Satija added, “NGOs now cannot sub grant their foreign contributions to another NGO even if they have FCRA registrations as was the case earlier. This has been a blow for many NGOs who have been working collaboratively on various programs and projects. However, FCRA donations can be spent on the ground — which is what we are doing for our Covid relief work, including making direct cash transfer to low-income families of the Covid deceased, often an earning member.”

Under the amended FCRA, all nonprofits must create and solely use a new account with the State Bank of India in New Delhi. Once the account gets opened, the bank then reports the contribution and its intended use to the federal government.The Indian government gave until March 31, 2021 for charitable groups to set up this account. It said that the NGOs can continue to use existing FCRA accounts until the transition date.However, many nonprofits in the US said that funds have not gone to recipients in India.

For example, AbhayBhushan one of the pioneers in terms of the Indian-American nonprofit sector, who helms Indians for Collective Action (ICA), told indica News that money he has sent to India has been returned, not once but several times.He said that the ICA has partnered with 50 NGOs in India and 20 percent of those who applied have got the new accounts and some are just getting it. “Due to covid the processing has gone slow,” Bhushan said.

He said an application takes months to process and government officials were nixing FCRA applications for the slightest of errors in the application.“So the government of India, for whatever reason, is putting a lot of stoppages [in the path of foreign aid],” he said.

“I don’t know why,” Bhushan added. “I understand they want to have control. Now through this, they can see they have clear visibility.”Dr Thomas Abraham, chairman of the Global organization of People of Indian Origin (GOPIO), shared similar views.“The [Indian] government has been making arbitrary decision on giving permission to non-profits in India under FCRA rules without properly looking at the merit of organizations applying for the same, or even delaying the permission to genuine groups which have been active in the field,” Abraham told indica News.

“GOPIO chapters in India are yet to get the permission FCRA,” he said. “For example, it is going to be more than two years since GOPIO-Kochi, a duly registered nonprofit organization, applied to receive funds from outside, especially from GOPIO International which collected funds for the 2018 Kerala flood relief. The chapter’s application is still pending and we have not been able to send the money collected to our chapter yet.

“Now,” Abraham continued, “a large number of nonprofit community organizations are raising funds for India, including to to send oxygen concentrators which are badly needed all over India. The government must immediately remove all hurdles to get this medical equipment and supplies to the hospitals which need them urgently.”

DrTulika Narayan, a development economist who has been associated with the non-profit Association for India’s Development (AID) in Washington DC, told indica News that some NGOs are still waiting for the FCRA account approval letter either from the SBI or the ministry of home affairs.

“All the work has stalled and we are trying our best to help,” said Narayan. “We are sending medical equipment but imagine right now in the time of need is exactly when we are not able to help.She said that the grassroots NGOs that have good connections in the community and those working on issues of public health in remote areas, urban slums, etc, could play a very powerful role in stemming the spread of the pandemic.

“In fact, many of them are already doing it. But without support, the efforts might begin to fade. Also to support people who are moderately ill or help severely ill people to get to the hospitals, NGOs can play a significant role,” she pointed out.

Asked what she wanted the Indian government should do, Narayan said: “Authorize all NGOs which have FCRA clearance to use their earlier FCRA bank accounts to receive new funds from grants… Our request is to the government is only that you extend the deadline by six months.”Shaheer Khan, who is on the board of directors of the Aligarh Muslim University Alumni Association of Northern California, echoed Narayan.

“I request the government to extend the deadline for six months and facilitate the flow of humanitarian aid, whether funds or medical supplies,” Khan told indica News.The Modi government has earlier severely curtailed the functioning of many international charity organizations, including Amnesty International, in India — mostly by choking them of funds.

(Courtesy: IndicaNews)

Modi’s Actions In Attempting To Stifle Criticism During Crisis Inexcusable

At times, Prime Minister Narendra Modis government has seemed more intent on removing criticism on Twitter than trying to control the Covid-19 pandemic, medical journal The Lancet has said in an editorial. “Modi’s actions in attempting to stifle criticism and open discussion during the crisis are inexcusable,” Lancet said.

The editorial published in the world’s most renowned medical journal said the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME) estimates that India will see a staggering 1 million deaths from Covid-19 by August 1.“If that outcome was to happen, Modi’s government would be responsible for presiding over a self-inflicted national catastrophe,” Lancet said in a scathing criticism of the government.

Lancet said India squandered its early successes in controlling Covid-19. Until April, the government’s Covid-19 taskforce had not met in months, it said.“The consequences of that decision are clear before us, and India must now restructure its response while the crisis rages. The success of that effort will depend on the government owning up to its mistakes, providing responsible leadership and transparency, and implementing a public health response that has science at its heart,” Lancet said.

In the suggested course of action, Lancet said India must reduce SARS-CoV-2 transmission as much as possible while the vaccine is rolled out.“As cases continue to mount, the government must publish accurate data in a timely manner, and forthrightly explain to the public what is happening and what is needed to bend the epidemic curve, including the possibility of a new federal lockdown,” it said.

Genome sequencing needs to be expanded to better track, understand and control emerging and more transmissible SARS-CoV-2 variants, it said.“Local governments have begun taking disease containment measures, but the federal government has an essential role in explaining to the public the necessity of masking, social distancing, halting mass gatherings, voluntary quarantine, and testing,” it added.

Lancet said the botched vaccination campaign must be rationalised and implemented with all due speed. There are two immediate bottlenecks to overcome: increasing vaccine supply (some of which should come from abroad) and setting up a distribution campaign that can cover not just urban but also rural and poorer citizens, who constitute more than 65 per cent of the population (over 800 million people) but face a desperate scarcity of public health and primary care facilities, the editorial said.

The government must work with local and primary healthcare centres that know their communities and create an equitable distribution system for the vaccine, it added.Lancet said the scenes of suffering in India are hard to comprehend. As of May 4, more than 20.2 million cases of Covid-19 had been reported, with a rolling average of 3,78,000 cases a day, together with more than 2,22,000 deaths, which experts believe are likely to be substantial underestimated, Lancet said.

Hospitals are overwhelmed, and health workers are exhausted and becoming infected. Social media is full of desperate people (doctors and the public) seeking medical oxygen, hospital beds, and other necessities, it said.Lancet said that yet before the second wave of cases of Covid-19 began to mount in early March, Minister of Health Harsh Vardhan declared that India was in the “endgame” of the epidemic.

The impression from the government was that India had beaten Covid-19 after several months of low case counts, despite repeated warnings of the dangers of a second wave and the emergence of a new strain, it added.“Despite warnings about the risks of superspreader events, the government allowed religious festivals to go ahead, drawing millions of people from around the country, along with huge political rallies —conspicuous for their lack of Covid-19 mitigation measures,” the editorial said.

The message that Covid-19 was essentially over also slowed the start of India’s Covid-19 vaccination campaign, which has vaccinated less than 2 per cent of the population, it said.

“At the federal level, India’s vaccination plan soon fell apart. The government abruptly shifted course without discussing the change in policy with states, expanding vaccination to everyone older than 18 years, draining supplies, and creating mass confusion and a market for vaccine doses in which states and hospital systems competed,” it added.

The crisis has not been equally distributed, with states such as Uttar Pradesh and Maharashtra unprepared for the sudden spike in cases, quickly running out of medical oxygen, hospital space, and overwhelming the capacity of cremation sites, and with some state governments threatening those asking for oxygen or a hospital bed with national security laws, Lancet said.

Others, such as Kerala and Odisha, were better prepared, and have been able to produce enough medical oxygen in this second wave to export it to other states, it said. (IANS)

After Ouster, Liz Cheney Says She Will “Lead The Fight”

Republican Party leader Liz Cheney says she will “lead the fight” for a Republican party based on conservatism after being removed from the party’s leadership. Wyoming congresswoman Liz Cheney remained defiant after being ousted from her post as the No 3 House Republican on Wednesday for her criticism of Donald Trump.

She said America needed a Republican party “based upon fundamental principles of conservatism” and vowed: “I plan to lead the fight to do that.” Her removal was widely expected after she refused to stop blaming the former president for inciting the 6 January attack on the US Capitol.

Before the vote, seen as a bellwether for the future of the Republican party, she addressed the caucus and was even booed by some of her colleagues. “If you want leaders who will enable and spread his destructive lies, I’m not your person,” she said.The battle to unseat Republican congresswoman Elizabeth Cheney from her leadership position in the party was a dispute that went far beyond simple jockeying for power by politicians.

It was widely seen as a litmus test for the direction of the Republican party as it grapples with the enduring power of Donald Trump, the former president who remains hugely popular with its base and thus a force to be reckoned with by party leaders.Cheney had emerged as a vocal critic of Trump, especially since the attack on the Capitol on 6 January by Trump supporters. But her price for her outspokenness was being ousted from party leadership – and may still cost her her congressional seat to a Republican challenger.

Who is Liz Cheney?

Cheney is a congresswoman from Wyoming and a staunch conservative who is also the daughter of the former vice-president Dick Cheney – a man who previously occupied the position of “liberal hate figure” before Trump appeared. She is also one of the most senior women in a party with few in top positions.

Why did the party oust her?

Cheney has angered Trump, and by extension his base and other Trump-supporting politicians, by slamming the former president for the attack on the Capitol on 6 January. She also been critical of Trump’s propagating of false claims that the 2020 election that Joe Biden won was somehow carried out fraudulently. After her ouster she said she would dedicate herself to ensuring Trump never returns to the Oval Office.

So what happened?

Congressional Republicans held a secret ballot to vote Cheney out from her leadership position in the House of Representatives, saying she is out of touch with the grassroots of the party. She is also being challenged in her Wyoming congressional seat.

What does it mean?

Bluntly, Cheney should have been untouchable on paper. She’s a high-profile woman in a party that desperately needs them. She’s a true conservative and daughter of a powerful party elder. On policy, she is widely seen as more conservative than the woman many now tip to succeed her, the New York congresswoman Elise Stefanik.

But in the post-Trump Republican party none of that mattered. Policy and networking fell prey to one thing: a Trump loyalty test. And with her outspoken criticism of the former president, Cheney failed that exam spectacularly.

What next?

The few other prominent anti-Trump voices will see Cheney’s ouster as a chastening moment that will keep their already weak movement even more in the background of Republican politics. It sends a message that to thrive in the next few years in the current incarnation of the party, loyalty to Trump is the be all and end all as the US looks to the 2022 midterm elections and the 2024 presidential contest.

US Casts 45 Vetoes – And Counting—While Protecting AClient State

UNITED NATIONS, May 14 2021 (IPS) – The UN Security Council (UNSC), the most powerful political body at the United Nations, has largely remained silent or ineffective in resolving one of the longstanding military conflicts in the Middle East involving Israelis and Palestinians.

But, at the same time, several attempts to condemn Israel for its excesses have been thwarted by successive US administrations, which have exercised the veto power in the Security Council to protect a client state whose survival has depended largely on billions of dollars in US economic and military aid, state-of-the-art weapons systems and outright military grants doled out gratis.

Stephen Zunes, professor of Politics and chair of Middle Eastern Studies at the University of San Francisco and who has written extensively on the politics of the Security Council, told IPS the US has vetoed no less than 45 resolutions critical of Israel, “thereby rendering the Security Council effectively impotent”.

Asked if any other UN member state has been protected by so many vetoes, he said: “Not even close”.
In January 2017, he pointed out, an overwhelming bipartisan majority in Congress passed a resolution opposing United Nations involvement on the question of Israel and Palestine, insisting all matters should be resolved only through direct talks between the Palestinians and their Israeli occupiers, a position which thus far appears to being upheld by the administration of President Joe Biden.

Still, said Dr Zunes, it is unlikely the Biden administration will allow any resolution to pass that is critical of Israeli attacks in East Jerusalem or Gaza, even if balanced by criticism of Palestinian actions, since in the view of Washington, every military action by Israel is by definition “self-defense.”

Early this week, a State Department spokesperson defended the Israeli air strikes in a crowded urban area in the Gaza Strip on the grounds that every state has a right to self-defense.However, when pressed, he was unwilling to acknowledge–even theoretically–that Palestinians also have a right to self-defense, said Dr Zunes, a columnist and senior analyst at Foreign Policy in Focus.

As US Presidents go, Biden was no exception when he told reporters early this week that his expectation was that tensions would be “closing down sooner rather than later” but pointed out that “Israel has a right to defend itself, when you have thousands of rockets flying into your territory.”
But he ignored the lethal Israeli airstrikes with US-supplied fighter planes that have so far killed 67 Palestinians, including women and children, while turning houses and buildings into rubble, including a 12-storeyed office building.

In the US, the Israeli lobby has remained so powerful that few Americans politicians dare challenge the Jewish state or its violations of Security Council resolutions.Pat Buchanan, a senior advisor to three US Presidents and twice candidate for the Republican presidential nomination, once infamously described the United States Congress as “Israeli-occupied territory” -– apparently because of its unrelentingly blind support for Israel.

Meanwhile, according to Cable News Network (CNN), riots and violent clashes between Arab and Jewish citizens have swept through several Israeli cities after days of deadly airstrikes and rocket attacks.“Militants in Gaza have fired more than 1,000 rockets into Israel since the latest round of violence began Monday afternoon, and Israel has responded with devastating airstrikes in Gaza.”

At the same time, residents have reacted with fury, and there have been reports of attacks and raids at places of worship, said CNN.Dr. Simon Adams, Executive Director of the Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect (R2P), told IPS the situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territories has been justify to fester and rot for a generation.
In the past, he said, the United States routinely used its veto to provide political cover for Israel, making the UN Security Council irrelevant.

“The new Biden administration should make it clear that the US will no longer provide diplomatic excuses for Israel’s violations of international law, its collective punishment of civilian populations or its apartheid-like policies,” he said.“Otherwise, the UN Security Council will be justify on the sidelines watching as yet another senseless war kills both Israeli and Palestinian civilians,” declared Dr Adams, a former member of the international anti-apartheid movement and of the African National Congress in South Africa.

Zunes said since the United Nations and virtually the entire international community recognizes East Jerusalem as territory under foreign belligerent occupation, responding to the escalating violence is very much within the purview of the Security Council.

Since 1993, however, the United States has blocked—either by a veto threat or an outright veto—every UN Security Council resolution which has included criticisms of Israeli actions in Jerusalem in its operational clause.
It was under the Clinton administration when the United States began to informally recognize occupied East Jerusalem as part of Israel and blocking UN Security Council resolutions that confirmed greater East Jerusalem as occupied territory.

Meanwhile, an “Atrocity Alert” issued by the Global Center for the Responsibility to Protec, said Israel has controlled East Jerusalem since the 1967 war, but Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention prohibits an occupying power from transferring parts of its civilian population into occupied territory.

JahaanPittalwala, Research Analyst at the Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect, said that, “forced evictions of Palestinian families from East Jerusalem are rooted in the Israeli government’s apartheid policies. The illegal transfer of Israeli settlers into occupied territory may amount to a war crime.”

With tensions already high in Jerusalem, last Friday, 7 May, Israeli security forces stormed the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound as tens of thousands of worshippers finished their prayers during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan. Israeli authorities fired rubber bullets and stun grenades at Palestinian protesters who were throwing rocks.The situation escalated further when Israeli forces carried out another raid on the Al-Aqsa Mosque, one of the holiest sites in Islam. According to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, more than 1,000 Palestinians were wounded between 7-10 May. At least 17 Israeli police were also injured.

On 11 May two UN Special Rapporteurs issued a joint statement asserting that, “the recent scenes of Israeli police and security forces attacking large crowds of Palestinian residents and worshipers is only intensifying a deeply inflammatory atmosphere in the City. A militarized response to civilian protests against discriminatory practices only deepens social divisions.”

(ThalifDeen is the author of a newly-released book on the United Nations titled “No Comment – and Don’t Quote Me on That.” Published by Amazon, the book is mostly a satire peppered with scores of anecdotes– from the sublime to the hilarious. The link to Amazon via the author’s website follows: https://www.rodericgrigson.com/no-comment-by-thalif-deen/)

Kamala Harris Describes India’s Covid Situation As Heartbreaking

“The surge of Covid-19 infections and deaths in India is nothing short of heartbreaking. To those of you who have lost loved ones, I send my deepest condolences,” Vice President Kamala Harris Says

In an address to the Indian diaspora in the US, Vice President Kamala Harris lamented over the deteriorating Covidd-19 situation India, saying it was “nothing short of heartbreaking”.

“Generations of my family come from India. My mother (Shyamala Gopalan) was born and raised in India. And I have family members who live in India today. The welfare of India is critically important to the US,” Harris said in her pre-recorded message played at a diaspora event hosted by the State Department’s Bureau of South and Central Asian Affairs (SCA) on Friday.

“The surge of Covid-19 infections and deaths in India is nothing short of heartbreaking. To those of you who have lost loved ones, I send my deepest condolences. As soon as the dire nature of the situation became apparent, our administration took action.

“On Monday, April 26, President Joe Biden spoke with the Prime Minister (Narendra Modi) to offer our support. By Friday, April 30, US military members and civilians were delivering relief on the ground.

“Already, we have delivered refillable oxygen cylinders, with more to come. We have delivered oxygen concentrators, with more to come. We have delivered N95 masks, and have more ready to send. We have delivered doses of Remdesivir to treat Covid patients.

“At the beginning of the pandemic, when our hospital beds were stretched, India sent assistance. And today, we are determined to help India in its hour of need.

“We do this as friends of India, as members of the Asian Quad, and as part of the global community. I believe that if we continue to work together, across nations and sectors, we will all get through this,” the Vice President added.

In her address, she also acknowledged diaspora groups like Indiaspora and the American India Foundation that “have built bridges between the US and India”.

“And this past year, you have provided vital contributions to Covid-19 relief efforts.”

Harris’ remarks come as India is battling the devastating second wave of the pandemic that have triggered record number of new Covid-19 cases and deaths, leading to a shortage in oxygen supplies across the country, including in the national capital of New Delhi.

On Sunday, India reported 4,03,738 new cases, which took the overall tally to 2,22,96,414, the second highest in the world after the US.

Meanwhile, the country’s death toll, currently the third largest after the us and Brazil, increased to 2,42,362.

Sunday’s figure is the fifth highest since India crossed the four-lakh-mark of new Covid cases, while over 3,000 casualties have been reported for the last 11 days. (IANS)

Sadiq Khan Re-elected As Mayor Of London

Sadiq Khan has been re-elected as Mayor of London for a second term after beating his closest rival with a vote share of 55.2 per cent versus 44.8 per cent in an election that was closer than expected.

Labor Party candidate Khan, 51, defeated his Conservative Party rival, Shaun Bailey, after winning a total of 1,206,034 votes as against 977,601 when both first and second preference votes from Thursday’s mayoral election were fully counted overnight on Saturday.

The Pakistani-origin former Labor member of Parliament was the first Muslim mayor of a European capital city when he was first elected in 2016. The mayoral poll was due last year but was postponed by a year at the peak of the coronavirus pandemic in 2020.

“I am deeply humbled by the trust Londoners have placed in me to continue leading the greatest city on earth,” said Khan. “I promise to strain every sinew, help build a better and brighter future for London, after the dark days of the pandemic and to create a greener, fairer and safer city for all Londoners, to get the opportunities they need to fulfil their potential. I am proud to have won an overwhelming mandate today,” he said, speaking at his City Hall office.

“The results of the elections around the UK shows our country, and even our city, remains deeply divided. The scars of Brexit have yet to heal. A crude culture war is pushing us further apart,” he added.

“Economic inequality is getting worse both within London and in different parts of our country. “As we seek to confront the enormity of the challenge ahead, and as we endeavour to rebuild from this pandemic, we must use this moment of national recovery to heal those damaging divisions,” Khan, also the first Muslim mayor of an European capital city, added.

Labor continues its dominance in the capital, remaining the largest party on the London Assembly. Labor took nine constituency seats, with the Conservatives winning the remaining five.

His victory is one of the few positives for the Labour Party as the party held on to its dominance in the London Assembly as well. Labour also kept hold of its mayoralty in Greater Manchester, where Andy Burnham was re-elected in a landslide win.

However, overall the local election performance has been largely dismal for the Opposition party as it lost many of its strongholds. The Conservatives have gained control of around 12 councils and the Labour has lost control of seven and the Labour failed in its attempt to oust Conservative Andy Street as the popular mayor of the West Midlands.

UK Environment Secretary George Eustice said the Labour had been punished in Leave-voting areas by “wrangling” over Brexit in recent years. The Boris Johnson led Conservatives are also seen to have benefitted from the successful roll-out of vaccines against COVID-19.

WHO Hails ‘Monumental Moment’ as US Backs Patent Waiver

President joe Biden has supported the waiver proposal, drafted by India and South Africa, winning praise from the World Health Organization which called it “a monumental moment.”

It seems patently obvious. But for the first time U.S. President Joe Biden has said he supports lifting intellectual property rights on coronavirus vaccines in order to increase production and make them more accessible to developing nations. Biden  threw his backing behind the waiver proposal, drafted by India and South Africa, winning praise from the World Health Organization which called it “a monumental moment.” However, the drug industry is not happy, with shares in BioNTech, Moderna and Novavax down after the news broke. The E.U. is now set to hold talks on whether to follow America’s lead.

The Biden administration announced last week it will support waiver of intellectual property protection on Covid-19 vaccines to help end the global coronavirus pandemic, citing “extraordinary times and circumstances call for extraordinary measures”.

US Trade Representative Katherine Tai made the announcement after pressure from developing countries and liberal and progressive lawmakers in the US while disclosing that Washington will actively participate in WTO negotiations to make that happen.

India and South Africa were among the lead countries that had campaigned for the IP waiver. More than 100 US lawmakers had written to President Biden supporting the demand even though an equal number, many bankrolled by the pharma lobby, had opposed it.

“As our vaccine supply for the American people is secured, the Administration will continue to ramp up its efforts – working with the private sector and all possible partners – to expand vaccine manufacturing and distribution. It will also work to increase the raw materials needed to produce those vaccines,” Tai said in a statement.

The Biden administration’s backing for talks on Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) flexibility for vaccines at WTO has prodded others such as the European Union, a key opponent, out of its waiver hesitancy, but trade negotiators are treading with caution.

“The EU is also ready to discuss any proposal that addresses the crisis in an effective and pragmatic manner,” European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen said Thursday. “And that’s why we are ready to discuss how the US proposal for waiver on intellectual property protection for covered vaccines could help achieve that objective,” she told an online conference, weeks after the trading bloc had told WTO members that this was a no-go area.

The Indian government appeared pleased with the progress after months of deadlock. “We welcome the US government supporting this initiative and joining 120 other countries working towards affordable Covid-19 vaccines,” commerce and industry minister Piyush Goyal said on Twitter.

For now, Indian negotiators are keeping their fingers crossed, waiting to see how the other traditional naysayers – Switzerland, the UK, Japan, Canada and Brazil – react, and acknowledge that the statements from the US and the EU only signal a start of some tough negotiations in Geneva over the coming weeks.

Significantly, the dilution of US’ traditional resistance, following intense pressure from civil society, was limited to talks on vaccines, while India and South Africa’s joint proposal at WTO had sought to extend the flexibility to Covid-19 related medicines as well.

The Joe Biden administration’s about-turn to endorse patent waiver for Covid-19 vaccine during the pandemic has put the European Union in the dock, just days ahead of a meeting with India.

  • India and South Africa had been pushing for a waiver of the intellectual property rights of Covid-19 vaccines at the World Trade Organization so that other vaccine makers can make the jabs developed in the West.
  • Biden administration on Wednesday endorsed the patent waiver, a significant departure from its earlier stand.
  • But a WTO-level waiver, under the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property (TRIPS) agreement, needs a consensus by all 164 members — and could take months.

The European Union is now under pressure to shed its opposition to a waiver.

  • There aredifferences within the EU. France’s Emmanuel Macron said he was “absolutely in favour” of a waiver and a transfer of technology. Italy, Belgium, and some members of the European parliament, too, have backed the idea.
  • European commission president Ursula von der Leyen Thursday said the bloc is “ready to discuss” the proposal.
  • But the EU is not alone. A waiver is also opposed by the UK, Switzerland, and Canada. Australia is non-committal.
  • The 27 national leaders of the EU are to hold a virtual summit with Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Saturday to discuss a long-delayed free trade agreementand more.

Even as India pushes for a waiver at WTO, the central government hasn’t enforced compulsory sharing of license on Bharat Biotech’s Covaxin, which was co-developed by public-funded ICMR and NIV.

“We’re Helping India Significantly,” President Biden Says

President Joe Biden has said that the US was “doing a lot for India” by sending it oxygen and materials to make anti-COVID-19 vaccines. He said last week that he had spoken to Prime Minister Narendra Modi and “what he needs most is, he needs the material and the parts to be able to have his machines that can make the vaccine work. We’re sending them that.

“We’re sending them a lot of the precursors,” he added, referring to the ingredients needed for making the vaccines. He said the US was also sending oxygen, which is in short supply in the nation in the throes of a COVID-19 resurgence. “We’re helping India significantly,” he said.

Secretary of State Anthony Blinken has acknowledged assistance last year from India when the US was facing its deep crisis while speaking of the aid the US is now sending it. “India came to our assistance early on in our hour of need when we were having real struggles with COVID-19, providing millions and millions, for example, of protective masks. We remember that, and we’re determined to do everything we can to help now,” he told the Financial Express according to the interview transcript provided by the State Department.

He said, “What I’ve seen really is an amazing mobilisation not just of the United States government, but of our private sector, and of Indian Americans as well. I was on a call a week ago with virtually every leading CEO — it was a who’s who — all wanting to help. And the government, our government, is coordinating those efforts. So we are doing everything we can.”

Biden’s Spokesperson Jen Psaki, who gave a rundown of the assistance to India, said that the US government was sending ingredients for making 20 million doses AstraZeneca (Covishield) vaccine from supplies that it had ordered.

These were ingredients had been ordered on a priority basis by invoking the Defence Production Act to supply to companies under contract to make vaccines for it.

The US is unlikely to need the 300 million doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine that it had contracted because it has adequate supplies of the Moderna, Pfizer and Johnson & Johnson vaccines. She said that the total value of the COVID-19 aid will exceed $100 million.

Psaki said that six air shipments funded by the US Agency for International Development (USAID) with oxygen and oxygen supplies, N95 masks, rapid diagnostic tests, medicines and components requested by the Indian government have already been sent.

“At the request of the government of India, USAID provided these urgently needed supplies to the Indian Red Cross to ensure they reach those most in need as quickly as possible,” she said.

India is in dire need of oxygen and USAID sent about 1,500 oxygen cylinders that will remain in India and can repeatedly be refilled locally, 550 concentrators to obtain oxygen from ambient air and a large-scale unit to support up to 20 patients, she said.

She said that 2.5 million N95 masks have been sent and an additional 12.5 million are available if the Indian government asked for them, she said. One million rapid diagnostic tests and 20,000 treatment courses of the anti-viral dug Remdesivir have also been sent, she said.

White House officials said Sunday, May 2, 2021, that they are doing all they can to help India cope with the country’s escalating coronavirus crisis, pushing back against criticism that the United States should be moving faster on actions such as waiving patent rights on vaccines.

In interviews on several political shows Sunday, Biden administration officials emphasized the aid the U.S. has already delivered to its South Asian ally, including the first planeloads of medical supplies and supplemental oxygen to the country on Friday. The United States has also diverted raw materials for vaccines to India.

“In a crisis of this speed and ferocity, we always wish we could move faster and do more. And we’re proud of what we’ve done so far,” national security adviser Jake Sullivan said on ABC’s “This Week.” “We are continuing to work to source additional critical materials to move them as fast as we can, both directly from the United States and also galvanizing partners around the world.”

A recent surge in coronavirus cases has sent the pandemic spiraling anew in India, which reported more than 400,000 new coronavirus cases Saturday, a new global record. People being treated for covid-19, the illness that can be caused by the novel coronavirus, have overwhelmed hospitals there, while images of mass cremations and funeral pyres burning overnight have spread worldwide.

“We are concerned about variants. We’re concerned about spread,” Sullivan said. “We’re concerned about the loss of life, and also all of the secondary effects that emerge as this pandemic rages out of control in India.”

On Monday, April 26, 2021, President Joe Biden spoke with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and pledged to provide supplemental oxygen, personal protective equipment and other medical supplies to the country.

Modi and other world officials have called on the United States to go a step further and waive vaccine patent protections, saying that would let other countries and companies speed up production of generics and expedite the vaccination effort worldwide.

“If a temporary waiver to patents cannot be issued now, during these unprecedented times, when will be the right time?” Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the director general of the World Health Organization, tweeted in March. “Solidarity is the only way out.”

The administration has also vowed to share up to 60 million doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine with other countries, prompted in large part by the crisis in India. Officials made that announcement several days ago, adding assurances here that the United States does not need the AstraZeneca vaccine to continue inoculating the U.S. population.

Anita Dunn, a senior adviser to Biden, said that the 60 million AstraZeneca doses the U.S. has promised to other countries have been ordered but that not all have been produced. The AstraZeneca vaccine is undergoing a safety review by the Food and Drug Administration.

“To be clear, there isn’t some huge warehouse filled with AstraZeneca vaccines that we can just release at a moment’s notice,” Dunn said on CNN’s “State of the Union.” “As soon as it is ready to be shared with the world, we plan to share it.”

White House Chief of Staff Ron Klain said on CBS’s “Face the Nation” that despite the calls by Modi and others, vaccine patents were only part of the problem, and that manufacturing limits would still hinder production.

“India has its own vaccine, the Covishield vaccine,” Klain said. “Production is slow there because they don’t have the scarce raw materials to make that. We sent enough raw materials to make 20 million doses immediately. Intellectual property rights is part of the problem, but manufacturing is the biggest problem.”

Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” that the United States had an obligation to share vaccines with the rest of the world faster, particularly in poorer countries. “Not only do we have a moral responsibility to help the rest of the world, it’s in our own self-interest, because if this pandemic continues to spread in other countries, it’s going to come back and bite us at one point or another,” Sanders said.

Sanders and other Democratic senators last month sent a letter to Biden, urging him to support a temporary patent waiver for coronavirus vaccines, one of several efforts to advocate what some have taken to calling “vaccine diplomacy.” China and Russia, some critics note, have been aggressive about distributing their vaccines to developing countries, a move that could help them earn goodwill.

A temporary patent waiver would let the Biden administration not only “reverse the damage done by the Trump administration” to U.S. reputation but bring the global pandemic to an end more quickly, the senators wrote.

“What we have got to say right now to the drug companies, when millions of lives are at stake around the world, is, ‘Yes, allow other countries to have these intellectual property rights so that they can produce the vaccines that are desperately needed in poor countries,’ ” Sanders said Sunday.

Sullivan said Katherine Tai, the U.S. trade representative, has been engaged in “intensive consultations” at the World Trade Organization to work through the issue of waiving vaccine patents. “We should have a way forward in the coming days,” Sullivan said on “This Week.”

Amidst Deadly Pandemic, Work At Delhi’s Rajpath As Central Vista Redevelopment Project Takes Shape

Over the past several weeks, New Delhi’s iconic Rajpath stretch that has India Gate as the backdrop has witnessed drastic changes as the ambitious Central Vista redevelopment project takes shape. Trenches dug on the sides of the road and red road blockers have replaced the iconic chain link fence and lamp posts. The path leading up to the Rashtrapati Bhavan too is fenced with yellow boards set up by the Central Public Works Department (CPWD), which read: ‘Development/ Redevelopment of Central Vista Avenue’.

Officials from HCP Design, Planning and Management, the architectural consultant of the Central Vista project, have said the original design elements of the area will be kept intact to a large extent after work is complete.

Media reports say, barring a few construction workers, Rajpath wore a deserted look. Officials from the Central Public Works Department (CPWD) said they are trying to meet the initial deadlines despite fewer workers showing up in the past few days.

Against the backdrop of a Covid-induced lockdown, workers said they have been issued e-passes and are being paid daily wages since the lockdown. Sanjay (27), a contractual worker with MTNL, said he has been coming every day so that he has some savings in case they are barred from working in the near future. The men travel to work and back home in a rented two-wheeler.

“Earlier, there were eight of us. But now only four of us can come to work in a vehicle. When the others tried to come, we were issued a challan so they don’t come any more,” said Sanjay, who lives in Bhatti Mines with his family of five. He said they will have to sustain on the meagre amount his wife earns from tailoring work, in case his work stops.

The four men dug a trench to bury existing underground wires further underground, saying this was being done since sewerage work will begin soon and some public amenities might be underground. According to a CPWD official, digging of an underground passageway is about to begin.

The redevelopment at Rajpath, under Phase I of the project, is aimed at making the area pedestrian friendly and providing better amenities for visitors and tourists. This includes refurbishing the lawns, creating underpasses at Janpath and C Hexagon crossing with Rajpath, building wide walkways or footpaths parallel to the avenue, and constructing low-level bridges at 12 selected locations.

Other amenities include toilets, drinking water facilities, vending areas, parking spaces, signages, lighting and CCTV cameras.

More trees will also line the lawn, with the plan envisaging increasing green cover from 3,50,000 sq mts to 3,90,000 sq mts. Also under Phase 1, a sewerage treatment plant will be set up for recycling of waste water along with rainwater harvesting systems and water supply systems.

Attacks Against Asians Rise In US: Panel

Attacks against people of Asian descent aren’t new in the history of the US, but recent spike in anti-Asian incidents post-Covid, panelists at a recent online seminar organised by top American think tank East-West Centre argued.

The context of the post-Covid violence against Asians is more worrying, Representative Ted Lieu told attendees at the ‘EWC Live: Asian Americans Unsilenced’ online seminar, covered by IANS.

With the numbers of anti-Asian attacks projected to grow, other panelists speaking at the seminar called for more activism and collaborations with other ethnic groups.

The issue of anti-Asian hate is getting attention “from the very highest level of our government”, Lieu said, adding: “I think we’re in a different political environment. I think you’re seeing the political awakening of the Asian American community.”

Manjusha Kulkarni, executive director of the Asian Pacific Policy and Planning Council and co-founder of Stop AAPI Hate, said she expects more school-related cases in the days ahead, with schools increasingly returning to in-person learning.

Kulkarni said research in Canada, Australia and New Zealand show similar increases in anti-Asian incidents, and some of the solutions may have to involve international organizations like the World Bank and the UN, she said.

Actor Rizwan Manji, who starred in the Canadian situation comedy “Schitt’s Creek” and NBC’s “Outsourced”, recalled after 9/11 only being offered roles as a terrorist.

Manji said that today the industry is producing more works that include Asians but not frequently enough. “We need to have something that brings us to that next level,” he said.

Madalene Xuan-Trang Mielke, president and CEO of the Asian Pacific American Institute for Congressional Studies said it is important in the current environment for the AAPI community to be represented and participate in policy decision-making, including greater representation at the cabinet level.

Representation in and by the media needs improving as well, said NBC’s Asian-American reporter Kimmy Yam. She called for more nuanced, sensitive coverage of Asian communities by knowledgeable reporters.

Many American scholars think the Donald Trump era, though brief, galvanised white supremacism in a way not seen in US in five decades.

“Trump anti-migrant demonization played into the post-9/11 psyche and posturing against China’s rise, ending up villifying Middle Eastern and Chinese settlers. Even Sikhs with turbans are being mistaken as Iranians and attacked. Same is true of Koreans and Japanese being mistaken as Chinese,” said Tuhin Sanzid, who runs a Bengali-English online site in US.

Sanzid, who studies race relations in the US closely, says even Bangladeshis and Indian Muslims who largely uphold a secular national culture are bracketed with ‘”troublesome” Pakistanis , Iranians or Arabs.

“Less than educated White Americans are as poorly informed as Trump who was idolized by a lot of them. Remember Trump messing up on South Asian geography to insist Bhutan was an Indian province,” Sanzid told IANS.

“Ignorance explains hostile stereotyping and many absolutely peaceful and integrated Asians are seen with suspicion,” he added.

A new study has found that there was nearly a 150 per cent surge in anti-Asian hate crimes across major cities in the US in 2020, while overall hate crimes fell by 7 per cent.

The study, titled “Report to the Nation: Anti-Asian Prejudice & Hate Crime”, has been conducted by the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism (CSHE) at the California State University, San Bernardino. (IANS)

Book, “India And Asian Geopolitics: The Past, Present” By Shivshankar Menon Shows Light At Modern India’s Role In Asia’s And The Broader World

One of India’s most distinguished foreign policy thinkers addresses the many questions facing India as it seeks to find its way in the increasingly complex world of Asian geopolitics. A former Indian foreign secretary and national security adviser, Shivshankar Menon traces India’s approach to the shifting regional landscape since its independence in 1947. From its leading role in the “nonaligned” movement during the cold war to its current status as a perceived counterweight to China, India often has been an after-thought for global leaders—until they realize how much they needed it.

Examining India’s own policy choices throughout its history, Menon focuses in particular on India’s responses to the rise of China, as well as other regional powers. Menon also looks to the future and analyzes how India’s policies are likely to evolve in response to current and new challenges.

As India grows economically and gains new stature across the globe, both its domestic preoccupations and international choices become more significant. India itself will become more affected by what happens in the world around it. Menon makes a powerful geopolitical case for an India increasingly and positively engaged in Asia and the broader world in pursuit of a pluralistic, open, and inclusive world order.

Shivshankar Menon is a Distinguished Fellow at CSEP and a Visiting Professor at Ashoka University. His long career in public service spans diplomacy, national security, atomic energy, disarmament policy, and India’s relations with its neighbours and major global powers. Menon served as national security advisor to the Indian Prime Minister from January 2010 to May 2014. He currently serves as chairman of the advisory board of the Institute of Chinese Studies in New Delhi. He was also a Distinguished Fellow with Brookings India. He is the author of “Choices: Inside the Making of Indian Foreign Policy” published by the Brookings Press and Penguin Random House in 2016. His new book, “India and Asian Geopolitics; The Past, Present” is likely to be out in 2021.

Menon has previously served as foreign secretary of India from October 2006 to August 2009 and as ambassador and high commissioner of India to Israel (1995-1997), Sri Lanka (1997-2000), China (2000-2003) and Pakistan (2003-2006). From 2008 to 2014, he was also a member of India’s Atomic Energy Commission. A career diplomat, he also served in India’s missions to the International Atomic Energy Agency in Geneva and the United Nations in New York.

As high commissioner of India to Pakistan, Menon restored high commissioner level relations after a gap of a year and a half and initiated what is so far the best period in the two countries’ relationship. He also served as India’s ambassador to China, restoring relations following the India nuclear weapons tests of 1998. During his work as high commissioner of India to Sri Lanka, he was responsible for the free trade agreement with Sri Lanka. Menon was the second Indian ambassador to Israel and oversaw the beginning of the now flourishing India-Israel defence and intelligence relationship.

During his service in the Ministry of External Affairs from 1992 to 1995, Menon negotiated the first boundary related agreement between the Republic of India and the People’s Republic of China, the root of the subsequent series of agreements that have maintained peace on the border despite ongoing boundary disputes. He also served as special representative of the prime minister of India on the boundary issue from 2010 to 2014, and has dealt with the India-China boundary and India-China relations since 1974.

Menon has been a Richard Wilhelm Fellow at the Center for International Studies at MIT and Fisher Family Fellow at the Belfer Center, Harvard University. In 2010, he was chosen by Foreign Policy magazine as one of the world’s “Top 100 Global Thinkers.” He attended the Scindia School, Gwalior and St. Stephens College of the University of Delhi, where he studied ancient Indian history and Chinese. He speaks Chinese and some German.

Praise of India and Asian Geopolitics

“In this brilliant examination of India’s recent past as an Asian power, the distinguished Indian diplomat Shivshankar Menon gives us much to consider about its future as well. His evocation of India as central to Asia’s geopolitics and yet also set apart from it is a major contribution to our understanding of this great, rising power in this Asian century.”
—Nicholas Burns, former U.S. under secretary of state; professor, Harvard University

“This book is a tour de force by one of today’s most perceptive strategic thinkers. Menon deftly surveys how India has navigated its geopolitical environment in the past, while illuminating the international landscape and challenges it faces today. Anyone interested in Asia’s future should read this book.”
—M. Taylor Fravel, Arthur and Ruth Sloan Professor of Political Science, and director, Security Studies Program, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

“An important work that restores India into the Asian story, and a timely reminder that active engagement with Asia and the world will not just be a choice, but also a necessity for New Delhi.”
—Tanvi Madan, senior fellow and director of the India Project, the Brookings Institution

“Shivshankar Menon is one of the most distinguished diplomats in the world. In his latest book, he has brilliantly laid out the stages of India from independence to the rise of Modi. When he looks to history, he focuses on Asian geopolitics. But when he turns to the future, he opens the aperture to the global trend of illiberality. He believes India, with no existential outside threat and a vast diversity in its populace, can afford expansive rights of all its citizens.”
—Strobe Talbott, distinguished fellow, the Brookings Institution; U.S. deputy secretary of state (1994–2001)

India and Asian Geopolitics: The past, present by Shivshankar Menon (Brookings Institution Press, Washington DC, 2021) may, at first glance, appear to be primarily on India. But it is about Asia as a whole, its past, present and future in the context of global developments.”
Eurasia Review

Unrestricted Warfare: China’s Master Plan to Destroy America

A sobering and fascinating study on war in the modern era, Unrestricted Warfare carefully explores strategies that militarily and politically disadvantaged nations might take in order to successfully attack a geopolitical super-power like the United States. American military doctrine is typically led by technology; a new class of weapon or vehicle is developed, which allows or encourages an adjustment in strategy. Military strategists Qiao Liang and Wang Xiangsui argue that this dynamic is a crucial weakness in the American military, and that this blind spot with regard to alternative forms warfare could be effectively exploited by enemies. Unrestricted Warfare concerns the many ways in which this might occur, and, in turn, suggests what the United States might do to defend itself.

The traditional mentality that offensive action is limited to military action is no longer adequate given the range of contemporary threats and the rising costs-both in dollars and lives lost-of traditional warfare. Instead, Liang and Xiangsui suggest the significance of alternatives to direct military confrontation, including international policy, economic warfare, attacks on digital infrastructure and networks, and terrorism. Even a relatively insignificant state can incapacitate a far more powerful enemy by applying pressure to their economic and political systems. Exploring each of these considerations with remarkable insight and clarity, Unrestricted Warfare is an engaging evaluation of our geopolitical future.

More relevant than ever, this interesting handbook on modern all-enveloping warfare was first published in China in 1999. Re-digitized from the 2004 Filament Books edition, this new edition contains specific methods for American troops, government, academia, and business circles for dealing with unrestricted warfare.

Coauthored by Major General Qiao Liang and Wang Xiangsui, the book has been required reading at West Point. The People’s Liberation Army manual for asymmetric warfare details the waging of war, strategically and tactically, using weapons not limited to bullets, bombs, missiles, and artillery shells. The two PLA officers who advocated the strategy set forth in the following pages argue that modern warfare, in ways not too dissimilar from Sun Tzu’s Art of War, is about impeding the enemy’s ability to wage war and to defend itself against a barrage of attacks against its economy, its civil institutions, its governmental structures, and its actual belief system.

This is not a manual for achieving an overnight victory. Rather, it is a recipe for a slow but inexorable assault on an enemy’s institutions, often without the enemy’s knowledge that it is even being attacked. As Sun Tzu once wrote, “If one party is at war with another, and the other party does not realize it is at war, the party who knows it’s at war almost always has the advantage and usually wins.” And this is the strategy set forth in *Unrestricted Warfare,* waging a war on an adversary with methods so covert at first and seemingly so benign that the party being attacked does not realize it’s being attacked.

In the age of the worldwide internet, what seems like the free flow of information is also an open door policy for one country to insert its propaganda into the thinking and belief systems of its enemy. Do we consider Vladimir Putin’s Russia to be a friend to the United States? Are we really that naïve? Voting constituencies might have very legitimate reasons to support the politicians of their choice, but when those choices are based on the flow of absolutely false information inimical to the best interests of that population, it is an example of the success of asymmetric or unrestricted warfare, in essence, propaganda war. The Russians have been experts at this since the days of the czar, and since the experiments of Pavlov and his dogs have mastered the art of getting the responses they want from the stimuli they inject into their subjects’ thought patterns. In this past election cycle, it worked.

As you read the following pages, a manual for the military humbling of the United States through nonmilitary means that most Americans will not even realize, you should understand that this is not just a “what if,” but a reality. It is happening now even as North Korea’s Kim blusters about sending missiles towards Guam and Donald Trump responds by rattling his own saber in its scabbard. China, meanwhile, watches while its enemy is engaged with a tiny country that has the means to send nuclear tipped ICBMs to American cities. If North Korea attacks Guam or Pearl Harbor and the United States responds, who benefits? Not North Korea, not South Korea, not the United States. China benefits when U.S. Naval facilities on Guam or at Pearl Harbor are damaged so that the American presence in the Pacific is diminished to the point of incapacity.

Readers, therefore, should take this little manual as a dire warning. Complacency cripples. Hubris kills. And blindness without guidance usually leads one into the nearest wall if not hurtling down a flight of stairs. Thus, although this book was written almost twenty years ago, it should be regarded as the playbook for the destruction of not only the United States, but of western democracies in general.

Modi-Led BJP Trounced In 3 Key Indian State Polls. Mamata Emerges As Contender On National Political Stage

In the state Assembly elections held last month, Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s BJP has been defeated by regional parties, in spite of major efforts by Modi and leaders from the Hindutva party that is in power in India for the past 7 years.

In the state Assembly elections held last month, Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s BJP had sought to expand its footprint in the country’s east and south, where it has struggled to gain traction. The long awaited elections results in the five states that went to the polls have come as a huge shock to Modi and his Hindutva ideology-led party that is governing India for the past seven years.

India held its biggest democratic exercise in two years over the past month, with 175 million people eligible to vote in five regional elections. But the marathon polls involved huge rallies where many attendees were maskless, and a record-breaking coronavirus spike coincided with the final phases of voting.

In West Bengal, incumbent Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee’s All India Trinamool Congress won around 72% of 292 seats up for grabs, while Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party took 77, according to results posted on the Election Commission of India. Last month, the prime minister predicted his party would win more than 200 seats in the state, which held voting over eight phases starting on March 27.

Modi’s opponents won in the southern states of Tamil Nadu and Kerala, while his party kept power in the northeastern state of Assam and gained the federally-controlled territory of Puducherry, where it contested in alliance with a regional party.

In Puducherry, a small former French colony previously known as Pondicherry, the BJP was expected to come to power through an alliance amid efforts to increase its presence in the country’s south, where it has been traditionally weak.

In the southern state of Tamil Nadu, M.K. Stalin returned his DMK party to power after a decade by defeating an incumbent coalition that has the BJP as its national partner.

In Kerala in the south, where the BJP until now has played only a bit part, a justify-wing alliance retained power with a comfortable victory over a Congress-led coalition. It was the first time a government in the state had been re-elected since 1977.

The Congress party, which was expected to win at least two states but could not do, failing to wrest Assam from the BJP and Kerala from the justify, still insists that it is the only option to BJP.

Congress chief spokesperson Randeep Surjewala said: “Congress is the sole national party which is alternative to the BJP as it is fighting BJP in all the states.”

But the messages from the leaders of regional parties indicate that Banerjee, whose Trinamool which was once part of the UPA, has shown her mettle by single-handedly defeating the BJP and in a convincing manner.

In a victory speech later Sunday, 66-year-old Banerjee said West Bengal’s “immediate challenge is to combat the Covid-19 and we are confident that we will win This victory has saved the humanity, the people of India. It’s the victory of India,” Banerjee, a fierce critic of Modi, added.

After winning a bitterly-fought battle with the BJP to record her third successive victory in the West Bengal Assembly elections, Trinamool Congress supremo Mamata Banerjee seems to have emerged as a formidable challenge to the Centre’s ruling party.

With almost all the results counted, the Trinamool Congress party (TMC) led by the state’s Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee has won more than 200 seats in the 294-seat assembly. The results are set to make Ms Banerjee the leader of West Bengal for a third time. She is also India’s only female chief minister.

With leaders of different regional parties, including NCP chief Sharad Pawar, sending her congratulatory massages, the message from the Assembly election is clear that Banerjee is capable of taking the challenge of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah, and combating it successfully.

The BJP targeted West Bengal heavily during campaigning but the state was comfortably held by the incumbent, Mamata Banerjee, a fierce Modi critic.  Her win came as a surprise to political observers, who noted how much time and money the BJP invested in the state.

The poll results show that people of West Bengal have rejected the Bharatiya Janata Party’s attempt to polarise the elections. The BJP, which had justify no stone unturned to dislodge the Banerjee government, could not cross three-digit figure despite its claims of getting 200-plus seats out of the state’s 294.

The reason behind Banerjee’s masterful performance was admitted by a BJP leader, who said that their leadership “failed to understand the pulse of Bengal and its culture”. “And that is the reason despite leading in 121 Assembly constituencies in the 2019 Lok Sabha polls, we are facing difficulties in winning over 100 seats in less than a two-year period.”

“People rejected politics of polarization or communal politics. Muslim votes polarized in favor of the Trinamool while the Bengali Hindu also rejected communal politics and voted for the Trinamool,” the BJP leader said.

The alleged gross failures of Modi’s administrative management of the second wave of Covid were reflected in the West Bengal mandate. The BJP could win only 24 of the 114 seats that went to the polls in the last three phases, when the pandemic had turned traumatic.

With thousands of Modi critics campaigning for his resignation, and the BJP’s electoral debacle adding fuel to their demands, the pro-Hindu party is indeed at a crossroads in its history. “The BJP has met its match and lost,” says Congress lawmaker Shashi Tharoor, praising the success of Mamata Banerjee, the leader of Trinamool (Grassroots) Congress, a party based in West Bengal.

Here lay the folly. This aggrandizement — a characteristic of Modi’s politics — epitomized the sloppiness and errors in electoral strategy. The BJP underestimated the influence of Banerjee in the state and ignored the Minorities, who are known for voting against Modi’s party.

“As three strongly anti-BJP regional leaders have emerged victorious, they are likely to be the nucleus of the opposition challenge to Modi in the months ahead as he battles the backlash to his mismanagement of the Covid crisis,” said Arati Jerath, a New Delhi-based author and political analyst who has written about Indian politics for nearly three decades. The results weaken the government and indicate there are “huge political and constitutional challenges ahead for Modi.”

-+=